Saturday, 20 September 2014

The Union is maintained!!

The Gordon Highlanders salute Queen Victoria, who had a special affection for the Jocks! We have all seen the classic films where the beleaguered garrison hears the pipes in the distance and knows rescue is at hand!

Glad you are still with us!! Scotland the Brave!!

69 comments:

Unionist said...

Hear hear, well said TC and long live the union.

SerpentSlayer said...

I think this outcome was always planned and to whatever end this talk of devolving powers served is something to watch. The EU is up to something.

Depression Kills said...

It's ok to say the word Jocks then?

Anonymous said...

Is it a good thing that just less than half voted for independence? And without all the scare tactics, I'd say it's a safe bet that a good many more would've gone the same way.

If you speak out they will come for you said...

Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers.
Aristotle

Fair Funding said...

Salmond WAS theSNP. If Sturgeon's the best they've got left, Labour Scotland must be rubbing their hands in glee.

John Lydon 'I'd like to kill Jimmy Savile' [1978] said...

John Lydon talks about Jimmy Savile and his 'seediness' during an interview recorded for BBC radio in late 1978, this excerpt was not broadcast but has just been made available as part of the reissue of the first PIL album. Interviewer: Vivienne Goldman.

Pope Francis: if you speak ill of your brother, you kill him said...

Pope Frances reiterated that we must never become judges of our brothers through gossip and negative chit-chat.
"Those who live judging their neighbor, speaking ill of their neighbor, are hypocrites, because they lack the strength and the courage to look to their own shortcomings. The Lord does not waste many words on this concept. Further on he says that he who has hatred in his heart for his brother is a murderer. In his first letter, John the Apostle also says it clearly: anyone who has hatred for his brother is a murderer, he walks in darkness, he who judges his brother walks in darkness". And the Pope continued saying: "If you speak ill of your brother, you kill your brother. And each time we judge.

Make no mistake, the BBC will NOT like this video - CON-Trol-Led? TV Lie said...

Anti BBC campaign use roy west's videos.

Gordon Brown's eve of poll speech said...

Stonking speech by Gordon Brown. He could truly be credited with saving the Union. Well done Brown.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMvwsMmXvDY

Classic pictures said...

By roy west of Saddleworth

Reimer said...

Heartening to see good old John Lydon being so far ahead (thirty-odd years) of the curve, as befits someone who makes such powerful pronouncements on the state of Britain from his publishing heiress wife's mansion in Venice Beach, California, whilst dressing himself in the garb of a crusty reform-minded patriot and being lauded as "the greatest living Englishman" atop a Channel Four chart of stroppy interloping multicult-loving Irish gobshites.

Hopefully the (imminent) tenth anniversary of John Peel's death will see the release of cabinet minutes confirming that the grumpy old snob (whose affected and unchallenged "Scouse" accent sounded more like something from the West Midlands) was all ready to go in and take out Stuart Hall for good until he realised attention would then fall on Rotherham, threatening the happy-clappy cohesion of everything Margaret Thatcher (and those who never listened to his legendary Radio One show) hadn't been able to destroy.

Reasoned Hatred said...

Why is Pope Francis being so judgmental towards those who practice selective hatred against the increasing amounts of human scum infesting the planet. Accurate judgment of course takes reason and logic, two things fatal to the worshippers and preachers of a fundamentally irrational philosophy.

Anonymous said...

@ 08:32 no, he's saying false witness against your neighbour.

Anonymous said...

@22/09/2014 08:32 In terms of practicing Catholics that spread vicious smears against their neighbour, all the time say that they are devote Catholic.

Alf Garnett said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alf Garnett said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Yes vote would have been a disaster for Labour in England.

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour" said...

Pope Francis is right, first Pope I've ever felt respect for.
You simply can't claim to be a Catholic and occupy the world of darkness spreading vicious gossip about someone.

The roots are growing said...

Untill people finally see new charter housing's political agenda backed by the police.
New charter housing's growing Influence in all the essentials services, like mental health, schools, the work place, ect.
These are the new charter roots "not just a landlord" but a worrying development of consequence.
No free speech allowed in the new charter world only the word obey or face eviction.

audaces fortuna iuvat or fortes fortuna iuvat said...

@ 09:49 The Great battle to come depends upon the faith of the one true God.
The reality of FAITH, the trust of faith, the knowledge of our fathers past down, the crucifixion, the resurrection, the gospel, the word, unity, courage, these things, that a police state cannot/never control.

Fresh push for all-black Labour shortlists said...

Ed Miliband is facing demands to impose "all black" shortlists for the selection of Labour candidates in certain constituencies.

Labour Black Network launched a "manifesto for change" at the Labour conference in Manchester.

It wants "action to right the wrong of poor representation of black members".

Labour says it has the "best record" for recruiting black and ethnic minority candidates but accepts there is more to do.

Labour MP and London mayoral candidate David Lammy and frontbencher Diane Abbott have both thrown their weight behind the campaign for all-black shortlists and the Labour Black Network's manifesto, which was launched at a conference fringe event.

All-women shortlists

If parliament reflected the diversity of the British population there would be 36 Black MPs, the Labour Black Network says, but there are currently just nine. Five of them are Labour MPs, a number that has barely increased since the late 1980s when the first black MPs took their seats in the Commons.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29330744

I wonder what the Labour White Network make of this - that is if such a thing exists.

When does the killing start. said...

The air now stinks in many urban areas, caused by the massive number of vehicles on the road, caused by massive population increases, caused by out of control immigration running at 200,000 plus per year into England (official figures, the reality is FAR worse) - which is now virtually the most overcrowded country in the world, - caused by our elected representatives, caused by the apathetic, traitorous, moronic dross who make up a massive part of the British electorate who continually vote them into office despite the totally obvious and ongoing ruination they have visited upon our nation.

The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald said...

Never give no matter the cost.

Alf Garnett said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

@2330

If you're so contemptuous of the British people, then why (simultaneously) do you bitch and moan about the state of their country? After all, are not the people of the country its most crucial component? Do you not see the silly contradiction in what you're saying? If you hate a nation's people, then it must follow that you also dislike the nation itself. A nation is nothing without its people.

Or is this just another disgruntled local BNPea brain who threw his toys out the pram when the local electorate gave him and his cranky mates (no names mentioned) a rather firm two fingered salute at the ballot box?

God help Britannia said...

The Labour conference was a demonstration of utter mediocrity from a busted flush of a party.
Only professional 'Tory haters', traitors, scum, parasites, certain immigrant groups or morons could possibly consider voting for such a clueless, innovation/intelligence free, group of unprincipled, self-seeking non-entities and no talents.

Day of the Locust said...

ISIL aren't the real threat, the maternity wards in many urban areas of Britain ARE.
The former is, apparently, being addressed. The latter is being wilfully ignored by cowards and traitors in office.

Alf Garnett said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous 22:10, I love my country for the best of the things it has until the last few years represented. Patriotism, fair play, a strong and shared sense of identity, justice and commitment to healthy and decent values.
In the last few decades a culture of self-indulgence, indiscipline and corrupted values made worse by an unasked for tidal wave of often regressive and hostile aliens imported by our elected representatives, have gained increasing sway.
I love my country but increasingly detest what many of its denizens are becoming.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 2210, any people who keep voting in parties who are destroying their own country are committing national, racial and cultural suicide. Anyone NOT consumed with disgust for such a people (the ones who still vote for establishment parties that is) cares nothing for the country's survival.

Scottish Cup Final 1980 - Hampden Riot - Celtic Rangers said...

Highlights from the 1980 Scottish Cup Final and the pitch invasion / riot that followed.

Reimer said...

God help Britannia said...

The little I saw and read of the Labour conference brought me to the same conclusion.

Quite astonishingly poor. Calling it "mediocre" would be a compliment.

Recycled Obama-isms structuring the leader's overblown-yet-lame speech. And all at the head of what seems like a rally for all the various provinces' counterparts to the self-serving no-marks who make so much of the news on this blog. Watching them pour out of the hall gushing praise after Ed's "speech" brought home what a shower of vile brazen interloping scum they are.

And Ed's "forgetting" to address the deficit, and immigration...
A coded signal that actively ignoring these issues is sine qua non for his party to successfully court their latterday client base.

R

Reimer said...

And as to the Union being maintained...

They're only staying together for the children's sake. The fire died out long ago.

Anonymous said...

TC Important news for you, but most importantly for new charter housing tenants.
New charter told me on the phone today, that they are currently involved in an internal dispute with Tameside Council over payments of people's housing benefits payments.
Something to do with the "computer systems"
If you have been award of Housing Benefit, and new charter are sending you demands for extortion amounts of money contact this blog.

88 said...

The defeat of NS Germany in 1945, marked the beginning of the end for the white European race & civilisation. Anyone who celebrates the 'victory' of 1945 is to all intents and purposes celebrating the beginning of the end of the European peoples and our civilization.

Blood and Soil said...

@ 88, If National Socialist Germany hadn't been defeated and we'd had a non-aggression pact instead of going to war, Europe and Britain would now be very different places.
No massive and exponentially growing immigrant ghettos; no being in the thrall of internationalist banks and their masters; the indigenous White peoples of Europe united, healthy and thriving; no widespread degeneracy, crime and disorder.
Instead we're heading for oblivion to be replaced by masses of imported backward savages and barbarians, but hey, at least it's 'moral'.

Anonymous said...

"White peoples of Europe united, healthy and thriving"

Could you explain what your fuhrer's plans were for the peoples of Russia and Poland etc, assuming you regard them as white and not as 'untermenschen'. Are you aware of the generalplan ost? Are you also aware of Hitler's view of Germans when he was staring defeat in the face? Namely a U-turn that they had proven themselves inferior to Russians and should be annihilated via the Nero Decree, a fact substantiated by Albert Speer at Nuremberg. And while we're on the subject, could explain why your hero (who was anything but 'aryan' in appearance) hid in his bunker like a coward, along with all those other leading Nazis who took an easy suicide pill or bullet or just surrendered? The very same people who ordered brave young Germans to fight to the last man and last bullet?

tonydj said...

Anon @22-29
Your posting merely highlights the error committed by placing our trust in "The Leader" who will "One day arise" The way forward is to lead ourselves.Just one quick question though, what does an Aryan look like???

Blood and Soil said...

Anonymous 22:29, 1930's National Socialism was indeed a hard and often cruel political credo, dictated in many ways by the more cruel nature of the era. Hitler wanted room in the east and like many other realists knew that the Soviets would eventually encroach west, the ever-growing pre-war Red Army troop build up on their Western frontiers weren't for show. As for mass killings the Nazi's brutality was massively outweighed by the mass starvations and atrocities inflicted by Stalin and the Soviet system on their own and other peoples. The wrongs or otherwise of then and the reality of White European destruction now are directly linked in many ways. Survival of our kind is the only essential. Those who care about the continued existence of the White race know that nature can be cruel, denial of that most basic fact can ne punished by self-annihilation as a people, the worst crime of all.

Next time, no more Mr nice guy. said...

Hitler was indeed a coward, four years fighting in WWI and two Iron Crosses. A hard and brutal man who may have been the White Race's last hope.

Anonymous said...

On Soviet troop build ups - are you aware of Hitler's proclamations in Mein Kampf in the 1920s regarding lebensraum? What do you think the Russians should have done, had a free open frontier with Nazi Germany? Hitler's intentions were clear from day one. And on that subject I'll ask you and Anthony Jones again, why did Hitler and Goebbels hide in their bunkers like cowards?

tonydj said...

anonymous @ 15.49
With all the problems and threats facing modern Britain I cannot understand the obsession that exists in the minds of many critics of Nationalism. Nationalists are often accused of being 'worshipers' of the late German Chancellor but these critics are as obsessed themselves.

If hiding in a bunker is a sign of "Cowardice" (your terminology, not mine) then so were most soldiers in WW2 who, given the choice, would prefer to take cover rather than remain in the open. Can't say I blame them either! I believe Churchill had access to quite deep bunkers. If this partially thought out argument is your best effort then you must try harder.

I don't want to get into a tiresome historical debate on Hitler's life but I believe his roll in his regiment was "Company runner". This entailed carrying messages from one position to another when the telephone cable was cut. Usually by shell fire. Not exactly "Cowardly".

Anonymous said...

Since when did one alleged act of courage redeem another act of craven scurrying?

Do forgive me, but what were Hitler's orders to men in such hellholes as the deep freeze of Stalingrad? Fight to the last man and last bullet I think it was. Note the word fight, which according to the warriors code the Nazis like to promote meant just that, not hiding underground and choosing a quick death at the last minute. The Japs knew how to fight and so did many ordinary brave young German men. Unfortunately for them they were led by cowardly weasels like Himmler and Goering who chose to surrender without firing a damned shot - pathetic! When the ability to effectively command was lost they should've (as a token gesture) picked up their tin hats and rifles and faced the might of the Red Army in anticipation of their place in Valhalla. While German women were being raped and their men falling on the front line their dear leaders were nowhere and settled for the soft option. Their only place in history is in the cowards hall of fame.

Blood and Soil said...

Anonymous 15:49, 'Hitler wanted room in the east', try reading my post. Everyone knows about lebensraum and the mutual hatred between fascism and communism. Two such massively armed and ideologically opposed regimes were almost inevitably headed for conflict and atrocities were widespread on both sides. Hitler's biggest 'crime' in the greater scheme of things was to ruthlessly uphold and try to expand the rights and powers of the White Race.

Blood and Soil said...

Anonymous 14:42, 'One alleged act of courage', no a fully documented four years through WWI, first and second class Iron Crosses and volunteered for a highly dangerous job as a runner. Goering was a coward too, a highly decorated fighter ace from WWI.
Whatever criticisms, justified and false, are levelled at Hitler and National Socialism, under such a regime the White Races of Europe would NEVER be facing the annihilation they are now. undoubtedly on course for.

Anonymous said...

"Hitler's biggest 'crime' in the greater scheme of things was to ruthlessly uphold and try to expand the rights and powers of the White Race."

Define 'white race'. Defending the right of Germans and Austrians to conquer and enslave Russians? Some clarification needed here I think. Also, I think you'll find chump that in the broader scheme of things the Germans and their nation faired much better than would Russians under the cosh of Nazi Germany.

But on that particular issue, we already know that your beloved fuhrer's final intention was to destroy German's and their nation, deeming that in losing their war with Russia they had lost the right to exist as per natural selection. So that in itself makes a total mockery of any claim that 'the white race' was in safe hands. Perhaps you should take note of your fuhrer and go and jump under a bus.

And I really do need to comment any further on your apparent claim that a few war medals mitigate / redeem every single act of cowardice which follows in man's lifetime.

Blood and Soil said...

Anonymous 14:36, Cowards don't win two Iron Crosses, stick four years of hell in WWI and volunteer for highly dangerous jobs as runners.
White means White European. The war with the Soviet Union was primarily ideological and territorial rather than racial and atrocities were committed by both sides.
Whatever its excesses, if National Socialism had prevailed it would never have allowed the White race to approach the precipice of annihilation that now confronts it.

Anonymous said...

"White means White European"

Nordic? Celtic? Slavic? Alpine? Germanic? Very easy to define! Are Dusky Italians 'white' and blonde Russians 'non-white'? Being half English/Irish of the fair skinned non-Jewish variety, am I white?

You've already made clear that you regard Russians as non-white. You stated that Nazism's policy was all about... "to ruthlessly uphold and try to expand the rights and powers of the White Race." Since that primarily involved enslaving Russians / Poles etc, you must presumably regard them as 'non-white'. And what about 'white' Americans - a mongrel mix of European groups.

Do you think Germany has had a closed border for 10,000 years? Central Europe had waves of Nordic migrants coming down from Scandinavia, darker Mediterranean groups coming from southern Europe and Slavic influences on its Eastern fringe.

And more to the point, since in that particular instance 'whites' lost to 'non-whites' when Moscow conquered Berlin, the whole issue of white survival is at once meaningless. Your beloved Fuhrer declared at the end of the campaign that 'whites' (in this instance Germans / Austrians) had proven themselves inferior to 'non-white' Russians and should cease to exist.

So bite the bullet and stop moaning about the demise of the 'white race', which your Fuhrer intended anyway when he found himself and his 'master race' soundly beaten in the ruins of the Reichstag.

SerpentSlayer said...

The Slavs were clearly considered white, just lesser perhaps than the Germans maybe. Long have European peoples enslaved other European peoples, since the existence of agriculture among the Aryan tribes, slavery has existed. Not of the north American plantation kind we have forced down our throats, more the type that existed in the days before rampant capitalist greed and horrible foreign religions.
a slave class has existed amongst European peoples for centuries and the hardy eastern Europeans would have made perfect servants, as well as providing plenty of people to rise into higher positions as free man as merited.

Blood and Soil said...

@ Anonymous 11:54, 'White means White European', Italy, Ireland et al are in Europe.
Like all races White has no exact genetic classification just shared, centuries old, strong cultural, ethnic and geographical links, subdivided into various regions and nations.
I never mentioned Russia, the conflict was against the Soviet Union, a varied collection of peoples including European, Slavic, Mongoloid etc.
The German and their Axis allies invaded many European countries for territorial, conquest, revenge and security reasons with no racial element. Barbarossa was the same but with ideological and racial aspects added.
National Socialist Germany was massively outnumbered in men and materials by the Soviet Union alone. Add the other Allied powers and no nation could have withstood such an array of power, production capacity and military size and technology. That the Germans held out for so long was an amazing act of courage and endurance.
A modern National Socialist regime would no doubt be less 'moral' than the weak, decadent, failing White western democracies currently being deluged by hordes of ultra fertile, backward and hostile alien cultures and races. The latter is the ultimate obscenity, putting the rights of alien peoples and their creeds above the survival of our own people. If that's 'moral' give me National Socialism or similar, and the guarantee of our kinsmen's survival any time.

The Victors' Write the History Books said...

Hear hear Blood & Soil. The person you are debating with clearly has a limited understanding of National Socialism and what he or she does have has evidently been spoon fed from the History Channel or the BBC.

Anonymous said...

"National Socialist Germany was massively outnumbered in men and materials by the Soviet Union alone. Add the other Allied powers and no nation could have withstood such an array of power, production capacity and military size and technology. That the Germans held out for so long was an amazing act of courage and endurance."

Do forgive me, but didn't Nazi Germany have all the manpower and resources of occupied Europe to draw on in its war with Russia as well as assistance from allies such as Finland, Italy and Romania... It's a shame you didn't choose to credit the Red Army with holding out even when beaten back to Moscow and Leningrad. Allied aid was slow coming in the early phase of Barbarossa and the many of the early decisive battles were fought with Soviet men and equipment. And if Nazi Germany were such a whizz at warfare then why did the RAF run circles round them in the battle of Britain? I am aware that you 'nationalists' have a creepy infatuation with Germany, Germans and all things German, but in serious discourse stick to facts and not fantasy!

Anonymous said...

@blood and soil

"I never mentioned Russia, the conflict was against the Soviet Union, a varied collection of peoples including European, Slavic, Mongoloid etc."

who in the Soviet Union was 'European' and who exactly was 'Slavic', two groups you clearly differentiate?

Poles are regarded as 'slavic', yet it has been suggested they are more indigenous to Europe than Germans, the opposite of what serpentslayer says. It has also been suggested that the purest European gene pool is to be found in the Baltic region around Lithuania / Latvia, who are also regarded as Slavic. Ashkenazi Jews are regarded as 'non-white', yet are said to share genetic ties with southern European groups such as Italians and Greeks who you regard as 'white European'. Is a dusky Sicilian who could pass as Lebanese 'white' whilst a Jew who could pass as German 'non-white'?

Cro-Magnon man was said to be the first native European going back 30,000 years, and certain genetic traces of Cro Magnons (Y DNA) are said to be strongest in Yugoslavia - a Slavic region. Russians are also regarded as 'slavic', yet are 'non-white' according to you and Hitler. So your apparent clear cut belief of what constitutes 'European' or 'white' falls flat. There is said to be a mongoloid / Lapp genetic presence in Scandinavia, which might explain why Bjork looks like an Eskimo. Yet according to Nazis Scandinavians are the purest 'aryans'!

In order to assert your moral claim for 'whites' (Germans) to enslave 'non-whites' (Russians)who you regard as alien to Europe, you must first show who is European and who is not. And on that score, you have proven nothing.

You might well say Germans were aliens in Russia, yet you don't seem quite so hot and bothered about the prospect of Germans ruling the place for 1000 years (or whatever!). And one other thing, in the longer term Germany and Germans faired much better under Russian rule than how Russians / Russia would've faired under Nazi rule. Try factoring that into your nauseating pro-Nazi arguments next time.

Blood and Soil said...

Anonymous, 18:57, 20:10, Nazi Germany had a large number of imported labourers but also had to govern, defend and secure a vast area which significantly overstretched its armed forces.
Finland, Italy and Romania were a tiny fraction of the production capacity and military might of the Soviet Union, the USA and the other Allies. Germany was also being increasingly bombed to destruction and was simply outgunned, outnumbered and outproduced.
The Red Army's fanatical bravery is well known and their refusal to surrender in the vast encirclement battles in the first few months of Barbarossa, caused the Germans major delays as they were forced to mop up far longer than they had planned for. This led them into the early torrential rains and early and severe winter, all of which stopped them taking Moscow.
Aid wasn't slow in coming, 75% of the tanks used defending Moscow were provided by the Allies, before the Soviet's massively increased all production from Tankograd etc.
The Battle of Britain was in reality an extremely close run conflict. The heroism and skill of the RAF and Goering's major error in switching from bombing RAF airfields to British cities were the two most significant factors.
I wonder what many of those British pilots who gave their lives would make of the state of our inner cities today where British faces are increasingly a rarity.
Your cribbed diatribe on White genes directly confirms my previous post that the White race, like all races has no exact genetic classification just shared, centuries old strong cultural, ethnic and geographical links, subdivided into various regions and nations.
As for being under Soviet rule, the biggest mass murder scheme in human history is communism. Of the 100 million killed, at least 20 million are thought to have been killed by the Soviet Union. All these atrocities and crimes, whoever committed them, are part of history. NOW, the White European people's lands are the ONLY ONES being deliberately deluged with highly fertile, and fundamentally alien peoples and cultures who have ghettoised themselves and taken over many of our towns and cities.
It boils down to whether an individual cares about the destruction of their people or not. The gullible, modern 'global village' fantasists should take a reality and demographics check. The White race is currently on course for destruction and replacement.
Whatever the crimes and brutalities of National Socialism were, it would never have allowed our people's extermination.

Anonymous said...

Getting involved in WWII was one of Britain's biggest ever blunders. Hitler had no interest in invading Britain and admired the empire. He wanted a deal (there is now strong evidence that that is precisely what Hess was sent to Britain to negotiate) and we should have done one.
Hundreds of thousands of British dead, the country bankrupted and a few decades later we're overrun with a tsunami of imported, often hostile foreign cultures. What was it for, that's the question to be asked. Britain and the west is on the way out by orchestrated, bloodless genocide.
Too much self-interest as a nation/race/culture is a bad idea. Too little is FATAL.

Anonymous said...

@blood and soil

so the Soviet Union fought the first year or so of Barbarossa mainly with USA weapons and equipment did they? And I like the way you dismiss the heroism of Red Army combatants as 'fanaticism'.

As for occupied Europe or allied / puppet governments... France, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, Poland, Denmark, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Italy, Romania, Ukraine, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Norway, Yugoslavia, Greece, Belarus, Finland, Croatia, Albania... I mean, it really was a case of Outmanned outgunned Germany taking on the might of the world wasn't it?

The real miracle of WW2 was the stoicism of the Red Army who retreated back to their major cities and pushed right the way back to Berlin.

As for the 'white race', its relevance here is the fact that you cite Hitler as having been its potential saviour, whilst totally disregarding the fact that he changed his tune and intended for its destruction in the closing phase of WW2. Having lost the war to what he (and you) regard as a 'non-European' race (Slavic Russians), the Germans should go the way of natural selection and perish. Whatever Hitler's initial motivation was in relation to 'the white European race', it's a complete irrelevance when the same man decides he's got it all wrong and credits 'non-white' Russians as the rightful heirs to the soil of Germany.

And when you've actually researched what Nazi plans were for post-war Russia and eastern Europe, then come back and tell me that your 'white' brothers in Germany had it so much worse in the cold war years under Russian rule.

Blood and Soil said...

@ Anonymous 16:20, I didn't say 'The Soviet Union fought the first year or so of Barbarossa mainly with USA weapons and equipment' so don't misquote me. I said 75% of the tanks used in the defence of Moscow were provided by the Allies, before the Soviet's massively increased all production from Tankograd etc. This was in direct rebuttal to your previous incorrect point that 'Allied aid was slow in coming.'.
I said 'fanatical bravery' not 'fanaticism', another convenient misquote directly altering the meaning and intent of my point, i.e. the Red Army's backbone is what saved the Soviet Union in its greatest hour of peril.
The production capacity, military might and manpower of the USA abd Soviet Union alone dwarfed anything the Germans could produce, depite Speer's near miracle production increases whilst Germany was being saturation bombed and blockaded. So yes it really was a case of outmanned, outnumbered, outgunned Germany talking on the might of the world. All the puppet government's listed had to be simultaneously ruled, administered, governed and secured by a combination of the individual nation's Nazi selected rulers and men, and German occupying forces, further massively overstretching the remaining Axis and German military.
I never cited Hitler as having been the White race's saviour but said a modern day National Socialist regime, whatever its failings and excesses would never allow the ongoing annihilation and replacement of the White European peoples.
The conflict wasn't against the 'Slavic Russians' it was against the vast, multi-ethnic Soviet Union with its varying peoples, some of European or similar stock, some Slavic, some Mongoloid etc. Modern terms like non-White weren't relevant (there was mass uncontrolled Third World style immigration unlike now) or used and the Axis powers contained similar ethnic nations like Romania and Bulgaria, proving race (whatever its perceived propaganda value) was far less significant than to Axis partners than territory, ideology, resoruces and security.
No-one has mentioned the Cold War or denied planned or actual oppression and atrocities by any side.
It boils down to the survival of the White European peoples and whether an individual cares about that. Whether they are prepared to support ideologies and organisations who will take the necessary action to ensure our continued existence.
Modern, democratic western governments have patently and utterly failed in this and are (by deliberate action, omission or cowardice) actively complicit in our ongoing destruction.
A different attitude with no fake selfish, assumed 'morality' (assisting in the eradication of your own people is now moral) is now required to save our peoples.

Anonymous said...

Give me Hitler, Uncle Joe, Hirohito etc anytime over the shambolic bunch of gutless traitors in charge of GB now. None of them would have let their countries be overrun with millions of unwanted foreigners and parasites.

Real History said...

Game, set and match to Blood and Soil. You have comprehensively annihilated the argument put forward by Mr or Mrs History Channel.

Red Star said...

Well, 'fanatical bravery' is (by definition) fanaticism. And whilst I'm no scholar of history, I'm pretty certain that the Soviet war effort was far more commendable than your bastardised re-revisionist account which focusses all merit on your German heroes. And I'm not entirely sure how you would quantify the supposed complications which made occupied Europe more of a hindrance than a boon for the Nazis. But I very much doubt that the German Army would have had such an easy ride to Moscow with nothing but Germany to rely on. I'm really not interested in what any one cherry picked supposed 'fact' has to say, the link above I'd say gives a more factual account of the times.

As for those eastern Europeans who fought with the Nazis, well they were just convenient cannon fodder. Ukrainians and the likes were not regarded as 'Germanic' and certainly wouldn't have formed the basis of any Nazi 'master race'. And I very much doubt the English would either. Whatever his supposed admiration of Britain may have amounted to, Hitler has (I think) been quoted as saying the average Englishman is of 'lower stock' than the average German.

Are the Celts of Britain Germanic / white, or are they 'non white' like anyone east of Austria or somewhere dividing Slovaks and Czechs perhaps? The Celtic genetic presence in the 'Saxon' English is quite prevalent and vice versa. Do you think there's been no intermarriage between Austrians and those from neighbouring eastern European countries who you deem as 'non European'? You prattle on about 'white European' whilst failing to provide anything in the way of a clear cut definition of the very thing you feel so passionately about. What about European Americans many of whom are a mix of European ethnic groups incl. slavs like Poles - are Americans 'non white' too?

I'm by no means a 'Red', but neither am I Nazi admirer.
And I have to wonder what your view would be if Nazi plans for eastern Europe had instead been directed at Britain. Sorry, but I don't regard Russians and the likes as any less worthy a people than your precious 'white British' or 'white Germans'. So telling me that 'the white race' would've been better off had eastern Europeans been conquered and enslaved just doesn't wash.

And it doesn't wash either coming from a load of jingoistic national chauvinists who are still disgruntled about the BNP's failings at the ballot box. And I certainly don't regard 'the white race' as represented by ex Tameside BNP members as being any kind of people or race more worthy of 'saving' than the average Russian or Pole.

Blood and Soil said...

Fanatical bravery isn't by definition fanaticism at all, you said 'I dismissed Red Army combatants' with the word fanaticism, that was a direct, intentional misquote. I have never denied the Red Army's heroism which is why I have repeatedly used terms such as fanatical bravery.
I have never 'focussed all merit' on the Germans and you can't point out where I have, so that's a lie. They aren't my 'heroes', but the German armed forces had both admirable qualities and brutal methods: from fighting, organisational and tactical skills to the atrocities they, and the Soviets, Japanese and many other nation's forces carried out.
I referred to the governance of occupied Europe in rebuttal of your point that it was a source of benefit to the German armed forces, it was also a massive drain on their time, effort, manpower and resources.
The Germans didn't have an 'easy ride to Moscow', it was a harsh, brutal conflict and no-one suggested the Germans didn't have help but they did the vast bulk of the work and often had to bolster failing allies.
Posting links is desperation on your part and a patent attempt to substitute for your inavility to construct reasoned argument and answer any of the points raised.
No-one has ever said any of the Axis Ukrainian/Romanian/Bulgarian etc forces were Germanic. They were however ideologically similar and for mutual reasons of territorial gain, security and the benefits of picking what they thought would be a more beneficial to side to them, allied themselves with the Axis.
I have repeatedly said, and you have repeatedly failed to respond, that the White European peoples, like all races, have no exact DNA classification just a centuries long, cultural, ethnic and geographical connection. Absolute racial purity doesn't exist, ethnic and cultural extreme similarities built and connected over millennia DO.
I never said the White race would be better off if the Russian had been conquered and enslaved, you are now responding to your OWN points. I said a modern day National Socialist regime would never have allowed the White European of British peoples to be replaced and annihilated as they are undoubtedly being by the mass importation of foreigners, many of them utterly alien to our way of life and culture who are forming exponentially ghettos in our towns and cities.
The sufferings in 1940s Europe however severe, are of inifintely less importance to anyone who actually does care about the current survival of Britain and Europe as recognisable cultural and ethnic entities. You clearly don't care about that, that's left to what you choose to describe as 'National Chauvinist' types, patriots would be a better word.
I have no idea what the local BNP's relevance to any of this is supposed to be, perhaps its just barrel scraping on your part.

Anonymous said...

It's NOW that matters and I'd take a dictator who'd stand up for our land and the White British people any day over the scum backstabbers in power now.

'European' said...

"Posting links is desperation..."

Or more accurately put - is boredom. I'm really not interested in debating the ins and outs of WW2, other than to put a more rational take on matters when having to listen to some cranky Hitlerite falsely imply... a) that the Wehrmacht fought primarily on its own merits whilst... b) the Red Army's efforts must be considered in light of all outside help received.

So to the get back to the original point which was of real interest to me... Hitler's Nero Decree, which (at once) makes an utter nonsense of everything you've argued. When a man decrees that his own people (Germans? The 'white race'?) have lost the right to exist in favour of Russians, then all previous proclamations and motivations are an irrelevance. That's the point chump, the significance of which you seem utterly incapable of grasping.

As for 'white European race', thanks for confirming your total failure to define the very thing which is your primary driving force in life. You differentiated 'white Europeans' from 'Slavs'. To define separate 'races' (or more scientifically - sub-species) certain tests have to applied. One is to separate a mix of two groups into their respective categories with a 75-90% success rate. On that score I would challenge anyone to separate Swedes from Poles and score a decisive win, yet the former are said by some to be the most 'Germanic' and the latter the most 'Slavic'.

And to add to the complication, differentiating Slavs as 'non-European' or 'less white' (serpentslayer) is also dubious, since many Slavs are said by some to be more 'European' than some 'Germanics' as per the link above. Hitler's intention was to enslave Slavs, so declaring him as in any way 'pro-European' is open to interpretation. The long of short of it is that Hitler was a comedian, a self obsessed megalomaniac who would sooner write his own people off as 'inferior' than admit to his own faults and failings, which included his craven last stand in Berlin.

As for what I believe, well, if the 'white race' is so superior, then it can survive in multi-ethnic lands can't it? To the best of my knowledge, no-one's being told whether they can have children and who they are allowed to have children with. If being white Anglo-Saxon British means so much to you, then self organise your own communities and networks and reproduce with your own kind and try convincing your other precious white indigenous Britons to do the same. But expecting a government in Downing Street that is going to 'repatriate' anyone whose 1500 year old bloodline is not pure 'British' or 'Germanic' is not happening any time soon. Sorry.

Blood and Soil said...

@ European, You don't come across as bored. Just extremely vague, confused and indifferent to the ongoing destruction of the White European peoples.
You patently ARE interested in debating the ins and outs of WWII as you repeatedly post on it whilst simultaneously failing to reply to points raised.
The original post was that a modern National Socialist regime would never have allowed the White European peoples to be annihilated by imported mass replacement, an indisputable fact.
I'm not a Hitlerite, I just want my kinsmen and my kind to survive, a thing you don't care about.
The Wehrmacht DID primarily achieve things on their own merits, but had help from, and was frequently called upon to help other Axis powers, another point I have repeatedly stated. Nor have I attempted to deny or diminish the bravery of the Red Army, quite the contrary.
'I die with a happy heart, aware of the immeasurable deeds and achievements of our soldiers at the front, our women at home and the achievements of our farmers and workers. That from the bottom of my heart I express my thanks to you all'. From Hitler's official political testament.
Another repeat ramble about the lack of precise DNA classification in racial typing that simply confirms MY previous, repeated point, demonstrates the paucity of your argument.
Bu multi-ethnic lands I presume you mean the formerly homogeneous lands of the White European peoples. The indigenous communities you sneeringly describe MAY come to pass but will no doubt be derided as 'racist' all the way by you and your ilk. The law itself is increasingly being weighted to prevent ANY expression of the rights and desires of the British and European indigenous.
Using terms like 'precious White indigenous Britons' as an insult, when it in fact describes you yourself, demonstrates a warped mental process and also the depths to which your self-loathing, and loathing of the White race itself has sunk.
As for repatriation, maybe maybe not, the priority is survival. But that's something you don't care about isn't it regarding the White race.
I wonder if such ambivalence in your views applies to the survival of other, 'oppressed' peoples from distant lands.

Sour Grapes said...

"The Wehrmacht DID primarily achieve things on their own merits, but had help from, and was frequently called upon to help other Axis powers, another point I have repeatedly stated."

Well approximately three quarters of the German army were stationed in the east from 1941 onwards. I know that simply because I recall none other than John Tyndall making the point when discussing WW2. As for uncle Adolf's official stance, well I'm not aware that 'official' has ever been any measure of truth value. I'll prefer to believe Speer's testimony at Nuremberg.

You also make a lot of false assumptions. I'm not of the 'left', I'm what you might call a bit of an anarchist, but of the kind that wouldn't disallow any group the freedom of association or disassociation. It's far right cranks like you who want to narrow down the choice of who people breed with so as to preserve some narrow little sub group of a sub group. So here might be a good place to start recruiting for your little Anglo-Saxon breeding colony... http://www.whitelover.co.uk/

Blood and Soil said...

German forces were stationed where they were needed in whatever proportion was required or available. The specific proportion serving in the east or any other area is irrelevant to the point raised. They and their allies were increasingly overstretched.
Speer was chosen as the 'good' repentant Nazi by the victors and rewarded with survival and prison instead of execution. He was unlikely to say much that was non-condemnatory about Hitler or National Socialism.
I never said you were of the left and haven't made any assumptions just responded directly to points raised.
An anarchist who 'wouldn't allow' freedom of association? You really are confused aren't you.
I'm not far right and the White race isn't any kind of sub group but a large group of extremely similar peoples connected by blood, culture, history and geography. I'm proud to have Anglo Saxon and Celtic blood and want to perpetuate our kind who have made and helped to make so many magnificent achievements throughout human history. You aren't and don't care if the White race is exterminated.

Russian Bear said...

I'd sooner believe Albert Speer than I would David Irving. I even recall a speech Hitler made referencing natural selection regarding the loss of the war, and unless it was mis-translated and everyone's lying on something else as well as the 'holohoax' I have no problem believing anything about that nutjob.

"An anarchist who 'wouldn't allow"...

Err, DISallow actually, for those who can't even be bothered putting on the glasses they're clearly in dire need of when debating on internet forums. And that I'd say is a good place to terminate this particular debate.

You're a tiresome chap, blood and soil, a first class time waster on account of the very simple fact of being totally immune to reasoned argument. But with a name like B & S I suppose I should've known better... another phrase for cowpat springs to mind.

And don't **** with Russia again Nazi boy, 'cause next time they might opt to be as severe on you 'Germanics' as what your Fuhrer intended on Russia (before sore loser syndrome kicked in and Russians became the new 'master rece').

Blood and Soil said...

The political testament is part of the official international war record and nothing to with David Irving. Speer was a very shrewd man and bought his life by playing the role expected of him as the repentant Nazi.
If you've no problem with freedom of association you'll have no problem with the White peoples of Britain and Europe wanting to live and survive in THEIR OWN ancestral homelands. Currently we're having mass immigration from every part of the world, but particularly the more backward parts of the EU and the Third World, forced upon us. A modern National Socialist regime, whatever its excesses and failings, would never have allowed that to happen, which was the original point posted. The right to survive, and do what is necessary to survive, takes absolute priority.
'Totally immune to reasoned argument', I've responded to all your posts with reasoned argument and counterpoints, something you have singularly failed to do.
I'm not 'Germanic' but like many Brits and Europeans have some 'Germanic' genetic components, combined with other European types.
The 'Russians' didn't win the war or even the multi-ethnic Soviet Union, the Allies did with their overwhelming superiority in manpower, resources and production capacity.