BNP Chairman´s statement on the Gaza incident

**Wowbanger TIP** · 21-01-2009 08:40 PM

Originally Posted by angelman

BNP might well have taken this stance of nothing to do with us, but that just shows why a lot of people will never be able to vote for them. If they are to be taken as a serious political party, then surely they should have a foreign policy. I know the likes of TIP and London Orbital say that it has nothing to do with us, but if a party can't show that it has decent foreign policies, are we supposed to take them seriously on other parts of life and the economy?

Where have you been? I've been arguing Israel's case for weeks at great length (and élan and success as usual).

Griffin is wrong, nationalism does not preclude a position on the affairs, even internal affairs of other nations.

It is in the interests of a British nationalist government to make sure it has ideological allies and is not surrounded by internationalist and Imperialists. It also has a moral duty to ensure that it does what it can to bestow the right of democratic self determination on any people who want it.

It does not have the right to interfere in another self determining democratic nation states internal business, but we can safely assume that the Foreign Office won't be surplus to requirements anytime soon.

In practical terms a British Nationalist foreign policy would have to support Russia and Israel as these are the two most powerful nationalist states on Earth. But of course Griffin's position is not defined by Nationalism.

**moon** · 22-01-2009 08:37 AM

British Conservatism;

If the BNP say it is nothing to do with us then it is our foreign policy isnt it.
Stay neutral unless British interests are concerned.

Respect for international law is in British interests. The UK is too small to exist without it.

Populist Lee;

There's not one damn thing any of you can do about aggressive Zionism.
Get used to it.

You're wrong. Fascism is not a natural state of Man and fascists' tanks need fascist drivers.

Wowbanger;

It ( British nationalism ) also has a moral duty to ensure that it does what it can to bestow the right of democratic self determination on any people who want it.

Then it should champion the Palestinians, using the tools of international law. Brits are never, ever, going to elect a bandit regime.

**angelman** · 22-01-2009 08:44 AM

Originally Posted by Wowbanger TIP

Where have you been? I've been arguing Israel's case for weeks at great length (and élan and success as usual).

Yes you have - apologies.

BC - I know where you are coming from but can't agree. You say that your (BNP) neutral stance is your foreign policy, but saying "It's nothing to do with us" is not even taking a neutral stance. It's a cop out. To me a neutral stance would be to comment about the situation and both sides, but not to pass judgement.

Out of interest (and not sure if it has been covered) why was this statement released in the first place? Was he asked what he thought? If BNP were to take a neutral stance wouldn't it have been better not to even release this cop-out statement?

**moon** · 22-01-2009 08:48 AM

Out of interest (and not sure if it has been covered) why was this statement released in the first place?

I did contact the BNP and offered to help formulate a policy on Zionism if none existed. Perhaps lots of other people did too and the 'statement' is the result. Now I'm wondering if 'Mighty Erick's' take on the 'statement' is the general consensus. People do get a tad peeved having armored fascists dictating terms to the international community.

**whypatcondellisntfun** · 22-01-2009 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by angelman

If BNP were to take a neutral stance wouldn't it have been better not to even release this cop-out statement?

Er... That is what I said here : http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/592680-post124.html

**British-Conservatism** · 22-01-2009 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by angelman

Yes you have - apologies.

BC - I know where you are coming from but can't agree. You say that your (BNP) neutral stance is your foreign policy, but saying "It's nothing to do with us" is not even taking a neutral stance. It's a cop out. To me a neutral stance would be to comment about the situation and both sides, but not to pass judgement.

Out of interest (and not sure if it has been covered) why was this statement released in the first place? Was he asked what he thought? If BNP were to take a neutral stance wouldn't it have been better not to even release this cop-out statement?

Read the article he does comment on both sides.

**British-Conservatism** · 22-01-2009 10:31 AM

Interesting situation here.

Nazis and Muslims v the BNP and Israel.

**moon** · 22-01-2009 11:11 AM

Interesting situation here.

Nazis and Muslims v the BNP and Israel.

How do you manage to connect 'Nazis' with 'muslims' when the actions of the Zionist military in Gaza are closely comparable to the actions of the Nazi military in Warsaw ? What examples of 'muslim nazism' would you use to offset this query ?

**Wowbanger TIP** · 22-01-2009 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by British-Conservatism

Interesting situation here.

Nazis and Muslims v the BNP and Israel.

Actually the line up goes Progressives, Infanatlized kidults, Communists, Muslims and Nazis Vs Democratic Nationalism as represent by Israel.

The BNP's position is far more nuanced.

**david H** · 22-01-2009 01:21 PM

This is another from Reconquista on green arrow forum and shows how the socialists have become the Nazis while nationalists oppose anti-Semitism.

The Green Arrow-Supporting the BNP - The March Of The Dhimmis - Reconquista

Thread: BNP Chairman´s statement on the Gaza incident

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions