opinionated

ANKARA (AFP) - Cheap cover prices and a rise in nationalist sentiment have made an unlikely best-seller in Turkey of Adolf Hitler's infamous autobiography, "Mein Kampf", analysts here say.
The book was first published here in 1939, when Axis and Allied countries were competing for Turkey's soul as they tried to woo it away from the neutrality it would maintain until the very end of World War II.
But since January, the book has sold more than 50,000 copies and is number four on the best-seller list drawn up by the DetR bookstore chain.
"'Mein Kampf' has always been a sleeper, a secret best-seller," said Oguz Tektas of Mefisto editions, one of several publishing houses to re-release the book Hitler wrote while in jail in 1925. "We took it out of the closet for purely commercial reasons."
His company's sole aim, he stressed, was "to make money," which they did by slashing the cover price.
"Mein Kampf," published by about a dozen companies over the years, always sold at a fairly steady annual rate of about 20,000 at some 20 New Turkish Lira (YTL -- 11.3 euros or 15 dollars) a copy.
The Mefisto edition retails at 5.90 YTL (3.3 euros or 4.5 dollars) and sold 23,000 copies in two months.
The readership?
"Those who want to know about a man who wreaked death and destruction on the world," Tektas said.
"Mostly young people," said Sami Kilic, owner of the Emre publishing house, another company on the "Mein Kampf" bandwagon, which sold 26,000 copies from a run of 31,000 released in late January.
"The times we live in have a definite impact on sales," Kilic said. "It is an astonishing phenomenon."
He linked interest in the book to Turkey's bid to join the European Union, seen by the right-wing as a desertion of national values, and rising sentiment against the United States and its ally Israel over the treatment they are perceived here as meting out to the Iraqis and the Palestinians, respectively.
"This book, which does not contain a single ounce of humanity, unfortunately appears to be taken seriously in this country," political scientist Dogu Ergil complained in a recent newspaper interview.
He agreed that the unexpected popularity of "Mein Kampf" in this Muslim-majority country has its roots in a rise in anti-American sentiment sparked by the occupation of Iraq and anti-Semitism resulting from Israel's Palestinian policy.
"Nazism, buried in the dustbin of history in Europe, is beginning to re-emerge in Turkey," he warned.
But despite what the sales may imply, Turkey has never been an anti-Semitic country -- on the contrary, it has been a safe haven for Jews ever since the 15th century, when Sultan Bayezit II first took in Spanish Jews fleeing the inquisition.
Throughout Ottoman times and the republic proclaimed in 1923, Jews fleeing pogroms and extermination camps were always welcome in Turkey.
Silvyo Ovadya, the head of Turkey's Jewish community, said he was "troubled" by the book's popularity.
Ovadya told AFP he was "astonished a 500-page book that sows the seeds of racism and anti-Semitism can sell at such a low price."
But, he said, his complaints to the publishers have gone unheeded.
Most of Turkey's 22,000 Jews -- out of a total population of 71 million -- live in Istanbul, where there are 18 synagogues.
In November 2003, two of them were targeted by car bombs blamed on an Al-Qaeda linked organisation, killing 25 people and wounding hundreds of others.

opinionated

:roll:

opinionated

opinionated

ow listen Aardark!

You apprarently find me boring and challenge my ancestary and you find me a racist . What you don't realise is I am challenging the notions of what is evil.

You claim Nazis are bad news whilst Aryan Idians are just "drongos " Come on, when are you going to admit that the Indian caste system is a racist sytem worst than the Nazis

As far as your Vietnamese connectio is concerned, her country had the common sense to remain a monocultural society. They dont have multiculuralism. you want to see racism, go to Asia! It should also be said the punishment she suffered was a cultural thing, not a communist thing. The Vietnamese place people in Tiger cages in water and used panji sticks as weapons. They are far more racist as a culture than any dopey Nazi! I am also sincerely very sorry if this woman suffered like this!

I am not asking that you should discriminate against individuals! However State enforced multicultural and immigration programmes are bad news and are seperate from the individual

All to dopes rave on about naughty nazis yet taking the circumstances of the time INTO phpbb_account I find the Nazis Innocent of the charge of the most evil regime in history


So let's hear someone say that the caste system is evil. Let's hear you exclaim the forced marriages of **** girls born and bred in England is wrong, can you do it!

German to marry German is racist and nazi, but good jewish boy matty only good jewish girl is culture. hahahaha! God you hypcrits are sickening

OB

Ho hum.

opinionated

Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 1:57 AM
Subject: The Politics of Auschwitz by Gilad Atzmon who served in the Israeli
military...


> January 30, 2005
>
> The Myth of the Open Society
> The Politics of Auschwitz
> By GILAD ATZMON
>
> Gilad Atzmon was born in Israel and served in the Israeli military. He is
the
> author of the new novel A Guide to the Perplexed. Atzmon is also one of
the
> most accomplished jazz saxophonists in Europe. His recent CD, Exile, was
named
> the year's best jazz CD by the BBC. He now lives in London and can be
reached
> at: atz@onetel.net.uk
>
> Start:
> http://www.counterpunch.org/atzmon01292005.html
>
>
> Sixty years after liberation, Auschwitz became an international political
> event. It is no coincidence, and I feel that we should spare a moment
asking
> ourselves: why now, why Auschwitz?
>
> Living in a scientific technological environment, it is natural for most
> commentators to judge any given narrative reflecting on its positive
contents,
> i.e. the story it tells, the facts it picks up on and the message it
conveys.
> When it comes to Auschwitz, it is always the terrifying numbers, Mengele
and the
> selection, the clinical mass murder, the Gas Chambers, the trains, the
famous
> Arbeit Macht Frei above the front gate, the death march just before
liberation
> etc. And yet, I would argue that it is at least as enlightening to expose
> that which the Auschwitz narrative is there to conceal. Every historical
tale can
> operate as a smoke screen; narratives are very effective in encouraging
> collective blindness. Auschwitz and the Holocaust narrative, in this
sense, are no
> different.
>
> As it seems, without engaging ourselves with the many questions,
> concerning the validity of the widely accepted holocaust narrative, we can
> safely ask what the Auschwitz Narrative is there to serve. Who benefits
from the
> Auschwitz account? We are entitled to ask why the official holocaust
> narrative is so widely promoted by different and opposing political
institutions. Is
> it a result of a highly sophisticated orchestrated Jewish propaganda? I am
not
> so sure anymore.
>
> On the surface, the answer to these questions is simple, the devastating
> image of the Auschwitz and the Nazi Judeocide is a self-sufficient
argument
> against nationalism, racism and totalitarianism. Within the state of
acceptance of
> the holocaust tale, any of these three is regarded as an enemy of
humanity. But
> then, one must admit that it neither nationalism, racism, nor
totalitarianism
> that killed so many innocent human beings in Auschwitz. Ideologies do not
> kill, it is always people who kill, regardless of their ideologies.
>
> But it goes a bit further, with the image of Auschwitz in the back of our
> minds, our western liberal thinkers and politicians are enthusiastically
> depicting a naive vision of our social reality, presenting us with a
simplistic binary
> division. On the one hand, we find the open society, on the other, we find
> its many enemies. Following this world view, there is only one open
society, but
> many different enemies; and yet, it is important to mention that the open
> society is an empty signifier, in practice it means very little, not to
say
> nothing. As it seems, in order to become a member in the exclusive open
club, one
> simply must join the right wars. President Bush, a man who is far from
being
> eloquent when verbal capabilities are concerned, was unexpectedly
articulate in
> presenting that very post Auschwitz western axiom: you are either with us
or
> against us.
>
> Being with us, namely being amongst the open, means that you believe that
it
> was us who liberated Europe, it was us who liberated Auschwitz, it was us
who
> saved the Jews, and it is us who still bring the notion of democracy to
the
> most remote corners of this boiling planet. Being with us means that you
accept
> the fact that we are the voice of the free world. It means as well that
you
> know that you are unconditionally free. It is basically a new form of
tautology:
> you are free even if you aren't. Being with us means that you believe that
> the world is rapidly progressing towards a greater divide, namely a
cultural
> clash, in which you are a good innocent Judeo-Christian enlightened being,
and
> the rest are dark fundamental evils or at least potential evil. Being with
us
> means that you are not supposed to ask too many questions about our own
immoral
> conduct. For instance, you don't ask why Bomber Harris & co. murdered
850,000
> German civilians, targeting German cities rather than Nazi industrial
> infrastructure.
>
> Being a free being in an open society means that you should never raise
> questions about Hiroshima. In case you are stupid enough to raise the
issue, you
> had better be clever enough to accept the official lie: it was the best
way to
> bring this horrible war to an end. Being a free being you won't raise
questions
> regarding the morality behind leaving 2,000,000 fatalities in Vietnam.
Being
> with us means that you don't have to ask all those silly annoying
questions
> because Auschwitz is the ultimate in evil. Auschwitz is the bedrock of
human
> wickedness and don't you ever forget that it was us who put it to an end.
>
> Let us put the truth in place, Auschwitz was beyond doubt a horrible
place,
> but unfortunately it isn't the ultimate evil, just because evil has
neither
> limit nor scale. But, to be historically accurate, it wasn't even us who
> liberated Auschwitz. As it appears, it was Stalin, the other evil. It was
Stalin who
> gave so many Jewish, POWs, political prisoners, gypsies and inmate the
chance
> to see daylight. But again, being a free being in an open society you
don't
> really have to pay attention to minor historical details.
>
> It would seem that Auschwitz is essential within our righteous western
self
> image. When Iraqi oil is in demand, the American president will equate
Saddam
> with Hitler. Next we will learn that the Iraqi people should be liberated
from
> their 'Auschwitz'. We already know the inevitable consequences.
>
> Since Auschwitz is so crucial for the American policy makers, it isn't
> surprising that not too far from the residency of the American president,
there is a
> big Holocaust museum dedicated to the memory of the Jewish people and
their
> heroic liberators. This museum is not about people or even about crimes
against
> humanity, it is about the maintenance of the illusion of the open society.
It
> is about the maintenance of a very specific narrative. It is all about how
we
> are right, and they, who ever they are, are categorically wrong.
>
> This museum is not really about Jewish suffering. I assume that there will
be
> some basic facts that the museum won't share with its visitors: for
instance,
> it will not tell the passing crowd that the American government adopted a
> highly restrictive immigration policy that was never modified between
1933-1944,
> in order to block Jewish immigration. It will avoid the fact that the
American
> government refused or obstructed German offers of negotiation to remove
Jews
> from Nazi controlled territories. Mostly important, it will hide the clear
> fact that the US air force was not instructed to disrupt the Nazi killing
> machine. Neither railways to Auschwitz nor Auschwitz itself was ever
bombed neither
> by the RAF nor by the American Air Force. It seems as if a real murderous
> negligence was involved in the American decision making on the issue along
side the
> war. For instance, on 20 August 1944, 127 flying fortress escorted by one
> hundred Mustang fighters successfully dropped their bombs on a factory
less than
> five miles from Auschwitz. Not a single plane was diverted to attack the
death
> camp.
>
> These stories won't appear in the American Holocaust museum. They simply
> don't fit INTO phpbb_the heroic and righteous American self image. The history
of
> Auschwitz is in fact a story of brutal Anglo American negligence. The
acceptable
> Auschwitz narrative is basically a myth that is there to support the
American
> expansionist practice. Auschwitz is the moral pillar of the American
ideology.
>
> The Holocaust museum is there to tell Americans what may happen when
> everything goes wrong. As sad as it may sound, in contemporary America
everything is
> going wrong, despite of the museum. The reason is simple, when the image
of
> evil is brewed within your cultural heritage as the discourse of the
other, you
> may as well become blind to the fact that you yourself are already evil.
Like
> their Israeli brothers, the Americans forgot how to look at themselves.
>
> In the case of America, the Holocaust narrative serves the right wing
> expansionist philosophy. In order to prevent another Auschwitz, the
Americans will
> send their armies to Vietnam, Korea, Iraq. They are always the liberators.
Till
> the end of the cold war, there were communists to fight with, a real
concrete
> evil; but now the evil is becoming more and more abstract. In fact, the
only
> way to materialise the vague enemy is to equate it with Hitler.
>
> Europe's case is slightly different. As strange as it may sound, in Europe
it
> is the parliamentary left that is capitalising on Auschwitz. As long as
> Auschwitz is there deeply entrenched within the daily discourse, the right
wing can
> never raise their heads. The European mainstream left is totally dependent
on
> the Holocaust narrative and the Auschwitz tale. As it seems, Auschwitz is
the
> last left barricade against the possibility of right wing revival. In
Europe,
> any sense of national aspiration, or even just a demographic concern that
may
> sound like xenophobia is immediately addressed as an awakening of Nazism.
> Within this oppressive world view, people are not allowed to express any
> affection towards their land. Furthermore, being politically dependent on
the image of
> the Jewish innocent victim, the European mainstream left can never fully
> support the Palestinian cause.
>
> As it may seem, Auschwitz stands as a symbol of partnership between the
> European parliamentary left and the American expansionist right. For both,
> Auschwitz stands as an icon of threat against the image of open society,
within the
> prospect of this fatal bond, any European genuine left is destined to be
pushed
> to the margin. Any form of genuine left inspired by red aspirations is
doomed
> to be presented as a subversive and radical outlook. In March 1998, Robin
> Cook, then the British foreign minister, paid a diplomatic visit to
Israel. While
> there, Cook rightly refused to visit Yad Vashem, claiming that he was
> concerned with the future rather than with the past. It wasn't long before
Cook lost
> his job. The refusal to bow to the Auschwitz tale cost Cook his job. It
wasn't
> the Jews who ousted him out of the foreign ministry. It was the Labour
party
> that kicked him out, a parliamentary European left institute.
>
> So, Auschwitz is there to maintain the myth of open society; it is there
to
> present an illusion of liberated Western identity. As long as Auschwitz is
> there, in the core of our discourse, we are everything but liberated.
There is
> life after Auschwitz and this life belongs to us. We had better do
something with
> it. If there is something we should never do, then that is taking other
> people's lives in the name of Auschwitz. And apparently, this is exactly
what we
> are doing.
>
> Gilad Atzmon was born in Israel and served in the Israeli military. He is
the
> author of the new novel A Guide to the Perplexed. Atzmon is also one of
the
> most accomplished jazz saxophonists in Europe. His recent CD, Exile, was
named
> the year's best jazz CD by the BBC. He now lives in London and can be
reached

opinionated

Oh dear my typos are terrible. I must learn to use the spell checker or type slower

O B

Robert Edwards

May I point out that "opininated" is not a member of the BNP and, as such, the logo you have assigned to him is inappropriate.
And in case you ask, yes, I know his true identity.

Aardvark

Opinionated,

I didn't say you were boring, it's just that an ancestry without a whiff of scandal is disappointing. I'd love to stumble across something scandalous in my ancestry, but usually all I find is weavers, miners and farm labourers. The only good bit is the RC soldier of Scots and Irish descent who ran off with the Welsh protestant minister's daughter - that must have had tongues wagging for years.

I don't think I've directly called you racist, although some of your posts suggest you might well be.

The caste system is just that; it is unfair and morally wrong, but there are no recent accounts of mass murder because of caste. There are accounts of individual and localised atrocities that make your assertions that it is evil sustainable in part. The system was originally set up so that there was a clear delineation of roles in society. At the time it originated it must have seemed like a good idea to bring order out of chaos, but it has definitely outlived its usefulness.

In a league of evil Hitler is up near the top with Mao, Stalin. Pol Pot, Nero, de Medici, Torquemada, Genghis Khan and a miriad of despots and rulers who we in the west have never even heard of. It's not even a numbers game; being burnt at the stake for your religion hurts if there is one or a thousand victims. Systematic evil for evil's sake is wrong whether it is committed in the name of communism, nazism, catholicism or whatever. I don't think anyone cares that you find Hitler innocent of running the most evil regime in history - the fact is that the evil he unleashed is something that we really don't need to have repeated.

There is an argument that a 'good Aryan' would not have supported Hitler since a racially superior person would by definition be above murder and expropriation of land and personal property. If I was a racially superior person, which I don't accept that I am, I wouldn't soil my hands using the tactics of the heathen and barbarian.

You need to make sure you're completely sober before you post. It helps the fingers hit the right keys. :roll:

Robert Edwards

If you are not a racially superior person, as you claim, then you would not know what a truly racially superior person would do or not do.
Heathens and barbarians were at the gates of Rome when that empire had become exhausted and decadent. We are heirs to that barbarism, for it inherited the glories before it and built upon them.
I do not know what you mean by "tactics", in this case.

It could be that my friend's fingers are too fat and his keyboard touch-sensitive.