Comments on: Is the BNP Christian?

By: EscapeVelocity (nwo)

EscapeVelocity (nwo) — Thu, 07 May 2009 05:18:18 +0000

The BNP in its essence is divisive, elitist, exclusive and flavoured with more than a pinch of hatred. — Israelnurse

Just like the Western Left.

By: sheik yer'mami

sheik yer'mami — Mon, 04 May 2009 23:02:20 +0000

“What passes for Christianity in this country today can only be described as superstitious sociology; a bland doctrine of welfare-mongering with guilt, humility and self-abasement as its cardinal principles. We can only have contempt for a Church which, in the name of Christianity, facilitates the Islamic occupation of whole neighbourhoods, condones homosexuality, promotes multi-racialism and will forgive everything.”

You have a problem with that? I don’t. I don’t care for the warped ideology of Paganism or Odinism either, but the man’s views on Christianity are spot on.

As for “our race is our religion”- his issue is that he prefers white Anglo’s to black Africans or the invading Muslim proletariat. He must have forgotten that being called “racist” is far worse than being a pedophile. Well, if Africa is for the Africans he might not be the only racist on the globe. Black on white racism may not exist in Nullabour Britain or on Harry’s Place, but the reality bites.

The “nation is our church” – what problem do you have with that? Is it wrong being a nationalist? And then there are those who see Nazi’s behind every bush: if they can’t win an argument by reason they shout you down. One poster above even invoked the BNP-man’s ‘German genealogy”- wow, what could be a greater crime in Britain today!

By: DocMartyn

DocMartyn — Mon, 04 May 2009 22:46:43 +0000

2500 years ago the Greeks imported their tin from the “White Hill of Ictis”, in the ‘Cassiterides’. Nowadays it is St Michael’s Mount, Cornwall.

http://www.roman-britain.org/places/ictis.htm

By: mettaculture

mettaculture — Mon, 04 May 2009 21:38:54 +0000

Someone

sorry I was merging you into larkers.

I think the word nation has an older pedigree than the nation state after all the United Kingdom of Great Britain is a multi nation state.

just explaining the title of this country already will lead you down the path of realising that there were four nations in existence for over the last 100o years.

Of course pre-history gets murkier but the new genetics is essential to incorporate in understanding this.

Curiously the DNA map of human history looks very like an evolutionary linguistic one.

Sure whole populations change language but they never do so without some migration of a new elite class

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 04 May 2009 21:30:09 +0000

This has to be the most erudite and original comments thread for a very long time. Far more enlightening and entertaining than the usual name-calling over Israel/Palestine.

For my part, if Odinism means I can get to behave like Kirk Douglas in “The Vikings” (and run off with Janet Leigh), then I’m all for it!

By: M o r g o t h

M o r g o t h — Mon, 04 May 2009 21:07:37 +0000

I think Morgoth and Metta have played way too much Dungeons and Dragons…

There’s no such thing as too much Dungeons and Dragons.

By: Israelinurse

Israelinurse — Mon, 04 May 2009 21:05:00 +0000

BTW -if you’re a Dungeons & Dragons freak you’re liable to get a lower score on your psychological profile from the IDF psychologists.

By: hasan prishtina

hasan prishtina — Mon, 04 May 2009 20:38:25 +0000

Placing a verb before the subject does happen in classical Hebrew: bereshit bara eloh!m et hashamayim v’et ha’aretz. It also happens in Maori and (to some extent) in Albanian and (less so) in Dutch. Make of this what you will.

By: Someone

Someone — Mon, 04 May 2009 20:20:16 +0000

“I came across a theory that Welsh shares an a syntatical feature with semitic languages, namely the placing of the verb before the subject”

This is a highly bizarre and unlikely theory, since in Semitic languages (well, Hebrew anyway) the verb can come either before or more often AFTER the noun it relates to.

By: Someone

Someone — Mon, 04 May 2009 20:18:01 +0000

Metta, you got me quite wrong, I am afraid. Far from “deconstructing”, my intention was to re-establish concrete facts in the face of reality-deconstructing myths.
The pre-history of this island gains no credibility from becoming hostage to cod-Celtic fantasisers. Indeed, it becomes a silly game of Dungeons and Dragons, Swords and Sandals and Sorcery. Only serious archaeology can tell us whether there were nations here, or tribes, or roving bands of hunter-gatherers or (semi-)settled villagers.
I am no professional archaeologists, but have read a bit of serious archaeology on this subject. Let me assure you that there was no coherent entity around 1000-500 BC (which is what I was talking about, not 150 BC). Nor did I ever mention “Lost”.
A language in and of itself is insufficient evidence for a nation, all the more so as there were no written languages in Britain at the time. That is why we know so little about the supposed Celts, despite the great deal of serious research. Professional archaeologists still don’t know for sure where they came from, ultimately. Professional maps show a fuzzy “Celtic” region extending all across central Europe but even into eastern Turkey.
The survival of languages X and Y over 2000 years later is very difficult to relate with certainty to what was happening to those illiterate tribes at the time, and the experts don’t try to.
My point was to emphasise the huge and genuine ignorance that still exists about those people in the 1st and 2nd millenia BC.