41% of Britons think Holocaust could happen in UK

Status
Not open for further replies.
It would be far easier in the UK because everyone is legaly disarmed, you have survelience everywehere and you can easily pinpoint those you wish to persecute. In the US it would still be possible but you would run into resistance that caused more casualties in the forces employed to round up those to be persecuted. This would stall the genocide and cause a more long term resistance. In the UK however genocide would easily move forward as the death squads moved from house to house clearing unopposed, and able to easily dominate those that did oppose with no casualties.
The cost of genocide in America to a government would be so expensive and costly to the lives of those employed to do it as to be prohibitive. You could twist the encounters in the media to still have majority support by painting the resistance as psycos or criminals, but it would still be costly. In the UK however it would be easy to slaughter a selected people like livestock with nothing but outcry, no actual dangerous or costly resistance.
Guns support a mindset, even if they are not the deciding factor.
 
In Cambodia, I saw the same results, although it doesn't look like it was classified as a genocide. It looks like the Khmer Rouge did have large public support and represented the majority.


Cambodia is one of my areas of speciality, so I'd just like to clear up a few major errors here.

First off, the Khmer Rouge killed around 31% of the population. There was a systematic nature to it as the KR targeted all of those who were educated, involved in the Buddhist community, were middle class, and basically every one else whom they deemed "the enemy".

Also, the Khmer Rouge had virtually no support outside of the European educated fringes (Pol Pot himself was educated in Europe where he picked up Marxism) and the lowliest of poor (who, in every country) are vulnerable to the claims of Communism. The only time when there was a swell in support for the KR was when there would be US bombing in Cambodia and the bombadiers would "accidentally" level a village or a few families.

After the KR took Phnom Pehn they were intially supported because they told the people that they had driven out the Americans and the hated Vietnamese (none of which were really true---the Americans made sure for years that the KR stayed in power because they wanted to spite the Vietnamese any potential territory after they pulled out in '75).

As soon as the mass migrations to the country side began the only people who were "pro-KR" were the ones who either were the thugs with the guns or the hard-core old KR members from the late 60's.


The Cambodian genocide has been largely ignored for many years; offically there is a certain amount of shame on the part of the State department that they refused to allow the Vietnamese remove the KR from power (I'm not saying that the US is complicite in the matter, they had no idea how bad it really was, but they know they could have easily ended it) and unoffically there is less interest in the matter because it occured in the years during the late stages of the Vietnam war and during the aftermath of the war. Most Americans wanted to pretend SE Asia didn't exist at that time.

Also, the Cambodian government hasn't had the support of super-powers to rebuild their country and give them billions of dollars in aid every year. Further more, there isn't a new Cambodian state that can support law-suits bilking billions of dollars in reparations from various minorly guilty parties.
 
These Muslims in London (in the photo) are advocating mass murder, and they're doing it in public. Deport the bastards back to from whence they came. If they're home-grown, throw 'em in jail, or banish them to the Orkney Islands. It's a hate crime. Or haven't they outlawed hate in the UK yet?
 
Forty-one percent of Britons believe that an event like the Holocaust could happen in the country today, given the depth of intolerance and prejudice, according to a new survey.

This is a high number (to me anyway)
The way England is moving (with the gun and camera-everywhere laws) should they really be surprised?
 
The myth that the Nazi's persecuted black people is silly because there really were not enough black people around to be persecuted.


Jesse Owens was well recieved by many in the Nazi party (they saw him as an example of evolution) and to my knowledge there are no known stories of systematic mistreatment of black soldiers who were POW's.

People are mixing up the feelings of modern neo-Nazi's and neo-fascists with the Germans of the 1930-1940's.
 
Despondent ignorant youths being fed b.s. from charismatic leaders.
It is a concept as old as the sands.
 
The myth that the Nazi's persecuted black people is silly because there really were not enough black people around to be persecuted.


Jesse Owens was well recieved by many in the Nazi party (they saw him as an example of evolution) and to my knowledge there are no known stories of systematic mistreatment of black soldiers who were POW's.


Silly? Persecution isn't defined by some number. It's not like if you only have 5,000 blacks in your country, and you kill/torture them all, it doesn't count as a persecution of black people because you didn't kill enough. There wasn't a systematic persecution like there was for the Jews, but the black people in the Nazi regime were isolated, sterilized, subjected to forced experimentation, murdered, among others. And yes, black POWs faced illegal incarceration and abuse at the hands of the Nazis.
 
Obviously this entire discussion is very very much besides the point, but just to quibble, how does the treatment you describe differ from how their own government and military treated them? Black POW officers expressed surprise when they were actually treated like officers, called 'sir' and such. Meanwhile back on the continent black serving soldiers were worse treated that German POWs. There's an entire History Channel documentary on the 56th armoured infantry battalion under Patton, and though it is clearly only one side of the story any evidence you could provide to substantiate your statements would help.

Let's remember that the Nazi's were horribly racist, but selectively so. Else it's hard to explain Hitler's extremely close relations with the Mufti of Jerusalem (a founding father of radical Islam), as they shared a common goal, if not a common background.
 
These Muslims in London (in the photo) are advocating mass murder, and they're doing it in public.

The current British Government is actually importing those types into the country.

Deport the bastards back to from whence they came. If they're home-grown, throw 'em in jail, or banish them to the Orkney Islands.

See Above & below, It'll never happen.

It's a hate crime. Or haven't they outlawed hate in the UK yet?

They did, but only if the hate crime is done by Caucasians or Blacks, doesn't apply to anyone else.:banghead:

If you are Caucasian or Black and are a victim of a hate crime they generally flip it on it's head and throw you in jail for a hate crime or "Antisocial Behavior".:banghead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top