September 07, 2009

Lee Barnes: Jewish Bolsheviks to blame for Holocaust

When Lee John Barnes, legal officer of the British National Party, proclaims on his blog, “WW2 – Time To tell The Truth” you wonder if at long last the BNP leadership is simply going to tell its followers that Nazism was a uniquely hideous ideology; and that its innumerable crimes against humanity were epitomised by the Holocaust. But then you read the article, (penned as a response to Leo McKinstry in the Daily Express) and once again the grim reality of the BNP hits you between the eyes: because this is a poisonous and revealing article that depicts the Holocaust as a defensive action against “Jewish Bolsheviks”.
“…The Holocaust was the price ordinary Jews of Europe paid for the actions of the Bolshevik Jews in Russia after the Russian Revolution.

The fear of the Bolshevik threat, and the fact that so many Jews were Bolsheviks, allowed Hitler to link Jews with Bolshevism.

Therefore the Holocaust lays at the feet of those Jewish Bolsheviks in Russia and Germany whose actions allowed ordinary people, and ordinary Germans, to link Bolshevism with Jews.

Hitler used this linkage between Jews in Russia and the ideology of Bolshevism as the basis of his anti-Jewish propaganda, and this in turn led to the Holocaust itself.

Those like Rosa Luxemberg, a Jewish-Polish Bolshevik, were used by Hitler to create the perception that Germany was threatened with a Judeo-Bolshevik threat in Germany that linked Jews, Russia and Bolshevism – and this was, unfortunately, correct.”

The fact that Bolshevik scum like Rosa Luxemberg have statues erected in their honour in todays Germany shows how sick and degenerate Germany has become.

She would have turned Germany into a death camp like the Soviet Union, a charnel house of horror and murder with gulags filled with Germans, Jews, democrats and nationalists.

It was the actions of Bolshevik filth like Rosa Luxemberg in Germany during the Spartacist Uprising that allowed Hitler to equate Jews and Bolshevism – and thereby prepare the way for the Holocaust.

The issue that never gets debated in the media or the Hollywood movies is why did ordinary Germans participate in the Holocaust.

There are two reasons ;

1) They were ordered too [sic] as they would have been shot if they did’nt eg the troops involved in killings and shipping prisoners to concentration camps and concentration camp guards

2) They were terrified of Jewish Bolshevism as they saw what scum like Rosa Luxemberg did in Germany after WW1 and they feared that if the Communists took power, what happened in Russia would happen to them.

The Holocaust was not the product of ‘evil’ Germans, it was a product of the fear installed in ordinary Germans by the Russian Revolution and the actions of Jewish Bolsheviks like Rosa Luxemberg in Germany itself…”.
So, Barnes correctly plays the anti-antisemite card by repeatedly distinguishing between (bad, very bad) Bolshevik Jews and all other “ordinary” Jews, but how does this fit with his saying that Hitler was “unfortunately, correct” to link “Jews, Russia and Bolshevism”? There is no explicit condemnation in the article for the genocidal conclusions that Hitler and “ordinary Germans” (to use Barnes’s phrase) drew from this alleged Jewish/Bolshevik linkage. On the contrary, Barnes saves all of his hatred for one side only:
“…murdering Bolshevik scum…communist jackboot…Stalin, the insane butcher…[Jewish Bolshevik] blood frenzy…[Bolshevik] Jewish death cult…Soviet Union, a charnel house of horror and murder…Bolshevik filth…”.
The historical (in)accuracy of the article is another matter altogether. When an article correctly states that millions of Poles were murdered in WW2, you have to rub your eyes to believe that there really is no mention here of Nazis. Instead, its “the murdering Bolshevik scum that were murdering millions of Poles”. Indeed, when Barnes discusses who bears responsibility for WW2 and the mass murders of the period, the Nazis are once again invisible. Jews, however (especially of the Bolshevik variety) are certainly not:
“…The tragedy is that whilst the Bolsheviks from Russia were killing poles, the Jewish Bolsheviks in Russia that ran the secret police were killing millions of ethnic Russians, poles and their fellow Jews.

Stalin, the insane butcher that he was, was prepared to allow the Jewish Bolsheviks that ran the execution gangs and the secret police free rein to murder millions of his fellow ethnic Russians and Jews due to his insane paranoia.

These Jewish Bolsheviks were the driving force behind the Russian Revolution and the Soviet Union, and they projected their self loathing upon not just Russians but also those Jews who were not militant atheists and Communists like them. In their blood frenzy anyone who was a nationalist, anti-communist, a democrat, religious, Jewish or non-Jewish, was regarded as an enemy…

…the secret police NKVD and other security units were primarily an Jewish death cult determined to liquidate as many Christians, religious Jews and non-Jewish Russians as possible.

The war has to be laid at the feet of the Bolsheviks, Stalin and the Jewish terrorists in the empire of horror created by Stalin and his willing executioners.

No Russian Revolution = No Hitler…”
Barnes is canny enough to know that he shouldn’t just be quoting Hitler on the Jewish-Bolshevik tie up. So, he plays the British patriot card and quotes Winston Churchill on the subject:
“Let us not forget the words of Winston Churchill himself.

In an article in the Illustrated Sunday Herald on February 8 1920, Winston Churchill asserted::

” There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistic Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews.”
For sure, the BNP has come a long way since the 1980s and early ’90s: when (then) BNP deputy leader Richard Edmonds would stand bedraggled on the corner of Brick Lane in his tatty green coat, peddling soggy copies of the antisemitic rag, “Holocaust News” to bemused locals. But it still hasn’t gone that far, and it is beyond chutzpah that Barnes should be quoting the one world statesman who consistently warned against Hitler and led the stand against Nazism. When the BNP is able to show even 1% of Churchill’s opposition to Nazism then perhaps they will have the right to quote him.

As for the other sources that Barnes has drawn upon for his noxious piece, he lists two at the end of the article:

‘Information clearing house’ reads as if it’s a surplus store for left wing news, sort of where TK Maxx meets Indymedia. It’s a fairly typical amalgam of anti-Iraq and anti-Afghan War articles, and the compulsory attendant sneering at Israel and “Zionists”. (The fact that Barnes is referring his readers to it, says as much about the modern left as it does the modern right, but that’s another story…).

The letters ‘ihr’, however, will be brutally familiar to anyone with a passing knowledge of the American far right and Holocaust denial scene. IHR stands for Institute for Historical Review and it was for many years the world’s leading supplier of Holocaust denial propaganda. It still trades in such filth, but the covers and titles of its propaganda are not quite as explicit as they once were. Still, when a senior BNP officer repeats the Hitlerite line that World War 2 and the Holocaust were defensive actions against Jewish Bolshevism – and he then links to the IHR website – you know that not too much has changed: even if Richard Edmonds is no longer hanging about on street corners.



Bill Bow said...

Aw shit, Bonkers is off the medication again!

Anonymous said...

I read this sickening piece a while back. Needless to say Barnes is all over the place with his history.

1) Only a minority of early Soviet leaders were Jewish (ie Trotsky). To say they were 'the driving force behind the russian revolution' is incorrect. In fact Stalin loathed Jews & was on the verge of purging them before his timely death.

2)the idea Germans would have been shot if they did not get involved in the genocide is plain wrong. Barnes should read work by proper historians (ie Christopher Brownings 'Ordinary Men - which destroys this argument).

I could go on all afternoon rebutting this garbage but to be honest I can't be arsed. I have to say I don't believe Barnes is 'Bonkers' & I think saying he is minimises his foul beliefs. I think he is an extremely nast bit of work.


Anonymous said...

I don't know a great deal of history but this all sounds like crap to me.

Anonymous said...

I know that we like to joke and take the piss out of Barnes but this piece shows that he is a fairly orthodox National Socialist.

His 'arguments' come straight out of an opening chapter in Arthur Butz's vile book "Hoax of the 20th Century" (one of the early revisionist works). They are a sort of halfway-house between outward denial of the Holocaust (what Barnes and Griffin still probably actually believe) and a standard, historically accurate view of the Holocaust. So, according to Barnes the Holocaust happened but the Germans were driven and forced to exterminate millions by those foul Jewish Communists. This has been a typical viewpoint of Neo-Nazis since the late 1940's.

Essentialy Barnes and the BNP want to have their cake and eat it and his piece proves that they are still, very much, anti-Semites.

Anybody who wants read a truthful book about the motivations of the Nazis try anything by Martin Gilbert or Raul Hilberg.

Anonymous said...

I love the fact - an incongruous word to use in connection with Barnes's writing - that despite being knowledgeable in his subject, to the extent of telling us what her future actions would have been, not even once did he spell Rosa Luxemburg's name correctly.

BNP member who hates Barnes said...

You should know that this person Barnes is hated by almost all us BNP members. He never shows his face at official BNP meetings like the RWB and Annual Conference. He is ridiculed by us ordinary members who want what is best for us here and now. For us its a question of making do and trying to believe that someone in politics really can make a difference. Whether its the BNP, ABC or XYZ it dont matter much. Its about survival not a set of abberviations. History is important but it is not more important than what we need to keep food on the table, to pay bills and keep us warm in the weeks of autumn soon. I dont see why the BNP needs to have an opinion on something that happened 70 odd years ago. Barnes dont speak for the BNP majority.

Anonymous said...

Roza Luksemburg is the correct spelling i know am petty but there you go.

ex-fascist said...

"Barnes dont speak for the BNP majority."

Then presumably he will be thrown out? Or at least demoted? Or, at the very least, the BNP will publicly disassociate itself from his views?

No? Thought not.

Anonymous said...

Anti-Semitism returns to the BNP with a bang.

Justify that one, Nick Griffin!

Anonymous said...

That Churchill quote says it all for me. Discussion over.

Anonymous said...

>Anti-Semitism returns to the BNP with a bang.

>Justify that one, Nick Griffin!

"It's a Trick, We Always Use It."