Tory MP huge fan of SS/Hitler/Eichmann/Himmler

[Thanas]

Link

Tory MP regrets stag party's Nazi toasts, SS costumes and waiter taunts

A Conservative MP who attended a party where friends allegedly chanted Nazi slogans and dressed up in SS uniforms, has apologised for "any offence that was caused" at the event.

Aidan Burley used the social networking site, Twitter, to say he did "deeply regret inappropriate behaviour by some guests at a stag party" he attended and was "extremely sorry for any offence that was caused".

The apology, posted at 12.30pm on Sunday, was sent to the MP's 385 followers but was picked up by the Twitter community and passed around to many others. It failed, however, to assuage those outraged by his behaviour, with many continuing to call for his sacking and resignation.

The 32-year-old Cannock Chase MP was dining at a restaurant in the ski resort of Val Thorens, at Savoie, in the French Alps. Some of his 12 friends in the restaurant chanted "Hitler, Hitler, Hitler", according to the Mail on Sunday.

The paper claimed that the MP, who was elected in 2010, sipped wine while at least one man sitting near him goaded a French waiter, asking: "You are from Germany? No, you must be from Austria, then?" and "Are you insulting his Reich?"

Burley was filmed raising his glass in a toast before, the paper claimed, another guest beside him made a speech, in which he said: "Let's raise a toast to Tom for organising the stag do, and if we're perfectly honest, to the ideology and thought process of the Third Reich."

The party was said to have moved on to a British-themed pub, where partygoers adopted thick German accents and chanted: "Mein Fuhrer! Mein Fuhrer! Mein Fuhrer!", "Himmler! Himmler! Himmler!" and "Eichmann! Eichmann! Eichmann!"

The paper quoted a French police spokesman who said that Burley's friends could face prosecution: under the French penal code it is a crime to wear or exhibit in public anything reminiscent of what was worn or used by the Nazis, unless required for the purposes of a film, play or historical exhibition. The spokesman added: "Anti-Semitic and pro-Nazi crimes are taken extremely seriously in France. Anyone suspected of breaking the law in this respect can and will be prosecuted."

Burley, a rising star in the Conservative party and senior aide to the transport secretary, Justine Greening, was thought to be close friends with the man who wore the SS uniform – Mark Fournier, 34, an accountant and graduate of Queen's College, Oxford University, for whom the stag party was held.

Fournier, the paper added, was frequently addressed by the others as "Himmler". His brother, John Fournier, 37, a businessman, gave the toast. Later, the elder brother gave another speech, saying of Burley: "This man is a Tory MP. He went to Oxford as well. A Tory boy. He was the candidate for Berlin East."

Burley, who was said to be standing a few feet away, was not seen to object to any of the speeches or the actions of his friends, the paper claimed.

Yeah, what a nice way to do this in the country of Oradour-sur-Glane, Maillé and Tulle.

You got to be a special kind of nut to embrace the SS.

[Alkaloid]

Seriously? What is it with the British and their upper class fetish for Nazis?

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Well, it's said that the Nazis may have lost the war but they won the fashion war.

[Panzersharkcat]

Well, it's said that the Nazis may have lost the war but they won the fashion war.

Oh, yes. After all, quoting P.J. O'Rourke, "No one has ever had a fantasy about being tied to a bed and sexually ravished by someone dressed as a liberal."

[spaceviking]

In Britain isn't the Nazi uniform a popular Halloween costume? Though I believe one is supposed to look sloppy and disheveled when they dress as a Nazi.

[Zaune]

Seriously? What is it with the British and their upper class fetish for Nazis?

Envy, I expect, probably mixed with grudging admiration for a member of the lower-middle classes who managed to claw his way to the top by nothing but sheer grit and determination like they have to pretend they're in favour of. And I suppose his views on eugenics mesh rather well with our class system. Or the Mail on Sunday's, for that matter; if there's any actual criticism of the Honourable Member for Cannock Chase in that article, it's for diluting our ability to puff ourselves up as Vanquishers of the Evil Nazis even as we continue our own slow but inexorable spiral down towards totalitarianism.

Actually, I've sometimes felt that a short dose of dictatorship would not be good for Britain. It might teach us a few important lessons on the theme of being careful what you wish for.

[thejester]

What the fuck is wrong with you people? They're obviously joking. You can be outraged about how inappropriate/unfunny it is for an MP to be doing this - but if you seriously think they're actual Nazi fetishists then...

[Johonebesus]

I have to say that the article creeped me out twice. First with Nazi business, then with the threat that the ass-holes could be prosecuted. As repugnant as their message may be, legally suppressing it seems like a dangerous step towards totalitarianism. Haven't there been some recent prosecutions in Europe under blasphemy laws for insulting religious beliefs? Not to mention that outlawing Nazis hasn't stopped their very visible presence in Europe, especially in Germany. Maybe I'm way off base. Maybe if the U.S. didn't have the First Amendment some of the worst far right excesses could have been prevented. But I just can't help but feel that outlawing "hate speech" opens the door to the government suppressing criticism, or protecting groups with popular beliefs, like conservative Christians, from being called out on their bigotry. With their persecution complex, I know that evangelicals and far right Catholics would use hate speech laws to try to persecute gays and anyone else who finds some of their message disgusting.

But then laws are just useless paper without a populace willing to hold the government accountable. A constitution is secondary to the political culture of the People. Comparing the U.S. to monarchies like Canada and European kingdoms makes that abundantly clear.

[Alkaloid]

What the fuck is wrong with you people? They're obviously joking. You can be outraged about how inappropriate/unfunny it is for an MP to be doing this - but if you seriously think they're actual Nazi fetishists then...

Not actual fetishists, but for fucks sake this keeps happening. Surely at some point after a high profile person goes on TV and looks all shame faced about dressing up as a nazi or being at a party where there are a few people dressed up as nazis, or making a toast to the fucking third reich, someone with a job like an MP may realise that 'hey, maybe people don't really think it's appropriate for me to dress as a nazi,' but apparently not.

But then laws are just useless paper without a populace willing to hold the government accountable. A constitution is secondary to the political culture of the People. Comparing the U.S. to monarchies like Canada and European kingdoms makes that abundantly clear.

Uuuum. Do you want to clarify what you mean by that? Because I'm a little confused as to who is supposed to be holding the government accountable for what, because most countries I know with hate speech laws don't have issues with calling people out for bigotry.

[Simon_Jester]

Nazis are the extreme limiting case. In Europe, you have to remember two things.


One, Naziism never entirely went away. It's a convenient public fiction that Naziism in Germany (and its sister ideologies elsewhere in Europe) were decisively destroyed by the end of World War Two, but you can't kill ideas with bullets. A significant residue of people who still believed much or all of what the Nazis believed in the 1930s persisted, and persist, to this day.

Europe's efforts to 'de-Nazify' itself involve a lot of work put into making it socially unacceptable to express opinions that smack of Naziism, or that smack of approval of Nazi actions. This is necessary for Europe, if we accept the basic (majority-held) premise that Naziism was a foul abomination and that the future of Europe hinges on making sure nothing like it ever happens again.


Two, Naziism triggers a huge avalanche of bitter memories for any European culture. We in the US tend to underestimate this, but you must remember that the Nazis were directly responsible for turning practically the entire European continent into a war zone. Whole cities were blasted flat, enough people were killed that nearly everyone in Europe at the time would have lost friends or loved ones. Lines of bunkers and minefields littered the landscape even after the smoke cleared.

We normally think of this in the context of the Holocaust, but the war killed and destroyed a lot of people and things for reasons that had nothing to do with Nazi anti-Semitism, and the trauma of that has taken a long time to fade. This contributes to laws that ban Nazi symbology specifically, because no one from the generations that fought or lived through the war ever wants to have to see that monster rise from the grave again.

You can talk idealistically about free speech, but under the circumstances I think there's a lot to be said for recognizing that even rights we normally consider inviolate to have some limit defined by practical considerations.

[Thanas]

but if you seriously think they're actual Nazi fetishists then...

At the very least I think they are classless assholes with a tongue-in-cheek Nazi fetishism.

Seriously, to do this in france is doubly insulting, considering there probably are few places worse where you can do this (Eastern Europe, Israel being those).

[Johonebesus]

But then laws are just useless paper without a populace willing to hold the government accountable. A constitution is secondary to the political culture of the People. Comparing the U.S. to monarchies like Canada and European kingdoms makes that abundantly clear.

Uuuum. Do you want to clarify what you mean by that? Because I'm a little confused as to who is supposed to be holding the government accountable for what, because most countries I know with hate speech laws don't have issues with calling people out for bigotry.

A bit of text does not limit government action unless the people are willing to vote leaders out or take to the streets. For example, FISA did not prevent the Bush administration from monitoring citizens' communications without a warrant. More than a century of established law did not prevent waterboarding. The First Amendment hasn't prevented "free speech zones" or ridiculous limitations on assembly from being enacted to limit free speech, since Americans are generally less interested in voting and less likely to engage in massive protests than in a lot of other democracies.

[Thanas]

That is because the Supreme Court has no real power over the president in the USA. Unlike in Europe, where constitutional courts have a long history of proving to be the bigger dogs when it hits the fan.