Fleeing the Nazis

[XabbaRus]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7632507.stm

This is mad...

[JHuschke]

Neo-Nazi's, stupid. In Britain, I am suprised, hope they don't do anything stupid or harm anyone.

[Konovalov]

Yeah, noticed this video today on the Beeb website. Shocking. And the owners of the pub said they were not even aware of the gathering of neo-Nazi thugs. :huh:

[August]

Y'all ought to get some tanks and infantry, hunt those nazis down and annihilate them like it was 1945.

[XabbaRus]

My thoughts exactly.

The pub owners are stupid, liars or Nazis....

Nazi or not with friends if I caught one of them peeing in my drive I would have confronted him. I have a nice baseball bat from the US of A.

[DeepIron]

Nah... keep 'em around to water the landscape... It'll give 'em something constructive to do... ;)

[Letum]

I expect most neo-nazis are only neo-nazis for the social cliquiness of such groups,
rather than well developed personal political beliefs.
That does not make them any less dangerous of course.

Crack down hard if they do anything illegal or anti-social, but give them the free
speech to seigh-hail all they like.

I'm in dismay that the police intelligence didn't pick up on this and ensure there was
a police presence.

[Quillan]

Are they worse than Illinois nazis?
http://www.vortexmind.net/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/Illinois_Nazis.JPEG

[Jimbuna]

My thoughts exactly.

The pub owners are stupid, liars or Nazis....

Nazi or not with friends if I caught one of them peeing in my drive I would have confronted him. I have a nice baseball bat from the US of A.

Then run as fast as you could indoors as dozens of their elk answered the cries for help.

Quick solution:

1) Phone the local constabulary and claim adults are exposing themselves to children.

2) Hide behind drawn curtains and peek out to watch the ensuing riot as the territorial support group are called in with dog teams to quell the resulting affray.

[DeepIron]

http://www.northrim.net/jhouck/images/GodwinsLaw_CatPoster.jpg

Cat Nazis are the absolute worse...

[antikristuseke]

Know some people who went there from Estonia.

[Letum]

Know some people who went there from Estonia.

I didn't know the Nazis where so friendly with those from Eastern Europe.

I guess it's part of their diversity policy. ;)

[antikristuseke]

Estonians are concidered to be nordic people not slavic people by them.

[Biggles]

Are they worse than Illinois nazis?

I hate Illinois nazis...;)

And I strongly dislikes nazis in general too.

It's really fascinating that one ideology has become so genreally loathed by the public. I know why, it's rather obvious, but still...fascinating....

[Skybird]

Zero tolerance for Nazis, always, everywhere. Make them run back to where they came, always, everywhere. Do not accept coexistence, cooperation, and temporary alliance with them, never, nowhere. they shall not find rest wherever they show up, never, nowhere.

:arrgh!:

[Letum]

Make them run back to where they came

errrr....That would be where you are. ;)

[Jimbuna]

Make them run back to where they came

errrr....That would be where you are. ;)

A lot come from the UK unfortunately....met a few in my time.

Some actually seriously believe what's in their heads and minds.

No problem with that....it only becomes problematic when they try to impose their beliefs on others.

[Skybird]

I do not wish to bash america here, but international polices agrees that the biggest Nazi community is to be found in America - not Germany, not England, not Italy. Also, international financing of Nazi actiivities in various countries is controlled and dominated by american Nazi networks. Additionally, there is the English-founded network of Nazi-bands named Blood and Honour, coordinating and bringing together Nazi bands from many countries, which also plays a role in international nazism that leads beyond just Nazi music and Nazi bands.

However, my remark before was meant in not that specific historic context - and Letum knows that. If he ever dares to really play me in chess, he will pay the price for this impertinent interference. :cool:

[antikristuseke]

Zero tolerance for Nazis, always, everywhere.
:arrgh!:

Zero tolerance you say, what exactly do you mean by that?

[DeepIron]

I do not wish to bash america here, but international polices agrees that the biggest Nazi community is to be found in America...It's that "right to freedom of speech" thing again... ;)

That, and there just a lot more room to hide in around here... :o

[joea]

I'm pretty sure some of those guys have posted on here or other forums I frequent. No worries, no one I on this thread or among the "stars" of subsim but still. :shifty:

[Digital_Trucker]

I do not wish to bash america here, but international polices agrees that the biggest Nazi community is to be found in America - not Germany, not England, not Italy.

Would that be in sheer numbers or as a percentage of total population?

[Platapus]

I do not wish to bash america here, but international polices agrees that the biggest Nazi community is to be found in America...It's that "right to freedom of speech" thing again... ;)



You see, in America we grant civil rights even to people we disagree with. :up:

The commitment to freedom is not measured in how the majority is treated, but in how the minority is treated.

[DeepIron]

I do not wish to bash america here, but international polices agrees that the biggest Nazi community is to be found in America...It's that "right to freedom of speech" thing again... ;)


You see, in America we grant civil rights even to people we disagree with. :up:

The commitment to freedom is not measured in how the majority is treated, but in how the minority is treated.

Actually I'm more pragmatic: let them talk lest they get the ACLU involved... ;)

[Skybird]

I do not wish to bash america here, but international polices agrees that the biggest Nazi community is to be found in America...It's that "right to freedom of speech" thing again... ;)

That, and there just a lot more room to hide in around here... :o
hitler's fans I exclude from that right. Like I exlcude everybody from rights that he claims for himself but does not accept to allow for others. To assassinate hitler also would have denied him the right of free speech. and still it would have been a morally good deed to do so.

Freedoms and rights you only deserve to the degree you give them back and allow them for others. there it is again, the word I learned to like so much: reciprocity. Nobody has only rights, but no duties. the way you fill your duties and responsibilities decide to what degree rights should be given to you. If you work for the destruction of the constitution, you cannot claim the constitution's protection, if you position yourself outside a code of laws and freedoms, then you are outside of it, and have no right to claim just it's benefits for yourself that at the same time you deny to others. And Nazism is trying to destroy wetsern constitutional orders. Thus it does not deserve the constitution's respect or protection. The same is true for Islam, and any other fundamentalism wether it be of relgious or poltical format that does not correspond with the values expressed in the design of the constitutions.

Every freedom has - and needs - limits. No freedom is unlimited - not as long as you are not the only entity in the universe.

[Skybird]

Zero tolerance for Nazis, always, everywhere.
:arrgh!:

Zero tolerance you say, what exactly do you mean by that?
confront them, drive them back, do not allow them tp spread their poison and drive anchors into society. Let them feel that they are total pariahs.

In Cologne, a civil movement aganst the islamisation of europe and the building of a mosque greater than the dome of cologne has been hijacked by rightwing populists and Nazis. Under the label to defend germany against Islam, they try to spread nazism and give it an acceptable face that the ordinary cit9izen an vote for. that is irnoic, since both Nazism and islam are working for the destruction of our values and the german constitution,a nd thus are more allies than enemies. however, the people in cologne showed this kind of zero tolerance some days ago. They orgnaised oppsoing demonstrations that claimed all grounds and places whwere the rights wnated to march. No baker sold them brwad, no supermarket sold them beer or limonade. No taxi driver accepted to drive the, no bus driver let them aboard. The attenpts to proclame their manifesto where drowned by bands playing them down. nobody tolerated their presence, nobody accepted them to be there, nobody gave them one inch to stand and to breath. Well done! An aliance with Nazi groups is totally unacceptable, even if it is against islam - both are totally unacceptable for our society and it's values on which they are founded. These we need to defend - against both.

http://www.welt.de/politik/article2471753/Nicht-die-Moschee-der-Islam-ist-das-Problem.html (German)

[SS107.9MHz]

I do not wish to bash america here, but international polices agrees that the biggest Nazi community is to be found in America...It's that "right to freedom of speech" thing again... ;)

That, and there just a lot more room to hide in around here... :o hitler's fans I exclude from that right. Like I exlcude everybody from rights that he claims for himself but does not accept to allow for others. To assassinate hitler also would have denied him the right of free speech. and still it would have been a morally good deed to do so.

Freedoms and rights you only deserve to the degree you give them back and allow them for others. there it is again, the word I learned to like so much: reciprocity. Nobody has only rights, but no duties. the way you fill your duties and responsibilities decide to what degree rights should be given to you. If you work for the destruction of the constitution, you cannot claim the constitution's protection, if you position yourself outside a code of laws and freedoms, then you are outside of it, and have no right to claim just it's benefits for yourself that at the same time you deny to others. And Nazism is trying to destroy wetsern constitutional orders. Thus it does not deserve the constitution's respect or protection. The same is true for Islam, and any other fundamentalism wether it be of relgious or poltical format that does not correspond with the values expressed in the design of the constitutions.

Every freedom has - and needs - limits. No freedom is unlimited - not as long as you are not the only entity in the universe.

Would it? How can a murder be morally equated? Yes maybe the deaths of millions could be spared, or they could not because someone else would take his place... maybe, maybe not, but that implies a moral absolutism I can't agree with.
Killing someone is never about justice or a moral right, that's just one of the reasons why myself am against any kind of death penalty (the other main reason is that as humans we can never have absolute certaintyy our decisions are right) - For instance It does not shock me killing someone in a war, because in war there is no rational of justice, you kill because it's the nature of war, it needs not any justification for what it is.
And about denying their freedom, how can we stand for a free society where we value things like democracy and respect and tolerance for others, if we take exactly the same actions as them if they we're on our position? In that sitation yes, I see a moral right/duty to allow them or a crtain degree of freedom... but to prevent or heavily punish them if they should ever cross the line that interfers with the sake of ther citizens... Of course it's hard to draw that line, but that's what society and law are there for

[August]

Zero tolerance for Nazis, always, everywhere.
:arrgh!:
Zero tolerance you say, what exactly do you mean by that? confront them, drive them back, do not allow them tp spread their poison and drive anchors into society. Let them feel that they are total pariahs.

In Cologne, a civil movement aganst the islamisation of europe and the building of a mosque greater than the dome of cologne has been hijacked by rightwing populists and Nazis. Under the label to defend germany against Islam, they try to spread nazism and give it an acceptable face that the ordinary cit9izen an vote for. that is irnoic, since both Nazism and islam are working for the destruction of our values and the german constitution,a nd thus are more allies than enemies. however, the people in cologne showed this kind of zero tolerance some days ago. They orgnaised oppsoing demonstrations that claimed all grounds and places whwere the rights wnated to march. No baker sold them brwad, no supermarket sold them beer or limonade. No taxi driver accepted to drive the, no bus driver let them aboard. The attenpts to proclame their manifesto where drowned by bands playing them down. nobody tolerated their presence, nobody accepted them to be there, nobody gave them one inch to stand and to breath. Well done! An aliance with Nazi groups is totally unacceptable, even if it is against islam - both are totally unacceptable for our society and it's values on which they are founded. These we need to defend - against both.

http://www.welt.de/politik/article2471753/Nicht-die-Moschee-der-Islam-ist-das-Problem.html (German)

I rarely agree with Skybird but he's spot on here. Too much human blood was shed ridding the world of the scourge of nazism to allow it to flourish again.

[Sailor Steve]

The commitment to freedom is not measured in how the majority is treated, but in how the minority is treated.
I think I just found my next sig quote. :rock:

To assassinate hitler also would have denied him the right of free speech. and still it would have been a morally good deed to do so.
I agree and disagree. Assassinating Hitler may have been a good deed, but not because he spoke out against certain people, or even because he advocated genocide; but because he committed genocide.

I've said in other arguments that you either have freedom or you don't. The American ideal is that we are born free, and freedoms are only to be tampered with in the case of someone who has committed crimes which justify that tampering. Your reciprocity ideal is valid, since, as the old saying goes, "Your freedom ends where my nose begins".

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
-commonly attributed to Voltaire, but almost certainly not said by him.
http://www.classroomtools.com/voltaire.htm

But whether or not he said it, equally as certainly an excellent commentary on true liberty. True, there are limitations, such as the famous one against shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater, but political speech has to be protected at all costs. I exit with Thomas Paine:
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his own enemy against oppression."

[UnderseaLcpl]

With all the recent talk about Nazis I find myself wondering if there isn't a bigger threat than a highly visible and generally disdained group of extremist hate-fanatics.

Skybird isn't going to like hearing this one bit, but I don't think the subject of nazis and nazism should be so taboo, nor should they be so dreaded.

Why is it that no one recoils in disgust when the Hammer and Sickle are displayed? What about the Rising Sun? Japan commited horrible atrocities against conquered peoples and prisoners of war. And Stalin.....

Well, Stalin leads hitler's death toll by tens of millions. Persecution of Jews? Yup.
maybe not in overall deaths of Jews, but the persecution was there.

Why is he not vilified the same way Hitler is?


Methinks that may have something to do with the fact that he was our ally in ww2. His crimes had to be downplayed greatly in both the U.S. and Britain. And many seemed not to notice that both Churchill and FDR had lambasted him and his communist state in the 1930's.


Nazis are a highly visible threat, so I do not fear them much. But what is not so visible is the threat the state poses in distorting the public perception. Few ever speak of how FDR brought this country closer to dictatorship than it has ever been. To this day he is hailed as a hero by most.

Both Hitler and Stalin, and pretty much every other authoritarian leader ever has relied on controlling the flow of information and distorting it to suit their needs. So should we not be wary of how readily we condemn nazis in popular culture but not others, some of whom were arguably worse? And should we not also be wary of blindly condemning this group or that group when to do so makes our personal freedoms vulnerable? Is it really worth to silence a bunch of people who just make themselves look worse everytime the public eye falls upon them?

Hating Nazis is all good fun, but the real threats lay elsewhere. :hmm:

[OneToughHerring]

There was recently some talk here in Finland when someone put a swastika flag on their balcony. Later the flag was changed to a flag with an iron cross with a small swastika.

I hate skinheads and organised nazis, I've had shouting matches with some of them and almost gotten into actual fights with some. I'm not in the habit of allowing people like that 'owning' the streets.

I have to say that I sometimes think that when I have an interest in WW2 - issues I'm kinda unknowingly taking part in the legitimization of nazi ideology. This is definitely something I'd rather not want to do.

[Kipparikalle]

Hah, I read that from the newspaper too.

This reminds me of a thing from month ago

Me and my friend got asked if we would like to join them
In Rovaniemi (I was visiting there)

We just said "Meh, no thanks mate"


I don't mind these guys as long as they aren't causing any harm to me or my friends. But damn man, are they searching for younger fellows to their "army"?

[OneToughHerring]

I think they are recruiting new members, they rely on the young recruits to expand. They might be targeting the smaller places in Finland because in more civilised places like Helsinki they wouldn't be allowed to exist. Wouldn't want any skinheads beating up people in Erottaja, that would give a bad impression of Finland to the outside world. And as Skybird wrote, US is pretty much the 'base' for these organisations these days, Stormfront and other similar pages are pretty free to spout racist message without any restraints.

[HunterICX]

I don't mind these guys as long as they aren't causing any harm to me or my friends. But damn man, are they searching for younger fellows to their "army"?

Young people are easy to manipulate, the recruiters will show them mostly the stuff about the Nazi's and Hitler which pictures the Ideology that you're superior then the others. They just lie to them like they did back then in the 30's - 40's.

HunterICX

[Skybird]

I do not see it as morally favourable to grant sombedody else rights and freedoms that he uses to make a society where people allowing him these freedoms would be denied these rights and even would be slaughtered. That is no sign of how morally superior such a philantropist is is, and how outstanding high developed his civilisational level is - it is pure idiotism, a sign of intellectual confusion. Reciprocity, gentleman. You want the right of free speech? Than you have to withstand from propagating ideologies that reject the right of free speech. that very simple.

Tolerance needs limits if you want to define an identity of your own. These limits decide what you do not tolerate, and what is not you. If you tolerate all and everything undiscriminatory, you do not draw a line between what is "me/us" and what is not "me!us" - andwhat "we/us" also do not wish to become or being turned into. Unlimited tolerance is a an intellectual exitus imo. Identity not only is defined by saying what one is, but also by making clear what one is NOT and what one does not wish to be. To set limits, to draw lines, to say "no!" is necessary, if you are true with wanting to show tolerance - you can only decide wqether you tolerate something foreign or not if you are sure of your own identity, your own standards, and who you yourself really are. that is neither modern, nor wanted nowadays, today every standards must be relativised until they do not mean anything anymore, every argument you give must immediately counterbalanced by you by giving the counterargument else you get labelled as "biased", and all identity must be denied and minimised so that all and everything foreign gets embraced uncritically, unchecked, and unexamined. Thus my position is under fire - but I hold this ground. the alternative is self-denial, and that I refuse to tolerate or accept as an option for myself.

Unlimited freedom is an utopia that in a world that you share with others is impossible to realise - as long as you do not accept a totalitarian collectivism where everybody is made to be equal and of the same kind so that his wishes and desires are the same like that of any other. That way, his interest cannot collide with that of others, and his usage of his freedoms cannot limit the freedoms of others. Because I strongly believe your freedom and your rights end where you start to limit the freedom of others. As long as you do not live as the only being on this planet earth, you can never have unlimited freedom. and even then you cannot have it - or are you free to breath under water or fly by the power of mind just becasue you wish you could?

A free democratic society has the right of self-defense, and for example the constitution of Germany even gives every German the right to resist even with force, if needed, to everybody who tries to overturn the constitutional order. This order is to be defended, and that is why probably not only in germany but in all countries in the West police and intelligence services, state attorneys and investigators work for protecting the constitution against people trying to violate it, ignoring it and to overturn it.

Nazism does not want to be part of the political life in this republic like any other party there is. It wants this republic not to be, and replace it with faschist tyranny, were thugs in uniform beat up or slaughter everybody not being in complinace with themselves. It uses freedom of speech to push for an order where freedom of speech is taken away from people and different opinions get crushed with violence.

Islam does not wish the constitutional order to be, it wants the ruling of sharia instead, and it demands that all other different cultures need to be killed and Judaism and christinaity needs at least to be subjugated and must accept to live as subordinates and being treated in a wanted, discriminatory fashion to let them never forget that they are subordinates to superior Islam indeed. Muslim males are not free to choose to participate in this discrimination or not - by Quran, it is mandatory for them. where they do not accept that, that speaks for them and to their advanatge as human beings, but still they are in violation of muhammad's ruling. -

Can anyone give me a good reason why I should treat these two ideologies respectful and welcoming then? why should I give them all benefits of our legal system and constitutional guarantees - if they wish to destroy this constitution and to bring people like me to silence, even to death?

For me, the case is as clear as it ever gets. It is simple, straight self-defense - not so much on a personal level (but who knows, I have already gotten threats to kill me), but on a civilisational and cultural level. This culture of ours should better not tolerate all and everything. else it raises the demons that later destroy it from within. the criterion could be wether or not some cult, group, ideology, religion, party accepts the constitutional order as is and accepts to live by the general rules it outlines, unconditionally, or not. If somebody does not fully accepts that, he has to go, better he even does not come in the first, and he has no right to demand the protection of this constitution that in the end he wishes to destroy and replace with his own ideology.

This is common sense, I would say. no legal or philosophical hairsplitting it is, but simply that: common sense. Simple, healthy reason. Don't make it more complicated than it is. I really cannot understand some complicated guys here.

Regarding Hitler, killing him early on would have prevented the NSDAP to take over Germany, for his personal charisma was a deciding factor to keep mit all together, and there was nobody able to replace him, especially early on. no taking over of Germany. no attack on Poland. No second world war. no holocaust. No dozens of million dead in Europe alone. Simple math it is. I must not think a second wether I can morally justify the assassination of people like hitler or Stalin, or not. I can, ethically, morally, religiously, and I have a clean conscience about that, absolutely. I even can agree to do it myself, with my own hands. A case of "let live or let die" cannot become any more simple than with the most of extreme examples of history like this.

I agree with SS109.xyz in that I oppose death penalty, but here the similiarity already ends again. - As I repeatedly argued, the term already is a contradiction in itself, for a penalty is sanction you impose onto somebody in order to change his future behavior and/or let him pay compensation and repair damage he did, if possible. For that, his ongoing existence is necessary precondition. Even if you want to make him object of revenge and want to see him suffer - he needs to live for that. death penalty is a no-brainer for me.

Nevertheless I can accept, in certain extreme cases, the preventive killing of extremely dangerous criminals who to put into prison would not stop them to have crimes commited in their names and by their command, crimes of a certain level of seriousness so that I rate the need to stop their ongoing as higher than the interest of the individual to live on: illegal traders with military weapons, senior drug barons, Godfathers, extremist ideological leaders, heads of groups smuggling and exploiting girls and kids and directing sexual slavery, etc. the ordinary street crimes like robbery, slaughter by passion, rape etc I do exclude, because there is no reason to assume that putting these offenders behind bars does not prevent them to continue with posing a threat to many people during or after their prison term, and sometimes people even do change and remain clean after prison. killing somebody for me never is a penalty, but eventually makes sense as a preemptive measure to prevent major ongoing harm, threat and damage to larger parts of the community or groups of people. However, it should not be a regular tool of routine, but remain reserved for the most serious cases.

[antikristuseke]

With all the recent talk about Nazis I find myself wondering if there isn't a bigger threat than a highly visible and generally disdained group of extremist hate-fanatics.

Skybird isn't going to like hearing this one bit, but I don't think the subject of nazis and nazism should be so taboo, nor should they be so dreaded.

Why is it that no one recoils in disgust when the Hammer and Sickle are displayed? What about the Rising Sun? Japan commited horrible atrocities against conquered peoples and prisoners of war. And Stalin.....

Well, Stalin leads hitler's death toll by tens of millions. Persecution of Jews? Yup.
maybe not in overall deaths of Jews, but the persecution was there.

Why is he not vilified the same way Hitler is?


Methinks that may have something to do with the fact that he was our ally in ww2. His crimes had to be downplayed greatly in both the U.S. and Britain. And many seemed not to notice that both Churchill and FDR had lambasted him and his communist state in the 1930's.


Nazis are a highly visible threat, so I do not fear them much. But what is not so visible is the threat the state poses in distorting the public perception. Few ever speak of how FDR brought this country closer to dictatorship than it has ever been. To this day he is hailed as a hero by most.

Both Hitler and Stalin, and pretty much every other authoritarian leader ever has relied on controlling the flow of information and distorting it to suit their needs. So should we not be wary of how readily we condemn nazis in popular culture but not others, some of whom were arguably worse? And should we not also be wary of blindly condemning this group or that group when to do so makes our personal freedoms vulnerable? Is it really worth to silence a bunch of people who just make themselves look worse everytime the public eye falls upon them?

Hating Nazis is all good fun, but the real threats lay elsewhere. :hmm:

A cigar for this man.:up:

Anyway, i spent about two years of my life actively fighting neo-nazis, both with words as well as violence, so I have the scars and broken bones that zero tolerance brings about before I realized the futility of that strugle. They are a highly visible fringe majority and because of their high profile they can not pose any real threat to society at large.

[Skybird]

The visible Nazi rallies - are just the tip of the iceberg. the real danger comes from the intellectual Nazis in business suits who push into legislation, influential business and political offices without outing themselves as Nazis. the German Verfassungsschutz rates the danger projected by these people as so much more dangerous as public rallies.

[HunterICX]

Call me crazy on this,

has anyone else gave it a thought that the (Neo-) Nazi are the Western Variant of Muslim Extremists.

if you compare them both, you'll find similarities.

HunterICX

[Skybird]

Call me crazy on this,

has anyone else gave it a thought that the (Neo-) Nazi are the Western Variant of Muslim Extremists.

if you compare them both, you'll find similarities.

HunterICX
What are muslim extremists? They refer to the quran, and more rightfully than many want to see. but do Nazi refer to the basic constitutional order of western nations? Hardly. there is a huge difference here.

They both want to destroy our nations. They both are intolerant, and they both want to overthrow our constitutional order. These are the similiarities.

[Letum]

Call me crazy on this,

has anyone else gave it a thought that the (Neo-) Nazi are the Western Variant of Muslim Extremists.

if you compare them both, you'll find similarities.

Not really. Both tend to believe in their own superiority based on gender, race or
religion, to be aggressive and authoritarian, but thats where similarities end.
I don't think it makes sense to reduce one to a simplicity where it can be compared
to the other. You certainly can't get a better understanding of one by saying it is
like the other.

All political, social and religious groups can be made to fit into just two or three
categories if you want them too. So can most things for that matter!

[SS107.9MHz]

The visible Nazi rallies - are just the tip of the iceberg. the real danger comes from the intellectual Nazis in business suits who push into legislation, influential business and political offices without outing themselves as Nazis. the German Verfassungsschutz rates the danger projected by these people as so much more dangerous as public rallies.
That's very true, when a couple of years ago the "Freedom Party" reached government in Austria, I just couln't believe my eyes...We've a similar party the PNR, and every time there's a problem with the immigrant community, they put up signs and organize demonstations, and then someone makes fun of them and they get humiliattedhttp://www.subsim.com/radioroom/images/icons/icon10.gif:
http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r222/tdtonline_album/gatofedorento1.png

http://www.laicidade.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/cartaz-pnr-a.jpg
"enough imigration,nationalism is the solution; Good trip; Portugal for the Portuguese"

The Response

http://cache02.stormap.sapo.pt/fotostore01/fotos//a9/1b/7a/20974_0003879h.jpg
"More imigration!The best way to pissoff foreigners is to force them to live in Portugal - Welcome! With Portuguese people only we get nowhere"


Unfortunately we have kind of an active neo-nazi cell in portugal involved in a series of robberies and drug traffic, but the PJ (it's our criminal and organized-crime investigating police) seems to be handling them...

[Letum]

We have the BNP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party) in the UK.
it's a political group formed from a split in two of England's biggest neo-Nazi
groups when some of the members opted for being slightly less evil in an
attempt to become political.

It is the 5th largest party in England. :nope:

[SS107.9MHz]

I really think humour is a powerfull weapon against these guys, namelly the politicall branches... These groups, as any other kind of gangs, prey upon those who don't feel integrated, who feel misaligned from their local society, they offer peer support... But if those possible peers are seen as a laughing matter, it will be less probable for them to join... Avoidance of suffering is a basic psychosocial mechanism.

[Happy Times]

I really think humour is a powerfull weapon against these guys, namelly the politicall branches... These groups, as any other kind of gangs, prey upon those who don't feel integrated, who feel misaligned from their local society, they offer peer support... But if those possible peers are seen as a laughing matter, it will be less probable for them to join... Avoidance of suffering is a basic psychosocial mechanism.


Also the supressive policies in our societys probably drive even some normal people over the top. These include multiculturalism and political correctness. Its only resently that other parties have started to question openly these policies and the dangers they pose. Communist are the number one supporters of these policies, it comes to mind that destabilizing societys is their game.

[SS107.9MHz]

Yeah but commies don't have a single funny bone in their bodies :p

[Happy Times]

Yeah but commies don't have a single funny bone in their bodies :p

And they are much more numerous than Nazis, they have infiltrated other parties and masked themself from the start.

[Happy Times]

"Communist are deconstructing our nation" was one justification given by nazis back then, funny that you mention it.

They were rivals, inside Germany and later in WW2.

[mrbeast]

Yeah but commies don't have a single funny bone in their bodies :p

And they are much more numerous than Nazis, they have infiltrated other parties and masked themself from the start.

Yes taking instructions from Moscow Central no doubt.............hang on :hmm:

[SS107.9MHz]

I don't worry much about communists in my country, they amount to be just silly angry men/women who don't get anything done... http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/images/icons/icon10.gif even if they are the third major party...
Poor guys they had an important role before 1974 revolution, but since then they'dd better off be quiet..

[Rhodes]

I don't worry much about communists in my country, they amount to be just silly angry men/women who don't get anything done... http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/images/icons/icon10.gif even if they are the third major party...
Poor guys they had an important role before 1974 revolution, but since then they'dd better off be quiet..

Before?When?:lol:

[Skybird]

Yeah but commies don't have a single funny bone in their bodies :p

And they are much more numerous than Nazis, they have infiltrated other parties and masked themself from the start.

Yes taking instructions from Moscow Central no doubt.............hang on :hmm:
No more, since communists do not rule in Moscow anymore, and cold war is over - Putin and Medwedew are anything but communists. But it has been like that during the cold war, at least in west-germany. German communists today have formed an alliance with GDR-sympathisers, the survivors of the SED, and frustrated extreme lefts from the Western part of Germany, their party is called Die linike, and it is CUTE, really CUTE. I could shoot them to the dark side of the moon, if only I would have the money to do so. They are also dangerous, are under suspicious to be anti-constitutional, and maintain conctatcs to international left terror and guerilla organisations, for example FARC. A party in the German Bundestag with no unrealistic hope to participate in a government coalition in maybe two legislation periods from now on - holding hands with something like FARC, and making noise that porivbate enterprise in family hands in Germany should be expropriated.

Just think of this. they are kingmaker in one federal state, have overtaken the socialists as the strongest left party in Germany, and really - holy could see them in government coalition with the SPD after the second next national elections.

Holy cow.

Of course, the current financial turbulences and the capitalistic excesses swapping over from America help them a lot to become popular.

[mrbeast]

No more, since communists do not rule in Moscow anymore, and cold war is over - Putin and Medwedew are anything but communists.......

That was my point:up:

Communists represent a fairly limited threat to western countries; they no longer have a spiritual or logistical centre to draw on; nobody to take orders from or what their opinions should be. Chinese communism has sold its soul to capitalism, and North Korea is an isolated, inward looking back-water with little desire to start world revolution when half of its population doesn't have enough to food to eat. I don't doubt that some extremist groups may pose a local danger (remember the communist terroist groups of the 1980's) but fears of them infiltrating and taking over are overstated to say the least. Such fears are the product of a bygone age.

[Platapus]

The commitment to freedom is not measured in how the majority is treated, but in how the minority is treated.
I think I just found my next sig quote. :rock:




Nah, stick to the sig quote you already have. It is clear that you are a Marxist at heart. :rock:
:rotfl: :rotfl:

[August]

The commitment to freedom is not measured in how the majority is treated, but in how the minority is treated. I think I just found my next sig quote. :rock:



Nah, stick to the sig quote you already have. It is clear that you are a Marxist at heart. :rock:
:rotfl: :rotfl:
Besides it's way too vague. For example. How is a freedom loving people supposed to treat a hostile minority?