German police arrest 22 in neo-Nazi internet raid

[Gerald]

German police said on Wednesday they had arrested 22 people suspected of spreading neo-Nazi ideology in a major swoop against far-right internet radio station Widerstand-Radio (Resistance Radio).

In an operation involving some 270 officers, police raided 22 premises across 10 of Germany's 16 states, confiscating numerous computers and telephones, the Federal Crime Office (BKA) said in a statement.
The station could be heard worldwide around the clock, and operated from a server based in the United States, the BKA said. Listeners to the site would register via a false name and address in the western German city of Dortmund, it added.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...979381,00.html








Note:Wednesday, November 3, 2010 7:44:00 PM CET

[Ducimus]

Sweet.

[Betonov]

Neo-nazi? What does that mean exactly? Is there some codified definition?

[tater]

I hate nazis.

Won't even play one in a game (never flown german planes in il-2, never even looked at the u-boats in SH4 (aside from a couple I sank in the PTO)). Been in ww2ol since closed beta, never spawned german, not once. I watch movies like SPR, and when they shoot the nazis with hands in the air (and yep, I consider anyone in ww2 in a german uniform a nazi, regardless of their actual party membership status), my reaction is "damn straight, the time to surrender is BEFORE you kill so many of the guys who are obviously gonna win."

This story, OTOH... they are being arrested for being morons? Wrong-thinking? I guess this American head can't get too excited about a score of morons being arrested for their thoughts—or were they actively plotting terrorism, or something actually physically criminal?

tater

PS—where is neo-nazi ideology congruent with economic policy that is more free-market, or non-centralized government power, etc? I'm not seeing the "far right" except in the sense it was originally applied tot he nazis—by Stalin.

[Gerald]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Nazism

[tater]

Originally Posted by Vendor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Nazism

Neo-Nazism consists of post-World War II social or political movements seeking to revive Nazism or some variant thereof.

So they want a command-economy run by an oligarchy of "picked" businessmen, a socialist government with very strong central control, and are genocidal racists.

I'm seeing zero overlap with any "right" political goals. Odd that people continue to use Stalinist propaganda to define a group that is functionally closer to Stalin than any modern political grouping. (know it's been done to death her with Political Compass threads, etc, but this "far right" nonsense WRT nazis is a pet peeve.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by tater

(and yep, I consider anyone in ww2 in a german uniform a nazi, regardless of their actual party membership status),

Wow, just wow.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

Wow, just wow.

Germans knew exactly what was going on in Germany. Fighting for Germany in WW2 was fighting for Hitler, and everything that meant. they knew this.

I should not have said anyone in German uniform. I take that back. A few did the right thing and tried to kill Hitler. Those guys were OK in my book.

[nikimcbee]

Originally Posted by tater

I hate nazis.

Won't even play one in a game (never flown german planes in il-2, never even looked at the u-boats in SH4 (aside from a couple I sank in the PTO)). Been in ww2ol since closed beta, never spawned german, not once. I watch movies like SPR, and when they shoot the nazis with hands in the air (and yep, I consider anyone in ww2 in a german uniform a nazi, regardless of their actual party membership status), my reaction is "damn straight, the time to surrender is BEFORE you kill so many of the guys who are obviously gonna win."

This story, OTOH... they are being arrested for being morons? Wrong-thinking? I guess this American head can't get too excited about a score of morons being arrested for their thoughts—or were they actively plotting terrorism, or something actually physically criminal?

tater

PS—where is neo-nazi ideology congruent with economic policy that is more free-market, or non-centralized government power, etc? I'm not seeing the "far right" except in the sense it was originally applied tot he nazis—by Stalin.

No SH3 then?

[tater]

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

No SH3 then?

Never even considered buying it (nor SH5).

[AngusJS]

Originally Posted by tater

(and yep, I consider anyone in ww2 in a german uniform a nazi, regardless of their actual party membership status)

Especially those who were drafted, or who joined the military before 1933, right?

"damn straight, the time to surrender is BEFORE you kill so many of the guys who are obviously gonna win."

So I assume that if this were to happen to American soldiers, you'd have no problem with it? Serves em' right, I suppose?

Germans knew exactly what was going on in Germany. Fighting for Germany in WW2 was fighting for Hitler, and everything that meant. they knew this.

Exactly, because access to unbiased sources of information is easy and unfettered in totalitarian states, and the price of dissent is minimal.

So EVERYONE in Germany knew exactly what was going on all the time. ANYONE who wasn't willing to risk his family and friends being arrested after he opposed the regime bears full responsibility.

If the Germans knew everything their government was doing, then I guess the Soviets knew everything their government was doing too, right? So I guess any man to wear the Soviet uniform was culpable for the USSR's crimes, especially the ones who died by the millions to win the war?

If only everyone had your moral clarity. Life would be so simple.

[frau kaleun]

Originally Posted by AngusJS

Especially those who were drafted, or who joined the military before 1933, right?

So I assume that if this were to happen to American soldiers, you'd have no problem with it? Serves em' right, I suppose?

Exactly, because access to unbiased sources of information is easy and unfettered in totalitarian states, and the price of dissent is minimal.

So EVERYONE in Germany knew exactly what was going on all the time. ANYONE who wasn't willing to risk his family and friends being arrested after he opposed the regime bears full responsibility.

It sometimes happens that people who've never actually lived through a particular type of experience prefer to believe that, if they did, they would do the "right thing" (usually determined to be "right" by virtue of their own hindsight) without question and without regard to the sacrifices it would entail. Consequently, they tend to judge very harshly anyone who actually did live through that experience and didn't do what they believe they would have had the knowledge, foresight, determination, and courage to have done themselves. Doing that is much easier than admitting that we are all subject to the same human frailties, failings, and limitations.

The reality is that none of us who weren't and aren't there can ever know what we would have done, even if we had been party to all the available information. Would I have had the courage to resist and fight back if it were only my life that was put at risk? Maybe. I would hope so. Would I have been willing to risk the lives of my friends and loved ones as well? I don't know. Nobody does, unless they've done it.

I like to believe that if my life were threatened, or if I saw someone's life being threatened, that I'd immediately take action and do whatever was necessary to defend those that needed defending. It's something I believe is the right thing to do, and it's something that I have been training myself to do for several years now. Do I think I could live with the consequences of doing what seemed necessary? Absolutely. Do I know for sure that I would actually step up and do it? No. The truth is, no matter how hard I train, and no matter how noble my intentions, when push came to shove I might freeze up entirely or misjudge the situation until it was too late to for me to do anyone any good.

You don't get the "A" until you've passed the test, and there are some tests that no one should ever have to take, and some that none of us will ever be required to take. Some people take them, or have the tests forced on them, and - by our standards - fail. But our standards are often based on a virtue we believe we possess even though it has never been tested to the same extreme, if at all. It's far too easy to condemn others for not making the choices we think they should have made when we have never been faced with making them ourselves.

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

You prove NOTHING.

Actually, I proved that Germany was not solely responsible for World War II, thereby refuting your claim that they were.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

Instead bringing historycal data regarding the current subject you go around it.

How exactly? Empty words, my friend.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

To bad you did not mentioned Jesus and Roman Empire as well.

Jesus and the Roman Empire have nothing to do with Germany, the Second World War, Poland, or European politics of the 20th century from 1920-1945.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

In conclusion what was the plan for Germans regarding Poland?

If you had bothered to read my post, let alone any of my citations, you would have noticed that they were only planning to go after provinces that they had originally owned- particularly focusing on Danzig. Evidently, you did not bother to... conveniently enough. The plan after the invasion began was to split the country with the Soviet Union, as per the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. And this was done. It could have been avoided if the Poles had turned over the respective territories that rightfully belonged to Germany, but they didn't. They were sure as hell quick to take territory from the Germans (as they did with Silesia), but no sir, they couldn't give any that really didn't even belong to them (like Danzig).

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

Hm!! You know the answer

Yep. Gave you lots of good information in that post of mine I quoted above.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

and i know the answer.

Pray tell then, why did you ask me what the German plans were for Poland then? If you knew, it should not have been necessary.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

So don`t try to play this games with me ok.

Or what? What are you going to do lol? Not a damn thing.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

What happend to Russian soldiers in Poland in that time, you know?

Russia did not have any soldiers in Poland when the Germans invaded in 1939, you moron...

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

Innocent Germans shoot them in the back and latter invade they country as well

Lol, well that's got to be difficult. Shooting someone in the back who isn't even physically there, I mean. Kudos to them for accomplishing such a miraculous feat.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius

(one of the biggest mistakes Hitler done if you ask me).

Good thing I didn't ask you then. It's also good nobody takes this hogwash you're spouting seriously. Let me repeat myself: the Soviet Union did not have soldiers in Poland when Germany invaded in 1939. There was not a single Russian trooper who could have therefore been shot in the back. Quit lying.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

The bottom line is:
Hitler wanted to take over the world,

Well now... we have a pretty definitive answer on who here hasn't read Mein Kampf. Hitler was not interested in taking over the world. He wanted to reach the resource-rich areas of Russia to build his vision of Germania. He wanted to share Europe, as well, with the British and French, as well as Italy. That's it. That's how simple it is (and, for that matter, was).

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

just like any dictatorship wants.

Sweeping generalizations will get you nowhere. Not all dictatorships want to take over the world... to think so is grossly ignorant.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

And just like you buddy in Iran also wants.

Or like your prime minister buddy wants with Palestine.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

You probably going to denie this as well.

I'm just going to point out where you're right and where you're wrong. So far, you're not doing so good as far as correct statements made are concerned.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

See a person like to type long and big words.

Or, more correctly, people like me like to act like sophisticated, well-educated individuals who actually have respect for history.

Conversely, people like you have no regards whatsoever for the past, let alone civilized discussion.

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

But when it comes to explanation he start to spam.

Spam? Why there's no spam here. Not from this poster. But you on the otherhand... dozens of these tiny posts that say the same crap over and over again: "I'm right, these are the facts, I'm right, I'm infallible!" You use no citations or anything, you just talk and talk about how you're right. Saying you're right does not make you right. Concurrently, when other sources show that what you are saying is incorrect, it's up to you to prove them wrong. And you have not done that once in this entire thread. You disappoint.