"And not for nothing Pat, as far as the Nazi party goes, we're talking about a movement that tried to exterminate a whole race of people. In the early years, people said " Oh just ignore them, they'll go way." But they grew stronger and stronger because no one would pay attention to what they were doing. Before the world knew it, they grew into this powerful race of people who were now causing havoc on a huge population of innocent people, murdering them and torturing them by the millions. Caused a world war that gave way to the sacrifice of many lives."

With that idea that we shouldn't just "ignore" them in America, that is where I made my post from.

Besides DC, how would the so-called "Liberal Media" allow for this to happen?

What do you mean I should be in school? Where do you think I am right now? And you didn't answer my question. Did you agree that it was okay to torture suspected terrorists? If you agreed that it was okay to torture suspected terrorists, then doesn't that make you no better than a Nazi who wants to murder someone because of religion or race? [/b][/quote]Yes, if ur in school right now pay attention to your teacher. Also, I did answer your question, and dont call me a Nazi, my grandfather was shot in the forehead at Normandy fighting those pigs. Why does it have to come to name calling all the time? Iam sick of it. It seems like no one here can have a decent conversation anymore without calling people names?

DS

These girls sing horribly out of key (Lamb and Lynx? ) I don't think even Nazis like the music.

Still, the fact that this people are allowed to spew their hate is disgusting.

The best part of the article was in the last couple paragraphs in page 3

well I think they need to go back to school and fine out who
won the war or go to Germany with that bull [/b][/quote]Agreed. Oh, and Neo-Nazis need to go and study that their strong, immortal leader Adolf Hitler commited suicide like a coward 60 years ago.

Ronnie, there is nowhere that I say that Americans are Germans. So please do us all a favor and stop putting words in others mouths. Of course you're more than welcomed to be a part of this discussion, but if you are not mature enough to contribute to and be a part of this discussion, then don't resort to infintile antics.


Don Cardi

Even if this were true, which I don't believe it is of anyone that believes, preaches, advocates, etc. ... it still does not take away their right to believe, preach, advocate whatever cause they want.

Whether you & I agree with it or not.

I'm sure that we all agree with you Don's Cardi & Smitty - that what this family believes and symbolizes and sings about is horrible. But I'm not sure what you mean by 'common sense' prevailing. Surely you do not mean that they should be locked up or prevented from expressing their views....or that any misfortune befall them...???

Apple
Apple

Well certainly, I was disturbed by how I felt you "implied" that Americans could drive down the same road as the Germans did over 70 years ago. I apologize if you didn't mean to do such a thing.

Thus, that does still work my general statement, which is the best American way to rid of these groups is to ignore their attention-grabbing rhetoric. In fact, most rallies by Neo-Nazis and "Klan" members purposely spread their message by getting angry pissed-off people from the majority/non-hating masses of America to come to their rallies in "Protest". I mean, think about it. You know I'm onto something.

In my country, it's a crime wearing a swastika, saying the holocaust never existed, or being pro-Hitler. Isn't that the case in the USA? (just a question, not meant ironic, to clear out misunderstandings)

Socialists are not so close to communists as you think. Socialist want a rather strong state, while the dream of communists is no state at all.

Socialists and liberals are also not so very close. Liberals want less social security, and less state. They want the economy to lead itself, and they want the state not to intervene in the economy. That's the definition of liberalism.
However, liberals are always pro-humanism, and thus when it comes to ethics, liberals and socialists are kinda close.


People have been saying for 10000 years that morals are diminishing. Why would it be true now?

Apple,

Are you telling me that if a person believes that the Nazi's mass murder and torture of millions of innocent people was just, that when this person professes to be a member of the Nazi party and supports their beliefs, when this person speaks and preaches about hate and supremecy over other races and religion, and advocates the actions of committing crimes against humanity, that the person does not necessarily have the ability to carry out those crimes?

I cannot speak for Don Smitty as to what he means about common sense prevailing, but I can answer for myself.

If someone like this goes around preaching hate, supporting crimes against humanity, supports a party that has a history of commiting biased crimes and has the background of senselessly murdering and torturing millions of innocent men, woman and children, then you bet that I think that they should be locked up! Common sense tells me that this person is dangerous.

As for their expressing their views? Well there are laws in this country that are made to protect the people of this country that may fall victim to these hate mongers. It is not their right to express their view and make biased anti semetic remarks, or biased anti christian remarks, or biased remarks in general against a person. It is not their right to "express their views" or excersize thier "freedom of exspression" when those views or expressions can cause harm to another human being.


Don Cardi

Yes.

What we're talkinig about here is freedome of speech. And it is not their views or expressions or their off-key singing that can cause harm to another human being. It is the carrying out of assault or torture or imprisonment or murder of another human being BASED on those preachings that would be illegal and subject to punishment.

And as stated above, I don't necessarily think that everyone who embraces and preaches Nazi-ism is truly capable of carrying out those actions against others. Some may be, but not all.

If you can name for us a law that this family in particular is breaking that should warrant their being 'locked up', then please name it for us.

Apple

DC, I think that they have the right to brand their cattle and wear their belt buckles and sing their songs. What do I have the right to do? Not buy their beef or their records.

Are these people capable of murder? I don't know. Any time any humann places greater value on one race or creed over another, it is dangerous. It is the same mentality that allowed Americans to deal in slavery. Their slaves were considered sub-human, so they were worked and traded and treated like oxen or horses, or worse. The same with Nazis. The Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and the mentally and physically challenged were treated as subhuman and targeted for extermination, or used up as slave labor, and then exterminated. The others, such as the Poles, were imprisoned in concentration camps and used as labor as well, but were not targeted for extermination (if they happened to die because of the atrocious conditions, so be it).

Do I think these are horrible people with sick and twisted thoughts? I certainly do. But as I said before, the fact that they are allowed to march and sing is protected under the same freedoms that gave civil rights activists, war protestors and suffragists the right to do so.

I think the only reason this even made it into the news is because they look like such sweet little girls.

They're not the first people in this country who have sung racist songs or made racist art, and they certainly won't be the last.

There are millions of Americans who are just like them. Some are less obvious than others, and many disguise their racism and pretend that their concerns lie elsewhere, such as financial status. A lot of people pass their racism off as snobbery, because that's more socially acceptable. But that's flawed logic because there are rich people from a lot of different races, and the snobs I'm referring to still don't accept them.

The family in the article wants to move the the NW because they want to find a white community. You guys think that's unheard of? Here in California, we have several white communities. Especially in Orange County, the land of the "gated community." They're not labeled as white communities, but they are. If you see a Mexican in some of those communities, it's because he's mowing a lawn. I'm sure this is even more true in states that are not as diverse as California. My point is that if this mentality exists even here, where we have so many different races of people, how much more does it exist in middle America?

Furthermore, I mentioned racist songs and art above. That is not only white supremacist art that I'm talking about. The Getty Museum here had an exhibit of African American art a couple of years ago. There was a lot of racism and "down with the white man" concepts in it. Same with Mexican-American art from the first half of the century. There's some beautiful art from that style, especially the 1920s and 30s, but a lot of it is so racist.

And people who think that those sentiments died with the times are completely out of touch.

This can't really be banned. How do you legislate against personal prejudices and free expression? People can be educated, and many are. So far in this thread, everyone has agreed that this family is morally wrong. This means that even though there is no law saying that we must disagree with them, we do anyway. If you want the government to stop them, on what grounds can you justify so much government involvement in something so immaterial? They're not killing anyone, they're not taking anyone's rights away, and they're not even staying close enough to any minority groups to inflict any harm on them. They're moving away from them, even. I say let them sing their little hearts out if that's what they want to do, and focus on and arrest the people who actually are out there committing hate crimes and murders. That just seems a little more pressing to me than a couple of 13-year-old Olsen lookalikes singing about white power.

Again, it's the media influencing things and blowing them up to almost iconic status. In never ignoring the attitudes and values it detests, and deciding to make it into a big issue, the media is actually encouraging "wannabe rebels" to automatically find a culture worth being part of, in order to rebel against society's values.

Seriously, the same works with all "sub-cultures" and the like; if the media stopped reporting how bad hip hop fashion was, for instance, I bet we'd see a lot less people adhering to it.

Mick

They're 13, you read that right?

its okay, Patrick doesn't know Jailbait when he sees it.

No. In the United States you are allowed to believe in whatever you so choose, so if you want to believe that the Holocause didn't exist and that Hitler should run for president posthumously, you are entitled to do so.

I'm surprised that the whole Hitler thing hasn't brought more anger from the left. After all, the last time I mentioned Adolph people wanted to ban me. :rolleyes:

Pretty disgusting.

They're 13, you read that right? [/b][/quote]Hey I just turned 17..

Still you're what a senior in high school and you're calling someone in 7th or 8th grade hot?


Whatever floats your boat, I guess

It'd be 8th. A little touchy new guy?

yes

I find myself agreeing with Plawrence on this one(yo plawrence don't let this go to your head this will probably be the only time )

As much as we may/may not agree with it these girls have the right to sing about whatever they choose. And if they or their grandfather choose to show the Swastika then again that's their right.

To curtail their freedom of speech would be going down a very slippery slope. Cause then we could possibly loose the first amendment altogether. Someone will always have a problem with another persons views/beliefs, that will never change. Hell I have several friends who claim the holocaust never happened.

Why does that only apply to something that you choose stand up for?
If that is the case than if you don't like it when I say UNDER GOD in the pledge then don't listen.[/b][/quote]Here's the difference:

The Pledge is, in effect, "sponsored" or "sactioned" by our government. If you want to say the worrds "Under God" when you recite the pledge, fine, but the words should not be part of the official pledege.

Of course we've had this argument before.

Should the words be part of the pledge and let people omit them, or should they not be part of the pledge, but let people say them?

I really don't care to go around in that circle again.

But the difference is obvious.

Here, we are "standing up" for the rights of our citizens to have unpopular views.

If it were the governement espousing these views, of course I would object.

I fail to see any inconsistency here.

If you are willing, for the sake of argument, to assume for a moment that the NBS dress code is discriminatory, then:

NBA Dress Code = Discriminatory = "Morally" Wrong = But the NBA has the right to implement it

Nazi Girls = Hateful = "Morally" Wrong = But they have the right to spew their hate.

Nobody wanted to ban you.

It was just that comparing a member here to Hitler was considered by some to be, shall we say to put it politely, in "poor taste".

As far as this thread goes, there are really two things going on here:

First, is the views of these people and their support of Nazism with the attendant hate that goes along with this views.

Second is the right of these people to have these views.

I chose to adress the second issue only. I personally detest Nazis, as I do members of several other political persuasions.

I think (or, at least, hope) we can all agree that Nazis are despicable people, etc., and to add my agreement to that would merely be redundant.

Neo- Nazis initiate people into their groups by requiring them to do acts of hate, such as assaulting racial- ethnic people, beating or killing persons perceived to be homosexual, desecrating synagogues, and burning churches with racial- ethnic or multi-cultural membership.
Here are some acts of violence carried out by neo-nazi groups in the last year alone:


In Los Angeles, CA.- a group of skinheads were arrested and found guilty for trying to provoke a race war by plotting to shoot members of an African-American church.


In Eugene, OR.- members of a neo-nazi group are arrested and found guilty of throwing rocks, engraved with sastikas, through the windows of a synangogue during religious services.

Springfield, MO.- a member of the neo-nazi creativity movement is arrested and found guilty for beating his roommate because the roommate is not willing to share the same neo-nazi views.

Lawrenceville GA.- members of a neo-nazi party are arrested and found guilty for burning images of swastikas into the lawn of a Jewish families home.

Gresha, OR.- neo-nazi skinheads are arrested and found guilty of threatening and assaulting an African American man with a machette.

Fond du Lac, WI. - A member of the Nazi Party is arrested for manufacturing and selling pipe bombs to a federal agent.

Santa Fe, NM. - Four teenage boys are charged with spray-painting swastikas and racial slurs, burning a cross and leaving a noose on a tree at a black woman's residence. Turns out that 2 of the boys father's were supporters of a neo-nazi group.

In Carson NV - a 16 year old teen was sentenced to 10 years to life in prison. The crime? Sexually assaulting a fellow student as an initiation requirement to become a member of a white supremist nazi group

And the unsoved crimes of Sastika Neo Nazi symbols that were painted or etched into Schools, Homes, Businesses, etc. are just tooo many to even list.


It all probably started out harmless, the singing of the songs, the wearing of swastikas, etc. because someone was "afraid" to violate thier rights! :rolleyes:


"Like they shoulda stopped Hitler at Munich, they shoulda never let him get away with that, they were just asking for big trouble..."


Don Cardi

Don Cardi...the acts you outline above appear to be examples of Nazi supporters who DID eventually commit horrible crimes to support or avenge their cause. It also appears that in each case, they were charged/prosecuted/jailed only AFTER commiting the crimes, not while 'harmlessly' singing songs, wearing swastikas, etc. because someone was "afraid" to violate thier rights!.

And it's not a matter of being 'afraid' to voilate these rights...it's the simple fact that if charges were brought against people for singing songs, wearing symbols, and basically practicing their right to freedom of speech, the cases would be thrown out quicker than I could read the next 3 pages of The Godfather.

And...this still doesn't prove that EVERYONE who preaches or displays symbols of the Nazi movement is cabable of actually DOING to other human beings what the Nazi's did.

And...all these stories of other people's crimes still does not alter the right of this family and their daughter(s) to do what they are currently doing.

Apple

Don Cardi, I appreciate your non-tolerant stance against those extremist groups. I think, however, that forbidding those parties will do no good. First of all, it is always dangerous when the state dictates what opinions you are allowed to have and which you don't. It can be used in a bad way, just as some people argue that states are decreasing civil liberties in the name of anti-terrorism.

In Belgium the authorities made the flemish-nationalist party Vlaam's Blok illegal a few years ago. The next day it reappeared as Vlaam's Belang... The same things have happened in Germany where, naturally, national socialism is forbidden. So just forbidding those parties doesn't work.

Also I think that forbidding people to have some views is dangerous because the risk is that it actually make them stronger since they can picture themselves as martures and victims.

It is much better if society keeps informing, in schools and other places, about the lessons of authoritarianism, nationalism and racism that we learned in the 20th century. We have to fight extremism with humanism.

Nobody wanted to ban you.

It was just that comparing a member here to Hitler was considered by some to be, shall we say to put it politely, in "poor taste".
[/b][/quote]You didn't get the PM's I did, then. :p

Also, I didn't compare Patrick to Hitler. I simply suggested that his ideals might have been in syncopation with that of our old friend Adolph.

Here's a video from ABC about the two little Hitler Youth:

Video

Simply put, one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.