It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Neo Nazi-ism alive and well...How?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   
The National Socialist Movement, a neo-Nazi group, is holding two rallies in Arizona and Minnesota on Saturday to demonstrate against illegal immigration. Similar rallies in Riverside, Calif., near Los Angeles, have led to violent clashes with counter-protesters.

Late last month, a rally near a day-laborer site in Riverside attracted about two dozen members of the National Socialist Movement (NSM), who wore World War II-era Nazi garb. They were outmatched by about 700 counter-protesters.


source : www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120129726


How are these guys able to legally do this? One would think they would be barred for "disturbing the peace" or "inciting riots". I wonder if an American Indian group were to have an "anti- illegal immigrant rally" (meaning all non Indians) how the local authorities around the nation would react or if they would even be allowed to hold such a rally. Certainly we are free to express our opinions as Americans however I believe such demonstrations by known hate groups which have incited violence in the past should be barred from holding public rallies. Why doesn't our goverment crack down on these "homegrown terrorists"? Members of this and other white supremicist groups have gone on killing sprees several times in recent memory. Is there perhaps a double standard at work here?




posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
You can't misuse the laws to suppress free speech, even when that speech is offensive to you and just about everyone else. Claiming it's "disturbing the peace" is not going to work.

That logic would have (and, in fact, did) applied to Martin Luther King. His words, though peaceful, were said to be "disturbing the peace" or "causing unrest", and so on. They were highly offensive to many people, an outrage to them and their way of living.

The downside of freedom of speech is that you have to let complete idiots have their say, as well.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Well, that is the best thing about America. We have the freedom of speech and the freedom to peacefully assemble. I have been to one of these exact rallies, and it is the counter protesters who spark violence. Censoring them would make us as bad as Cuba or North Korea. No matter how much you disagree with them, it is their right. And most white supremacy groups do not go on "killing sprees" as you have mentioned. I can't even name one. And what would that double standard be? Perhaps I am just missing it.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Why doesn't our goverment crack down on these "homegrown terrorists"? Members of this and other white supremicist groups have gone on killing sprees several times in recent memory. Is there perhaps a double standard at work here?


They aren't terrorists. They are Americans who have a point of view and your constitution gives them the right to march and express their ideals, so long as they do it without violence.

If you want freedom of speech, you better stand up and protect that right, even if you don't agree with what is being said.

With your logic in mind. Tea Partier's are terrorists. We here at ATS are a terrorist organization. Anti-gun law protesters are terrorists. You see the point?

~Keeper


[edit on 11/7/2009 by tothetenthpower]



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Racism benefits the government because most of the reasons people become racist are social and economic, not because they actually hate the color of someones skin or their way of life. Thus its better for the government if the people blame each other for a lack of jobs, poverty and crime than if they blame the government.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
As i've previously stated, these guys ARE violent. I also disagree with the opinion of most tea partiers, however somehow their marches never lead to violence. Also, to refute your claim, here are several links to recent racially motivated killings by white supremacists:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Baumhammers

www.slate.com/id/2220270/

www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4915661

These rallies usually end in violence. These guys preach violence. You have people of mid-eastern descent going to jail just for visiting jihadist websites. Once again I re-iterate: is there a double standard here? And why?
Btw these are just three examples. There are numerous others.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seventhdoor
Racism benefits the government because most of the reasons people become racist are social and economic, not because they actually hate the color of someones skin or their way of life. Thus its better for the government if the people blame each other for a lack of jobs, poverty and crime than if they blame the government.


yeah this is the way it has been for years people are just ignorant to see the real enemy of humans because of progressive washing cultured humans.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   
I would much prefer a neo-nazi rally on the street than to have them all together in a basement feeling like they are being persecuted. That's when people have nothing else to do but plan real terrorist actions and not just run their mouths. I'll take their inane rantings anyday. Too bad they have to be giving the anti-illegal immigration movement a black eye.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 

Exactly! I would much rather they march in the streets then be forced underground where they WILL then resort to using violence. Ditto for all the Hispanic separatist groups, I would rather they march in the streets of Los Angeles then rise up in revolt and cause a 2nd civil war.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seventhdoor
its better for the government if the people blame each other for a lack of jobs, poverty and crime than if they blame the government.


I see your point: divide and conquer. However I think about how quickly the Black Panthers were shut down, as well as other black nationalist / American Indian liberation movements were shut down (cointelpro). I understand how they pit one group of poor people against another to avoid the poor from realising who the real oppressors are, however why are these neo nazis allowed to flourish to this day?



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
I would much prefer a neo-nazi rally on the street than to have them all together in a basement feeling like they are being persecuted. That's when people have nothing else to do but plan real terrorist actions and not just run their mouths.


To the contary, they are planning terrorist plots:

www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/1027081obama1.html

Will the skinhead apologists give it a rest for a little while and allow someone who has a bit of insight regarding this seeming double standard to reply?



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by chiron613
You can't misuse the laws to suppress free speech, even when that speech is offensive to you and just about everyone else. Claiming it's "disturbing the peace" is not going to work.

That logic would have (and, in fact, did) applied to Martin Luther King. His words, though peaceful, were said to be "disturbing the peace" or "causing unrest", and so on. They were highly offensive to many people, an outrage to them and their way of living.

The downside of freedom of speech is that you have to let complete idiots have their say, as well.


Thanks for pointing out THE DOUBLE STANDARD!

Its ok for neo-nazis to organise and protest, a known hate group mind you, but it wasn't ok for oppressed blacks to do the same. Whats wrong with you?

I agree we should have freedom of speech for everyone, not a select few!

In case you don't already know the american government has unofficially supported facism since the end of WW2. The previously classified PROJECT PAPERCLIP absolutely proves it. Not to mention the kkk which for many decades did as they please with almost total impunity....



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by siahchi
 


As horrible as their creed is, they have the right to say it. Those are the joys, and pains, of free speech. ...and I wouldn't have it any other way.

If we shut these guys down, or the govt. does, who is next? You? Me? Anyone who doesn't toe the line? No. I'll take it the way it is now, warts and all, rather than the alternative.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


Of course they have their right to free speech, I have posted that time after time. I would not want anyone to take that away from anyone, whether I agree with they're position or not. The question is and has been, do they have a right to continually incite violence. And why the double standard when non- caucasians voice they're opinion, often peacefully. Seems that anytime non whites stir up any controversy, they are shut up, shot down and taken out. Case in point (I guess i'll keep repeating myself) cointelpro. And yes I know they went after commies too not just Black and Indian nationalist groups.

(BTW Seagull, who is Majic? thats a great qoute!)

[edit on 7-11-2009 by siahchi]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 10:36 AM
link   

The question is and has been, do they have a right to continually incite violence.


This is where the slippery slope begins. When is stating an unpopular opinion inciting violence? That's a very good question, and the answer will be different for everyone. I don't know if I have an answer for you.


Seems that anytime non whites stir up any controversy, they are shut up, shot down and taken out.


That was very much the case back in the bad ole days of J. Edgar Hoover and his personal Gestapo, and with many larger, or even not so large, metropolitan police and sherriff departments. Is that the case now? Some would say yes, others would say no. I'm in the middle with a not so much as it used to be, but still too often.


And yes I know they went after commies too not just Black and Indian nationalist groups.


Yes, they did... ...and it was wrong then, too. Where is the line between a govts. obligation to protect its citizens begin, and the rights of a rebelious minority to speak their minds without fear of harassment end?

This is the key question. The rights of the majority vs the rights of the minority. There will always be clashes. It's up to us, all of us, to decide; and make sure that the govt. abides by those strictures.


(BTW Seagull, who is Majic? thats a great qoute!)


Majic is a fellow mod, actually a supermod. That's a quote from a thread that has long since been relegated to the "stacks" of ATS. I, obviously, thought it was great, too...


[edit on 11/8/2009 by seagull]



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Of course they have their right to free speech, I have posted that time after time. I would not want anyone to take that away from anyone, whether I agree with they're position or not. The question is and has been, do they have a right to continually incite violence.


Maybe because rallies by organisations like the NSM contribute to the stereotype of Nazis as bonehead racist fools. It seems like more of an effort is done to silence racist individuals or organisations with a more intellectual foundation.



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   
The Black Panthers fell apart due to infighting and high legal costs.

There are government agents all up in the white supremacists movements. Remember Ruby Ridge? Randy had nothing to do with those Nazi's save geographic location and the feds still slaughtered his family. Not because he was violent or racist but because the feds wanted his help and he said no.

A simple Google search of: "federal agents infiltrate white supremacists" brings up plenty of info about how they have been relentless since 911 to keep tabs on these people.

The ones who actually commit crimes like assault and vandalism are generally charged with those crimes. You cant just attribute the crimes of an individual who claims membership in a group to everyone in said group.

Had to edit out hyperlink to Google search. Too many characters in the url I guess.

[edit on 18-11-2009 by thisguyrighthere]



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Before ww2, loads of americans and uk people where into plenty of hitler stuff.

Stop believing the news media. Its quite popular. As long as people do not harm anyone, why do you care. America is supposed to have freedom of speech, lol.

Personally i don't care.

Like in uk, we have bnp, but because i am white and have short hair, people think you like them. No i do not, they hate irish people, which i am of irish parents, so they hate people like me. But i do not care if they exist, just do not come near me, and why do i get profiled as one of them just for being white, i jsut do not know.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
The Black Panthers fell apart due to infighting and high legal costs.

There are government agents all up in the white supremacists movements.


Indeed. Organisations like the NSM are used to provide controlled oposition for those few who are attracted to such organisations and to make them look ridiculous with regards to ordinary citizens, thus destroying the possibility of such movements becoming mature or gaining the intellectual baggage necessary therefor.

I know a guy who once tried to educate the bonehead skinheads of Blood & Honour by selling magazines, books, organising lectures, etc. As a consequence, they arrested him and threw him in jail with charges of terrorism even though he never promoted any violence or owns any weapons. Blood & Honour was left alone, even though they are in direct violation of anti-racism laws. This case happened in Belgium, though, but I see lots of similarities between the way the "ultra-right" is treated in Western-Europe and the US, even though we in Western-Europe do have laws that limit free speech.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by siahchi
 



Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Thanks to this. If you want freedom of speech it has to apply to everyone, including moronic hate filled [snip] holes.



[edit on 11/19/2009 by whatukno]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join