Under Entirely New Management, concluded - Turncoat-17E.jpg (1/1)

Mitchell Holman wrote:

Interesting note for the Germans: The Nazi Hakenkreuz (Swastika) has
been crudely photoshopped out of this picture so that it will be "legal"
to have, display and send/receive in Germany.

I am not belabouring the German people here, just making an observation.

Cheers,

Dave

I had always thought that the German law allowed the Swaztika to be
displayed for educational purposes. If ayone knows, is this not the
case still? (I suppose the devil is in the details, what qualifies for
educational purposes?)

Waldo.

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 09:39:13 -0600, CWO4 Dave Mann
wrote:

Mitchell Holman wrote:

Interesting note for the Germans: The Nazi Hakenkreuz (Swastika) has
been crudely photoshopped out of this picture so that it will be "legal"
to have, display and send/receive in Germany.

I am not belabouring the German people here, just making an observation.

Cheers,

Dave

German law is the same as it has always been (before the war, during the
war, after the war). Only fanatics are allowed, the only question is which
brand of fanaticism will prevail.

"Waldo Pepper" wrote in message
...
I had always thought that the German law allowed the Swaztika to be
displayed for educational purposes. If ayone knows, is this not the
case still? (I suppose the devil is in the details, what qualifies for
educational purposes?)

Waldo.

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 09:39:13 -0600, CWO4 Dave Mann
wrote:

Mitchell Holman wrote:

Interesting note for the Germans: The Nazi Hakenkreuz (Swastika) has
been crudely photoshopped out of this picture so that it will be "legal"
to have, display and send/receive in Germany.

I am not belabouring the German people here, just making an observation.

Cheers,

Dave

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 15:39:13 -0000, CWO4 Dave Mann wrote:

Mitchell Holman wrote:

Interesting note for the Germans: The Nazi Hakenkreuz (Swastika) has
been crudely photoshopped out of this picture so that it will be "legal"
to have, display and send/receive in Germany.

I am not belabouring the German people here, just making an observation.

Cheers,

Dave

You can't send/receive a swastika in Germany? That's a little childish.


--
http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.insanevideoclips.com http://www.petersphotos.com

Everyone farts, admit it or not. Kings fart, queens fart.
Edward Lear, the 19th century English landscape painter, wrote affectionately of a favorite Duchess who gave enormous dinner parties attended by the cream of society.
One night she let out a ripper and quick as a flash she turned her gaze to her stoic butler, standing, as always, behind her.
"Hawkins!" she cried, "Stop that!"
"Certainly, your Grace", he replied with unhurried dignity,
"Which way did it go?"

Peter Hucker wrote:
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 15:39:13 -0000, CWO4 Dave Mann wrote:

Mitchell Holman wrote:

Interesting note for the Germans: The Nazi Hakenkreuz (Swastika) has
been crudely photoshopped out of this picture so that it will be "legal"
to have, display and send/receive in Germany.

I am not belabouring the German people here, just making an observation.

Cheers,

Dave

You can't send/receive a swastika in Germany? That's a little childish.




I seem to recall that it is due to a law which first regulated Nazi-era
souvenirs. But, there was concern by the Germans about the burgeoning
neo-Nazi groups which flourished in the old East Germany after the
Reunification.

An example is eBay.de -- the German eBay system. Nazi-"anything" are
not allowed on that system. There was a lawsuit a few years back, but I
dis-remember the details.

I suppose we could look at it from several views:

1. It is the result of Political Correctness gone mad in a world
already insane.

2. It is a cloying Government technique to stifle free speech -- which
is not guaranteed by the German constitution anyway.

3. It is a reaction to the rebirth of the Nationalist Socialist Workers
Movement (Nazi Party) in modern day uniforms but in 1930's style jack boots.

4. It is a sop to the leftists of Germany whose goal may be to convert
Germany to a Socialist state and want to remove the Hitler times from
the history books.

5. It is due to pressure from the Jewish Rulers of the World -- a Ukase
issued from the secret Fortress of International Jewry located near
Mount Ararat in a cave.

6. It is a legitimate but ill-thought-out attempt by government censors
to limit exposure of modern day Germans to Nazi idealization.

7. Erasing the Swastika from historical images is required by law ..
eventually there will be no-one alive who remembers and it will be "old
history" anyway that nobody studies because they are too busy
demonstrating against something.

As a historian, I think it is unwise to elimiate images which may
offend. Look at the re-creation of history and historical pictures
which took place under the regimes of Stalin and Hitler and the
manipulation of historically important facts such as FDR's paralysis and
the fact that he was wheel-chair-bound ...

Would you believe that it is only in the 1990's that a statue of FDR
showing him in his wheel chair was "allowed" to be made and placed in a
national historical park? Something like that denies the existance of
Polio and more importantly the fortitude of Roosevelt in overcoming his
mobility impairment.

Removing the swastika and make the Seig arm salute illegal in Germany
simply removed one more link to an already distorted view of history.

Travel to any German city today and try to find the local Synagogue.
Naturally there are none, but you will find only a small brass plaque
which has some simplistic words such as "here was the location of the
Jewish Congregation of Beth-Israel which existed from 1525 to 1938 and
which was destroyed by the Nazi government in World War Two." That
statement leaves a whole bunch of history out, to be sure. Somewhere
along the line "Never Again" becomes lost to the casual on-looker, Jew
or non-Jew alike.

I've meandered along here, but the bottom line is that once freedom of
speech and expression becomes constricted or restricted, it is a very
slippery downhill slope.

That slippery slope conundrum is one reason that I, a veteran of 30
years military service, two wars and with a purple heart to show for it
was not in favor of the flag burning amendment. As obnoxious as I find
the maltreatment of Old Glory, once the law says a person cannon express
themselves by defacing Her, then what will the next step be? How about
"Speaking Out Against the Policies of the Government".

That should give you chills.

Meanwhile,

Cheers,

Dave

"CWO4 Dave Mann" wrote:

Peter Hucker wrote:

You can't send/receive a swastika in Germany? That's a little childish.

I seem to recall that it is due to a law which first regulated Nazi-era
souvenirs. But, there was concern by the Germans about the burgeoning
neo-Nazi groups which flourished in the old East Germany after the
Reunification.

The banning of Nazi symbols started with the occupation of
Germany. It was fairly comprehensive, at least in the US
zone, sometimes to the point of seeming inane. Some works
of classical music were banned from public performances on
the grounds that they had been used by the Nazi regime
(Liszt's "Les Preludes" was one such work; among other
things, an excerpt from it was used to open radio news reports
on the war in Russia).

As the occupation settled into the Cold War, the government
of Bizonia/Trizonia/FRG maintained the ban on Nazi symbols.
There are multiple reasons for this, in no particular order of
their importance:

1: Don't **** off the Soviets; they're still in a bad mood.

2: It's a sop to the Western powers; a lot of former Nazis were
only technically denazified, and banning Nazi symbols made
it look like something was being done to keep them in check.

3: The FRG leadership had a realistic attitude toward the Nazis,
who had a habit of jailing, torturing and executing their opponents.
Why take a chance that the Green Devils, "Deutsche Revolution,"
Gotenbund or other splinter parties might turn into the next NDSAP?

4: If you can't talk about the Reich, then you can't talk about
its atrocities, which saves some people a lot of embarrassment.

The ban stayed in place long after the "economic miracle" and the
FRG's entry into NATO removed the two major issues that might
have fuelled a Nazi revival. My guess is that motive #4 would
have to receive considerable weight in any discussion of why
the ban remains in place.

--Bill Thompson

William R Thompson wrote:
"CWO4 Dave Mann" wrote:

Peter Hucker wrote:

You can't send/receive a swastika in Germany? That's a little childish.

I seem to recall that it is due to a law which first regulated Nazi-era
souvenirs. But, there was concern by the Germans about the burgeoning
neo-Nazi groups which flourished in the old East Germany after the
Reunification.

The banning of Nazi symbols started with the occupation of
Germany. It was fairly comprehensive, at least in the US
zone, sometimes to the point of seeming inane. Some works
of classical music were banned from public performances on
the grounds that they had been used by the Nazi regime
(Liszt's "Les Preludes" was one such work; among other
things, an excerpt from it was used to open radio news reports
on the war in Russia).

As the occupation settled into the Cold War, the government
of Bizonia/Trizonia/FRG maintained the ban on Nazi symbols.
There are multiple reasons for this, in no particular order of
their importance:

1: Don't **** off the Soviets; they're still in a bad mood.

2: It's a sop to the Western powers; a lot of former Nazis were
only technically denazified, and banning Nazi symbols made
it look like something was being done to keep them in check.

3: The FRG leadership had a realistic attitude toward the Nazis,
who had a habit of jailing, torturing and executing their opponents.
Why take a chance that the Green Devils, "Deutsche Revolution,"
Gotenbund or other splinter parties might turn into the next NDSAP?

4: If you can't talk about the Reich, then you can't talk about
its atrocities, which saves some people a lot of embarrassment.

The ban stayed in place long after the "economic miracle" and the
FRG's entry into NATO removed the two major issues that might
have fuelled a Nazi revival. My guess is that motive #4 would
have to receive considerable weight in any discussion of why
the ban remains in place.

--Bill Thompson




Drat! I never thought about Option #4 -- and that is the most obvious
and probably of them all!

Cheers, Bill ..

Dave

Clearly Dave is neither a Jew or an historian. I lived through that war and
know why display of the Hakenkreuz is still frowned upon by those who
remember.

Dr G K Gerlach


"CWO4 Dave Mann" wrote in message
. ..
Peter Hucker wrote:
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 15:39:13 -0000, CWO4 Dave Mann
wrote:

Mitchell Holman wrote:

Interesting note for the Germans: The Nazi Hakenkreuz (Swastika) has
been crudely photoshopped out of this picture so that it will be "legal"
to have, display and send/receive in Germany.

I am not belabouring the German people here, just making an observation.

Cheers,

Dave

You can't send/receive a swastika in Germany? That's a little childish.




I seem to recall that it is due to a law which first regulated Nazi-era
souvenirs. But, there was concern by the Germans about the burgeoning
neo-Nazi groups which flourished in the old East Germany after the
Reunification.

An example is eBay.de -- the German eBay system. Nazi-"anything" are not
allowed on that system. There was a lawsuit a few years back, but I
dis-remember the details.

I suppose we could look at it from several views:

1. It is the result of Political Correctness gone mad in a world already
insane.

2. It is a cloying Government technique to stifle free speech -- which is
not guaranteed by the German constitution anyway.

3. It is a reaction to the rebirth of the Nationalist Socialist Workers
Movement (Nazi Party) in modern day uniforms but in 1930's style jack
boots.

4. It is a sop to the leftists of Germany whose goal may be to convert
Germany to a Socialist state and want to remove the Hitler times from the
history books.

5. It is due to pressure from the Jewish Rulers of the World -- a Ukase
issued from the secret Fortress of International Jewry located near Mount
Ararat in a cave.

6. It is a legitimate but ill-thought-out attempt by government censors
to limit exposure of modern day Germans to Nazi idealization.

7. Erasing the Swastika from historical images is required by law ..
eventually there will be no-one alive who remembers and it will be "old
history" anyway that nobody studies because they are too busy
demonstrating against something.

As a historian, I think it is unwise to elimiate images which may offend.
Look at the re-creation of history and historical pictures which took
place under the regimes of Stalin and Hitler and the manipulation of
historically important facts such as FDR's paralysis and the fact that he
was wheel-chair-bound ...

Would you believe that it is only in the 1990's that a statue of FDR
showing him in his wheel chair was "allowed" to be made and placed in a
national historical park? Something like that denies the existance of
Polio and more importantly the fortitude of Roosevelt in overcoming his
mobility impairment.

Removing the swastika and make the Seig arm salute illegal in Germany
simply removed one more link to an already distorted view of history.

Travel to any German city today and try to find the local Synagogue.
Naturally there are none, but you will find only a small brass plaque
which has some simplistic words such as "here was the location of the
Jewish Congregation of Beth-Israel which existed from 1525 to 1938 and
which was destroyed by the Nazi government in World War Two." That
statement leaves a whole bunch of history out, to be sure. Somewhere
along the line "Never Again" becomes lost to the casual on-looker, Jew or
non-Jew alike.

I've meandered along here, but the bottom line is that once freedom of
speech and expression becomes constricted or restricted, it is a very
slippery downhill slope.

That slippery slope conundrum is one reason that I, a veteran of 30 years
military service, two wars and with a purple heart to show for it was not
in favor of the flag burning amendment. As obnoxious as I find the
maltreatment of Old Glory, once the law says a person cannon express
themselves by defacing Her, then what will the next step be? How about
"Speaking Out Against the Policies of the Government".

That should give you chills.

Meanwhile,

Cheers,

Dave

Do not be so sure of your answer Herr Doktor.

In short form, the Twisted Cross is a symbol of hatred, intolerance,
horror and unlimited cruelty.

Of course the majority of German people are dead set against being
reminded of the Hitler years. As it should be with any nation which has
suffered from a dictatorship. The Holocaust was a terrible event which
continues to horrify me and the world. But, let the next generations
forget or minimize, and the possibility for occurrence becomes more
possible.

Look at the Islamo-Fascists as an example of resurgence in modern times.
The main actors are, in the main, a group of psychopaths who idealize
the Hitler Universe. It does not take much of a stretch to see them
goose-stepping and seig heil-ing just as the Arabs did during World War
Two when they were Axis Allies.

And speaking of Goose-stepping ... have you ever wondered exactly why
the totalitarian armies, the far left or right dictator armies, and the
otherwise nasty thug armies ALL seem to march in parades with the
goose-step? I mean, Hitler didn't invent that style of marching, but it
seems to be de'rigeur amongst the heavy-handed.


Regards,

David ben-Mann
BA (Hons), MA, D.Phil.





Ken Gerlach wrote:
Clearly Dave is neither a Jew or an historian. I lived through that war and
know why display of the Hakenkreuz is still frowned upon by those who
remember.

Dr G K Gerlach


"CWO4 Dave Mann" wrote in message
. ..
Peter Hucker wrote:
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 15:39:13 -0000, CWO4 Dave Mann
wrote:

Mitchell Holman wrote:

Interesting note for the Germans: The Nazi Hakenkreuz (Swastika) has
been crudely photoshopped out of this picture so that it will be "legal"
to have, display and send/receive in Germany.

I am not belabouring the German people here, just making an observation.

Cheers,

Dave
You can't send/receive a swastika in Germany? That's a little childish.



I seem to recall that it is due to a law which first regulated Nazi-era
souvenirs. But, there was concern by the Germans about the burgeoning
neo-Nazi groups which flourished in the old East Germany after the
Reunification.

An example is eBay.de -- the German eBay system. Nazi-"anything" are not
allowed on that system. There was a lawsuit a few years back, but I
dis-remember the details.

I suppose we could look at it from several views:

1. It is the result of Political Correctness gone mad in a world already
insane.

2. It is a cloying Government technique to stifle free speech -- which is
not guaranteed by the German constitution anyway.

3. It is a reaction to the rebirth of the Nationalist Socialist Workers
Movement (Nazi Party) in modern day uniforms but in 1930's style jack
boots.

4. It is a sop to the leftists of Germany whose goal may be to convert
Germany to a Socialist state and want to remove the Hitler times from the
history books.

5. It is due to pressure from the Jewish Rulers of the World -- a Ukase
issued from the secret Fortress of International Jewry located near Mount
Ararat in a cave.

6. It is a legitimate but ill-thought-out attempt by government censors
to limit exposure of modern day Germans to Nazi idealization.

7. Erasing the Swastika from historical images is required by law ..
eventually there will be no-one alive who remembers and it will be "old
history" anyway that nobody studies because they are too busy
demonstrating against something.

As a historian, I think it is unwise to elimiate images which may offend.
Look at the re-creation of history and historical pictures which took
place under the regimes of Stalin and Hitler and the manipulation of
historically important facts such as FDR's paralysis and the fact that he
was wheel-chair-bound ...

Would you believe that it is only in the 1990's that a statue of FDR
showing him in his wheel chair was "allowed" to be made and placed in a
national historical park? Something like that denies the existance of
Polio and more importantly the fortitude of Roosevelt in overcoming his
mobility impairment.

Removing the swastika and make the Seig arm salute illegal in Germany
simply removed one more link to an already distorted view of history.

Travel to any German city today and try to find the local Synagogue.
Naturally there are none, but you will find only a small brass plaque
which has some simplistic words such as "here was the location of the
Jewish Congregation of Beth-Israel which existed from 1525 to 1938 and
which was destroyed by the Nazi government in World War Two." That
statement leaves a whole bunch of history out, to be sure. Somewhere
along the line "Never Again" becomes lost to the casual on-looker, Jew or
non-Jew alike.

I've meandered along here, but the bottom line is that once freedom of
speech and expression becomes constricted or restricted, it is a very
slippery downhill slope.

That slippery slope conundrum is one reason that I, a veteran of 30 years
military service, two wars and with a purple heart to show for it was not
in favor of the flag burning amendment. As obnoxious as I find the
maltreatment of Old Glory, once the law says a person cannon express
themselves by defacing Her, then what will the next step be? How about
"Speaking Out Against the Policies of the Government".

That should give you chills.

Meanwhile,

Cheers,

Dave