Thread: SC: Neo-Nazi group to rally against illegal immigration

Here's another story: Now why do you think the ACLU is getting into this one over a matter of limiting how far the Nazis can march? And in this case it seems to be to inflame the black population. But I suspect the ACLU thinks it will strengthen the OBL's position too as I wouldn't be surprised if they carried anti-illegal immigration signs as well. It seems everyone's trying to get into the act of getting white supremacists into the press doesn't it? Not to mention getting press for themselves. The heck of it is that those who aren't really educated in this issue might fall for the short video blurbs they're likely to see on the evening news. And the OBL crowd knows it!

April 13, 2007
ACLU To Defend Nazis Again

The ACLU lost a number of members in 1977 when they defended the American Nazi Party when they wanted to stage a demonstration in the town of Skokie, Illinois -- a city where a number of Holocaust victims and their families had settled. Over 30,000 ACLU members staged a demonstration of their own when they marched out of the organization, even after the ACLU won the case, and even though the Nazis never did march in Skokie.

Thirty years later, the ACLU proves that they have not learned their lesson. The Ohio chapter has agreed to represent the American Nazi Party again in a conflict over a demonstration permit, this time in a predominantly black neighborhood in Cincinnati. Holly at The Moderate Voice shares the e-mail:

On April 20, 2007, the American National Socialist Workers Party of Roanoke, VA—a neo-Nazi group—plans to march through the predominantly African-American neighborhood of Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati. The city initially issued a permit to the group for its march, but the permit was soon revoked and prohibitions were added by city officials limiting the group’s demonstration to a three-block area. Believing their constitutional rights to free speech and free assembly have been violated, the ACLU of Ohio will be defending the demonstrators.

The ACLU condemns violent action and supports its prevention. Yet we also believe that our government must allow citizens their unhindered right to free speech. The City of Cincinnati should stand behind this basic freedom while taking steps to ensure a peaceful demonstration.

As in previous cases where the ACLU has come to the defense of people or groups with whom we disagree, our position is rooted in certain fundamental principles. While we in no way endorse the views of the American National Socialist Workers Party, we believe that the constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and press would be meaningless if the government could pick and choose the persons to whom they apply.

I agree that the government should not be in the business of determining the acceptability of political speech. I would not want to have to get permission to hold a public assembly that hinges on the political content of the speech for myself, and I would want government have the same approach for others as well.

However, that isn't what has happened in Over-The-Rhine, at least judging by the ACLU's description. The city did revoke their permit, but then apparently issued another that gives them three blocks in which to demonstrate. That does not sound like an overwhelming burden for the Nazis to meet, and it does not keep them from conducting their protest. They're not being stopped from demonstrating; they want to complain because of the boundaries placed on their protest, even though such permits routinely impose boundaries on demonstrations.

The ACLU will put themselves in the position of arguing that the city of Cincinnati has no authority to determine the geographical boundaries for a protest -- on behalf of a group that would, if given the chance, strip everyone of the right to demonstrate in any form at all. They do so even though they have no requirement to represent Nazis; the Nazis could hire their own lawyers to handle this case, and unfortunately they can probably afford it, too. The ACLU has determined that they can get a lot of publicity for their flacking on behalf of Nazis, and have climbed into bed with racists as a result. They're doing nothing more than unnecessarily enabling the Nazis.

Indiana Jones once said, "I hate these guys." In this context, it would be difficult to determine which group he would have meant.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/ ... 009678.php

Yes, the powers that be want to make us look bad, just like they want to include illegal immigrants in with the legal ones. I hope others will take a good long look at the big picture.

I thought Nazism was outlawed internationally after the defeat of Hitler's Germany.

These types of people are twisted in their ideology. They are "racists", anti-semetics, anti-everything except for the arian race. It's a bad scene to say the least.

That's why they don't like the Minutemen. The Minutemen are made up of all types of Americans. Color, and religon aren't a topic.

You know, I have to say I agree with all of you, something smells awful bad in the Federal government right now.

I am no conspiracy theorist, but......seems to me that in order to get their heavily desired amnesty and push through the NAU and SPP, someone is playing up on the sudden "surge" of Neo-Nazi groups in the public eye, maybe to take the attention off of the feds lack of border controls, and all else. As well when you combine all of this information with the three officers jailed for actually doing their jobs, it seems like we have a huge conspiracy by "someone" to get the publics attention off of their backs.

All of the sudden media attention of Neo-Nazi's and an apparent staged event by the FBI informant (with their blessings no less), it would seem that they want us all to appear as racist, so other concerned Americans may turn against those of us fighting the politics of illegal immigration.

Could we be headed towards being labeled by Homeland Security as "enemy combatants" soon?

Originally Posted by AmericanElizabeth

You know, I have to say I agree with all of you, something smells awful bad in the Federal government right now.

I am no conspiracy theorist, but......seems to me that in order to get their heavily desired amnesty and push through the NAU and SPP, someone is playing up on the sudden "surge" of Neo-Nazi groups in the public eye, maybe to take the attention off of the feds lack of border controls, and all else. As well when you combine all of this information with the three officers jailed for actually doing their jobs, it seems like we have a huge conspiracy by "someone" to get the publics attention off of their backs.

All of the sudden media attention of Neo-Nazi's and an apparent staged event by the FBI informant (with their blessings no less), it would seem that they want us all to appear as racist, so other concerned Americans may turn against those of us fighting the politics of illegal immigration.

Could we be headed towards being labeled by Homeland Security as "enemy combatants" soon?

Put that way, it gets kinda scary. But I don't underestimate anything, or anyone, where money and power are concerned.

Hylander, I have talked to and read comments of other people who feel this is something we have to pay attention to.

I am not a paranoid person, but look at how many people have problems with travel, get pulled aside for unknown reasons and sometimes it is never fully explained to them why they were detained at the airport, or put on the no fly list.

Now I have only flown one time in my life, but I see it as a freedom, and wonder how our government can actually put a person on a "no fly list" and take away a freedom you have a right to in this country, over who knows what? I can understand wanting to screen people, make sure they cannot carry in anything potentially usable as a weapon, or chemicals and such, but to actually put someone on a no fly list, saying although you may have committed no crime, you cannot freely travel within or outside of your country. Are we then leaning towards having to apply to travel at all? Are we coming to that?

We're headed in the direction of a society which basically has only certain people who have privelages, and then those who have none (either due to their religions, political activism, or maybe even ethnicity, who knows). Only allowing people who are unfailingly faithful to their "One World" ideals, the privelages, and those who will not, nothing.

I'll go in this direction though, Biblical prophecy, it has already been written, does not mean we are not supposed to fight it while we are here and kicking.

AmericanElizabeth,

The technology already exists to put ID chips in the people, and unless you have it, you won't be able to work, conduct business, buy food, or open a bank account.

Call me crazy, but that is in the Book of Revelations. The mark of the Beast. I personnally won't accept it, and will struggle against it when it comes into play.

All I know is that the KKK Took My Baby Away!

She went away for the holidays
Said she's going to L.A.
But she never got there
She never got there
She never got there, they say

Now I don't know
Where my baby can be
They took her from me
They took her from me
I don't know
Where my baby can be
They took her from me

ring me
Up the President
And find out
Where my baby went
Ring me, ring me, ring me
Up the FBI
And find out if
My baby's alive

The KKK took my baby away
They took her away
Away from me
The KKK took my baby away

Video
Ramones - The KKK took my baby away LIVE in Sweden
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-4EZyPIsSY

Hylander, many Biblical scholars feel that the believers will already be gone by then. Now mind you, some have refuted that and think believers will be here for part of it all. Those on the first track have said those left behind (the name of the movie series BTW) will suffer these consequences and will have to die (become martyrs) to be redeemed.

These people will have to suffer for their faith and die for it, doing without that "mark" potentially the microchip, will be part of that, as it will make surviving very hard.

Up in Washington state, when we lived there, it was on the news about a grocery store, the first in Washington, to have a debit system which was based on the account holders thumbprint (which is in your hand, and generally with such devices, they simply would use your right hand possibly because the majority of people are right handed!). Now we have biometrics coming into play, with the eye scan, which is not new technology, but new in it's use with everyday citizens and i.d.'ing them (your eye is considered to be in your forehead).