|
#14
●
11-29-2016, 04:39 PM
|
|
Re: Nazi Grandma Sentenced To 2.5 Years For Wrong-Think
|
|
#15
●
11-29-2016, 04:44 PM
|
|
Re: Nazi Grandma Sentenced To 2.5 Years For Wrong-Think
Yeah but she's voicing her opinion about the third reich, they almost destroyed Germany and the world with their opinions, so that's kinda a big deal to them. If anything, they also need to throw in jail any ISIS sympathizers as well
|
|
#17
●
12-01-2016, 11:59 AM
| ||||||||
| My Rank: CORPORAL Poster Rank:1552 Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 362 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Quoted: 141 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Nazi Grandma Sentenced To 2.5 Years For Wrong-Think
Yes, and now the Merkel regime is trying to arrest people for criticizing immigrants too. Germany could be headed for the chaos of the early 1930s again at this rate. And we know how that turned out.
|
|
#18
●
12-04-2016, 10:19 AM
| ||||||||
| My Rank: CORPORAL Poster Rank:1693 Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 316 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Quoted: 74 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Nazi Grandma Sentenced To 2.5 Years For Wrong-Think
Anyone can have an opinion, no matter how stupid it may be. Acting upon those stupid opinions is what leads to conflict. Germany's opinions never destroyed anything. Their actions were the real problem. |
|
#19
●
12-05-2016, 01:52 PM
|
|
Re: Nazi Grandma Sentenced To 2.5 Years For Wrong-Think
I think Germany is still very ashamed of the nazis and Germany's actrions during WWII. I think that is one of the reasons that those laws exist. Also I think they're still afraid of another hitler popping up and dragging them through the mud again. |
|
#20
●
12-07-2016, 02:55 PM
| ||||||||
| ★ Legacy Member ★ Poster Rank:2850 Male Join Date: Jul 2015 Posts: 141 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Quoted: 33 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Nazi Grandma Sentenced To 2.5 Years For Wrong-Think
This is ridiculous. This is due to the typical communist bullshit known as 'Social Justice'. Let her think what she wants. But I would seriously like to know what she is basing her assertion on. She would have only been 17 in 1945, so I don't think she could claim to be an eyewitness. So, she must be basing her assertion on evidence she saw or what she's been told. I realize the point of the law is to prevent the spread of this disinformation, but I would prefer to see disinformation destroyed with truth rather than with force.
|