Top

The Nationalist Report: March in Dresden

February 17, 2010

Dresden War Crime

Mike Conner & Mishko Novosel interview Alaric Pfeiffer of europanetwork.org. Alaric is a journalist who reported on the Feb. 13 memorial march for the victims of the Dresden bombing. Topics include:

  • A recounting of the Allies’ tragic 1945 bombing of Dresden, and the criminal nature of that bombing
  • The motivations of the marchers, and the peaceful, solemn, democratic nature of their memorial march
  • How the police, particularly the German Federal police — not the “antifascist” protesters — were the primary force thwarting the march
  • How the police thwarted the march in defiance of Saxony’s Supreme Court’s ruling that the march was legal and democratic; how police overriding the civil authority is the textbook definition of a police state, and not of a democracy.
  • Prospects for the future: Why the marches will continue, and why police state tactics will eventually fail in eastern Germany.

About Alaric Pfeiffer

For more info on Alaric’s coverage of the Dresden march, please visit www.europanetwork.org to view videos on the march.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 58 min.




Contact Mike: mike.conner reasonradionetwork.com

Contact Mishko: mishko vornetwork.com

Comments

28 Responses to “The Nationalist Report: March in Dresden”

  1. CuriousG on February 18th, 2010 3:13 pm

    Who is the female singer/group doing the intro music to this show? Is it Russian?

  2. Mishko Novosel on February 18th, 2010 4:04 pm

    Yes she’s russian, the singer is Origa and the song is Rebirth.

  3. Mike Bailey on February 18th, 2010 4:25 pm

    I much admired Dietrich’s essay on the horrors of the Dresden bombing. Please permit me to add two addenda. a. The first wave of bombers dropped their load in a random pattern, forcing the residents to flee to a large open park in the center of the city. The second wave of bombers targeted the public park in the center of the city. Knowing full well there would be many thousands of innnocent victims in the park, seeking refuge from the firestorms. b. The day after the bomber raid flights of P-51 fighter planes descended on the city. Machine gunning ambulances, fire trucks, groups of survivors, and rescue vehicles.

  4. johnUK on February 18th, 2010 9:09 pm

    Wasn’t there a case in Iraq in the 91 Gulf war where there was a huge civilian convoy in a desert where US bombers incinerated them with napalm bombs?

  5. charles ellis on February 18th, 2010 9:22 pm

    The Highway of Death. Plenty of pictures on the net.

  6. Arthur on February 18th, 2010 9:25 pm

    Not much has changed since Dresden. Look at the “collateral damage” and “accidents” and “misidentified targets” such as wedding parties in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

  7. Mishko Novosel on February 19th, 2010 12:11 am

    Arthur, the reality is that it’s the same people that were making the decisions back then, are the same ones pulling the strings now, but they’re wheeling a lot more power. The next Nationalist Report show will be an interview with a Nationalist from Greece. We’re talking with him tonight to set up the schedule to do the interview and will have the interview posted this Wednesday. Things are heading up in our white lands, and I think all hell might break loose, enough is enough.

  8. Chris on February 19th, 2010 11:37 am

    Actually the suppression of a peaceful protest can be very democratic. If they have the sanctioning of the majority, they are doing the general will of the people. I’m not saying this incidence qualifies, but to think a police state can’t be a democracy is to not understand what democracy is, and Leftism in general.

  9. Carolyn on February 19th, 2010 3:55 pm

    Mike Bailey is exactly right about the pattern of bombing.

    I just caught up with this new program — it was fantastic. Alaric Pfeiffer is a perfect guest. I will sure be tuning in to all the future ones. The European perspective is great.

  10. Alaric Pfeiffer on February 19th, 2010 7:43 pm

    And tell me chris; what is the relationship between the right to organize, free speech and democracy?

    The majority wanted Socrates dead. Does that make it an act of democracy?

    Is it possible that democracy is more than the dictatorship of the majority?

    What are the democratic ideals?

  11. Arthur on February 19th, 2010 8:17 pm

    I know this thread is about Dresden and I do not want to steer away from that, but bombing the innocent does serve a strategic purpose. In the heyday of whaling it was well known that if the harpooner could find a baby whale, he could use a “cold” harpoon (non-exploding harpoon) and then keep the baby alive and on the line to attract adult whales that would otherwise get away. The adult whales in a pod are inclined to come to the aid of an injured baby, and then they can be harvested. Correspondingly in the wars for Israel (currently being waged in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and coon coming to Iran) innocents are being targeted for bombing to draw out fighters. Wedding parties are a favorite bombing target of the real terrorists (Americans).

  12. Alaric Pfeiffer on February 19th, 2010 10:33 pm

    Except for the fact that when the bombing runs in question were conducted, the fighters were already pinned down in the basements and sewards of Berlin and Budapest.

  13. Arthur on February 19th, 2010 11:31 pm

    It would be great if an old survivor from Dresden were to turn into a war criminal hunter, similarly to the showman and pathological liar Simon Wiesenthal.

  14. Chris on February 20th, 2010 2:40 am

    The relationship between free speech, the right to organize, and democracy… well to give a short answer, there is no direct relationship. If it is the will of the majority to pass a law forbidding free speech or the right to organize… well it is democratic. It may not be of a liberal democracy, but it is democratic. That is one reason democracy is such a horrible governmental form.

    Socrates may not have been sentenced to death in a modern understanding of a democracy as a political method, and way of life, but to say his death was “democratic”, is frighteningly accurate.

    Is it more than the dictatorship of the majority? Sure, that is just one aspect of it, but one important facet people tend to overlook in favor of some illusion of ‘self-government’.

    Its ideals: equality/uniformity, centralization, materialism, envy, intolerance… amongst others.

  15. Alaric Pfeiffer on February 20th, 2010 2:23 pm

    Im sorry chris. You cant make up definitions of words yourself if you want to take part in a conversation. I think you need to read up on the thoughts of the men that founded modern democracy. After all, the word is theirs to define. Not yours.

  16. Chris on February 22nd, 2010 1:48 am

    What definition did I make up? Please enlighten me, what did I miss about the nature of democracy?

  17. Skirnir on February 23rd, 2010 11:10 am

    OK

    “‘Democratic’ in its original meaning [refers to] unlimited majority rule . . . a social system in which one’s work, one’s property, one’s mind, and one’s life are at the mercy of any gang that may muster the vote of a majority at any moment for any purpose.”
    -Ayn Rand

  18. Akira on February 23rd, 2010 11:29 am

    Can I please go a day without reading the ravings of the Jewess Alisa Rosenbaum on some allegedly nationalist website!

  19. Akira on February 23rd, 2010 11:53 am

    ROSENBAUMER ALERT!

    In the intro to the show, above, you state:

    “the police thwarted the march in defiance of Saxony’s Supreme Court’s ruling that the march was legal and democratic; how police overriding the civil authority is the textbook definition of a police state, and not of a democracy.”

    Chris set you off on an irrelevant tangent with his statement:

    “the suppression of a peaceful protest can be very democratic. If they have the sanctioning of the majority, they are doing the general will of the people. I’m not saying this incidence qualifies, but to think a police state can’t be a democracy is to not understand what democracy is”

    Fact: The police are under the authority of the courts and the legislators. The police the courts, the legislators are all under the authority of the Grundgesetz / Constitution, which can only be overturned or amended by a supermajority.

    Therefore, if in fact the police acted contrary to the ruling of the Saxony Supreme Court, then the police acted unconstitutionally, and also undemocratically, since it is the democratic representatives (according to the Constittion) — not the police — who determine the law.

    Skirnir’s Jew-statement that democracy is “unlimited majority rule [acc. to which] one’s life [is] at the mercy of any gang that may muster the vote of a majority at any moment for any purpose,” is alsoinaccurate and irrelevant, since a mere majority would be insufficient to vote away the German citizen’s constitutional rights.

    The role of the these ‘Rosenbaumers’ is to confuse and demoralize. They also infest the patriotard and tea-party sites.

  20. Skirnir on February 23rd, 2010 4:33 pm

    Akira, your argument presupposes Germany is a complete democracy instead of a represented, republican government.

    I would like to see proof of your allegations against those who follow Rand.

  21. Akira on February 23rd, 2010 5:20 pm

    Skirner, your argument presupposes Germany is a “complete” (?) democracy instead of a representative, republican government.

    Your comments are proof of my allegations against those who follow Rosenbaum.

    Art. 79 (1) of the GG (constitution) legislates that amendments can only be enacted by two thirds of the Members of the Bundestag and two thirds of the votes of the Bundesrat, therefore your Jewish mistress’ “definition” obviously doesn’t apply.

    Article 79 (3) legislates that no majority, nor any internattional treaty, can EVER affect the division of the Federation into Länder, their participation on principle in the legislative process, or the principles laid down in Articles 1 and 20, which guarantee or affect the Basic Rights of Human dignity, Personal freedoms, Equality before the law, Freedom of faith, conscience, and creed, Freedom of expression, Marriage and the family, and children born outside of marriage, education, Freedom of assembly, Freedom of association, Privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommunications, Freedom of movement, Occupational freedom; prohibition of forced labor, Compulsory military or alternative service, Inviolability of the home, Property, inheritance, expropriation, Socialization, Citizenship; extradition, Right of asylum, Right of petition, Restriction of certain basic rights by laws respecting defense and alternative service, Forfeiture of basic rights, Restriction of basic rights, Basic institutional principles, and defense of the constitutional order.

    No doubt a Rosenbaumer such as yourself would point out problems with all of these clauses (problems such as Holohoax Laws denying citizens’ Freedom of Expression, or EU Laws affecting citizens’ rights and freedoms), but that is just another way of saying that nothing is perfect in this world and that all freedom requires care and vigilance; including vifilence against demoralization and confusion of the type that is spread by Rosenbaumers.

  22. Skirnir on February 23rd, 2010 9:45 pm

    I am not even going to bother with you. Go ahead and say that Germany is a pure democracy, go ahead and say that all those who agree with Rand are troglodytes, it is a comment section of a message-board, time is money and you are not worth a pfennig.

  23. Chris on February 23rd, 2010 11:31 pm

    My comment was an aside, its a misconception people make that a democracy cannot be a police state… it simply depends on the circumstances.

  24. Akira on February 24th, 2010 1:00 am

    Am I worth a shekel, Herr Rosenbaum?

  25. Akira on February 24th, 2010 1:31 am

    At a previous year’s commemoration/march there were demonstrators waving Israeli flags (and British and American). Is there any coverage of who these demonstrators are, who pays them, why they object to German civilian war-victims being remembered? If you go to their sites all they talk about is how they have to “fight against the Nazis/Neo-Nazis/Fascists!”

  26. Skirnir on February 24th, 2010 1:40 am

    I may redeem 10 pfennig at the Bundesebank for about 5 eurocents, whereas a shekel is worth about 4 times that. Ergo you are not worth a shekel.

  27. Bardamu on March 3rd, 2010 4:31 pm

    Outstanding interview. Alaric was able to grasp the details perfectly, even though I’m a little reluctant to join his optimism. The only fault, which really hurts my ears, was the throwing around of the term “fascist” – even with a disclaimer. There is nothing inherently Fascist in a police state, since Fascism leans towards economics most of the time. The term employed should be “Totalitarians” due to the micro-management of all social life. We have a faceless, borderless, raceless Zionist liberalist totalitarian state, not a Fascist one. Totalitarianism works with any economic theory, i.e. USSR. Actually after making straight comparisons to the Soviet regime calling it Fascism is rather out of place. We must say “soviets” or “totalitarians” and deprogram the lemmings.

  28. Bardamu on March 3rd, 2010 4:35 pm

    By the way, it was depressing to know the officer is “first and foremost a police officer”. He should be first and foremost a German! And the phrase “they are taking Germany away from us” uttered by nationalists facing heavily armed police helicopters sent in by their own federal government was just chilling, stunning. It should be adapted and reproduced all over the place.

Bottom