Dutch ban on Nazi helmet spurs sales
Fri Mar 10, 2006 4:15 PM GMT

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - Sales of orange replica Nazi helmets aimed at Dutch football fans attending the World Cup have trebled since they were banned from Dutch stadiums this month, the helmet's producer said on Friday.

Football's governing body in the Netherlands, the KNVB, banned the helmets ahead of a Dutch friendly against Ecuador in Amsterdam earlier this month, saying they were offensive.

The ban applies to all other home games for the national team although the KNVB has no power to ban them in Germany.

"We are now selling three times the previous average daily volume," said the helmet's producer Florian van Laar. "We are thinking of sending the KNVB a gold helmet in thanks," he added.

His firm sells around 5,000 to 7,000 orange helmets per week and has added helmets in the national colours of Australia, England, Germany, France and Italy to its range.

"This is simply meant as a joke," Van Laar said.

But the KNVB is not amused.

"We don't see the joke in wearing these helmets and think they are in bad taste," said KNVB spokesman Frank Huizinga. "A lot is possible in Holland, but we will not accept everything."

Germany has launched a campaign ahead of its hosting of the World Cup, marketing itself as a vibrant nation of composers, poets, philosophers and inventors. But it faces trouble from an unruly minority of foreign fans obsessed with Nazi-era images.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=2006-03-10T161634Z_01_L10500877_RTRIDST_0_OUKOE-UK-DUTCH-HELMET.XML

There's a lot of people fascinated with the Nazis.
Why?
They were nothing but worthless barbarians.

Originally posted by rendova
There's a lot of people fascinated with the Nazis.
Why?
They were nothing but worthless barbarians. Is it all that different than being interested in serial killers, gangsters or infanticides? They are pretty worthless too. :)

Anyhow, I don't think these fans are motivated by any historical interest. Seems to me they want to make a statement of some kind about today. I'm hoping someone can explain this to me.

Ha Ha, good point!

Still tho, OTOH, you won't see ME walking around wearing a "Manson for President" shirt, or sporting a "Bundy was my friend" bumper sticker ...or showing much sympathy for Andrea or even Capone (Dillinger, yes:) )

My take---some young folk just want to look "cool" by wearing this stuff. It's their way of thumbing their nose at society. We see this at the schools--kids with swastikas on their notebooks. Or giving the Hitler salute.

I can't help but think these kids know little about the true history of the Third Reich.....and then there's some who take it further--skinheads, the Aryan Brotherhood, who still blindly follow the Feuhrer and think he was a great guy. These are the dispossessed of society, by and large.

Godwins Law!!!!1!!1!1!

Funny. Reminds me of how a church in NZ called for a boycott of Southpark because of the bleed anus statue episode (not very good by south park standards anyways) and the veiwership was 5 times higher.

Originally posted by rendova
There's a lot of people fascinated with the Nazis.
Why?

The darker side of human nature captivates people.

They were nothing but worthless barbarians.

You must spend far too much time reading fruitless crime anthologies. The Nazi regime is one of the most dreadful and efficient political machines in history, empowering a massive military machine that swept a cloud over the whole of Europe.

The Nazi regime is one of the most dreadful and efficient political machines in history, empowering a massive military machine that swept a cloud over the whole of Europe. And that gives them worth and makes them not barbarians how?

Ganghis Kahn did (virtually) that same thing

Originally posted by 500lbguerilla
And that gives them worth and makes them not barbarians how?

Where is it present in my post that I claimed the Third Reich was not barbaric, where? I'd take issue with the claim they were worthless, but as far as being cruel barbarians, it is of no contest.

Ganghis Kahn did (virtually) that same thing

Ghengis Khan was a Mongol, of course he was a barbarian. But their tactics were not similar, aside from it left many people dead, mostly innocents.

Ghengis Khan was a Mongol, of course he was a barbarian. But their tactics were not similar, aside from it left many people dead, mostly innocents. tactics are based on time and technology. Of course they were different. The similarities are conquering huge expanses of land and power at the cost of thousands upon thousands of innocent lives. They are also admired by 'stratigists.'

I would also argue that killing technology is worthless. It's used to destroy, not create. Worth comes from creation.

Originally posted by 500lbguerilla
I would also argue that killing technology is worthless. It's used to destroy, not create. Worth comes from creation.

I always liked that line by Robert Oppenheimer quoting the Bhagavad-Gita about the story of Vishnu, "Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds."

I cannot think of a single thing the Nazis accomplished that was good. For themselves, or for the people they conquered. They laid waste to entire cultures. Hitler reminds me of Cortez, whose motivation was sheer greed, whereas Hitler considered himself an avenger of God, doing His will by wiping out the "dirty Jews". Both attempted to wipe out entire civilizations. In my mind, this makes them both barbarians and yes, worthless, and their followers.