Jump to content

Talk:Ulrike Meinhof

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 35.129.47.74 (talk) at 19:02, 5 April 2021 (→Suicide disputation (Section in article page)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Journalistic career

There is barely a mention of her acclaimed journalistic career pre-RAF, when she was one of West Germany's leading feature writers and also was very present on radio and television, working for e.g. WDR and SFB. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.128.66.121 (talk) 12:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone have more information on this? With sources? Zetetic Apparatchik (talk) 06:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Would you need a source for the fact that I. F. Stone was a journalist? I feel there is such a thing as a f.a.c.t., still it should be easy to find sources for this. The small Peter Brückner thing, 1970s at Wagenbachs Taschen Bücherei is good on BRD society. Ulrike Meinhof' s daughter Bettina Röhl is herself a journalist, with her own blog (She is very anti-raf).--Radh (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is already stated that she was a journalist. (Second sentence sure, but it's the case that the RAF part of her life that's why she's notable.) Her work for konkret is noted. Bambule is noted. If you wish to add information on other publications and works, please, please, please do so. With sources. :) Zetetic Apparatchik (talk) 06:17, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brain Surgery

I seem to remember that there was an article (perhaps in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung) that talked about Meinhof having brain surgery and that it affected her thinking. I think the theory was that it, in effect, made her a terrorist. Would we want to mention that here? I can look up the exact particulars before adding it in, but I wanted to see if anyone would be interested in seeing that here. Or is that perhaps out of place? -Maaya 02:19, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, such an addition would be absolutely welcomed! It would be good to make sure it's thoroughly sourced though, as it sounds like it could be a contentious statement.... Dan100 (Talk) 17:33, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Its, not just contentious, its a metaphysical, anti-scientific statement. Besides all, her brain was kept/examined 26 years after her death in order to construct such a theory (not easy to present something metaphysical as scientific diagnosis). Besides all, whoever does an effort to read the biography he will conclude that this time(1962) was not a turning point in her life. There are a lot of other turning points that don't coincide chronologically with that event. Stelarov (talk) 10:37, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Picture is not public domain

it says: Mit freundlicher Genehmigung von Bettina Röhl (Tochter von Ulrike Meinhof), but: even if Bettina Röhl ist Ulrike Meinhofs Daughter, it's not up to her to release the photo, because she hasn't taken the photo. Only the photografer could do that. It seem's quite clear a professional photografer has taken the picture. But even if a private aficionado has taken the picture, it cant't bee Bettina, who approx 3 years old when the pcture was taken. So please delete the picture on commons. I like Burke's Peerage 08:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just added the image back in before reading this but I still think it's right to leave the image on the page until/unless it's deleted. Zetetic Apparatchik 23:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested rewrite

I've done a heavy rewrite of the article (at Talk:Ulrike_Meinhof/zaTemp for now), mainly based on the German article. It could do with sources more than anything (some of which I can get of the DE article) but I am going to switch it over in the next week or so unless there are any objections. (Oh and feel free to correct.) Zetetic Apparatchik 02:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've replaced it now. Zetetic Apparatchik 18:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've added place of birth and death. The article still has the sources required tag though: where would you want more references? It seems pretty thorough already. Bhawks_2 01:01, 10 September 2007
I think that they should probably be listed as in 'West Germany' as I've done in the infobox, but I'm open to discussion. As regards references ; I'm pretty happy with it, others aren't apparently. I guess early Bio is a little lacking in sources. Zetetic Apparatchik 12:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LSD?

Not much noted is Ulrikes' experimenting with L.S.D. When she 'Tripped' for the first time she plunged into a deep panic attack. The cause of the attack was a terror she had that she would never 'sober up' from the Acid and would be forever in an Alice in Wonderland World. Johnwrd (talk) 03:35, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed! :) (I'm curious, if true.) Zetetic Apparatchik (talk) 12:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check Hohnwrd's page with his questions(zombies, ufo and so) and you will understand if this is true... He also states(check below) that by being in prison raf members' health was improved... Yell there is something called logic, some people seem to miss that. Stelarov (talk) 20:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What was the name of Ulrike's mother (including her maiden name)?

I encounter this annoying fact in Wikipedia, too frequently to be just an accident, that people's mother's name do not get mentioned in the biographies. Why is that? Granted that Ulrike's mother may not have been proud of her daughter, but the same can be said about her father! Could we please treat mothers equally as fathers? For those of us who may have forgotten it, we are now seven long years into the 21st century! Incidentally, Frau Meinhof won't do!

--BF 01:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Meinhof's father was a vaguely notable art historian, and a published author in that area as well. That's the reason that his name appears in the German article (from which I derived much of the article and particularly the first section) and her mother's doesn't. Zetetic Apparatchik 23:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Zetetic Apparatchik for your response. Actually I wrote the above somewhat provocative text in order to prompt someone finding out the name of the mother. I find it terribly unjust (for completeness, I am neither a woman nor a feminist, although I realise that the latter have points) that mother's names don't get mentioned in biographies, as also attested by your own experience that the German article from which you have taken your information does not mention the name. I believe this to be truly a social injustice which needs rectifying; that the mother may not have been a well-known person is not even a secondary issue (mind you, the name of the father is not mentioned in the context of his professional achievements but in the context of he being the father of Ulrike Meinhoff; why, then, is the name of the mother missing?). May I therefore request you to be kind enough and enquire from the people who might know the name and add the name to the biography? You may just ring a university deparment (history, sociology or political science department), or even the Bundes-Polizei, and ask about the name. With kind regards,
--BF 13:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
'Ingeborg' according to [1]. I might rewrite her early life to be a bit more complete generally at some point. Zetetic Apparatchik 22:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Zetetic Apparatchik, thank you for your prompt response. Now it remains to know the family name (that is the maiden name) of Ingeborg. One could write, for instnace, Ingeborg Meinhof, née <<the maiden name>>. (I have just checked the link that you give, and indeed there is no mention of Ingeborg's maiden name.) Kind regards,
--BF 01:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Horst Mahler/Anti-Semitism

This section seems badly crowbar'd in (and the foreshortened quote is even worse than my translation). If someone wants to try to defend it or suggest a rewrite themselves, then they're welcome to; otherwise I'm going to butcher it myself. (I'll accept that it's not entirely irrelevant but it's hard to give an accurate account of whatever the hell she's trying to get at, and I'm not sure that details of Mahler actually clarify the situation more. My personal reading, probably over-sympathetic I suspect, is that she's trying explain Nazi anti-Semitism away, as it were, as an anti-Capitalist reaction, rather than endorsing anti-Semitism. I'd welcome a discussion of this though, even better with some actual understanding of the German.) Zetetic Apparatchik (talk) 07:15, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm the one who put that in and I agree that I had to "crowbar it in". I don't speak German and took the quote from the referenced article. The article suggests (probably correctly) that it betrays confusion in her attitude to Jews. It is occasionally quoted as evidence of Baader-Meinhof antisemitism. I think it needs to remain in the article in some form to highlight the weird attitudes to JEws of the German far left in that period. I suppose it is related to their close identification with the Palestinians (and their use of Palestinian training). I think the quote is ambiguous (as is most antisemitism in my experience), rather then being antisemitic it suggests misinformed stereo-typing and ignorance and of course she had no time to prepare the statement. It sounds like she's referring to Marx "On the Jewish Question" which is widely regarded as an antisemitic text (Karl_Marx#Marx_and_antisemitism she was probably not aware of that). By the way the BM trained with PFLP who recieved funding from a former Nazi called Francois Genoud. see http://soc.world-journal.net/harabr.html I would put it in the text but I can't find an academic reference (haven't looked hard).

http://ww2.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/layout/set/print/content/view/full/60470

Telaviv1 (talk) 08:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand you decided to re-introduce the sentence concerning Mahler's antisemitism. Do you have some justification on how this is relevant to Meinhof? Zetetic Apparatchik (talk) 18:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it demonstrated the ambiguous nature of her statement and the affect on her of Mahler's views but I can see that people like yourself might find it irritating. If you want ot remove it that's OK, though I may then at a later date try to insert a third party quote about the problematic nature of her statement on Auschwitz.

Telaviv1 (talk) 11:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly think something about the quote is more informative that an insinuation. I guess it also stems from be uncomfortable about the use of the word 'admitting'; I suspect Mahler wasn't particularly reluctant to profess his racism. I'll leave it until it irritates me again in a few days. ;)

I still believe some kind of section (either Meinhof-specific, or linked to in the RAF article) on the RAF's rather varied political theory (what there is of it...) including some member's curious reaction to anti-Semitism. Of course that means someone has to write it...

I still believe Meinhof's statement is somewhat ambiguous, although deliberately so to be unpleasant and provocative. Zetetic Apparatchik (talk) 13:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suicide disputation

A section should clarify the questions about Meinhofs death. I do not like how the text now cites the "official investigation" since this is exactly what people question. How was the autopsy performed? What happened at the crimescene and why do scources conflict?

I just read Ditfurts biography on Meinhof and she heavily disputes that Meinhof was "isolated". The conflict with Ensslin ended "at least two months before her death". Post52 (talk) 22:39, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I won't deny that there are those who believe Ulrike Meinhof did not kill herself; however it should be noted that this is a minority viewpoint. Beyond this, there is overwhelming evidence, as presented by the offical investigation noted in the article, that she committed suicide while there is very little hard evidence that her death occurred due to homicide or what have you.

I would not object to a small section explaining the common reasoning behind the opposing viewpoint; I would reject any attempt to introduce weasel-words to undermine the claim that she did kill herself without properly referenced credible sources. Discussion is welcomed.

Zetetic Apparatchik (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The examination of Ms Meinhof is entirely consistant with death by 'self strangulation'. Ms Meinhofs' health actualy 'improved' when she was arrested by the German Police, (her health had steadily worsened in her last day's on the run).Johnwrd (talk) 02:59, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is that a joke, or you are talking seriously? In the second case I would recommend you visiting a psychiatrist. How can a person's health improve by contiously being for over a year in white cells and complete isolation(even during walks in the yard she didn't come in contact with other prisoners)? Holger Meins died under these circumstances. Ulrike had to deal with this for much longer and under even worse circumstances. What about the foreign committees' reports? I guess you didn't even read about them. Not to mention about Ulrike's notes that came out of jail (even the censored ones). I wan't go further cause I think I am wasting my time. Anyone interested can read any serious scientific work on this matter. The cruelest way to kill someone is the psychological torture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stelarov (talk • contribs) 15:34, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a (poor) google-translation from Swedish Wikipedia. According to those sources, the inquiry in question raises doubt she commited suicide. I'm not convinced, but I still believe this should be mentioned: "A group of British doctors were asked to study the autopsy report and found that Meinhof's body did not show the usual signs of suicide by hanging. [10] The doctors was also concluded that Meinhof may have been the victim of rape before she died, when the external genitalia, according to autopsy protocol, showed significant swelling. [11] The autopsy had not made the so-called histamine test, which could show whether Meinhof's death was suicide or not. [12]

Michael Oberwinden, one of Meinhof lawyers, said that he had less than a week before Meinhof's death had had a very involved conversation with her. [13] They had ruled that the trial against her had now reached a key stage. In a call with his older sister Wienke in March 1976 gave Meinhof: "If they say that I committed suicide, so be sure that it was murder." [14]

The German magazine Stern announced in August 2008 that found more than 400 photographs, which belonged to a German police photographer. [15] The photographs show including the dead Ulrike Meinhof and cell interiors of the so-called Death Night. One of the photographs on Meinhof, hanging in a break grated towel in cell window grilles, shows that her left leg is based on a chair. [16] Prison report said the chair had fallen [17].

-It should be noted that one of the sources is the inquiry you refer to: Der Tod Ulrike Meinhofs... Have you read it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.122.253 (talk) 20:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody who reads the stuff the raf "elite" wrote to each other in prison and esp. the way U M was treated should look not much further for reasons to kill herself.--Radh (talk) 07:32, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
May you read them for us please? I have spent two years of my life researching on ulrike meinhof and I can't find these notes. Maybe you could. Whoever did an effort to study about the Stammheim years will notice that by 1976 the things are starting to getting better, both for raf and Meinhof. World-wide attention on the matter, a lot famous academics and philosophers accusing West germany state for trial-parody and so... Also the hard years of continuous isolation and white cells had passed for Ulrike(well until the trial and publicity was not over). Finally when a person like Ulrike decides to commite suicide, he/she spends some time to write a note (especially if he/she chooses an anniversary date like 9 May!). Stelarov (talk) 10:51, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Money Jews

Can we get the original German of the quote? Also, it is incomplete - I recall an earlier part that went ' the worst part is, we are all agreed [on the Holocaust]'. 

A statement like "six million Jews were murdered and carted on to the rubbish dumps of Europe for being that which was maintained of them – Money-Jews" could be the standard far-left claim that the supposed anger of the workers at imperialism, capitalism, etc. was diverted on to the Jews. The rest of the quote tends to support this. Or, it could be a statement that the Jews were more guilty that others of involvement in the system the RAF hated, along the lines of Marx's thought in his "A World Without Jews". The earlier statement of support for the murder of the Israeli atheletes tends to support that.

Meinhof's statement "Being that which was maintained of them" is ambiguous. Does it mean they truly were what was said of them, or does it mean they were treated as though it were true? The article needs to clarify this. Expert linguists, please weigh in. 77.69.34.203 (talk) 10:22, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just some notes from recent German books

Her mother and Renate Riemeck were lovers (says Jutta Ditfurth). (Perhaps not verifiable?). Riemeck ((born in 1920, Peters)) in 1940 was a young NS historian (says D.). ((Peters simply calls her a fellow-student)). In 1946 Ingeborg M. and Renate R. will join the SPD. (Peters: Ingeborg M. started to study after her husband died, finishes it in 1944 (Promotion)) I. M. died in 1949. (U. M. is well educated in the protestant faith, says Peters (does not match Ditfurth's insistance on the NS ideology of M's parents past, but D. always to be handled with care)).

  • B. Riemeck is a founder of the Deutsche Friedens Union in 1958, runs for the parliament in 1961. Without any success and leaves politics.
  • Ulrike Meinhof joined the SPD in 1958 (SDS), the illegal KPD in October, 1958. (She left the SDS in 1959). She has been the first female member of the local SDS!) U. M. was KPD until 1964 ( she left because of dogmatism and East Berlin's heavy handed approach to konkret).
  • 1958, 59: M. had contacts with the Hamburg konkret group (a communist front). Jan., 1959: Conflict with the SPD (and with Helmut Schmidt) at the Student's Anti-Atom Congress, Berlin (a East-Berlin hijacked SPD affair). In November, 1961 the spd will throw all sds out. In the SDS she worked for a time with Jürgen Seifert, who was more "right-wing". Still, he and his wife, Monika Seifert helped her later in her illegial existence.
  • U. M. left the sds in July. Meinhof was ordered by the kpd to go to Hamburg. She dropped out of university and started work for konkret in October, 1959. She was made Chefredakteur in 1961 ((Peters says 1960)). 1964: Ulrike Meinhof left the kpd, her husband Röhl was thrown out and konkret's financing was finished. But Ulrike Meinhof started working freelance and for well paying german radio and tv (no private radio then).

Meinhof, the journalist was as popular as Rudolf Augstein.

In it's best times before the student protests erupted, konkret sold 20,000, but was much more widely read (Peters, p. 148). I just see that wikipedia has a much much higher circulation for the late 60s.

Jutta Ditfurth,Rudi and Ulrike, Munich: Droemer, 2008. Butz Peters, Tödlicher Irrtum, Berlin: Argon, 2004--Radh (talk) 19:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are still watching this page, please try to add some of these notes in the article's page. Though the part with the "East Berlin's heavy handed approach to konkret" needs some attention, since, what I understood from Ditfurth's book(the biography), was that the main cause leading a lot of people(including U.M) to leave konkret was the cultural shift (made by Rohl) into a completely postmodern and commercial magazine and the provocatively selfish wastefulness by Rohl(new car, new .. etc ...) even though U.M was indeed dissapointed by East Berlin's heavy approach on konkret(1964). Moreover Rohl was not thrown out but he was left to maintain the magazine by himself (economic support was over) if I recall correctly. If I find time I will try to add the info above. Stelarov (talk) 16:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suicide disputation (Section in article page)

I did my best to summarize the (most known) counter-arguments as shortly as I could, although it seems a big section at last. To respond proactively to the question "why this section is bigger than the official arguments " etc..., the answer is simple: Because the arguments supporting the murder scenario are much more than the ones supporting the suicide scenario. Anyone who knows about other facts, opinions, or anything supporting the official scenario can write them down, under: "Imprisonment and death" or anywhere he thinks they fit, even though I think there aren't. Stelarov (talk) 18:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

but are conspiracy theories really that encyclopedic to begin with? 16:03, 9 May 2016 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.56.183.71 (talk)

Why does the article imply that she could have been murdered by her comrades? I don't think there is any evidence for that. I understand that (unlikely and implausible) conspiracy theories have to be mentioned simply because so many want to believe them, but I've never heard anyone suggesting that she was murdered by her comrades. The pressure they put on her may have contributed to her suicide but there's no way she could have died against her will at the hands of other prisoners (unless one alleges that the prison guards wanted that to happen, but if the government had indeed decided to murder their prisoners, why bother with potentially messy intra-prisoner violence?).Tillalb (talk) 11:28, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the phrase "rather than her RAF comrades" should be removed from "... believe that she was murdered by the authorities, rather than her RAF comrades." There is no support in the article for it. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:04, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this blatant conspiracy theorizing on the page?

Quotes

I would like to write some "quotes" (well maybe even long ones), other people said about Meinhof. Should I put it here or in http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ulrike_Meinhof where Meinhof's own quotes also are?

Well since the talk page seems somehow inactive the last years, I took an initiative and wrote the sayings(quotes) in the wikipedia article itself, as it is the case with the german wikipedia page, and also because I believe they are indicative in order to be possible for the readers to also view (even abstractly through others view) the other side of the coin Stelarov (talk) 19:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

POV section Quotes about Meinhof

I have added the POV-section tag to the section, as I believes it fails NPOV guidelines, especially balancing different views. All of the quotes are high appraisal like: "She was not only the best journalist, Germany ever had, but also the greatest German woman after Rosa Luxemburg.", which quite likely doesn't guarantee a balance of different views considering she was a very controversial section. Either more critical quotes have to be added, or then the section could be removed. A list of quotes might be more fitting to Wikiquote. --Pudeo' 22:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since these quotes are not her quotes, but (as another user wrote here before) are other people' quotes about Meinhof, the quotes should stay here in the article.
Also i see that quotes were removed: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ulrike_Meinhof&diff=next&oldid=549231574 , but were not moved to wikiquote as was written in your 'edit summary', so i'm going to restore them.
Btw, they cant be moved there anyway because wikiquote Meinhof page is about quotes by Meinhof, not quotes about Meinhof.
About the alledged POV issue: It's not POV, it's the reality. It was a fact that she was a great journalist and person.
Classic POV. You could get different views from those she helped murder, except they are dead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.69.34.203 (talk) 10:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As you said, if critical quotes about her ever existed you can freely add them to the quotes section.

79.21.97.153 (talk) 00:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The section however very strongly contradicts common Wikipedia policies WP:LONGQUOTE:
Do not insert any number of quotations in a stand-alone quote section.
Instead, one or two quotes could be shown at the side at a relevant section like the comment about journalist skills in Early life. --Pudeo' 02:15, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Appart from the quoting formation, some of them are information that represent an objective reality and facts that happened, so I could add them in the main article section if your fetish is about "formation rules". So either way the quotes are coming back. As concerns the POV-matter, did you even searched about the people who said/wrote that things? I suppose not, because your preconstructed virtual world couldn't afford it, right? Ypovoleas (talk) 15:02, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover I consider the part of the article until imprisonment as POV from the other side, since it does not mention key parts of the early life, anti-military / peace movement, some incredible things from the childhood and so. Thus the POV thing, doesn't depends only on the writing style, but also depends on the information that are supplied. Should I delete the half of the article? No that's not how it works, you don't delete entire sections. You edit/add your sources if you want. Ypovoleas (talk) 15:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ulrike Meinhof. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:39, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Ulrike Meinhof. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:42, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wienke Zitzlaff

Spelling "Wienke Zitzlaff" is apparently difficult.94.191.150.248 (talk) 09:00, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Two women compatriots of Ensslin's

'Compatriot' means 'someone from the same country'. Ensslin was German as were most of the people concerned in this story - I wonder if the original editor didn't mean 'colleague' or 'confederate'? Guyal of Sfere (talk) 22:09, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ulrike_Meinhof&oldid=1016167824"