PDA

View Full Version : Hitler or Hindu Row



Roscoe
15-05-2008, 11:41 AM
Have you seen this article in the Auckland papers?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/4525321a6016.html

Surely New Zealand is a free country where you are able to say what you like about anything you like, including religion?

I was aware of the religious significance because my father told me of a building in Lambton Quay that had swastika’s inlaid on the tiles in the floor of the entrance. When WWII started, the authorities told them to remove or cover up the ‘offending’ floor covering, but I understand that the owners (Hindu, I suppose) refused saying that it was an ancient symbol of their faith and that they had had it on the floor years before Hitler came into power.

I wonder if anyone knows what the building was and whereabouts in Lambton Quay? I don’t suppose it still exists as they tore down most of the old buildings in downtown Wellington as they were deemed earthquake hazards.

It seems that this type of publicity is good for the Hindus which will hopefully educate people, who still hate the Nazis (and the Germans,) as to the true significance of the symbol and will allow Hindus to practice their religion, which should include the unrestricted use of religious symbols.

The swastika (from Sanskrit svástika स्वस्तिक ) is an equilateral cross with its arms bent at right angles in either right-facing form or its mirrored left-facing form. The swastika can also be drawn as a traditional swastika, but with a second 90° bend in each arm.
Archaeological evidence of swastika-shaped ornaments dates from the Neolithic period. An ancient symbol, it occurs mainly in the cultures that are in modern day India and the surrounding area, sometimes as a geometrical motif and sometimes as a religious symbol. It has long been widely used in major world religions such as Hinduism Buddhism and Jainism.

The swastika was used as a Nazi symbol and gained further association with the Third Reich as the Reich gained influence. Though once commonly used all over much of the world without stigma, because of its association with Nazism, the symbol has become controversial, especially in the Western world.

Thanks to Wikipedia.

Have a look at Wikipedia to see the original swastika.

Morgenmuffel
15-05-2008, 12:00 PM
Roscoe

The swastika was used in a lot of Christian Motifs too, In Christchurch cathedral Mosaics (http://www.pbase.com/bmcmorrow/image/55054918) they are used

There are more of the images on that page just click next or back (as that is the second to last image in the Christchurch section)

Thebananamonkey
15-05-2008, 12:13 PM
And Buddhist too.

Also, Lindbergs "spirit of saint louis" had a swastika painted inside it for good luck.

Its use was fairly widespread before WW2.

Interestingly, the nazi salute was suggested originally to be used in the states whilst reciting the pledge of allegiance. It was incredibly american.

I think outside of Buddhist or Hindu religous purposes it should not be used though. It has connotations of pain, no matter how you try and justify its use.

Roscoe
15-05-2008, 12:53 PM
Roscoe

The swastika was used in a lot of Christian Motifs too. There are more of the images on that page just click next or back (as that is the second to last image in the Christchurch section)

Thanks for that. I am surprised. Of that I was unaware. I assume that these same people will want that removed as well!

Thebananamonkey: The "Spirit of St Louis" is revered in America, is it not? And yet no-one noticed? Or tried to have it removed?

The Americans were very anti-German in WWII and on their way to Berlin destroyed everything in their path, yet they used a type of Nazi salute? These Americans are a strange breed.

While it does have nasty connotations, I think if it is drawn more in the way of the symbol shown in Wikipedia, it should be nearly acceptable? It certainly is different. Perhaps the depiction on the roof was not different enough.

Morgenmuffel
15-05-2008, 01:50 PM
The Americans were very anti-German in WWII and on their way to Berlin destroyed everything in their path, yet they used a type of Nazi salute? These Americans are a strange breed.
At the risk of offending a few Americans out there, there were a number of Pro-Nazi Germany Amercans(Joseph Kennedy), prior to Pearl Harbour, Although people like Roosevelt did everything they could within the confines of neutrality to help the UK.

Agent_24
15-05-2008, 02:01 PM
The Hindus used the symbol long before Hitler stole it, besides their version is different anyway.

As long as people understand the difference they should have no problem with it. I certainly don't.

PaulD
15-05-2008, 02:18 PM
The Americans were very anti-German in WWII and on their way to Berlin destroyed everything in their path, yet they used a type of Nazi salute? These Americans are a strange breed.



Everything that wasn't owned by an American Company or subsidiary.

"And indeed, while Cologne's historical city centre was flattened in repeated bombing raids, the large Ford factory on the outskirts of the city enjoyed the reputation of being the safest place in town during air attacks, although some bombs did of course occasionally fall on its properties."

Roscoe
15-05-2008, 02:47 PM
The Hindus used the symbol long before Hitler stole it, besides their version is different anyway.

As long as people understand the difference they should have no problem with it. I certainly don't.

Totally agree. Pity a few more of the people who fought in WWII against the Nazis thought that as well. Unfortunately so many of them have loooong memories and can't find it in their hearts to forgive.:(

Thebananamonkey
15-05-2008, 03:43 PM
Thanks for that. I am surprised. Of that I was unaware. I assume that these same people will want that removed as well!

Thebananamonkey: The "Spirit of St Louis" is revered in America, is it not? And yet no-one noticed? Or tried to have it removed?

The Americans were very anti-German in WWII and on their way to Berlin destroyed everything in their path, yet they used a type of Nazi salute? These Americans are a strange breed.

While it does have nasty connotations, I think if it is drawn more in the way of the symbol shown in Wikipedia, it should be nearly acceptable? It certainly is different. Perhaps the depiction on the roof was not different enough.

It wasn't a nazi salute though. It was an american one long before the nazis existed.

The spirit of saint louis hangs fairly high, and the swastika is inside, so you can't actually see it.

People accused Lindberg of being a nazi himself, but he was just an anti-semite eugenicist who liked the nazi/american salute, and knew most of the high command of the german army... You can see why they pegged him as one, but he was a patriot, and despised the idea of genocide.

Anti-Semitic Eugenicists existed all over the place before WW2, it's just that they had the good sense to cover it all up after/during the war.

Also, why would you remove it? It's a part of history. It was a common symbol of good luck for aviators then, and he needed all the luck he could get

Safari
15-05-2008, 04:08 PM
Charles Lindbergh flew 50 combat mission in the Pacific in WW2 and made a big contribution to the Pacific air war.
This is not very well known and how it came about is detailed at this link
http://www.ww2pacific.com/lindbergh.html

Biggles
15-05-2008, 04:10 PM
Wasn't the Nazi salute based on the Roman Empire's/Army salute?

Thebananamonkey
15-05-2008, 04:43 PM
Charles Lindbergh flew 50 combat mission in the Pacific in WW2 and made a big contribution to the Pacific air war.
This is not very well known and how it came about is detailed at this link
http://www.ww2pacific.com/lindbergh.html

He was cheeky though, and flew as a contractor to the military. He must have made an absolute packet out of it.

He was also sent to Germany pre-WW2 to inspect the luftwaffe, on top secret orders from the US army.

He was a really interesting man. It was funny though, his bigotry, if you can call it that, enabled him to really fight for ethnic minorities rights. He fought for them in the same way that people fight for tigers and elephants and such.

He was very much for preserving them, but in an animal way, not a human way. Like I said. Interesting man.

And I'm sure the salute was somewhat based on the roman one, however it was incredibly common in the states pre-WW2, as I said. I think it would have come more directly from there. But everything comes from the romans eventually.

Biggles
15-05-2008, 05:18 PM
He was cheeky though, and flew as a contractor to the military. He must have made an absolute packet out of it.


He flew as a contractor because he wasn't allowed to join the military. His pro-German statements and activities prior to the US joining the war doing go down well with the FDR administration and his applications to join the USAAF were rejected.

Thebananamonkey
15-05-2008, 05:54 PM
He flew as a contractor because he wasn't allowed to join the military. His pro-German statements and activities prior to the US joining the war doing go down well with the FDR administration and his applications to join the USAAF were rejected.

They weren't pro-german per-se though, just anti involvement. Which to anyone after WW2 sounds like the same thing.

But large amounts of americans resented being dragged into a european war. Some people think pearl harbour was known about in advance, but FDR ignored it as an excuse to engage.

I don't really know, or care that much about that. All I know is that he didn't feel that it was the US's place to get involved in someone elses war.

Terry Porritt
15-05-2008, 06:23 PM
Notwithstanding Lindberghs' views about Germany before the war, he was and still is rightly regarded as an American hero.

1927 was certainly a great year, and of course his achievement was celebrated in many songs....Lucky Lindbergh (http://www.jazz-on-line.com/ram/VIC38826.ram), the eagle of the USA.

Then there was a dance, The Lindy Hop (http://www.redhotjazz.com/songs/ellington/cotton/thatlindyhop.ram) which is still danced today by Lindy Hop enthusiasts in the US

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBdAuXr4ssQ

Thebananamonkey
15-05-2008, 06:28 PM
Notwithstanding Lindberghs' views about Germany before the war, he was and still is rightly regarded as an American hero.

1927 was certainly a great year, and of course his achievement was celebrated in many songs....Lucky Lindbergh (http://www.jazz-on-line.com/ram/VIC38826.ram), the eagle of the USA.

Then there was a dance, The Lindy Hop (http://www.redhotjazz.com/songs/ellington/cotton/thatlindyhop.ram) which is still danced today by Lindy Hop enthusiasts in the US

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBdAuXr4ssQ

The only reason I know anything about him is I was in an opera in the arts festival at the beginning of the year.

Kurt Weill/Bertholdt Brechts The Lindberghflug/The Flight over the Ocean.

Really good fun actually. One day before practice I went nuts on wikipedia looking up links to all the stuff he was involved in. There went my afternoon :D.

Metla
15-05-2008, 07:12 PM
Totally agree. Pity a few more of the people who fought in WWII against the Nazis thought that as well. Unfortunately so many of them have loooong memories and can't find it in their hearts to forgive.:(

Who the hell are you to judge those that fought in WW2?

The symbol has been tainted by the most evil acts ever commited by mankind.

Roscoe
15-05-2008, 09:17 PM
Who the hell are you to judge those that fought in WW2?

The symbol has been tainted by the most evil acts ever commited by mankind.

I believe you are taking what I said out of context. Perhaps you should read the previous comments before you comment.

I was not judging anybody - I have relatives who fought in Europe, North Africa and the Pacific and from their tales I have an idea of the horrors of WWII. None of these people hold any grudges against what was then the enemy, rather the governments of the time who were sending them out to fight.

Forgiving someone does not mean absolving them of their responsibility for what happened. It means letting go of the pain and hurt that you feel and reclaiming control over your life. You should not forgive as a gift to the person who has wronged you; instead you are doing it as a gift to yourself.

There is a difference between forgiving and forgetting. One can forgive, without forgetting what happened. You may never forget but you can choose to forgive.


The Hindus used the symbol long before Hitler stole it, besides their version is different anyway.

As long as people understand the difference they should have no problem with it. I certainly don't.

That was what I was replying to. I was not judging anyone, just agreeing with Agent 24. As he said - the Hindus version (much closer to the original) is different. Only to those not in the know, do the different versions seem to be the same.

TideMan
15-05-2008, 09:21 PM
But it was not one of the blokes that fought in WWII that was complaining (in fact I think most of them are dead by now), it was the SON. You have to be looking for things to complain about to be offended for imagined offence to your long dead father. What a prick!!
In contrast, the little Hindu man interviewed on TV was aghast that he had caused offence and tried to put things right.

Sweep
15-05-2008, 09:26 PM
I can understand how a symbol can be misused.

If we take a christian symbol like the cross and rotate this 180% it is not going to get the original meaning across.

My guess is it boils down to what you tolerate and what you don't.

http://www.luckymojo.com/swastika.html

And for Roscoe:-
New Zealand is NOT a free Country where you can say what you like about anything. The Government here has enacted a bill which tells you to **** during election year. People are not allowed to discriminate in many areas these days.

To take a more simple example this forum has rules. If you do not obey those rules then you just get banned rather than shot or gassed. (Thanks to the moderators) for that.

Metla
15-05-2008, 09:27 PM
Jesus Christ, what a load of dribble.

how about you suck it in, Ask yourself how arrogant it is to state that the vets just need to "get over it",While you pat yourself on the back for your ability to forgive.

I'm sure the vast majority of them harbour no ill will towards the general population of Germany, the reasoning isn't about forgiveness, But its obviously beyond your grasp.

Roscoe
15-05-2008, 09:45 PM
Jesus Christ, what a load of dribble.

how about you suck it in, Ask yourself how arrogant it is to state that the vets just need to "get over it",While you pat yourself on the back for your ability to forgive.

I'm sure the vast majority of them harbour no ill will towards the general population of Germany, the reasoning isn't about forgiveness, But its obviously beyond your grasp.

Obviously - in your little world - the best form of defence is personal attack.
You don't change, do you? Most probably never will.:illogical

GoodHour
15-05-2008, 09:49 PM
If the Nazi flag had had the cross on it, would we say the cross is an inherently nazi symbol?

Metla
15-05-2008, 09:53 PM
ah, So, the world needs to change to fit your view.

My apologies for considering you an arrogant twat, I was way way way way way way way way off the mark.

Perhaps you could consider that people are capable of comprehending your view, and yet can still disagree with you, No? And perhaps these same people would take it as a insult to be talked as they were somehow less enlightened or as some may say,stupid.

Anyway, my little would sure ain't as pretentious as yours, Thank god. Too busy trying to demonstrate your goldenness to notice what goes over your head.

Sweep
15-05-2008, 09:53 PM
But it was not one of the blokes that fought in WWII that was complaining (in fact I think most of them are dead by now), it was the SON. You have to be looking for things to complain about to be offended for imagined offence to your long dead father. What a prick!!
In contrast, the little Hindu man interviewed on TV was aghast that he had caused offence and tried to put things right.

Tried to put things right? How? By putting a few stars and extra blobs of paint about perhaps.

Possibly you could paint a rather large sign or symbol on your roof. If you did then what would it say to other people? What could they assume from it?

BTW I do not assume usually but I have the questions and I would like answers.

"offended for imagined offence to your long dead father."
Now what do you mean by that? How do you know the Father was not offended against?

Explain if you can please. Please note that I am just curious. When I was a child there were no mosques in New Zealand but there are now. Never been inside one but I tolerate them being here. This the same as I do believe there is good and bad in most people all over the world and just because a single bad person I meet happens to be a certain race I can't hate all of them.

I do not think I would have got on well with Hitler and his followers, along with Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, Ghengis Khan, Idi Amin and lately some others.

Roscoe
15-05-2008, 09:58 PM
If the Nazi flag had had the cross on it, would we say the cross is an inherently nazi symbol?

Good observation, although I think that you would be treading on many a Roman toe suggesting that.

With a good portion of the world professing to be Christian, I think that anyone of note advocating that the cross was a Nazi symbol would possibly be nailed to one!

If that were the case, I wonder how many Christians would be brave enough to paint it on their roof?

Metla
15-05-2008, 10:05 PM
If the Nazi flag had had the cross on it, would we say the cross is an inherently nazi symbol?

The swastika is still used by Nazi's worldwide, Its the most recognisable and powerful white power symbol in existence, People who hate still use it as a rally point, or to make a point, the legacy of the actions taken under the Nazi flag is still alive within our society and others around the world. People who are proud of the horror brought to bear by the nazi's place great honour in the symbol, and the bloodshed that was performed under it.

No matter what its history before WW2, The actions of the nazi's and others who have adopted the symbol since WW2 have tainted the symbol for these times, Its most powerful and recent association is with Genocide on a scale never seen before. Paint it on your roof?, moron.

For what its worth, Nazi's and White Power also use different variations of the swastika, it doesn't change anything.

in answer to your question, if the cross had been used instead it would definitely be tainted with blood, Though it wouldn't have had the same effect in my opinion, the Godless would not pick the symbol of god.

GoodHour
15-05-2008, 10:27 PM
The swastika is had has always been a symbol of god, and many thousands of years older than the cross. There are roughly a couple of thousand times more Hindus and Budhists for whom the swastika is a living symbol than there are neo-nazis. By continuing to attribute the nazi meaning to the swastika, do are doing exactly what neo-nazis want you to do.

on the subject of symbolism that people may find offensive, are you aware that you have a satanic avatar?

Roscoe
15-05-2008, 10:44 PM
The swastika is had has always been a symbol of god, and many thousands of years older than the cross. There are roughly a couple of thousand times more Hindus and Budhists for whom the swastika is a living symbol than there are neo-nazis. By continuing to attribute the nazi meaning to the swastika, do are doing exactly what neo-nazis want you to do.

on the subject of symbolism that people may find offensive, are you aware that you have a satanic avatar?

Nice to see a sane voice among us. The wise old New Testament saying, "Cast not your pearls before the swine, lest they trample them under their feet" seems apt.

And to your second point - of course - and proud of it - attempted intimidation. Little or no effect, otherwise.

Metla
15-05-2008, 10:48 PM
I shouldn't have to point out my comments were in relation to symbols within our socity, Our symbols of our most popular diety, and what the swastiki represents within our society.

how its done in India, now or ten thousand years ago have little relevance to someone painting a symbol on their roof in Auckland, A symbol that represents certain things within our NZ society. If The roof were in a Hindu country then it wouldn't been an event now would it?

We don't attribute the Swastika to the actions of the nazi, they did that themselves in WW2, You can't just deny it, Sure you can try, You can even pat yourself on the back, means nothing.

Metla
15-05-2008, 10:57 PM
on the subject of symbolism that people may find offensive, are you aware that you have a satanic avatar?

Your offended by the artistic representation of a mythical creature responsible for the suffering of exactly not one single person?

After all, Its not real, Unlike say, The Nazi's trying to cleanse the entire world of every single person that didn't have the desired physical attributes?, And succeeding in killing millions upon millions of people?

perhaps if I had a swastika in its place it would be more socially acceptable?, that is the point some are trying to force on others is it not?

R2x1
15-05-2008, 11:03 PM
With a good portion of the world professing to be Christian
A large proportion of the world's population would consider that professing to be Christian is an extremely bad thing. They have a fairly wide range of reasons to do that too. So we can strike the Christians out of the good portion?
Okay, what's next.

rob_on_guitar
15-05-2008, 11:06 PM
Paint a swastika on your shirt or what ever, then go to the Te kuiti pub. One of 2 things will happen, neither pleasent.(sp?)

This is NZ not india or whereever.

Metla
15-05-2008, 11:28 PM
Paint a swastika on your shirt or what ever, then go to the Te kuiti pub. One of 2 things will happen, neither pleasent.(sp?)

This is NZ not india or whereever.

Perhaps Roscoe could wear one on a trip to his local RSA, and in his own words, Tell them to "get over it". When they get upset he can just inform them they lack "enlightenment"

After all, Hindu's think its fantastic, Though I hear they also marry goats, monkeys,and donkeys.

beeswax34
16-05-2008, 01:10 AM
Perhaps Roscoe could wear one on a trip to his local RSA, and in his own words, Tell them to "get over it". When they get upset he can just inform them they lack "enlightenment"

After all, Hindu's think its fantastic, Though I hear they also marry goats, monkeys,and donkeys.

Um, what?

We've used that symbol for thousands of years without any problems. Hell, we've got the swastik a lot in our house and in our temples.

I've never met anyone who found it offensive and those who were a bit curious, I just showed them on the Internet where that symbol comes from and its religious meaning.

And no, we don't marry animals.

Metla
16-05-2008, 01:54 AM
Um, what?

We've used that symbol for thousands of years without any problems. Hell, we've got the swastika a lot in our house and in our temples.



I wouldn't expect anything less, What you do in your own houses and temples is your business. Most people would I hope (or imagine) to be aware that the symbol has a history aside from the use by the Nazi's, None of which discounts what I have said earlier.

rob_on_guitar
16-05-2008, 01:55 AM
Alot of symbols have different meanings in different parts of the world. Knowing that its pretty hardcore here doesnt make things go down to well.
Especially one so large, if people can get offended by billboards and slogans that are 'culturally insensitive' at a mere whimper and have those removed, doesnt that mean this will to anyway??
Just a thought.

Greg
16-05-2008, 06:40 AM
What a debate!

Anyway, my contribution - I believe the Finns also used the swastika look-alike symbol without any reference at all to Nazi'ism.

Roscoe
16-05-2008, 08:42 AM
Um, what?

We've used that symbol for thousands of years without any problems. Hell, we've got the swastik a lot in our house and in our temples.

I've never met anyone who found it offensive and those who were a bit curious, I just showed them on the Internet where that symbol comes from and its religious meaning.

And no, we don't marry animals.

My daughter has some Hindu friends and they have swastikas in their house. That has never been found offensive. It's called "understanding."

And, of course, the remark about marrying animals means, in his perverted personal attack on you, is that you do, by inference, other unmentionable acts as well. Racist?

There must be something in the Wanganui water.:waughh:

Thebananamonkey
16-05-2008, 10:15 AM
I think that we should respect hindu and buddhist use of a symbol that holds power to them.

But to think that this guy just wants to modify his swastika to make it less offensive makes me wonder what the hell is going through his head. You can justify it all you want, but at the end of the day a lot of people are going to be offended.

Not to mention how distasteful it is in the first place. If someone painted a big white cross on their roof I'd dispair. I respect peoples religious rights, but I respect them even more when I don't have them put in my face.

Really, this guy should paint over it, just in respect for other peoples feelings. But there's nothing stopping him having them all over his house. The symbol itself isn't the problem, just the public display of it.

John H
16-05-2008, 10:22 AM
Good grief, I have found myself agreeing with Metla twice in a row. Unprecedented.

I don't see the issue in terms of trying to predict how returned soldiers would feel - though other's opinions on that may be valid. I see it through the ways in which my relations (who went through the concentration camps and the Nazi atrocities in Poland) would react to a huge swastika on someone's roof.

No-one disputes what others do in the privacy of their own homes and temples - they can, and quite properly will, use all their revered symbols in those places. What I cannot accept is the large public display of a symbol that represents all that is evil in human nature to a significant part of our population. Why was that necessary?

The guy who did it graciously recognised the distress that he caused, and I would have thought that a genuine response would be for him to remove it completely. He did not do that though, which casts doubt on his sincerity as far as I am concerned. All he did was to try to distinguish it from the Nazi symbol - an improvement, but not sufficient IMHO.

rob_on_guitar
16-05-2008, 10:38 AM
Well said.

Roscoe
16-05-2008, 10:38 AM
I think that we should respect hindu and buddhist use of a symbol that holds power to them.

But to think that this guy just wants to modify his swastika to make it less offensive makes me wonder what the hell is going through his head. You can justify it all you want, but at the end of the day a lot of people are going to be offended.

Not to mention how distasteful it is in the first place. If someone painted a big white cross on their roof I'd dispair. I respect peoples religious rights, but I respect them even more when I don't have them put in my face.

Really, this guy should paint over it, just in respect for other peoples feelings. But there's nothing stopping him having them all over his house. The symbol itself isn't the problem, just the public display of it.

Does that mean, then, that you believe the "big white cross" that is outside, on public display, most churches throughout the world, should be removed, "just in respect for other peoples' feelings"? You see many every day. Isn't that, "in your face"?

So perhaps the churches need to "paint over" the "public display" of their emblems as well.

The Cross is, I think you will find, one of the most recognised (religious) symbols in the world. Perhaps even more so than Coca Cola.

I do hope that that Mr Gupta is not intimidated by the people that find his symbol of his faith unacceptable. We are supposed to live in a country that embraces free speech - one of the reasons this forum exists - and so he should be able to say what he likes as long as he is not breaking the law, and nobody has suggested, so far, that he has.

rob_on_guitar
16-05-2008, 10:45 AM
No we do not have free speech. What if a satanist publicly displayed their stuff in public, or a skin head etc what then?

Anyways I think it's obvious what should be done, if they havent figured it out then either be prepared for abuse or go back to india.

Thebananamonkey
16-05-2008, 10:55 AM
Does that mean, then, that you believe the "big white cross" that is outside, on public display, most churches throughout the world, should be removed, "just in respect for other peoples' feelings"? You see many every day. Isn't that, "in your face"?

So perhaps the churches need to "paint over" the "public display" of their emblems as well.

The Cross is, I think you will find, one of the most recognised (religious) symbols in the world. Perhaps even more so than Coca Cola.

I do hope that that Mr Gupta is not intimidated by the people that find his symbol of his faith unacceptable. We are supposed to live in a country that embraces free speech - one of the reasons this forum exists - and so he should be able to say what he likes as long as he is not breaking the law, and nobody has suggested, so far, that he has.

If it's on a temple then it has context. I'd be fine if it were there. But it's not is it? Do we know he's hindi from looking at his roof?

Faith is a private thing. People should know enough to keep it that way.

He has the right to keep it there, but that doesn't mean jack really. Any responsible adult in another culture should respect that culture. And in this society it's irresponsible to display that symbol with no context.

I used to dabble in buddhism before I just cut to the chase and went atheist. Should I have displayed my faith loudly and proudly? And then just expected my WW2 vet grandfather to be happy for me?

No.

Why? Because I'm not delusional. The symbol carries power for us, just as it does them. And in us respecting their faith, they should equally respect our beliefs. It's a two way thing.

I find it funny when people stand up for minorities to the bitter end, but then just deny the majority for being prissy. Two standards anyone? Just because I'm in the majority it doesn't make my values any less important. In some ways it should logically go the other way. But who listens to logic?

John H
16-05-2008, 12:10 PM
I agree with the point about context. When I first went to England a few years back, my wife's relations were fiercely patriotic about the English flag (cross of St George, not the Union flag) flying over churches in those cute villages. They were outraged that a group of overseas origin (who had permanent residency) were complaining about their employer flying the English flag above their place of work - they said it was intimidating, much to our rellie's disgust.

When I thought about it for myself I had to conclude that the only contexts I had ever experienced for the display of the cross of St George had been pictures of the cross on the shields of the mediaeval Crusaders; telly news and newspaper photos of the National Front; and football hooligans. In fact the only images I had for that flag had been entirely negative - it certainly affected the way I perceived that symbol, so to me it seemed redolent of violence, chauvinism, and racism.

Hardly surprising that others objected, though how you can go to a country, take all its benefits, and then complain about patriots flying the country's legitimate flag, I don't know. But it made the point for me about context being critical. This guy Mr Gupta should respect the context in which he is making a large public display of the swastika.

Sue
17-05-2008, 10:38 AM
I would like the Hindus to use their symbols more not less.
Hiding the real meaning of the swastika only gives it more power to offend.
Please take back your symbols and teach others that the Nazi's were / are thieves.
Over 60 here and born after the second world war.
Time to grow up and learn.

rob_on_guitar
17-05-2008, 10:49 AM
You cant change history, you have to wait a few more generations.

Metla
17-05-2008, 10:49 AM
Sweet, In honour of the sentiments put forward by Roscoe, Sue and others,I have changed my avatar to a swastika, In order to remove any chance of offending I have named the image file "peace".


Anyone offended, Please grow up, Your opinion is meaningless until you get educated, Obviously the killing means nothing.


HAIL.

Metla
17-05-2008, 10:50 AM
You cant change history, you have to wait a few more generations.

My thoughts exactly, time heals all wounds, No need to force it.



HAIL.

rob_on_guitar
17-05-2008, 12:11 PM
Not even a comment yet.... thats a first :lol:

John H
17-05-2008, 12:18 PM
If you are referring to Metla's change of avatar, Thomas01 (I think?) has commented in the Video of the month thread, asking Metla to turn the swastika off - it has replaced his usual avatar in all of his posts, not just this thread.

rob_on_guitar
17-05-2008, 01:57 PM
So his point came across... but to the wrong people?

Sweep
17-05-2008, 03:28 PM
You cant change history, you have to wait a few more generations.

You can change history. You will not be able to change the facts but certainly you can change the way a set of facts are reported and/or interpreted.

What I know of history is really only what I believe based on Parents,teachers, books, peers, research and other influences.

History is what people say it is. Now whom to trust to be accurate?

As I was too young to attend WW2 because I was born during it I have to rely on information from others.

Also rob_on_guitar, I would suggest rather than using "few" you use the word "many" generations. These things just never go away IMHO.

Sweep
17-05-2008, 03:57 PM
Sweet, In honour of the sentiments put forward by Roscoe, Sue and others,I have changed my avatar to a swastika, In order to remove any chance of offending I have named the image file "peace".


Anyone offended, Please grow up, Your opinion is meaningless until you get educated, Obviously the killing means nothing.


HAIL.

I had no problem with your other Avatar but I do now.

It might expel excrement on my head so therefore I could feel offended.

Not reporting this until a blob of poo comes out of one of my ports on the computer. I do not really believe this will happen but it might!

Should I change my motherboard if this occurs? Or should I just report you?
Please do not be offended as this is very much tounge in cheek.

If you are offended then I will come to your place and stamp on your pink fluffy slippers preferably whilst you are wearing them.

You make good points regarding the Swastika for which I thank you.
;)

rob_on_guitar
17-05-2008, 04:11 PM
I was being sarcastic Sweep! Some of the other people have no .... don't know what the word is.... idea?

John H
17-05-2008, 04:52 PM
Perhaps the one who suggested that "people should grow up" could take that idea to a synagogue, or go into a Holocaust museum (I think there is one in Auckland, and there is definitely one in Sydney) and suggest the museum guides who experienced the Shoah grow up and get over it. That would be a fairly quick route to getting an idea about what it is all about, Rob.

There is a really interesting obituary in the Press this am of a gentile Polish nurse/social worker who saved a large number of Jewish children from the Warsaw ghetto. The Gestapo beat her and tortured her, and she had the scars till the day she died aged 98. Perhaps she had not grown up.

However, this thread proves that there is none so blind than those who refuse to see (or whatever that expression is...).

rob_on_guitar
17-05-2008, 05:17 PM
Blind. Thats what I was looking for. On ANZAC day we say 'lest we forget', it seems some people have forgotten about the ones who fought for our freedoms. That bugs me too.

Thebananamonkey
18-05-2008, 12:34 AM
Blind. Thats what I was looking for. On ANZAC day we say 'lest we forget', it seems some people have forgotten about the ones who fought for our freedoms. That bugs me too.

Amen

Agent_24
18-05-2008, 12:49 PM
Originally Posted by GoodHour
If the Nazi flag had had the cross on it, would we say the cross is an inherently nazi symbol?

Good observation, although I think that you would be treading on many a Roman toe suggesting that.

With a good portion of the world professing to be Christian, I think that anyone of note advocating that the cross was a Nazi symbol would possibly be nailed to one!

If that were the case, I wonder how many Christians would be brave enough to paint it on their roof?

It's not the symbol itself, it's what the symbol represents and is associated to - so the symbol could be anything and it would still mean the same thing.

It's funny though when you think how many people were killed in the name of god by the church, and yet it's only the swastika we go nuts about.

Metla
18-05-2008, 02:57 PM
It's funny though when you think how many people were killed in the name of god by the church, and yet it's only the swastika we go nuts about.

Then its probably for good reason our Muslim brothers aren't too fond of Christians....

R2x1
18-05-2008, 05:55 PM
When it comes to misery for the opposition, a lot of religions encourage giving the unbelievers a bit of stick. Serve 'em right for having the wrong god.