June 22, 200719 yr Flame me if you want, but I support Hitler 100%. He just did one thing wrong. Instead of killing Jews, he should've killed every stupid person. Don't kill people for their religion or their ancestry, kill them for their actions! Kill them for getting behind the wheel of a car after 13 beers, or kill them for being racist, or kill them for smoking cigarettes through a hole in their neck after they had to have half their throat removed. Just don't kill them for their race. That opinion is so terrible it disgusts me. People with opinions like you need to be locked up in prison for life. Its hard to contain my disgust. All of these hitler themed topics are just going to end up flame wars.... Quit Runescape 30th May 2006.Thanks to Hawkxs for my signature :)
June 22, 200719 yr Guh, this really is your typical juvenile "I dare to say controversial stuff!!! Look at meeeee!" statement. The swastika is an age old symbol, yes. Typical of symbols is that values are attached to them. In our day and age, the swastika has the taint of nazism, whether we like it or not, regardless of the other meanings it holds in other cultures. As such, the swastika is a powerful symbol of racism, brutality, extreme nationalism and up to a certain degree even anti-intellectualism. No, it does not stand for the more redeeming qualities of nazism. That's just the way with symbols, they rarely leave space for the shades. You know, in Belgium, even the Hitler salute is illegal. You can be prosecuted for a Sieg Heil in a public space. Yes, this may go against the principle of freedom of speech. But respect for the individual > freedom of speech. I get so sick and tired of people saying what they will and then wave about with "freedom of speech!! freedom of speech!"
June 22, 200719 yr Author Guh, this really is your typical juvenile "I dare to say controversial stuff!!! Look at meeeee!" statement. The swastika is an age old symbol, yes. Typical of symbols is that values are attached to them. In our day and age, the swastika has the taint of nazism, whether we like it or not, regardless of the other meanings it holds in other cultures. As such, the swastika is a powerful symbol of racism, brutality, extreme nationalism and up to a certain degree even anti-intellectualism. No, it does not stand for the more redeeming qualities of nazism. That's just the way with symbols, they rarely leave space for the shades. You know, in Belgium, even the Hitler salute is illegal. You can be prosecuted for a Sieg Heil in a public space. Yes, this may go against the principle of freedom of speech. But respect for the individual > freedom of speech. I get so sick and tired of people saying what they will and then wave about with "freedom of speech!! freedom of speech!" Ok, the let's erase some history and let's keep the respect for the individual. Seriously, someone that gets offended by that symbol is just victim of the mass media. After years and years hering that the swastika is evil, is a truthly brainwash. However, many people might claim "I hate nazis because my grandfather was in a victim of the third Reich", ok, I accept that, but I donnot accept the fact that I'll be saw by others as a rascist/anti-smitist/idiot-nazi for wearing a Nazi swastika. For example, I got a friend, we both love the history, and we both are interested in third reich history (specially the part that talks about the occultism/paganism/symbols/SS/Runes/etc) but just for that, for talking about that, we can be perfectly etiqueted as rascists and pro-nazi guys. My friend's mom doesn't let him to even have a Swastika's picture in his computer, while my mother doesn't care very much if I put an imperial third reich flag in my room's door. The people just get this "crusade" of forgotting the history because they are part of families that suffered. But seriously, as time passes, there are more generations of young people that even do not know anything about thir grand grand parents, these new generations start to hate the nazism without knowing why! Anyways, in 300 years, no one will care about who gets his house covered with swastikas and nazi symbols, because they will just think "Ahahaha, what a historic freak! Remembers me of my father who collects little figures of crusaders". Because in 300 years, the nazism will be just as the crusades: History. By this principle, we must accept that the WWII is finished and a nazi swastika is just another historical symbol like the pyramids. http://darkluniux.blogspot.comBehold my blog! Thou shalt visit it and rejoice!
June 22, 200719 yr Flame me if you want, but I support Hitler 100%. He just did one thing wrong. Instead of killing Jews, he should've killed every stupid person. Don't kill people for their religion or their ancestry, kill them for their actions! Kill them for getting behind the wheel of a car after 13 beers, or kill them for being racist, or kill them for smoking cigarettes through a hole in their neck after they had to have half their throat removed. Just don't kill them for their race. That opinion is so terrible it disgusts me. People with opinions like you need to be locked up in prison for life. Its hard to contain my disgust. All of these hitler themed topics are just going to end up flame wars.... Actually, the other one turned out to be quite a healthy debate... just because a certain few have to act immaturely when talking about such matters doesn't mean those who can control themselves can't talk about these issues. As for your post, I actually find people like you harder to get along with than people like Kashi, despite our political views being polar to each other. You've not said anything about his opinion, you've just attacked the person that said it because it contains something you don't agree with. Like it or not, you have to accept his opinion as valid, or you lend yourself to ignorance. As for Sumpta, I agree with mot of that post, except the bit at the end about protecting the individual. I don't understand how symbols take away someone's individual respect. All symbols do is summarize a viewpoint in the form of an image and provide a preview of what that view involves. People aren't hurt just because someone thinks in a prejudicial way about them - they only get hurt when that person takes actions upon those views. Therefore, I don't see how a symbol, especially one with a thousand different interpretations, should be deemed as disrespectful to an individual. | Favourite Game Music | Last.fm | HYT Friend Chat Rules |
June 22, 200719 yr That opinion is so terrible it disgusts me. People with opinions like you need to be locked up in prison for life. Its hard to contain my disgust. All of these hitler themed topics are just going to end up flame wars.... I suppose it's my fault for actually saying, "Flame me if you want." :( My greatest ambition is to kill every member of the human race.However I am a realist and therefore know that I probably wont be able to.
June 22, 200719 yr I'd like to reply with a poem by Pastor Martin NiemÃÆÃâÃâöller (1892ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ãâ1984): First they came... First they came for the Communists, and I didnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t speak up, because I wasnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t a Communist. Then they came for the sick, the so-called incurables, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't mentally ill. Then they came for the Jews, and I didnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t speak up, because I wasnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t a Jew. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me. This poem exist in different versions. I like the NOFX version: First they put away the dealers Keep our kids safe and off the streets Then they put away the prostitutes Keep married men cloisterred at home Then they shooed away the bums Then they beat and bashed the queers Turned away the asylum seekers Fed us suspicions and fears We didn't raise our voice We didn't make a fuss It's funny there was no one left to notice when they came for us Sort of the same thing :D . Also, the reason the swastika shouldn't be banned isn't because it was firstly a symbol of peace, or because it reminds of what he did, it shouldn't be banned because no one should have the right to ban symbols.
June 22, 200719 yr A good thing with poetry, is that it can mean so many different things to many people. I just think it's something to think about, personally I find it scary that some people so easily think they can decide who is worthy of life and who isn't. All of us have or will once or more likely several times in our lives, make a wrong decision. But isn't banning Nazism the top of the slippery slope to censorship of all opinions contrary to the popular majority opinion? I don't support Nazism in any form, but banning it assumes infalibility on the government behalf. All opinions are allowed to be held, whats wrong and illegal is when you act on opinions like these or incite harm to another human. As long as the person holding the opinion does neither then there is no justification to ban that. Whether it be racist, sexist, supporting nazism, facism or whatever. The poem can be applied in the way that first they came for the Nazi's then they came for the communists, then they came for the liberals. When does it stop? With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed.
June 23, 200719 yr Flame me if you want, but I support Hitler 100%. He just did one thing wrong. Instead of killing Jews, he should've killed every stupid person. Don't kill people for their religion or their ancestry, kill them for their actions! Kill them for getting behind the wheel of a car after 13 beers, or kill them for being racist, or kill them for smoking cigarettes through a hole in their neck after they had to have half their throat removed. Just don't kill them for their race.I would not flame you for this, but many people are [bleep]s and don't know about this. Adolf Hitler started WW2, because he wanted to avenge the defeat of Germany in WW1. Stalin may have killed less than Hitler did during WW2, but he killed even more than Hitler after WW2. He killed more than 50 million people, but Hitler only killed about 20 million people less than Stalin did. My favorite band Slayer, has a lead/rthym guitarist called Jeff Hanneman. His father fought in the Battle of Normandy, and he is very interested in Nazis, so sometimes the Slayer logo comes up with a Nazi eagle, because of Hanneman's interests. First - Credit to Otbg . Second - Credit to 4be2jue
June 23, 200719 yr Flame me if you want, but I support Hitler 100%. He just did one thing wrong. Instead of killing Jews, he should've killed every stupid person. Don't kill people for their religion or their ancestry, kill them for their actions! Kill them for getting behind the wheel of a car after 13 beers, or kill them for being racist, or kill them for smoking cigarettes through a hole in their neck after they had to have half their throat removed. Just don't kill them for their race. The world in general is a hellhole. Young girls are kidnapped at night and sold off as sex slaves, after they are repeatedly raped by their captors for up to days. Tonight, someone will be murdered. Maybe they are murdered over an argument, something goes wrong when dealing with the drug dealer, or even for no apparent reason at all. People are slandered and abused by their parentals. People are treated like [cabbage] just because they stand up for something or they are a certain race or sex or from a different background. We have the knowledge for a perfect society, but somewhere down the line some idiot will ruin the plan. (Remember Communism?) But does that mean the world is totally bad? No. As surprising as it can seem, there is love in the mix of this chaotic world. There's always somebody out there that will love and care for you. They make life worthwhile. In my opinion if there was no love at all in this world, this world would just be a world of suicide. Would you want to continue living if there was no love? I wouldn't. By the way, we can think of a much worse system than Hitler could ever have set up. Read George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four if you don't believe me. SWAG Mayn U wanna be like me but U can't be me cuz U ain't got ma swagga on.
June 23, 200719 yr Flame me if you want, but I support Hitler 100%. He just did one thing wrong. Instead of killing Jews, he should've killed every stupid person. Don't kill people for their religion or their ancestry, kill them for their actions! Kill them for getting behind the wheel of a car after 13 beers, or kill them for being racist, or kill them for smoking cigarettes through a hole in their neck after they had to have half their throat removed. Just don't kill them for their race. "Hitler had the right idea, he was just an underachiever." I'm sure many people feel the same way as you from time to time. They just don't admit it.
June 23, 200719 yr :lol: My greatest ambition is to kill every member of the human race.However I am a realist and therefore know that I probably wont be able to.
June 23, 200719 yr @Kashi, I find your attitude disturbing, everyone has a right to life, and no one has the authority to decide to take anyone's fundamental right to life away from them. You or I least of all. To the OP, yes of course I think banning these symbols is wrong, but as Satenza put it so eloquently, only becuase no government should have the authority to ban these symbols, and because the freedom to hold an opinion is fundamental, and should be defended above all else. What's next? The banning of communist symbols in Russia? The banning of the eagle in Italy? Apart from that, it's the equivalent of sticking their fingers in their ears and going "lalala" and ignoring an important (if not probably embarassing) part of their history. We cannot afford to be ignorant of the past, because the past is what we learn from. "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo"
June 23, 200719 yr Flame me if you want, but I support Hitler 100%. He just did one thing wrong. Instead of killing Jews, he should've killed every stupid person. Don't kill people for their religion or their ancestry, kill them for their actions! Kill them for getting behind the wheel of a car after 13 beers, or kill them for being racist, or kill them for smoking cigarettes through a hole in their neck after they had to have half their throat removed. Just don't kill them for their race. Wow you're the most pathetic person I have seen on this forum, not everybody is an insipid stain on this earth like you Kashi. With an opinion like that you must be some kind of degenerate. As seen by your previous posts your opinion is diluted by anger felt towards other people that you know nothing about.
June 23, 200719 yr You support him 100% but dont condone the holocaust? He killed a lot of other innocent people too you know. There is no such thing as an innocent person. Anything that reduces the population of the human race is a good thing. Maybe I'm just being umm .. is vindictive the right word here? I hate humans! Humans killed my father, and raped my mother! You do realise that by following your own reasoning, you should now commit suicide, right ? Goodbye, you'll be missed. OT: It's a tricky situation. Total freedom of speech includes the freedom to insult. Despite arguments, the symbol is still insulting/threatening/hateful/offensive to and towards alot of people. Not to just jewish people, but to alot of members of the general populace: the silent majority if you will. No, I didn't lose family members during the war (though my grandfather got shot in the shoulder), but as a human being I can still find the Nazi-ideology that the symbol stands for utterly repulsive and offensive. The ideology, should it get widespread again, threatens my way of life, democracy and civil rights. The above mentioned also holds for communism for sure. Being the hypocrite myself, I cannot come up with a solid answer why I don't immediately have the same feeling triggered after seeing a hammer and sicle. The best I can some up with is, that the communist ideology uses equality for all as its basis, rather than superiority over others. Another reason might be the way the cold war ended, without bloodshed, a detente between east and west. A one sided view of the media ? No, I don't think so: stalin has been the subject of many tv-broadcasts, the attrocities he committed brought to light and always shared amongst the great villains of the 20th century. I guess what it boils down to is, how far can a democracy push values onto individuals in order to protect the democracy itself. In other words, how far should we be willing to limit freedom of speech, to keep that freedom of speech.
June 23, 200719 yr Since when is offence justification for censorship? Practicalty everyone's lifestyle or opinions offend someone. With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed.
June 23, 200719 yr Since when is offence justification for censorship? Practicalty everyone's lifestyle or opinions offend someone. Total freedom of speech includes the freedom to insult. "Wikipedia (click to read)"[/url]":2b6usa0n] -In Austria, the possession and/or trading of Mein Kampf is illegal. -In France, the selling of the book is forbidden unless the transaction concerns a historical version including commentaries from specialists and states the law allowing its special historical edition. In 2002, a French court ruled that the company Yahoo! had to pay ÃÆââââ¬Ã¡Ãâì100,000 per diem for selling revisionist materials, including Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, to French customers.[8] -In the Netherlands, selling the book, even in the case of an old copy, is illegal as "promoting hatred", but possession and lending is not. In 1997, the government explained to the parliament that selling a scientifically annotated version might escape prosecution. -In Spain, Argentina and Denmark, the book is unavailable, but copies before the unavailability of the book still exist. (Note: recent changes may have changed this status.) -Mein Kampf is freely available in Italy and Greece. -In the United States of America, the book can be found at almost any community library and can be bought, sold, and traded from many websites like Amazon.com and Borders Book Store. The US government seized the copyright during the Second World War as part of the Trading with the Enemy Act and in 1979, Houghton Mifflin, the US publisher of the book, bought the rights from the government. More than 15,000 copies are sold a year. [10] -In Britain, Mein Kampf is readily available and sells 3,000 copies annually [10]. Seems quite a few countries apply a form of censorship to prevent the spreading of the ideology. As well as there are other countries that apply no restrictions at all.
June 23, 200719 yr Sorry, i wasn't asking the question of "Who censors" but challenging dutch's principle of censorship to retain freedom of speech on the justification of offence. The banning of Mein Kampf is tricky, because in a way it does incite harm to others. With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed.
June 23, 200719 yr Then I guess my original post put you on a train of thoughts I didn't intend. My reasoning is: The offensive nature of the ideology falls under freedom of speech/insult. However, the spreading of the Nazi-ideology threatens my way of life should it get enough ground to get elected into parliament. A party with an authoritarian agenda using the democratic system to replace that very same system (similar to what happened in Germany 1933). Hence it would also threaten other freedoms I enjoy under the democracy. This leads to me asking, should we limit the freedom of speech to combat those set out to destroy the democracy. Should we protect that democracy (and the whole package of liberties that go with it), by restricting one of its freedoms? My question wasn't so much to censor due to the offensive content of the message, but to censor due to the destructive nature of that message. Spreading of that message can very well lead to harming people. The list of countries I provided doesn't show that putting some censorship in place immediately leads to oversealous censorship in other areas: France, Holland, Austria (Germany?), Spain. On the other hand, it also shows that not putting censorship up, doesn't immediately lead to a rise of power of extreme parties: UK, USA. I'm inconclusive ;)
June 23, 200719 yr I don't think you can justify censorship by saying 'If that ideology who's freedom we had protected got into power it would threaten my other freedoms', since the chances of that happening are vanishingly small. Besides, freedom of speech and opinion is a principle of democracy, I don't think you can defend democracy by denying those rights it, since that's a bit hypocritical. "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo"
June 23, 200719 yr Here's a real world problem: Collectors who spent good money on Third Reich memorabilia can no longer sell the items on eBay. Nor can they buy items to add to their collections. Search for 'Nazi' on this page at eBay. Which to me seems to be stupid. The symbol isn't inherently evil; the regime behind it was the problem. PvP is not for meIn the 3rd Year of the BoycottReal-world money saved since FT/W: Hundreds of DollarsReal-world time saved since FT/W: Thousands of Hours
June 23, 200719 yr Author So how can I then buy silver commemorative nazi coins data 1936 if they can't be sold in eBay? Seriously, the holocaust happened, and forgotting it will not get their victims back to life. The nazism is a dead ideology, I don't think than an actual goverment is going to become nazi because it will get the most horrible diplomatic relaitions with the most powerful countries of the world. We can compare the nazism to any acient goverment, like for example, the reign of Louis XIV, just another part of our history. If we can wear costumes of crusaders who killed muslims in name of their faith and for just more lands talking politicaly, why we flame an english prince for wearing an AfrikaKorps uniform in a costume party? http://darkluniux.blogspot.comBehold my blog! Thou shalt visit it and rejoice!
June 23, 200719 yr Here's a real world problem: Collectors who spent good money on Third Reich memorabilia can no longer sell the items on eBay. Nor can they buy items to add to their collections. Search for 'Nazi' on this page at eBay. Which to me seems to be stupid. The symbol isn't inherently evil; the regime behind it was the problem. Don't you think people search for and label their ads "German ww2" or "Third Reich memorabilia" instead? Daily 100's of items from Germany in the time period 1939-1945 are traded on eBay and other auction sites. You're accusing me of bigotry, how ironic. It's a nice attempt at argument, but your responses are facile and asinine, if not diatribe. Who's arrogant now?
June 23, 200719 yr It's not so much what the symbols really mean, it's what they are stereotyped to mean that makes them so offensive. Would you like the symbol which was the last thing 12 million people saw before they were slaughtered like animals to be accepted in society? Seminiferous Tubule.
June 23, 200719 yr Which to me seems to be stupid. The symbol isn't inherently evil; the regime behind it was the problem. The problem is the symbol, regardless of it's positive origins, is now synonymous with the Nazi party. He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart,and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God. - Aeschylus (525 BC - 456 BC)
June 23, 200719 yr Flame me if you want, but I support Hitler 100%. He just did one thing wrong. Instead of killing Jews, he should've killed every stupid person. Don't kill people for their religion or their ancestry, kill them for their actions! Kill them for getting behind the wheel of a car after 13 beers, or kill them for being racist, or kill them for smoking cigarettes through a hole in their neck after they had to have half their throat removed. Just don't kill them for their race. Wow you're the most pathetic person I have seen on this forum, not everybody is an insipid stain on this earth like you Kashi. With an opinion like that you must be some kind of degenerate. As seen by your previous posts your opinion is diluted by anger felt towards other people that you know nothing about. So, because he believes in Hitlers motives (somewhat) It gives you the right to insult him like that? Do you even know what Hitlers base motives were? To weed out the "insignificant" races, and create the master race, which he believed were the surviving ancestors of Atlantians. He believed the most likely spot for these people was in Tebet or some other Himmilayan country. (forgot which) That is also the root of the swastika I believe. Here is a site going into more detail about all this stuff. On topic, I think it is wrong that they have banned the swastika, as it is a symbol, that originated in an entirely different part of the world, that they do not own in any way. What next, changin the name of the U.S presidential Secret Servise to the Stealthy Agency of Presidential Protection Because its abreviation/initials are SS? Edit: Here is some stuff about the swastika. The swastika is one of mankind's oldest symbols, and apart from the cross and the circle, probably the most widely distributed. It is shown on pottery fragments from Greece dating back to the eighth century BC. It was used in ancient Egypt, India and China. The Navaho indians of North America have a traditional swastika pattern. Arab-Islamic sorcerers used it. In more recent times, it was incorporated in the flags of certain baltic states. The idea for the use of the swastika by the Nazis came from a dentist named Dr. Friedrich Krohn who was a member of the secret Germanen order. Krohn produced the design for the actual form in which the Nazis came to use the symbol, that is reversed, spinning in an anti-clockwise direction. As a solar symbol, the swastika is properly thought of as spinning, and the Buddhists have always believed the symbol attracted luck. The Sanskrit word "svastika" means good fortune and well being. According to Cabbalistic lore and occult theory, chaotic force can be evoked by revers- ing the symbol. And so the symbol appeared as the flag of Nazi Germany and the insignia of the Nazi party, an indication for those who had eyes to see, as to the occult nature of the Third Reich. Veni Vidi ViciI came, I saw, I conquered.Hail to the wiki! For all your information needs.
Create an account or sign in to comment