Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Ohelemapit

Ex-soldier told to repaint his St George's

103 posts in this topic

Wait a second, surely he should have the Union Jack? Since all armed forces fly the Union Jack? Not the St.George's flag?

Possibly he considers that Alex Salmon is likely to win overwhelming support for Scottish independence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The difference is in context and environment. Maybe some will approach these symbols devoid of either context/environment but apply universal rules. They will of course have a different view, not right or wrong, just different because of the criteria used.

For others, it can be seen that for the English being in England they have the home court advantage.

Muslims might be in their Islamic countries using their symbols for hate and intolerance against others, and that is a problem, people in those societies will eventually progress and veer toward secularism and away from religo-ethnic demands that everyone conforms to their singular view of the world.

In England a few have used that symbol as one of intolerance while the Muslims in England are not a majority, they are the weaker members of society, and thus their symbol of the crescent is not widely used as a symbol of hate in England. The more powerful might claim it is, they will claim they don't want Muslims there or that Muslims are taking over which is simply nativism. Others will claim all of Islam is a religion of hate or that they all want Sharia which is Islamophobia.

The way some see it, in pluralistic terms, is that all these groups need to get along, the stronger ones who would treat the weaker ones unfairly need to be regulated, that means not using any symbols perverted toward mass hatred be allowed until reforms are made.

America has the same issues with the Confederate flag. Depending where and how it is flown it can be offensive. It does not matter that some claim they don't fly it to be offensive, if that was true they would be in tune to all those around them. I have know some who have that flag displayed in their very own homes but they would not do so outside, not because they are cowards, or are having to give up their country to others, but because they understand how others have ruined their cultural symbol for them. They in turn have married into other groups.

There is a huge difference.

No doubt this flyer of Saint George does not like Muslims even if he claims he is not EDL.

what complete and utter garbage...laughable.

'symbol of hate' LOL!!!

this poster is self-deluded in the extreme...

she thinks she stands for tolerance....yet doesn't want to fly a flag in case it upsets muslims. right now...today...islam is the no.1 far-right mass movement in the world...it oppresses women, homosexuals, non-believers, jews, christians......

read her words again people...absord them....this is what has become of the left in the uk.

sad.

her intellectual backflips to try and justify her points are cringeworthy.

the confederate flag in the us is the equiv of the st george cross!??! what!??!

lol.....

Edited by dekker87
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what complete and utter garbage...laughable.

'symbol of hate' LOL!!!

this poster is self-deluded in the extreme...

she thinks she stands for tolerance....yet doesn't want to fly a flag in case it upsets muslims. right now...today...islam is the no.1 far-right mass movement in the world...it oppresses women, homosexuals, non-believers, jews, christians......

read her words again people...absord them....this is what has become of the left in the uk.

sad.

her intellectual backflips to try and justify her points are cringeworthy.

the confederate flag in the us is the equiv of the st george cross!??! what!??!

lol.....

Britney's an American bloke. But apparently an expert on the subject of the English flag. Such an expert that he believes the flag is an anti-Islamic symbol of oppression. He appears ignorant of the fact that this debate has been going on for several decades. Long before Islam became any kind of issue in Britain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Britney's an American bloke. But apparently an expert on the subject of the English flag. Such an expert that he believes the flag is an anti-Islamic symbol of oppression. He appears ignorant of the fact that this debate has been going on for several decades. Long before Islam became any kind of issue in Britain.

oh right...thanks for the heads up...thought we had a live one then rather than a rather boring stereotypical reactionary american libero-fascist.

britney - your country is one of the greatest in the history of the world...people in the US are freer than anyone else....i admire your country...if you didn't labour under the weight of privilege you may be able to see the woods from the tress...but clearly as you're agreein with restrictions on freedom of expression you simply don't get it at all...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Britney's an American bloke. But apparently an expert on the subject of the English flag. Such an expert that he believes the flag is an anti-Islamic symbol of oppression. He appears ignorant of the fact that this debate has been going on for several decades. Long before Islam became any kind of issue in Britain.

If that were true then the American flag would represent that sentiment ten fold.

Edited by itsnotoutthere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that were true then the American flag would represent that sentiment ten fold.

i'd be rather proud if st georges cross did actually represent oppostion to Islam anyway...

perhaps more accurate to say anti-fascist as we fought the german national socialists under this flag and we now fight the islamic variety of fascism under the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that were true then the American flag would represent that sentiment ten fold.

The irony is that the Union flag (not the St George' Cross) can rightly be seen as oppressive to those that were abused by British imperialism. But I wouldn't include Muslims living in Britain among them. Maybe we should ban the display of all European flags (and American) - cos they've all been there too.

Or some people could just get some perspective on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony is that the Union flag (not the St George' Cross) can rightly be seen as oppressive to those that were abused by British imperialism. But I wouldn't include Muslims living in Britain among them. Maybe we should ban the display of all European flags (and American) - cos they've all been there too.

Or some people could just get some perspective on it.

As i've said previously, some people just love to be offended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd be rather proud if st georges cross did actually represent oppostion to Islam anyway...

perhaps more accurate to say anti-fascist as we fought the german national socialists under this flag and we now fight the islamic variety of fascism under the same.

Once again, we see Godwin's Law coming into play. it's an immutable law of the universe. Is this going to turn into more interminable ranting about Muslims yet again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, we see Godwin's Law coming into play. it's an immutable law of the universe. Is this going to turn into more interminable ranting about Muslims yet again?

if the cap fits...

Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as censorship, fallaciously miscasting an opponent's argument as hyperbole when the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.[9] Similar criticisms of the "law" (or "at least the distorted version which purports to prohibit all comparisons to German crimes") have been made by Glenn Greenwald.[10]

<yawn>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The irony is that the Union flag (not the St George' Cross) can rightly be seen as oppressive to those that were abused by British imperialism. But I wouldn't include Muslims living in Britain among them. Maybe we should ban the display of all European flags (and American) - cos they've all been there too.

Or some people could just get some perspective on it.

You might as well ban ALL flags because MOST nations have resorted to despotism at some point in their time. I am thinking of Argentina, venezuela, Japan, China, Turkey, the Visigoths, Berserkers, Thugees, Egypt, Rome, S.Africa, Zimbabwe, DRC (including present), Pakistan, India, Jamaica, The Catholic Church, The Jewish Faith, Islam, etc etc.

Edited by keithisco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is in context and environment. Maybe some will approach these symbols devoid of either context/environment but apply universal rules. They will of course have a different view, not right or wrong, just different because of the criteria used.

For others, it can be seen that for the English being in England they have the home court advantage.

Muslims might be in their Islamic countries using their symbols for hate and intolerance against others, and that is a problem, people in those societies will eventually progress and veer toward secularism and away from religo-ethnic demands that everyone conforms to their singular view of the world.

In England a few have used that symbol as one of intolerance while the Muslims in England are not a majority, they are the weaker members of society, and thus their symbol of the crescent is not widely used as a symbol of hate in England. The more powerful might claim it is, they will claim they don't want Muslims there or that Muslims are taking over which is simply nativism. Others will claim all of Islam is a religion of hate or that they all want Sharia which is Islamophobia.

The way some see it, in pluralistic terms, is that all these groups need to get along, the stronger ones who would treat the weaker ones unfairly need to be regulated, that means not using any symbols perverted toward mass hatred be allowed until reforms are made.

America has the same issues with the Confederate flag. Depending where and how it is flown it can be offensive. It does not matter that some claim they don't fly it to be offensive, if that was true they would be in tune to all those around them. I have know some who have that flag displayed in their very own homes but they would not do so outside, not because they are cowards, or are having to give up their country to others, but because they understand how others have ruined their cultural symbol for them. They in turn have married into other groups.

There is a huge difference.

No doubt this flyer of Saint George does not like Muslims even if he claims he is not EDL.

I was with you until you made that statement (BOLDED by me). The Flag of St George (Patron St of England by the way), is a symbol of England, it is NOT a "Hate" symbol unless that is the way you perceive it based on your own internalised, belief system.

The Confederate Flag you allude to is disingenuous, because it was (IS) very much a Politicised Statement and is not concommitant with any National staus (the Confederacy does NOT exist, however ENGLAND most certainly DOES exist).

In Scotland you will see the flag of St Andrew flown, in Wales - the flag of St David, without debate or discussion. In England, once you get rid of the PC Brigade, then once again you will see the flag of St George flown without the interference of non - sequiter busy-bodies telling you that it is wrong!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I was with you until you made that statement (BOLDED by me). The Flag of St George (Patron St of England by the way), is a symbol of England, it is NOT a "Hate" symbol unless that is the way you perceive it based on your own internalised, belief system.

The Confederate Flag you allude to is disingenuous, because it was (IS) very much a Politicised Statement and is not concommitant with any National staus (the Confederacy does NOT exist, however ENGLAND most certainly DOES exist).

In Scotland you will see the flag of St Andrew flown, in Wales - the flag of St David, without debate or discussion. In England, once you get rid of the PC Brigade, then once again you will see the flag of St George flown without the interference of non - sequiter busy-bodies telling you that it is wrong!!

The flag of Saint Andrew or the flag of Saint David have never been appropriated by hate groups that I know of at the same level the flag of Saint George has.

There also seems to be a bit of downgrading and not respecting the Confederate flag, it was a nation once, it is still the heritage of many. To me those who support Saint George flags but put down the Confederate flag is like the guy with a tattoo saying his can be hidden and quite estimable while the other guys tattoo is not.

The Confederate flag is not just a symbol of intolerance, for many it is not and they mean it but they won't fly it in public, on the other hand for many they claim it is not but secretly use it as such and want to fly it in your face, and in other instances, such as in the Dukes of Hazzard it was not anything mischievous.

Nuance is totally missing.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The flag of Saint Andrew or the flag of Saint David have never been appropriated by hate groups that I know of at the same level the flag of Saint George has.

There also seems to be a bit of downgrading and not respecting the Confederate flag, it was a nation once, it is still the heritage of many. To me those who support Saint George flags but put down the Confederate flag is like the guy with a tattoo saying his can be hidden and quite estimable while the other guys tattoo is not.

The Confederate flag is not just a symbol of intolerance, for many it is not and they mean it but they won't fly it in public, on the other hand for many they claim it is not but secretly use it as such and want to fly it in your face, and in other instances, such as in the Dukes of Hazzard it was not anything mischievous.

Nuance is totally missing.

the st georges flag has not been appropriated by a hate group....the EDL is not a hate group.

nice to see you actually know what you;re talking about.

the confederate flag on the other hand wasn't just appropriated by a hate group...it was the symbol of a nation predicated on slavery and symbolised the fight against emancipation.

unlike you tho i actually know a little bit more about that subject than you clearly do about that which you're pontificating on and i would never tell you, as an american, not to fly a flag....

i bet you think you're a liberal eh...yet you're advocating the banning of flags....that makes you something other than a liberal...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also he looks like a thug or hooligan

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The flag of Saint Andrew or the flag of Saint David have never been appropriated by hate groups that I know of at the same level the flag of Saint George has.

There also seems to be a bit of downgrading and not respecting the Confederate flag, it was a nation once, it is still the heritage of many. To me those who support Saint George flags but put down the Confederate flag is like the guy with a tattoo saying his can be hidden and quite estimable while the other guys tattoo is not.

The Confederate flag is not just a symbol of intolerance, for many it is not and they mean it but they won't fly it in public, on the other hand for many they claim it is not but secretly use it as such and want to fly it in your face, and in other instances, such as in the Dukes of Hazzard it was not anything mischievous.

Nuance is totally missing.

Or those that support the crescent flag but put down the George flag...........er....um.....wait.........

You argue that you that as far as you are concerned the St Georges flag is a symbol hate because the EDL carry it on their marches,

You also stated the crescent 'is a symbol of a world religion' i.e. Islam.

As we all know many islamic terrorists have carried out atrocities (not marches) & left videos & such proclaiming to carry out those in the name of Allah.

So using your logic the Islam crescent is a far worse symbol of hate than any St George flag.

As far as I know the EDL haven't killed anyone unlike Islamic terrorists who have murdered thousands.

Edited by itsnotoutthere
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

also he looks like a thug or hooligan

The ones who insist on claiming they are patriots seem like the rowdier in-your-face types. This lady here not only double downed but triple downed her intolerance.

http://www.yourlocal...nd_Union_flags/

Really she should have just flown the Union Jack ~_~

They simply do not know patriotism has nothing to do with hating other groups. Xenophobia and nativism are not patriotism.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The ones who insist on claiming they are patriots seem like the rowdier in-your-face types. This lady here not only double downed but triple downed her intolerance.

http://www.yourlocal...nd_Union_flags/

Really she should have just flown the Union Jack ~_~

They simply do not know patriotism has nothing to do with hating other groups. Xenophobia and nativism are not patriotism.

Yea, I think I know what you mean :-

post-39751-0-66328100-1369167756_thumb.j

post-39751-0-80133800-1369167775_thumb.j

post-39751-0-91174400-1369167795_thumb.j

post-39751-0-99051600-1369167820_thumb.j

(the second picture....do you think thats supposed to be ironic?)

Edited by itsnotoutthere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yea, I think I know what you mean :-

post-39751-0-66328100-1369167756_thumb.j

post-39751-0-80133800-1369167775_thumb.j

post-39751-0-91174400-1369167795_thumb.j

post-39751-0-99051600-1369167820_thumb.j

(the second picture....do you think thats supposed to be ironic?)

Oddly you mention the second picture, which are women protesting Jack Straw's intolerant comments outside the Bangor Street Community Centre in Blackburn. To the nativist the veils appear foreign and strange, to the nativist anything foreign and strange belongs to outsiders, to one with a tribal mindset it is always "us vs them" narratives.

Now what about the other three photos? If one cannot provide unbiased media sources for them, crediting them to a reputable publication, which we know cannot be done because they were photoshopped, then brighter minds will simply see through them for the photoshopped propaganda pieces that they are.

Please provide sources from them if you can before those who insist on truth see through those, well-known, fake pics.

For the rest, if bored, and wanting to have a gaggle at this pitiful attempt toward intolerance, then simply download the four pictures and then zoom in on them close up and look at the signs and text.

One is real, three are total fakes.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also he looks like a thug or hooligan

Looks like a middle aged man to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly it is true: Snopes article on the rally. Only the one itsnotoutthere posted on page 1 (Behead those who say Islam is violent) is a photoshop.

But a rally of 500+ people shouldn't be seen as Islam as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oddly you mention the second picture, which are women protesting Jack Straw's intolerant comments outside the Bangor Street Community Centre in Blackburn. To the nativist the veils appear foreign and strange, to the nativist anything foreign and strange belongs to outsiders, to one with a tribal mindset it is always "us vs them" narratives.

Now what about the other three photos? If one cannot provide unbiased media sources for them, crediting them to a reputable publication, which we know cannot be done because they were photoshopped, then brighter minds will simply see through them for the photoshopped propaganda pieces that they are.

Please provide sources from them if you can before those who insist on truth see through those, well-known, fake pics.

For the rest, if bored, and wanting to have a gaggle at this pitiful attempt toward intolerance, then simply download the four pictures and then zoom in on them close up and look at the signs and text.

One is real, three are total fakes.

And what's your response to my post 66 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oddly you mention the second picture, which are women protesting Jack Straw's intolerant comments outside the Bangor Street Community Centre in Blackburn. To the nativist the veils appear foreign and strange, to the nativist anything foreign and strange belongs to outsiders, to one with a tribal mindset it is always "us vs them" narratives.

Now what about the other three photos? If one cannot provide unbiased media sources for them, crediting them to a reputable publication, which we know cannot be done because they were photoshopped, then brighter minds will simply see through them for the photoshopped propaganda pieces that they are.

Please provide sources from them if you can before those who insist on truth see through those, well-known, fake pics.

For the rest, if bored, and wanting to have a gaggle at this pitiful attempt toward intolerance, then simply download the four pictures and then zoom in on them close up and look at the signs and text.

One is real, three are total fakes.

3 are total fakes are they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly it is true: Snopes article on the rally. Only the one itsnotoutthere posted on page 1 (Behead those who say Islam is violent) is a photoshop.

But a rally of 500+ people shouldn't be seen as Islam as a whole.

Those are fakes, if one cannot provide the exact publication they are from, they are fake. No reputable news source carried those photos.

The question remains now is if some are gullible enough to believe them because of their sentiment toward Islam or if some are actually passing on photoshops deliberately because of their sentiment toward Islam.

The bottom line is in both is some simply are going to be negative no matter what, all the more reason we can't have them flying symbols of intolerance.

And what's your response to my post 66 ?

It is in post #48.

The question asked was already answered before it was asked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you guys missed my post? Those 4 are real; the one on page 1 is fake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.