Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Ex-soldier told to repaint his St George's


Uncle Yammy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Apologies to anyone who might be offended, but I felt moved to email the Preston office where this woman works. This is the email that I sent...

"Sack Ms Hardy!! She is an Uber Political Correctness Officer that should not be in any position of Authority. She vilifies ex- forces tenants with her own Personal Agenda. She is a hateful Quizzling."

Should anyone else feel sufficiently moved to send an email to the Housing Society then this is the Link: http://www.placesfor...es/preston.aspx

Nice one. :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That some are willing to personally call others names shows anger, coupled with the demonstrated intolerance toward Muslims, it all leaves little doubt that such measures as described in the OP are necessary.

In a more tolerant climate where traditional symbols are not perverted and where others would reclaim such symbols for more traditional uses by confronting intolerance instead of contributing toward it then things would be different.

For now the need is definitely established.

For someone who is putting the case for a more tolerant society so strongly, I find your intolerance of those who dare to hold views differing to yours quite amazing!

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really have a problem with them asking him to do it. In some ways for the safety of him and people living around him.

There are groups of all ethnic origins that have extreme groups. Something little like this may be all the provocation they need to vandalise, terrorize or even in extreme cases commit arson. Or it could be mistaken as the premises of an EDL or BNP member or group.

It is not like it is something that he really needs, you don't need a whacking great flag to be patriotic. Most housing associations carry out their own exterior painting. If they have paid or budgeted for it then he has repainted it without permission he is not exactly going to please them much.

Edited by skookum
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of those near where I live. I expect that if they start appearing they will soon learn to gather quietly and respectfully. southerners tend to target practice on things that upset them. No bloodshed mind, just a few strategically placed holes in a facade :w00t:

So, if you are upset or ofended by something you guys just shoot? Looks like the terrorists have a good teacher in the southern rednecks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its amazing that the EDL is labelled a hate group because they openly oppose everything everybody else hates, (assuming everyone reading hates them anyway) Terrorists, Muslim grooming, Muslim hate speech, Sharia Law, The EDL call it the Islamification of the UK, and its easy to see their point when in places like Radstock Somerset from a population of over 5k the councillor decides to remove the national flag because 16 Muslims complained due to its ties to the crusades, she only added the reason "it had been hijacked by the far right" from her own opinion and not from complaints, the BNP and even UKIP are being labelled racists now, the BNP use the Union Jack so why hasn't that been removed ?

This whinging about overt National symbolism ie flying the George cross has been around longer than the EDL here we have a forum dated Feb 2008 discussing this very issue http://www.talk-uk.c...hp/t-22750.html the EDL formed in March 2009 http://en.wikipedia...._Defence_League

The BNP who are also labelled fascist and racist adopted the Union Jack but no ones whinging about that yet....and I stress yet as it will happen,

Edited by ciriuslea
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

'symbol of hate' !!! it's the English flag you muppet.

Obviously they know nothing about the British flag. Some just have nothing better to do than to complain about everything. Off with his head! He just insulted the English flag in England of all places. All this stupidity is incomprehensible.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That some are willing to personally call others names shows anger, coupled with the demonstrated intolerance toward Muslims, it all leaves little doubt that such measures as described in the OP are necessary.

Whilst it may be unnecessary to resort to name-calling, you did kinda ask for it.

It's the St. George's Cross, not a swastika.

Edited by Arbenol68
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we in the third grade?

"I called him a name because he asked for it?"

Nah, there is a good reason it is going to be taken down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, while nativist and/or Islamophobic views are expected they are not universally appreciated.

Some of us are glad this symbol of hate will be removed. Good marks to whoever reported it and hopefully it will inform others to do the same whenever symbols of intolerance are encountered, however well disguised or claims of innocence proclaimed. Now he knows.

You seem to be under the impression that tolerance is a one-sided coin - it isn't. I'm guessing that's how you're able to recognise the crescent as representing an entire religion and not any minority group within it, yet completely disregard your own stance when it comes to saying an entire countries flag represents a minority group within it and is therefore a symbol of hate. It's double standards like that which makes situations like this far worse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, while nativist and/or Islamophobic views are expected they are not universally appreciated.

Some of us are glad this symbol of hate will be removed. Good marks to whoever reported it and hopefully it will inform others to do the same whenever symbols of intolerance are encountered, however well disguised or claims of innocence proclaimed. Now he knows.

Symbol of hate? It's not a giant Swastika or KKK symbol. Seriously, get a sense of proportion.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously they know nothing about the British flag. Some just have nothing better to do than to complain about everything. Off with his head! He just insulted the English flag in England of all places. All this stupidity is incomprehensible.

I think Its actually a reflection of the real feeling towards Englishness when the flag of a Nation is allowed to be belittled by its removal, especially in light of recent political gains by UKIP and the growing numbers of groups like the EDL, its almost as if the majority are being punished for the views of the few..

But ultimately in reply to the original point, I think if you don't own your property then your at the mercy of the landlord and so dont really have a leg to stand on...if it was his own home then thats a different issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we in the third grade?

"I called him a name because he asked for it?"

Nah, there is a good reason it is going to be taken down.

You think you're a liberal, don't you? You're wrong.

Explain why it is offensive.

Edited by Arbenol68
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really thinking about myself or about any other poster in a negative way.

There is a topic. Focus on that, if you can.

I could explain why it is offensive to some, but it would just open myself up for attack instead of actually considering our views, dismiss my views if you wish, attack them all you want, once we begin to try and personally offend others, name call, saying it is deserved, and "you think you are this but you are not" well count me out.

Maybe that is how they talk at the pub with brews, but some of us prefer a different type of conversation.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a topic. Focus on that, if you can.

OK. Fair enough. No more ad hominems.........I promise.

I'm genuinely interested, though. Why do you consider the English flag to be offensive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really thinking about myself or about any other poster in a negative way.

There is a topic. Focus on that, if you can.

I could explain why it is offensive to some, but it would just open myself up for attack instead of actually considering our views, dismiss my views if you wish, attack them all you want, once we begin to try and personally offend others, name call, saying it is deserved, and "you think you are this but you are not" well count me out.

.

By all means do. If you're going to say that various racist groups or organisations have used it to promote their views which are consdidered offensive, I'm sure the same could be said for racist groups in any country using that country's Flag. Why should this one be a particular cause for shame? It's not even as if the racist groups or organisations are all that influential or effective, certainly comapred with racist groups in some other countries they're very small beer indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really thinking about myself or about any other poster in a negative way.

There is a topic. Focus on that, if you can.

I could explain why it is offensive to some, but it would just open myself up for attack instead of actually considering our views, dismiss my views if you wish, attack them all you want, once we begin to try and personally offend others, name call, saying it is deserved, and "you think you are this but you are not" well count me out.

Maybe that is how they talk at the pub with brews, but some of us prefer a different type of conversation.

Again - how can you label an entire nations flag as offensive, yet not apply the same standard to all flags and symbols?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By all means do. If you're going to say that various racist groups or organisations have used it to promote their views which are consdidered offensive, I'm sure the same could be said for racist groups in any country using that country's Flag. Why should this one be a particular cause for shame? It's not even as if the racist groups or organisations are all that influential or effective, certainly comapred with racist groups in some other countries they're very small beer indeed.

But it isn't just one person who is willing to make this thread about persons who post here instead of topics.

For example, instead of saying , "You seem to be under the impression that tolerance is a one-sided coin," it could have simply been phrased as: tolerance is not a one-sided coin, etc, etc....

And instead of, "how can you label an entire nations flag as offensive," one could have asked: how can only one entire nation's flag be labeled as offensive when the same standard should be applied to all flags and symbols, etc, etc...?

Both questions following the crimson highlighted parts above are ones I would love to answer, but when we make it about attacking one poster, and having that poster defend himself, instead of simply offer and exchange views, some are not going to be accustomed to that type of discussion. It does not seem stimulating to me. It is why I stopped having discussions in the Americas sections, and probably why you won't find me willing to converse much here either now. It just does not seem like a sophisticated way of communication for me but carry on since all seem to enjoy that type of discussion, count me out. We all have standards, mine will be met or I will simply move on. Take care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it isn't just one person who is willing to make this thread about persons who post here instead of topics.

For example, instead of saying , "You seem to be under the impression that tolerance is a one-sided coin," it could have simply been phrased as: tolerance is not a one-sided coin, etc, etc....

And instead of, "how can you label an entire nations flag as offensive," one could have asked: how can only one entire nation's flag be labeled as offensive when the same standard should be applied to all flags and symbols, etc, etc...?

Both questions following the crimson highlighted parts above are ones I would love to answer, but when we make it about attacking one poster, and having that poster defend himself, instead of simply offer and exchange views, some are not going to be accustomed to that type of discussion. It does not seem stimulating to me. It is why I stopped having discussions in the Americas sections, and probably why you won't find me willing to converse much here either now. It just does not seem like a sophisticated way of communication for me but carry on since all seem to enjoy that type of discussion, count me out. We all have standards, mine will be met or I will simply move on. Take care.

Good grief. You have stated your opinion, I am asking you questions about your opinion. There would be no point in me asking questions about a general opinion, since it's your opinion that has been posted, and your opinion i'm interested in. That is not attacking you - that is having a discussion, which is the very premise of what a forum is about.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, different standards of discussion, a forum has room for all types. Not just the confrontational prove the other guy wrong type.

No one has to change for anyone else but no one has to be drawn into debates that are not their style either. I usually prefer general opinion discussions and questioning those.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, different standards of discussion, a forum has room for all types. Not just the confrontational prove the other guy wrong type.

No one has to change for anyone else but no one has to be drawn into debates that are not their style either. I prefer the general opinion discussion.

Ok, despite the fact you state your opinion on matters, you want any questions about your stance addressed generally, and not to you personally.

If general members of the public rightfully stated that a religious symbol is not offensive, even is used by a minority group with distasteful views, then went on to say a nations flag is offensive because a minority group have used it in line with their distasteful views. How do you think such members of the public could draw such a conflicting conclusion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was this question

By all means do. If you're going to say that various racist groups or organisations have used it to promote their views which are consdidered offensive, I'm sure the same could be said for racist groups in any country using that country's Flag. Why should this one be a particular cause for shame? It's not even as if the racist groups or organisations are all that influential or effective, certainly comapred with racist groups in some other countries they're very small beer indeed.

actually answered here?

But it isn't just one person who is willing to make this thread about persons who post here instead of topics.

For example, instead of saying , "You seem to be under the impression that tolerance is a one-sided coin," it could have simply been phrased as: tolerance is not a one-sided coin, etc, etc....

And instead of, "how can you label an entire nations flag as offensive," one could have asked: how can only one entire nation's flag be labeled as offensive when the same standard should be applied to all flags and symbols, etc, etc...?

Both questions following the crimson highlighted parts above are ones I would love to answer, but when we make it about attacking one poster, and having that poster defend himself, instead of simply offer and exchange views, some are not going to be accustomed to that type of discussion. It does not seem stimulating to me. It is why I stopped having discussions in the Americas sections, and probably why you won't find me willing to converse much here either now. It just does not seem like a sophisticated way of communication for me but carry on since all seem to enjoy that type of discussion, count me out. We all have standards, mine will be met or I will simply move on. Take care.

most of this seems to be taking offence at being asked questions, rather than answering any. :unsure2:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If general members of the public rightfully stated that a religious symbol is not offensive, even is used by a minority group with distasteful views, then went on to say a nations flag is offensive because a minority group have used it in line with their distasteful views. How do you think such members of the public could draw such a conflicting conclusion?

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.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In England a few have used that symbol as one of intolerance

Well, exactly, surel;y. it's hardly democractic to say the symbol as a whole should be prohibited as an Offensive symbol, is it, if a few have used that symbol as one of intolerance. You might as well say the same about every country's flag there's ever been. That really is letting the intolerant win, isn't it, if they're able to appropriate anything they want to.

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

And that's not at all making blanket assumptions, is it. Why do you make such a big thing of the EDL? They're hardly a major political force.

Edited by Colonel Rhuairidh
Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.