Hindu symbolism or not

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 8:48 am

I find spot's sig pic offensive and thought I'd say so for the record.

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 8:51 am

I've moved it here and taken it out of my sig, so that we can discuss it. I hope that sounds reasonable.

I note that it's hot-linked from a US Government site, valerie.

Rehabilitate Hindu symbolism!

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:07 am

spot;704607 wrote: I've moved it here and taken it out of my sig, so that we can discuss it. I hope that sounds reasonable.

I note that it's hot-linked from a US Government site, valerie.

Rehabilitate Hindu symbolism!

I can't say it bothers me, I don't see any SS officers, ovens, fences etc etc. I see some red squiggly lines and dots. It doesn't surprise me that there are red dots in it. I also noted that the legs have some curvature to them. It really doesn't in any way remind me of Nazism.

Lady G · Post by **Lady G** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:24 am

valerie;704604 wrote: I find spot's sig pic offensive and thought I'd say so for the record.

Why does it offend you Valerie?

pinkchick · Post by **pinkchick** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:26 am

Personally I don't see it as being offensive in any way.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:27 am

Lady G;704648 wrote: Why does it offend you Valerie?

Offensive might have been the wrong word. But there is no way to

get away, even with "dots" from what that symbol (or even one

close to it) represents. I don't "see" ovens YZGI but they are sure

called to mind.

Ugly.

JacksDad · Post by **JacksDad** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:29 am

Rethink this one Val.

That is Hindu.

The only thing that would be offensive is to censor Spot based on what a symbol reminds you of.

:-6

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:35 am

JacksDad;704696 wrote: Rethink this one Val.

That is Hindu.

The only thing that would be offensive is to censor Spot based on what a symbol reminds you of.

:-6

Don't need to.

I know it is.

Where did I censor spot?

JacksDad · Post by **JacksDad** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:08 am

You didn't.

You don't need to.

You know what it is.

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:19 am

valerie;704694 wrote: Offensive might have been the wrong word. But there is no way to

get away, even with "dots" from what that symbol (or even one

close to it) represents. I don't "see" ovens YZGI but they are sure

called to mind.

Ugly.

If it were twisted to 45 degrees, val, and if it were set on a black background, and if the proportions were those invariably used by the Nazi Party, then my posting the symbol might, depending on its context, be ugly or offensive. Or it might be educational or informative, depending on what I was doing with it.

The shape I've posted has long cultural roots in a non-European setting. The Nazi symbol doesn't derive from it, that would be two stylized Nordic S-runes overlaid at right-angles to each other, the same two S-runes which made up the regalia of the Schutzstaffel. It's hard to think of two symbols with less in common.

I repeat that the symbol in my sig was hot-linked from a US Government site, you seem to have ignored that. Do go back and look at it in context. Do you find the appearance of it there to be offensive as well? Would you like to complain to the department concerned?

The point of putting the symbol and the comment into my sig was to inform in the face of ignorance, val. I'd be grateful for your comment to what I've just written.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:44 am

You can't tell me what I find ugly or offensive, spot. I didn't ignore

anything, I don't care where you hotlinked from, it makes no difference

to me. I believe in my post #6 in this thread I stated "or close to it"

and that should suffice.

Now you're calling me ignorant, SUPER. I've been called worse. Hell,

YOU have called me worse.

It's my feeling that you can't un-ring the bell. And if anyone comes

here in the future, anyone who may be of Jewish descent say, or

who had a great grandmother who died in the ovens, at least they

will know someone stood up and said something. Someone who

obviously has no hatred for all things Germanic. :rolleyes:

I didn't pm you and ask you to take it out, lest I get accused of the

backchat bs again. I wouldn't have done that, in any case. But as

long as I stay well within the TOS, then by God I'm going to comment

on something as I see fit. If I am the only one who feels like I do,

FINE. I'm strong enough to live with that.

Signed:

An intemperate, irrational, flighty woman.

guppy · Post by **guppy** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:52 am

is it really hindu? honestly i thought it was a joke..and it reminds meof tic-tac-toe...:-3

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:58 am

valerie;704726 wrote: You can't tell me what I find ugly or offensive, spot. I didn't ignore

anything, I don't care where you hotlinked from, it makes no difference

to me. I believe in my post #6 in this thread I stated "or close to it"

and that should suffice.

Now you're calling me ignorant, SUPER. I've been called worse. Hell,

YOU have called me worse.

It's my feeling that you can't un-ring the bell. And if anyone comes

here in the future, anyone who may be of Jewish descent say, or

who had a great grandmother who died in the ovens, at least they

will know someone stood up and said something. Someone who

obviously has no hatred for all things Germanic. :rolleyes:

I didn't pm you and ask you to take it out, lest I get accused of the

backchat bs again. I wouldn't have done that, in any case. But as

long as I stay well within the TOS, then by God I'm going to comment

on something as I see fit. If I am the only one who feels like I do,

FINE. I'm strong enough to live with that.

Signed:

An intemperate, irrational, flighty woman.
No worries Val. You have a right to express your opinion. Some things just hit people differently than others.

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:23 pm

valerie;704726 wrote: Now you're calling me ignorant, SUPER. I've been called worse. Hell,

YOU have called me worse.I do try not to, you know.

I'm content to pay attention to experts from more than one tradition. Here's the Editor-in-Chief of Hindu Jagat, Yatindra Bhatnagar, discussing the matter. It's on the basis of informed opinion like this that I'm prepared to take a stand on the issue.The most common is the traditional Hindu Swastika with straight standing character, slightly angled individual arms and four dots inside the four squarish designs. It symbolizes good, and the light and energy emanating from the Sun. It can’t be anything but good for the community and is used in religious ceremonies, prayers, and meditation, rituals and offerings. The word Swasti also denotes blessings for everyone, and not extermination of anyone.

In Buddhism, the symbol is used to depict the feet, or footprints of the Buddha, after the new religion was exported to the East from India as an off shoot of Hinduism. The Swastika symbol, was also used widely in the ancient world including the tribes of Native Indians and the Latin American areas where Maya culture, akin to Hindu culture and religion prevailed.

Hitler adopted Swastika as the symbol of the Nazi Party but with a left-tilted form. It is clearly different from the Hindu Swastika that has been used for thousands of years. Just because of Hitler’s misuse and making it the symbol of his Nazi Party, Swastika can not become a dirty, disgusting and derogatory symbol. It is extremely unfair to put a stigma to Hindu religious symbol that is widely respected and used at religious ceremonies.

http://www.hindujagat.com/index.html

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:40 pm

http://history1900s.about.com/cs/swasti ... istory.htm

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:47 pm

That's a sensible article Lon, thank you.

Everything depends on context, val.

Consider the following:The synagogue at Ein Gedi dates from the Roman-Byzantine period, but it underwent several changes in the course of its use.

When first built at the beginning of the 3rd century, it was a modest, trapezoidal structure. In its northern wall, facing Jerusalem, were two openings. The floor was of simple white mosaic with a swastika pattern in black tesserae in the center. This pattern has been interpreted as a decorative motif or as a good luck symbol.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... ngedi.html

Now, would you destroy the mosaic floor in a place like that, or would you think that time and place change symbolic meanings and that Nazi Germany was both aberrant and long gone from the world?

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:50 pm

Hindu or not, the swastika is a tainted symbol and brings to mind bad stuff for many people.

I think the true ignorance is to pretend that isn't so.

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:52 pm

So you'd tear out the synagogue floor, RG?

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:05 pm

spot;704744 wrote: So you'd tear out the synagogue floor, RG?

No, I wouldn't. Not any more than I would raze leftover concentration camps. Those things need to be seen as they were. But I think taking a symbol that is now generally recognized by the world as standing for something bad and wrong, and using it for something else and then saying "I don't care who's offended" (or whatever that guy said) is a bit callous.

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:26 pm

This symbol can generate feelings of hatred by many who were victims of the "Bataan Death March", prisoners of war, and those that were in combat in the Pacific. Many have forgiven and many have not.

JacksDad · Post by **JacksDad** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:27 pm

So let's offend Buddhists in the name of chosen ignorance.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:28 pm

I can understand how guppy would be put in mind of tic-tac-toe.

And that's great that she can have that.

But twist this on its' side, right facing, left facing, dots, curves,

whatever, even though I know better, I still have the wrong,

awful thing come to the fore, I can't get away from it nor do I

really feel I should. I wouldn't tear up a beautiful mosaic tile floor,

if I saw it I might even be able to enjoy the beauty and workmanship.

Might.

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:37 pm

I'm distinguishing between the Hindu symbol I used and the tilted Nazi swastika, based on Nordic runes, which is quite distinct and (as everyone surely agrees) distasteful in anything but a historical context. The Hindu swastika has never been unemployable in India and it's time people recognized there's a difference instead of criticizing its continued use. Obviously it's a matter of opinion, obviously we're expressing different conclusions, I'm as grateful for RG's and val's as I am for the others here. The essential thing is that the Internet now has another discussion on the subject to which it can refer. Who knows, we may even get referenced one day.

Going by val's earlier signature, the thread has more to do with a dreadful rankling over past slights than is seemly. I've said all I intend to say about assorted swastika forms if that's alright with everyone, so perhaps this is a thread I'd do better to stay out of from now on. Maybe in another year I'll be shanghaied on yet another opportunist topic - I walked into this one quite unaware that memories ran so far back on the Internet.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:52 pm

spot;704766 wrote:

Going by val's earlier signature, the thread has more to do with a dreadful rankling over past slights than is seemly. I've said all I intend to say about assorted swastika forms if that's alright with everyone, so perhaps this is a thread I'd do better to stay out of from now on. Maybe in another year I'll be shanghaied on yet another opportunist topic - I walked into this one quite unaware that memories ran so far back on the Internet.

What a load of hooey!! Shaghaied my butt. This had nothing to do

with past slights as you so cutely call them. If ANYONE else had that

in their sig pic, I would have said the same thing as I did in my

original post.

The signature was a reference (obscure to most? Some?) to what I

said earlier in that post about being called worse than ignorant.

Unseemly dreadful rankling. HAHAHAHA!!

;):yh_rotfl:yh_youkid

guppy · Post by **guppy** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 4:20 pm

spot;704735 wrote: I do try not to, you know.

I'm content to pay attention to experts from more than one tradition. Here's the Editor-in-Chief of Hindu Jagat, Yatindra Bhatnagar, discussing the matter. It's on the basis of informed opinion like this that I'm prepared to take a stand on the issue.The most common is the traditional Hindu Swastika with straight standing character, slightly angled individual arms and four dots inside the four squarish designs. It symbolizes good, and the light and energy emanating from the Sun. It can’t be anything but good for the community and is used in religious ceremonies, prayers, and meditation, rituals and offerings. The word Swasti also denotes blessings for everyone, and not extermination of anyone.

In Buddhism, the symbol is used to depict the feet, or footprints of the Buddha, after the new religion was exported to the East from India as an off shoot of Hinduism. The Swastika symbol, was also used widely in the ancient world including the tribes of Native Indians and the Latin American areas where Maya culture, akin to Hindu culture and religion prevailed.

Hitler adopted Swastika as the symbol of the Nazi Party but with a left-tilted form. It is clearly different from the Hindu Swastika that has been used for thousands of years. Just because of Hitler’s misuse and making it the symbol of his Nazi Party, Swastika can not become a dirty, disgusting and derogatory symbol. It is extremely unfair to put a stigma to Hindu religious symbol that is widely respected and used at religious ceremonies.

http://www.hindujagat.com/index.html

cool spot..i learned something..i have been looking at the siggy every since you put it up..wondering what it symbolised..thanks

guppy · Post by **guppy** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 4:33 pm

Valerie..i am sorry you choose to see pain in the symbol..its a manmade form of art..and we each as individuals attach what we will to it..

in another sense..i have to bring this up..i associated alchohol..a symbol to me..with pain..infidelity..abuse.neglect..i do not ask people on this board to not talk about alchohol..if anything..i saw it as a chance to see another way..i used to wouldnt take a drop of alchohol..so much did i hate everything i associated with it..eventually i got a balance with it..to each his or her own..anything that bothers me that much..its a sign to me now its something for me to work on. to resolve within my self..:-4

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:01 pm

Oh brother.

guppy · Post by **guppy** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:14 pm

RedGlitter;704823 wrote: Oh brother.

group prayer?:p

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:25 pm

Well, spot, I don't see a thing wrong with your sig, and I'm a little disappointed that it wasn't present in your last post.

Did it remind me of the Nazi swastika? Sure. Was my mind open enough to realize that it was, in fact, something entirely different? Definitely.

I may be misinformed, since I read this a long time ago, but didn't Hitler take the Native American symbol for peace and reverse it? Isn't that how the Nazi swastika came about? Or am I thinking of something else?

Anyway, the Hindu symbol may be reminiscent of the Nazi swastika but the very fact of the matter is that it's not the Nazi swastika. Be offended all you want, but the issue you're offended about doesn't even exist.

spot, I hope I see your sig again. I found it enlightening and refreshing that the symbol was being used properly. But, of course, the negative nancies will find anything to squawk about if it doesn't appeal to their very sensitive "feelings."

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:29 pm

Guppy, it wasn't a CHOICE.

Don't you think I'd much rather be tra-la tra-la, sweetness and light

and freakin' tic-tac-toe?

I said earlier, you can't un-ring that bell. It is what it is, I see it the

way I do from YEARS of mental images coming at me.

To get this STRAIGHT... or try very hard to, I didn't ask spot to remove

it. I simply said what it seems to ME. I didn't sneak around back with

flying pm's. I did an up front post. I did actually try to see other ways

and stated that.

I don't see how I could possibly "work on" the way I feel about this thing.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:37 pm

valerie;704839 wrote:

I don't see how I could possibly "work on" the way I feel about this thing.

I don't see why we should have to. We've been told of the other meaning, but decades of teaching have drummed it into our heads that it's "the" Nazi symbol. That may be a shame but it's how it is for many people.

guppy · Post by **guppy** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:39 pm

valerie;704839 wrote: Guppy, it wasn't a CHOICE.

Don't you think I'd much rather be tra-la tra-la, sweetness and light

and freakin' tic-tac-toe?

I said earlier, you can't un-ring that bell. It is what it is, I see it the

way I do from YEARS of mental images coming at me.

To get this STRAIGHT... or try very hard to, I didn't ask spot to remove

it. I simply said what it seems to ME. I didn't sneak around back with

flying pm's. I did an up front post. I did actually try to see other ways

and stated that.

I don't see how I could possibly "work on" the way I feel about this thing.

my post wasmore for me..val..i remember when my sponser used to sendme to open aa meetings andthen askmelater what isaw..everytime i said a roomfull of ****..took me two years to get past that..untillthen..i wasnt ready to hear anything..

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:48 pm

valerie, I'm wondering why you felt the need to state your offense in the first place. What was the point? To simply state your disgust for the resemblance of the Nazi swastika? Well, you've done that. Is this conversation closed? Or do we all need to continue hashing it out?

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:57 pm

What's the problem Laney? You opened a thread you didn't like? Then open a different one.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:59 pm

laneybug;704843 wrote: valerie, I'm wondering why you felt the need to state your offense in the first place. What was the point? To simply state your disgust for the resemblance of the Nazi swastika? Well, you've done that. Is this conversation closed? Or do we all need to continue hashing it out?

Sigh.

Post number six I said offensive might have been the wrong word.

Okay?

This post:

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=11

Last 2 paragraphs should give a little hint as to why I did it.

This place is subtitled "Conversations of Life" in case you hadn't noticed,

the entire POINT is to hash stuff out.

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 8:04 pm

RedGlitter;704847 wrote: What's the problem Laney? You opened a thread you didn't like? Then open a different one.

I don't have a problem, Red. I'm simply engaging in conversation. Please don't tell me what do.

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 8:07 pm

valerie;704848 wrote: Sigh.

Post number six I said offensive might have been the wrong word.

Okay?

This post:

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=11

Last 2 paragraphs should give a little hint as to why I did it.

This place is subtitled "Conversations of Life" in case you hadn't noticed,

the entire POINT is to hash stuff out.

Alright. Fair enough. I disagree with you, but fair enough. You're certainly entitled to how you react to things. That's yours and is valid. I'm assuming, since you mentioned it earlier, that your point wasn't to have spot remove his sig or to make him feel bad. I'm assuming your point was to simply talk about how symbols can evoke different responses in different people. Am I right in that assumption?

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 8:12 pm

LaneyB

This conversation is not done

Spot posted a Nazi symbol to be ornery - I don't appreciate the symbol

Its not similar - it doesn't resemble nothing but NAZI

Val & All go to RED's thread - this NAZI Emblem is a roll over from another thread.

It is offensive

Patsy

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 8:48 pm

laneybug;704849 wrote: I don't have a problem, Red. I'm simply engaging in conversation. Please don't tell me what do.

I responded as I did Laney because I felt your comment to Valerie was rude.

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:07 pm

Patsy Warnick;704851 wrote: LaneyB

This conversation is not done

Spot posted a Nazi symbol to be ornery - I don't appreciate the symbol

Its not similar - it doesn't resemble nothing but NAZI

Val & All go to RED's thread - this NAZI Emblem is a roll over from another thread.

It is offensive

Patsy

It's entirely inaccurate to say that the swastika is nothing but a Nazi symbol. It has much more history and culture to it than that. Whether or not spot is using it in an offensive manner is not my call.

Check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

"The swastika (from Sanskrit svÃ¡stika स्वास्तिक ) is an equilateral cross with its arms bent at right angles, in either right-facing, or left-facing, forms. The term is derived from Sanskrit svasti, meaning well-being. The Thai greeting sawasdee is from the same root and carries the same implication.

Archaeological evidence of swastika-shaped ornaments dates from the Neolithic period. It has long been widely-used in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. Hindus often decorate the swastika with a dot in each quadrant. In India, it is common enough to be a part of several Devanagari fonts. It is also a symbol in the modern Unicode and is often imprinted on religious texts, marriage invitations, and decorations. It is used to mark religious flags in Jainism and Buddhist temples in Asia.

In 1920, the right-facing swastika was appropriated as a Nazi symbol, and since then has become a controversial motif. In the Western world, this usage is the most familiar.

The symbol occurs in other Asian, European, African and Native American cultures – sometimes as a geometrical motif and sometimes as a religious symbol."

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:11 pm

RedGlitter;704853 wrote: I responded as I did Laney because I felt your comment to Valerie was rude.

What don't you find rude?

I have faith enough in Valerie to be able to speak for herself. If she thinks I'm being rude to her, than fine. I can accept that from her. But I don't think she needs a peanut gallery to speak for her.

Tell me, what is this issue you have with me, anyway?

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:20 pm

Laney

Is that all you got out of my reply?

your want to critique my statements- I don't need a history lesson.

Val & I find the symbol insulting - the NAZI SWASTIKA means evil to me.

Yet on pg 33 you have to ask why?

You stated this is a controversial motif - I know where I stand.

Patsy

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:22 pm

laneybug;704855 wrote: What don't you find rude?

I have faith enough in Valerie to be able to speak for herself. If she thinks I'm being rude to her, than fine. I can accept that from her. But I don't think she needs a peanut gallery to speak for her.

Tell me, what is this issue you have with me, anyway?

I wasn't speaking for her. I was speaking for me. You seem to want to challenge everything and everyone. What is that about?

I find it to be you with the issue. More and more of late.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:23 pm

Laney

Can't you have a conversation with calling others names.??

Your welcome to reply with your opinion - but why all the labels

ignorant - KKK - peanut gallery ??

How old are you? Because this isn't working for me

Patsy

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:26 pm

Patsy Warnick;704856 wrote: Laney

Is that all you got out of my reply?

your want to critique my statements- I don't need a history lesson.

Val & I find the symbol insulting - the NAZI SWASTIKA means evil to me.

Yet on pg 33 you have to ask why?

You stated this is a controversial motif - I know where I stand.

Patsy

Ok. It means evil to you. Understandable. I get that.

I was under the assumption that this was an open discussion of the meaning and controversy of symbols. I misunderstood.

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:29 pm

Patsy Warnick;704858 wrote: Laney

Can't you have a conversation with calling others names.??

Your welcome to reply with your opinion - but why all the labels

ignorant - KKK - peanut gallery ??

How old are you? Because this isn't working for me

Patsy

I never called anyone the KKK. I said one of Red's comments reeked of white supremacy. That was my opinion, and as you've stated, I'm entitled to that.

As for calling others names, take a look at some of Red's posts. She isn't exactly what I would call "gentle" with other people.

I'm 22. As if that makes a hill sh*t of difference. But, of course, if I'm young than I must be a complete moron.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:36 pm

Laney

let me ask you this - say you have a young son @ 3 to 4 yrs old

would you dress him in a t-shirt (in public) with the Nasi Swastika printed on the front of it?

I'd think you'd parade him around tethered like a balloon - after all we already had the history lesson.

You never made a reply to the rudness - you very assertive & aggressive in the approach to the subject - thats not a bad thing.

its the comparison to being in the peanut gallery - being ignorant ..

why do you feel thats appreciated ?

Patsy

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:38 pm

RedGlitter;704857 wrote: I wasn't speaking for her. I was speaking for me. You seem to want to challenge everything and everyone. What is that about?

I find it to be you with the issue. More and more of late.

I like a good debate, that's all. I like open conversation. So what if I challenge? That's how people grow, learn, and exchange new ideas. As if you don't challenge others.

Anyway, the whole thing is pointless. There is too much sensitivity and "you're hurting my feelings" by being rude bullsh*t.

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:44 pm

Patsy Warnick;704861 wrote: Laney

let me ask you this - say you have a young son @ 3 to 4 yrs old

would you dress him in a t-shirt (in public) with the Nasi Swastika printed on the front of it?

I'd think you'd parade him around tethered like a balloon - after all we already had the history lesson.

No, I wouldn't. All of this is taken grossly out of context. I'm in America. Most Americans see that and think Nazi, Neo-Nazi, KKK, skinheads, whatever.

You never made a reply to the rudness - you very assertive & aggressive in the approach to the subject - thats not a bad thing.

its the comparison to being in the peanut gallery - being ignorant ..

why do you feel thats appreciated ?

Patsy

What kind of reply would you like? Admit I'm rude? Sure. In your opinion, I'm rude. I can deal with that.

My comments are probably not any more appreciated. Never assumed they were.

What makes you think your comments about parading a young child in America with a Nazi swastika on his chest like a damn balloon is appreciated? Quid pro quo, I guess.

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:47 pm

To display a Hindu symbol on an internet forum that reaches many countries of the world is an entirely different matter altogether. It is not the same as parading a young child around in the Nazi swastika. To me, there is a fundamental difference. To you, there may not be. That's fine.