WWII vet needs to get over himself.

When I first saw the picture I was SHOCKED!!!

Actually no I wans’t, but apparently I was the only one. A couple of years in the Far East is evidently the difference between being able to tell the difference on sight between a Nazi swastika and a positive Hindu religious symbol.

Finding some guy who’s dad fought in WWII and getting him to on camera that he’s offending is just plain bullshit. He’s offfended because hes ignorant. That is not the fault of the guy who painted it on his roof. A little education and a stong cup of tea is all thats needed here, not a bloody lynch mob.

Aaron (who should damn well know better) has jumped in with cries of ban symbols of peace and love like some jack booted gaulighter – I’m happy to change that description the second you acknowledge your error Aaron – and Blair has a poll on what is more Nazi. A Hindu symbol (also used in Roman times btw) or Reich minister… I’m sorry “councillor” Von Bhatnagar’s reaction.


4 Responses to WWII vet needs to get over himself.

  1. Murray – a little more learning on the issue would serve you better.

    The original symbol on the roof was a swastika. It has since been modified heavily by Mr Gupta to not resemble the Nazi symbol.

    As someone of Indian descent, I would put it to you that even Indians who mean well ought to be aware that a swastika ought to cause offence to many people, particularly after living here for 8 years. That’s how I feel, and how my father, raised in the Hindu faith, also feels. Mind you, we’ve had the advantage of living in NZ longer.

    Lastly, you will need to amend your post anyway regarding your spelling of “gaulighter” – it’s spelt “gauleiter”. Forgive me if I am implying you are ignorant.

  2. llew says:

    Oddly enough, I knew it was a benign hindu symbol too. Must be all those Dennis Wheatley books I read as a kid.

  3. Murray says:

    Aaron you remain wrong, you started wrong and stayed there.

    The origional symbol had the dots which no nazi symbol ever did. As some of Indian descent I fully expected you to be aware of the difference.

    Regardless of the symbol it was altered to aviod confussion. There’s a huge world of difference between your intollerence and my dyslexia if we’re going to decide which of us qualifies for the ignorant award.

    I’m assuming for your banning asumption that you will be standing for Labour in future.

    Llew evidently did not suffer from your selective knowledge.

    I would also ask on the basis of your contrived offence taking where you stand on the Japanese flag as this was also a symbol of a particularly vile empire who waged war on civilians in a manner that made the SS look like boy scouts.

    They still fly that flag.

    Also pelase let me know which particular legislation protects you from being offended.

  4. Alisa says:

    Murray, I am with you on this, as I think no symbols should be banned, however offensive. But I can see why the veteran would be pissed – I know I would be. There are things beyond the rational, after all. Also, this is weird, no?:

    He says he had no idea it had another meaning in western culture – as the mark of the Nazi regime – when he painted it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: