Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

German Politician charged for Auschwitz Tattoo

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,553 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Medusa22 wrote: »
    However, I think that every idiot should be able to get whatever they want tattooed on their body and it shouldn't be illegal, regardless of how offensive or distasteful it may be. I don't think any government should dictate what a person can or cannot have tattooed on their body.

    The government doesn't dictate it though - him having the tattoo is not illegal.
    Medusa22 wrote: »
    and I understand why people find this tattoo very upsetting and offensive, and it is designed to be provocative, and I suppose you could argue that this guy put it on display at the pool, and perhaps he should have kept it hidden.
    'you could argue'? It is the only argument - that is what the prosecutor has charged him for.

    As I asked earlier, if tattoos are 'different', do you not think that creates a loophole by which such provocative images or symbols,otherwise illegal to display on a t-shirt or flag or whatever, could be legally displayed?


    I actually think that charging the tattooist, as bodice ripper supports, would be far more dictatorial in terms of controlling what tattoos people can get on their body that what the current law is.


  • Options
    #93
    Medusa22
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,400 ✭✭✭Medusa22


    osarusan wrote: »
    The government doesn't dictate it though - him having the tattoo is not illegal.

    So, having the tattoo itself is not illegal, it's the displaying of the tattoo in public that is?
    osarusan wrote: »
    As I asked earlier, if tattoos are 'different', do you not think that creates a loophole by which such provocative images or symbols,otherwise illegal to display on a t-shirt or flag or whatever, could be legally displayed?

    I think it does create a loophole, though wearing a t-shirt and getting a tattoo are two very different things, getting a tattoo costs time, money, it can be painful and it is a permanent fixture - wearing a t-shirt doesn't require as much dedication so many people are far more inclined to do the former than the latter. Having said that though, I also think that provocative images on t-shirts or flags etc shouldn't be illegal, regardless of whether the images are offensive or not.


  • Options
    #94
    Fleawuss
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭Fleawuss


    He should go the whole hog: done the tattoo so may as well try the gas for himself.


  • Options
    #95
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,553 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Medusa22 wrote: »
    So, having the tattoo itself is not illegal, it's the displaying of the tattoo in public that is?
    With respect, I'd say that has been pointed out at least half a dozen times.

    Yes, public display with the intent of incitement/promoting Naziism.
    Medusa22 wrote: »
    I think it does create a loophole, though wearing a t-shirt and getting a tattoo are two very different things, getting a tattoo costs time, money, it can be painful and it is a permanent fixture - wearing a t-shirt doesn't require as much dedication so many people are far more inclined to do the former than the latter.
    I'm not sure why people who are dedicated enough to such a cause/ideology/etc to get a painful, expensive, permanent fixture on their body can use its very permanence as a loophole.


  • Options
    #96
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,074 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    jimgoose wrote: »
    I think you know well how raw and upsetting all that business still is in Germany, and are trying to be all edgy and left-field for kicks.
    "Raw"? 70 years on? That's more like two generations of keep em guilty craw thumbing than anything. If I were a young German who had nothing to do with any of that I'd be getting a bit ticked off about it at this stage.

    IMH censorship of this sort is more damaging than it is not. It increases curiosity about the forbidden subject for a start. It stops open questioning, which then leads to behind closed doors questioning which all too often leads to daft conspiracy theories and nearly always denial and it's bad for history as the events become pickled in an Accepted Truth(™) and details of the narrative can be lost, or even plain incorrect.

    The other advantage to not censoring this kinda thing is as in this case it shows you who are the muppets, which is always good. LOL at "Fazi" :pac:

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,074 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Canadel wrote: »
    The banality of evil.
    Well I'd draw to a halt before we got to evil, but yep the irony of forbidden subjects is lost on this kinda thinking.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #98
    Medusa22
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,400 ✭✭✭Medusa22


    osarusan wrote: »
    With respect, I'd say that has been pointed out at least half a dozen times.

    Yes, public display with the intent of incitement/promoting Naziism.

    I did read the thread but as far as I was aware I thought it would be illegal to have the tattoo in the first place, regardless of it being on display, just that it happened to be seen when he went for a swim, so apologies about that.
    osarusan wrote: »
    I'm not sure why people who are dedicated enough to such a cause/ideology/etc to get a painful, expensive, permanent fixture on their body can use its very permanence as a loophole.

    Like I said, I also believe that images or symbols on t-shirts or flags should
    not be prohibited, regardless of how offensive they are. How would you feel if he had gotten this tattoo but had never displayed it in public, do you think he should still be prosecuted if it came to light that he had such a tattoo, or is the main issue for you that the tattoo was on display and therefore could be seen as incitement of hatred/ promotion of Nazi ideology?


  • Options
    #99
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,074 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    The Backwards Man wrote: »
    It's a tattoo of Auschwitz with the phrase 'you get what's coming to you' under it. And people are defending his right to display it? Classy, real classy.
    In a free society it is up to that society to defend anyone's right to be a complete gobshíte, as far as symbolism goes in any event. As I said it also make spotting the morons an easier task.
    The Backwards Man wrote: »
    Which is worse, rape or an earthquake?
    As a single event clearly an earthquake. Potential to kill, injure and leave homeless many thousands of people.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #100
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,553 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Medusa22 wrote: »
    Like I said, I also believe that images or symbols on t-shirts or flags should
    not be prohibited, regardless of how offensive they are.
    I don't have any problem with that.

    I'm posting about the inconsistency (as I see it) of arguing that a tattoo is 'different'.


  • Options
    #101
    Medusa22
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,400 ✭✭✭Medusa22


    osarusan wrote: »
    I don't have any problem with that.

    I'm posting about the inconsistency (as I see it) of arguing that a tattoo is 'different'.

    I agree with you that if a tattoo cannot be considered part of selection of banned symbols then this would be a loophole in legislation, however I don't agree with the legislation in the first place and I don't think it should apply to anything, not just tattoos, but I do believe that a tattoo is ''different'' because it does become part of a person's body.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Wibbs wrote: »
    "Raw"? 70 years on? That's more like two generations of keep em guilty craw thumbing than anything. If I were a young German who had nothing to do with any of that I'd be getting a bit ticked off about it at this stage.

    IMH censorship of this sort is more damaging than it is not. It increases curiosity about the forbidden subject for a start. It stops open questioning, which then leads to behind closed doors questioning which all too often leads to daft conspiracy theories and nearly always denial and it's bad for history as the events become pickled in an Accepted Truth(™) and details of the narrative can be lost, or even plain incorrect.

    The other advantage to not censoring this kinda thing is as in this case it shows you who are the muppets, which is always good. LOL at "Fazi" :pac:

    Survivors are still alive Wibbs and children and grand children would know all the stories that are passed on.

    Your ordinary German has nothing to feel ashamed about? Why would they. Its guys like this that do.

    Again it isn't just a Swastika, it's a very specific tattoo, as somebody posted earlier, this isn't just some Illinois Nazi!

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #103
    Skylinehead
    Registered Users Posts: 11,690 ✭✭✭✭Skylinehead


    Wibbs wrote: »
    As a single event clearly an earthquake. Potential to kill, injure and leave homeless many thousands of people.
    Not if it's the famed Donegal earthquake of 2012 :pac:

    Off topic (but on topic), any ideas where I can get a Stukas Jericho-Trompete? I want to replace my horn with one and terrify the world :D


  • Options
    #104
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,029 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    OP have you ever thought you may in fact be, a Nazi?

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #105
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,074 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    K-9 wrote: »
    Again it isn't just a Swastika, it's a very specific tattoo, as somebody posted earlier, this isn't just some Illinois Nazi!
    K I have no issue with the negative reaction to this moron's expanding back fat tat. I share it. I do take issue with the idea of legally banning symbols and that whole German law itself.
    Skylinehead wrote: »
    Off topic (but on topic), any ideas where I can get a Stukas Jericho-Trompete? I want to replace my horn with one and terrify the world :D
    You're gonna need one helluva big car. The siren was driven by a propeller a couple of feet across on one of the Stuka undercarriage struts, so kinda unwieldily. :D Later versions of the aircraft were usually not fitted with them as they caused notable drag. They also used to weld lengths of metal tube to the bombs themselves so they'd make an eerie whistling sound on the way down. There ya go weld some copper pipe to your car doors. Job done.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #106
    PucaMama
    Registered Users Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭PucaMama


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    With skulls and Kalashnikovs? It's pretty offensive. I was asking where the cut off point for acceptability is. As it happens, I won't tattoo either.

    i dont care what you do personally, but dont be comparing the tricolour with guns or not to a nazi symbol


  • Options
    #107
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    I think tattoos are different because they are part of your body.

    But as it happens, I support people's right to wear offensive shirts and wave offensive flags. Not least because I like my arseholes up front where I can see them.
    bodice ripper wrote: »
    Sounds like back peddling to me.

    I have friends with swastika tattoos. Do you think they ought to be charged?

    Yep. Real close.


  • Options
    #108
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    Celtic knots *are* recognised white power symbols worn by white supremacists though. So where is the cut off? Or do you think it's right here with the one instance?

    Are they :eek: I thought they were more for Americans that wanted to be hard and are inordinately proud of their Irish granddad.

    Like if your trying to stop Facists symbology where do you draw the line, do you spend a couple of minutes asking probing questions about sport and politics to work out if the lad getting a Celtic Cross really likes the GAA symbol/Irishness or is he a Stormfronter.


  • Options
    #109
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,465 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Is That a Nazi Tramp stamp ?


  • Options
    #110
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    PucaMama wrote: »
    i dont care what you do personally, but dont be comparing the tricolour with guns or not to a nazi symbol

    Or what?

    In my opinion, they are on the same spectrum of bull**** political posturing, violence glorifying, instantly regrettable, job blocking tattoo.


  • Options
    #111
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Is That a Nazi Tramp stamp ?

    I wanted to point out that it was a Camp Stamp, but I thought I would be evicerated...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    Yep. Real close.

    Feel free to read the thread.


  • Options
    #113
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    RDM_83 again wrote: »
    Are they :eek: I thought they were more for Americans that wanted to be hard and are inordinately proud of their Irish granddad.

    Like if your trying to stop Facists symbology where do you draw the line, do you spend a couple of minutes asking probing questions about sport and politics to work out if the lad getting a Celtic Cross really likes the GAA symbol/Irishness or is he a Stormfronter.

    Context. If that person is already sporting white power tattoos. And it tends to be specific, usually very simple, crosses or knots. And it tends to be an American thing, the rest of the world gets Celtic because they like it.


  • Options
    #114
    PucaMama
    Registered Users Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭PucaMama


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    Or what?

    In my opinion, they are on the same spectrum of bull**** political posturing, violence glorifying, instantly regrettable, job blocking tattoo.

    :rolleyes:

    yeah thats your opinion. do what you want with it. but its still nothing near a nazi symbol and what it stands for is nothing near what you say it is.


  • Options
    #115
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    PucaMama wrote: »
    :rolleyes:

    yeah thats your opinion. do what you want with it. but its still nothing near a nazi symbol and what it stands for is nothing near what you say it is.

    Tell me, what does a skull with a beret, a tricolour and a Kalashnikov tattoo stand for?


  • Options
    #116
    Skylinehead
    Registered Users Posts: 11,690 ✭✭✭✭Skylinehead


    Wibbs wrote: »
    K I have no issue with the negative reaction to this moron's expanding back fat tat. I share it. I do take issue with the idea of legally banning symbols and that whole German law itself.

    You're gonna need one helluva big car. The siren was driven by a propeller a couple of feet across on one of the Stuka undercarriage struts, so kinda unwieldily. :D Later versions of the aircraft were usually not fitted with them as they caused notable drag. They also used to weld lengths of metal tube to the bombs themselves so they'd make an eerie whistling sound on the way down. There ya go weld some copper pipe to your car doors. Job done.

    Crap. Scratch that idea, I'm just going to cut the wings off one and drive it instead!


  • Options
    #117
    PucaMama
    Registered Users Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭PucaMama


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    Tell me, what does a skull with a beret, a tricolour and a Kalashnikov tattoo stand for?

    if i had it on my body it would stand for "this is the tattoo i want mind your own business".


  • Options
    #118
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    PucaMama wrote: »
    if i had it on my body it would stand for "this is the tattoo i want mind your own business".

    It's my business by definition if you ask me to tattoo it on you.

    You'll note I said earlier in the thread that I believe people have a right to sport anything they like.

    Don't want to say what a tattoo like that stands for though, do you?


  • Options
    #119
    PucaMama
    Registered Users Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭PucaMama


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    It's my business by definition if you ask me to tattoo it on you.

    You'll note I said earlier in the thread that I believe people have a right to sport anything they like.

    Don't want to say what a tattoo like that stands for though, do you?

    its your business to do the tattooing. i havnt once had to explain any tattoo i got and not all of mine are little cute tattoos either.

    why should i engage you on that topic? we are so obviously miles apart in opinion


  • Options
    #120
    endacl
    Registered Users Posts: 22,233 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    Tell me, what does a skull with a beret, a tricolour and a Kalashnikov tattoo stand for?

    'The owner of this tattoo is a bellend'?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    PucaMama
    Registered Users Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭PucaMama


    endacl wrote: »
    'The owner of this tattoo is a bellend'?

    a lot of people would say that about the owner of ANY tattoo. im sure the other poster wont be agreeing with them. :rolleyes:


Advertisement