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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

German Politician charged for Auschwitz Tattoo

  • 16-12-2015 1:56pm
    #1
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/german-politician-charged-over-auschwitz-death-camp-tattoo-711713.html

    Is this going a bit far? A German politician is being charged because he has a tattoo of the Auschwitz camp on his back. The authorities say it is illegal to have public displays of Nazism.

    While distasteful to most people, what's the difference in displaying a tattoo of Auschwitz on your back or pictures of Auschwitz on book covers, or even pictures at the Auschwitz site itself?


«1345

Comments

  • #2
    SEPT 23 1989
    Registered Users Posts: 43,024 ✭✭✭✭SEPT 23 1989


    Did he expect it for free?


  • #3
    Dirty Dingus McGee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Dirty Dingus McGee


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/german-politician-charged-over-auschwitz-death-camp-tattoo-711713.html

    Is this going a bit far? A German politician is being charged because he has a tattoo of the Auschwitz camp on his back. The authorities say it is illegal to have public displays of Nazism.

    While distasteful to most people, what's the difference in displaying a tattoo of Auschwitz on your back or pictures of Auschwitz on book covers, or even pictures at the Auschwitz site itself?

    Only a person trying to glorify something would gte a tatoo of it. So yes it is different from pictures of it appearing in books etc.


  • #4
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,395 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Sounds like a right Nazi piece of work.


  • #5
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    ****ing nazis. Will they ever just **** off!



    image http://bilder.bild.de/fotos-skaliert/tattoo-49568344-43677294/2,w=559,c=0.bild.jpg


  • #6
    The King of Moo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭The King of Moo


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/german-politician-charged-over-auschwitz-death-camp-tattoo-711713.html


    While distasteful to most people, what's the difference in displaying a tattoo of Auschwitz on your back or pictures of Auschwitz on book covers, or even pictures at the Auschwitz site itself?

    Having a picture of a concentration camp on a book cover just tells you that the book is about concentration camps.

    Having a tattoo of a concentration camp says you're a Nazi.
    People don't usually get tattoos of things they don't like.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    I think it's fair to say he's not doing it to say how bad the camps were.


  • #8
    Derek Cuddly Millipede
    Posts: 50,630 ✭✭✭✭ Derek Cuddly Millipede


    biko wrote: »
    ****ing nazis. Will they ever just **** off!



    image http://bilder.bild.de/fotos-skaliert/tattoo-49568344-43677294/2,w=559,c=0.bild.jpg

    He's more of a Fazi.


  • #9
    Samaris
    Registered Users Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Samaris


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/german-politician-charged-over-auschwitz-death-camp-tattoo-711713.html

    Is this going a bit far? A German politician is being charged because he has a tattoo of the Auschwitz camp on his back. The authorities say it is illegal to have public displays of Nazism.

    While distasteful to most people, what's the difference in displaying a tattoo of Auschwitz on your back or pictures of Auschwitz on book covers, or even pictures at the Auschwitz site itself?

    I would say it's drastically inappropriate for a politician of all people, who, in theory, are supposed to represent their people and from an outside perspective, act as a representative of their country.

    I'd also say that the difference is context. If he also gets a load of text talking about Auschwitz on his back, grando, but as is one can only guess at the thousand words the picture is giving.


  • #10
    GAAman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭GAAman


    I hate Illinois nazis :cool:


  • #11
    c_man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,436 ✭✭✭c_man


    Another bather took a photo of the tattoo, which also carried the slogan from the Buchenwald concentration camp’s gate – “Jedem das Seine” or “To each his own”

    I can see why people are outraged, he should really change it to read "To each their own"


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    asherbassad
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,869 ✭✭✭asherbassad


    Gas man.


  • #13
    Skylinehead
    Registered Users Posts: 11,690 ✭✭✭✭Skylinehead


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    . The authorities say it is illegal to have public displays of Nazism
    No, the law says it is illegal to have public displays of Nazism. Not the "authorities". I'm all for free speech, but given their uncomfortable past and desire for Nazism to be killed off, I can see why the law exists.


  • #14
    JupiterKid
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,557 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    From reading that article, I was not in the least bit surprised to see that he comes from the former East Germany.

    There does seem to be a hardcore of far right wing sentiment in the former East Germany. The politician in question is too young to even remember the fall of the Berlin Wall.


  • #15
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    That is not ok. He may do what he wants with his own body.


  • #16
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,174 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    That is not ok. He may do what he wants with his own body.

    No he may not. In particular, in Germany, he may not use it to display symbols associated with the Nazi regime or their actions. This is especially so given this man's political affiliations. The Germans, being a right-thinking and decent people, do not consider this kind of thing appropriate or acceptable.


  • #17
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    jimgoose wrote: »
    No he may not. In particular, in Germany, he may not use it to display symbols associated with the Nazi regime or their actions. This is especially so given this man's political affiliations. The Germans, being a right-thinking and decent people, do not consider this kind of thing appropriate or acceptable.

    I don't think the tattoo is appropriate but when the Government step in and say it's a crime to have a drawing on your back, I think that's a bit far.

    Is every single Nazi symbol illegal?


  • #18
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,542 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I don't think the tattoo is appropriate but when the Government step in and say it's a crime to have a drawing on your back, I think that's a bit far.


    It's not illegal to have a drawing/this tattoo on your back, it's illegal to display it.


  • #19
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    jimgoose wrote: »
    No he may not. In particular, in Germany, he may not use it to display symbols associated with the Nazi regime or their actions. This is especially so given this man's political affiliations. The Germans, being a right-thinking and decent people, do not consider this kind of thing appropriate or acceptable.


    I think that's pretty fascist.


  • #20
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,174 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    I think that's pretty fascist.

    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.


  • #21
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    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.

    That some chip you have there.

    I like government kept out of bodily affairs. I'd like to see the tattooist's hands broken by other tattooists


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,174 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    ...Is every single Nazi symbol illegal?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strafgesetzbuch_section_86a


  • #23
    MRnotlob606
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,642 ✭✭✭MRnotlob606


    Not a happy camper.


  • #24
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,174 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    That some chip you have there.

    I like government kept out of bodily affairs. I'd like to see the tattooist's hands broken by other tattooists

    I like people's bodily affairs kept out of my view. Particularly when the aforementioned bodily affairs include displaying symbols like that.


  • #25
    Carpo II
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭Carpo II


    jimgoose wrote: »
    No he may not. In particular, in Germany, he may not use it to display symbols associated with the Nazi regime or their actions. This is especially so given this man's political affiliations. The Germans, being a right-thinking and decent people, do not consider this kind of thing appropriate or acceptable.

    Ah yes. Have 'Right-Thinking and Decent' people determine what its legal for someone else to do with their body, that always works out so well. So who gets to decide what counts as 'Right-Thinking and Decent' people again?


  • #26
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    jimgoose wrote: »
    I like people's bodily affairs kept out of my view. Particularly when the aforementioned bodily affairs include displaying symbols like that.

    I thought this might be about what you find acceptable to look at alright.


  • #27
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,174 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    I thought this might be about what you find acceptable to look at alright.

    It has nothing to do with what I find acceptable to look at, you'll find that this whole tale pertains to Germany. Strafgesetzbuch section 86a applies there, not here. :D


  • #28
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    jimgoose wrote: »
    I like people's bodily affairs kept out of my view. Particularly when the aforementioned bodily affairs include displaying symbols like that.

    Why? It eliminates all of this "I wonder if yer man is just a bit right wing or a Nazi?" crap.


  • #29
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,174 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    Nodin wrote: »
    Why? It eliminates all of this "I wonder if yer man is just a bit right wing or a Nazi?" crap.

    Well, let him wear hot-pants and a tattoo of Donald Trump on his arse-cheek.


  • #30
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    jimgoose wrote: »
    Well, let him wear hot-pants and a tattoo of Donald Trump on his arse-cheek.

    Not the point. My time for the shower is fairly limited as is well known, but he should be entitled to put that stuff on his own skin. Rather undermines any denials he might make.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    c_man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,436 ✭✭✭c_man


    So if you have a swastika tattoo on your face, you would have to wear a balaclava? And maybe shades too.


Advertisement