The term "PC" should be renamed

[Beanz]

I don't think you should ban anything, but if you can not see the difference between a flag that the German people themselves do not want to be associated with, and a flag that represents a country, then you are not really interested in having a debate.

[Beanz]

They twist language so that even dissent becomes terrorism, yet government creates terrorism!


So now that this is understood then perhaps some can see that many of those who turn simply disagreement or the ability to be offended into an automatic assumption that the person who voices this dissent, is being politically correct, are just as guilty of twisting language themsleves. Behind a keyboard people get a sense of immortality and invulnerability in which to admit a flaw in ones argument, a false supposition, or a error of judgement is seen as a weakness. I am as guilty of it as anybody else and it can soon become a war of egos. This though is a forum about boxing and martial arts, with some non boxing boards provided courtesy of the Guv up there behind the curtain twiddling his golden locks and scratching his goaty beard. It is not our own personal blog or website and so common courtesy dictates that restraint must sometimes be used. There has been a huge amount of leeway and freedom shown and though personal insults amongst the Brits are sometime missed by those not living here, seem to have been there since day one. It's banter, what blokes do.

That said the general public who end up here should not be alienated by huge sweeping generalisations and stuff that is offensive for the sake of it. There is a time and a place.


Right now you may throw a stool through the window and let the punch ups resume

[Gandalf]

That was a very good quote. Surely I don't need to break it down for you.

[walrus]

That was a very good quote. Surely I don't need to break it down for you.

That actually was a good quote, I didn't even notice it until it was in bold. Also, your theory is worthy of being on one of those conspiracy docs.

[Beanz]

That was a very good quote. Surely I don't need to break it down for you.

[TitoFan]

Nazi flags should be displayed in museums and shown in documentaries.
Other than that it has no practical, constructive use whatsoever.
Its being deployed in public places or private property where it can be seen by others and deemed offensive should be prohibited.
My opinion and I'll continue to stand by it.

Have a nice day.

[El Kabong]

Nazi flags should be displayed in museums and shown in documentaries.
Other than that it has no practical, constructive use whatsoever.
Its being deployed in public places or private property where it can be seen by others and deemed offensive should be prohibited.
My opinion and I'll continue to stand by it.

Have a nice day.

Alright well that leads me (just playing Devil's Advocate here) to ask....

"How much offense does something have to cause in order for it to be grounds for removal?"

....is there a way to quantify offense? Or is it qualitative and it's simply a matter of how many folks find it offensive?

Anyway, the Supreme Court precedent in 'The National Socialist Party of America vs Skokie, Illinois' flies in the face of your beliefs. I mean I would like for people to abide by the Golden Rule, but some folks are just assholes for no other reason than they want to be and they like everyone else in this country are allowed to express themselves.

Free Speech is something I just figure that people know and accept, but apparently that concept is more difficult than I thought....it does involve lots of patience, mental clarity, and a great deal of restraint.

[Beanz]

Nazi flags should be displayed in museums and shown in documentaries.
Other than that it has no practical, constructive use whatsoever.
Its being deployed in public places or private property where it can be seen by others and deemed offensive should be prohibited.
My opinion and I'll continue to stand by it.

Have a nice day.

Alright well that leads me (just playing Devil's Advocate here) to ask....

"How much offense does something have to cause in order for it to be grounds for removal?"

....is there a way to quantify offense? Or is it qualitative and it's simply a matter of how many folks find it offensive?

Anyway, the Supreme Court precedent in 'The National Socialist Party of America vs Skokie, Illinois' flies in the face of your beliefs. I mean I would like for people to abide by the Golden Rule, but some folks are just assholes for no other reason than they want to be and they like everyone else in this country are allowed to express themselves.

Free Speech is something I just figure that people know and accept, but apparently that concept is more difficult than I thought....it does involve lots of patience, mental clarity, and a great deal of restraint.

It's no good banning anything. Know your enemy. Far right groups have threatened to March all over Europe in places heavily populated by Jewish Holocaust survivors like Golders Green in London and usually they do not turn up or a group of thirty or so are met by hundreds of counter demonstrators. In my younger days I marched with the anti-nazi league in London, Birmingham, Glasgow, Milan, etc and it was important to stand up to bully boys ( even if that meant throwing a few punches if they tried to intimidate and attack, pacifism rarely works) and to show that when they attack minorities that the underdogs will stick together in solidarity. When Mosely and the British Union of Facists marched in 1936 the Police allowed it but the few thousand that turned up in the battle of Cable street in the East End were met not just by the large Jewish Community there, but also the Irish, Trade Unionists, Working class dockers and even housewives. About 100,000 people it is estimated, all united and turned over trucks etc and all though the Police surrounded and protected Mosely and the fascists to protect their right to march, Irish Catholic housewives emptied chamber pots and bowls of old vegetables onto them.