I'm sure you already know about this....

http://abcnews.go.com/International/horticultural-hate-mystery-forest-swastikas/story?id=19588288#.UdmHcawsaSo

And what is up with the Talent Scout badges? You are a rock star of the obscure!

...gotta have me that swastika fan now

@mintbbb No no! Watch the videos FFS, before you call dupeof on your own stuff! They're different, some different shots, this one is much more edited (swastika at the beginning, zoom-in on yawning face etc.) And the other one was doing so well, too!

Definitely not going to agree with your moral assessment of the act, but I was also surprised to see Coke put "Peace" tagging in an advertisement and label it as the work of a peaceful warrior. Somebody clearly didn't get the corporatist memo on suppressing "free" acts of expression.

But of course, they did include the label "harmless soldier" which could just as easily be "offensive" to those peace warriors. Guess it cuts both ways.

Oh thanks baby killer. Thanks for destroying my building with "smart" bombs. Is Coke going to pay for that?

Using a tank would've been cheaper lol
>> ^jjw001:

Oh thanks graffiti vandal. Thanks for defacing my building with "Peace". Is Coke going to pay for that?

A swastika would've been cheaper to remove lol

Oh thanks graffiti vandal. Thanks for defacing my building with "Peace". Is Coke going to pay for that?

A swastika would've been cheaper to remove lol

Oh man this is ironic. I've never seen the Celtic cross being used that way before. For Irish and Scottish Gaelics the Celtic cross is just a Celtic cross, symbolizing their religion and culture. While the Hooligans in Poland are using it as a symbol of racial supremacy, kind of like how the Swastika from India came to be known as a Nazi symbol, which also changes meaning in different cultures as in Hinduism it's a good luck charm, while in buddhist context it symbolizes circle of life or eternity.

Possibly not, he'd have to get more scars to hide it. When I say "an unrecognisable mess", I mean his swastika, not his whole face. He's not going to win any beauty contests but it's better than what would have happened to him if the Basterds hadn't intervened, getting blown up in a theatre or if he's lucky, spending his life running from Nazi hunters.

(What's up with quotes? Videosift seems to be mucking them up.)

>> ^alien_concept:

Were skin grafts that great back in the 40s? If he had to scar his whole face up, that'd still be terrible for a character like him

>> ^Quboid:
>> ^alien_concept:
>> ^Quboid:
>> ^kymbos:
I watched this film again recently, having absolutely loved it the first time, and found myself enjoying it less than I expected. Mainly because of the excessive use of the 'person is dead / no they're not not they're really just pretending' trick, which I thought was a bit cheap. It happens at least twice at key points in the film (the woman in the bar fight scene, and then the German war hero in the cinema scene).
Don't get me wrong - Tarantino is a God, and the suspense he creates in scenes is brilliant, and the Jew Hunter was pure awesome - but there were a few bits that I found a bit cheap on second viewing. I don't think it hangs together as a film as well as Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs.
So there.

Spoilers
This bugged me but what really annoyed me is this: what did the Basterds actually achieve? The only difference they made to the big ending is that they helped the main baddie! Landa (Christoph Waltz, in a superb performance) to survived, and got a nice life in the U.S. because of them screwing up the assassination attempt, at the cost of some plastic surgery. They were counter productive!

Survive with a fat swastika on his head

That could be fixed with plastic surgery, or if that wasn't available, he could get more slices in his face to change it into an unrecognisable mess. Claim he was hit by shrapnel while saving children from Nazis.
.

>> ^Quboid:

>> ^alien_concept:
>> ^Quboid:
>> ^kymbos:
I watched this film again recently, having absolutely loved it the first time, and found myself enjoying it less than I expected. Mainly because of the excessive use of the 'person is dead / no they're not not they're really just pretending' trick, which I thought was a bit cheap. It happens at least twice at key points in the film (the woman in the bar fight scene, and then the German war hero in the cinema scene).
Don't get me wrong - Tarantino is a God, and the suspense he creates in scenes is brilliant, and the Jew Hunter was pure awesome - but there were a few bits that I found a bit cheap on second viewing. I don't think it hangs together as a film as well as Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs.
So there.

Spoilers
This bugged me but what really annoyed me is this: what did the Basterds actually achieve? The only difference they made to the big ending is that they helped the main baddie! Landa (Christoph Waltz, in a superb performance) to survived, and got a nice life in the U.S. because of them screwing up the assassination attempt, at the cost of some plastic surgery. They were counter productive!

Survive with a fat swastika on his head

That could be fixed with plastic surgery, or if that wasn't available, he could get more slices in his face to change it into an unrecognisable mess. Claim he was hit by shrapnel while saving children from Nazis.


Were skin grafts that great back in the 40s? If he had to scar his whole face up, that'd still be terrible for a character like him.

>> ^alien_concept:

>> ^Quboid:
>> ^kymbos:
I watched this film again recently, having absolutely loved it the first time, and found myself enjoying it less than I expected. Mainly because of the excessive use of the 'person is dead / no they're not not they're really just pretending' trick, which I thought was a bit cheap. It happens at least twice at key points in the film (the woman in the bar fight scene, and then the German war hero in the cinema scene).
Don't get me wrong - Tarantino is a God, and the suspense he creates in scenes is brilliant, and the Jew Hunter was pure awesome - but there were a few bits that I found a bit cheap on second viewing. I don't think it hangs together as a film as well as Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs.
So there.

Spoilers
This bugged me but what really annoyed me is this: what did the Basterds actually achieve? The only difference they made to the big ending is that they helped the main baddie! Landa (Christoph Waltz, in a superb performance) to survived, and got a nice life in the U.S. because of them screwing up the assassination attempt, at the cost of some plastic surgery. They were counter productive!

Survive with a fat swastika on his head


That could be fixed with plastic surgery, or if that wasn't available, he could get more slices in his face to change it into an unrecognisable mess. Claim he was hit by shrapnel while saving children from Nazis.

>> ^Quboid:

>> ^kymbos:
I watched this film again recently, having absolutely loved it the first time, and found myself enjoying it less than I expected. Mainly because of the excessive use of the 'person is dead / no they're not not they're really just pretending' trick, which I thought was a bit cheap. It happens at least twice at key points in the film (the woman in the bar fight scene, and then the German war hero in the cinema scene).
Don't get me wrong - Tarantino is a God, and the suspense he creates in scenes is brilliant, and the Jew Hunter was pure awesome - but there were a few bits that I found a bit cheap on second viewing. I don't think it hangs together as a film as well as Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs.
So there.

Spoilers
This bugged me but what really annoyed me is this: what did the Basterds actually achieve? The only difference they made to the big ending is that they helped the main baddie! Landa (Christoph Waltz, in a superb performance) to survived, and got a nice life in the U.S. because of them screwing up the assassination attempt, at the cost of some plastic surgery. They were counter productive!


Survive with a fat swastika on his head

Man, I gotta tell you quantum, life must be hard with you spending your days rolled up in a ball of seething hatred.

I totally agree that the OWS movement was dealing with an undesirable element within their ranks but I don't think that we should be tainting the intent of the entire thing because of it. Just as I feel that it is wrong to persecute everyone who wears an expensive suit as being a heartless corporate swindler. If you remember the Tea Party had their own undesirables showing off swastikas and spouting racial and religious hatreds.

One thing that I would like to point out about the comparison between the Tea Party rallys and the OWS protests is that on one side they were organized and supported financially by corporate and political interests to the extent of even being bussed in to the locations and the other is a barely held together movement with no obvious leaders or focal point with little support or backing from anyone but a few wealthy sympathizers.

I dislike all protests and civil unrest in general but I can see how some people might feel it necessary. Sadly, in the end it always seems to come down to a bunch of people just like quantumushroom on both sides of the argument hating each other, neither side willing to walk a mile in the other man's shoes.



>> ^quantumushroom:

All too easy, Slapnuts.

Now deny it cause the stats don't come from SocialistWorker.org

>> ^ChaosEngine:
>> ^quantumushroom:
Drug use, rapes, murders and random deaths are in every camp, all the attendant chaos one would expect when socialists, anarchists, code pink commies and feed-the-flames libmedia descend anywhere. These protestors are not even 1% of the 99%.

Citation needed, motherfucker.

>> ^FlowersInHisHair:

Does Anonymous not realise that Guy Fawkes's goal was to install a Catholic theocracy? Kind of at odds with what they want, right?


It's not about what he was or what he tried to do, it's about the idea he represents has turned into. He's turned into an icon of anonimity and unity under that pretense.

Che Guevara, who is now considered an anti-imperialistic figure, was at one point attempting to lead a Cuban-led revolution in the African Congo.

How about when American children used to perform the Bellamy Salute during the Pledge of Allegiance?

Even the swastika had many different benevolent meanings before it was used as a symbol for an oppressive regime.

Symbols change over time and are used by people to unite under an idea, whether it be a positive or negative one. I believe the current use of the Guy Fawkes mask and what it stands for is positive.

Helluva story. Here's the whole thing from Wiki:

The Christie Pits riot occurred on 16 August 1933 at the Christie Pits (Willowvale Park) playground in Toronto, Canada. The riot can only be understood in the context of the anti-semitism, Swastika clubs and parades and resentment of "foreigners" in Toronto, and the rise of Hitler and the Nazis in Germany in 1933.[1]

The riot, which lasted six hours, broke out after a quarter-final baseball game at Christie Pits Park between two local clubs, Harbord Playground, predominantly Jewish, and St. Peter's, a baseball team sponsored by a church at Bathurst and Bloor.[2]

The riot occurred soon after Adolf Hitler took power in Germany and in the midst of the Great Depression. The Toronto papers, including the Telegram and the Toronto Star, as well as the Yiddish journal, Der Yiddisher Zhurnal, reported on how Jews were being dismissed as lawyers, professors, teachers, etc. in Germany, as well as incidents of violence against them. Thus to Jews the swastika represented degradation and physical violence against Jews, and was inflammatory.[3]

At that time, the Jewish community in Toronto was predominantly poor and working class. They were also the subject of discrimination and were excluded from summer resorts outside of the city. Jewish families and youths in particular would therefore cool off during the hot summer months by staying in town and going to the predominantly Anglo Beaches area in order to swim. This resulted in complaints and resentment from some local residents. Some of the locals formed "Swastika Clubs", which openly displayed the Nazi symbol to express their displeasure and make Jews feel unwanted.[4] The leaders of the Swastika Club initially insisted that the swastika had nothing to do with Hitler. They said they merely wanted to keep the Beach clean. After a meeting with Jewish leaders backed by City officials, the Swastika club agreed to drop its symbol and its name. At that point, several of the members joined the Swastika Association of Canada that was much more open about its links to Hitler.[5]

The night of the riot was the second game between Harbord and St. Peter's. Two nights earlier, at the first game of the series, a swastika had been displayed. Police were warned that there could be trouble at the second game, but those warnings were ignored. After the final out of the second game, Pit Gang members displayed a blanket with a large swastika painted on it. A number of Jewish boys and young men who had heard about the previous Swastika incident rushed the Swastika sign to destroy it, supporters of both sides (including Italians who supported the Jews) from the surrounding area joined in, and a fight started.[6]

The Toronto Daily Star described the event the next day:
“ While groups of Jewish and Gentile youths wielded fists and clubs in a series of violent scraps for possession of a white flag bearing a swastika symbol at Willowvale Park last night, a crowd of more than 10,000 citizens, excited by cries of ‘Heil Hitler’ became suddenly a disorderly mob and surged wildly about the park and surrounding streets, trying to gain a view of the actual combatants, which soon developed in violence and intensity of racial feeling into one of the worst free-for-alls ever seen in the city.

Scores were injured, many requiring medical and hospital attention... Heads were opened, eyes blackened and bodies thumped and battered as literally dozens of persons, young or old, many of them non-combatant spectators, were injured more or less seriously by a variety of ugly weapons in the hands of wild-eyed and irresponsible young hoodlums, both Jewish and Gentile".[7]
”

No one was killed in the riots. There was criticism of the police for not being ready to intervene, as they had been during previous potential problems in the Beach area.[8] After the riot, Mayor Stewart warned against displaying the swastika and there were no further riots.[9]

The riot revealed the xenophobic attitudes toward Jews and other non-Anglo immigrants among Anglo Canadians. Jews represented the largest minority in Toronto in 1933 and were thus a target of xenophobic residents.

In August 2008, a Heritage Toronto plaque was presented to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the riot.

Beautiful. Like the music a lot too.

3:27 - Swastika... ?
Ok, Ok, I looked it up myself. Seems they were occupied by Japan during WW2 for a few years.

What's with all the Swastika people?