Confederate Flag

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 17 of 29 < 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 >

Kingvagabond London 20 Jul 14 10.44pm
Quote Mapletree at 20 Jul 2014 10.36pm Forgive me. I never said original meaning. The original meaning of the Swastika was somewhat opposite to its current perception. Just trust people like Mike T why don't you. I understand what you are saying Mapletree, interestingly enough I just conducted a bit of a strawpoll of Americans in a chatroom I use a lot regarding whether the Battleflag of North Virginia (to give the Confederate Flag its real name) is a symbol of racism and it seemed somewhat split down the middle. All I can say is what I said before, I don't think its the major issue that some have pushed for it to become, especially as the HF immediately took it down in a show of sensitivity and maturity. Part of Holmesdale Radio: The Next Generation @KingvagabondHOL Quote cornwalls palace at 24 Oct 2012 9.37am He was right!!!...and we killed him!!... poor Orpinton Eagles........
Alert a moderator to this post

Kingvagabond

London 20 Jul 14 10.44pm

Quote Mapletree at 20 Jul 2014 10.36pm

Forgive me. I never said original meaning. The original meaning of the Swastika was somewhat opposite to its current perception. Just trust people like Mike T why don't you.

I understand what you are saying Mapletree, interestingly enough I just conducted a bit of a strawpoll of Americans in a chatroom I use a lot regarding whether the Battleflag of North Virginia (to give the Confederate Flag its real name) is a symbol of racism and it seemed somewhat split down the middle. All I can say is what I said before, I don't think its the major issue that some have pushed for it to become, especially as the HF immediately took it down in a show of sensitivity and maturity.

Part of Holmesdale Radio: The Next Generation
@KingvagabondHOL

Quote cornwalls palace at 24 Oct 2012 9.37am

He was right!!!...and we killed him!!... poor Orpinton Eagles........

Alert a moderator to this post

adrian b Landrindod, Wales 20 Jul 14 10.45pm
I really think it is difficult to understand why a few people should be allowed to do something that could restrict the commercial viability of CPFC. What is more difficult to understand why they should be prevented from doing that and if someone points out the problems this raises, it is just stiring a hornets nest. Be more mature and objective to face the issue for what it is, not a question of the freedom for them to do as they please, more the correct decision to prevent them from harming Palace. It doesn't matter if only one person saw it and didn't understand the implications to Palace's standing, the point is the potential for everyone to see it and find it objectionable. I think that would harm the perception of Palace.
Alert a moderator to this post

adrian b

Landrindod, Wales 20 Jul 14 10.45pm

I really think it is difficult to understand why a few people should be allowed to do something that could restrict the commercial viability of CPFC. What is more difficult to understand why they should be prevented from doing that and if someone points out the problems this raises, it is just stiring a hornets nest. Be more mature and objective to face the issue for what it is, not a question of the freedom for them to do as they please, more the correct decision to prevent them from harming Palace. It doesn't matter if only one person saw it and didn't understand the implications to Palace's standing, the point is the potential for everyone to see it and find it objectionable. I think that would harm the perception of Palace.

Alert a moderator to this post

Kingvagabond London 20 Jul 14 10.49pm
Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 10.45pm I really think it is difficult to understand why a few people should be allowed to do something that could restrict the commercial viability of CPFC. What is more difficult to understand why they should be prevented from doing that and if someone points out the problems this raises, it is just stiring a hornets nest. Be more mature and objective to face the issue for what it is, not a question of the freedom for them to do as they please, more the correct decision to prevent them from harming Palace. It doesn't matter if only one person saw it and didn't understand the implications to Palace's standing, the point is the potential for everyone to see it and find it objectionable. I think that would harm the perception of Palace. Again Adrian, the point is the HF immediately took the flag down using common sense and it would not have been an issue, you continuing to stir the hornets nest was my issue when in all actuality the thread was dead as soon as someone said the flag was removed. For me I personally agree with Stirling that as the connotations from the flag are only held in America (and Canada) then it shouldn't really be an issue in south London but either way its completely irrelevant now. Part of Holmesdale Radio: The Next Generation @KingvagabondHOL Quote cornwalls palace at 24 Oct 2012 9.37am He was right!!!...and we killed him!!... poor Orpinton Eagles........
Alert a moderator to this post

Kingvagabond

London 20 Jul 14 10.49pm

Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 10.45pm
I really think it is difficult to understand why a few people should be allowed to do something that could restrict the commercial viability of CPFC. What is more difficult to understand why they should be prevented from doing that and if someone points out the problems this raises, it is just stiring a hornets nest. Be more mature and objective to face the issue for what it is, not a question of the freedom for them to do as they please, more the correct decision to prevent them from harming Palace. It doesn't matter if only one person saw it and didn't understand the implications to Palace's standing, the point is the potential for everyone to see it and find it objectionable. I think that would harm the perception of Palace.

Again Adrian, the point is the HF immediately took the flag down using common sense and it would not have been an issue, you continuing to stir the hornets nest was my issue when in all actuality the thread was dead as soon as someone said the flag was removed.

For me I personally agree with Stirling that as the connotations from the flag are only held in America (and Canada) then it shouldn't really be an issue in south London but either way its completely irrelevant now.

Part of Holmesdale Radio: The Next Generation
@KingvagabondHOL

Quote cornwalls palace at 24 Oct 2012 9.37am

He was right!!!...and we killed him!!... poor Orpinton Eagles........

Alert a moderator to this post

adrian b Landrindod, Wales 20 Jul 14 10.52pm
But it's not irrelevant. There has not been a policy statement banning flags in the ground. But what flag? There's the question we are discussing, this is the hornets nest you have sprouted.
Alert a moderator to this post

adrian b

Landrindod, Wales 20 Jul 14 10.52pm

But it's not irrelevant. There has not been a policy statement banning flags in the ground. But what flag? There's the question we are discussing, this is the hornets nest you have sprouted.

Alert a moderator to this post

Kingvagabond London 20 Jul 14 11.00pm
Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 10.52pm But it's not irrelevant. There has not been a policy statement banning flags in the ground. But what flag? There's the question we are discussing, this is the hornets nest you have sprouted. Hmm, would you at least agree that the Swastika was a deliberately extreme example intended to provoke reaction? Part of Holmesdale Radio: The Next Generation @KingvagabondHOL Quote cornwalls palace at 24 Oct 2012 9.37am He was right!!!...and we killed him!!... poor Orpinton Eagles........
Alert a moderator to this post

Kingvagabond

London 20 Jul 14 11.00pm

Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 10.52pm
But it's not irrelevant. There has not been a policy statement banning flags in the ground. But what flag? There's the question we are discussing, this is the hornets nest you have sprouted.

Hmm, would you at least agree that the Swastika was a deliberately extreme example intended to provoke reaction?

Part of Holmesdale Radio: The Next Generation
@KingvagabondHOL

Quote cornwalls palace at 24 Oct 2012 9.37am

He was right!!!...and we killed him!!... poor Orpinton Eagles........

Alert a moderator to this post

adrian b Landrindod, Wales 20 Jul 14 11.05pm
Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 11.00pm Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 10.52pm But it's not irrelevant. There has not been a policy statement banning flags in the ground. But what flag? There's the question we are discussing, this is the hornets nest you have sprouted. Hmm, would you at least agree that the Swastika was a deliberately extreme example intended to provoke reaction? Not the point of this thread, but I would be appalled. There again, some on this thread will say that if the person flying this flag was of the opinion it was not harmful, then he should be allowed to fly it. And to them I say think about Palace.
Alert a moderator to this post

adrian b

Landrindod, Wales 20 Jul 14 11.05pm

Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 11.00pm

Hmm, would you at least agree that the Swastika was a deliberately extreme example intended to provoke reaction?

Not the point of this thread, but I would be appalled. There again, some on this thread will say that if the person flying this flag was of the opinion it was not harmful, then he should be allowed to fly it. And to them I say think about Palace.

Alert a moderator to this post

MikeT Burlington (Toronto Area) 20 Jul 14 11.15pm
Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 10.01pm Quote MikeT at 20 Jul 2014 9.42pm Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 9.01pm Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 8.50pm This thread is about flying a flag at Selhurst and the impression this gives to the rest of the World. The Swaztica, like the confederate rag is a flag. It's not a completely different argument. The point being asked about is whether people should be happily allowed to fly any flag they wish and that's the issue I'm addressing. If you are stating they should be able to than that includes the swatztica. As you say they have a difference of opinion and assume it is ok to do so. Ok do it then and the image this gives of our club? You're ok with that? I hope not I see you're on the wind up as always Adrian. There is a world of difference between flying a flag that is universally recognised as representing a racist murderous organisation the world over and a flag representing the Confederates. The recognition of the Confederate Flag as racist propaganda is recognised only in the States and at that only in certain ones. The HF flew a small Confederate flag as part of a much larger flag as its red and blue and they felt it represented them as rebels/plucky underdogs. As soon as they realised that it was causing a modicum of unrest amongst the yanks they chose to take it down. That is a million miles away from anyone knowingly flying a flag to be offensive. Stop being a WUM kiddo. The HF certainly didn't desire to be offensive and agreed to remove it, but you're vastly underplaying the impact. It's widely taken as a racist symbol across both US and Canada and doesn't just generate a 'modicum of unrest' in a few US states. Anybody that noticed it in my circle couldn't believe their eyes and questioned why the club would allow it. "Is Palace racist" was the standard question. I can't help but feel that part of the issue is with Americans (and I suppose Canadians too) presuming everyone should share their own perspective of values. Certainly, I can only assume that fan clubs in North America would happily continue to wave a flag with a Bulldog on it even if it was subsumed as a symbol of the BNP in Britain. I also assume that they would ignore a plea from British fans to stop waving it as they might rightly think 'well that might be what it means in Britain but we're in America/Canada, how does it affect them?' I understand that maybe we should look at eventually becoming a world wide brand and that part of this is caving to others sensibilities but for 99% of the crowd and the followers of Palace a confederate flag means nothing to them except possibly fond memories of Daisy Duke. I get the impression you may have missed some of the earlier bits of the thread, but just in case you did or in case you've been locked up with no access to newspapers or TV, the majority of Premier League clubs including us are spending their pre-seasons in various parts of the globe -- especially in North America this year. The Premier League already has a huge world-wide presence and, like it or not, as soon as Palace won at Wembley, there was no eventually, we were a world-wide brand. You'll get used to the idea given time. And it's not just our supporters in North America, of which there are many ex-pats as well as new fans, it's also the club's reputation among the millions that watch on TV. Oh crap. Why do we bother Fawlty........... Edited by MikeT (20 Jul 2014 11.19pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

MikeT

Burlington (Toronto Area) 20 Jul 14 11.15pm

Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 10.01pm

Quote MikeT at 20 Jul 2014 9.42pm

Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 9.01pm

Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 8.50pm

This thread is about flying a flag at Selhurst and the impression this gives to the rest of the World. The Swaztica, like the confederate rag is a flag. It's not a completely different argument. The point being asked about is whether people should be happily allowed to fly any flag they wish and that's the issue I'm addressing. If you are stating they should be able to than that includes the swatztica. As you say they have a difference of opinion and assume it is ok to do so. Ok do it then and the image this gives of our club? You're ok with that? I hope not

I see you're on the wind up as always Adrian. There is a world of difference between flying a flag that is universally recognised as representing a racist murderous organisation the world over and a flag representing the Confederates. The recognition of the Confederate Flag as racist propaganda is recognised only in the States and at that only in certain ones.

The HF flew a small Confederate flag as part of a much larger flag as its red and blue and they felt it represented them as rebels/plucky underdogs. As soon as they realised that it was causing a modicum of unrest amongst the yanks they chose to take it down. That is a million miles away from anyone knowingly flying a flag to be offensive. Stop being a WUM kiddo.

The HF certainly didn't desire to be offensive and agreed to remove it, but you're vastly underplaying the impact. It's widely taken as a racist symbol across both US and Canada and doesn't just generate a 'modicum of unrest' in a few US states. Anybody that noticed it in my circle couldn't believe their eyes and questioned why the club would allow it. "Is Palace racist" was the standard question.

I can't help but feel that part of the issue is with Americans (and I suppose Canadians too) presuming everyone should share their own perspective of values. Certainly, I can only assume that fan clubs in North America would happily continue to wave a flag with a Bulldog on it even if it was subsumed as a symbol of the BNP in Britain. I also assume that they would ignore a plea from British fans to stop waving it as they might rightly think 'well that might be what it means in Britain but we're in America/Canada, how does it affect them?'

I understand that maybe we should look at eventually becoming a world wide brand and that part of this is caving to others sensibilities but for 99% of the crowd and the followers of Palace a confederate flag means nothing to them except possibly fond memories of Daisy Duke.

I get the impression you may have missed some of the earlier bits of the thread, but just in case you did or in case you've been locked up with no access to newspapers or TV, the majority of Premier League clubs including us are spending their pre-seasons in various parts of the globe -- especially in North America this year. The Premier League already has a huge world-wide presence and, like it or not, as soon as Palace won at Wembley, there was no eventually, we were a world-wide brand. You'll get used to the idea given time.

And it's not just our supporters in North America, of which there are many ex-pats as well as new fans, it's also the club's reputation among the millions that watch on TV.

Oh crap. Why do we bother Fawlty...........

Edited by MikeT (20 Jul 2014 11.19pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Kingvagabond London 20 Jul 14 11.17pm
Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 11.05pm Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 11.00pm Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 10.52pm But it's not irrelevant. There has not been a policy statement banning flags in the ground. But what flag? There's the question we are discussing, this is the hornets nest you have sprouted. Hmm, would you at least agree that the Swastika was a deliberately extreme example intended to provoke reaction? Not the point of this thread, but I would be appalled. There again, some on this thread will say that if the person flying this flag was of the opinion it was not harmful, then he should be allowed to fly it. And to them I say think about Palace. I think Stirling's point was more that the feeling against the Confederate flag comes from across the pond and not here. The Swastika has become universally (i.e. globally) recognised as a symbol of oppression and hatred. The confederate flag has not thus far. Part of Holmesdale Radio: The Next Generation @KingvagabondHOL Quote cornwalls palace at 24 Oct 2012 9.37am He was right!!!...and we killed him!!... poor Orpinton Eagles........
Alert a moderator to this post

Kingvagabond

London 20 Jul 14 11.17pm

Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 11.05pm

Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 11.00pm

Hmm, would you at least agree that the Swastika was a deliberately extreme example intended to provoke reaction?

I think Stirling's point was more that the feeling against the Confederate flag comes from across the pond and not here. The Swastika has become universally (i.e. globally) recognised as a symbol of oppression and hatred. The confederate flag has not thus far.

Part of Holmesdale Radio: The Next Generation
@KingvagabondHOL

Quote cornwalls palace at 24 Oct 2012 9.37am

He was right!!!...and we killed him!!... poor Orpinton Eagles........

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 21 Jul 14 8.39am
Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 11.17pm Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 11.05pm Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 11.00pm Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 10.52pm But it's not irrelevant. There has not been a policy statement banning flags in the ground. But what flag? There's the question we are discussing, this is the hornets nest you have sprouted. Hmm, would you at least agree that the Swastika was a deliberately extreme example intended to provoke reaction? Not the point of this thread, but I would be appalled. There again, some on this thread will say that if the person flying this flag was of the opinion it was not harmful, then he should be allowed to fly it. And to them I say think about Palace. I think Stirling's point was more that the feeling against the Confederate flag comes from across the pond and not here. The Swastika has become universally (i.e. globally) recognised as a symbol of oppression and hatred. The confederate flag has not thus far. I repeat my earlier point Would you want an LTTE flag flown at SP? After all, the atrocities in Jaffna are nothing to do with us, so why not? Could also be viewed as a flag celebrating the will of a few people that want freedom from oppression.
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 21 Jul 14 8.39am

Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 11.17pm

Quote adrian b at 20 Jul 2014 11.05pm

Quote Kingvagabond at 20 Jul 2014 11.00pm

Hmm, would you at least agree that the Swastika was a deliberately extreme example intended to provoke reaction?

I repeat my earlier point

Would you want an LTTE flag flown at SP? After all, the atrocities in Jaffna are nothing to do with us, so why not? Could also be viewed as a flag celebrating the will of a few people that want freedom from oppression.

Alert a moderator to this post

adrian b Landrindod, Wales 21 Jul 14 8.41am
No, wrong. Stirlings point is if a person flying a flag does not think the flag, in his opinion, is offensive, then he should be allowed to fly it. By allowing this he must mean all flags and if he objects to the Swaztica and expects me to accept his feelings, then I object to the Confederate flag and expect him to accept mine. Simps peeps
Alert a moderator to this post

adrian b

Landrindod, Wales 21 Jul 14 8.41am

No, wrong. Stirlings point is if a person flying a flag does not think the flag, in his opinion, is offensive, then he should be allowed to fly it. By allowing this he must mean all flags and if he objects to the Swaztica and expects me to accept his feelings, then I object to the Confederate flag and expect him to accept mine. Simps peeps

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 21 Jul 14 8.57am
F**k me, is this really on 17 pages? Flag spotted. May possibly offend someone on the other side of the world. Flag removed. Have I missed something?
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 21 Jul 14 8.57am

F**k me, is this really on 17 pages?

Flag spotted.
May possibly offend someone on the other side of the world.
Flag removed.

Have I missed something?

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 21 Jul 14 11.56am
Quote adrian b at 21 Jul 2014 8.41am No, wrong. Stirlings point is if a person flying a flag does not think the flag, in his opinion, is offensive, then he should be allowed to fly it. By allowing this he must mean all flags and if he objects to the Swaztica and expects me to accept his feelings, then I object to the Confederate flag and expect him to accept mine. Simps peeps My reading of your note is that you are agreeing with me. My point is that I would not want an LTTE flag flown, it has awful connotations even if originally it was simply a flag of protest. And, as I now have been taught that the confederate flag has awful connotations, I would not want it flown as it isn't correct to grossly upset a group of people without an extremely strong rationale to do so. Freedom of individual expression is simply not a strong enough reason.
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 21 Jul 14 11.56am

Quote adrian b at 21 Jul 2014 8.41am

My reading of your note is that you are agreeing with me. My point is that I would not want an LTTE flag flown, it has awful connotations even if originally it was simply a flag of protest. And, as I now have been taught that the confederate flag has awful connotations, I would not want it flown as it isn't correct to grossly upset a group of people without an extremely strong rationale to do so. Freedom of individual expression is simply not a strong enough reason.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 17 of 29 < 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Confederate Flag

Site Map

Sponsors