The new Nazi swastika

http://dailym.ai/2lH0M7v

A new 'more discreet' symbol for the Nazi party.

And a nasty new one for the KKK as well.

Yet more evidence of the rise of the extreme far right.

And there are supporters of them on here.

How long before some of our posters use the symbols as avatars?

I didn't know you were a fan of the Daily Mail Andy.

Those updated neo-Nazi/KKK/alt.right signs and symbols might have been more or less "secret" before now...

Not anymore..

Raggamuffin wrote:I didn't know you were a fan of the Daily Mail Andy.

Where am I a fan of the Mail?
Know your enemy.
Why the deflection, Raggs. Anything to say about the OP?

Angry Andy wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I didn't know you were a fan of the Daily Mail Andy.

Where am I a fan of the Mail?
Know your enemy.
Why the deflection, Raggs. Anything to say about the OP?

I just wondered why you're treating the Daily Mail as a reliable source these days.

As for the OP, it's just a pop at other members anyway.

And there sre supporters of them on here.

How long before some of our podters use the symbols as avatars?

The Mail IS an unreliable source.

BUT. The film evidence is not theirs, they simply used it.
And it is incontrovertible.

Were you in the crowd Raggs?

Angry Andy wrote:The Mail IS an unreliable source.

BUT. The film evidence is not theirs, they simply used it.
And it is incontrovertible.

Were you in the crowd Raggs?

Which crowd?

I'm rarely in crowds actually.

I didn't see any film evidence in that article.

I sent my white coat and hood to the dry cleaners last week,,they charged me £10 and lost my KKK badge, disgusting.

Angry Andy wrote:The Mail IS an unreliable source.

BUT. The film evidence is not theirs, they simply used it.
And it is incontrovertible.

Were you in the crowd Raggs?

You mean that it doesn't print what YOU want to read. Perhaps you prefer the educated, cultured and principled style of the, er, phone hacking Daily Mirror.

Wikipedia has even dropped The Fail as a reliable source of information. 
It might be because too many of their sleazy hacks are photographing and reporting on the blossoming assets and developing womenhoods of underage girls.
At least the Sport only photographs the bare breasts of over 18's.

The Daily Mail has attacked Wikipedia after the site banned the tabloid as a source for its entries, saying it was unreliable.
The notoriously inaccurate online encyclopedia’s users accused The Daily Mail and Mail Online of “poor fact checking, sensationalism, and flat-out fabrication”.
Its volunteer editors will now gradually remove around 12,000 links to Mail stories that have been used to source claims in Wikipedia entries, after a debate to ban it.





In its response, the tabloid attacked the site and poked fun at its co-founder Jimmy Wales for allegedly editing his own entry on the site.
It also called the decision a “cynical politically motivated attempt to stifle the free press”.
The paper also hit out at how the decision was made following a discussion in which only a handful of people voted.
A spokeswoman for Mail Newspapers said: “It is hard to know whether to laugh or cry at this move by Wikipedia - a website that is notorious for its own inaccuracy and false truths and which was co-founded by a man who doctored his own biographical entry.


[ltr]
View image on Twitter


[/ltr]
”For the record the Daily Mail, in common with most reputable academic institutions, banned all its journalists from using Wikipedia as a sole source in 2014 because of its unreliability.
“Last year, the Daily Mail and Mail Online together published more than half a million stories and yet received just two upheld adjudications each for inaccuracy from the UK Industry’s regulator Ipso.
“The so-called ban by Wikipedia came at the end of a month-long ‘debate’ triggered by a clearly obsessive newspaper-hater who hides behind the pseudonym Hillybillyholiday’ - which attracted just 75 votes from Wikipedia’s 30 million anonymous registered editors.”
The statement continued: “The debate makes it abundantly plain that the majority of those calling for the Mail to be banned were driven primarily by political motives.




http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/daily-mail-wikipedia-inaccurate_uk_589dd292e4b0ab2d2b1467c2

But what are your thoughts on the new, updated Nazi emblem, the swastika?
Asnwers on simple English without deflection would be good (and a first).

Angry Andy wrote:But what are your thoughts on the new, updated Nazi emblem, the swastika?
Asnwers on simple English without deflection would be good (and a first).

There has always been variations of the Swastika
Take the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging version for example.
All they are trying to do is separate themselves from actual Nazism and yet failing badly, as they share many of the same Far Right views

There was no film in the article though, so why do you think the article is reliable Andy?

I see they've used the Othala rune symbol. I'm disgusted. I use rune stones a lot and they are a spiritual tool. Taken literally, this rune stone symbolises your spiritual ancestry and the spiritual living among your neighbours, living in harmony.
The Nazis have taken this and twisted it's message. This isn't about taking back your homeland or promoting 'racial purity'.

It's fucking sick.

Angry Andy wrote:Wikipedia has even dropped The Fail as a reliable source of information. 
It might be because too many of their sleazy hacks are photographing and reporting on the blossoming assets and developing womenhoods of underage girls.
At least the Sport only photographs the bare breasts of over 18's.

Oh my God! Dropped by Wikipedia! That well-known font of truth, wisdom and accuracy (shurely shome mishtake, as dear old Bill Deeds would have opined in Private Eye).

Somehow, however, I doubt that Paul Dacre would have so much as spluttered a single crumb of his mid morning Hob Nob at the revelation, particularly as - as someone else has got in before me - any "facts" gleaned from Wiki are never allowed to go unchecked in the serious news media.

And those, er, notorious photos! Disgusting and immoral! Almost as bad as the Labour mouthpiece Daily Mirror publishing faked photos alleging to show British troops "torturing" terrorist suspects. I wonder how many squaddies were targeted after that little episode.

In the meantime I'm sure the Mail's top dogs will continue to lament the Wiki decision, weep over the cutting remarks on anti-Mail websites and worry themselves sick over the histrionic ranting of the Loony Left.

Or then again, perhaps not.

Ps. Odd how this much maligned paper continues to sell more than twice the number of copies as the Mirror; be one of the, if not the, most quoted titles on regular TV media reviews; continue to collect award after award, including those judged by its peers, and notch up successes in its campaigns such as that which at long last gained justice for the murdered black teenager Stephen Lawrence.

eddie wrote:I see they've used the Othala rune symbol. I'm disgusted. I use rune stones a lot and they are a spiritual tool.  Taken literally, this rune stone symbolises your spiritual ancestry  and the spiritual living among your neighbours, living in harmony.
The Nazis have taken this and twisted it's message.  This isn't about taking back your homeland or promoting 'racial purity'.

It's fucking sick.

I bet uniformed officers in the commercial shipping business ain't too happy either...it's a key part of the design of their sleeve and epaulette badges of rank, distinguishing them from Royal Navy officers.

bingo is the new nazis

two fat ladies 88
heil hitler.

You would know, Flop. You are the expert. You have plenty of them on your forum.

Fuck off Andy you don't know what your on about, your still "Angry" because head banned you,  it sticks out a mile.   And when you disparage posters on Flap your also including me in your stupid rants,
so think on !

nicko wrote:Fuck off Andy you don't know what your on about, your still "Angry" because head banned you,  it sticks out a mile.   And when you disparage posters on Flap your also including me in your stupid rants,
so STFUP.

To be fair Nicko, he only said plenty, which does not necessarily mean that is including you.
I think he is wrong to even say plenty, there is only in my opinion, two on there that hold Far Right extreme views.
Though Andy, needs to get over speaking about that forum, its boring.

That's what I was trying to get across to him Didge.

nicko wrote:That's what I was trying to get across to him Didge.

Now worries mate.
Have to go, so hope you have a good day

Angry Andy wrote:You would know, Flop. You are the expert. You have plenty of them on your forum.

but not so craven or vile as you eh Andwew