Barracks shaped like swastika

MadDoctor · Post by **MadDoctor** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:30 pm

Blisster wrote:umm, I think the book *may* have come out first

You are right (of course). Unless it's a "pop-up book", I don't know crap.

Comtrad · Post by **Comtrad** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:40 pm

MadDoctor wrote:You are right (of course). Unless it's a "pop-up book", I don't know crap.

MadDoctor · Post by **MadDoctor** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:03 pm

I got that book! I still get excited when I read it to the kids.

No... I don't allow them to sit on my lap.

Bouncer · Post by **Bouncer** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:30 pm

Kids does not legally include 22 year old girls named "Kandi" that you met at a bar.

Even if it is appropriate for their level of maturity.

As to the building, it's not likely the architect was a nascent neo-nazi. If he/she wasn't, then those offended by this are giving power over their own lives NOT to a symbol, but to a series of lines. Consider that for a moment. It's like insisting every + shaped building is really in the shape of a cross, or every C shaped building is encouraging Islam.

I have no love at all for Nazis or neo-nazis, but I do not ascribe to them "they who must not be named" Voldemortesque powers. It is a building. That happens to have a superficially similar (not identical as the wings aren't long enough to match the correct dimensions) design as a symbol of the 3rd Reich. That is ALL it is.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

knightmare · Post by **knightmare** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:44 pm

the symbol is the reverse of the Hindu.. the nazi's reversed it, the symbol represents chaos.( Through Chaos, perfect order). Used in Chaos majik.

They use symbolism everywhere. The focused intent behind symbols, give it power.

Was the building laid out that way by mistake? No,
I had seen it about a year ago @ another site.

Perhaps they will spend $666,000 to camouflage it.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:44 pm

David wrote:Do you understand the significance of the swastika and how it might relate to Jewish people?

listen, I've taken history and thats all it is "History".

This isn't about nothing more than a damn shape that is seen from a sat camera. If this is the case then may as well open a big can of worms to any and all objects in the world to the same issue at hand. It would have never been an issue if not for Google earth, no planes have a flight path over it according to the news, nobody has said anything for many years now. Why make a damn fuss over it when its only buildings?

I'm not arguing with anyone wishing to change it if thats what they want to do cause THEY are offended then fine, but not with the use of tax payer money! I refuse to pay for something this stupid to be fixed with my tax money that should go towards fixing bridges that fall under people,with paying health care to kids that die from not having it...etc etc. If someone wants to fix it then let them pay for it! Would you rather see a kid die cause he/she couldn't get their shots while you watched a building get changed cause you didn't like how it looked from a skyward view? I sure as hell wouldn't.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:36 pm

Sava700 wrote:listen, I've taken history and thats all it is "History".

This isn't about nothing more than a damn shape that is seen from a sat camera. If this is the case then may as well open a big can of worms to any and all objects in the world to the same issue at hand. It would have never been an issue if not for Google earth, no planes have a flight path over it according to the news, nobody has said anything for many years now. Why make a damn fuss over it when its only buildings?

I'm not arguing with anyone wishing to change it if thats what they want to do cause THEY are offended then fine, but not with the use of tax payer money! I refuse to pay for something this stupid to be fixed with my tax money that should go towards fixing bridges that fall under people,with paying health care to kids that die from not having it...etc etc. If someone wants to fix it then let them pay for it! Would you rather see a kid die cause he/she couldn't get their shots while you watched a building get changed cause you didn't like how it looked from a skyward view? I sure as hell wouldn't.

Don't worry about paying for it. You won't have to. At the debt right now, your grandkids will because this culture refuses to do anything about it but gripe about taxes.

First part. So you took history............ I'm impressed at your "understanding" of that part of human history.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:51 pm

downhill wrote:Don't worry about paying for it. You won't have to. At the debt right now, your grandkids will because this culture refuses to do anything about it but gripe about taxes.

First part. So you took history............ I'm impressed at your "understanding" of that part of human history.

still, its not a good enough reason to spend tax payer funds...

as for history it was one of my fav subjects

I prefer Geography though and in this case I could find much better use of Google Earths Sat pictures with that perspective than looking at how buildings are shaped.

But lets not forget there are prob several thousands of objects in the world that represent things people find offensive. Should we change them all with tax money just cause someone doesn't care how they look? I never cared for how the Washington Monument looked like a dildo, its of a sexual reference and should be changed right now with tax payer funds!

Comtrad · Post by **Comtrad** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:59 pm

Sava700 wrote:still, its not a good enough reason to spend tax payer funds...

It's better than most of the **** they spend it on.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:05 pm

Sava700 wrote:still, its not a good enough reason to spend tax payer funds...

as for history it was one of my fav subjects I prefer Geography though and in this case I could find much better use of Google Earths Sat pictures with that perspective than looking at how buildings are shaped.

But lets not forget there are prob several thousands of objects in the world that represent things people find offensive. Should we change them all with tax money just cause someone doesn't care how they look? I never cared for how the Washington Monument looked like a dildo, its of a sexual reference and should be changed right now with tax payer funds!

sava....lets say I don't find that spending money to cover up an obvious mistake a misuse of funds. If it were a private enterprise, I'd say hey...but it isn't. That said I think it could be fixed for less than $600,000 but hey it's Washington and there are backs to scratch.

Odd what you find acceptable to spend taxpayer money on and what upsets you. lol

You really want to make a statement? Write your congressmen. ALL of them.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:16 pm

downhill wrote:
Odd what you find acceptable to spend taxpayer money on and what upsets you. lol

Yep everyone is different on their views.. I just don't find this one important to spend tax money on.. let the one that complained pay for it.

David · Post by **David** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:27 pm

EDIT...

Bouncer,

The building is from the 40's, hence not by a "neo-nazi". In addition, it must have been blue printed, it was by design not by accident. It is indeed a 60 year old "Easter egg".

david

9mmprincess · Post by **9mmprincess** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:49 pm

David wrote:9mm,

That is very easy to say, more difficult to enact. I trust you have never been assailed for your ethnicity. What can a black man say to a white man that has the same strength as n****r? Can a homosexual give back as good as to a straight man as f****t? Can a woman denigrate a man with a term as strong as c***? True, they are only words, but like the symbols they can hurt.

Walk a mile in another man's shoes. Not everyone is so strong.

As for spending the money, yes it would be a waste.

Well then you trust wrong. I'm Irish and Native American, and first of all, I understand ALL about oppression. TRUST me. I've had people do Indian "war cries" at me - I don't really look "Indian" (unless I weigh about 115, then my high cheekbones come out), but a couple times when ppl have found out I'm part Native American, the reaction wasn't favorable. And of course sometimes you're privvy to peoples racism because like I said, I don't look my ethnicity, so people assume I'm white and will be the one to join in with racist talk.

If the buildings were in the shape of General Custer, I still wouldn't care. Know why? Because the only way you can see it is from space. You have to physically go onto the internet, go to google earth, put in the right coordinates, and pull up the image. Then, I guess, stare at it in abject horror, I don't know. And if I sound pissed off right now, I am, because it seems you can't express an opinion on this board without people getting cunty and implying that you're insensitive or "don't understand". If it was a swastica on the side of a building - I'd agree, remove it. If it was "f a g g o t" written in daisies on the courthouse lawn - yes, remove it. And ect. But given that you can only see it from SPACE, I think the reaction to it is a bit extreme.

As for Jewish stuff -yes, the holocaust was horrible - no one's denying that. I just think it's an overreaction to spend half a mil to fix something you can only see from space.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:21 pm

Seeing it from space isn't the point. Once it's been pointed out that a goverment building exits like that, it simply can't be ignored.

Comtrad · Post by **Comtrad** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:47 pm

David wrote:EDIT...

Bouncer,

The building is from the 40's, hence not by a "neo-nazi". In addition, it must have been blue printed, it was by design not by accident. It is indeed a 60 year old "Easter egg".

david

Pretty sure it was built in the '60s

David · Post by **David** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:48 pm

9mmprincess wrote:Well then you trust wrong. I'm Irish and Native American, and first of all, I understand ALL about oppression. TRUST me. I've had people do Indian "war cries" at me - I don't really look "Indian" (unless I weigh about 115, then my high cheekbones come out), but a couple times when ppl have found out I'm part Native American, the reaction wasn't favorable. And of course sometimes you're privvy to peoples racism because like I said, I don't look my ethnicity, so people assume I'm white and will be the one to join in with racist talk.

You first comment will be answered shortly. Native Americans at this point in US culture, suffer indignations from hackneyed stereotypes. I cannot speak of your personal experiences, only from those of a close friend who is also half Native American and looks every bit of it. Never has he faced any hatred for his background, but has been aggravated by sophomoric teasing. That said, relations do vary in different parts of the country.

9mmprincess wrote:If the buildings were in the shape of General Custer, I still wouldn't care. Know why? Because the only way you can see it is from space. You have to physically go onto the internet, go to google earth, put in the right coordinates, and pull up the image. Then, I guess, stare at it in abject horror, I don't know. And if I sound pissed off right now, I am, because it seems you can't express an opinion on this board without people getting cunty and implying that you're insensitive or "don't understand". If it was a swastica on the side of a building - I'd agree, remove it. If it was "f a g g o t" written in daisies on the courthouse lawn - yes, remove it. And ect. But given that you can only see it from SPACE, I think the reaction to it is a bit extreme.

People often respond by conditioning. Accept that they do so by their experiences, not for being "cunty". Certain symbols carry powerful connotations, something that cannot be readily dismissed with a "I just think it has as much power as you let it have." That particular comment did set me off a bit. I offer my contrition to assume that you had not experienced personal affronts based on your ethnicity. My response was to a perceived indifference.

9mmprincess wrote:As for Jewish stuff -yes, the holocaust was horrible - no one's denying that. I just think it's an overreaction to spend half a mil to fix something you can only see from space.

It is not just the holocaust...

For the fourth time, I am not saying that the money should be spent to mitigate it. It is a waste to do so. However, I would not dismiss the sensibilities of some who are offended by a building size swastika. Whether it is viewable by helicopter, space shuttle or pogo stick, just knowing that it is there can be troubling.

David · Post by **David** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:50 pm

Comtrad wrote:Pretty sure it was built in the '60s

You are right. Thank you for the correction.

A_old · Post by **A_old** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 12:19 am

The underlying issue, at this point (imho), is that it's a US government building and the US government can't be seen as supporting Nazis. Period. What's about 600K? Hell, they take 30% of my and most other people's pay every year..they can afford it. They just need to shift some money from the $90 per hammer fund over to the renovation of this building. Problem solved.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:53 am

They'll now need to fly over college campuses...any idea how many dormitories are shaped like that? Creating 4x wings and quads?

Only 600,000 to overhaul it? Bwah hah! There may be a 6 up front in the figure..but there will be 6 numbers after it also...and 2 commas.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 8:13 am

9mmprincess wrote:And if I sound pissed off right now, I am, because it seems you can't express an opinion on this board without people getting cunty and implying that you're insensitive or "don't understand". If it was a swastica on the side of a building - I'd agree, remove it. If it was "f a g g o t" written in daisies on the courthouse lawn - yes, remove it. And ect. But given that you can only see it from SPACE, I think the reaction to it is a bit extreme.

very well spoken 9mm.. i agree 100%. In regards mostly how I imply things in certain ways and how you express yourself on a forum board or post just for fun...

Bottom line government building or not, we shouldn't have to fund this project from tax money. If you don't like it take up a collection, go stand in front of Walmart with your little bucket and collect as much as you want to pay for it.

YeOldeStonecat wrote:They'll now need to fly over college campuses...any idea how many dormitories are shaped like that? Creating 4x wings and quads?

Only 600,000 to overhaul it? Bwah hah! There may be a 6 up front in the figure..but there will be 6 numbers after it also...and 2 commas.

Ohh I'm sure there are thousands of objects and buildings like this.. as I referenced the Washington Monument looking like a dildo.. Just cause anyone finds it that way and says its Offensive and should be fixed will it? NO.

yeah I'd be surprised if it was exactly any amount they said.