Flag Burning

[M29]

Originally posted by dancingdoggie17
firstly, being at the prostests in melbourne i think it is unfair and downright sacremungering to only shopw the bad points. In melboune there were NO ARRESTS & NO DAMMAGE. All the students go together and voiced our opinions..that was all. and the media focuses on sydney and perth!

secondly, they have a right to voice their opinions...free DEMOCRATIC country, and if people aren't allowed to criticise a government it's a dictatorship!! It's only a bloody flag!

Blah blah blah. As I said, I don't care that they protested. But burning your own countries flag is treason.

 

[Mr Eagle]

Originally posted by knuckles
They're about to legalise table-top dancing in Singapore. Now that's freedom!

But enjoying the performance is about to be outlawed

 

[M29]

Originally posted by Pessimistic
You guys who seem to hold the flag as sacred.

I wouldn't hold it as sacred, in a way maybe. But it's what it represents to me.

 

[M29]

Originally posted by Squeak
Fair point.

Hang them instead.

It would be cheaper then deporting them.

 

[mantis]

Originally posted by M29
Blah blah blah. As I said, I don't care that they protested. But burning your own countries flag is treason.

No it isn't, at least not in Australia.

 

[M29]

Originally posted by mantis
No it isn't, at least not in Australia.

I meant to say it is comparable to it. And it should be.

 

[mantis]

Originally posted by M29
I meant to say it is comparable to it. And it should be.

Oklies, glad we got that cleared up then.

 

[gPhonque]

Originally posted by M29
I wouldn't hold it as sacred, in a way maybe. But it's what it represents to me.

I wonder what the flag, or in particular the Union Jack, represents to the Aboriginals?

I say the sooner we get rid of it, the better.

As for the supposed disrespect to those who died in wars:

Originally posted by DockerBrat
Fighting and dying for a piece of material would be utterly stupid.

Fighting and dying for freedom and way of live would make a bit more sense.

Nicely said.

 

[myee8]

Originally posted by mantis
No, but killing them isn't the way, as you said this has been happening for years, so how come it is only now people are suddenly interested in "freeing" them, couldn't be the oil could it?

It's called a sacrifice. Unless you have a better way of stopping Saddam mistreating his own people like in North Korea.

 

[mantis]

As others have mentioned, how about sending in a team of CIA assasins to get rid of Saddam, they have changed other regimes without resorting to wholesale murder of civilians.

Give that a try first, if it doesn't work then go the war option.

 

[bulldogs1]

Not a lot, I reckon. Perhaps a lot of cheering from those supporting the evil axis of right.

Originally posted by knuckles
What would happen if a pro-war person burnt an Iraqi flag? Technically not anti-govt.

 

[Adrian Shelton]

Just a hypothetical question here while while having a break from my uni student space waster bashing. I wonder how the UN will go about suspending or expelling the US if they act without authorisation, would they even consider such action to start with?

 

[myee8]

Originally posted by mantis
As others have mentioned, how about sending in a team of CIA assasins to get rid of Saddam, they have changed other regimes without resorting to wholesale murder of civilians.

Give that a try first, if it doesn't work then go the war option.

I bet Bush is considering all options including asassination. I did remember reading an article that Saddam moves around all the time and MIGHT have body doubles. In otherwords it will be hard (that shouldbe obvious), but ya don't mess with the CIA. I say send in all everyone - US, British, and Aussie special forces and some CIA assassins.

 

[Adrian Shelton]

How about the Mossad, they never miss.

 

[Bee]

Originally posted by M29
I wouldn't hold it as sacred, in a way maybe. But it's what it represents to me.

And what does that thing up in the left hand corner of 'our' flag, represent to you? British rule? Still tied to Britain's apron strings?The Monarchy?

You do realise don't you, that Australia didn't actually have a legal national flag until 1953? Until the Flags Act 1953 the flag was required to be flown only with the Union Jack and in an inferior position to the Union Jack. Even then the Act had to be passed by the Queen. And the Union Jack on 'our' flag sits in what is known as the vexillological honour point. Why should the symbol of another country occupy this position on what is supposed to be 'our' flag?

Call it 'our flag', if you like, but it still reprents Britain and the Monarchy as far as I am concerned.

 

[knuckles]

Originally posted by Docker_Brat
Fighting and dying for a piece of material would be utterly stupid.

Fighting and dying for freedom and way of live would make a bit more sense.

The two are directly related. The "cloth" is symbolic of the freedom and way of life in Australia.

 

[M29]

Originally posted by Bee
And what does that thing up in the left hand corner of 'our' flag, represent to you? British rule? Still tied to Britain's apron strings?The Monarchy?

You do realise don't you,

blah blah blah

on what is supposed to be 'our' flag?

Call it 'our flag', if you like, but it still reprents Britain and the Monarchy as far as I am concerned.

You sound like eddie.

And what does the southern cross represent?

I don't agree with it (union jack) being on our flag, and am with gPhonque that something should representaboriginals. (not the current convict pommy bastards uniuon jack.)

But until then, it's still something that represents 'our' country.

 

[M29]

Originally posted by mantis
As others have mentioned, how about sending in a team of CIA assasins to get rid of Saddam, they have changed other regimes without resorting to wholesale murder of civilians.

They did try it on his son, Uday an equally if not more evil sick bastard than sadam. And, they rooted up royally. Only managing to kill his body guards and shoot him in the groin. So, I'd say they don't want anything else like that happening.

 

[gbear]

Originally posted by mantis
As others have mentioned, how about sending in a team of CIA assasins to get rid of Saddam, they have changed other regimes without resorting to wholesale murder of civilians.

Give that a try first, if it doesn't work then go the war option.

APparently they tried this on several occasions during the early nineties. Unfortunately the man has too many lookalikes.

 

[gbear]

Originally posted by Adrian Shelton
Just a hypothetical question here while while having a break from my uni student space waster bashing. I wonder how the UN will go about suspending or expelling the US if they act without authorisation, would they even consider such action to start with?

The UN would probably collapse. I can't see them expelling one of the world's super economic power that has a considerable nuumber of allies.

 

[Sydneyfan]

Originally posted by gbear
APparently they tried this on several occasions during the early nineties. Unfortunately the man has too many lookalikes.

I don't know about the validity of this, but I heard that over the past decade or so, 30+ Saddam lookalikes have been killed.

Dodgy business being a lookalike, wonder if they get danger money!

 

[Sydneyfan]

Originally posted by M29
They did try it on his son, Uday an equally if not more evil sick bastard than sadam. And, they rooted up royally. Only managing to kill his body guards and shoot him in the groin. So, I'd say they don't want anything else like that happening.

Well I guess they've managed to stop him from producing any prodigy, so it's a small step in the right direction!

 

[Bee]

Originally posted by M29
You sound like eddie.

And what does the southern cross represent?

I don't agree with it (union jack) being on our flag, and am with gPhonque that something should representaboriginals. (not the current convict pommy bastards uniuon jack.)

But until then, it's still something that represents 'our' country.

Fair enough. But when people mistake the New Zealand flag for ours, doesn't that make you think it's not exactly unique?
About four years ago The Australian Monarchists League proudly displayed 'our' flag on their website. Unfortunately they had mistaken it for the New Zealand flag. Embarrassing for them, but hilarious for the republicans.
For years the monarchists had been denying that the Australian flag was often confused with the New Zealand flag, and argued that 'our' flag should not be changed. But they shot down their own argument and looked a tad silly with the New Zealand flag displayed proudly as the Australian flag.
If monarchists can't tell the difference, then no one ever will!

BTW The Southern Cross represents Australia's geographical position.

 

[gPhonque]

Originally posted by DIPPER
We had this during the last Gulf war that it was about oil from a US point of view but if that was the case surely they would have got rid of Saddam & appointed some sort of puppet government.

The war was about oil then, and is now.

Saddam had biological weapons at that time, and the US knew it.

They also knew that their forces had no protection against those weapons.

Any direct threat to Saddams position in power would have undoubtedly resulted in a biological weapons retaliation.

So they drove him out of Kuwait and let him be.

Skip forward 12 years.....

US and Allied forces now have protection against these weapons.

The war is still about oil. The only difference being the US are now prepared to take it all the way.

 

[Squeak]

What's actually on the flag is irrelevant here. The fact that it is Australia's flag is the point. Even if I was vehemently against what was on the flag, I would still be outraged by someone burning it.