LZ Ace wrote: Well, I think I got Walrus' post right and you got mine wrong. I basically agree with you (and by the way the Swatiska comes from an ancient symbol from Buddhism). But still I don't think we can say "Allahu Akbar" has a bad connotation.
Using Allahu Akbar and giving it a bad connotation is what's wrong. Allahu Akbar itself isn't wrong while the Swatiska is (because yeah, a swatiska has reversed the former symbol which has nothing to do with Nazism).

What is wrong is giving "Allahu Akbar" a bad connotation, that's it.

[quote="LZ Ace" post=155065]I think you completely missed Walrus' post by generalising the swastika. It's an ancient ornament that was already used by the Romans, if not before. It has been abused by Hitler in the past and please, let us not come to the point where a religuous phrase like "Alluhu akbar" immediatly gets the same kind of negative connotation. It's not about whether it's written in the rules or not, it's about respect.[/quote] Well, I think I got Walrus' post right and you got mine wrong. I basically agree with you (and by the way the Swatiska comes from an ancient symbol from Buddhism). But still I don't think we can say "Allahu Akbar" has a bad connotation. Using Allahu Akbar and giving it a bad connotation is what's wrong. Allahu Akbar itself isn't wrong while the Swatiska is (because yeah, a swatiska has reversed the former symbol which has nothing to do with Nazism). What is wrong is giving "Allahu Akbar" a bad connotation, that's it.