BS, that's just another straw argument ,used by neo-nazis.
Strawmen like that are necessary to justify the accusation of whining Jews.
Someone took candles off the graves, and arranged a swastika on a Jewish grave out of respect. On the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. I believe that. And the Kluckers are just putting up Christmas decorations.
As I have clearly said: if this was a swastika of burning gasoline poured on the grass I would not be saying that it might not be a hate crime. If this were in France or Belgium I wouldn't say this. But it is in Sweden where the swastika has historically been a good symbol dating back millenia before the advent of Hitler and his evil henchmen. I've also pointed out that the synagogue Beith Tefila in Gothenburg has swastikas on the front door as an example of such.
Since, as is your collective point of view, that any use of a swastika is a hate crime should the Jewish synagogue be destroyed and its members arrested for daring to defy your misconceptions?
Why not go to India and destroy every temple with a swastika on it? There's lots of them, by the way. Or go destroy the Laguna Bridge on the Hopi Nation. Why not destroy the Amiens Cathedral? Howzabout we burn some Buddhist Temples for having "NAZI!!!" symbols on them?
Why don't we just round up all of these people who are so offending you with their refusal to surrender their cultural icons to your hatred? Why don't we round them up, put them in camps, and gas them if they won't give up their non-Nazi swastikas?
You people are just as bad as the Nazis. You hate without even knowing what it is you hate. You don't even bother to look at the links I've posted that would show you that certain Scandinavians still consider the swastika as their own symbol and not a Nazi symbol.
Why not let us turn this around?
You put up a picture of the KKK appropriating a cross to burn as a symbol of hate. By your logic then, isn't ANY cross a symbol of hatred? Shouldn't we tear down each and every cross because of what that symbol meant to people oppressed, terrorized, and murdered by the people who used that symbol? C'mon, this is YOUR argument here.
So why is it that we can accept the cross as a symbol apart from the KKK who carry it as a symbol of hate to this very day - yet the swastika that was carried for a much shorter period as a symbol of hate *must* receive no tolerance? Why is it you cannot accept that there are people who don't care a whit about Naziism who use swastikas?
Aren't crosses an intolerable symbol of hatred? This is your logic, after all.
And don't give me some intellectually dishonest explanation that "it's different". It is not. A hate group appropriates a symbol and now it is lost forever to any other group?
Please.
Are you going to stop your children from enjoying rainbows because the homosexuals have appropriated the rainbow as a symbol of homosexuality?
Will mathematicians have to stop using the "=" sign because another queer group appropriated that?
Heck, a white power group called 'National Alliance' has used the Star of David in some of their sickening drivel. Should the Star of David be forever banned being as it has been 'tainted' by a hate group?
Of course not.
And there's no reason why people who have nothing to do with Nazis, the Klan, or any other offensive hate group should have to lose *anything* because of the actions of a bunch of despicable criminals.
Think about this: because of the Nazis you would hurt Native Americans, Hindus, Arabs, Africans, rural Europeans, Pacific Islanders, & etc.
Which is utter nonsense.
Which brings me full-circle back to my point that it is a fact (which I've substantiated) that some people in Sweden do not consider the swastika a bad thing.
If they did this out of ignorance (but meaning well) then they sure as heck need an education that while they have no issue with the swastika that Jewish people do.
If it proves out to be an act of hatred then I'm all for horsewhipping the clods who did it.