PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — His U.S. Senate campaign under fire, Maine Democrat Graham Platner said Wednesday that a tattoo on his chest has been covered to no longer reflect an image widely recognized as a Nazi symbol.
The first-time political candidate said he got the skull and crossbones tattoo in 2007, when he was in his 20s and in the Marine Corps. It happened during a night of drinking while he was on leave in Croatia, he said, adding he was unaware until recently that the image has been associated with Nazi police.
I didn’t say that. Mostly, I am saying that this guy is very very clearly not a Nazi, and so the broad-spectrum freakout about this particular tattoo is an establishment funded psyop which people on Lemmy should not be dutifully freaking out about when prompted to by the media.
What I said about the military personnel side was just that the specific details of how that one other user is claiming it works in the military are definitely false.
Oh he’s very clearly not a Nazi is he? The guy with a Nazi tattoo on his chest? The guy who’s now very clearly lying about said tattoo? An ex marine? Sure very clear. What you mean to say is his current political campaign rhetoric doesn’t appear to be openly Nazi based. Well thank God we would never fall for campaign rhetoric that goes against all previous records of a person cough Fetterman cough. Maybe the psyop you should be concerned about is another Democrat getting into the Senate and then immediately voting against what Democrat voters actually want.
Also I’m confused by your last paragraph there. If you’re not saying that these kind of tattoos never get by the military sometimes then how is it definitely false what the other guys claiming? So which is it do they sometimes get through like he claims or they never get through like you were suggesting and now have suggested once again they are with that sentence? Can’t be both.
You’re becoming hoisted by your own control-the-conversation.
It is fine for a person with this tattoo to be in the military, because it’s not a Nazi tattoo any more than the Iron Cross is a Nazi tattoo. That is an obvious conclusion that can be drawn just from the pure fact that this guy was in the military. It’s only confusing if you are accepting the premise that it’s an overtly and exclusively Nazi tattoo (to the same extent as having an SS lightning bolt or a swastika or something).
The objective fact of this guy being allowed to be in the military with this tattoo is a problem for the people who are pretending it’s a Nazi tattoo, so one commenter tried to explain away that discrepancy by pretending that the US military is just lax and inconsistent about tattoo enforcement. I can actually believe that idea in some circumstances and depending on the details, but the person didn’t know what they’re talking about, so they doubled down about some weird aspects of what they were claiming in ways that revealed that they were definitely lying. They didn’t know enough about the subject matter to make a well-constructed lie (which also betrays the fact that they were making up stuff they were talking about, which is it own whole type of interesting and important).
Hope that clears up your confusion.
Okay so you cleared my Confusion by doubling down and saying that the US military would never allow Nazi tattoos. Good to know. That is the hill you’ve decided to die on. Well seeing as how that silly statement goes against literal reality I think we know who really knows what they’re talking about in this conversation don’t we? Hint it’s not the guy now apologizing for blatantly Nazi tattoos. Straight up downplaying nazi iconography. Wow.
Wooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww