Posting as a German by birth and nationality, I just found out that the German flag seems to be "protected by law" - you can end up for up to three years in prison for defaming national symbols (§ 90a StGB).[/quote]So as a German do you think this is common? Are there many laws that you are unaware of? And would, should that be taken as a sign that Germans are polite? [/quote]
As I am not a lawyer, there certainly are thousands of laws I am not aware of.
What do you think does this have to do with politeness, however?

wrote:

Chari]Both flags [Dutch & German] have been burnt in the past, worldwide -- recently in Afghanistan, for instance. I am not surprised that you did not hear or read about it :)

Why?

I am not surprised because this is not likely to be featured in foreign news sources. The spotlight typically is on what your own nation does, how people worldwide react to your own country, etc. My ample travels to your country indicate that the USA are no exception to that rule.
wrote:

Both flags [Dutch & German] have been burnt in the past, worldwide -- recently in Afghanistan, for instance. I am not surprised that you did not hear or read about it :)[/quote]Why?[/quote]
I am not surprised because this is not likely to be featured in foreign news sources. The spotlight typically is on what your own nation does, how people worldwide react to your own country, etc. My ample travels to your country indicate that the USA are no exception to that rule.

wrote:

Chari][Over here, s]uch news [of anti-US demonstations where flags may be burnt] are typically summarily reported under minor events (unless, of course, they are exceptional in size, place or whatever else). And as a minor event, they don't get much attention to details (e.g., flag burning isn't mentioned, they just say that an anti-American demonstration took place).

I am use to seeing video of any event that is reported. And agreed that general they don't announce that our flag was burned, however the video shows images of the flag or flags burning...

Interesting. I am not a very visual person myself, if that is the right word, in my news consumption. I typically read journals, listen to radio programmes. My tv news are limited to 15 minutes per work day and perhaps twice as much in the weekend -- little, thus. As I understand, visual images are more suitable for transporting subliminal messages, suggestive readings, so I feel a bit "on the safe side" with my choice of media. You can read a text on your own speed, when you want it, and it's still there for future reference afterwards. I realise that with the internet, the visual media nowadays approach that standard as well. But still, it is much more difficult to locate the source of a quote from a YouTube video than from a Reuters message.

[Over here, s]uch news [of anti-US demonstations where flags may be burnt] are typically summarily reported under minor events (unless, of course, they are exceptional in size, place or whatever else). And as a minor event, they don't get much attention to details (e.g., flag burning isn't mentioned, they just say that an anti-American demonstration took place).[/quote]I am use to seeing video of any event that is reported. And agreed that general they don't announce that our flag was burned, however the video shows images of the flag or flags burning...[/quote]
Interesting. I am not a very visual person myself, if that is the right word, in my news consumption. I typically read journals, listen to radio programmes. My tv news are limited to 15 minutes per work day and perhaps twice as much in the weekend -- little, thus. As I understand, visual images are more suitable for transporting subliminal messages, suggestive readings, so I feel a bit "on the safe side" with my choice of media. You can read a text on your own speed, when you want it, and it's still there for future reference afterwards. I realise that with the internet, the visual media nowadays approach that standard as well. But still, it is much more difficult to locate the source of a quote from a YouTube video than from a Reuters message.

wrote:

Chari]I did not know about this [British couple having sex on the beach someplace in the USA], but it is common knowledge in Europe (confirmed by almost every US visitors' experience) that the US version of freedom is very special, to say the least.

Really? While I'm not a world traveler by any stretch of the imagination, my guess is our freedoms are not really that different. I've lived outside of the US for a time, and found it very enjoyable. Never felt that my freedoms where infringed on in any way.

So it works in one travel direction :)
Not to be mistaken, the USA are of course an extremely free country -- you can do a lot, especially in terms of starting up a business. As the prudishness case ("sex on the beach") illustrates, however, the experience of freedom is very much culturally determined. The US rules about public display of nudity, the "war on drugs", some states' laws on marriage and euthanasia, however, make one wonder how much a person is allowed to determine her own life. Have you ever tried to get by, without a driving license, in a middle-sized US city? Doesn't feel like freedom, I can reveal to you...
wrote:

I did not know about this [British couple having sex on the beach someplace in the USA], but it is common knowledge in Europe (confirmed by almost every US visitors' experience) that the US version of freedom is very special, to say the least.[/quote]Really? While I'm not a world traveler by any stretch of the imagination, my guess is our freedoms are not really that different. I've lived outside of the US for a time, and found it very enjoyable. Never felt that my freedoms where infringed on in any way. [/quote]
So it works in one travel direction :)
Not to be mistaken, the USA are of course an extremely free country -- you can do a lot, especially in terms of starting up a business. As the prudishness case ("sex on the beach") illustrates, however, the experience of freedom is very much culturally determined. The US rules about public display of nudity, the "war on drugs", some states' laws on marriage and euthanasia, however, make one wonder how much a person is allowed to determine her own life. Have you ever tried to get by, without a driving license, in a middle-sized US city? Doesn't feel like freedom, I can reveal to you...

wrote:

Chari]... if somebody posts here in the w'wide news & politics forum, it is expedient NOT to assume that everyone reading or posting here is a US citizen.

I don't believe I assume anywhere that everyone is a US citizen...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=agnosticspirit wrote:

... if somebody posts here in the w'wide news & politics forum, it is expedient NOT to assume that everyone reading or posting here is a US citizen.[/quote]I don't believe I assume anywhere that everyone is a US citizen...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=agnosticspirit;853355]It's also expedient NOT to assume that ALL US citizens who participate on WNP are NOT aware of this, yes? ;) Americans are no more a monolithic block than citizens of any other country.[/QUOTE]
You need not try to fit every hat on the rack :)
To be very explicit: I was talking about the guy who started the flag burning thread (this one), who -- if I understand you correctly -- seems to have referred to a mindset that is easily accessible for US citizens, but not so much where I live.

To illustrate (although I repeat myself), this thread's title reads
"Why shouldn't people burn Saudi Arabia's Flag.?? I think they burn the U.S.A. Flag..."

In my understanding of English grammar, one would need to assume that the "they" the second sentence speaks of is the "people" of the first sentence. But none of our American posters seems to think that. Why? Because cultural background trumps grammar, I would say. A convoluted message can become lucidly clear when you inject the correct mindset to decode it... Yet otherwise, it remains convoluted.

tl;dr