To say it's in 'bad taste' would be the ultimate understatement! It's one thing to use a name that's outrageous and attention-grabbing, but it's quite another thing altogether to use a name, infamously associated with mass genocide and human brutality on a scale never before seen. There's nothing wrong with using the Swastik, but to pair it with the name of that perverted, hideous criminal, is criminal.
it shame for indians to choose hitler as our hero.it means that new generation do not know anything about jew holocaust.and days are not far when indians will meet similar fate as like millions jews.also it is eqully shame for indians that our one chief minister selected his son name as stalin.afterall stalin was more cuel than hitler as he killed more civilians than fascists alone.
I would not dine at Hitler's Cross. I think it's disgusting and downright insensitive. What the big deal about changing the name? Anything else would be better.
Its a shame that the government approved this name and concept. I would say this is a disgrace for us Indian if we eat in this restaurant, which tends to respect the biggest villain of earlier century, and one of the worst guys in history. It would only mean that we approve his heinous crime. We should, in fact , join the Israilies in condemning this act instead of discussing if we would be eating there. What a shameful approach from rediff !
dude, Even in my town Tuticorin, we have a coffee shop named as "Hitler Cafe"...umm the taste of coffee and tea is superb there...Go and eat, why look at names..?..sure those guys will make good money with this publicity:)
(If the name "Hitler" is an issue, then there should not be any products by the name of "Bush" too..:-)) )
I'd rather starve than eat at this Nazi lover's restaurant. Not just the Jews, the Christians should stay away from the place too. After all, the first Christians were converted Jews.
RE:They chose a name like this cos the food's probably terrible
by vivek on Aug 24, 2006 06:57 PM Permalink
Man...dont we have anything better to talk about than debate about the names of restaurants?? Are we that jobless?? But since I have decided to waste a few minutes on this topic...I might as well say my point. All you people who want to boycott businesses based on thier names such as this "Hitler's Cross"...think for just a moment, what are you gonna do when your extremely nice and helpful neighbor's last name is Hitler??
interesting thing...the Hitler's cross owner didnt choose the age old Hindu swastika symbol which but its mirror Nazi symbol!!
Insensitive
by Satya on Aug 23, 2006 05:59 PM Permalink
If the owner had chosen just the symbol Swastika, he can defend his actions, as Swastika is an ancient Hindu holy symbol which was appropriated by Hitler to serve his Aryan supremacy theory.
But having Hitler's name shows that he is insensitive to the plight suffered by the Jews in the holocaust. I cant seen how anyone can have their food sitting in a restaurant named after a person who systematically and brutally killed 6 million people. Just remember scenes from a movie like Schindler's list or Life is Beautiful or The Pianist, and you can then realise how grotesque and inhuman Hitler was!
I have a simple question to the owner: Can he dare put up the name General Dyer's cross? If he can answer that question, he will have an answer to the question of whether the name Hitler's Cross is justified or not!
