Robin Hood?! Oh no he isn’t…


Christopher Houseman

A Glasgow pantomime production of “Robin Hood” has changed the colour of the crosses on a nurse’s uniform from red to green after being informed by the British Red Cross that it might otherwise face prosecution for being in violation of the Geneva Convention.

A Red Cross spokesman explained that “Repeated and widespread misuse of the Red Cross emblem could dilute its neutrality and its ability to protect.”

Perhaps someone should explain to the dimwitted bureaucrats at the Red Cross that:

(i) A symbol has no intrinsic power to protect anyone or anything

(ii) Getting shirty about the use of a symbol in a pantomime is likely to bring a flurry of contempt in the direction of the Red Cross, and may therefore undermine the organisation’s image of “neutrality”.

Meanwhile, I await Dave Prowse’s response to the news that an improperly dressed person in a Green Cross uniform is at large somewhere in Glasgow…

About these ads

6 responses to “Robin Hood?! Oh no he isn’t…

  1. C H Ingoldby

    It’s very disappointing that people have so little spirit that they gutlessly cave in to this crap.

    Anyone with any spirit at all would have told the Red Cross to prosecute and be damned. The idea that they would actually have done so is so obviously ludicious as to be laughable.

    It really does seem that people have become so devoid of spirit and independence of mind that they will bow down to any bureaucratic nonsense, and that has sad implications for the revival of liberty.

    So many people really are happy living without the responsibility of freedom. They are scared of losing their chains.

  2. Perhaps Mr Ingoldby would care to look at the evidence before asserting the British Red Cross does not refer cases to the prosecuting authorities (the Ministry of Defence and CPS):

    http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jmbb.htm

    As for it being bureaucratic nonsense, and an emblem that provides no protection, I doubt those being protected by it would say that. Perhaps we should abolish the relevant bits of the Geneva Conventions and find out what happens?

    I thought libertarians belived in the right to possess property, including intellectual property, without misuse?

  3. Bobalob, the generic use of the red cross to indicate a nurse is well established. Therefore there is absolutely no harm in a character wearing one in a play.

    No one has suggested that a red cross is ”an emblem that provides no protection”, as you falsely (dishonestly?) suggest, rather, there is absolutely no reason to believe that the use of a red cross to denote a nurse in a play will have absolutely no effect on its role outside that playhouse.

    And if you think that Libertarians believe in the right to possess ‘intellectual property’ then you are utteroly ignorant of Libertarian thought. Intellectual property is an area of deep contention for Libertarians.

    And linking to a website maintained by the Red Cross in which it discusses dealng with major organisations using the red cross in major publicity campaigns has no relevance whatsoever to a small playhouse using the symbol on a character in a play.

    So, you have succesfully misunderstood the issue, misunderstood Libertarianism and misrepresented my argument. All told, you have succesfully made yourself look like a priggish idiot. Well done.

  4. Howard R Gray

    The Red Cross is a symbol of many organizations not just one based in Geneva. A cursory examination of its origin might have detered the Geneva people and their UK offshoot from going to court over an event of no international significance. Intellectual proprietary bullying is about as silly as it gets, didn’t some folks centuries earlier use the same cross for those notorious crusades? Ho hum, nuff said.

  5. C H Ingoldby

    I imagine that the Red Cross will now take England to court. After all, England has been fragantly using the Red Cross on its flag without any permission whatsoever.

  6. Howard R Gray

    That pesky St George will need counsel asap. Perhaps the Red Cross folk might consider the international implications of the Georgian flag, it has even more red crosses on it. Perhaps the Middle Temple will have to give up its red cross too? All this is just another example of the joyless politically correct minions as the Red Cross being mean and idiotic. The symbol is universal they simply have no extra right to it. Petty terrorism does not become them in threatening people with court action over the red cross. No is likely to mistake their use of the symbol other than themselves.