Re the image - The image wasn't offensive at all in it's intent. In other words, it didn't set out to offend. It was just a large-breasted girl in a semi nazi-type uniform. More of a kinky look than a military one. In fact, without the swastika, I don't think there would have been grounds for complaint by anyone. But.... you can bet your horse and wagon that if Georgous had left it there, SOMEONE would have complained. Re Chuck's comment 'So much for freedom of speech and artistic freedom' - I understand what you're saying, but I don't think this is just about artistic freedom. It's more a question of manners and not willingly offending people. There are many symbols that we don't use, mainly out of good taste. Is an image of an upside-down crucifixion satanic or does it represent artistic freedom? I don't know. It may represent the artist's right to express him/herself, but it's also pretty crass. This is a whole other topic, (and no comment on Georgous's image), but there seems to be an idea floating around that artists should be exempt from the rules of society, good manners or taste. And, God forbid that we should express disgust at their work, because it's ART. Well, that may be OK up to a point. But just ask yourself this. If a paedophile claims that the pictures he/she looks at are art, where the hell does that leave us? Sorry about the rant. I just like to let off steam now and again. mac PS Chuck - No offence - I do actually agree with you... mostly.