politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » GE2019 Tory remainers – the key voting group who are giving St
Options
Comments
-
See Peter Shilton has offended the wokerati0
-
I’m sorry to break it to you, but Robin Hood is as real as Sweeny Toddstate_go_away said:There's a rather romantic statue of Robin Hood and Maid Marian (ironically they are both on one knee) in the village (edwinstowe) near Sherwood Forest . Its my favourite statue but worried the Woke may view (its after all the only view that matters ) that Robin was an evil Crusader who killed non-whites .
0 -
Perhaps because for many people Daniel Radcliffe is Harry Potter. In a way, JK Rowling is responsible for Radcliffe's success. Perhaps he would have succeeded anyway, but who knows?state_go_away said:
I think that's reasonable although quite why you need to be associated with Harry Potter to have a newsworthy view on this I don't knowBeibheirli_C said:
Radcliffe merely expressed his position that he disagreed with JK Rowling. He also said that he hoped that people who disagreed with Rowling would not judge the books' positive message that love was the strongest force in the universe.Cyclefree said:... I see Daniel Radcliffe has climbed on the latest bandwagon and is busy telling women that he knows better than them what they should feel.
I think his comments are entirely reasonable
0 -
ydoethur said:
Thanks. I hadn’t heard. When I can travel freely again I shall go and see it.SandyRentool said:
Greenhead Park. Only went up last year.ydoethur said:
I never knew that! Where is it?SandyRentool said:
We have this in Woking:ydoethur said:
I thought there already was a national Sikh war memorial in Brighton.eadric said:Mr Khan has his replacements in mind
"Instead a number of new memorials in the capital have been pledged by Mr Khan, including ones for Stephen Lawrence, the Windrush generation, a National Slavery Museum or memorial and a National Sikh War Memorial."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Burial_Ground,_Horsell_Common
There is also a memorial in Huddersfield.
The Indian soldiers who fought and very often died should be far more widely known and commemorated than they are, as should the African soldiers. Very important in Britain’s survival, yet given very little for it. It genuinely is an area that shows race relations in this country in an unflattering light.0 -
YesBenpointer said:
Is that meant to be the ≠ symbol?Charles said:
Sure =/= rightydoethur said:
Are you sure of that?Carnyx said:
Not Pusey House any more - it's become Linacre College.algarkirk said:
It's Karma of a sort after their disdain for Mrs Thatcher.eadric said:
You underestimate the emotional power of this strange, Dianas-death-like western spasm.Flatlander said:
I understand Oriel have a Very Large (£100m) donation hanging on their decision.eadric said:Looks like Rhodes Won't Fall in Oriel College, tonight
Good. At some point the mob must be challenged, and pushed back
Why would anyone try and leave a legacy as a philanthropist if they are going to be removed from history on a whim at a later date?
The rather wet Provost at the time this last came up (an ex civil servant) was hopeless and lost a lot of goodwill with old college members.
Hopefully the current Provost won't make the same mistake.
Ex-chaplain Nigel Biggar might have something to say (if he isn't a non-person by now).
Everyone at Oriel will move in a world of liberal-left pieties, this is academe. They will have friends and colleagues on social media screaming at them to "do the right thing". Anyone who wants the statue kept will be terrified of speaking out, in case they get cancelled. Careers are ending around the world on this issue.
It would be hard enough for a private company to resist this intense pressure, but an Oxford college, with all its angry students and professors, seeking approval from their peers?
I predict they will yield, or they will quietly let some hoons do it for them
BTW has anyone consulted Oriel's distinguished fellows Newman, Keble and Pusey on the matter? Or will Keble College and Pusey House be razed to the ground anyway.0 -
So more pissed than George Best after happy hour?Foxy said:
I am as sober as a judge!eadric said:
Put down the cheap Aussie Merlot, FoxyFoxy said:
Purge the Wreckers and intellectual deviationists!eadric said:
If the Left wants a Culture War to the Bitter End, which it seems they do, then they can have one. Raze the whole fucking country to the ground so the professors have to eat pebblesFoxy said:
Yes, let's declare Year Zero and remove the intellectuals to re-education camps. Let them learn from the peasants by picking vegetables! Cultural revolution now! The only book that matters is the thoughts of Chairman Boris!eadric said:
Good, let the universities die. They are the seedbed of this repulsive Woke creedanother_richard said:
I don't see how many universities aren't financially bolloxed with the economic and educational changes that will take place.rottenborough said:Maybe I am a cynic, but seems university authorities are giving into their client base's loudest in order to keep the fees rolling in?
0 -
They should put him in front of Rhodes - Nothing would get past him!Pulpstar said:See Peter Shilton has offended the wokerati
0 -
We face a wider media situation telling us that America handled the war whilst Britain manned the tea tent. It's hardly surprising that there's little nuance to the counter-argument that 'Britain stood alone'. But you're right, it's high time we did a lot more to recognise the part played by the Commonwealth (nee Empire).Carnyx said:
Absolutely so. It's part of the Brexiter myth that 'Britain' (sic) stood alone against Hitler and the other dictators. And they fought in both world wars - Mespot and East Africa in the GW (after a brief and ghastly encounter with the Western Front weather), and so on.ydoethur said:
Thanks. I hadn’t heard. When I can travel freely again I shall go and see it.SandyRentool said:
Greenhead Park. Only went up last year.ydoethur said:
I never knew that! Where is it?SandyRentool said:
There is also a memorial in Huddersfield.ydoethur said:
I thought there already was a national Sikh war memorial in Brighton.eadric said:Mr Khan has his replacements in mind
"Instead a number of new memorials in the capital have been pledged by Mr Khan, including ones for Stephen Lawrence, the Windrush generation, a National Slavery Museum or memorial and a National Sikh War Memorial."
The Indian soldiers who fought and very often died should be far more widely known and commemorated than they are, as should the African soldiers. Very important in Britain’s survival, yet given very little for it. It genuinely is an area that shows race relations in this country in an unflattering light.1 -
Well if Londoners disagree they can vote against Khan at the next Mayoral Election.eadric said:
I doubt 1% knew who he was.CatMan said:
You think most Londoners wanted that statue to stay?eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
But it is part of London's intricate and contentious history. If it it to be removed, Londoners need to be asked how we feel. Probably most would agree it should be removed to a museum?
You don't do it this way. In the blink of an eye, like a municipal book burning.0 -
Unless he had to deal with a Pole.state_go_away said:
They should put him in front of Rhodes - Nothing would get past him!Pulpstar said:See Peter Shilton has offended the wokerati
#ShitGoalie0 -
Well, you sound like you're losing it to me... 'nationwide bloodthirst'? Statues don't bleed.Casino_Royale said:
One. So far. Many others have been heavily vandalised and defaced.Benpointer said:
Get a grip for God's sake!Casino_Royale said:
If you defend partisan mobs that remove statues outside the law, and accuse those who object of being racist, then you're fuelling that mob with their own rhetoric.Sunil_Prasannan said:
How?Casino_Royale said:
You helped unleash the beast,Sunil_Prasannan said:
Honestly, not too sure about this one. Step too far, IMHO.BannedinnParis said:
his. father's.dr_spyn said:W. E. Gladstone now next in line for attaining non person status.
https://twitter.com/maxclementsECHO/status/1270391104022745088
You have no grounds for objecting to where this ends up now.
None.
How many statues have actually been removed by these 'partisan mobs'?
And it was the lack of action by the authorities and shameless acquiescence of so many that has now led to a nationwide bloodthirst for stripping them out.
I'm not the one that needs to get a grip. I'm one of the ones that has one.
Both sides of this argument have merit imo. Damaging statues because you disagree with what they stand for is not acceptable, nor is it legal. But public statues need to be acceptable to the broad sweep of the population and it's clear that Colston's had little merit and even less local support.0 -
If they do, I await some interesting squarings of the circles by some in this country. 5 times in prison including threatening to kill the unborn of a pregnant woman, still ok for a statue. William Gladstone, Robert Peel and Winston Churchill, not ok.MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
Going to make Owen Jones, antisemite Marx grave must be protected, Peel, Gladstone, yeahhh goo for it, rip the MFer downs, the lot, look like minor hypocrisy.
Personally, I think there should be a statue to Floyd. Not because he was a good man, but because his death at the hands of the police is a symbol of something bigger.
But then I am also comfortable having statues of other bad men and those I vehemently disagree with out there.1 -
Honestly, if white people want to respect BAME people, they should shut up for a bit and listen to them not talk at them.Cyclefree said:
Excuse me? I have not done this and I object strongly to you making unjustified accusations against me. You made a fool of yourself last night and you’re doing so again. If you had any honour you’d apologise.Sunil_Prasannan said:Cyclefree said:
It’s not just racism. It’s dismissing BAME experiences or views or telling them what they should think. I see Cyclefree has climbed on the latest bandwagon and is busy telling BAME people that she knows better than them what they should feel. Honestly, if white people want to respect BAME people, they should shut up for a bit and listen to them not talk at them.
1 -
No its not, that's an absurd straw man. Statues have gone up and down for hundreds if not thousands of years.state_go_away said:
Its a bit TalibanPhilip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
We have no obligation to the past to celebrate via statues that which we do not approve of today. Nor can we oblige the future. A free society can choose what it wants to have and if people don't want statues up they shouldn't be up - and this was done legally so no qualms there.0 -
@ydoethur - we have this in Woking:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Burial_Ground,_Horsell_Common0 -
Really? What have they managed to expunge so far?eadric said:
Because the Left is trying to get it expunged from history? They are quite good at thatCatMan said:
So you couldn't find that speech anywhere other then on far-right websites? Maybe you should think why that is.isam said:
Err...Actually, I tried but I couldn't! I was going to just paste some of it with no link, but thought the whole thing was worth reading, and hoped the independent minds of PB wouldn't be swayed by the sourceCatMan said:
Errr, couldn't you have a found a link to that speech which didn't involve going on what Wikipedia calls "a far-right British pressure group" and "founded in 2001 by Gregory Lauder-Frost, a former officer and known racist Western Goals Institute (WGI)"isam said:This speech by Enoch Powell from 1977 predicts the BLM movement's recent actions as if he were commenting today about what has just happened
https://traditionalbritain.org/blog/road-national-suicide/0 -
I think he would have done. His breakout role wasn’t Harry Potter, it was David Copperfield (also starring Maggie Smith). After that he was assured of a decent career on TV and stage. He’d also appeared in minor roles in film - i’ve got a feeling he was in The Tailor of Panama.Beibheirli_C said:
Perhaps because for many people Daniel Radcliffe is Harry Potter. In a way, JK Rowling is responsible for Radcliffe's success. Perhaps he would have succeeded anyway, but who knows?state_go_away said:
I think that's reasonable although quite why you need to be associated with Harry Potter to have a newsworthy view on this I don't knowBeibheirli_C said:
Radcliffe merely expressed his position that he disagreed with JK Rowling. He also said that he hoped that people who disagreed with Rowling would not judge the books' positive message that love was the strongest force in the universe.Cyclefree said:... I see Daniel Radcliffe has climbed on the latest bandwagon and is busy telling women that he knows better than them what they should feel.
I think his comments are entirely reasonable
But it’s unlikely his rise would have been so meteoric.1 -
Told you! Racist!eadric said:
The horizon is DARK.
0 -
If your culture is celebrating slave traders I'm happy to join the left in that culture war.eadric said:I have never been so pessimistic for my country, my culture, my civilisation.
We are facing the worst recession in a century, or maybe more. We are in the middle of a deadly pandemic which might yet worsen. We have a generation of children going without schooling - damaged in so many ways.
And in the middle of this painful chaos, the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war, unleashing violent passions which they do not begin to understand.
The horizon is dark.
If its not, then don't be so pathetically preposterous.0 -
These guys have a problem with Abraham Lincoln, you really think Robin Hood can escape guilt by not being real?Charles said:
I’m sorry to break it to you, but Robin Hood is as real as Sweeny Toddstate_go_away said:There's a rather romantic statue of Robin Hood and Maid Marian (ironically they are both on one knee) in the village (edwinstowe) near Sherwood Forest . Its my favourite statue but worried the Woke may view (its after all the only view that matters ) that Robin was an evil Crusader who killed non-whites .
0 -
Who'd have guessed Woking was so, er... Woke?tlg86 said:@ydoethur - we have this in Woking:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Burial_Ground,_Horsell_Common0 -
I was meaning the consequences were a net positive for the world.Gallowgate said:
I can’t say I agree with this. It is what it is, a creature of its time. I wouldn’t describe it as good, or bad.Charles said:
“Deeply beneficial” is over egging it, but - on balance - the empire did more good than bad.topherdawson said:
Eadric perhaps not a bad thing to deconstruct our identity in order to examine it a bit? Especially the bit which depends on the idea that the British Empire was deeply beneficial to the colonised. Because that leads to the idea that we are a Great Power who should be leading the world and not a middle sized European country. Sense of identity matters and ought not to be exempt from examination. If you have another British history you want to promote, let's hear it.Theuniondivvie said:
The Great Replacement, whether by the Muslamics or the Woke, seems to be a deep, nagging insecurity for the white (mostly male) right. Why are you so unconfident in your culture's ability to survive?eadric said:
It's gone way beyond BLM, it is now about vandalising all of British history, and trying to make white Britons feel guilty for simply being British. It is an attempt to deconstruct our identity, driven by a weird ragbag or anarchists, Marxists, greens, and Remainers (really, check the FBPE people egging this on).algarkirk said:
Could this revolution possibly devour its children? I hope it does so before burning the Bodleian and Cambridge University Library to the ground rather than after.eadric said:Queen Victoria targeted in Leeds
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1270410855348350978?s=20
Fuck them, I hate them, we have to fight back.
Britain is a force for democratic values and liberty. That is something we should be immensely proud of.
Constitutional structures are neither good nor bad in themselves0 -
Been away for a couple of hours. Anyone have a Churchill statue update? 0
-
Apparently Francis Drake is on the list.0
-
Errrrr... well I knew you'd say that!CatMan said:
So you couldn't find that speech anywhere other than on far-right websites? Maybe you should think why that is.isam said:
Err...Actually, I tried but I couldn't! I was going to just paste some of it with no link, but thought the whole thing was worth reading, and hoped the independent minds of PB wouldn't be swayed by the sourceCatMan said:
Errr, couldn't you have a found a link to that speech which didn't involve going on what Wikipedia calls "a far-right British pressure group" and "founded in 2001 by Gregory Lauder-Frost, a former officer and known racist Western Goals Institute (WGI)"isam said:This speech by Enoch Powell from 1977 predicts the BLM movement's recent actions as if he were commenting today about what has just happened
https://traditionalbritain.org/blog/road-national-suicide/
Errrrrr maybe you can have a guess errrrr why
0 -
There was a vote, the Mayor was elected. If the people don't like the Mayor's actions they can elect a new one who can reverse it and put the statue up.eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
And yes London is owned by all Londoners. Today's Londoners, not the past. This "patrimony" you speak of doesn't own London, its populace do. The voters who elected Khan as their Mayor do.
If the populace via their elected Mayor don't want the statue then the statue should be gone.0 -
They were two separate points: then and now.Sunil_Prasannan said:
How many Viceroys were elected by the Indian people? India only became a democracy after Independence (ie. a concious choice made by the Indians). OTOH her neighbours Burma and Pakistan quickly became military dictatorships.Charles said:
“Deeply beneficial” is over egging it, but - on balance - the empire did more good than bad.topherdawson said:
Eadric perhaps not a bad thing to deconstruct our identity in order to examine it a bit? Especially the bit which depends on the idea that the British Empire was deeply beneficial to the colonised. Because that leads to the idea that we are a Great Power who should be leading the world and not a middle sized European country. Sense of identity matters and ought not to be exempt from examination. If you have another British history you want to promote, let's hear it.Theuniondivvie said:
The Great Replacement, whether by the Muslamics or the Woke, seems to be a deep, nagging insecurity for the white (mostly male) right. Why are you so unconfident in your culture's ability to survive?eadric said:
It's gone way beyond BLM, it is now about vandalising all of British history, and trying to make white Britons feel guilty for simply being British. It is an attempt to deconstruct our identity, driven by a weird ragbag or anarchists, Marxists, greens, and Remainers (really, check the FBPE people egging this on).algarkirk said:
Could this revolution possibly devour its children? I hope it does so before burning the Bodleian and Cambridge University Library to the ground rather than after.eadric said:Queen Victoria targeted in Leeds
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1270410855348350978?s=20
Fuck them, I hate them, we have to fight back.
Britain is a force for democratic values and liberty. That is something we should be immensely proud of.0 -
Errrrrr correct!eadric said:
Because the Left is trying to get it expunged from history? They are quite good at thatCatMan said:
So you couldn't find that speech anywhere other then on far-right websites? Maybe you should think why that is.isam said:
Err...Actually, I tried but I couldn't! I was going to just paste some of it with no link, but thought the whole thing was worth reading, and hoped the independent minds of PB wouldn't be swayed by the sourceCatMan said:
Errr, couldn't you have a found a link to that speech which didn't involve going on what Wikipedia calls "a far-right British pressure group" and "founded in 2001 by Gregory Lauder-Frost, a former officer and known racist Western Goals Institute (WGI)"isam said:This speech by Enoch Powell from 1977 predicts the BLM movement's recent actions as if he were commenting today about what has just happened
https://traditionalbritain.org/blog/road-national-suicide/0 -
Are we going to have to have referendum's every other week, like in Switzerland, to decide which statues are ok?williamglenn said:Apparently Francis Drake is on the list.
0 -
Sorry, but I don't condone those who protested and 'tried' to maintain social distance. Not even if they succeeded. They whole essence of the public health advice is, if it isn't essential, don't do it. Otherwise we'd have been able to visit friends and family if maintaining social distance all this time. It is very clear, there's no wriggle room. Someone sadly losing their life in America doesn't change that.ydoethur said:
Well, all lives do matter, at least to me. And these protests are risking widespread loss of life through spreading this bloody virus.Mango said:
"All racism is bad" is fine.Brom said:
Apparently you can't say all racism is bad or all lives matter, think he's hoping someone might fall into the trap and let the twitter mob eat them up.
"All lives matter" is a calculated rejection of "black lives matter" by people who think their over-privileged take on an issue can trump the years of lived experience of millions of people. It reeks of whataboutery, ignorance and, above all, fear.
I am amazed that so many of you otherwise eloquent folk can be so deaf and blind. Dumb, not so much.
For those who have tried to maintain
distancing and protested peacefully, fair enough, good on them.
For those who have wilfully formed into mobs to show how right on they are by attacking anything they disapprove of - nah. They are proving that they don’t care about lives and are just seizing on an excuse to go out and behave like arseholes.
And if people die as a result, how are they morally superior to that Minneapolis cop who murdered somebody apparently just to show he could?0 -
Philip_Thompson said:
If your culture is celebrating slave traders I'm happy to join the left in that culture war.eadric said:I have never been so pessimistic for my country, my culture, my civilisation.
We are facing the worst recession in a century, or maybe more. We are in the middle of a deadly pandemic which might yet worsen. We have a generation of children going without schooling - damaged in so many ways.
And in the middle of this painful chaos, the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war, unleashing violent passions which they do not begin to understand.
The horizon is dark.
If its not, then don't be so pathetically preposterous.
Well Khan should have put it in his manifesto then when getting elected. The fact he ordered it one day after on the back of an illegal demo and vandalism is the Taliban bit.Philip_Thompson said:
No its not, that's an absurd straw man. Statues have gone up and down for hundreds if not thousands of years.state_go_away said:
Its a bit TalibanPhilip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
We have no obligation to the past to celebrate via statues that which we do not approve of today. Nor can we oblige the future. A free society can choose what it wants to have and if people don't want statues up they shouldn't be up - and this was done legally so no qualms there.0 -
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
0 -
Doesn't the University of Aberystwyth have a statue of that racist, Nazi lover, and fornicator Edward VIII?
Tear it down.0 -
The Mayor has the authority to make decisions more than just what's in the manifesto, as all do. If the public didn't want Khan making these decisions they shouldn't have elected him. That's democracy, if you don't like it the alternative is mob rule - pick your poison!state_go_away said:Philip_Thompson said:
If your culture is celebrating slave traders I'm happy to join the left in that culture war.eadric said:I have never been so pessimistic for my country, my culture, my civilisation.
We are facing the worst recession in a century, or maybe more. We are in the middle of a deadly pandemic which might yet worsen. We have a generation of children going without schooling - damaged in so many ways.
And in the middle of this painful chaos, the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war, unleashing violent passions which they do not begin to understand.
The horizon is dark.
If its not, then don't be so pathetically preposterous.
Well Khan should have put it in his manifesto then when getting elected. The fact he ordered it one day after on the back of an illegal demo and vandalism is the Taliban bit.Philip_Thompson said:
No its not, that's an absurd straw man. Statues have gone up and down for hundreds if not thousands of years.state_go_away said:
Its a bit TalibanPhilip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
We have no obligation to the past to celebrate via statues that which we do not approve of today. Nor can we oblige the future. A free society can choose what it wants to have and if people don't want statues up they shouldn't be up - and this was done legally so no qualms there.0 -
@eadric would probably want the whole place renamed! Slaverville?Benpointer said:
Who'd have guessed Woking was so, er... Woke?tlg86 said:@ydoethur - we have this in Woking:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Burial_Ground,_Horsell_Common
And then there's Woke-ingham too to rename!0 -
We'll finally know what Santa feels like, each year working out who has been naughty and who has been nice.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are we going to have to have referendum's every other week, like in Switzerland, to decide which statues are ok?williamglenn said:Apparently Francis Drake is on the list.
0 -
Sorry Ben, but that isn’t true. There was general support in bristol for keeping it, including among the BAME community, although the mayor wanted it removed. That was at the root of the row about a new plaque and that is why it has stayed despite the fact that Labour has had 17 years to remove it if they wished. And anyone who argues against that is wrong. Yes, there was a large minority that wanted it removed, but it was just that - a minority. All the rewriting of facts in the world by nutty professors won’t alter that.Benpointer said:
Well, you sound like you're losing it to me... 'nationwide bloodthirst'? Statues don't bleed.Casino_Royale said:
One. So far. Many others have been heavily vandalised and defaced.Benpointer said:
Get a grip for God's sake!Casino_Royale said:
If you defend partisan mobs that remove statues outside the law, and accuse those who object of being racist, then you're fuelling that mob with their own rhetoric.Sunil_Prasannan said:
How?Casino_Royale said:
You helped unleash the beast,Sunil_Prasannan said:
Honestly, not too sure about this one. Step too far, IMHO.BannedinnParis said:
his. father's.dr_spyn said:W. E. Gladstone now next in line for attaining non person status.
https://twitter.com/maxclementsECHO/status/1270391104022745088
You have no grounds for objecting to where this ends up now.
None.
How many statues have actually been removed by these 'partisan mobs'?
And it was the lack of action by the authorities and shameless acquiescence of so many that has now led to a nationwide bloodthirst for stripping them out.
I'm not the one that needs to get a grip. I'm one of the ones that has one.
Both sides of this argument have merit imo. Damaging statues because you disagree with what they stand for is not acceptable, nor is it legal. But public statues need to be acceptable to the broad sweep of the population and it's clear that Colston's had little merit and even less local support.
Now a largely white mob, possibly not from the city although we don’t know that yet, has torn it down because they think it was racist. Wouldn’t surprise me if actually the mayor was behind it as it’s the sort of stupid thing he’d think was a bright idea (he’s a very Cummings figure).
If that doesn’t make you uncomfortable, it should. This makes it less likely people will think about how entwined Bristol’s past is with the slave trade, not more. Because it strips the city of a visible, uncomfortable reminder.
And it’s worth remembering that many supporters of this action - Sultana, Whittinghorne, Burgon, Rachael Cousins - are undoubtedly highly racist. So anti-racism isn’t the real or at least sole reason for its removal.
Good night.6 -
My understanding is that it is true. Imprisoned 5 times. Worst case being a violent robbery, where they broke into a home looking to steal guns and drugs, and he threatened to shoot the unborn of a pregnant woman.isam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
And despite the narrative that he moved to Minneapolis and had gone totally straight, lets not forget he was smashed out of his head on meth and fentanyl on the day of his arrest.0 -
Which was why I phrased it like that rather than anything stronger.Benpointer said:
Boris being of 'Turkish descent' is surely a bit of a myth?Charles said:
Presumably they are not being racist because they depicted someone of Turkish descent in the same way as someone of Gujarati (?) descent.Luckyguy1983 said:Guardian won't remove Priti Patel cartoon: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/09/guardian-will-not-remove-racist-priti-patel-cartoon/
Their panel has concluded the cartoon isn't racist - an odd verdict for The Guardian, as I thought it was now the role of the victim to say whether they feel racially abused, rather than a panel of men 'whitesplaining' to them why they're wrong to be offended?
Or something
IIRC only his great-grandfather was Turkish, most of his great-grandparents were English.
It’s still more than Pocahontas0 -
The truth is it doesn't matter. I don't know and I don't care and neither did the officer who knelt on his neck for nine minutes until he died a painful death of asphyxiation.isam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
1 -
If he had a record with anything on it fox would have been all over it all last weekisam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
0 -
Actually, I have a feeling most Londoners don't own any part of London at all. And I suspect a big proportion of London is owned by people who don't even live there most of the time.Philip_Thompson said:
There was a vote, the Mayor was elected. If the people don't like the Mayor's actions they can elect a new one who can reverse it and put the statue up.eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
And yes London is owned by all Londoners. Today's Londoners, not the past. This "patrimony" you speak of doesn't own London, its populace do. The voters who elected Khan as their Mayor do.
If the populace via their elected Mayor don't want the statue then the statue should be gone.1 -
It'll be a lot cheaper than paying for imaginary bridges, that's for sure.eadric said:
You cretin. On that basis Khan can pull down any statue, art, memorial, building just because. And we have to wait til the next election, to complain?Philip_Thompson said:
There was a vote, the Mayor was elected. If the people don't like the Mayor's actions they can elect a new one who can reverse it and put the statue up.eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
And yes London is owned by all Londoners. Today's Londoners, not the past. This "patrimony" you speak of doesn't own London, its populace do. The voters who elected Khan as their Mayor do.
If the populace via their elected Mayor don't want the statue then the statue should be gone.1 -
I see Sandy already answered the question, but googling for it did also turn up this little gem....Nigelb said:
Only put up last year, so you can forgive yourself...ydoethur said:
I never knew that! Where is it?SandyRentool said:
There is also a memorial in Huddersfield.ydoethur said:
I thought there already was a national Sikh war memorial in Brighton.eadric said:Mr Khan has his replacements in mind
"Instead a number of new memorials in the capital have been pledged by Mr Khan, including ones for Stephen Lawrence, the Windrush generation, a National Slavery Museum or memorial and a National Sikh War Memorial."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-50588998
https://twitter.com/ReetyorkyPud/status/12702694094589009920 -
But the public bits, like statues? They are typically owned by the public aren't they?Benpointer said:
Actually, I have a feeling most Londoners don't own any part of London at all. And I suspect a big proportion of London is owned by people who don't even live there most of the time.Philip_Thompson said:
There was a vote, the Mayor was elected. If the people don't like the Mayor's actions they can elect a new one who can reverse it and put the statue up.eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
And yes London is owned by all Londoners. Today's Londoners, not the past. This "patrimony" you speak of doesn't own London, its populace do. The voters who elected Khan as their Mayor do.
If the populace via their elected Mayor don't want the statue then the statue should be gone.0 -
-
Oh did he die like that?! NastyPhilip_Thompson said:
The truth is it doesn't matter. I don't know and I don't care and neither did the officer who knelt on his neck for nine minutes until he died a painful death of asphyxiation.isam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
1 -
He was stuffed to the gills with fentanyl, meth and cannabis according to the autopsy report, but so what? Nothing excuses what happened, and it would take some pretty serious shit before I started to think along the lines of karma - shit so serious that he would be behind bars anyway.isam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
0 -
Oh give it a bloody rest, you tiresome drama queen.eadric said:I have never been so pessimistic for my country, my culture, my civilisation.
We are facing the worst recession in a century, or maybe more. We are in the middle of a deadly pandemic which might yet worsen. We have a generation of children going without schooling - damaged in so many ways.
And in the middle of this painful chaos, the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war, unleashing violent passions which they do not begin to understand.
The horizon is dark.2 -
Not sure, his jump when running backwards was a bit weak at time.state_go_away said:
They should put him in front of Rhodes - Nothing would get past him!Pulpstar said:See Peter Shilton has offended the wokerati
0 -
He did have a criminal record, but after being sentenced for five years in 2009 for armed robbery he appears to have turned his life around.eek said:
If he had a record with anything on it fox would have been all over it all last weekisam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
0 -
I hate to make this about brexit, but this is why I voted remain. This is the world where brexit happened and it didn't work out.eadric said:I have never been so pessimistic for my country, my culture, my civilisation.
We are facing the worst recession in a century, or maybe more. We are in the middle of a deadly pandemic which might yet worsen. We have a generation of children going without schooling - damaged in so many ways.
And in the middle of this painful chaos, the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war, unleashing violent passions which they do not begin to understand.
The horizon is dark.0 -
Statues yes I believe he has that authority absolutely.eadric said:
You cretin. On that basis Khan can pull down any statue, art, memorial, building just because. And we have to wait til the next election, to complain?Philip_Thompson said:
There was a vote, the Mayor was elected. If the people don't like the Mayor's actions they can elect a new one who can reverse it and put the statue up.eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
And yes London is owned by all Londoners. Today's Londoners, not the past. This "patrimony" you speak of doesn't own London, its populace do. The voters who elected Khan as their Mayor do.
If the populace via their elected Mayor don't want the statue then the statue should be gone.
Buildings no I don't think so. Who said buildings?
Yes you have to wait until the next election to change a Mayor you disapprove of,that's representative democracy for you. You can complain all you want but its just impotent wailing if Khan is doing what he is entitled to do as directly elected Mayor of London.0 -
No need to so what me, I was just wondering if the meme was fake or not. If he were caught red handed committing a serious crime the policemen still shouldn't have done what they didIshmaelZ said:
He was stuffed to the gills with fentanyl, meth and cannabis according to the autopsy report, but so what? Nothing excuses what happened, and it would take some pretty serious shit before I started to think along the lines of karma - shit so serious that he would be behind bars anyway.isam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
Wouldn't go putting statues of him up though if he had been up to anything "problematic"0 -
They have...Here from the Mail,eek said:
If he had a record with anything on it fox would have been all over it all last weekisam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
He plead guilty to entering a woman’s home, pointing a gun at her stomach and searching the home for drugs and money, according to court records
Floyd was sentenced to 10 months in jail for having less than one gram of cocaine in a December 2005 arrest
He had previously been sentenced to eight months for the same offense, stemming from an October 2002 arrest
Floyd was arrested in 2002 for criminal trespassing and served 30 days in jail
He had another stint for a theft in August 1998
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8366533/George-Floyd-moved-Minneapolis-start-new-life-released-prison-Texas.html0 -
I think that's how it works with elected leaders. They make decisions on things that are their responsibility, and if you don't like them you can elect someone else in the future.eadric said:
You cretin. On that basis Khan can pull down any statue, art, memorial, building just because. And we have to wait til the next election, to complain?Philip_Thompson said:
There was a vote, the Mayor was elected. If the people don't like the Mayor's actions they can elect a new one who can reverse it and put the statue up.eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
And yes London is owned by all Londoners. Today's Londoners, not the past. This "patrimony" you speak of doesn't own London, its populace do. The voters who elected Khan as their Mayor do.
If the populace via their elected Mayor don't want the statue then the statue should be gone.3 -
I saw a tweet (when checking Sadiq Khan's Twitter) that he was arrested for holding a pregnant (black) woman at gunpoint. No idea whether its true, but reading the news stories about him, his brother said something like 'He had a one year old so he was turning his life around'. If you read between those lines it's not a glowing testimonial.isam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
Of course the point in this case is that he could be Beelzebub himself, he still should not have been brutally killed in police custody.
0 -
-
I pressed like on that as I assumed it was sarcasm. Sorry if it wasn't.Benpointer said:0 -
Judging by the incidents today and in the past few days, education for a generation of youngsters has been non-existent anyway. What are kids taught in schools these days except for Taking Offence? Maybe a few months out will do them some good.eadric said:I have never been so pessimistic for my country, my culture, my civilisation.
We are facing the worst recession in a century, or maybe more. We are in the middle of a deadly pandemic which might yet worsen. We have a generation of children going without schooling - damaged in so many ways.
And in the middle of this painful chaos, the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war, unleashing violent passions which they do not begin to understand.
The horizon is dark.2 -
Good post and I stand corrected, thank-you.ydoethur said:
Sorry Ben, but that isn’t true. There was general support in bristol for keeping it, including among the BAME community, although the mayor wanted it removed. That was at the root of the row about a new plaque and that is why it has stayed despite the fact that Labour has had 17 years to remove it if they wished. And anyone who argues against that is wrong. Yes, there was a large minority that wanted it removed, but it was just that - a minority. All the rewriting of facts in the world by nutty professors won’t alter that.Benpointer said:
Well, you sound like you're losing it to me... 'nationwide bloodthirst'? Statues don't bleed.Casino_Royale said:
One. So far. Many others have been heavily vandalised and defaced.Benpointer said:
Get a grip for God's sake!Casino_Royale said:
If you defend partisan mobs that remove statues outside the law, and accuse those who object of being racist, then you're fuelling that mob with their own rhetoric.Sunil_Prasannan said:
How?Casino_Royale said:
You helped unleash the beast,Sunil_Prasannan said:
Honestly, not too sure about this one. Step too far, IMHO.BannedinnParis said:
his. father's.dr_spyn said:W. E. Gladstone now next in line for attaining non person status.
https://twitter.com/maxclementsECHO/status/1270391104022745088
You have no grounds for objecting to where this ends up now.
None.
How many statues have actually been removed by these 'partisan mobs'?
And it was the lack of action by the authorities and shameless acquiescence of so many that has now led to a nationwide bloodthirst for stripping them out.
I'm not the one that needs to get a grip. I'm one of the ones that has one.
Both sides of this argument have merit imo. Damaging statues because you disagree with what they stand for is not acceptable, nor is it legal. But public statues need to be acceptable to the broad sweep of the population and it's clear that Colston's had little merit and even less local support.
Now a largely white mob, possibly not from the city although we don’t know that yet, has torn it down because they think it was racist. Wouldn’t surprise me if actually the mayor was behind it as it’s the sort of stupid thing he’d think was a bright idea (he’s a very Cummings figure).
If that doesn’t make you uncomfortable, it should. This makes it less likely people will think about how entwined Bristol’s past is with the slave trade, not more. Because it strips the city of a visible, uncomfortable reminder.
And it’s worth remembering that many supporters of this action - Sultana, Whittinghorne, Burgon, Rachael Cousins - are undoubtedly highly racist. So anti-racism isn’t the real or at least sole reason for its removal.
Good night.
As I said, I can see merit in both sides of the argument.0 -
His claim is certainly not understated, but I can't see which bit is not absolutely true.Anabobazina said:
Oh give it a bloody rest, you tiresome drama queen.eadric said:I have never been so pessimistic for my country, my culture, my civilisation.
We are facing the worst recession in a century, or maybe more. We are in the middle of a deadly pandemic which might yet worsen. We have a generation of children going without schooling - damaged in so many ways.
And in the middle of this painful chaos, the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war, unleashing violent passions which they do not begin to understand.
The horizon is dark.0 -
Someone else with such a poor grasp of history.
1 -
The top charge seems especially niceFrancisUrquhart said:
They have...Here from the Mail,eek said:
If he had a record with anything on it fox would have been all over it all last weekisam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
He plead guilty to entering a woman’s home, pointing a gun at her stomach and searching the home for drugs and money, according to court records
Floyd was sentenced to 10 months in jail for having less than one gram of cocaine in a December 2005 arrest
He had previously been sentenced to eight months for the same offense, stemming from an October 2002 arrest
Floyd was arrested in 2002 for criminal trespassing and served 30 days in jail
He had another stint for a theft in August 1998
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8366533/George-Floyd-moved-Minneapolis-start-new-life-released-prison-Texas.html0 -
It was outside of a museum as an intrinsic part of the conversationeadric said:
I doubt 1% knew who he was.CatMan said:
You think most Londoners wanted that statue to stay?eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
But it is part of London's intricate and contentious history. If it it to be removed, Londoners need to be asked how we feel. Probably most would agree it should be removed to a museum?
You don't do it this way. In the blink of an eye, like a municipal book burning.0 -
I can confirm it was sarcasm. Clearly I need to earn my bullshit.Philip_Thompson said:
I pressed like on that as I assumed it was sarcasm. Sorry if it wasn't.Benpointer said:1 -
It was right in front of a museum, the Museum of London Docklands. That, err, goes into huge detail about slavery and references the statue outside. And it's been moved before. And it's in West India Quay, in the heart of Canary Wharf.eadric said:
I doubt 1% knew who he was.CatMan said:
You think most Londoners wanted that statue to stay?eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
But it is part of London's intricate and contentious history. If it it to be removed, Londoners need to be asked how we feel. Probably most would agree it should be removed to a museum?
You don't do it this way. In the blink of an eye, like a municipal book burning.
I worked there for years: the only people who walk past it there are bankers going to Browns or Burger & Lobster from Credit Suisse and HSBC.
It's a hugely irrelevant distraction and strikes me as just shameless electioneering by Khan.1 -
Thank you Robert.rcs1000 said:
"In the states more whites are killed by blacks than vice versa."contrarian said:
Er its not that mate. Sod culture. Its the retribution coming our way.Theuniondivvie said:
The Great Replacement, whether by the Muslamics or the Woke, seems to be a deep, nagging insecurity for the white (mostly male) right. Why are you so unconfident in your culture's ability to survive?eadric said:
It's gone way beyond BLM, it is now about vandalising all of British history, and trying to make white Britons feel guilty for simply being British. It is an attempt to deconstruct our identity, driven by a weird ragbag or anarchists, Marxists, greens, and Remainers (really, check the FBPE people egging this on).algarkirk said:
Could this revolution possibly devour its children? I hope it does so before burning the Bodleian and Cambridge University Library to the ground rather than after.eadric said:Queen Victoria targeted in Leeds
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1270410855348350978?s=20
Fuck them, I hate them, we have to fight back.
The OJ Simpson trial suggested black people are more than happy to tolerate murder when race is a factor.
In the states more whites are killed by blacks than vice versa. That's with racist white cop forces protecting them.
Minneapolis is getting rid of that protection. Or 'open season on whites' as its otherwise known.
You do realise that as there are a lot more whites than blacks that's basically inevitable, right? That's simple mathematics. It's almost impossible, when whites outnumber blacks 5-to-1, for whites to kill more blacks, than vice-versa.
There are some real fruitcakes on the board today.1 -
Why should that matter? Does it justify his killing while handcuffed?isam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
1 -
I thought that was Seaman!BannedinnParis said:
Not sure, his jump when running backwards was a bit weak at time.state_go_away said:
They should put him in front of Rhodes - Nothing would get past him!Pulpstar said:See Peter Shilton has offended the wokerati
0 -
Funny how yesterday we had people complaining about "the mob" illegally pulling down a statue in a protest saying it was wrong because it was illegal and should have been done within the law . . . then today some of the same people are complaining that a directly elected Mayor with the authority to remove statues is exercising his democratic mandate to remove them entirely within the law.
Its almost as if all the complaints about "oh but do it within the law" were just excuses and the real issue is they don't want these statues of slave traders being removed in the first place?3 -
Linking Floyd and Covid to Brexit requires a good imagination.whunter said:
I hate to make this about brexit, but this is why I voted remain. This is the world where brexit happened and it didn't work out.eadric said:I have never been so pessimistic for my country, my culture, my civilisation.
We are facing the worst recession in a century, or maybe more. We are in the middle of a deadly pandemic which might yet worsen. We have a generation of children going without schooling - damaged in so many ways.
And in the middle of this painful chaos, the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war, unleashing violent passions which they do not begin to understand.
The horizon is dark.
Are you suggesting if we'd remained he'd still be alive and we'd never have heard of the virus?0 -
No, you're fine. I need to re-tune my subtlety antennae!Tres said:
I can confirm it was sarcasm. Clearly I need to earn my bullshit.Philip_Thompson said:
I pressed like on that as I assumed it was sarcasm. Sorry if it wasn't.Benpointer said:0 -
You think it will be popular then?Casino_Royale said:
It was right in front of a museum, the Museum of London Docklands. That, err, goes into huge detail about slavery and references the statue outside. And it's been moved before. And it's in West India Quay, in the heart of Canary Wharf.eadric said:
I doubt 1% knew who he was.CatMan said:
You think most Londoners wanted that statue to stay?eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
But it is part of London's intricate and contentious history. If it it to be removed, Londoners need to be asked how we feel. Probably most would agree it should be removed to a museum?
You don't do it this way. In the blink of an eye, like a municipal book burning.
I worked there for years: the only people who walk past it there are bankers going to Browns or Burger & Lobster from Credit Suisse and HSBC.
It's a hugely irrelevant distraction and strikes me as just shameless electioneering by Khan.0 -
Except that Bristol residents wanted to keep him before with a plaque and the left-wing Labour council and left-wing BAME mayor thought the best solution was to keep him in the public eye to raise awareness of Bristol's past and encourage debate and discussion about it but, yeah, other than that .. spot on.Benpointer said:
Well, you sound like you're losing it to me... 'nationwide bloodthirst'? Statues don't bleed.Casino_Royale said:
One. So far. Many others have been heavily vandalised and defaced.Benpointer said:
Get a grip for God's sake!Casino_Royale said:
If you defend partisan mobs that remove statues outside the law, and accuse those who object of being racist, then you're fuelling that mob with their own rhetoric.Sunil_Prasannan said:
How?Casino_Royale said:
You helped unleash the beast,Sunil_Prasannan said:
Honestly, not too sure about this one. Step too far, IMHO.BannedinnParis said:
his. father's.dr_spyn said:W. E. Gladstone now next in line for attaining non person status.
https://twitter.com/maxclementsECHO/status/1270391104022745088
You have no grounds for objecting to where this ends up now.
None.
How many statues have actually been removed by these 'partisan mobs'?
And it was the lack of action by the authorities and shameless acquiescence of so many that has now led to a nationwide bloodthirst for stripping them out.
I'm not the one that needs to get a grip. I'm one of the ones that has one.
Both sides of this argument have merit imo. Damaging statues because you disagree with what they stand for is not acceptable, nor is it legal. But public statues need to be acceptable to the broad sweep of the population and it's clear that Colston's had little merit and even less local support.0 -
Scott_xP said:
Brexiteers whining about unleashing a culture war is almost too piquant...whunter said:I hate to make this about brexit, but this is why I voted remain. This is the world where brexit happened and it didn't work out.
Wait a minute, which party elected a crypto-communist revolutionary as its leader all the way back in 2015, when the Tories were led by cuddly Europhile David Cameron?
It's often overlooked that Labour kicked off the culture war right then and there.0 -
No they don't need to be asked. Statues go up and down regularly which is part of why this is in the Mayor's authority so don't get your knickers in a twist over this one.eadric said:
I doubt 1% knew who he was.CatMan said:
You think most Londoners wanted that statue to stay?eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
But it is part of London's intricate and contentious history. If it it to be removed, Londoners need to be asked how we feel. Probably most would agree it should be removed to a museum?
You don't do it this way. In the blink of an eye, like a municipal book burning.
The Mayor has discretion over this. If you don't like it, pick a new Mayor who can reverse this decision. Hint: books can't be unburnt so that's not the same thing.1 -
Get out the temperance spoon for that hard on Doctor, I don't think it justifies the way he died, I just wondered if it were fake news or notFoxy said:
Why should that matter? Does it justify his killing while handcuffed?isam said:
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?MarqueeMark said:
When do his statues start going up?Tim_B said:George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
0 -
The irony with complaining about all these (two so far?) Victorian-erected statues being hauled down is that the Victorians were some of the worst architectural vandals in British history. Whole medieval town centres were demolished to make way for Victorian buildings.0
-
So where are they going to put the Tony Blair statue?1
-
Yes it had a history of being there.eadric said:
No, idiot. The statue was first put there in 1813TheScreamingEagles said:Someone else with such a poor grasp of history.
Then it was moved. Then it went back
So it has a history of being in that exact place of 200 years
"Following his death in May 1809, the Company commissioned a commemorative statue from sculptor Richard Westmacott. The statue did not idealise Milligan's portly figure. The statue stood in front of the Museum of London Docklands on West India Quay, where it was originally erected (1813–1875) before being relocated to the nearby Main Gate (1875–1943), held in storage and later re-erected at the London Docks. It was re-erected at West India Quay in February 1997 by the London Docklands Development Corporation."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Milligan_(merchant)
It still has a history of being there.
Its just not there. Are you getting this yet?0 -
Let me help you: "the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war"IshmaelZ said:
His claim is certainly not understated, but I can't see which bit is not absolutely true.Anabobazina said:
Oh give it a bloody rest, you tiresome drama queen.eadric said:I have never been so pessimistic for my country, my culture, my civilisation.
We are facing the worst recession in a century, or maybe more. We are in the middle of a deadly pandemic which might yet worsen. We have a generation of children going without schooling - damaged in so many ways.
And in the middle of this painful chaos, the Left has decided, in its imbecility, to launch a huge culture war, unleashing violent passions which they do not begin to understand.
The horizon is dark.0 -
Excellent post. Spot on.ydoethur said:
Sorry Ben, but that isn’t true. There was general support in bristol for keeping it, including among the BAME community, although the mayor wanted it removed. That was at the root of the row about a new plaque and that is why it has stayed despite the fact that Labour has had 17 years to remove it if they wished. And anyone who argues against that is wrong. Yes, there was a large minority that wanted it removed, but it was just that - a minority. All the rewriting of facts in the world by nutty professors won’t alter that.Benpointer said:
Well, you sound like you're losing it to me... 'nationwide bloodthirst'? Statues don't bleed.Casino_Royale said:
One. So far. Many others have been heavily vandalised and defaced.Benpointer said:
Get a grip for God's sake!Casino_Royale said:
If you defend partisan mobs that remove statues outside the law, and accuse those who object of being racist, then you're fuelling that mob with their own rhetoric.Sunil_Prasannan said:
How?Casino_Royale said:
You helped unleash the beast,Sunil_Prasannan said:
Honestly, not too sure about this one. Step too far, IMHO.BannedinnParis said:
his. father's.dr_spyn said:W. E. Gladstone now next in line for attaining non person status.
https://twitter.com/maxclementsECHO/status/1270391104022745088
You have no grounds for objecting to where this ends up now.
None.
How many statues have actually been removed by these 'partisan mobs'?
And it was the lack of action by the authorities and shameless acquiescence of so many that has now led to a nationwide bloodthirst for stripping them out.
I'm not the one that needs to get a grip. I'm one of the ones that has one.
Both sides of this argument have merit imo. Damaging statues because you disagree with what they stand for is not acceptable, nor is it legal. But public statues need to be acceptable to the broad sweep of the population and it's clear that Colston's had little merit and even less local support.
Now a largely white mob, possibly not from the city although we don’t know that yet, has torn it down because they think it was racist. Wouldn’t surprise me if actually the mayor was behind it as it’s the sort of stupid thing he’d think was a bright idea (he’s a very Cummings figure).
If that doesn’t make you uncomfortable, it should. This makes it less likely people will think about how entwined Bristol’s past is with the slave trade, not more. Because it strips the city of a visible, uncomfortable reminder.
And it’s worth remembering that many supporters of this action - Sultana, Whittinghorne, Burgon, Rachael Cousins - are undoubtedly highly racist. So anti-racism isn’t the real or at least sole reason for its removal.
Good night.
I went to Bristol university and lived there for several years. That was my experience too.0 -
That's a very interesting statement, which ones? This isn't me disagreeing with you, I'm interested. I know the Victorians could be ruthless, but they were also famously very sentimental about the medieval period particularly.Stark_Dawning said:The irony with complaining about all these (two so far?) Victorian-erected statues being hauled down is that the Victorians were some of the worst architectural vandals in British history. Whole medieval town centres were demolished to make way for Victorian buildings.
0 -
Indeed, and the Colston one from 1895.TheScreamingEagles said:Someone else with such a poor grasp of history.
All very reminiscent of the festival of erecting statues of Confederates across the South, and then again in the 1950s and Sixties.
The bas relief of the three Confederate leaders on Stone Mountain Georgia (bigger than Mount Rushmore) was finished in 1972. When I was at school in Georgia, this was the State Flag, raised everyday, below the Stars and Stripes.
It was only adopted in 1956 ffs.0 -
Maybe in 50 years time it will be different but historians today are roundly mocking the 'statues need to stay up otherwise we will forget history" argument.Casino_Royale said:
Sorry? There are statues being vandalised, defaced, pulled down - or petitioned to be removed all over the country - seemingly with no discrimination, and you think *we're* the deranged ones?Tres said:PB tories appear to have reached peak statue derangement.
It's views like yours which historians in 50 years time will look back and think..
WTF?2 -
If that was the ambition then respectfully I'd suggest its being there and the subsequent manner of its removal have indeed raised awareness of the past and encouraged debate and discussion about it so mission accomplished!Casino_Royale said:
Except that Bristol residents wanted to keep him before with a plaque and the left-wing Labour council and left-wing BAME mayor thought the best solution was to keep him in the public eye to raise awareness of Bristol's past and encourage debate and discussion about it but, yeah, other than that .. spot on.Benpointer said:
Well, you sound like you're losing it to me... 'nationwide bloodthirst'? Statues don't bleed.Casino_Royale said:
One. So far. Many others have been heavily vandalised and defaced.Benpointer said:
Get a grip for God's sake!Casino_Royale said:
If you defend partisan mobs that remove statues outside the law, and accuse those who object of being racist, then you're fuelling that mob with their own rhetoric.Sunil_Prasannan said:
How?Casino_Royale said:
You helped unleash the beast,Sunil_Prasannan said:
Honestly, not too sure about this one. Step too far, IMHO.BannedinnParis said:
his. father's.dr_spyn said:W. E. Gladstone now next in line for attaining non person status.
https://twitter.com/maxclementsECHO/status/1270391104022745088
You have no grounds for objecting to where this ends up now.
None.
How many statues have actually been removed by these 'partisan mobs'?
And it was the lack of action by the authorities and shameless acquiescence of so many that has now led to a nationwide bloodthirst for stripping them out.
I'm not the one that needs to get a grip. I'm one of the ones that has one.
Both sides of this argument have merit imo. Damaging statues because you disagree with what they stand for is not acceptable, nor is it legal. But public statues need to be acceptable to the broad sweep of the population and it's clear that Colston's had little merit and even less local support.
Now we'll see if it goes back up. My guess is the elected politicians will say no, which says it all really. If they want it back up though it will go back up.0 -
The awful cycle of life. I spent the first thirty odd years rolling my eyes whilst listening to people from the East End/Essex droning on, hoping to bask in reflected glory about some tenuous link they had to The Krays, and how "they were lovely to their mums", "only killed their own" etc etc, then finally when that rubbish dies down, it is replaced by the same shit from progressive, woke student types about BAME criminals.0
-
Yes, this is quite puzzling.Philip_Thompson said:Funny how yesterday we had people complaining about "the mob" illegally pulling down a statue in a protest saying it was wrong because it was illegal and should have been done within the law . . . then today some of the same people are complaining that a directly elected Mayor with the authority to remove statues is exercising his democratic mandate to remove them entirely within the law.
Its almost as if all the complaints about "oh but do it within the law" were just excuses and the real issue is they don't want these statues of slave traders being removed in the first place?
Can someone clarify under what circumstances statutes can be removed? Some form of national plebiscite perhaps, or by unanimous consent of every UN member state?0 -
I don't think that anyone is tearing them down because they dont like the style of them . The Victorians gave the country universal education so that people could make their own minds up about history and not be the modern day equivalent of pitchfork mobsStark_Dawning said:The irony with complaining about all these (two so far?) Victorian-erected statues being hauled down is that the Victorians were some of the worst architectural vandals in British history. Whole medieval town centres were demolished to make way for Victorian buildings.
0 -
I think eadric is in favour of democracy over mob rule only in certain situations when he agrees with it.rcs1000 said:
I think that's how it works with elected leaders. They make decisions on things that are their responsibility, and if you don't like them you can elect someone else in the future.eadric said:
You cretin. On that basis Khan can pull down any statue, art, memorial, building just because. And we have to wait til the next election, to complain?Philip_Thompson said:
There was a vote, the Mayor was elected. If the people don't like the Mayor's actions they can elect a new one who can reverse it and put the statue up.eadric said:
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.Philip_Thompson said:
Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.eadric said:Sadiq Khan gloats as he removes another chunk of London's history, good and bad
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056?s=20
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
And yes London is owned by all Londoners. Today's Londoners, not the past. This "patrimony" you speak of doesn't own London, its populace do. The voters who elected Khan as their Mayor do.
If the populace via their elected Mayor don't want the statue then the statue should be gone.0 -
Baghdad?MikeSmithson said:So where are they going to put the Tony Blair statue?
0 -
The right are suddenly concerned about a culture war? What do they think they’ve been up to themselves these last few years?
It turns out that they don’t like it up ‘em.2 -
NEW THREAD
0
This discussion has been closed.