Offensive Thatcher statue in Grantham

I was more thinking about the statue itself, but now I've looked more at it, I think it's just weird. For one thing, it doesn't look much like her.

This is exactly why I feel that only women should be permitted to egg the statue, or indeed carry it off to a Place of Breaking.

I think the discussion is going a tad off-topic.

@Fullofsurprises, what makes it permissable for someone to exercise their supposed right to vandalise and destroy a statue because it offends them? Can't we seemingly apply this justification to any statue or property? It seems like a pretty subjective metric.

So let's get this straight.

Throwing eggs at a statue is wrong and heinous in your view , but launching an attempted coup to overthrow a democratically elected president is good?

Interesting set of morals you have there.

Again, finding it amusing how so many on the right, seem so triggered by people throwing


So let's get this straight.

Throwing eggs at a statue is wrong and heinous in your view , but launching an attempted coup to overthrow a democratically elected president is good?

Interesting set of morals you have there.

I found it appalling that an ex-soldier was sentenced to 30 days imprisonment for defacing a statue of Churchill. Instead of allowing the political point (against a political person) to be a mitigating factor, it seems to have resulted in the sentence being worse.The judge said that Churchill was held in high esteem by many people -as if popular opinion about esteem should ever have bearing and as if that invalidates thinking otherwise about some aspects of a person. The culprits did the act in daylight, not underhandedly to not be caught. They should have just been made to observe the cleaning up of the statue, given no more than 1 night in a cell to deter from doing it again, and given a large fine. We cannot fairly increase jail time because the establishment holds a statue of Churchill in higher esteem than my handmade garden gnome of myself might be.

Wait a second, you think that the privatisation of railways is okay, but you're against progressive tax???

You're telling me that you think that marmite is delicious, but you hate the taste of quinoa???lan
These two things are completely disconnected from one another.

Anyone who thinks privatising the railways is a good idea wants to check themselves. It’s like people forget how utterly shocking British Rail actually was. On top of that, there are examples of poorly ran companies across this country that are basically state owned. You’ve only got to look at their appalling performance to know it’s not a bright idea.

At the risk of derailing the thread, I think you mean nationalising rather than privatising, but yeah, I agree with you. Nationalisation, generally, decreases the quality of a given product or service.

Apologies yeah, typo on my part. I meant nationalising them is a terrible idea. Corrected.

Then say it’s weird, it looks weird. But don’t call it fascistic.

Lets be fair it was a riot, not a coup. The word coup might play well to rile up the medias audience but the event was an absolute nonevent outside of it happening to occur where it did. It didnt ever stand a chance of succeeding, merely restraining someone from saying aye not really being coup material

How on earth could a 'political point' be a mitigating factor
Your idea of punishment is rather quaint though, make him be a rubbernecker whilst others clean up his vandalism.
The fact of the matter is simple Church was a great man who helped the country survive the nazi onslaught. all those whining about how mean he was miss the point that that is what everyone thought in the day and no one with half a brain cell really cares if a historical figure held opinions that may be questionable by todays standards. Such people being intellectually clueless at the very best considering they view the entirety of humanity up till today to be a bunch of fascists because they didnt approve of sodomy back in the day . applying modern moral frameworks to historical figures, utterly moronic idea for no observable purpose.
I find it odd you support destroying public property though. Do you also approve of petrol bombing a police station because a black person was held their for questioning? It being a political point in your words...

The fact of the matter is simple Church was a great man who helped the country survive the nazi onslaught. all those whining about how mean he was miss the point that that is what everyone thought in the day and no one with half a brain cell really cares if a historical figure held opinions that may be questionable by todays standards.

The cases going through the courts in the US show a high degree of prior planning and collusion between the Proud Boys and other groups, including serving cops and Army officers. Perhaps you've also forgotten that there was a van load of bombs nearby and messages were going out to supporters to bring guns. Oh and a number of rioters as you know had equipment with them to take prisoners and were advocating murdering Democrats. Sure sounds like a coup. Not all coups consist of swarthy men with bandoliers but a lot consist of storming government buildings, killing officials and bombing or setting fire to them, all of which were planned by elements of the rioters that day.

Nope still sounds like an angry riot as opposed to a 'coup'.
I'm not entirely sure why youre getting so flustered over a semantic argument though given it hardly matters what its called

It's been a long running campaign by the Right to decline to admit that it was a coup attempt orchestrated by Trump.

Today it's come out that the House committee has evidence that some Republican Congressmen organised advance tours of Congress for coup leaders the day before, to familiarise them with the complex.

There's no evidence of orchestration imo or that they had a plan to seize power as opposed to riot in the building. It wasn't that organised.

At best Trump incited some violence (and I find this dubious) but do I think there was any way to seize power, no.

There's no evidence of orchestration imo or that they had a plan to seize power as opposed to riot in the building. It wasn't that organised.

At best Trump incited some violence (and I find this dubious) but do I think there was any way to seize power, no.

The fact that an attempted coup was pathetic, badly organised and bound to fail, doesn't mean it wasn't an attempted coup.