Today’s headlines .........

[pulisa]

Don't forget Lord Cowell.

Rumour (according to my daughter's internet foraging) has it that he is very unwell..

[Lencoboy]

Rumour (according to my daughter's internet foraging) has it that he is very unwell..

Oh dear.

But on an unrelated note, he seems to have been lower key in the music business over recent years.

Incidentally the demise of X Factor has occured at the same time.

[Lencoboy]

The Toppling Of A Statute…

Namely: The Criminal Damage Act 1971.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/1

‘Destroying or damaging property.

(1)A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence.’

Disliking, finding offensive or disagreeing with something objectionable are, from hereon in, lawful excuse for the damage and destruction of any property.

I mentioned in a previous mildly sardonical post on this subject that there’s about six thousand years of recorded history – a history which contains something to offend everyone of us. So, what are we waiting for? It’s now open season on the past and time for us to cancel ourselves from history.

Whilst I don't agree with a lot of historical events that have occurred the world over, and that bad treatment of ethnic minorities (and indeed persons with disabilities, regardless of ethnicity) has very much been one of many 'elephants in the room' for far too long now, I don't necessarily agree with erasing all our past history, especially where the BLM'ers were attempting to link historical events in the city of Bristol to systemic police brutality in the USA, which in itself is an absolute travesty, and another one of many 'elephants in the room' over there that keeps getting brushed under the carpet time and time again.

But on the subject of British history in itself, where does this outrage malarkey end?

Attacking and trying to ban/shut down museums next?

[MyNameIsTerry]

The Toppling Of A Statute…

Namely: The Criminal Damage Act 1971.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/1

‘Destroying or damaging property.

(1)A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence.’

Disliking, finding offensive or disagreeing with something objectionable are, from hereon in, lawful excuse for the damage and destruction of any property.

I mentioned in a previous mildly sardonical post on this subject that there’s about six thousand years of recorded history – a history which contains something to offend everyone of us. So, what are we waiting for? It’s now open season on the past and time for us to cancel ourselves from history.

Going to be interesting next time someone urinates on the cenotaph. Just claim you are anti war.

Can we start knocking down some seats of power?

I did laugh at their comparison to the Suffragetes. Somehow I don't think they live in a society where they are seen so second class. Blimey just imagine if the unions go all militant to get their points across despite the free society we live in.

I suppose at least we will have some precedent should a statue of Tony Blair appear...

[Lencoboy]

I suppose at least we will have some precedent should a statue of Tony Blair appear...

Can't see a cat in hell's chance of a statue of Blair ever appearing in this mass outrage culture we now live in.

Ditto for a statue of Thatcher.

[MyNameIsTerry]

A defence that played to emotions and a jury too afraid to concentrate on the law in fear of what they may be branded? Looked a pretty simple case if you replaced it with another statue.

No reason they can't pull down Churchill now.

[MyNameIsTerry]

The poor penguins. Such lovely creatures. Very hard for the keepers who probably reared them:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...m_source=upday

[dorabella]

A defence that played to emotions and a jury too afraid to concentrate on the law in fear of what they may be branded? Looked a pretty simple case if you replaced it with another statue.

No reason they can't pull down Churchill now.

Just gives these idiot social justice children carte blanche to start another round of toppling if they think they will get away with it. Certainly wasn't helped by a TV historian chiming in that it was about time a mass murder was brought to justice (since when did Colston actually kill someone??).. the jury's verdict was definitely playing to the gallery and not the law.

I see the Oxford SJ brethren are now having another pop at the Rhodes statue.... and Drake, Churchill and any number of 'colonial' figures to follow. Like to see them try toppling Nelson from his plinth in Trafalfgar Square - might just be beyond their physical capacity.

[pulisa]

Just gives these idiot social justice children carte blanche to start another round of toppling if they think they will get away with it. Certainly wasn't helped by a TV historian chiming in that it was about time a mass murder was brought to justice (since when did Colston actually kill someone??).. the jury's verdict was definitely playing to the gallery and not the law.

I see the Oxford SJ brethren are now having another pop at the Rhodes statue.... and Drake, Churchill and any number of 'colonial' figures to follow. Like to see them try toppling Nelson from his plinth in Trafalfgar Square - might just be beyond their physical capacity.

That would be a tall order.

[dorabella]

That would be a tall order.

I would say MONUNENTAL!!