Crosswords0 min ago
Sir Winstons Statue Defaced
Do these little thugs not realise that it is because of the activiies of people like Sir Winston that they are free to vandilise his statue?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by R1Geezer. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
There has been several threads re rioting and different views on the response and actions of the police force. This behaviour is only going to encourage a more forceful approach by the police and the clashing will put innocent and peaceful protestors in harms way. These thugs are not only de-tracting focus from the issues that the protests are aiming to tackle, but people are going to get hurt and property destroyed. If they have no regard for the churchill statue, whats next?
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
I've come into this debate very late but I have a question for Jno if he's still following this thread.
Jno states that, “... If the police feel the need to arrest someone for peeing against a piece of concrete, I suppose they'd better go ahead...”
But it's not 'just a block of concrete' is it? It's not just another inanimate object like a bridge abutment or a subway wall – it's a symbolic structure. By urinating on it, this individual is desecrating (knowingly or [moronically] unknowingly) a culturally significant icon.
Describing it as 'a piece of concrete' is disingenuous to say the least.
If all physical objects were treated the same and on equal terms, then presumably it would be completely acceptable and none controversial if I were to purchase a copy of the Koran and the Bible and to urinate on them in public? After all, they're 'just' books aren't they?
Jno states that, “... If the police feel the need to arrest someone for peeing against a piece of concrete, I suppose they'd better go ahead...”
But it's not 'just a block of concrete' is it? It's not just another inanimate object like a bridge abutment or a subway wall – it's a symbolic structure. By urinating on it, this individual is desecrating (knowingly or [moronically] unknowingly) a culturally significant icon.
Describing it as 'a piece of concrete' is disingenuous to say the least.
If all physical objects were treated the same and on equal terms, then presumably it would be completely acceptable and none controversial if I were to purchase a copy of the Koran and the Bible and to urinate on them in public? After all, they're 'just' books aren't they?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.