Is anyone here so woke that..........
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Eaglecoops  CR3 05 Apr 22 12.00pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Nicholas91
I've been there twice now, first time I went thought it was a bit of a let down and sh!t. Second time, still sh!t. I can quite comfortably state as well, being a Christian, that I do not feel the Colosseum is offensive to me despite the fact numerous Christians were persecuted and brutally murdered there. This may be because I value it's historical value and the awe it inspires as a relic of an ancient world. Or maybe because I am the kind of person who finds solace and confidence in my own personality and achievements in life, and who does not hold a bitter grudge with the world as a result of my own failures or necessity to rely upon others for mere survival. I also do not feel the need to seek drama or some sort of pathetic, moral martyrdom to give my life meaning in the absence of any other evidence. Not saying definitely but I think it could well have something to do with it. Very good. Personally I’d knock it down and put a refugee centre on the site. Seems to make more sense in the modern world.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Mapletree Croydon 05 Apr 22 12.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by HKOwen
yes, they are not ruling out removing statues in the future, hence the use of " yet ". If you disagree that of course is your view Please show me where the Council actually says that. Don't believe all that you read in the Daily Fail. Here is what the Council actually states: Glasgow Slavery Audit The core of this study is focused on individuals, who were residents of Glasgow and elsewhere, involved with Atlantic slavery between c.1603 and 1838. Some of these individuals shaped today's city, whilst others are memorialised in civic space. You see, no recommendations. I don't know how often I need to say that before people notice it. And even if some statues are eventually removed that would be following consultation with local people and I am sure Livingstone would not be anywhere near the top of the list for any action, let alone removal of the statue You are just so easy to wind up, totally credulous. Maybe best to go directly to sources occasionally, or would that ruin the potential for you to let the blood vessels on your forehead dilate. Glasgow's city council made a lot of money out of the slave trade in the past (both indirectly and directly), the current Council now wishes to consider how to square that.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
cryrst  The garden of England 05 Apr 22 1.02pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Please show me where the Council actually says that. Don't believe all that you read in the Daily Fail. Here is what the Council actually states: Glasgow Slavery Audit The core of this study is focused on individuals, who were residents of Glasgow and elsewhere, involved with Atlantic slavery between c.1603 and 1838. Some of these individuals shaped today's city, whilst others are memorialised in civic space. You see, no recommendations. I don't know how often I need to say that before people notice it. And even if some statues are eventually removed that would be following consultation with local people and I am sure Livingstone would not be anywhere near the top of the list for any action, let alone removal of the statue You are just so easy to wind up, totally credulous. Maybe best to go directly to sources occasionally, or would that ruin the potential for you to let the blood vessels on your forehead dilate. Glasgow's city council made a lot of money out of the slave trade in the past (both indirectly and directly), the current Council now wishes to consider how to square that. Why not just give a million pounds to every black person in the world. I'm sure it's all about the money, in fact it is all about the money. Reparations seem to solve the guilt from us whites and alleviate the grim existence blacks have because of something that happened over 6 generations ago.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  05 Apr 22 1.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Please show me where the Council actually says that. Don't believe all that you read in the Daily Fail. Here is what the Council actually states: Glasgow Slavery Audit The core of this study is focused on individuals, who were residents of Glasgow and elsewhere, involved with Atlantic slavery between c.1603 and 1838. Some of these individuals shaped today's city, whilst others are memorialised in civic space. You see, no recommendations. I don't know how often I need to say that before people notice it. And even if some statues are eventually removed that would be following consultation with local people and I am sure Livingstone would not be anywhere near the top of the list for any action, let alone removal of the statue You are just so easy to wind up, totally credulous. Maybe best to go directly to sources occasionally, or would that ruin the potential for you to let the blood vessels on your forehead dilate. Glasgow's city council made a lot of money out of the slave trade in the past (both indirectly and directly), the current Council now wishes to consider how to square that. Square it to whose benefit? Glasgow has shockingly high rates of deprivation and deaths from both homelessness and drug related causes.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 05 Apr 22 1.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Why not just give a million pounds to every black person in the world. I'm sure it's all about the money, in fact it is all about the money. Reparations seem to solve the guilt from us whites and alleviate the grim existence blacks have because of something that happened over 6 generations ago. Cool When your black mates get theirs I am sure they'll take you out for a pint.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 georgenorman 05 Apr 22 2.21pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Please show me where the Council actually says that. Don't believe all that you read in the Daily Fail. Here is what the Council actually states: Glasgow Slavery Audit The core of this study is focused on individuals, who were residents of Glasgow and elsewhere, involved with Atlantic slavery between c.1603 and 1838. Some of these individuals shaped today's city, whilst others are memorialised in civic space. You see, no recommendations. I don't know how often I need to say that before people notice it. And even if some statues are eventually removed that would be following consultation with local people and I am sure Livingstone would not be anywhere near the top of the list for any action, let alone removal of the statue You are just so easy to wind up, totally credulous. Maybe best to go directly to sources occasionally, or would that ruin the potential for you to let the blood vessels on your forehead dilate. Glasgow's city council made a lot of money out of the slave trade in the past (both indirectly and directly), the current Council now wishes to consider how to square that. Of course the report is intended to draw up a hit list, what do you think it is for, to consider putting up more statues of people with connections to salvery?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 05 Apr 22 4.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Of course the report is intended to draw up a hit list, what do you think it is for, to consider putting up more statues of people with connections to salvery? Well, it would be nice to celebrate those that first created salves and other soothing balms but I don't think that is what is going on. I continue to suggest people read what the Council actually said not the Daily Mail's rant about what it implies. Anyone actually believing the Daily Mail's take on anything needs serious therapy. Or is not just credulous but dangerously gullible. This seems more balanced from Sky News in June 2021 Glasgow's review into statues and place names was already under way before the controversy began last year. (this refers to Colston's statue, which is now to be found in L Shed in Bristol - Mapletree) Members of the public there will be consulted on the future of statues in their city, such as 19th century military leader Field Marshal Frederick Roberts, who is accused of helping to set up concentration camps, and Sir John Moore, who participated in both the Royal African and East India Companies.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Eaglecoops CR3 05 Apr 22 4.41pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Well, it would be nice to celebrate those that first created salves and other soothing balms but I don't think that is what is going on. I continue to suggest people read what the Council actually said not the Daily Mail's rant about what it implies. Anyone actually believing the Daily Mail's take on anything needs serious therapy. Or is not just credulous but dangerously gullible. This seems more balanced from Sky News in June 2021 Glasgow's review into statues and place names was already under way before the controversy began last year. (this refers to Colston's statue, which is now to be found in L Shed in Bristol - Mapletree) Members of the public there will be consulted on the future of statues in their city, such as 19th century military leader Field Marshal Frederick Roberts, who is accused of helping to set up concentration camps, and Sir John Moore, who participated in both the Royal African and East India Companies. Why was a review required in the first place? Who was offended and how is it currently impacting their lives? These are the more important questions if we are going to waste public money.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| BlueJay UK 05 Apr 22 5.20pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Of course the report is intended to draw up a hit list, what do you think it is for, to consider putting up more statues of people with connections to salvery? I appreciate that you're being facetious but that's of course preciously what happened around the time of the civil rights movement in the US, as a middle finger gesture. Which frames removing them in a different light. Regardless of politics people want to arbitrarily start 'history' at a point of their choosing.
Edited by BlueJay (05 Apr 2022 5.26pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 05 Apr 22 5.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by BlueJay
I appreciate that you're being facetious but that's of course preciously what happened around the time of the civil rights movement in the US, as a middle finger gesture. Which frames removing them in a different light. Regardless of politics people want to arbitrarily start 'history' at a point of their choosing.
Edited by BlueJay (05 Apr 2022 5.26pm) One of the problems in America is that George Washington, “The Father of the Country”, owned hundreds of slaves and has both the capital and a state named after him.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| cryrst The garden of England 05 Apr 22 7.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Cool When your black mates get theirs I am sure they'll take you out for a pint. It seems you agree with it then. Reparations are the way forward and it's all about the money.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| BlueJay UK 05 Apr 22 7.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
One of the problems in America is that George Washington, “The Father of the Country”, owned hundreds of slaves and has both the capital and a state named after him. Denzel Washington DC . Problem solved. Next!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.