Sadiq Khan name changes ....

[Heathclaret]

I am chilled bro, I’m watching a film with one of my favourite actors in, you might have heard of him, Denzel Washington.

I answered one of your posts a few days ago, it was somewhat lengthy and I took a few visits to compile my response. Unfortunately, I was timed out and when I went to post the response, it was erased. I thought about re-writing it, came to the conclusion that it wouldn’t really register with you.

Part of what you wrote was “ do you not find it a staggering statistic that out of every thousand black male babies born one will be killed by the police.

Your use of the word babies was ridiculous, as they don’t get killed by the police when they are babies and , of course the obvious one, anyone born is a baby, aren’t they?

As to the statistic itself, staggering, no, saddening, yes. The social and economic situation for a large amount of people in the states bring them in to direct conflict with law enforcement, when the police don’t know if the crime they are responding to is perpetrated by people who are armed, they will probably have large amounts of adrenaline in their system, mixed with fear. No conducive to a controlled confrontation. I don’t have the answer, but what’s going on now, is not it.

[AndrewJB]

A very reasonable point but Saviles behaviour woujd have been appalling for any period in history .Slavery in the 1600’s was seen simply as a lucrative supply and demand business , regardless of how unpleasant we rightly view it today

I’m afraid you’re entirely wrong when it comes to pederasty. For most of western civilisation it was seen as a “mild vice” (of course mostly when it was a wealthy or popular child fiddler fiddling with children from a lower class background). You only have to look at the omertà that helped Saville get away with his crimes, to know all those otherwise good and decent people were merely carrying on that western tradition of looking the other way. I don’t know about all, but you’ll find it in other cultures too (so I’m not saying it’s just a white person thing).

I’d say probably if you asked a preacher of the time which was the greater sin, they’d likely answer “slavery”

[Heathclaret]

Where did I say remove references?

I've actually said we should have places that are designed to tell the whole tale and make visits compulsory, did you blink and miss that one?
I don't want our history erased, but nor do I want us to be taught selective parts of it.

We don't need a statue in the street that people will walk past and generally ignore because what's the point of it?

I visited all the museums as a kid, my guardian used to take us to London regularly.

My point is, and remains, schools are given a history curriculum that has a favourable outlook of British history in the main.
RE lessons are the same if I recall correctly, they don't teach you everything about religion, just the nice parts.

Some people look down on others due to skin colour, but they'd have less to feel superior about if they were taught about all the atrocities alongside the good things that were carried out in the name of the Empire.

We led the way in bringing an end to slavery as it was then, maybe its time we led the way in bringing an end to racism/discrimination of non white people in this country.
We will never please everyone, because some people will always hold a grudge, but we should at least make more of an effort.

You don’t have to accept everything you are taught, did you miss that? you can question and you can search for the truth if you think you have been given a biased history.

When I was at school, RE was only about Christianity and I could drop the subject once I had to make my GCE choices. Now it encompasses all religions and at my sons school and is a compulsory subject.

Perhaps the idea of museums is one of compromise, but for them to be removed by force by the rabble is not right.

[Rileybobs]

I am chilled bro, I’m watching a film with one of my favourite actors in, you might have heard of him, Denzel Washington.

I answered one of your posts a few days ago, it was somewhat lengthy and I took a few visits to compile my response. Unfortunately, I was timed out and when I went to post the response, it was erased. I thought about re-writing it, came to the conclusion that it wouldn’t really register with you.

Part of what you wrote was “ do you not find it a staggering statistic that out of every thousand black male babies born one will be killed by the police.

Your use of the word babies was ridiculous, as they don’t get killed by the police when they are babies and , of course the obvious one, anyone born is a baby, aren’t they?

As to the statistic itself, staggering, no, saddening, yes. The social and economic situation for a large amount of people in the states bring them in to direct conflict with law enforcement, when the police don’t know if the crime they are responding to is perpetrated by people who are armed, they will probably have large amounts of adrenaline in their system, mixed with fear. No conducive to a controlled confrontation. I don’t have the answer, but what’s going on now, is not it.

Not sure of the relevance of one of your favourite actors being Denzel Washington is but anyway...

Why haven’t you countered my post about Sadiq Khan to add to your unprovoked personal attack?

Not sure why you don’t think your post wouldn’t register with me. I’m always open to debating subjects with other people on here, and usually without having to resort to childish insults.

Without going back and finding my post, I’m pretty sure that I originally said that as things stand, 1 in 1000 black males will be killed at the hands of the police. Another poster didn’t understand the statistic and asked if that was per year. I’m certain I didn’t use the term babies in my original posting of the statistic.

Later, on the same thread I think, I tried to make it clearer by saying that out of every thousand black male babies born in the USA, one of them will go on to die at the hands of the police. I didn’t use that word to invoke any kind of emotiveness.

The distinction is important because 1 in 1000 black men will die at the hands of the police in the duration of their life. If I picked 1000 black men at random the statistic wouldn’t be the same because all of these people would have less than a whole life left to live. Not sure if I’ve explained that very well but hopefully you get my point.

Shame you didn’t post at the time as I would have happily clarified and discussed it with you.

[AndrewJB]

Stab Alley,
Pickpocket Square,
Drug dealing Gardens.

All super current and modern!

That’s going back to medieval London. There used to be a Grope C***Lane.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

You don’t have to accept everything you are taught, did you miss that? you can question and you can search for the truth if you think you have been given a biased history.

When I was at school, RE was only about Christianity and I could drop the subject once I had to make my GCE choices. Now it encompasses all religions and at my sons school and is a compulsory subject.

Perhaps the idea of museums is one of compromise, but for them to be removed by force by the rabble is not right.

If only one side of the narrative is drilled into your mind then most will accept it, hence the existence of racism, homophobia and religion.

[Rileybobs]

I am chilled bro, I’m watching a film with one of my favourite actors in, you might have heard of him, Denzel Washington.

He's not my favourite actor of all time by the way. My favourite actor of all time is Mister Sidney Poitier.

Sorry, I tried but I couldn’t resist a bit of Brent.

[Colburn_Claret]

You said;

‘ He pontificates about racism in a country where he is the Asian Mayor of one of the biggest cities in the world. Oh the irony.......’

Which suggests that you think it’s wrong that Khan pontificates about racism in this country because of his heritage and senior position. So what is the irony?

To me, imo of course, jumping on the band wagon of the Bristol statue incident, and talk about renaming streets, pulling down statues in London is pontificating and pampering to the illiberal left. It ignores the very freedoms that gave him the opportunity to stand for election as the Mayor of London. It ignores the many lives sacrificed over the history of this country, that gave him the freedom he enjoys. He, as many of the Left Wing of the Labour Party do, hates this country. He wants to erase its past. Eradicate its traditions. Dissolve the Royal Family. Drag us back into the EU. He speaks for a myopic few, not the majority. The sooner he's gone the better.

[TopCat]

It’s Potter not Poitier

[martin_p]

To me, imo of course, jumping on the band wagon of the Bristol statue incident, and talk about renaming streets, pulling down statues in London is pontificating and pampering to the illiberal left. It ignores the very freedoms that gave him the opportunity to stand for election as the Mayor of London. It ignores the many lives sacrificed over the history of this country, that gave him the freedom he enjoys. He, as many of the Left Wing of the Labour Party do, hates this country. He wants to erase its past. Eradicate its traditions. Dissolve the Royal Family. Drag us back into the EU. He speaks for a myopic few, not the majority. The sooner he's gone the better.

Is he advocating the burning of history books?

[Rileybobs]

To me, imo of course, jumping on the band wagon of the Bristol statue incident, and talk about renaming streets, pulling down statues in London is pontificating and pampering to the illiberal left. It ignores the very freedoms that gave him the opportunity to stand for election as the Mayor of London. It ignores the many lives sacrificed over the history of this country, that gave him the freedom he enjoys. He, as many of the Left Wing of the Labour Party do, hates this country. He wants to erase its past. Eradicate its traditions. Dissolve the Royal Family. Drag us back into the EU. He speaks for a myopic few, not the majority. The sooner he's gone the better.

Ok, so in a nutshell Khan shouldn’t address the issue of racism because of the opportunity that this country has afforded him? That’s what I claimed that you said the first time.

[RingoMcCartney]

To me, imo of course, jumping on the band wagon of the Bristol statue incident, and talk about renaming streets, pulling down statues in London is pontificating and pampering to the illiberal left. It ignores the very freedoms that gave him the opportunity to stand for election as the Mayor of London. It ignores the many lives sacrificed over the history of this country, that gave him the freedom he enjoys. He, as many of the Left Wing of the Labour Party do, hates this country. He wants to erase its past. Eradicate its traditions. Dissolve the Royal Family. Drag us back into the EU. He speaks for a myopic few, not the majority. The sooner he's gone the better.

Agreed.


"Sadiq Khan has announced a commission to review statues, plaques and street names in London to ensure landmarks in the capital “suitably reflect London’s achievements and diversity”.

The London mayor said the new Commission for Diversity in the Public Realm will focus on “increasing representation among Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (Bame) communities, women, the LGBT+ community and disability groups”.

The simple fact is that given statues represent historically important individuals and their achievements. Another fact is that the ethnic profile of London until relatively recently has been majority white. London is the capital of the country so the it should be expected that individuals from outside the country should also be celebrated with a statue, plaque, street name. Again until relatively recently the vast vast majority of people in this country have been white.

Khan appears to see these facts as resentfully inconvenient.

If Khan is using today's vastly different demographics as a basis to judge who can, and cant be represented in statues, plaques and street names , purely on their skin colour.

At best, its divisive far left popularism. At worst , its the very definition of (anti white) racism.

[jurek]

We might have been one of the first Western European countries to abolish slavery
and clearly not one of the first to get into it.

But we were one of the first to literally industrialise it and in terms of abolishing it
the government of the day had to cough up the equivalent of a year's GDP to pay off the
people/families that had shares in it. Of which there were, I believe, close to 4500.
Most of these people were already pretty wealthy and as a result of the payoffs many became
multi millionaires. So they certainly made sure they didn't lose out.

Maybe we should ask their dependants and current day families who have inherited
some of this wealth to own up and set up a fund to help those whose ancestors suffered as a result of it.

If nothing else we should ensure we teach the full story to our current youngsters
in history lessons and delve a little further into what happened and why rather
than just proclaim we were the first to abolish it.

[Dyched]

Agree with the post above. Lewis Hamilton can also donate his millions of pounds he’s earn working for one and advertising another business that were largely involved with the slavery of thousands of jews.

But would he ****

[Colburn_Claret]

Ok, so in a nutshell Khan shouldn’t address the issue of racism because of the opportunity that this country has afforded him? That’s what I claimed that you said the first time.

it wasn't, or certainly wasn't my intention. Everyone should address the racist issue. Sadiq Khan as well, but deciding to pull down statues and renaming streets isn't addressing racism, it justs pampers to a few left wing loonies, and an illiberal bloc of society.
Put it this way, if a man is racist on Friday, and we pull a statue down on Saturday, he'll still be racist on Sunday. What did it achieve nothing.
How many people had heard of Edward Colston before Sunday. Nobody outside Bristol, and the vast majority of Bristolians would know him as the benefactor who did so much for Bristol. His downfall wasn't at the hands of BLM supporters, but a handful of left wing anarchists, professional **** stirrers and agitators. Should we really allow this country to pamper to these extremists.

[martin_p]

Can I ask whose life on here is going to be any worse due to the removal of any of these statues?

[martin_p]

it wasn't, or certainly wasn't my intention. Everyone should address the racist issue. Sadiq Khan as well, but deciding to pull down statues and renaming streets isn't addressing racism, it justs pampers to a few left wing loonies, and an illiberal bloc of society.
Put it this way, if a man is racist on Friday, and we pull a statue down on Saturday, he'll still be racist on Sunday. What did it achieve nothing.
How many people had heard of Edward Colston before Sunday. Nobody outside Bristol, and the vast majority of Bristolians would know him as the benefactor who did so much for Bristol. His downfall wasn't at the hands of BLM supporters, but a handful of left wing anarchists, professional **** stirrers and agitators. Should we really allow this country to pamper to these extremists.

It's been a big issue in Bristol for a while so i doubt you're accurately representing the views of Bristolians.

[Rileybobs]

it wasn't, or certainly wasn't my intention. Everyone should address the racist issue. Sadiq Khan as well, but deciding to pull down statues and renaming streets isn't addressing racism, it justs pampers to a few left wing loonies, and an illiberal bloc of society.
Put it this way, if a man is racist on Friday, and we pull a statue down on Saturday, he'll still be racist on Sunday. What did it achieve nothing.
How many people had heard of Edward Colston before Sunday. Nobody outside Bristol, and the vast majority of Bristolians would know him as the benefactor who did so much for Bristol. His downfall wasn't at the hands of BLM supporters, but a handful of left wing anarchists, professional **** stirrers and agitators. Should we really allow this country to pamper to these extremists.

Well it might not have been your intention but by condemning his stance against racism by using his ethnicity I don't know how else you thought it would be interpreted.

Of course pulling down statues and renaming streets is addressing racism. It may not be directly tackling individual acts of racism but it is part of a movement to eradicate these views from our society. By removing statues of prominent slave traders and the like we are showing that the actions of these people are not cause for celebration - and the sole purpose of a statue is to celebrate someone - unlike some of the poor counter-examples that have been given.

[aggi]

I always find the "they hate this country" thing bizarre.

Generally it boils down to "they don't have British values" and that boils down to "they don't have MY values" because for some unexplained reason they are the arbiter of what are British values.

The most obvious one for this recently was Corbyn. Love him or loathe it's pretty hard to deny that he's spent a large part of his life working to serve this country and its inhabitants (albeit not always competently). Claiming he hates the country is a nice easy attack though because it requires no evidence and doesn't really mean anything.

[tiger76]

Sadiq's on as.....

#RobertMilliganIsGone #BLMs

I'd never even heard of Robert Milligan until the last couple of days, so he can't have been that noted.

I have no problem in these monuments and statues being removed, if it's done in a restrained manner, and through the proper channels, which seems to have been the case with this Milligan chap.

I understand it's an emotive subject for some, but if we're going to seriously eradicate racism, or at least suppress it, then as the leader of Oxford city council stated it's about far more then just removing historic symbols, however controversial those symbols might be.

What i do find ironic is the protesters who gathered at Nelson Mandela's statue in Parliament Square, he was by no means a saint in his long life.

https://www.npr.org/2013/12/06/24921635 ... 740821858

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opini ... 8a55e6cb2

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... la-legacy

And neither was his wife Winnie https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/worl ... 77898002/

If we're going to discuss these issues, then let's at least have an open and honest dialogue, even if that uncovers uncomfortable truths for everyone.

I agree these issues have been swept under the carpet for far too long, but if we're ever going to become a harmonious country, then harsh truths have to be faced on all sides.

[CoolClaret]

I always find the "they hate this country" thing bizarre.

Generally it boils down to "they don't have British values" and that boils down to "they don't have MY values" because for some unexplained reason they are the arbiter of what are British values.

Do you think England would be as progressive as it is in 2020 if it was a sectarian Islamic country?

I can't see anyone that does believe in British values about inclusivity can also subscribe to Conservative religious views.

[dsr]

I've actually said we should have places that are designed to tell the whole tale and make visits compulsory, did you blink and miss that one?
I don't want our history erased, but nor do I want us to be taught selective parts of it.

What would be the focus of this museum? Would it be about how Britain was an evil evil place because some of its residents made money out of slavery?

Or would it be about how in Britain, unlike most countries of the world, has had no legal slavery since the Romans left and no enforceable slavery since the Black Death?

And how Britain was one of the first countries to take action against slavery by outlawing the slave trade throughout the Empire?

Followed by the freeing of all slaves in the Empire?

And then the abolition of the international slave trade, using British domination of the seas to stop even non-Empire countries from transporting slaves across the globe?

All countries have shame about the principle and practice of slavery in history. But if you want to find a country to put a museum about the abolition of slavery all over the world, the UK is a good place.

There is a lot of news stories at present implying that Britain is uniquely evil because of the slave trade; it isn't. All countries were at it. The African countries where the slaves were first sold had no scruples at all about slavery; they were pretty much unanimously in favour of the principle. Where the European countries (all of them) got the bad publicity is that they exported it and made it larger scale.

[Colburn_Claret]

Well it might not have been your intention but by condemning his stance against racism by using his ethnicity I don't know how else you thought it would be interpreted.

Of course pulling down statues and renaming streets is addressing racism. It may not be directly tackling individual acts of racism but it is part of a movement to eradicate these views from our society. By removing statues of prominent slave traders and the like we are showing that the actions of these people are not cause for celebration - and the sole purpose of a statue is to celebrate someone - unlike some of the poor counter-examples that have been given.

Perhaps because as a reasonable person I would expect him to use himself as an example as how people of any ethnicity, can succeed in this country if they work for it. To ride on a bandwagon of racism in this country, which I'm not denying exists, is to deny that the opportunity is there for anyone to succeed. As many other posters, you seem to want to pick at the scab of negativity rather than highlight the positives. If we want a positive future, show the possibilities of the present, of the future, to dwell on things that happened 200 years ago doesn't offer anything positive.

[martin_p]

What would be the focus of this museum? Would it be about how Britain was an evil evil place because some of its residents made money out of slavery?

Or would it be about how in Britain, unlike most countries of the world, has had no legal slavery since the Romans left and no enforceable slavery since the Black Death?

And how Britain was one of the first countries to take action against slavery by outlawing the slave trade throughout the Empire?

Followed by the freeing of all slaves in the Empire?

And then the abolition of the international slave trade, using British domination of the seas to stop even non-Empire countries from transporting slaves across the globe?

All countries have shame about the principle and practice of slavery in history. But if you want to find a country to put a museum about the abolition of slavery all over the world, the UK is a good place.

There is a lot of news stories at present implying that Britain is uniquely evil because of the slave trade; it isn't. All countries were at it. The African countries where the slaves were first sold had no scruples at all about slavery; they were pretty much unanimously in favour of the principle. Where the European countries (all of them) got the bad publicity is that they exported it and made it larger scale.

It's in Liverpool on the Albert Dock.

There was a news story today about Belgium (i think) removing a statue. It's not exclusively Britain going through this at the moment but clearly the British media is likely to focus on the story here.

[Colburn_Claret]

It's been a big issue in Bristol for a while so i doubt you're accurately representing the views of Bristolians.

Its been a big issue for a minority. The people of Bristol voted to keep it, but just like everything else the left wing lose, they can't accept defeat gracefully.

[martin_p]

Its been a big issue for a minority. The people of Bristol voted to keep it, but just like everything else the left wing lose, they can't accept defeat gracefully.

If you're referring to the newspaper poll it only attracted about 1000 responses in a population of about 450,000, so not really that relevant.

[aggi]

Do you think England would be as progressive as it is in 2020 if it was a sectarian Islamic country?

I can't see anyone that does believe in British values about inclusivity can also subscribe to Conservative religious views.

No. Although I think the same would be true of other major religions such as Christianity or Judaism as well. Look at TIm Farron or Jacob Rees Mogg as obvious examples.

I agree, although I'm not quite sure what relevance this has to my post.

[Heathclaret]

If only one side of the narrative is drilled into your mind then most will accept it, hence the existence of racism, homophobia and religion.

I don’t really know what point you are trying to make.

At school, a point is not drilled in to your head. Once you go on to further education and self education, you don’t have to accept one side’s point of view.

[Heathclaret]

He's not my favourite actor of all time by the way. My favourite actor of all time is Mister Sidney Poitier.

Sorry, I tried but I couldn’t resist a bit of Brent.

Is this funny? Sorry, never watched Brent.

[JohnMcGreal]

How many people had heard of Edward Colston before Sunday. Nobody outside Bristol, and the vast majority of Bristolians would know him as the benefactor who did so much for Bristol. His downfall wasn't at the hands of BLM supporters, but a handful of left wing anarchists, professional **** stirrers and agitators. Should we really allow this country to pamper to these extremists.

I'd never heard of him, and I've learned everything I now know about him since his statue was dumped in the river.

Seeing as everybody is eager to preserve this history and not to erase it, should all the statues of these monsters be tossed into rivers so that everyone can learn about the history of them?

Because as an educational event, the bringing down of Colston's statue was very effective.

[AndrewJB]

To me, imo of course, jumping on the band wagon of the Bristol statue incident, and talk about renaming streets, pulling down statues in London is pontificating and pampering to the illiberal left. It ignores the very freedoms that gave him the opportunity to stand for election as the Mayor of London. It ignores the many lives sacrificed over the history of this country, that gave him the freedom he enjoys. He, as many of the Left Wing of the Labour Party do, hates this country. He wants to erase its past. Eradicate its traditions. Dissolve the Royal Family. Drag us back into the EU. He speaks for a myopic few, not the majority. The sooner he's gone the better.

For someone so forgiving of the shortcomings of our supposed PM, you're very triggered by the mayor of a place where you don't live. According to you, being an ethnic, Khan should be thankful for the freedoms he has, and exercise them by being quiet and not having an opinion on anything. You offer up a list of things you say Khan wants to do, but no evidence whatsoever. Typical Daily Mail style smearing.

[Heathclaret]

Not sure of the relevance of one of your favourite actors being Denzel Washington is but anyway...

Why haven’t you countered my post about Sadiq Khan to add to your unprovoked personal attack?

Not sure why you don’t think your post wouldn’t register with me. I’m always open to debating subjects with other people on here, and usually without having to resort to childish insults.

Without going back and finding my post, I’m pretty sure that I originally said that as things stand, 1 in 1000 black males will be killed at the hands of the police. Another poster didn’t understand the statistic and asked if that was per year. I’m certain I didn’t use the term babies in my original posting of the statistic.

Later, on the same thread I think, I tried to make it clearer by saying that out of every thousand black male babies born in the USA, one of them will go on to die at the hands of the police. I didn’t use that word to invoke any kind of emotiveness.

The distinction is important because 1 in 1000 black men will die at the hands of the police in the duration of their life. If I picked 1000 black men at random the statistic wouldn’t be the same because all of these people would have less than a whole life left to live. Not sure if I’ve explained that very well but hopefully you get my point.

Shame you didn’t post at the time as I would have happily clarified and discussed it with you.

Nothing other than I was watching a film with him in it, no need to look for an alternative.

An unprovoked personal attack, is that what I did? Attack you? I apologise.


Sorry, I still don’t understand the use of the word babies, except to be dramatic, as the stat stays the same. One in a thousand black men will die at the hands of the police, no need for the word babies.

I also asked you to clarify your statistics, you said you couldn’t be arsed as you were chillin watching a film.


I think I explained why I didn’t post sooner.

I haven’t read your post that you mentioned, but if I find time, I will read it, I don’t know whether I will counter it, as, without having read it, I don’t know if I disagree.

[Rileybobs]

Is this funny? Sorry, never watched Brent.

It's a quote from The Office where David Brent is very awkward in the company of a black colleague, and trying to find some common ground he awkwardly asks him if he saw that film last night starring Denzel Washington. And then cringingly goes on to claim that Denzel Washington isn't his favourite actor ever, but Mister Sidney Potiter is.

[Rileybobs]

Nothing other than I was watching a film with him in it, no need to look for an alternative.

An unprovoked personal attack, is that what I did? Attack you? I apologise.


Sorry, I still don’t understand the use of the word babies, except to be dramatic, as the stat stays the same. One in a thousand black men will die at the hands of the police, no need for the word babies.

I also asked you to clarify your statistics, you said you couldn’t be arsed as you were chillin watching a film.


I think I explained why I didn’t post sooner.

I haven’t read your post that you mentioned, but if I find time, I will read it, I don’t know whether I will counter it, as, without having read it, I don’t know if I disagree.

To clarify the 1 in 1000 statistic further. The statistic I posted is that 1 in 1000 men, in the WHOLE DURATION of their lives will die at the hands of the police. If I picked a selection of 1000 black men in the USA at random, then statistically 1 of them WOULDN'T die at the hands of the police, because all of them have lived a proportion of their lives. Therefore, to simplify the statistic, 1 in 1000 black male babies born in the USA will go on to die at the hands of the police. There's quite an important and obvious distinction between the two. I definitely didn't use the word babies to be dramatic, if you don't believe me then that's your choice but if you follow my posts as closely as you suggest you should know that I don't spread lies on here.

On your last point, you have read the post that I mentioned because you replied to it by saying;

'Rileybobs with more of his off the cuff bullshit.'

Colburn insinuated that as Khan is a British Asian who has worked his way to becoming the Mayor of London he shouldn't pontificate about racism in this country. I made a perfectly reasonable response to that which you chose to ignore and instead resorted to an unprovoked personal response. It doesn't bother me, it just dilutes your point and makes you look like a hypocrite when you claim that it is my posts which are childish.

[Erasmus]

Sadiq Khan hates this country? Colburn, that was a really silly thing to say.

[Burnley Ace]

I find the whole concept of statues an odd thing. It seems as though a number of them are vanity projects paid for by rich people or their friends. 18th century Businessman made a lot of money exploiting slavery and/or the poor and when he dies gives a little bit to build a statue or park so he can be remembered forever?

[NottsClaret]

Can I ask whose life on here is going to be any worse due to the removal of any of these statues?

Glad it's not just me. Struggling to form a strong opinion about this at all really. I didn't know they were there, and now they're not, I can't see a good argument for putting them back up or mourning their loss.

[Burnley Ace]

But we were one of the first to literally industrialise it and in terms of abolishing it
the government of the day had to cough up the equivalent of a year's GDP to pay off the
people/families that had shares in it. Of which there were, I believe, close to 4500.
Most of these people were already pretty wealthy and as a result of the payoffs many became
multi millionaires. So they certainly made sure they didn't lose out.

Maybe we should ask their dependants and current day families who have inherited
some of this wealth to own up and set up a fund to help those whose ancestors suffered as a result of it.

There is a BBC TV programme called “Britain’s forgotten slave owners” by David Olusoga which covers this point. Very interesting, one of the “revelations” was that (for some reason widows in Glasgow were mentioned) a plantation in the West Indies may have had slaves owned by a number of different absentee owners who were paid for their labour, almost like a pension scheme.

[ClaretMoffitt]

Take the statues of all of them down. Including Chruchill, what do you think its like for an Indian man to walk past a glorified statue of a guy that famished his ancestors?

This is what they are saying on social media now.

Make no mistake.

Churchill is their end game.

And eventually they will succeed.

[Zlatan]

Dara hits nail on head (as usual)

daraobriain-statues.JPG (36 KiB) Viewed 2283 times

[CoolClaret]

Just blows my mind how people can support Sadiq tbh.

Islamic terror attack - 'part and parcel of life in a big city'

Finsbury Park nutjob van attack - extra police deployed around the area to show solidarity

Knife crime & gangland culture literally the biggest threat to black kids in London.

Sets up online units to monitor 'hate crime' & sets up a 'diversity committee' within hours after pressure from a few radicals to pull down statues (not to mention a you gov poll had only 13% agreeing with pulling them down).

Add all this in plus a myriad of other things - defense lawyer for the Nation of Islam and some people still wonder why the average disenfranchised northerner has an ill view towards Sadiq Khan?

[Devils_Advocate]

I don't think we do wonder #BLM

[CoolClaret]

Kids literally blown to smithereens in Manchester off a radical and we're told to not look back in anger.

A psychotic copper kills a career criminal 3000+ miles away and through mob rule we have to now start renaming and pulling stuff down?

People have lost their ******* minds

[ClaretMoffitt]

Kids literally blown to smithereens in Manchester off a radical and we're told to not look back in anger.

A psychotic copper kills a career criminal 3000+ miles away and through mob rule we have to now start renaming and pulling stuff down?

People have lost their ******* minds

This is literally the situation the UK is now in.

Its hard to make sense of it. Its like we are living in some kind of huge social experiment because none of this seems real.

[Sausage]

Sets up online units to monitor 'hate crime' & sets up a 'diversity committee' within hours after pressure from a few radicals to pull down statues (not to mention a you gov poll had only 13% agreeing with pulling them down).

Slightly selective with your stats there, CoolClaret. The YouGov poll shows that 53% of respondents support the removal of statues honouring slave traders and slave owners. However, only 13% approve of the way the Colston statue was removed.

[CoolClaret]

Slightly selective with your stats there, CoolClaret. The YouGov poll shows that 53% of respondents support the removal of statues honouring slave traders and slave owners. However, only 13% approve of the way the Colston statue was removed.

OK ill hold my hand up there - at least put it down to a vote eh?

Which in Bristol 56% of people had previously voted to keep the Colston statue

[AlargeClaret]

I doubt many would object to the sensible removal of long ago forgotten slave traders and random imperialists cum local philanthropists . It’s when they want to remove iconic “ fathers of the nation” like Nelson,Wellesley ,Churchill et al. Even Robert Peel ffs.The left have an almost incredible lack of historical context and the selectiveness of a Raging Twitter mob.

It’s as if the laws of the land have been handed over to a 6th form socialist debating club ,all the more remarkable that the powers that be are running very scared indeed

[martin_p]

I doubt many would object to the sensible removal of long ago forgotten slave traders and random imperialists cum local philanthropists . It’s when they want to remove iconic “ fathers of the nation” like Nelson,Wellesley ,Churchill et al. Even Robert Peel ffs.The left have an almost incredible lack of historical context and the selectiveness of a Raging Twitter mob.

It’s as if the laws of the land have been handed over to a 6th form socialist debating club ,all the more remarkable that the powers that be are running very scared indeed

Who, other than the raging Twitter mob, are suggesting this?

[tiger76]

There is a BBC TV programme called “Britain’s forgotten slave owners” by David Olusoga which covers this point. Very interesting, one of the “revelations” was that (for some reason widows in Glasgow were mentioned) a plantation in the West Indies may have had slaves owned by a number of different absentee owners who were paid for their labour, almost like a pension scheme.

I'm glad you mentioned David Olusoga, his 2016 show Black and British : A Forgotten History is being re-aired on BBC 4 and by the BBC Red button next week, i missed it first time around, so i'll definitely catch it this time.

Been watching Olusoga in A House Through Time, and he knows how to captivate his audience.

Glasgow is by no means blameless in the slave trade, TBH i doubt any major UK city is, and there has been a lot of debate in the last few years around this topic in the city.

[martin_p]

OK ill hold my hand up there - at least put it down to a vote eh?

Which in Bristol 56% of people had previously voted to keep the Colston statue

You mean a poll in a local rag in which just over 1000 people took part?

So we can be sure that approximately 600 out of Bristol’s population of over 400k wanted it to stay.