Moving statues

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Moving statues

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 28 of 32 < 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 >

Behind Enemy Lines Sussex 07 Jan 22 12.43pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle Yep, I found it amusing that the BBC’s own Favourite (Alex Scott), has direct ancestors who owned slaves. Who do you think you are uncovered the fact in her own family tree. Slightly awkward. Wonder if they’ve checked their family trees for any slave related misdemeanours? Not an issue for us peasants but who knows what lurks in their histories? hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.
Alert a moderator to this post

Behind Enemy Lines

Sussex 07 Jan 22 12.43pm

Send a Private Message to Behind Enemy Lines

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Yep, I found it amusing that the BBC’s own Favourite (Alex Scott), has direct ancestors who owned slaves. Who do you think you are uncovered the fact in her own family tree. Slightly awkward.

Wonder if they’ve checked their family trees for any slave related misdemeanours? Not an issue for us peasants but who knows what lurks in their histories?

hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.

Alert a moderator to this post

The Dolphin 07 Jan 22 1.05pm
Steeleye - whatever this man and thousands of others did back 300 odd years ago should not mean that the law can be broken today. There will not be a person on this forum who thinks that slavery was a good thing to have happened but it was what it was back then sadly. This man made his money in an inappropriate way for sure but back then it was the way of the world but at the same time he was at least philanthropic in Bristol. Maybe his statue should not have still been up but there are ways to about things and so go through due process and get it removed. The way that this was done by a load of woke Hooray Henry's whose Mummy and Daddy pay for them to do what they want does not make it right. There is a strong chance now that the Attorney General will now call a mistrial so that theses w*****s get what they deserve. Love to see how Milo Ponsford would get on behind bars! Edited by The Dolphin (07 Jan 2022 1.06pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

The Dolphin

07 Jan 22 1.05pm

Steeleye - whatever this man and thousands of others did back 300 odd years ago should not mean that the law can be broken today.
There will not be a person on this forum who thinks that slavery was a good thing to have happened but it was what it was back then sadly.
This man made his money in an inappropriate way for sure but back then it was the way of the world but at the same time he was at least philanthropic in Bristol.
Maybe his statue should not have still been up but there are ways to about things and so go through due process and get it removed.
The way that this was done by a load of woke Hooray Henry's
whose Mummy and Daddy pay for them to do what they want does not make it right.
There is a strong chance now that the Attorney General will now call a mistrial so that theses w*****s get what they deserve.
Love to see how Milo Ponsford would get on behind bars!

Edited by The Dolphin (07 Jan 2022 1.06pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Spiderman Horsham 07 Jan 22 1.12pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 Its shameful that there could ever have been a statue to this trafficker in human flesh. The prosecution were saying Colsons wealth was based on the enslavement of 84,000 men, women and children was immaterial. As was the fact that he was complicit in the deaths of 19,000 of them, who died, squirming in agony, chained to the decks of the Royal African Company’s slave ships. How Bristol could depict otherwise for 124 years is beyond the pale. Surely it was immaterial, given the charge was criminal damage. Unless of course Cokston was on trial
Alert a moderator to this post

Spiderman

Horsham 07 Jan 22 1.12pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

Its shameful that there could ever have been a statue to this trafficker in human flesh.

The prosecution were saying Colsons wealth was based on the enslavement of 84,000 men, women and children was immaterial. As was the fact that he was complicit in the deaths of 19,000 of them, who died, squirming in agony, chained to the decks of the Royal African Company’s slave ships.

How Bristol could depict otherwise for 124 years is beyond the pale.

Surely it was immaterial, given the charge was criminal damage. Unless of course Cokston was on trial

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 07 Jan 22 1.13pm
Originally posted by Spiderman Isn’t this the picture taken outside the court? 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

07 Jan 22 1.13pm

Originally posted by Spiderman

Isn’t this the picture taken outside the court?

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Spiderman Horsham 07 Jan 22 1.17pm
Originally posted by Behind Enemy Lines Saw a similar programme featuring Ainsley Harriet. They had travelled to the Caribbean to unearth his roots. His face when told that one of his ancestors was a slave owner was priceless Edited by Spiderman (07 Jan 2022 1.17pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

Spiderman

Horsham 07 Jan 22 1.17pm

Originally posted by Behind Enemy Lines

Saw a similar programme featuring Ainsley Harriet. They had travelled to the Caribbean to unearth his roots. His face when told that one of his ancestors was a slave owner was priceless

Edited by Spiderman (07 Jan 2022 1.17pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Behind Enemy Lines Sussex 07 Jan 22 2.39pm
Originally posted by Spiderman This is why we shouldn’t always try to change the past. These people’s actions would be better directed to parts of the World where these things still go on. White Europeans merely took advantage of a trade that had already existed for centuries in Africa and elsewhere…and still goes on there. We all have ancestors that probably did wrong’ (although I have one who regularly blew up French ships in the Channel, which I am proud of!!). Saw a similar programme featuring Ainsley Harriet. They had travelled to the Caribbean to unearth his roots. His face when told that one of his ancestors was a slave owner was priceless Edited by Spiderman (07 Jan 2022 1.17pm) hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.
Alert a moderator to this post

Behind Enemy Lines

Sussex 07 Jan 22 2.39pm

Originally posted by Spiderman

This is why we shouldn’t always try to change the past. These people’s actions would be better directed to parts of the World where these things still go on. White Europeans merely took advantage of a trade that had already existed for centuries in Africa and elsewhere…and still goes on there. We all have ancestors that probably did wrong’ (although I have one who regularly blew up French ships in the Channel, which I am proud of!!).

Saw a similar programme featuring Ainsley Harriet. They had travelled to the Caribbean to unearth his roots. His face when told that one of his ancestors was a slave owner was priceless

Edited by Spiderman (07 Jan 2022 1.17pm)

hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.

Alert a moderator to this post

YT Oxford 07 Jan 22 2.51pm
Originally posted by Badger11 I wonder how many people who cheered at the result were also furious about Trump and the Jan 6 2021 Capitol riots. Both were examples of mob rule of course mob rule is fine just as long as you agree with the politics behind it. Sadly I predict some idiot will damage a statue that is revered by the left and use the Bristol acquittal as a justification. Off topic. I was reading a book about the beginning of civilisation the written word was invented not because someone wanted to write love poems but to protect property. Thousands of year ago people who had accumulated wealth wanted to ensure that their society understood that it was theirs and no one else's. So property ownership and property rights were the cornerstone of civilisation. Edited by Badger11 (07 Jan 2022 11.21am) They may well do so, but they will quickly discover that they can't rely on it in court, as no legal precedent has been set. Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)
Alert a moderator to this post

Oxford 07 Jan 22 2.51pm

Originally posted by Badger11

I wonder how many people who cheered at the result were also furious about Trump and the Jan 6 2021 Capitol riots.

Both were examples of mob rule of course mob rule is fine just as long as you agree with the politics behind it.

Sadly I predict some idiot will damage a statue that is revered by the left and use the Bristol acquittal as a justification.

Off topic.

I was reading a book about the beginning of civilisation the written word was invented not because someone wanted to write love poems but to protect property. Thousands of year ago people who had accumulated wealth wanted to ensure that their society understood that it was theirs and no one else's.

So property ownership and property rights were the cornerstone of civilisation.

Edited by Badger11 (07 Jan 2022 11.21am)

They may well do so, but they will quickly discover that they can't rely on it in court, as no legal precedent has been set.

Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)

Alert a moderator to this post

steeleye20 Croydon 07 Jan 22 5.12pm
Clearly this case should not have been brought and has boomeranged spectacularly. A jury decision does not set a precedent at all and it cannot be overturned. The Attorney General going to the Appeal Court. Perhaps the tories see their history of slavery going with it.
Alert a moderator to this post

steeleye20

Croydon 07 Jan 22 5.12pm

Clearly this case should not have been brought and has boomeranged spectacularly.

A jury decision does not set a precedent at all and it cannot be overturned.

The Attorney General going to the Appeal Court.

Perhaps the tories see their history of slavery going with it.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 07 Jan 22 5.31pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 Clearly this case should not have been brought and has boomeranged spectacularly. A jury decision does not set a precedent at all and it cannot be overturned. The Attorney General going to the Appeal Court. Perhaps the tories see their history of slavery going with it. Maybe Sage and Milo could wander around the National Gallery and the British museum and smash up everything that offends them.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

07 Jan 22 5.31pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

Clearly this case should not have been brought and has boomeranged spectacularly.

A jury decision does not set a precedent at all and it cannot be overturned.

The Attorney General going to the Appeal Court.

Perhaps the tories see their history of slavery going with it.

Maybe Sage and Milo could wander around the National Gallery and the British museum and smash up everything that offends them.

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 07 Jan 22 5.55pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 Clearly this case should not have been brought and has boomeranged spectacularly. A jury decision does not set a precedent at all and it cannot be overturned. The Attorney General going to the Appeal Court. Perhaps the tories see their history of slavery going with it. Which I think is the correct move. The decision cannot be overruled or retried what the AG will ask the Court of Appeal for is a decision on point of law. In future can a defendant argue what these guys did as a defence justification. If the Court of Appeal says yes they can then Parliament can if they want amend the law. If the CA say it is not a valid defence then presumably if it happens again a defendants lawyers will take note. One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 07 Jan 22 5.55pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

Clearly this case should not have been brought and has boomeranged spectacularly.

A jury decision does not set a precedent at all and it cannot be overturned.

The Attorney General going to the Appeal Court.

Perhaps the tories see their history of slavery going with it.

Which I think is the correct move. The decision cannot be overruled or retried what the AG will ask the Court of Appeal for is a decision on point of law. In future can a defendant argue what these guys did as a defence justification.

If the Court of Appeal says yes they can then Parliament can if they want amend the law. If the CA say it is not a valid defence then presumably if it happens again a defendants lawyers will take note.

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 07 Jan 22 7.46pm
One of his good ones [Tweet Link] COYP
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 07 Jan 22 7.46pm

One of his good ones

[Tweet Link]

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 07 Jan 22 7.56pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman One of his good ones [Tweet Link] Very good, I chucked him a fiver a couple of days ago. He's putting out a lot of material. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

07 Jan 22 7.56pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

One of his good ones

[Tweet Link]

Very good, I chucked him a fiver a couple of days ago.

He's putting out a lot of material.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 28 of 32 < 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Moving statues

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors