| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Boo for the Royal Wedding | |
| Posted by: | Stewart Dean | |
| Date/Time: | 02/05/11 07:22:00 |
| Susan, You said.... "The families paid for the wedding itself. Okay, the taxpayer paid the bill for the policing, as they did for the anti-cuts demo a month ago, or for the G20 protests. At least this time people had something fun to watch. If I have to choose between paying to police a royal wedding and paying to police a riot by a bunch of nutters, then sign me up for the wedding." In the first paragraph you say that we paid for the policing of ALL those protesting. In the next you say we can choose between that and the royal wedding and then call it 'a riot by a bunch of nutters'. Therefore you are calling all protestors nutters and claim it was a riot. That is what you said even if that was not you intention. You then wrote. "Stewart, I didn't say that all the people on the anti-cuts march were nutters; only the ones who WERE nutters, like the people who occupied Fortnum & Mason, smashed windows and committed a number of other criminal offences." The people who occupied Fortnum & Mason where NOT nutters. They what part of the UKuncut campaign that stage peaceful direct action against companies that have unethical policy to avoid tax. I support their campaign as it has a clear point and their action has been peaceful and good spirited. This is unlike a very small minority of kids who think it's cool to be anarchists - 'cos, yeah, we are like standing up to the fascist state'. And even they are not nutters but clueless kids who want a bit of attention and have a laugh. |