• rah@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Prime Minister Rishi Sunak condemned the incident as a “disgraceful act of vandalism”.

    Not as disgraceful as awarding oil drilling licenses to companies your family is invested in.

    Leader of the Labour Party Sir Keir Starmer said the damage

    There is no damage: ‘Just Stop Oil said the orange powder paint was cornflour and it would “wash away with rain”.’

    was “outrageous”

    Not as outrageous as forcefully replacing local Labour candidates with your own choices.

    and described Just Stop Oil as “pathetic”

    Not as pathetic as Labour’s climate policies.

    • Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Did any of them comment on the reason for the protest, or just the act itself? I don’t want to see things like stonehenge or priceless art getting fucked up, but I am OK with more things being fucked up if that is what it takes… I’m fully expecting environmental extremism to become a thing in the next few years, as the situation will get worse and these sort of protests haven’t achieved anything.

        • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          How many people do you know that were pro actual environment saving acts before and are now against?

          • wewbull@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            None, but that’s also true in the other direction and those people are now more resolute.

            • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              They were never gonna do anything that doesn’t directly and immediately benefit themselves anyways.

      • rah@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Did any of them comment on the reason for the protest, or just the act itself?

        Pro-tip: if you have questions raised by an article’s headlines, read the article.

        “Just Stop Oil said the motivation behind the incident was to demand the next UK government end the extraction and burning of oil, gas and coal by 2030.”

        • Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          Pro Tip: Don’t be a cunt. Perhaps my wording was ambiguous, I am aware of the reason for the protest and the content of the article, my point is that the politicians have not commented on the reasons and deflected the topic to the protest itself.

          • wewbull@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            So it didn’t work as a form of protest. Don’t give your opponent such an easy win.

          • rah@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            It depends on which “them” is being referred to in OP’s comment. Assuming “them” are the protesters, then the answer provides what the protesters said, or at least what the organisation they represented said.

            • Zagorath@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Assuming “them” are the protesters

              Why would you assume that? It was obviously asking about what comment the politicians have made, from the fact that they were asking about whether “they” had commented “on the reason for the protest, or just the act”.

              • rah@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                It was obviously asking about what comment the politicians have made

                Why would you assume that? It was obviously asking about what comment the protesters have made, from the fact that they were asking about whether “they” had commented “on the reason for the protest, or just the act”.

                • Zagorath@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Yes, it’s very easy to make a bad faith argument if you just randomly pull quotes, rather than actually looking at context.