Like the whole piece is “we’re on the face of it saying we are against these lads but dig just an inch deeper and we are in fact fully emboldening them”
2 Likes
And above all – as so many have rightly pointed out – it is the height of lunacy to accuse him of racism, when he stood alone against a racist tyranny that without his resistance would have overwhelmed this country and the rest of Europe.
famously you can’t be a racist if you oppose another racist
13 Likes
surely those twats that peddle the “but white people were slaves too!” line should be all in favour of Cromwell’s statue coming down, right?
4 Likes
I just, I legit don’t understand what point he’s trying to prove by asking “should we condemn Cromwell for killing millions of Irish people” beyond “Irish lives don’t matter” still to this day. It’s staggering he even brought it up because it literally exposes what horrible bullshit British Imperialism is in one sentence even though he’s apparently trying to use to convince you otherwise?
5 Likes
Churchill took hitler on 1 v 1 did he…?
2 Likes
Churchill literally killed Hitler.
8 Likes
That’s the bit of Inglorious Basterds that is historically incorrect - it was Churchill in the cinema with the machine gun
Nah one of the racist statue protectors literally corrected us on history. Churchill was the man. He sorted it.
4 Likes
If there’s one thing I learned from my history degree it’s that fact into doubt doesn’t go
6 Likes
Don’t know what else to expect from that clown, but it is such a weird example to use. Like he’s had a good look down the list of statues to historical figures that exist in this country, and the least questionable thing any of them has done is to murder tens of thousands of people?
3 Likes
Can anyone amongst us truly say they have never murdered thousands of people though?
6 Likes
Seems perfectly reasonable 
Apparently owns ridelow on Church Street.
the royalists hated cromwell so much, they opened his grave up and ‘executed’ him after he died.
Fucking hell.
3 Likes
I got fucking fried on here the last time I came out with some trade mark chat, but here goes:
Short answer – strongly suspect that neither of these will be allowed to proceed.
Trade marks are essentially government granted monopolies. I think it is extremely unlikely that the UK Intellectual Property Office will grant an application for BLACK LIVES MATTER unless the applicant can show a connection to the BLM movement in the US (which he can’t). Even if he did somehow get it through, BLM could easily take it off him on the basis that the UK public would associate the term with them and not the applicant. The fact that he’s claiming that he will use the mark purely for collecting royalties for charity (which is all a bit 
in any event) does not make any difference at all.
The I CAN’T BREATHE mark is not quite as clear cut, but will likely encounter objections that it is contrary to public morality, in that the applicant is essentially trying to monopolise a term that is associated with a tragic event, for commercial gain (the disclaimer that he has added will make no difference). Additionally, the applicant’s lack of association with George Floyd’s family or estate will count against it. Finally, even if he did somehow get it granted, I suspect any UK would not look at all favourably on any attempts made to enforce it.
Tbh you see these sort of opportunistic applications all of the time when a major news event happens and the vast majority of them go nowhere. These are particularly stupid examples though.
16 Likes
Late edit
Should say, ‘I expect any UK court …’
Oh here comes Mr Trademarks
7 Likes