I disagree with you, that makes me a maga bot cx it’s funny how liberals can’t imagine for even one second the idea that someone besides a trump supporter wouldn’t be 100% on board with everything democrats do. I don’t tolerate nazis, therefore I am one. Very solid deduction, another mystery solved thanks to detective samtanko xD

Removed by mod

The fact it’s literally an official statement directly from the Virginia ACLU, on their own site, about the actions they took, is overshadowed by it being a “blog”, cool

Edit Legit what’s the point of this comment? The ACLU defends fascist violence. They did it while trump was in office, they’re doing it now with literal neo-nazi terrorists, and they’ll do that all throughout trump’s next term as fuhrer until he has them all put in camps along with the actually vulnerable people they protect. ACLU is not your friend. They’ll just act like it while also defending the fascists trying to kill you. None of this is changed just bc this statement is in the form of a blog post.

Hint: they’re planning by preparing legal defenses for nazis at violent hate rallies.

Wow. You’re telling a blatant lie, then telling me to read the article that disproves it on literally the first paragraph. What’s with liberals telling obvious lies to defend fascism and genocide? I’d genuinely love an explanation, but ig I’ll settle for you calling me a russian plant and a trump supporter for not supporting fascist bullshit like you do

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Exactly, it’s just a bunch of hand-wringing libs upset that their Nazi buddies are suffering consequences for their actions. Nothing bad happened here, other than ACLU actively rooting for and supporting Nazi terrorists

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

I thought they’d have gotten better since the Unite the right really, but nope, still going to bat for literal fascists who would kill everyone in the ACLU and everyone else they defend if given the chance. They deserve the wall like every other Nazi sympathizing cunt

This is a lie. Fuck off transphobe :3

deleted by creator

“The rain didn’t get the tiny flecks of wheat out of the cracks” Yet somehow it’s clean. Why are you continuing to act like this is comparable to actual paint? You’re whining about something that’s literally not a deal in the slightest, you really should stop making free propaganda for oil companies

slight wording edit at the start

Nobody’s first thought when they read “paint” is corn flour that easily washes off. Headlines written like this play these kinds of semantics games with their headlines to drive angry engagement, or even to push a political agenda sometimes. The Guardian seems to run articles critical of the oil industry fairly often so maybe this isn’t sinister like that, I’d have to do more research on The Guardian and the article’s author to get an idea

I am for sure, all the articles I’ve seen on this have called it paint and it’s really disingenuous and frustrating. The way they describe it makes it sound like they took a can of paint and splashed it on the stones. I interpreted it that way at first and got pretty mad, imo there’s no good environmental message that’s sent by destroying the ruins of long dead civilizations. At least defacing classic European art can be seen as a protest against the colonialist attitudes that led to climate change, Idk how actually effective it is at forcing change but part of me gets some morbid satisfaction from it :3

Not misinformation, disinformation. You read the article, yet choose to act like this is comparable to spray paint or something else that won’t immediately wash off. This is like getting indignant bc somebody threw a couple eggs at a great pyramid. It’s stupid and irrelevant to climate change, but sharing articles where the title says they threw acid instead of eggs is just fucking wrong, and serves no purpose besides discrediting climate activism

Edit actually this article says nothing about corn flour, sorry for accusing you of ignoring that. That’s super shady and shitty on the Guardian’s part, a detail that majorly changes how actually harmful this act was

Double edit you’re still acting like they threw actual paint, so nvm my apology. Stop being such a blatant oil shill

I mostly agree, but imo classic art is a much more valid target than Stonehenge or other historical sites. Some oil squirted onto cloth by an old white guy who’s been dead for 200+ years can be very pretty and can have some historical significance, but their loss isn’t anything close to a tragedy. What happened at Stonehenge would be inexcusable imo if it were coated with real paint that couldn’t be removed without ruining old carvings and stuff on it, as it is it’s just a stupid target. Fuck classic art, if people genuinely care more about preserving doodles made by slave owners than the environment, they should become climate activists to protect their precious art