57 thoughts on “Gretafying

  1. Zang

    That poor girl forced into a role as a propaganda puppet by her ANTIFA loving parents – pushing bad science, fake news and lies.

    Now here’s Nigel (or some other idiot) to tell us why this abused child is their hero even as they ignore her true plight.

    1. goldenbrown

      lol

      I still can’t get my head around how being anti-facist has apparently become a thing

      1. Mr. T

        It’s a nice way to justify being a silly boo boo pants.

        Oh but I am an ANTI-facist, all my actions no matter how reprehensible were only to stop those pesky facists!

        Nothing more than using a boogeyman type enemy to scare people into obeying you – like being anti-communist back in McCarthys USA. And if you dare to speak out against them or their methods, then YOU are a facist(communist) too

    2. Scundered

      +1 zang. Artwork should never be vandalised but people should be more aware of the wider picture here, to properly understand why it would become a target in the first place, there’s a very deliberate misunderstanding of the political background. Unless people genuinely seek truth without political bias no progress can be made in these matters. Good to see the artwork restored though.

      1. Nigel

        It became a target because the right has turned into a weird overheated reality-is-optional reactionary mess?

        1. goldenbrown

          ah now Nigel

          when are you going to get with the programme?

          haven’t you heard? there are good people on all sides

        2. Scundered

          And there goes Nigel jumping straight into a politically biased remark. So you have knowledge of the perpetrator Nigel? Or are you just making the usual lazy assumptions that prove the point of my statement?

          1. Nigel

            I’m sorry I forgot we have to selectively develop an inability to posit likely conclusions based on incomplete information when it comes to creepy misogynistic climate-change-denier vandalism and its possible relationship to the right turning into a weird overheated reality-is-optional reactionary mess.

          2. Scundered

            It could just as easily be some skanger who hates being told what to do, rather than the imaginary ghosts that haunt you in your sleep. There is zero evidence about the perpetrator.

          3. Nigel

            How is it being ‘a skanger who doesn’t like being told what to do’ inconsistent with anything else I’ve said about them?

          4. Nigel

            Skangers who deface Climate Change murals with that specific language? They’re not licking it off the pavement.

          5. Scundered

            You’re giving skangers too much credit that they would even see it as a climate change symbol

          6. Nigel

            It’s pretty clear they knew what the mural represents, don’t be obtuse. You are literally here in this thread deploring the vandalism but also claiming to understand why it became a target.

          7. Junkface

            Skangers don’t have an ideology usually. They just vandalize anything. If its an old man on the wall, they spray something upsetting to old men. If its a girl/woman they do the same, in this case they spray ‘slut’, as they are idiots. The Soros bit I’m sure they picked up from facebook Qanon or other conspiracy posts. That’s the age we live in.

            I’m glad they fixed the mural, but they are just asking for a repeat event. I still think Greta’s parents should be more careful with pushing her into the spotlight. She’s too young to take on the world’s trolling. Of course, if this was the early 2000’s Greta would not get so much hate. Social media drags everything down.

          8. Nigel

            Everything in your second paragraph suggests capitulating to bullying and allowing skangers on and offline to shut people down and shut people up.

          9. Junkface

            @Nigel

            I’m not suggesting that people give in to bullying, but let’s face reality. If skangers/trolls did this once they will do it again. They are setting themselves up for a fall.

          10. Nigel

            So? Doing the right thing in spite of the skangers makes people more admirable and heroic, not less, and more deserving our support. If people refrain from doing things because of the skangers, the skangers win.

    1. Nigel

      Well one side isn’t worried about global climate change and doesn’t want wanyone else to be worried about it either and anyone who is worried about it is a Soros antifa BLM terrorist.

        1. Nigel

          Show me anyone on the right anywhere who a) acknowledges the reaity of climate change b) offers genuine solutions to climate change that are derived from right-wing political ideology. I won’t accept mealy-mouthed centre-right parties who’d prefer to ignore the issue but are vaguely trying to greenwash themselves by badly and reluctantly implementing compromise solutions like carbon taxes while pushing ahead with coal mines and motorways and airpoirts.

          1. Nigel

            Yes, but Boris Johnson is a liar and a grifter. His words mean feck-all, and it’s exactly who I was thinking of when it comes to right-wing politicians whose actions speak louder thn words, though Varadkar was a closer-to-home second. Let Johnson take his massive safe majority and use it to fund green energy, green infrastructure, electrify and expand public transport, end oil and gas production and introduce sustainable and biodiversity-friendly agricultural methods, then we’ll talk. Feck then I’ll French-kiss Charger Salmons.

          2. Scundered

            Ah sure aren’t they all liars and grifters if they disagree with your politics in general terms…

          3. Nigel

            Some more than others. He’s AGREEING with me, politically, it’s just that he’s not going to do a damn thing about it and make it worse to boot. But that’s the UK. In the US for a conservative poliician to acknowledge climate change is electoral suicide, and I don’t even know how to begin with the calcified mess here in Ireland.

          4. Junkface

            Joe Biden is centre right. He accepts climate change is real. Not sure about the solutions he’s offering yet as his cabinet so far is full of grifters who are trying their best to silence and ignore progressives while pocketing as much cash as possible from Wall st.

          5. Nigel

            That’s actually a fair point, though Biden’s only centre right from our point of view, for the US he’s a radical socialist.

  2. eamonn

    If only we could fix the polar ice caps so easily.
    If only we could fix air quality so easily
    If only we could clean the oceans so easily…
    If only fish could learn to digest plastic –
    If only…..

    If being “antifa”, means having a custodial attitude to our shared home, how is it an insult ?
    If being “profa” means use, abuse, degrade and denigrate – is it not an easy choice to make.
    If we are waiting for unprompted action by governments and corporations to sort out the problems, we had better be very patient.

    1. Scundered

      The power is within the people’s hands, they could stop over populating the planet for a start, which would solve climate change and just about every other problem facing western society.

      1. Nigel

        Note: it would only solve the problems in the sense that people who don’t exist won’t have problems.

        1. Scundered

          Humans are responsible Nigel, did you think you can keep adding more and more humans to a limited supply of land and everything can be sustainable?

          1. Nigel

            I think humans are perfectly capable of implementing the many solutions to the problems of climate change and biodiversity collapse without blaming the bulk of people who are not responsible for the bulk of consumption and waste and CO2 emissions without resorting to some sort of cull or imposing population control measures on the poor and the powerless.

          2. Scundered

            It’s not a cull Nigel, can’t believe you would translate it that way, yet another deliberate misunderstanding. It’s about taking responsibility for yourself and for the world that humans have over-populated, within 50 years the world population could be naturally reduced

          3. Nigel

            But it’s not a solution to the various immediate and steadily worsening problems and would be even less justifiable a proposal if those solutions were enacted. Besides, global population is projected to peak and then decline, and is already declining sharply more developed nations.

          4. Junkface

            Some countries need to start paying people for NOT having kids. As I see it, single people or unmarried people pay way too much tax everywhere for not burdening the the climate / environment with more polluters. It’s a harsh reality, but some countries populations were out of control a long time ago. Take China for example, they are eating into more and more natural habitats for animals risking more virus outbreaks.
            They used their massive population to become the factory of the world and look where it has led us! Its not sustainable. Of course the USA is to blame too for outsourcing everything so that their 1%-er shareholders could have another million to spend on their useless, polluting offspring.

          5. Nigel

            Population reduction is a non-solution to the problems presented by the degradation of our living environment. The best solution to ‘over’ population is to keep degrading our living environment, if you want to be particularly grim about it. Fewer people scraping by on a degraded planet is not acceptable as a solution.

          6. Junkface

            It could be part of a solution. New technology for carbon extraction is getting better every year, these huge filters they are building are pretty incredible. This is where solutions are found. Also having more electric cars instead of fossil fuel ones helps. We also need to make sure the lithium batteries we need come from reliable sources and do not use coal powered machinery in extraction mines.

          7. Scundered

            Nigel you appear to have a poor grasp of the problem, the fewer the amount of people, the healthier the planet will be, it really is that simple. Up to you whether you want to do anything about it or just virtue signal online.

            Vasectomy for Nigel.

          8. Oro

            S – it’s really not that simple. For instance, the emissions per member of population varies widely by the country, with the worst offenders being the richest countries, so population control would have to be weighted, heavily towards richer (western) countries. When I know what you mean by “populations getting out of hand” is “it’s the Chinese and Indians fault” but they’re far lower on the environmental damage per person so it wouldn’t work.

            The problems need to be tackled directly, and the problems for the most part pertain to two industries that could be opted out of (or away from) for the most part, meat agriculture and fossil fuels.

          9. Nigel

            No. The more the people on the planet do to fix and reverse the degradation of our living environemnt the healthier the planet will be and the less utterly useless calls for enforced eugenics.

          10. Scundered

            Your plan isn’t working so far Nigel, how much longer are you going to keep deluding yourself that humans will suddenly all become climate aware activists? Not going to happen

  3. f_lawless

    Fair play to Katie Taylor. Women’s boxing is finally starting to get the attention it deserves on the world stage

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link