It’s them risking arrest, not you, so I would say they are the ones who get to say whether it’s a worthwhile use or not, wouldn’t you?

You’ve shifted from “destroyed” to “damaged”, I notice. The varnish of The Hay Wain was damaged, but the painting was not. The frames of various other paintings were damaged. The glass of The Rokeby Venus was damaged. Nothing compared to what Mary Richardson did in 1914.

It is literally Just Stop Oil’s point that people will start wringing their handkerchiefs at these actions but they are doing nothing about the climate emergency which threatens all our lives. You think it will make a difference if these people vote for different parties? The current parties are already doing worse than nothing - Sunak is opening up new oil and gas fields.

It is not climate protesters’ responsibility to persuade people to save the planet that we all live on. It is up to everybody, and too many people are not doing their share. Just Stop Oil have a right to be angry. We should all be angry.

Destroyed? Let’s talk about that.

As you know, Stonehenge has been standing in the rain for 3,000 years.

Following the industrial revolution, fossil fuel emissions made that acid rain. It attacked every cultural artifact standing outdoors for decades.

I think that the people who did that belong behind bars.

But they aren’t destroying them, are they? The stones have been standing in the rain and snow for 3,000 years. Some powder paint is just going to wash off the next time it snows. It’s not like they’ve taken a jackhammer to the Heel Stone.

They’ll probably publish the abridged version, sadly. The full version reads, as we well know:

Thou shall not commit adultery but, if thou doest, thou shalt pay off the other woman so that it harmeth not thy chances in the presidential election. Nor shall it turn thy supporters against thee when they heareth of it.

You also punt in rugby.

Last year, Tesla announced that they had improved with autonomous emergency braking system, to go ‘beyond standard AEB functionality’. And yet, here we have a story where a Tesla drove straight into a stationary vehicle and, according to the cop, didn’t slow down.

Yes, the driver should have been paying attention, but why did the AEB do nothing?

Is it an uptick? Ausländer were 11.2% of the population in 2016 when the proportion of crimes was about the same (40%). 50% more Ausländer, the same amount of crime => the rate is clearly going down.

I chose 2016 because the rates were the same, but you can do the same analysis for 2017. The population of Ausländer has increased by more than their share of the crime rate.

That is precisely why I think it’s important not to make exaggerated claims that can easily be refuted. Israel will claim that the calls for them to stop come from liars. The established facts are damning by themselves, so let’s stick to those.

One day? There have been countless atrocities committed against Israel over the last 100 years. Israel has the Iron Dome because rockets have been fired at them routinely. Those rockets are inaccurate; the chances of them hitting military targets and not civilians is low.

Israel is completely justified in wanting to retaliate. Retaliating against civilians is a completely different matter, however. Especially civilians who are completely powerless in almost every sense of the word.

It concerns me that the article blames this on El Nino and continued burning of fossil fuels.

I’m sure those are contributing, but what about the wildfires that we saw last year? They are a feedback effect (higher temperatures makes fires more likely; fires release CO2; CO2 increases temperatures). If feedback effects have started, then everybody needs to panic.

Significant money and effort? Greenpeace does not have ‘significant money’ in comparison with the petrochemical companies. And effort? Greenpeace was one of the first groups to raise awareness of the danger of global warming. They have been actively fighting it since long before you heard of the term. They have been promoting sustainable energy all that time. If we had followed their lead, we would most likely be off nuclear and off fossil fuels. The fact that we (the rest of us) have failed to follow their lead is not their fault.

This is just obviously untrue. Not least because we did build lots of nuclear power plants. One significant reason why we didn’t build more was their high price compared to … coal and gas plants. But sure, it’s Greenpeace’s fault and not Exxon Mobil.

None of what you said makes me think the situation would be worse than having Putin in charge. It’s a stretch to say Putin came from the civil sphere, and he assassinates his enemies in foreign countries using nerve agents and throws people out of windows at home.

But it doesn’t say “milk” or “ice cream”, does it? He’s actually upset because he saw “Haagen Dasz”, and he thinks that that must contain dairy- he even said as much. Faux outrage designed to serve his political ends.

It wouldn’t be so bad if they planned to start following them as well.

The water companies have been paying dividends to their shareholders while not doing anything to upgrade the sewerage system. Certainly the people won’t want to pay twice for the upgrade.