advance climate change by….destroying art? makes all kinds of sense

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

You do know the art is protected from just such an event. Or do you not understand or believe the link between the animal agriculture and global warming? This is the perfect set up for Scott, we will all be asked if we are driving our electric vehicles on the way to buy our all veggie diet requirements.

I didn't know the paintings were protected, until the environmental terrorists started doing this. The fact that the art is protected, makes their actions MORE stupid, if that's even possible.

you're right, I don't understand the link between animal agriculture and global warming, I know what your side is claiming, but I don't know what's fact.

Sorry if I'm not planning to become a vegan on the say-so of those who think the solution is to throw tomato soup on a Van Gough.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I didn't know the paintings were protected, until the environmental terrorists started doing this. The fact that the art is protected, makes their actions MORE stupid, if that's even possible.

you're right, I don't understand the link between animal agriculture and global warming, I know what your side is claiming, but I don't know what's fact.

Sorry if I'm not planning to become a vegan on the say-so of those who think the solution is to throw tomato soup on a Van Gough.

until the environmental terrorists Started doing This

Yep keep insisting you haven’t been radicalized


The fact that the art is protected, makes their actions MORE stupid, if that's even possible.

Your comment proves it is possible
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

until the environmental terrorists Started doing This

Yep keep insisting you haven’t been radicalized


The fact that the art is protected, makes their actions MORE stupid, if that's even possible.

Your comment proves it is possible
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

they’re attempting to destroy priceless art, unless we meet their political
demands. that’s a terrorist.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

they’re attempting to destroy priceless art, unless we meet their political
demands. that’s a terrorist.

If they know the art has glass in front of it protecting it how are they attempting to destroy it?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I didn't know the paintings were protected, until the environmental terrorists started doing this. The fact that the art is protected, makes their actions MORE stupid, if that's even possible.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

they’re attempting to destroy priceless art, unless we meet their political
demands. that’s a terrorist.

So you admit the painting was protected but you still believe that by throwing mashed pot. at the art they're attempting to destroy the art?

Seems like a contradictory statement.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

So you admit the painting was protected but you still believe that by throwing mashed pot. at the art they're attempting to destroy the art?

Seems like a contradictory statement.

yes, i’m sure their intent was to destroy it. they’re not very bright, you see.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

So you admit the painting was protected but you still believe that by throwing mashed pot. at the art they're attempting to destroy the art?

Seems like a contradictory statement.

not if they didn’t know the art was protected. the geniuses who threw tomato soup on a painting last week, yelled “what’s more important! life or art?”.

that suggests they believed they were destroying the art.

if they were rational, they’d be republicans.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

not if they didn’t know the art was protected. the geniuses who threw tomato soup on a painting last week, yelled “what’s more important! life or art?”.

that suggests they believed they were destroying the art. actually you are totally wrong as they said they knew they weren't destroying the art.

“I want to make one thing perfectly clear, we did no damage to the painting whatsoever,” Phoebe Plummer, a climate activist who, along with Anna Holland, threw the soup at the famous painting and then glued their hands to the gallery floor on October 14.

if they were rational, they’d be republicans. That is funny as the Rep. deny science and do nothing. Seems like they are smarter than most of the R party.

You can't help yourself?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

You can't help yourself?

"“I want to make one thing perfectly clear, we did no damage to the painting whatsoever,”

Which again Paul, tells us nothing about what they set out to do. Real MENSA candidates.

They're clueless idiots, that's all they are.

The wussification and dumbing-down of todays kids, is going to serve my kids quite nicely. My kids work their butts off and know how to take "no" for an answer sometimes. These kids will have no chance against my kids in the real world. None.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

they’re attempting to destroy priceless art, unless we meet their political
demands. that’s a terrorist.

And that's what you think is actually happening> that is Amazing

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

And that's what you think is actually happening> that is Amazing

Ok, Einstein, how come you didn't tell us what's actually happening. The group that did this last week, as they threw tomato soup on priceless paintings, yelled "what's more important, art or life"?

Why did they yell that as they were doing what they did?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Ok, Einstein, how come you didn't tell us what's actually happening. The group that did this last week, as they threw tomato soup on priceless paintings, yelled "what's more important, art or life"?

Why did they yell that as they were doing what they did?

But you're 100% wrong as they knew the art was protected

“We’re not asking the question, should everyone be throwing soup at paintings?” said Plummer. “What we’re doing is getting the conversation going so we can ask the questions that matter.”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

But you're 100% wrong as they knew the art was protected

“We’re not asking the question, should everyone be throwing soup at paintings?” said Plummer. “What we’re doing is getting the conversation going so we can ask the questions that matter.”

"But you're 100% wrong as they knew the art was protected"

How do you know what they knew, when they threw soup on the painting.

"“We’re not asking the question, should everyone be throwing soup at paintings?” said Plummer."

No, the question we're asking is, "did the bedroom you grew up in, have lead paint on your walls"?

"What we’re doing is getting the conversation going"

That's self flattery. That conversation has been going for 40 years, this just makes that side look like laughing stocks.

[scottw]

[QUOTE=wdmso;1234476]

And that's what you think is actually happening> that is Amazing

/QUOTE]

because throwing stuff on priceless art is not trying to destroy priceless art?

[wdmso]

[QUOTE=scottw;1234482]

Originally Posted by wdmso

And that's what you think is actually happening> that is Amazing

/QUOTE]

because throwing stuff on priceless art is not trying to destroy priceless art?

So you think thats was their plan Ya ok!! I bet you think there terrorist along with Jim