[Stones] Longman of Wilmington Abuse

[Andy Norfolk]

David Swindlehurst wrote:
> It appears that AN (and other[s]) think that I was saying that he was 
> comparable to Shipman. For that, although they are mistaken, I 
> apologise unreservedly. 
I'm glad to hear it - you certainly gave the impression that you were 
comparing us.
> The main point of this thread, as far as I am concerned, is that imvho 
> 99.9% of viewers of this broadcast won't give a monkey's as to whether 
> permission was granted by the appropriate authority, or whether damage 
> was caused - they will see people climbing etc over a "protected" 
> monument (is it a monument?) freely and at will. So the next time they 
> go to a monument, will they feel free to do the same? Unfortunately, yes.
Thank you for telling us why you object to the recent event. So this 
isn't about disrespect for you, or actual damage on this occasion, but 
more about setting a precedent which might lead to a future event 
causing damage? That is a good reason to object to what has been done, 
but I've no doubt that Sussex Archaeological Society considered that 
before giving permission. It sems to me unlikely that most people will 
suddenly go and scramble over the hill figure. It's on a steep slope and 
there are signs asking people not to. There will doubtless be a few who 
will ignore the signs and climb up there anyway. They are the sort of 
people who would do so anyway whether or not they ever see the T&S 
programme. I really doubt that this one programme will have much effect.

Incidentally - I don't remember howls of outrage when travellers gave 
the Westbury White Horse a unicorn horn years ago, nor when the hunt 
supporters burnt "No Ban" into the grass near the Long Man in 2004.

Andy N




---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 000754-4, 06/07/2007
Tested on: 11/07/2007 20:16:24
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com