So they control the media? Does the media have a favourable view of Policy Exchange already?

Parts of the media do, others don't. That tends to be the way with most things.

If you're arguing that the vandalism mainly got attention because PX are well-connected, then that answer is probably simultaneously true and not a good rebuttal of the argument that I'm making, which is that vandalism is in and of itself a bad idea.

So it's vandalism now? Thought it was violence? Move those goalposts any further and they'll be in France

I wasn't aware those two words were antonyms?

Different words are different, genius

I think vandalism is capable of being violence in and of itself, and also potentially a prelude to greater violence. I don't think that means it's the same kind of violence as shooting someone, but then again I didn't realise that I'd need to spell out these kinds of natural inferences.

Then why compare it to the Troubles? Again are you genuinely this ignorant?

I didn't compare vandalising a building with the Troubles, I was making the point that normalising violence as a political tactic tends to create an escalatory spiral that, if left unimpeded, results in uncontrolled inter-communal violence like the Troubles.

That was extremely apparent in my original tweet, but I realise we're in the Bad Faith corner of Bluesky, where ignoring natural and obvious inferences is par for the course.

Which parts of the media don't?

I've yet to see the Guardian or the Mirror be particularly effusive about them, and the FT and Independent probably fall into the mixed basket.

[citation needed]