lady thatcher
- Thread starter EZee
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Bastard you got everyone's hopes up then.
'Hire ventriloquists to throw their voices,
shouting, "why is it so dark in here?"'
shouting, "why is it so dark in here?"'
I suggest that her grave is named
THE MARGARET THATCHER MEMORIAL URINAL...........so that people like myself can p*** on her grave.
Alternatively we could call her grave the
MARGARET THATCHER MEMORIAL DANCE FLOOR
When she does die (a stake thru the heart might work)......the Devil will put out "House Full" signs on the Gates of Hell.
THE MARGARET THATCHER MEMORIAL URINAL...........so that people like myself can p*** on her grave.
Alternatively we could call her grave the
MARGARET THATCHER MEMORIAL DANCE FLOOR
When she does die (a stake thru the heart might work)......the Devil will put out "House Full" signs on the Gates of Hell.
you're all evil
i adore her - she's a wonderful woman
i adore her - she's a wonderful woman
Evil is a serious insult which needs to be considered carefully.
Thatcher is evil.
Morally, whether you're religious or not, seriously fecking evil.
forgive my ignorance, but I'm quite young...
why the hatred for her?
why the hatred for her?
What was that deleted post all about, Duckula?I was too young to remember anything much about Thatcher other than the fact that she now just randomly shouts out the name of her dead husband think he is still alive.
But I was brought up to hate Thatcher by many a teacher I do believe she deserves a state funeral, so the many that have suffered under her can see she is really dead.
But I was brought up to hate Thatcher by many a teacher I do believe she deserves a state funeral, so the many that have suffered under her can see she is really dead.
I was going to see how many people would bite and then realised it was not the time nor place for that.
There's Messi threads to wind people up in, not the Current Events forum where people tend to discuss their actual beliefs.
From what I've read/watched about her, there seems to be much to be respected. Standing up to the unions, for one. But when you weigh that up against all the cnutish things she managed to do in her time as PM, it's hard not to despise her. A lot of people, especially in the north of the country will be delighted to see her buried.
My mother was always of the opinion that it was Thatcher who fecked up the schools into the state that they are today - and she was a teacher. Something about Thatcher instilling in people the belief that they ought only to be out for themselves.
I was close to biting myself, but then I remembered the time you convinced me and a few others that you were a religious nut a few months back.
I am naturally inclined to vote Labour but when she came to power Labour were unelectable and the Labour movement behind them deeply destructive. The winter of discontent was the final nail in the Labour government's coffin with inflation out of control and the economy shrinking. Strikes, power cuts and a 3 day work week were the norm.
That she came in and turned the country round, making many much needed changes to the country and the economy, many changes now being accepted as normal by Labour administrations around the world, is to her credit. The way she made those changes however weren't always or even often necessarily desirable. Whether such change could have been achieved another way is debatable either way and I don't pretend to known the correct answer.
Indeed many of her achievements leave me "conflicted" as our Yank friends would say. The Unions needed to be reigned in but the social destruction in many parts of the country that resulted from the miners defeat isn't exactly an edifying sight and that some economic pits ended up being sacrificed negated the government's stance somewhat. Economic change was much needed but the unemployment used as a payoff for low inflation was pretty brutal and perhaps it was only oil revenue that prevent a virtually permanently high rate of unemployment occurring. The Falklands was another incident which I view in a similar way. It is quite right and proper that a nation stands up to protect it's citizen's and whatever Argentina's claim to the Islands they were British and occupied by people who were and wanted to be British. However, we knew that the ownership was disputed and if we had been less diplomatically clueless the invasion wouldn't have happened at all. So the death toll on both sides for what was in effect a diplomatic screw up (which we can lay at the feet of the Foreign Office rather than politicians directly) doesn't make me want to break into a chorus of Land of Hope and Glory. And this was all against a background of the Cold War where Thatcher and Reagan actually did rather well all in all. Her later years were a bit of a disaster with the poll tax sticking in my mind particularly. The idea, which sounded good, was to make tax more equitable and not just payed by home owners at the local level. That it ended up as an administrative nightmare that didn't save many people much if anything and costs everyone else more was a pretty disastrous outcome IMO.
Most people either love or hate her along party lines but I am far less certain. The best I can do it to say that I think she was somewhere between needed and necessary at least initially. I doubt that (the last year excepted) the UK's economy would be what it has been without her starting it all but I am also far from convinced that all of the social changes that she brought about have been good for the country in a general sense.
That she came in and turned the country round, making many much needed changes to the country and the economy, many changes now being accepted as normal by Labour administrations around the world, is to her credit. The way she made those changes however weren't always or even often necessarily desirable. Whether such change could have been achieved another way is debatable either way and I don't pretend to known the correct answer.
Indeed many of her achievements leave me "conflicted" as our Yank friends would say. The Unions needed to be reigned in but the social destruction in many parts of the country that resulted from the miners defeat isn't exactly an edifying sight and that some economic pits ended up being sacrificed negated the government's stance somewhat. Economic change was much needed but the unemployment used as a payoff for low inflation was pretty brutal and perhaps it was only oil revenue that prevent a virtually permanently high rate of unemployment occurring. The Falklands was another incident which I view in a similar way. It is quite right and proper that a nation stands up to protect it's citizen's and whatever Argentina's claim to the Islands they were British and occupied by people who were and wanted to be British. However, we knew that the ownership was disputed and if we had been less diplomatically clueless the invasion wouldn't have happened at all. So the death toll on both sides for what was in effect a diplomatic screw up (which we can lay at the feet of the Foreign Office rather than politicians directly) doesn't make me want to break into a chorus of Land of Hope and Glory. And this was all against a background of the Cold War where Thatcher and Reagan actually did rather well all in all. Her later years were a bit of a disaster with the poll tax sticking in my mind particularly. The idea, which sounded good, was to make tax more equitable and not just payed by home owners at the local level. That it ended up as an administrative nightmare that didn't save many people much if anything and costs everyone else more was a pretty disastrous outcome IMO.
Most people either love or hate her along party lines but I am far less certain. The best I can do it to say that I think she was somewhere between needed and necessary at least initially. I doubt that (the last year excepted) the UK's economy would be what it has been without her starting it all but I am also far from convinced that all of the social changes that she brought about have been good for the country in a general sense.
forgive my ignorance, but I'm quite young...
why the hatred for her?
There's an old saying; no favour goes unpunished. Most of the tossers on here pouring their ersatz vitriol on Thatcher are too young to remember the UK she inherited in 1979. She turned the joke of the western world into the envy of it in a quite remarkable decade.
Just because she had the temerity to point out that the Emperor that was primary industry, especially coal-mining, had for quite a long time been going around naked, she will earn the everlasting vilification of the mass of narrow, prejudiced, purblind dullards of the sort you see posting above.
When it costs £1.000 a ton to dig coal in the UK but you can buy it from Poland for £100, it's time to pull stumps on British mining and, painful though it undoubtedly would be for a time, get the workforce to turn to something profitable, from which the economy and thus everyone benefits. When the tide comes in, all vessels rise. This is Thatcherism, but those who prefer to spend their time hiding in the cupboard under the stairs sucking their security blankets will always roar their impotent anger into the deaf night of threads like this (with thanks to Plech!)
Very good post. It tells it like it always is with politicians; some good parts and some not so good. To those who lobby for her beatification, you rightly point out certain foibles. But to the posters who wish her to rot in hell (not that I would address myself to such cattle) it must be remembered that, on balance, she was an outstanding PM. As for the accuracy of that last statement (and to use one of my favourite expressions), we may safely leave that to posterity.
A posterity which I would wager a great deal upon it concluding that hers was one of the all time great Premierships.
Envy? You have to be kidding! She was the architect of 'greed is good' and you only have to look at current public reaction to our wonderful M.P.s to see how well this idea goes down. She took the perfectly reasonable idea of taking responsibility for ones own actions and twisted it into a McCarty-esque vision that equated any socialist ideas with communism and destroyed the notion of community. Just because some Unions (sometimes led by less than inspiring zealots) had become too powerful, she used this an excuse to publicly crush any union that had the temerity to fight for the rights of its workers. The idea of a minimum wage would have been anathema to her as only the rights of employers were important.
It is ironic to see the outcry over the G20 protests that occur today when under the Snatch, police brutality towards normal working people was par for the course (or indeed force) as was locking up any Irish people you didn't like the look of and as for the SPG - well lets not get started on that.
Britain was an ugly, divided, selfish place under her and even though things are not rosy now, I would far rather live in a country that is at least trying to get things right for everyone. When Thatcher's tide came in it brought with it a whole lot of shit from unregulated waste pipes - but you can't have irritating regulations getting in the way of profit, so she can drown in it as far as I'm concerned. Good riddance to bad effluence.
I'm no fan but personally I think anyone posting in this thread should qualify what they're saying by indicating how old they are.
im 31...
my dad used to be a miner and I saw thatcher decimate the area I grew up in... it has never recovered!... I also saw the police covering up their badges back in the strikes in the 80's and splitting peoples heads open for fun (happens in london at the g20 and suddenly its major news
)but i hate the cnut...
when somebody chopped the head off her statue part of me thought good on you, the other part thought why stop at the fecking statue...
she presided over an econmy that grew... about the same as japans, americas, germanys.... humm world wide boom springs to mind...
what she did with the falklands was as reprehencible as blair
the poll tax sums up thatcher... a compete and utter fecking cnut
Yeah, well I was actually joking with my reply because I thought people were going to be entering this thread expecting her to have died and then be disappointed to find out she hadn't.
But you're right, I'm too young, I don't particularly care.
But you're right, I'm too young, I don't particularly care.
I'm 30, and I dont have an opinion on her one way or the other simply because I was too young to understand things properly at the time.
But if people are suggesting pissing on her grave, I'd like to think they know why and aren't just jumping on a popular bandwagon.
But if people are suggesting pissing on her grave, I'd like to think they know why and aren't just jumping on a popular bandwagon.
im 31...
my dad used to be a miner and I saw thatcher decimate the area I grew up in... it has never recovered!... I also saw the police covering up their badges back in the strikes in the 80's and splitting peoples heads open for fun (happens in london at the g20 and suddenly its major news
but i hate the cnut...
when somebody chopped the head off her statue part of me thought good on you, the other part thought why stop at the fecking statue...
she presided over an econmy that grew... about the same as japans, americas, germanys.... humm world wide boom springs to mind...
what she did with the falklands was as reprehencible as blair
the poll tax sums up thatcher... a compete and utter fecking cnut
I think that it would be hard for you to think otherwise. Mining communities paid a very high price although I think Scargill, the NUM and the Union movement in general are also far from blameless.
The social disintegration that you witnessed first hand is a large part on my ambiguity to her.
44
Not that I totally disagree but I think that this is too simplistic a viewpoint.
Britian was an utter disaster before she came to power and economically at least improve things a great deal.
If only it was that simple. It was made to cost £1,000 per ton to dig it out purely by the stockpiling of new equipment that wasn't used, building multi-million pund cleaning plants that weren't used.. I could go on. And don't tell me it didn't happen because I saw it, I was there.
It doesn't take a genious to figure out that the Polish £100 per ton would quickly rise once our supplies were closed down - something we are now paying for.
The unions had to be controlled granted but by consigning thousands to the scrap heap was not the way to do it. Mining areas still haven't fully recovered.
The woman is pure evil and I for one will not mourn her passing and never will!
In some respects they did - but at what cost? Does the end always justify the means? Any half-decent politician could have made things better as they had pretty much bottomed out and the country as a whole (union members included) were sick of the instability. Throwing on a pair of jack boots when times are tough is a sign of weakness, not strength.
oh yeah... scargill was a nutter... no doubt about that one...
but its what was left afterwards...and the embivolence from the government... the only money that has gone into rebuilding the comminities has come from europe... and the general feck up that was left and ignored... well i blame thatcher and the government at the time for that...
its not like they didnt know about it... our MP (the beast of bolsover dennis skinner certainly made people aware of it)...
she divided the country imo... the north / south divide at the time was massive
My Dad was a miner and I lived in a mining community and saw in my part of the world what unchecked Union power was doing to the country.
I recall Arthur Scargill coming back from frequent trips to Russia and other parts of the old USSR and braying about the workers paradise they had
I recall it required ( on the instructions of Unions involved ) that 6 people were needed to change the batteries in vehicles in the local steelworks
of dozens of miners at the local quacks queuing up for sick notes on a Monday - most uneccessary as most were lead swinging
of Red Robbo at Longbridge and others in Dagenham et al calling strikes at the drop of a hat and destroying the British car industry in the process
Of TUC leaders almost on a daily basis calling at No 10 for tea and biscuits to screw down whoever was in No 10 for whatever took their fancy
of Union orchestrated strikes which left the dead unburied for weeks with refuse uncollected
of Harold Wilson ( a Labour PM ) blaming strikes on "politically motivated men¨¨ ncidentally this including one 2 Jags Prescott
and many more instances of Union abuse of power
Somebody had to take on the Unions - she was the only one with balls - and she should be applauded for taking them on and winning for that. I believe Blair understood that what she did made his vision of NEW Labour possible. Without her you´d still have Scargillesque figures and their lackeys running the Labour party
I recall Arthur Scargill coming back from frequent trips to Russia and other parts of the old USSR and braying about the workers paradise they had
I recall it required ( on the instructions of Unions involved ) that 6 people were needed to change the batteries in vehicles in the local steelworks
of dozens of miners at the local quacks queuing up for sick notes on a Monday - most uneccessary as most were lead swinging
of Red Robbo at Longbridge and others in Dagenham et al calling strikes at the drop of a hat and destroying the British car industry in the process
Of TUC leaders almost on a daily basis calling at No 10 for tea and biscuits to screw down whoever was in No 10 for whatever took their fancy
of Union orchestrated strikes which left the dead unburied for weeks with refuse uncollected
of Harold Wilson ( a Labour PM ) blaming strikes on "politically motivated men¨¨ ncidentally this including one 2 Jags Prescott
and many more instances of Union abuse of power
Somebody had to take on the Unions - she was the only one with balls - and she should be applauded for taking them on and winning for that. I believe Blair understood that what she did made his vision of NEW Labour possible. Without her you´d still have Scargillesque figures and their lackeys running the Labour party
There is obviously some attraction to this, but you are either to young to remember, or have conveniently forgotten, that Thatcher and her cabinet stated daily throughout the long 12 month strike, and I do mean daily, that it was not their intention to destroy British mining. Scargill daily claimed she was lying, and in this, at least, he was right.
You asked a fair question, Paz, this combination of destruction and deceipt is only partly an answer.
I don't think Thatcher had any particular strategic plan other than settling a score or two in her great class war, but if she did it must have been to end British coalmining, spend our oil and gas dividends without any energy investment for the future, and make us totally reliant on foreign coal and gas. Thank god for nuclear power, but even that needs foreign uranium. I wonder if her hero Churchill would have contrived to get us in a similar position? I think not.
well there were none on the Labour side thats for sure and none in the pipeline which was why Thatcher was welcomed and voted in and believe me in dealing with Scargill and others of his ilk she needed jackboots
Scargill was more motivated politically bu the USSR idea of Government and did his best to bring this Utopia to UK. To do this he kept out his workers for too long which eventually contributed to the death of the the coal industry.
It was he who split the Union and created untold hardship for his members and when mentioning liars of that era then Scargill would top my list - I do recall some of his dodgy dealings with Libya and Union funds being er lost.So anything he said I would take with a kilo of salt
Thatcher I think - looked at the Unions then decided a stand was necessary and realised the most intransigent leadership - and the most powerful economically at the time - was the NUC and decided to pick her fight with them. She knew that beating the NUC would send the right signals to the leaders of ASLEF, TGWU and others . She was proved right and subsequent Governments had it easier to manage UK than they would have without her stand
No she didn't. Scargill was a joke, in the press and the majority of the public's eyes. She could pulled the rug out from under him with finesse and nerves - with carrot and stick. With a combination of firmness and fairness - with her supposedly amazing intellect. She did none of these things because she needed to portray herself as the politician with the biggest cojones in order to cement her power base within the party - in order to allay voters' potential fears at the idea of a woman being a weaker leader than a man. This was the ultimate selfishness - putting her political gain above the long-term needs of the country. Nobody would argue that Scargill's influence had to be addressed; I would argue vehemently that her way cost us very, very dearly and it was a price that we did not need to pay.
Think you mean the NUM but I know what you mean.
Thatcher wanted revenge right from when Heath was ousted by the miners.
Yes Scargill was a liar and a cock who I'm convinced was paid.
Between them they fecked a country.
Indeed, or almost nobody. But watch the current tory leadership distance themselves from her now, on the likes of Question Time. Speaks volumes.
Scargill may well have been a joke in the papers but he was a joke that no Labour politician stood up to - and the carrot stick approach hadn´t worked till then with him or the rest of the trade union movement so why would it have worked with her. If Scargill was a joke to his followers then why did they follow him on a year long strike and not kick him out at the outset.
as did politicians in power before here such as Heath Wilson and Callaghan who lacked the cojones to stand up to the TUC- the latter IMO were the ones that created the mess that was inevitable if/when they had to be confronted
as for your point about revenge well like beauty its in the eye of the beholder - to people that elected her it could have been seen as a necessity
PS of course I meant the NUM - thanks
interesting, so am I right in assuming she was more capitalist than socialist hence the hatred?
RidiculousYou can't stand that comment up, and i can't believe so many have just let it slide.
She was the Fergie of her day, knocking Heath, Callaghan, Galtieri, Scargill, Foot, Kinnock and Livingstone off their perches. At the time she was highly popular but is not viewed so kindly nowadays - a blue rinse Reagan.