Maggie: What would be an apt tribute?

[ron obvious 1,502]

That''s a wonderfully succinct summary, Ricardo.

Spot on.

[Bill 1,788]

eh !

 

what on earth are you rabbiting on about ?

 

"British Welfare state was being heralded as some advantage over Germany"  who claimed that and where ? 

 

Neither was I "advocating the fitness and health of the population through the British Welfare state" either. I was merely pointing out it''s intend - no claims about it''s achievents at all.

 

Now why not read what I actually wrote and reply to that instead ?

 

 

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="Ches right hand man "][quote user="Blofield Canary"]

Maybe we should restrict this discussion to people who are old enough to have lived through the years leading up to Thatcher and actually saw the huge benefits she brought to us all. Perhaps some of the infantile comments being made on here would not be made if the younger ones amongst us were around then when the miners and other public utilities held us to ransom and we had to make do with only having electicity on every other day. Imagine that - no xbox or Playstation on Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. No heat  or hot food either.

The miners were blind in their faith to Scargill who led them into a battle with the government they were never going to win. The mines were losing millions which the UK taxpayers were subsidising.

How many of the people on here spouting bile now own therir own home?  Something else brought to many by Thatcher. And if we want to keep this thred to football how many of you want to go back to watching football like we had to before she made football get itself in order. Its easy to moan about id cards (which never happened) but she was behind the drive to rid the game of hooliganism and introduction of familly friendly stadia.

And to answer the OP question - football should do nothing to recognise her achievments. Football can pay its respect the same as everyone else who wishes to when she gets full honours at her funeral.

[/quote]And what party do you support?[/quote]Regardless of your personal political views Che, you need to ask

yourself this. Of all the things she changed in this country why have

subsequent governments not changed them back to the way they were

before? Or indeed why no future government would ever contemplate going

back to the past. She framed the political landscape we have today. Love

her or hate her she stands head and shoulders above today''s political midgets.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Dr Crafty Canary"]Kick it off wrote:She was a despicable woman and ruined the lives of millions, had people murdered, engaged with the racist Apartheid politicians and used the police to do her bidding in the most disgusting of fashions. What evidence do you have that she had people murdered? Why did Nelson Mandela praise her for her role in bringing about the downfall of apartheid? How disgusting of her to use the police to uphold the law of the land and not let the likes of Scargill to hold the country to ransom.[/quote]

 

Why did Nelson Mandela praise her for her role in bringing about the downfall of apartheid?

 

 

perhaps you could point us all to when and where he said that

 

 

 

[Joanna Grey 0]

City1st; "She even spend every Xmas (for a decade) with Jimmy Savile."

A bit of context to the Paedofantatist''s claims from Baroness Thatcher''s daughter;

"Jimmy Savile never spent Christmas as such at Chequers, although he certainly showed up for the odd drink, and mum used to visit Stoke Mandeville Hospital," she said.

[Bill 1,788]

"you need to ask yourself this. Of all the things she changed in this country why have subsequent governments not changed them back to the way they were before? Or indeed why no future government would ever contemplate going back to the past"

 

that is just being silly

 

the same changes happened elsewhere in Europe - she was merely a mouthpiece to front up these changes - albeit with rather a nasty approach

 

one that was swiftly dumped when not needed

 

ps I await your next treatise on Sooty, how he changed the face of British light entertainment

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,531]

[quote user="Dr Crafty Canary"]Nutty wrote: Exactly! Nothing!! So that''s great comfort for those who suffered when she waged war on her own people. Do you seriously believe Scargill considered it nothing to go from one of the most powerful Union bosses of his time to a has been. What did he achieve after the miners'' strike? Bugger all. His was a purely politically motivated strike and she had the will to smash him. She didn''t wage war on people, she waged war on those who would keep people downtrodden. Socialists can never escape their favourite creed of "We know how to spend your money better than you do." Why do they want a bloated welfare state? it gives them power over the people by making them dependent on the state. The Guardianistas cannot stand the fact that most working people actually support government efforts to reign in the welfare state. How do they explain away that thousands are not marching in the streets in protest? They say they are either stupid or don''t read the Guardian. Brilliant! Now they are disgusted that this outrageous government has actually introduced a limit to state benefits of £26000 a year. How awful of them.[/quote]

 

So many misconceptions on here. Maggie did what you are doing and what today''s tories are doing. Tarring everyone who you her they see as an enemy with the same brush. Rickyyyyy assumes that everyone who found Thatcher abhorrent must agree with Blair going to war. You assume that everybody who finds Thatcher abhorrent must have been on the side of Scargill. Thatcher believes that everybody who attends football matches is a hooligan and should be treated like an animals. the present tories have now stooped so low as to tar all benefit claimants with families with the Philpott brush.

 

You, Thatcher and the present tories have something in common at least. You''re all wrong. The vast majority of people in this country don''t fit into any of those boxes. The vast majority of benefits claimants with families are nothing like the Philpotts and the vast majority of football fans are good honest law abiding people including those who died at Hillsborough.

 

 

 

 

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="City1st"]

"you need to ask yourself this. Of all the things she changed in this country why have subsequent governments not changed them back to the way they were before? Or indeed why no future government would ever contemplate going back to the past"

 

that is just being silly

 

the same changes happened elsewhere in Europe - she was merely a mouthpiece to front up these changes - albeit with rather a nasty approach

 

one that was swiftly dumped when not needed

 

ps I await your next treatise on Sooty, how he changed the face of British light entertainment

 

 

[/quote]That''s right, because Callaghan and Wilson''s Social Compact was working so well that none of Maggie''s hard approach was really necessary was it?Dennis Healy running off the IMF must have been just a bad dream.

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="Blofield Canary"]

Maybe we should restrict this discussion to people who are old enough to have lived through the years leading up to Thatcher and actually saw the huge benefits she brought to us all. Perhaps some of the infantile comments being made on here would not be made if the younger ones amongst us were around then when the miners and other public utilities held us to ransom and we had to make do with only having electicity on every other day. Imagine that - no xbox or Playstation on Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. No heat  or hot food either.

[/quote]To be fair, the xbox and Playstation weren''t invented for another twenty-five years.

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="ricardo"]

Love them or hate them and their are plenty on both sides of the spectrum, only two political figures from the 20th century have been accorded a state funeral.Winston ChurchillMaggie Thatcher.[/quote]

 

Not so. She is not getting a state funeral. And Churchill - quite rightly - was given the honour because of his role as a wartime leader who unified the country rather than as a party politician.

[Rolf Harris 31]

Marmite  "Love it or hate it." ?

[WHITE VAN MAN 0]

[quote user="City1st"]

 Why did Nelson Mandela praise her for her role in bringing about the downfall of apartheid?

 

 perhaps you could point us all to when and where he said that

 

 [/quote]

Thatcher classed Nelson Mandela a terrorist! And when he was freed and visited the UK he refused to meet her! Fact!"The

ANC is a typical terrorist organisation ... Anyone who thinks it is

going to run the government in South Africa is living in cloud-cuckoo

land'' - Margaret Thatcher, 1987

[Bill 1,788]

eh ?

 

you haven''t quite grasped this have you ?

 

the point was whether Thatcher was cause or effect

 

I suggest you compare what happened in the rest of Europe during her time in office and see what was also happening there - it might also help if you have a closer look at what precipitated the IMF ''crisis'' of 1976 as well, it''s a little more complicated than something put out by the Sun 

 

 

[Monty13 2,231]

She is getting a Ceremonial funeral, the same as Diana and the Queen Mother.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

I lived through the years before her and the years during her time as PM and she''ll get no tributes from me. She destroyed Britain''s manufacturing base out of a naive belief in the passing economic theories of Friedman which then was at the heart of the recent caprices of the banking industry.

Having said all that, though, I have to ask what the f**k all this has to do with Norwich City?

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

Re.: Mandella

Source:

http://www.nelsonmandela.org/omalley/cis/omalley/OMalleyWeb/03lv00017/04lv00344/05lv00389/06lv00493.htm

 

 

........''And even his praise of Maggie Thatcher, praised her for her calling for his own release''

 

 

''He did an interview with, I think it was Ted Koppel where he does a series of interviews with different people from around the world, when he was first released and Koppel asked him who are the political figures that he admired and the first one he said was Margaret Thatcher.''

 

 

 

 

[Bill 1,788]

a curious aside to this was a conversation I had with a young lad who (at the time) wrote obituaries for the Times (many are written way in advance and are then periodically updated)

 

his view was that she would be cremated as the bitterness against her would mean any grave would be subject to vandalism/spray painting etc

 

the evidence with Jimmy Savile has proved him correct

 

coincidentally they were ''best mates''  .....

 

................... funny old world ain''t it

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="ricardo"]

Love them or hate them and their are plenty on both sides of the spectrum, only two political figures from the 20th century have been accorded a state funeral.Winston ChurchillMaggie Thatcher.[/quote]

 

Not so. She is not getting a state funeral. And Churchill - quite rightly - was given the honour because of his role as a wartime leader who unified the country rather than as a party politician.

[/quote]No need to get picky about the word "state"@skysarahjane: RT @VMcAVSKY: Downing st - Lady #Thatcher will be accorded same status of funeral as queen mum and princess Diana Near enough as far as I can see.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Yelloow Since 72"] ........., I have to ask what the f**k all this has to do with Norwich City?[/quote]

What an interesting question and the answer is.....................

[nutty nigel 7,531]

[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="Yelloow Since 72"] ........., I have to ask what the f**k all this has to do with Norwich City?[/quote]

What an interesting question and the answer is.....................

[/quote]

 

The way all Norwich fans travelling to support theiram were treated like the scum of the earth???

 

 

[Zak Van Burger 0]

No tribute for any Politician is apt for a football club, whatever next one for the last Pope???

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="Yelloow Since 72"]I lived through the years before her and the years during her time as PM and she''ll get no tributes from me. She destroyed Britain''s manufacturing base out of a naive belief in the passing economic theories of Friedman which then was at the heart of the recent caprices of the banking industry.

Having said all that, though, I have to ask what the f**k all this has to do with Norwich City?[/quote]Like I said before, there''s the myth and then there''s the factsManufacturing as a percentage of GDP:1979: 17.62%1990: 15.18%2010: 9.68%http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/datablog/2013/apr/08/britain-changed-margaret-thatcher-charts

[Zak Van Burger 0]

[quote user="ricardo"]Like I said before, there''s the myth and then there''s the factsManufacturing as a percentage of GDP:1979: 17.62%1990: 15.18%2010: 9.68%[/quote]LOL! Careful Ricky you''ll undo years of Nu Labor propaganda blaming the Tories for everything posting stats like that.

[Bill 1,788]

Tangible Fixed Assets

Re.: Mandella

Source:

http://www.nelsonmandela.org/omalley/cis/omalley/OMalleyWeb/03lv00017/04lv00344/05lv00389/06lv00493.htm

 

 

........''And even his praise of Maggie Thatcher, praised her for her calling for his own release''

 

 

''He did an interview with, I think it was Ted Koppel where he does a series of interviews with different people from around the world, when he was first released and Koppel asked him who are the political figures that he admired and the first one he said was Margaret Thatcher.''

 

 

 

So no quote actual from Mandela himself, merely hearsay from a journalist.

 

Whereas in reality Thatcher called him a terrorist and he refused to meet her when visiting London a year after that story.  A more accurate account, which easily refutes this myth, can be found here -

 

http://madiba.mg.co.za/article/1989-04-14-the-mandela-letter

 

As with stuff elsewhere there will be those desperate to peddle this misinformation just as much as there are those all to willing to swallow it all hook, line and sinker.

 

Curiously the original claim about Mandelawas posted up under the name of Dr Crafty, yet that name changed to Tangible fixed assets when replying.... hmmmmmm. A reply that took some fair while as this supposed praise from Nelson Mandela never happened, but it has still gone down as fact. That''s the power (and danger) of misinformation. Not only elsewhere but on here as well.

 

A level of deceit she even tries herself as can be seen here -

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O184yGKknSQ

 

 

[Yellowbeagle 0]

[quote user="Yelloow Since 72"]I lived through the years before her and the years during her time as PM and she''ll get no tributes from me. She destroyed Britain''s manufacturing base out of a naive belief in the passing economic theories of Friedman which then was at the heart of the recent caprices of the banking industry. Having said all that, though, I have to ask what the f**k all this has to do with Norwich City?[/quote]

Bloody Thatcher why didnt she stop the Asian market able to make something vastly cheaper than us paying their tiny wages, non existent workers rights, no environmental concerns, vast resources of raw materials.

[Chopper Harris 0]

An apt tribute would be if we all sang this at the next game.http://youtu.be/9t4-zDem1Sknuff said!

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="Dr Crafty Canary"]Nutty wrote: Exactly! Nothing!! So that''s great comfort for those who suffered when she waged war on her own people. Do you seriously believe Scargill considered it nothing to go from one of the most powerful Union bosses of his time to a has been. What did he achieve after the miners'' strike? Bugger all. His was a purely politically motivated strike and she had the will to smash him. She didn''t wage war on people, she waged war on those who would keep people downtrodden. Socialists can never escape their favourite creed of "We know how to spend your money better than you do." Why do they want a bloated welfare state? it gives them power over the people by making them dependent on the state. The Guardianistas cannot stand the fact that most working people actually support government efforts to reign in the welfare state. How do they explain away that thousands are not marching in the streets in protest? They say they are either stupid or don''t read the Guardian. Brilliant! Now they are disgusted that this outrageous government has actually introduced a limit to state benefits of £26000 a year. How awful of them.[/quote]

 

So many misconceptions on here. Maggie did what you are doing and what today''s tories are doing. Tarring everyone who you her they see as an enemy with the same brush. Rickyyyyy assumes that everyone who found Thatcher abhorrent must agree with Blair going to war. You assume that everybody who finds Thatcher abhorrent must have been on the side of Scargill. Thatcher believes that everybody who attends football matches is a hooligan and should be treated like an animals. the present tories have now stooped so low as to tar all benefit claimants with families with the Philpott brush.

 

You, Thatcher and the present tories have something in common at least. You''re all wrong. The vast majority of people in this country don''t fit into any of those boxes. The vast majority of benefits claimants with families are nothing like the Philpotts and the vast majority of football fans are good honest law abiding people including those who died at Hillsborough.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]I mean no disrespect Nigel but I think that''s a simplistic view. It might be fun making sweeping generalisations but we both know that the reality is far more complicated than that. The solutions are not simple ones either.

[nutty nigel 7,531]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="Dr Crafty Canary"]Nutty wrote: Exactly! Nothing!! So that''s great comfort for those who suffered when she waged war on her own people. Do you seriously believe Scargill considered it nothing to go from one of the most powerful Union bosses of his time to a has been. What did he achieve after the miners'' strike? Bugger all. His was a purely politically motivated strike and she had the will to smash him. She didn''t wage war on people, she waged war on those who would keep people downtrodden. Socialists can never escape their favourite creed of "We know how to spend your money better than you do." Why do they want a bloated welfare state? it gives them power over the people by making them dependent on the state. The Guardianistas cannot stand the fact that most working people actually support government efforts to reign in the welfare state. How do they explain away that thousands are not marching in the streets in protest? They say they are either stupid or don''t read the Guardian. Brilliant! Now they are disgusted that this outrageous government has actually introduced a limit to state benefits of £26000 a year. How awful of them.[/quote]

 

So many misconceptions on here. Maggie did what you are doing and what today''s tories are doing. Tarring everyone who you her they see as an enemy with the same brush. Rickyyyyy assumes that everyone who found Thatcher abhorrent must agree with Blair going to war. You assume that everybody who finds Thatcher abhorrent must have been on the side of Scargill. Thatcher believes that everybody who attends football matches is a hooligan and should be treated like an animals. the present tories have now stooped so low as to tar all benefit claimants with families with the Philpott brush.

 

You, Thatcher and the present tories have something in common at least. You''re all wrong. The vast majority of people in this country don''t fit into any of those boxes. The vast majority of benefits claimants with families are nothing like the Philpotts and the vast majority of football fans are good honest law abiding people including those who died at Hillsborough.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

I mean no disrespect Nigel but I think that''s a simplistic view. It might be fun making sweeping generalisations but we both know that the reality is far more complicated than that. The solutions are not simple ones either.
[/quote]

 

Rickyyyyyyy... the first sweeping generalisation on this threrad was probably your comment about Blair going to war on Iraq...

 

 

[BOO 0]

[quote user="Zak Burger"][quote user="ricardo"]Like I said before, there''s the myth and then there''s the factsManufacturing as a percentage of GDP:1979: 17.62%1990: 15.18%2010: 9.68%[/quote]LOL! Careful Ricky you''ll undo years of Nu Labor propaganda blaming the Tories for everything posting stats like that.[/quote]

Not sure about new labour propaganda but I think you will find Ricky''s figures are a significant underestimate as manufacturing as a % of GDP in the late 70''s .It was much closer to 30% and Thatchers policies had a dramatic effect on its contribution in later years

"UK Manufacturing decline is the real story of the Budget

by Scott Newton

Most of the comment on the Budget has concentrated on the very large government borrowing requirement revealed by the Chancellor. But that figure is just symptomatic of a crisis rooted in Britain''s recent economic history; the crisis derives from the contraction of British manufacturing.

All developed economies have experienced a reduction in the contribution of manufacturing to GDP over the past forty years, but its fall here has been more rapid than in any comparable economy. In 1979 manufacturing accounted for almost 30 per cent of the UK''s GDP. Rapid decline followed, as large parts of British industry closed down while the financial and service sectors expanded. By 2007 just 14 per cent of the GDP could be attributed to manufacturing.

The retreat of the manufacturing sector has been accompanied by a growing deterioration of the balance of payments current account: the difference between exports and imports. Even though there were times in the 1950s and 1960s when the current account went into the red, it was very rare for the deficit to be equivalent to more than 1 per cent of GDP. The special circumstances of the oil crisis in 1973 led to a deficit worth 4 per cent in 1974, but the Wilson and Callaghan governments transformed this into a 0.5 per cent surplus by 1978. Thereafter the position became far more volatile, and by the end of the 1980s the current account deficit was approaching 5 per cent of GDP. Since 2000 it has consistently exceeded 2 per cent, reaching 3.4 per cent and 2.9 per cent of GDP in 2006 and 2007 respectively."

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="City1st"]

Curiously the original claim about Mandelawas posted up under the name of Dr Crafty, yet that name changed to Tangible fixed assets when replying.... hmmmmmm. A reply that took some fair while as this supposed praise from Nelson Mandela never happened, but it has still gone down as fact.

[/quote]

Firstly I am not Dr Crafty and I do not need your permisson to post.

Secondly are you Nelson Mandela in disguise? So how can you say he didn''t say these things that are posted on HIS website? If this wasn''t true do you think he would tolerate it being on his website?

I suppose you think the planet is flat!