Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Warren Hill

Maggie: What would be an apt tribute?

Recommended Posts

Let''s play a game of "match the quote"

"No one would remember the Good Samaritan if he''d only had good intentions; he had money as well."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Perhaps my input on this thread is not welcome as I have lived most of my years outside of the UK. Further, I was not resident during Margaret Thatcher''s leadership period, so I won''t speak to what that was like for the British people. However, I find myself very sympathetic to Ricardo''s views for a number of reasons.

 

I was born a just a little earlier than Ricardo in a welfare environment in Norwich. I left school at 15 years old and my first jobs were in the the factories of the shoe manufacturing industry that had a base in Norwich at that point. After three years of that I was in the printing industry for a while, all labouring jobs. I was a hard worker who just wanted to do the best I could as well as look for an opportunity to improve my station in life, and get away from the welfare background I grew up with. All the factories I worked in were unionized. I could not begin to count how many times over those years that I was told by people older and senior to me to slow down in my work habits. It became apparent to me that the key was to discourage initiative rather than promote it. It was clear, even to me as a young relatively naive person, that many of these industries would have difficulty surviving in an increasingly competitive world as the stranglehold of unionization that may have been a good thing in earlier years had now become counter to the interest of British jobs and competitiveness.

 

I made the decision to emigrate to Canada ( Ontario ). When I arrived in my new chosen country although it was difficult acclimatising for the first year, the whole experience was like a breath of fresh air. The shackles were removed, the harder you wanted to work the more that was thrown at you. I was able to progress and become successful in business. I have no doubt that had I stayed in the UK I would not have flourished in the way that I did.

 

I will say this about Margaret Thatcher. To those who were a generation before me living on this side of the water she was greatly admired. They saw her as a leader who would stand up for her principles and not, like so many leaders before and since, as the type that would hold a finger up to test which way the wind was blowing before making a decision.

 

Finally, regardless of your politics in life, I still believe that is is right for people to have enough SELF RESPECT and dignity when someone ( anyone ) who has just died to not express some of the horrible things I have seen on this thread.

 

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"][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...

 

 

[/quote]Unfortunately for him, that one word is going to be his legacy.A singular disappointment as a Prime Minister. A man who could and should have done much more with his talents if only he''d had half Maggies courage. A great shame because he had the good will of the vast majority of people when he came to power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ricardo"]


Unfortunately for him, that one word is going to be his legacy.

A singular disappointment as a Prime Minister. A man who could and should have done much more with his talents if only he''d had half Maggies courage. A great shame because he had the good will of the vast majority of people when he came to power.


[/quote]

 

Nobody would deny Fatcha had courage. Nobody would suggest Blair was as courageous as her. Different people, different times. We now live in the era of image. A huge proportion of voters decide where to make their mark by their first visual impressions of the candidates. We couldn''t be any further away from Michael Foot and his donkey jacket[:O][;)]

 

Fatcha may have been the last real party leader before the spin doctors took over. Whether this change is a good or bad thing only history will tell us. But for me the party leaders are little more than tv presenters and election promises (manifestos) mean nothing.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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! 

 

 

 

oh dear, still making up stuff or perhaps you can point out where I stated or suggested that you need my pemission to post on here

 

there is no evidence that Nelson Mandela made this statement and certainly NO evidence of the original claim, which was " Why did Nelson Mandela praise her for her role in bringing about the downfall of apartheid?"

 

So can you or Dr Crafty (or whatever other name is being used) point us to evidence of that claim, which is so you don''t get confused - 

 

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

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ricardo"][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.[/quote]

 

No, ricardo.  Words have meanings. She is not getting a state funeral. There is a difference between what she is getting and what Churchill got, and it is not being picky to point that out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="YankeeCanary"]

 

Perhaps my input on this thread is not welcome as I have lived most of my years outside of the UK. Further, I was not resident during Margaret Thatcher''s leadership period, so I won''t speak to what that was like for the British people. However, I find myself very sympathetic to Ricardo''s views for a number of reasons.

 

I was born a just a little earlier than Ricardo in a welfare environment in Norwich. I left school at 15 years old and my first jobs were in the the factories of the shoe manufacturing industry that had a base in Norwich at that point. After three years of that I was in the printing industry for a while, all labouring jobs. I was a hard worker who just wanted to do the best I could as well as look for an opportunity to improve my station in life, and get away from the welfare background I grew up with. All the factories I worked in were unionized. I could not begin to count how many times over those years that I was told by people older and senior to me to slow down in my work habits. It became apparent to me that the key was to discourage initiative rather than promote it. It was clear, even to me as a young relatively naive person, that many of these industries would have difficulty surviving in an increasingly competitive world as the stranglehold of unionization that may have been a good thing in earlier years had now become counter to the interest of British jobs and competitiveness.

 

I made the decision to emigrate to Canada ( Ontario ). When I arrived in my new chosen country although it was difficult acclimatising for the first year, the whole experience was like a breath of fresh air. The shackles were removed, the harder you wanted to work the more that was thrown at you. I was able to progress and become successful in business. I have no doubt that had I stayed in the UK I would not have flourished in the way that I did.

 

I will say this about Margaret Thatcher. To those who were a generation before me living on this side of the water she was greatly admired. They saw her as a leader who would stand up for her principles and not, like so many leaders before and since, as the type that would hold a finger up to test which way the wind was blowing before making a decision.

 

Finally, regardless of your politics in life, I still believe that is is right for people to have enough SELF RESPECT and dignity when someone ( anyone ) who has just died to not express some of the horrible things I have seen on this thread.

 

   

[/quote]

 

Yankee, your view and those of others abroad is common among those who looked on from a distance, rather than experiencing life at that time on the ground, and I think it is particularly an American view. Indeed she always seemed more like an American politician than a British one. She exemplified the dream that anyone could make it from a log cabin (Grantham in this case standing in for the lowly residence) to the White House. The idea is a seductive fraud, of course. That someone could do it doesn''t mean everyone can do it.And she championed in British politics the idea of splitting people up into winners and losers, particularly economic winners and losers, which is quintesentially American. Her policy on selling off council houses, for example. Giving people the freedom to buy their own home! Sounds great. Probably went down a storm with the leaders writers of the Wall Street Journal. But it was only freedom for those who could afford it. The result was that there were fewer council houses available and those left were the grottier ones in the grottier areas, because the better one had been sold off.So this vote-catching "freedom" was socially and economically divisive, and there were other policies in this vein, such as the idea of a share-owning democracy, which sounded egalitarian but only worked if you had the money. Her attack on some of the powers of the trade unions, which you touch on, was probably justified (althugh funnily enough this lawyer never did anything about the closed shop in the legal profession) but went so far that the ordinary worker lost any protection from the power of the over-mighty employer.

 

Whether she quite meant "There is no such thing as society" literally is a question, but in a broader sense that was her attitude. Ideology was part of it, but in a deeper sense she never seemed to understand that because she had through her cleverness and drive risen from reasonably humble surroundings (it was hardly a dirt-poor log cabin) to eminence that not everyone could do that. Not everyone can stand on their own two feet. Some people do need help. As she discovered when her idiot son got lost in the desert in some car rally. Suddenly she was all for help from other people. Pleas for the world to help find the chump. Of course she didn''t learn the lesson of this little episode.Her spurious and very partial idea of freedom exacerbated rather than eliminated the divisions in society and took away help from those who increasingly needed it. A truly great politician is a unifier who cares for all. She was a divider who looked after her own.As to your last point, I think this has been a pretty well-mannered debate. Moreover in this case the end result of your view would be that only nice things would be said about someone who seemed to glory in being, as explained above, a hugely divisive figure. That would be farcical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="ricardo"][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 Churchill
Maggie 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.
[/quote]

 

No, ricardo.  Words have meanings. She is not getting a state funeral. There is a difference between what she is getting and what Churchill got, and it is not being picky to point that out.

[/quote]

 

Indeed they do, Purple, which had me wondering why you chose the words you did in describing why Winston Churchill was accorded a state funeral, namely, "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."

The last six words of your sentence, in my view, are redundant in describing who most observers would describe as the greatest leader of the twentieth century. I understand that it''s difficult for someone who leans to the left to describe a great Conservative leader but that is what he was, despite his flings on the Liberal front. He not only, as you pointed out, unified the country in its hour of need but, prior to that, he spent years of his life trying to convince peers as well as the public ( despite being ignored by most ) of the dangerous course the country was following on policy. Most of his warnings and insights turned out to be visionary and, when proven to be correct, it became clear to almost everyone that he, above all, was the only man who could lead the country in its hour of need. Further, he was able to rally support around the world in a manner that would surely have made his detractors green with envy. Having fulfilled his task in nothing less than a heroic manner when most men are focused on retiring, he was cast aside and yet, even then, he was the voice of wisdom that all looked to as he warned of the desending iron curtain. 

 

 I believe he was given the honour for all of his contributions to the country and, indeed, the world. There. I think that sounds a lot better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

[quote user="Dr Crafty Canary"]What harm came to Scargill, Nutty? Physically none but he and the NUM were a spent force after. A clear message was sent to the TUC that she was prepared to face up to bullies like Scargill and his ilk and that her government ruled the country not the TUC. God bless her![/quote]

 

Exactly! Nothing!! So that''s great comfort for those who suffered when she waged war on her own people.

[/quote]Yes, far better to be like Tony Blair and wage war on the poor bloody Iraqi''s. Only 500k died but never mind ay.[/quote]

POOR IRAQI''''S!!!

How many would''ve died had that regime continued?!?!

Really wish I could give an address out on here,where an ex Iraqi now lives,and let him show you his scars,and the story concerning the persecution and torture he had witnessed!

What ever led us into Iraq,lies or not, the removal of that man,and regime has saved countless families!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="YankeeCanary"]

 

Perhaps my input on this thread is not welcome as I have lived most of my years outside of the UK. Further, I was not resident during Margaret Thatcher''s leadership period, so I won''t speak to what that was like for the British people. However, I find myself very sympathetic to Ricardo''s views for a number of reasons.

 

I was born a just a little earlier than Ricardo in a welfare environment in Norwich. I left school at 15 years old and my first jobs were in the the factories of the shoe manufacturing industry that had a base in Norwich at that point. After three years of that I was in the printing industry for a while, all labouring jobs. I was a hard worker who just wanted to do the best I could as well as look for an opportunity to improve my station in life, and get away from the welfare background I grew up with. All the factories I worked in were unionized. I could not begin to count how many times over those years that I was told by people older and senior to me to slow down in my work habits. It became apparent to me that the key was to discourage initiative rather than promote it. It was clear, even to me as a young relatively naive person, that many of these industries would have difficulty surviving in an increasingly competitive world as the stranglehold of unionization that may have been a good thing in earlier years had now become counter to the interest of British jobs and competitiveness.

 

I made the decision to emigrate to Canada ( Ontario ). When I arrived in my new chosen country although it was difficult acclimatising for the first year, the whole experience was like a breath of fresh air. The shackles were removed, the harder you wanted to work the more that was thrown at you. I was able to progress and become successful in business. I have no doubt that had I stayed in the UK I would not have flourished in the way that I did.

 

I will say this about Margaret Thatcher. To those who were a generation before me living on this side of the water she was greatly admired. They saw her as a leader who would stand up for her principles and not, like so many leaders before and since, as the type that would hold a finger up to test which way the wind was blowing before making a decision.

 

Finally, regardless of your politics in life, I still believe that is is right for people to have enough SELF RESPECT and dignity when someone ( anyone ) who has just died to not express some of the horrible things I have seen on this thread.

 

   

[/quote]

 

Yankee, your view and those of others abroad is common among those who looked on from a distance, rather than experiencing life at that time on the ground, and I think it is particularly an American view. Indeed she always seemed more like an American politician than a British one. She exemplified the dream that anyone could make it from a log cabin (Grantham in this case standing in for the lowly residence) to the White House. The idea is a seductive fraud, of course. That someone could do it doesn''t mean everyone can do it.

And she championed in British politics the idea of splitting people up into winners and losers, particularly economic winners and losers, which is quintesentially American. Her policy on selling off council houses, for example. Giving people the freedom to buy their own home! Sounds great. Probably went down a storm with the leaders writers of the Wall Street Journal. But it was only freedom for those who could afford it. The result was that there were fewer council houses available and those left were the grottier ones in the grottier areas, because the better one had been sold off.

So this vote-catching "freedom" was socially and economically divisive, and there were other policies in this vein, such as the idea of a share-owning democracy, which sounded egalitarian but only worked if you had the money. Her attack on some of the powers of the trade unions, which you touch on, was probably justified (althugh funnily enough this lawyer never did anything about the closed shop in the legal profession) but went so far that the ordinary worker lost any protection from the power of the over-mighty employer.

 

Whether she quite meant "There is no such thing as society" literally is a question, but in a broader sense that was her attitude. Ideology was part of it, but in a deeper sense she never seemed to understand that because she had through her cleverness and drive risen from reasonably humble surroundings (it was hardly a dirt-poor log cabin) to eminence that not everyone could do that. Not everyone can stand on their own two feet. Some people do need help. As she discovered when her idiot son got lost in the desert in some car rally. Suddenly she was all for help from other people. Pleas for the world to help find the chump. Of course she didn''t learn the lesson of this little episode.

Her spurious and very partial idea of freedom exacerbated rather than eliminated the divisions in society and took away help from those who increasingly needed it. A truly great politician is a unifier who cares for all. She was a divider who looked after her own.

As to your last point, I think this has been a pretty well-mannered debate. Moreover in this case the end result of your view would be that only nice things would be said about someone who seemed to glory in being, as explained above, a hugely divisive figure. That would be farcical.

[/quote]

 

Purple, I''m not quite sure what you were reading regarding my post but, given your response, it had little to do with what I wrote. I made it quite clear that I was not offering my views on Margaret Thatcher because I did not reside in the UK during her tenure. My main input was what I experienced in a unionized environment causing me to attempt to make my way in the new world. I did comment on  the view that I have heard from others on this side of the water with respect to Margaret Thatcher. However, with respect to your comment on well-mannered debate there, I''m afraid, I fail to see how you arrive at your conclusions. There are clearly several ill-chosen comments ( I''m being kind ) in this thread, from accusations of the lady ordering a murder, comparing her to Hitler, to the suggestion that she be chopped up and fed to the dogs. Do you honestly consider that well-mannered debate? Finally, you conclude by saying the end result of my view is that I would have only only nice things said about Margaret Thatcher. I neither said, nor implied, any such thing. I clearly indicated that some of the horrible things that clearly have been stated in this thread are innapropriate when someone ( anyone ) has just died. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I havent read all this thread but it has no place on an NCFC forum, it should be removed.

plenty of places to discuss the love/hatred for her elsewhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I think we should have a minutes sil..........

 

Joking!

 

Perhaps we should put the fences back up and treat all fans like animals for a weekend. I think that would be fitting. Especially if some of the innocents die..

 

 

[/quote]

We could always re-inact all the riots we had during her time in office,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="ricardo"]

Unfortunately for him, that one word is going to be his legacy.A singular disappointment as a Prime Minister. A man who could and should have done much more with his talents if only he''d had half Maggies courage. A great shame because he had the good will of the vast majority of people when he came to power.

[/quote]

 

Nobody would deny Fatcha had courage. Nobody would suggest Blair was as courageous as her. Different people, different times. We now live in the era of image. A huge proportion of voters decide where to make their mark by their first visual impressions of the candidates. We couldn''t be any further away from Michael Foot and his donkey jacket[:O][;)]

 

Fatcha may have been the last real party leader before the spin doctors took over. Whether this change is a good or bad thing only history will tell us. But for me the party leaders are little more than tv presenters and election promises (manifestos) mean nothing.

 

 

 

[/quote]Nothing ever stays the same Nigel and all change has winners and losers.As you rightly say, history will be the final judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hypocrisy of the left as usual shines through.

Yes, Thatcher introduced many ''unpopular'' policies, but if they were so bad why didn''t Blair or Brown''s governments reverse them. The selling of council houses was a very unpopular policy apparently according to the lefties but was continued throughout the Labour reign.  That says it all really. Sheer hypocrisy. They continued the policy which is popular, but condemn Thatcher to this day.

Union laws introduced on secondary picketing, secret ballots etc. Why were they not reversed by the whingeing lefties ? 

Thatcher had the courage of her convictions to lead and do unpopular things to improve the majority of lives that no other politician since has had the courage to do. She deserves her place in history and a ceremonial funeral. The greatest politician since Churchill IMO.   

RIP Maggie

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If MT had not fought the unions and other big institutions - where would we be now?    The country was in a total mess in 1979 and it was mainly due to the battles between  unions and their unelected  leaders and the elected   government.    Something had to happen to improve the country - it was on its knees at the time - and at least she had the strength of character to follow through policies that allowed the country to become more prosperous.    I know that doesn''t help people who lost their jobs and suffered as a result, but what it seems to me is that the main thing that upset people was the loss of their little bit of power that they felt they had through their union.  

Nothing is perfect and things may have gone too far the other way now, but she did what was necessary at the time as the country was being ruined and held to ransom by the unions.    Labour couldn''t control them and if the party that was being supported by the unions couldn''t control them then no-one could.   

She was the right person at the right time and was strong enough to stand up to the unelected few that were bringing our country down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul Moy.

Tony Blair was just Thatcher Mk 2. There are no " lefties " in the Labour party...apart from Denis Skinner.

Thatcher gave as 3 million unemployed , the poll tax , the destruction of UK industry , the promotion of greed , the " loadsamoney " culture , the deregulation of banks , easy credit , a reckless bonus driven banking industry ( which we are still paying for today ) and rioting on the streets not seen in hundreds of years. " " A ceremonial funeral " you think. Head first down a disused mine shaft......there are plenty of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Larson E Whipsnade"]Paul Moy. Tony Blair was just Thatcher Mk 2. There are no " lefties " in the Labour party...apart from Denis Skinner. Thatcher gave as 3 million unemployed , the poll tax , the destruction of UK industry , the promotion of greed , the " loadsamoney " culture , the deregulation of banks , easy credit , a reckless bonus driven banking industry ( which we are still paying for today ) and rioting on the streets not seen in hundreds of years. " " A ceremonial funeral " you think. Head first down a disused mine shaft......there are plenty of them.[/quote]

 

 Blair should not be mentioned in the same breath as Thatcher and will deservedly go down in history as one of our worst prime ministers. His one and only aim was to pursue popular policies to ''buy'' votes and thus would swing with the wind as welfare, debt, the public sector and immigration increased vastly to that end. Thatcher was unpopular with many for a very good reason and that was good for the country at the time in an earlier period of austerity after Labour and Denis Healey took us to the IMF.  Things haven''t changed much have they !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="city4eva"]

I havent read all this thread but it has no place on an NCFC forum, it should be removed.

plenty of places to discuss the love/hatred for her elsewhere

[/quote]

Couldn''t agree more. This is a board to discuss all things NCFC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="paul moy"]

[quote user="Larson E Whipsnade"]Paul Moy. Tony Blair was just Thatcher Mk 2. There are no " lefties " in the Labour party...apart from Denis Skinner. Thatcher gave as 3 million unemployed , the poll tax , the destruction of UK industry , the promotion of greed , the " loadsamoney " culture , the deregulation of banks , easy credit , a reckless bonus driven banking industry ( which we are still paying for today ) and rioting on the streets not seen in hundreds of years. " " A ceremonial funeral " you think. Head first down a disused mine shaft......there are plenty of them.[/quote]

 

 Blair should not be mentioned in the same breath as Thatcher and will deservedly go down in history as one of our worst prime ministers. His one and only aim was to pursue popular policies to ''buy'' votes and thus would swing with the wind as welfare, debt, the public sector and immigration increased vastly to that end. Thatcher was unpopular with many for a very good reason and that was good for the country at the time in an earlier period of austerity after Labour and Denis Healey took us to the IMF.  Things haven''t changed much have they !!

[/quote]

They certainly haven''t. You''re still talking sh**e.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I think we should have a minutes sil..........

 

Joking!

 

Perhaps we should put the fences back up and treat all fans like animals for a weekend. I think that would be fitting. Especially if some of the innocents die..

 

 

[/quote]

You empty headed fool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lake district canary"]If MT had not fought the unions and other big institutions - where would we be now?    The country was in a total mess in 1979 and it was mainly due to the battles between  unions and their unelected  leaders and the elected   government.    Something had to happen to improve the country - it was on its knees at the time - and at least she had the strength of character to follow through policies that allowed the country to become more prosperous.    I know that doesn''t help people who lost their jobs and suffered as a result, but what it seems to me is that the main thing that upset people was the loss of their little bit of power that they felt they had through their union.  

Nothing is perfect and things may have gone too far the other way now, but she did what was necessary at the time as the country was being ruined and held to ransom by the unions.    Labour couldn''t control them and if the party that was being supported by the unions couldn''t control them then no-one could.   

She was the right person at the right time and was strong enough to stand up to the unelected few that were bringing our country down. 

[/quote]

Well said LDC. Sadly, I am not surprised by some of the unpleasantness expressed in this thread but it''s still depressing to learn how many nasty, ignorant people use this MB. I am surprised that this thread was not moved to Non-Football as it certainly isn''t Norwich City related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well said BOGBRUSH, let this be moved to Non-Football where those vile people can spew their poison and the civilised among us can ignore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was very pro Thatcher, ''cause the country was a complete mess when she took over! At least she dared to take decisions which were better in the longer run!!! No one can deny that she dragged the UK out of a mess! I''ve got a miner''s son in my family and it was tough on them, but o deary me if it had stayed like it was in 1978! Just look at the morons who were actually protesting yesterday...you just can''t get a job if you heven''t been to school can you? The miner''s son was taught to work for his degree and he succeeded! The ones shouting in Glasgow have falen just as low as their fathers ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thank fcuk for that! I now don''t have do do a dirty protest at the Emirates on Saturday...

Premier League clubs not asked for Thatcher minute''s silence

The Premier League says it will not be asking clubs to hold a minute''s silence in memory of Baroness Thatcher at their upcoming fixtures.

The former prime minister died on Monday aged 87 after suffering a stroke.

Lady Thatcher was Conservative prime minister from 1979 to 1990 and won three successive general elections.

There was no minute''s silence before Monday night''s Manchester derby between Manchester United and Manchester City.

As well as Premier League games this weekend, the FA Cup semi-finals take place at Wembley, which come under the auspices of the Football Association.

It is understood the FA has no plans at present to mark Lady Thatcher''s death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lake district canary"]If MT had not fought the unions and other big institutions - where would we be now?    The country was in a total mess in 1979 and it was mainly due to the battles between  unions and their unelected  leaders and the elected   government.    Something had to happen to improve the country - it was on its knees at the time - and at least she had the strength of character to follow through policies that allowed the country to become more prosperous.    I know that doesn''t help people who lost their jobs and suffered as a result, but what it seems to me is that the main thing that upset people was the loss of their little bit of power that they felt they had through their union.  

Nothing is perfect and things may have gone too far the other way now, but she did what was necessary at the time as the country was being ruined and held to ransom by the unions.    Labour couldn''t control them and if the party that was being supported by the unions couldn''t control them then no-one could.   

She was the right person at the right time and was strong enough to stand up to the unelected few that were bringing our country down. 

[/quote]

LDC I completely agree with you...I bet you actually were living in the UK when she came to power...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ricardo - thanks for the link to the stats - some very interesting material there! Manna from heaven for a data nurd like me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ROBFLECK"]I was very pro Thatcher, ''cause the country was a complete mess when she took over! At least she dared to take decisions which were better in the longer run!!! No one can deny that she dragged the UK out of a mess! I''ve got a miner''s son in my family and it was tough on them, but o deary me if it had stayed like it was in 1978! Just look at the morons who were actually protesting yesterday...you just can''t get a job if you heven''t been to school can you? The miner''s son was taught to work for his degree and he succeeded! The ones shouting in Glasgow have falen just as low as their fathers ...[/quote]

 

So if it wasn''t for Thatcher the country would have stayed where it was in 1978!

 

That''s 35 years ago. And during that time there has been massive change. Probably an unprecedented amount of change for the timespan. Thatcher waged war on our own people. There were casualties as if it was a real war. People died. Prejudices still live on to this day. Read the thread - all miners are tarred as Arthur Scargill. All travelling football fans are tarred as hooligans. Some people feel so strongly that they protested at her death. You''d be better asking yourself why rather than tarring them all withg the moron brush. You''re certainly a Thatcherite Flecky.

 

Bogbrush - She wouldn''t have trucked with you. She liked people who had enough gumption to stand up to her. Not the little toady hangers on.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×