BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 May 15 - 10:00 AM

The Ukrainians and Cossacks were claimed as Soviet citizens who had fought for Hitler against the allies.

This also included many Russian ex-pats living in Poland and other countries. The crime they were executed for? Not fighting against the allies but being forced into labouring for the Germans.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 May 15 - 09:54 AM

...there was a very real fear that my Grandfather could have been 'sent back' to Russia even though they had kicked him out in the 1920s for his religious beliefs and for having a Polish wife. His children, my Father and Aunty, could have been 'repatriated' as well, even though they had lived in Poland most of their lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 May 15 - 09:42 AM

but we did it because the Soviets held thousands of liberated British POWs and could have retained them

To what end and with what excuse?

Besides the point really. My reason for bringing it up was reminding people that both sides stood by while atrocities were committed. It is little wonder that my Father and his family got out of Poland while they could.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 May 15 - 09:36 AM

Oh God, no - PLEASE don't get Keith started on another bout of his "all eminent live historians" idiocy!

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 May 15 - 09:35 AM

I do not defend it, but we did it because the Soviets held thousands of liberated British POWs and could have retained them.

The Ukrainians and Cossacks were claimed as Soviet citizens who had fought for Hitler against the allies.

It was a tragedy.
It should not have happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 May 15 - 09:30 AM

Bear in mind, Keith, that my Father was Polish and my Grandfather was a Kuban Cossack who had a book published in France about the betrayal of the Cossacks by the allies after the war so I grew up knowing this stuff. Mind you he is dead now, wrote it in the 1950s and it is not on prominent display in major bookshops so I guess we cannot rely on him...

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 May 15 - 09:23 AM

We were not an ally of Russia yet at the the end of the war we (Primarily the UK and USA) sent thousands of Ukraine and Cossack people to be butchered in Russia without a word of complaint? I wonder why we did that then?

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 May 15 - 09:07 AM

In 1939, Britain sent forces to oppose both Hitler and Stalin.
Britain chose to stand up for Poland in 1939 just as it chose to stand up for Belgium in 1914.
A noble choice which ordinary folk supported.

It did not have to.
It never became impossible not to.
In 1940 Britain and Commonwealth stood alone.

Only when Hitler invaded Russia did they cease to be his friend and become his enemy.
We did not choose Stalin as an ally.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 May 15 - 08:23 AM

Russia allied itself with Hitler in the invasion of Poland, and massacred thousands of Polish prisoners.

And then Britain allied itself with Stalin and handed over thousands of Ukraine and Cossack people to be butchered by the Russians. As they say, all is fair in love and war :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 May 15 - 06:11 AM

"Russia allied itself with Hitler in the invasion of Poland"
Briatin stood by while Germany rearmed, did nothing whatever to stop the rise of Hitler, and was prepared to leave him in control of Germany up to the point that it became impossible to do so
The British authorities labeled those who actively went out to fight fascism as "premature anti-fascists" and punished them for being such - my father being one of them
Hitler counted among his friends and supporters several members of the British House of Lords, including The Duke of Wellington, and a monarch (Edward III - gawd bless 'im)
Despite Stalin's growing reputation, Britain was happy to treat him as a ally and a war hero - "good old Uncle Joe"
Both hot and cold wartime necessity on all sides has much to answer for.
In the time I spent travelling central and eastern Europe I never uncounted the fear and oppression I associate with Nazi Germany
I never visited fascist Spain on principle (though I have several times since), but I believe it was rampant there almost up to Franco's death (ask Julian Grimeau's ghost - tortured and eventually garroted by Britain's ally)
It certainly was in fascist Chile (we've discussed Mrs Ts' attitude to that)
The nearest I ever got to experiencing a repressive state was on an ill-advised trip to Turkey (Britain's ally) when, on at least three occasions, we saw dozens of police with dogs and batons enter the seaside village where we were staying and clearing the streets of young people who (they claimed) "upset the tourists".
If it's all the same to you, I'd rather end this dialogue here before we get another thread closed.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 May 15 - 05:58 AM

Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, set in motion events designed to cause a famine in the Ukraine to destroy the people there seeking independence from his rule. As a result, an estimated 7,000,000 persons perished in this farming area, known as the breadbasket of Europe, with the people deprived of the food they had grown with their own hands.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/stalin.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 May 15 - 05:30 AM

Russia allied itself with Hitler in the invasion of Poland, and massacred thousands of Polish prisoners.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 May 15 - 05:23 AM

Ok, Jim, but in my defence I did say that I thought both characterisations of the old USSR (fascist and communist) were incorrect. There were severe restrictions on movement and free speech which definitely lean more in feel towards the f-word side of things. And Joe turned out to be not such a nice guy. A lot of attributes there that don't exactly fit my idealistic view of a good communist state (oxymoron brickbats cheerfully invited).

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 May 15 - 05:01 AM

"People are."
Are you suggesting Russia was 'fascist' - if so, on what grounds?
The most convincing suggestion I've ever heard was 'State Capitalism' - works for me.
Certainly never encountered anything resembling what was happening in Nazi Germany, but I may have missed something - any idea what?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 May 15 - 04:53 AM

Hitler's Germany was fascist, but had I am sure a traveller like yourself would have found the people warm and welcoming.
People are.

The Warsaw Pact countries had powerful Secret Police, encouraged children to inform on their families and shot people trying to escape to the West.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 May 15 - 04:40 AM

"Well I agree that the USSR was more fascist than socialist"
Not my experience, I'm afraid.
In the 60s I spent a fair amount of time hitching around Europe - during that time I visted 5 communist countries (Russia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Hungary, and travelled over another 2, Poland and East Germany - never saw any sign of "fascism" in any of them.
The Cold War was a fact all their existences, but I could travel freely and without hindrance, apart from having to obtain a visa for some.
I was treated with warmth and friendliness by everyone I met and made a number of friends
My first trip, to Russia, was in 1965, ten years after a war that had devistated the country, yet in the two places I was able to spend several days in, Moscow and Leningrad, they had rebuilt their Cities and appeared to be leading fairly happy, and not too uncomfortable lives - I was lucky enough in Leningrad to meet up with a couple who spoke English (trades unionists), and spent a great deal of time talking to them - the overall impression I was left with was a shortage of material goods (I was asked to sell my nylon short-sleeved shirt) and a feeling that they believed they had some say in their lives and a possibility of change - long time since I felt that back home.
This was one of the cities that had been devastated and almost razed to the ground by the Germans and, a few decades prior to that, had lived under despotic feudalism - quite impressive, I thought
My most memorable experience was in 1968, when two of us set out for a beer festival in Germany, couldn't get lifts, and were finally picked up by a couple of lads returning to Prague in the hope of getting to see their families following the Russian invasion - the border was rumoured to be due to be reopened the following day.
We stayed with them in a hostel in a German border town and the following day my friend and I walked over the newly re-opened border, having had our photographs taken for our visas
Prague was somewhat chaotic, the Russian troops were still around as observers, the main resistance was over.
We couldn't find accommodation at first, but after trying a student hostel (we weren't students) a lad who had heard our being refused ran after us and told us the building had a number of empty rooms and if we didn't mind using the back stairs, he'd find us some bedding and a key - we stayed a week and spent most of the time with the two fellers who gave us our lift and a bunch of students who took us around, showed us the sights and told us what had happened (including showing us some spectacular photographs taken by one of them, a student of photography.
I don't think we met anybody who wanted to 'overthrow' communism, rather, they wanted to see a reform of what they already had (we got much of this from long drinking sessions (bloody awful weak beer) in a workingman's restaurant in the centre of the city).
It's a beautiful city and I've always wanted to revisit it, but was put off somewhat by somebody who revisited 'free' Prague a few years ago who described walking around Wenceslas Square and being stopped by a young girl who slid her hand into his pocket, began to massage his balls and offered to show him a good time in a back street not too far away - you can't beat being 'free'.
"If you can name me any country of considerable size in which socialism has been practised untrammelled"
You don't vote socialism in - you achieve it over time - always against a great deal of pressure from within and without.
I have little doubt that all countries who tried it brought about enormous improvements, even if they fell during the race - try reading William Hinton's 'Fanshen' sometime - an account of China before, during and after the revolution - breathtaking
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 May 15 - 08:04 PM

Well I agree that the USSR was more fascist than socialist (though - and at risk of being labelled a Stalin apologist, which I am most decidedly not - I don't think either characterisation is correct). But I'm not sure which alleged stereotype you think I'm subscribing to. If you can name me any country of considerable size in which socialism has been practised untrammelled, for a significant period of time, you're a better man than I am. Socialism doesn't, and will never, get a chance in a world in which the US-led capitalist west will immediately undermine it and generally shit on it from a great height. There are plenty of socialist ideals we could aspire to nonethe!ess.   Unfortunately, the Labour/New labour mindset is to ditch those principles in the name of electoral expediency. But that still doesn't work for them and they deserve what they get.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Musket
Date: 12 May 15 - 10:33 AM

Falling into a stereotype trap, if you don't mind me saying so Steve.

Socialism is indeed state knows best, but there is no reason why that can't be by the will of the people. I doubt the people had much of a stake in USSR politics, hence that was fascism.

Interestingly, The USA, where socialist is an insult at the level of paedophile, is a socialist society in principle.

In the words of Dick Gaughan;

"By the people, for the people,
That was Lincoln's vow
But what the hell would Abraham Lincoln say
If he could see America now?

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 May 15 - 08:50 AM

" before someone takes offence again"
Wot - us???
"socialism" claimed by successive regimes in the USSR,"
Socialism was never more than a dream in the USSR, though in the first five years, they did take steps to move towards achieving it - Civil War backed by an invasion of 14 countries, massive problems in governing a vast un-industialised country which had previously been run on a feudalist lines , pretty well put a stop to that.
The advent of Stalin and W.W.2. didn't help, of course.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 May 15 - 08:23 AM

Musket's characterisation of socialism seems to relate to the kinds of "socialism" claimed by successive regimes in the USSR, in China, and in eastern Europe before 1990. That's a long way from the kind of socialism some of us have in mind (call us idealists, I care not a jot). We could argue that true socialism on any significant scale has never been tried.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 May 15 - 07:44 AM

Thanks Jim. Much appreciated.

So far this week I have had acknowledgement from Keith that I was right, A confirmation from Greg that we were at cross-purposes and an apology from Jim. I'm on a roll! Think I should try for the lottery this week :-)

(Only kidding chaps, before someone takes offence again)

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 May 15 - 06:50 AM

"I have neither said nor implied any such thing"
If you haven't, I apoloogise - I read your suggestion " which is why we either try again or reset our sight" as suggesion what Terrtoon had before you - it was not my intention to endow the title of 'suckhole' on you - far from it - that's for Terry and his ilk - apologies for having given tat impression.
"No point in opening a shipyard in Nottingham because there are a lot of unemployed welders available."
Course not - that would be bad governance - just as closing shipyards on the Mersey, the Tyne and Belfast is, or coalmines, or light industries or steelworks - all of which have been adopted as deliberate policies by the Tories, and passively accepted by Labour.
I started work as an apprentice electrician in the shipping industry in a seaport city because it seemed a sensible and secure thing to do - shortly after I finished my time the ships stopped coming into The Mersey
I fulfilled my side of the bargain by acquiring appropriate skills and offering myself for work - they reneged on theirs by removing my opportunity be employed.
"The state imposing its will on people is called socialism by the way"
No it isn't - socialism is where the people have a full say in and the running of the state - I think you will find that the declared ultimate aim of socialism is "the withering away of the state"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 May 15 - 06:33 AM

I agree with a lot of what you say, Jim, but then you spoil it with The argument put forward by state suckholes like Terrytoon (and by you, to some extent) is that we should all be prepared to move to wherever the work is

I have neither said nor implied any such thing. As I have already gone to great lengths to prove, all I have said is that it is our own responsibility to get what we want. We should certainly receive all the help we need if required but I did not mention moving location at all. You are attempting to knock down the straw man that I did not build. I also object quite strongly to be called a 'state suckhole', even if it is only to some extent. You know very little about me. Certainly not enough to cast such aspersions anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Musket
Date: 12 May 15 - 05:37 AM

to be fair Jim, geography has its place. No point in opening a shipyard in Nottingham because there are a lot of unemployed welders available. I may be an ex miner from a mining community but you only have to back three generations to find one side farming in Staffordshire and the other farming in Scotland.

I have sympathy with some of what you put, but getting on your bike a la Tebbit is what you did, what I did and what many others have done and will continue to do so. One son of mine has a 100 mile daily commute and the other, having recently submitted his thesis is now applying for jobs that match his skills, not his distance from bedroom.

The state imposing its will on people is called socialism by the way. It's fascism when the people don't want it. The manifesto of the government seems to have had a clear run by the people, whether that is to the liking of any of us or not. And especially for those of us who choose to live here..

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 May 15 - 05:21 AM

"If someone wants something they are the only ones who can make it happen. But when something happens to stop them, like sickness or unemployment,"
Extremely simplistic - and since Thatcher made her "There is no such thing as society" statement, it has become an excuse for the State for renaging on its responsibility
Yes - it is everbody's responsibility to support themselves, feed themselves, find work, homes.... and all the rest of it.
At the same time, it is the responsibility of the State to create the conditions which make this possible.
Governments are fully aware of this - Thatcher won one election on the slogan "Labour isn't working" - the implication being it was Labour's responsibility to create work - they failed and the Conservatives could do better (they didn't of course - under Thatcher unemployment peaked at 4 million).
The argument put forward by state suckholes like Terrytoon (and by you, to some extent) is that we should all be prepared to move to wherever the work is - a permanent itinerant work-force when the Government fails to manage the economy - a terrifying nonsense - Orwell couldn't have come up with anything more bizarre
He also suggested that Britain could not afford to adhere to the minimum wage and further suggested that the workers could not be truted to have their own representatives and that when they had they brought Britain to bankruptcy.
All this is fascism in it's most pure form- the State imposing its will on the people - Mussolini's 'bundle of staves tied around an axe' - it reduces working people to 'wage-slaves' with no choice in their lives other than to be moved about like chess pieces.
Society can only be considered fair when the Government provide us with a choice - at present, for far too many (a growing number) there is none - it is a dehumanising situation to be in for a large number of British people and it is contemptuous to blame them for their plight.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 May 15 - 05:27 PM

Thought so myself, Greg. Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 May 15 - 05:23 PM

Never mind, Dave - we're talking at cros-purposes.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 May 15 - 05:09 PM

Thanks Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 May 15 - 03:06 PM

Dave, what I stated was correct, but it did not invalidate your point about what people claim.
You were right.
Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 May 15 - 01:21 PM

At the risk of labouring the point, Greg, And I know what you said, Dave. I'm not a mind reader.

There is a very easy way of determining what I said. Look it up. I have even saved you the trouble.

From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 May 15 - 03:16 AM

I agree, Teribus. If someone wants something they are the only ones who can make it happen. But when something happens to stop them, like sickness or unemployment, we should be helping them, not blaming them for our own deficiencies.

From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 May 15 - 08:04 AM

Why fatuous, Greg? Simplistic maybe but, if you want something, you have the ultimate responsibility for making it happen. You may fail on a number of occasions but, if so, either try again or reset your sights.

From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 May 15 - 09:51 AM

I am not following your reasoning here at all,Greg, please explain. What is facile about stating that the responsibility of getting something ultimately lies with yourself?

From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 May 15 - 05:13 AM


"You ARE living in a dream world if you think that all that is required for "success" is individual initiative - excluding all the myriad factors outside the individual's control."

Where did I or anyone say it was all that was required? I believe the term used was that the ultimate responsibility was personal. Of course things can get in your way, which is why we either try again or reset our sights. Again something I already stated.

Now, in which of those statements do you believe I said that that all that is required for "success" is individual initiative? Just so I don't make the same mistake again.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 May 15 - 12:05 PM

Christianity, Judaism and Islam all believe that we have free will

Better re-read John Calvin, Keith.

And, of course, those three are theonly religions on the face of the earth.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 May 15 - 11:22 AM

Greg - I know very well what I meant

And I know what you said, Dave. I'm not a mind reader.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Musket
Date: 11 May 15 - 10:50 AM

Ah, but the prophets have to be alive, writing on scrolls in the last thirty years and called eminent by articles found on the Internet!

Mind you, keep searching and you may well find a few......

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 May 15 - 10:41 AM

Greg - I know very well what I meant and it was not what you suggest.

Keith - I have heard it from many people. None of whom you will be familiar with.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 May 15 - 10:29 AM

What, like the people who say that whatever they do is the will of god?

Who says that Dave?
Christianity, Judaism and Islam all believe that we have free will, and are not merely God's puppets.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 May 15 - 10:25 AM

Of course "we have ultimate responsibility for our [own] actions" Dave, but that's not what you were going on about.

As in that the responsibility of getting something ultimately lies with yourself and you have the ultimate responsibility for making it happen

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 May 15 - 09:51 AM

I have heard that there are some who do argue against the concept of ultimate personal responsibility .

What, like the people who say that whatever they do is the will of god? :-P

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Musket
Date: 10 May 15 - 06:51 PM

Brendon. You have every opportunity to wake up and display equal intelligence. You don't have to though, you'll be pleased to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 May 15 - 03:44 PM

Tell us what you've heard them arguing, and tell us who they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Peter from seven stars link
Date: 10 May 15 - 02:54 PM

I have heard that there are some who do argue against the concept of ultimate personal responsibility .

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,BrendanB
Date: 10 May 15 - 01:35 PM

Blimey! For a second there I thought that I was agreeing with Musket, then I caught on that I was agreeing with a quote from a book. So that's alright then.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 May 15 - 05:13 AM


You ARE living in a dream world if you think that all that is required for "success" is individual initiative - excluding all the myriad factors outside the individual's control.

Where did I or anyone say it was all that was required? I believe the term used was that the ultimate responsibility was personal. Of course things can get in your way, which is why we either try again or reset our sights. Again something I already stated. It is obvious that you misunderstood my view,for which I will, as always accept some of the responsibility but you could have been a bit clearer in what you were objecting to rather than hurling out obscure references as invective.

Unless of course you do not believe that we have ultimate responsibility for our actions as well?

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 May 15 - 04:33 AM

We've got two Barbara Allen threads going, Jim. Don't turn this into another!

≈M≈

"Men have died from time to time and worms have eaten them. But not for love"

As You Like It>

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 15 - 04:27 AM

"What was Mrs. Thatcher's problem?"
It's rumoured that Pinochet jilted her
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Musket
Date: 10 May 15 - 03:50 AM

"Shallow fools spit the word "equality" to mean a nirvana where difference is eradicated. What they forget to mention is that they fear equality of opportunity as a concept because they didn't take it themselves. An equal chance at happiness and success can be dictated by government. Naysayers are generally failures with attitude."

A quote from a book I am reading. It had been highlighted by over 800 readers.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: LadyJean
Date: 09 May 15 - 09:07 PM

Reagan wasn't a thug. He was an ass. He spent most of his life in Hollwyood, making the kind of movies they made in the 30s and 40s, where the good guys won, and there were no shades of gray. He was too nearsigted for combat, and spent the war years making training films. He saw the world through a Hollywood lense. This goes a long way toward explaining his policies, and toward explaining why people liked him. He did a good job of playing the role of president, until the last couple of years, when the Alzheimer's became obvious.

Ronald Reagan was an uninformed, senile actor.

What was Mrs. Thatcher's problem? She seemed bright enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 May 15 - 06:41 PM

Take it up with the Republicans, stan.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Stanron
Date: 09 May 15 - 04:48 PM

Good luck in your endeavours to impose equality on multinational corporations. Please keep us informed of your progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 May 15 - 04:08 PM

It is to the credit of any society if it aims to help those at the bottom of the heap, but not if in trying so to do they ruin it for eveyone.

The 1% and the corporations paying their fair share is hardly going to "ruin it for everyone".

At this point the 1% & the multintionals are ruining it for every one but themselves.

Gonzo capitalism on steroids.

Subject: RE: BS: Pro / Anti Thatcher Squabble Thread...
From: Stanron
Date: 09 May 15 - 03:58 PM

What an interesting point this thread has reached. Equality. Of course we are not all equal. It appears to be an ambition of the left to impose equality on everyone and that might be a reason the Left always fails. Some people will see inequality as an opportunity and others as a challenge. So we aren't even equal in how we see inequality.

It is to the credit of any society if it aims to help those at the bottom of the heap, but not if in trying so to do they ruin it for eveyone.