BS: Was Thatcher right?

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Geordie-Peorgie
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:50 PM

Hadaway!! Sunderland's for Makkems

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Tootler
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 04:01 PM

"... triumphalism afterwards was nauseating to many who went."

The same nauseating triumphalism she displayed at the end of the miners strike.

"We won!", she said. We won, my arse. Nobody won in that case. The whole episode was a disaster for everyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 01:58 PM

cultural diversity is all very well, but we don't all love losers - some of us like Tony Blair and Manchester United.

can't all be Sunderland fans....

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Geordie-Peorgie
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 12:59 PM

My apologerries WLD - Insufficient attention to detail!

Eric, If the little bugger cannit be bothered te waalk up yer drive/path te put the thing through yer letter box he dizzent desorve a tip - Unless it's heid forst into the dustbin.

AND..... we'll still be blaming her for the state of this country at the turn of the next century - It's cos she committed the cardinal sin when she won and we aall knaah that this country LOVES a loser!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST,Still bitter
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 11:22 AM

As someone who lost a good friend on Wireless Ridge when the craphats in the RA couldn't get their fucking guns to range properly because their equipment was obsolete shite, I would happily spit on her bloody grave.
There was fuck all of him left, so the bag in the coffin that was shipped all the way home to be buried with full military honours was more full of peat than person.
I've gone on to have kids and a life - he didn't get that chance. Dulce et Decorum Est? He didn't give his life for his country; it was taken away from him by incompetence and penny pinching. The sort of incompetence and penny-pinching that Thatcher stood for.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 11:11 AM

yeh but those islands would never have been even put at hazard had it not been for her, trying to save a few quid in the first place - to fund tax relief for the stinking rich.

'the lady's will and determination' - I bet she could give a good hiding any day of the week in a rubber mask Teribus......

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST,06:53
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 11:10 AM

So, by and large, you agree with me Teribus?
Good show!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 09:09 AM

Yes GUEST of 03 Jan 07 - 06:53 AM, I was and I am addressing a very specific point, that very specific point having been raised by weelittledrummer in his post of 01 Jan 07 - 11:44 AM

"As I remember, the interior of the Sir Galahad was coated in highly flammable material to save a few quid. And the whole bloody escapade was caused by her nibs deciding to knock off the naval patrols which were protecting the islands. that's why the Argies decided to chance their arm."

What is quoted above is incorrect. Whereas much of what you say in your post I agree with

"The Tories, like Labour before them, were running down the Navy and Fearless was to be pensioned off."

Very true, but what is the relevance of this in relation to Margaret Thatcher, or to the Falklands. The Falklands War was brought about by Argentinian aggression. If ever the "green light" was given to the Argentinians in relation to the Falklands it was when Dennis Healey as Minister of Defence oversaw the axing of the Carriers and his attempt to get rid of the Fleet Air Arm. If at any time during the period 1966 to 1982 anybody had told me that the UK would independently mount an amphibious assault operation supported by minimal air cover to recover possessions over 12,000 miles away, I would have laughed. The biggest mistake the Argentinian Junta made was in underestimating the lady's will and determination.

"Standards of construction and specs in recently-built vessels had been pared to ludicrously low levels while the construction companies creamed off the cash."

Take this up with the Royal Corps of Naval Constructors at Bath - Nothing political with regard to technical input into the Construction Standards and Specs of Royal Navy warships.

"The kit for those on land wasn't great either - some of 2 Para experienced trench foot because of the shite boots. Before the task force sailed Silverman's was under seige because the issue kit was so useless (As it has been before every major engagement since - the MoD should simply make them Quartermasters General and be done with it!)."

As you infer yourself - How far back do you want to go? It was the same for soldiers of Wellington's Army as it is for the present day British soldier, and not just boots, why do you think their back packs are called Bergans - Those on winter training in Norway ditched the UK issued kit and bought Norwegian rucksacks made by Berghans of Norway. Once again this has always been a common failing in the British armed services and is not down to any specific government or politician. As such it should be up to the senior members of the armed services and civil servants in charge of procurement to get it set right.

"Thatcher's arse was saved by the fact that the men she sent were extraordinary. Their professionalism had absolutely nothing to do with her, and her triumphalism afterwards was nauseating to many who went."

With that I whole-heartedly agree, but you have to admit, she did demonstrate the will to recover what had been taken and act to defend the inhabitants of the islands and restore to them what had been taken and I will give her full credit for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 07:42 AM

Hi Geordie, the feckin paper lad chucks it at my door in a poor attempt
at breaking my window cos I didn't tip him at christmas.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 07:35 AM

Perhaps the guy on the ground made a mistake. At least he was there on the ground. a position you should respect.

they always DO put you in this position. i don't need vast military experience. just a bit of insight into human nature.

i spent frigging years in inner city schools trying to make them work with thirty year old text books, shitty uncleaned buildings, senior staff imported fom 'nice'schools sat in their offices making up rules that were complete bollocks, money shovelled out of every window on politically motivated 'initiaves'.....

Its the way of the world my friend, the guy who gets the job of making things work is always 'arse end charlie'.

its the privilege of those who seek power without responsibility, and those who fawn upon them, to sneer.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 07:04 AM

I remember those boots well.
The tongue was not sewn in.
Just walking through wet grass got your socks wet.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 06:53 AM

Once again, Teribus, you are devoting huge energy to outlining and defending a very specific point, while ignoring the great ocean of truth before you. The Tories, like Labour before them, were running down the Navy and Fearless was to be pensioned off. Standards of construction and specs in recently-built vessles had been pared to ludicrously low levels while the construction companies creamed off the cash.
The kit for those on land wasn't great either - some of 2 Para experienced trench foot because of the shite boots. Before the task force sailed Silverman's was under seige because the issue kit was so useless (As it has been before every major engagement since - the MoD should simply make them Quartermasters General and be done with it!).
Thatcher's arse was saved by the fact that the men she sent were extraordinary. Their professionalism had absolutely nothing to do with her, and her triumphalism afterwards was nauseating to many who went.
Agreed, the senior ruperts in the Household Division were wankers. But they always have been - it's what comes of putting inbred halfwits in charge. Brave as lions in a tight spot, but that tight spot is usually a result of their own stupidity.
And when they retire from the Army they become stalwarts of the local Tory party, with the blue-collar deferential tories fawning around them, licking arse and tugging forelocks, because they have 'breeding'.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 06:50 AM

That's terribly terrible, Teribus

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 06:27 AM

From my post that weelittledrummer looked back over to find that I had critisized the NCO's and men of the Welsh Guards:

"the landing ships were near Fitzroy, the designated landing point. The landing craft should have been able to unload the ships to that point relatively quickly, but confusion over the ordered disembarcation point (the first half of the Guards going direct to Bluff Cove) resulted in the senior Welsh Guards infantry officer aboard insisting his troops be ferried the far longer distance direct to Port Fitzroy/Bluff Cove."

"The longer journey time of the landing craft taking the troops direct to Bluff Cove and the squabbling over how the landing was to be performed caused enormous delay in unloading. This had disastrous consequences."

Now then WLD where, in all of that, does it refer to any Welsh Guard's Private, NCO or Junior Officer? Doesn't does it WLD? So where does your charge of me critising them come from? Or are you just putting words into my mouth then hauling me to task over them?

Also, with your extensive military experience, how if Fitzroy is designated (Ordered) landing point for ALL troops, and the senior Welsh Guards Officer onboard altered that against the best specialist advice of the Royal Marine Liaison Officer (Rank - Major). Does the fault for this monstrous cock-up devolve to those higher up the chain of command and to those political leaders sitting many thousands of miles away? Local decision, the senior Guards Officer did not want half of his troops to "yomp" seven miles with full kit, he wanted his "Household Brigade" delivered to the front door by taxi. In short WLD - His decision - caused unnecessary delays - resulted in the disaster that followed.

I hope that that is simple enough for you, and the massive chips you bear on each shoulder, to understand. Difficult though that may be for a cynical, hard-left, old-labour dinosaur, such as yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 06:53 PM

It wasn't me who cast aspersions on that little lamp of thine. i wouldn't have too much confidence in them though, I think my Grandad used his to light his fags with - send down a pit pony, or whatever... if it turns into a canary, theres something fishy going on.....(ancient piece of mining folk lore)

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 02:39 PM

Teribus is essentally right (as he's shown) about the Sir Galahad tragedy coming about because the Welsh Guards not disembarking in timely fashion.

Wld, you sort of misremembered the situation a bit, in that it was Hms Sheffield (& possibly her sister ship Coventry too, also lost) which had insulation around electrical wiring (stuff that looked like black-coloured pipe lagging) that burned & gave of toxic fumes, in 'companionways' (passageways) & workspaces.

Not only had the Government planned to withdraw Hms Endurance from Antarctic/South Atlantic waters, they had also had preliinary negotiations to sell one of the 2 larger Amphibious Landing Ships (larger than Galahad class I mean) either Fearless or Intrepid (I cant remember which). What the hell we thought they wanted a Landing Ship for though is one of the things that boggles my mind the most.

It was also the case that the discussions with the Foreign Office had possibly led the Argentinians to think that we wouldnt be unhappy to hav the issue of the Falklands resolved in whatever way.

As is often the case in war, this armed conflict was as a result of somebody calling the other guys bluff.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 02:02 PM

SHE STOLE MY MILK.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST,Ms Penelope Rutledge
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 01:58 PM

Is Big Ben on the Isle of Wight? No, she was not bloody right!

* PR

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 12:33 PM

looking back over your contribution Teribus. It does seem a bit of a bugger, attacking the NCO's and junior officers (presumably) who were having to execute orders which weren't crystal clear. where were all the big nobs when the shit started to fly - writing down statistics for mr dick to fly his kite round......

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Geordie-Peorgie
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 12:33 PM

Yup! There's lots of tory geordies - Mair than ye'd reckon!

"I bet there are quite a few geordie tories. i bet half of them sing unaccompanied folksongs about pit explosions for light relief. its so much easier to blether on the what a rough time they had in those catherine cookson novels" The Wilson Family by any chance??

And Thanks for coming in with a real bit of historical accuracy there Teribus

And..... you guessed wrong about the Davey Lamp, WLD - It's an original which belonged to my paternal Grandfather - My Granny was a labour councillor in Wallsend for many years but saw the light eventually (after WWll) and swapped horses.

Eric, Do you still have the Morning Star delivered or do you collect it yourself??

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 11:16 AM

Once again Mr Dick sets us right....!

from David Copperfield, but it does have a certain resonance on these occasions.

Happy new Year Teribus!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 10:59 AM

I bet there are quite a few geordie tories. i bet half of them sing unaccompanied folksongs about pit explosions for light relief. its so much easier to blether on the what a rough time they had in those catherine cookson novels, than to focus on the groups in society who are having a shit time of it in the here and now.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 10:56 AM

weelittledrummer - 01 Jan 07 - 11:44 AM

"As I remember, the interior of the Sir Galahad was coated in highly flammable material to save a few quid. And the whole bloody escapade was caused by her nibs deciding to knock off the naval patrols which were protecting the islands. that's why the Argies decided to chance their arm."

Eh, No WLD, you remember incorrectly:

"Anchored 1200 feet apart in Port Pleasant, the landing ships were near Fitzroy, the designated landing point. The landing craft should have been able to unload the ships to that point relatively quickly, but confusion over the ordered disembarcation point (the first half of the Guards going direct to Bluff Cove) resulted in the senior Welsh Guards infantry officer aboard insisting his troops be ferried the far longer distance direct to Port Fitzroy/Bluff Cove. The intention was for the infantrymen to march via the recently repaired Bluff Cove bridge (destroyed by retreating Argentinian combat engineers) to their destination, a journey of around seven miles.

The longer journey time of the landing craft taking the troops direct to Bluff Cove and the squabbling over how the landing was to be performed caused enormous delay in unloading. This had disastrous consequences. Without escorts, having not yet established their air defence and still almost fully laden, the two LSLs in Port Pleasant were sitting targets for two waves of Argentinian-FAA A-4 Skyhawks."

The "Household Brigade" and Amphibious Operations should never be mixed. Throughout this whole sorry business the Royal Marine liaison officer pleaded with these prats to get their men shifted ashore ASAP, he was politely ignored, after all who the hell was he, a marine, to instruct officers of the Household Brigade on what to do in the field of amphibious operations. Their ignorance, arrogence and incompetence were astounding.

But one thing is certain WLD it had nothing whatsoever to do with any orders or instructions given by Margaret Thatcher, it had nothing whatsoever to do with the paint, and it had nothing whatsoever to do with Admiral Sandy Woodwards fleet dispositions. The orders given for the operation were simple and straightforward, get in there, get ashore as rapidly as possible, and let the ships get clear as quickly as possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 05:05 AM

Must be one of a rare breed, a Geordie tory! Probably a plastic Geordie with an 'Innovations' catalogue miner's lamp on the mantlepiece alongside his collection of Daily Mail free gifts.
The DUP is still a force to be reckoned with, and still has links with the murderers of the UVF and the UFF. The ones who haven't got rid of their guns.
Look at the name of the Tory party - it's the 'Conservative and Unionist Party'. There's a clue there!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 02:16 AM

Divant ye taalk to me like that ye geet big conservative geordie pillock.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 07:34 PM

If the Cameron gets in, Paisley's cohorts will be kicking ass again. Cameron will kissing the boots that kick his ass and call him a sell out.

that much is surely predictable.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 07:07 PM

Sounds like you could do with some of those electrocution lessons Geordie.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Geordie-Peorgie
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 06:55 PM

Are you seriously saying that Ian Paisley is STILL a force to be reckoned with??

He's almost dead!!

Eric, There's nothing funny about my accent - Strangely enough I thought that a serious response was woth a serious response - Obviously not!!

So gan and stuff yersel' ye commie twat!!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 11:44 AM

As I remember, the interior of the Sir Galahad was coated in highly flammable material to save a few quid. And the whole bloody escapade was caused by her nibs deciding to knock off the naval patrols which were protecting the islands. that's why the Argies decided to chance their arm.

Callaghan had averted a similar war by just lining up the warships a few years earlier.

the bloody woman was a bag of shite. she had a rip roaring time giving anti Irish speeches to a load of daft old sods in hats at the tory party conference - provoking the worse violence between the two countries for nearly two hundred years.

The only thing that she really did right was to make her rotten party unleadable and unelectable. She was kept in power by the Ulster Unionists. The frightening thing is that if Cameron gets himself elected, he will similarly have his nuts in Paisley's hands and we can look forward to another round of mayhem.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 10:55 AM

Hooly crap, man. Ye mean tez say that Geordie lad disn't allus write like that? Aye, and there was me thinking he was a poor illiterate victim of the Thatcher yers!
Inside that ludicrous affectation is an old-fashioned twat. Fancy!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 10:28 AM

Funny how you can speak good English when your ranting on.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Geordie-Peorgie
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 09:54 AM

"Funny how those who support her now are those who were in the forces or the police - the favoured ones"

Aye, because the previous governments had ignored those areas.

Oh! When soldiers sailors & airmen went off to fight in the Falklands (A British Island) they DID have adequate equipment and enough of it - Albeit the fact that the media in UK showed the Argies where our 'shortfalls' were.

Our current leader has packed off a bunch of ill-prepared and ill-equipped young men & women to fight someone else's fights (plural) in the middle east - I bet HE gets a congressional medal of honour.

But, back to the title of the thread - Yes! She was right - our society was, is and will continue to be 'dog eat dog' and 'every man for himself' because that's the way we are

She didn't cause it!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 09:28 AM

That guardianlies site is a hoot! There are some truly deranged people out there, eh?
Are to to believe that the CPS, the whole legal system and a jury were party to all of this? Makes Fayed's paranoia seem sane!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 09:25 AM

Funny how those who support her now are those who were in the forces or the police - the favoured ones.
She was a misguided, bigotted harridan who ruined thousands of lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: sapper82
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 09:03 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: akenaton - PM
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 09:42 PM

Even Teribus seems to have missed the point of this thread.
Its not about whether on not Thatcher was a good leader, but whether her remarks about "society" were valid.

As I have said in previous posts, as well as providing links, when one actually takes the time to read the entire interview in "Woman's Own" it is immediately obvious that what she was really saying is totally at odds with the "accepted" interpretaion of the left.
This leads to a further point.
When one looks at the mendacity of the Left in the way it has taken quotations out of context or reinterpreted "facts" to suit their adgenda, one tends to think what else have they twisted and lied about. Perhaps this link here might enlighten some of those with open minds.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 05:05 AM

I vividly remember the 'Letters' column of my local newspaper from around the time that Thatcher was elected (1979). This was full of letters complaining about 'benefits scroungers', 'immigrants', 'trade unionists' etc. The main thrust of these letters appeared to be that people who were perceived to be of a lower social status than the letter writers were 'getting away with things'/'getting more than their fair share'. There were never any letters about what people of a perceived higher social status may have been 'getting away with'.

I believe that Thatcher appealed to these letter writers and their 'silent majority' neighbours, and they are the people who elected her. She came to power on a platform of envy, petty spite, greed and snobbery (always a winning combination!). Of course, Thatcher's real project was all to do with Free Market Economics and giving away the 'family silver' to Big Business.

I'll give her her due though: most modern politicians make promises to the electorate in order to get elected and then promptly sell out to Big Business when in office. Thatcher sold out to Big Business and kept her promises to stop the poor and disadvantaged from 'getting away' with stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 08:19 PM

Tootler...the damage will never be healed...It's built into the system that our society will diverge.
The "have nots" are a product of "progress".

THe world of science fiction is not far off, where a continual civil war is joined by the ruling elite and the underclass...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Tootler
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 06:34 PM

NO!!

She was a ragbag of prejudices and most of what she did was about settling old scores. That she did some things that needed doing was a by product of that but she did it in such a way as to alienate large numbers of people.

She was perfectly prepared to tread on people and kick them when they were down to get her way. That is not the mark of a good leader.

Her legacy is a divided society with a great many people feeling excluded and it will take at least a generation to heal the damage.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 12:17 PM

She was right about a lot of things, we just did not like the things she was right about. She did some unpleasant things that needed doing, that is never popular, is it ?

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: autolycus
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 07:31 AM

In no way do I share the violent attitudes of other posters, and I'm glad that the Americans are refusing her that medal - well done people.

   Interesting that it has not been prominent news here on UK radio.


   

    Happy and fruitful New Year






      Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 07:16 AM

What is this medal? is it reserved for nice people?

if so, can I have one?

I have always paid my speeding fines, and change my guitar strings quite often. I think its high time I got some form of recognition for these services to humanity.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: sapper82
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 05:09 AM

The more I read some of the comments above, particularly the violent wishes of punkfolkrocker, the more I wonder of their sanity and the more I am glad I do not share such hate filled opinions.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 04:43 AM

Good name though innit ' Thatchers Falling Down '

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 09:49 PM

sod saddam..

i want to watch Thather be slowly garotted..!!!??


[big party in ciderland planned for her wake..]


.. though if my mum and dad could have afforded to buy their council house back in the 80's

and leave it to me in their will..

maybe my attitude might be a slight bit different..!!!???


..and how dare 'Thatchers vintage cider' be so exquiitely lovely

with that surname making each sip so bitter sweet..!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 09:42 PM

Even Teribus seems to have missed the point of this thread.
Its not about whether on not Thatcher was a good leader, but whether her remarks about "society" were valid.

I detested Thatchers ideology almost as much as I detest Blair personally, but there is a ring of truth about her opinion of the British electorate.
Are we really only motivated by self interest.
With the death of Saddam today, why are we all saying on another thread that the monster deserves to die, yet turn our heads away from the death and mutilation of innocent women and children, caused in part by our support for "our monsters".

Double standards and hypocrisy abound......Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: GUEST,Bruce Michael Baillie
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 08:09 PM

...NO Margaret Thatcher was never right she was a fucking bitch! Yes she showed strong leadership, but leadership without an ounce of compassion. I lived through those years and always wondered why it was she promoted the home ownership thing, getting everyone to own their own houses rather than rent? over the years I've seen why the old bitch was so keen on that idea, so when you're old and decrepit your house can be sold to pay someone to look after you, ...well that's if you call being looked after, sitting in your own piss for 18 hours a day while some poor overworked woman on below the minimum wage tries to cope with 40 or so inmates of what are laughingly reffered to as 'Care Homes'.
Teribus, if Margaret Thatcher was our best Prime Minister then God help us when the worst one finally arrives!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 07:35 PM

With out any reservation, the best Prime Minister that the United Kingdom has ever had. You elect people to provide LEADERSHIP. OK subsequent to her departure, name one British politician who has demonstrated leadership as opposed to populist claptrap.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Cluin
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 06:30 PM

Was Thatcher right?

She certainly wasn't left.

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Tom Hamilton frae Saltcoats Scotland
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 04:09 PM

naw she wasnae richt, mind you neither is blair or b.lair as he should be called.

I don't know how anyone could call themselevses solicalists and yet vote for another right wing party

Subject: RE: BS: Was Thatcher right?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 09:28 AM

This must be about the only thing she ever did that did not deserve wholehearted condemnation. Hers was on this occasion (and probably only this occasion) a "very legitimate and strong" reaction to a series of illegitmate threats to lawful authority.   

Oh, that and a certain "Gotcha".

However, given the other sins of hers, the idea that anyone other than the ghost of Mussolini would want to give her a medal beggars belief.

I would happily hang her in a gibbet until only bleaching bones remained.