Awol

Where is that confirmed mate?

No offence but you need to calm down a bit. AQ are trying to hit the west ALL THE TIME. No point pissing your pants about it.

You cant really think like that though, you are infinitely more likely to be hit by a car when crossing the road than you are to be a victim of a terrorist attack. Does that stop you going outside? Exactly. The point of terrorism is to terrorise. If you don't allow your daily life to be affected then it's failed.

Nil.

Looking at the footage that has come out so far full marks to the local emergency services, they seem to have handled this in a very calm, measured and professional way. Horrible way to find out whether you've got your s**t together in terms of disaster planning but fair play, they're good.

Is it too early to ask whether it might be race related?

JFK library also hit. Leading Democrat...political target, maybe? Sorry, probably shouldn't be speculating yet but I'm thinking right wing extremist(s).

Not a jihadi then. Terrible but at least he's alive and the damage is low so he'll walk again, truly incredible what they can do with prosthetics now after having 10 years of R & D and 1000's of squaddies coming back with similar injuries to practice on.

Total speculation but it wasn't a big blast wave from the first explosion and no windows appeared to shatter in the immediate vicinity. Probably home made (certainly not military grade Semtex/C4 type) explosive which would also fit with ball bearings being added as additional shrapnel to give it more punch. Lethal close up (or if exploding in a confined space like a tube train) but not a "mass killer" in the open air. First guess would be domestic extremists of some flavour but not a pukka AQ job by the looks of it. Still bastards whoever did it.

Doesn't that relate to manufacturing jobs rather than manufacturing output? link Interesting statistic about the coal mines too, but probably better to ignore that in case someone has an aneurysm.

One figure for the record: The rebate she won from the EU has saved the UK £75 billion pounds, so far. I'd be interested to see how much money has been lost over the years by destroying the manufacturing industry in this country. How much have we lost out on so far? Manufacturing rose 7.5% under the Thatcher Government.

One figure for the record: The rebate she won from the EU has saved the UK £75 billion pounds, so far.

If you're so keen on following the views of the majority, why use a vague question and then read across to impute support for a specific event which wasn't asked about? I wrote: "more people think she was good for the country than bad", I didn't make any comment about whether a majority approved of using tax payers money for her funeral. I did highlight that it was a paltry sum in terms of money spent by the Government and used the example of the cost being equal to the bill so far for keeping that lovely terrorist Abu Qatada in the country, just to put it in perspective - of course Drat then deliberately misinterpreted that and said: Which (I'm sure he knows) was obviously not the point at all. No opinions will ever be changed on this issue so I'll say this before ducking out of the celebrations: The haters are thrilled that she is dead and have made their point repeatedly. Whether or not wishing a helpless old woman dead reflects an ignoble streak in an individuals character is a matter of for them. Personally I think it betrays the falseness of often stated claims to occupy the moral high ground on so many social and political issues, but she's gone, dead, which really should satisfy their lust for vengeance - even those born after her career ended. However, the opinion they hold of Thatcher is far from unanimous and many others welcome the opportunity to mark her passing in what they consider to be the appropriate manner for an inspirational and transformative national leader. The haters would like to deny them this opportunity out of sheer small minded spite, and no doubt there will be pithy responses about this being an appropriate reflection of the woman's character. Fine, in which case let's not pretend on other issues that they hold themselves to some higher moral standard. In my view Thatcher was the right woman at the right time, someone brave enough to administer the medicine required to cure the "sick man of Europe", circa 1979. If a good leader is one who gets more right than wrong, and a great leader is one who achieves that through principal rather than populism then she was a great leader. Her record as the longest serving PM of the 20th Century would seem to reflect that. As someone said earlier in the thread, I take pleasure in knowing that the central legacy of her tenure remains secure. The evil of real socialism is dead in the UK, never to return. For that I am most certainly grateful. RIP Mrs T. I hope you have a good send off.

But to ram it down the throats of all the millions she did down in this way, making out she's some sort of hero and we should all mourn her, is both ludicrous and more to the point deeply offensive. I have no problem at all with people demonstrating against this part of it. Please don't shoot me. As others have rightly contributed regarding "Ding Dong the witch is dead", no one is being forced to watch, no one is being forced to participate, so if you don't like it, don't participate in it. Let's not pretend that the anti-Thatcher view is the only one in the country. In a post I made earlier in the thread (according to the Guardian) more people think she was good for the country than bad. So, respecting the view of the majority what is the harm in spending the same on a good send off for a politically giant figure as it has cost the country to house that barsteward Abu Qatada? So now your "justification" for the costs and the disruption is because of Abu? Are you serious? I don't need to justify anything, it wasn't my decision. Merely pointing out the hypocrisy of you and other posters (and before you cry 'personal abuse' note your description above of those who disagree with your view as being deluded and foolish). On one hand you suggest that those who get all upset about the "charts" really need to get over it (and you're right, they should) but then her detractors wail like little girls about 10 million quid over a funeral for someone who, according to the polls, garners more respect than hatred in the population at large. We get it, you didn't like her, fair play to you. What you and others seem incapable of recognising is that many more people thought she was bloody good for the country and are happy for her memory to be honoured in this way. Don't like it? Easy solution, ignore it. Ultimately those against her have had every opportunity to say their piece, which being a staunch defender of UK democracy Thatcher would have whole heartedly approved of. My personal opinion, which isn't worth any more than anyone else's, is that to protest at a funeral betrays a lack of common decency which does otherwise civilised men no credit whatsoever.

But to ram it down the throats of all the millions she did down in this way, making out she's some sort of hero and we should all mourn her, is both ludicrous and more to the point deeply offensive. I have no problem at all with people demonstrating against this part of it. Please don't shoot me. As others have rightly contributed regarding "Ding Dong the witch is dead", no one is being forced to watch, no one is being forced to participate, so if you don't like it, don't participate in it. Let's not pretend that the anti-Thatcher view is the only one in the country. In a post I made earlier in the thread (according to the Guardian) more people think she was good for the country than bad. So, respecting the view of the majority what is the harm in spending the same on a good send off for a politically giant figure as it has cost the country to house that barsteward Abu Qatada?

Drat, I asked you very politely for your opinion, nothing more. You say you understand it but I asked whether you thought it was acceptable. So, pretty please, with a cherry on top, do you think protesting at any funeral is acceptable? Thanks in advance..

You need to be a special kind of clearing in the woods to want to spend millions for a funeral for one of teh most divisive and hateful PM's all in the name of politics. You need to be a special kind of clearing in the woods to want to do that and agree with it and then support a political party that encourages social divide, persecution of the most vulnerable etc. So putting politics aside, do you think that protesting at a ceremony to lay someone to rest is acceptable? Clearly some posters on here do but I'd be interested in hearing a straight answer from you on that point, please.

Don't worry they have orders to only shoot people carrying "Socialist Worker" placards.

By all means hate what she stood for, buy the silly little song and have your parties in Trafalgar Square if that's what gets you off. But protesting an actual funeral ceremony? You'd need to be a special kind of word removed to do that. "No specific threat" is not the same as an "absence of terrorist threats". Putting on a large ceremonial event in London is always a potential target and a proportional security operation is to be expected.

I "proper" lol'd!

Which holocaust are you referring to? The Armenian one? The Rwandan one? The Cambodian one? East Timor? The Jewish holocaust? NSSM 200? Or the largest holocaust in the history of humanity and the most successful? That of the native Americans? Thatcher is not responsible for all of these.... Great now we're going into tin-foil conspiracy territory. I think it skipped tin-foil, flew past fahrenheit 911 and went balls out straight into bat shit crazy. Still it's nice to know Thatcher wasn't a genocidal maniac and wasn't writing policy for the US national security council before she was our PM, or is Eddy saying she was... er, nurse! Could you clarify which of the points in the post (statement of fact rather than opinions) you think are factually incorrect? There are several to choose from. Peter, the comment that "Thatcher is not responsible for all of these" after listing a series of mass murders seperated by decades if not centuries, would imply she was responsible for some of them. I'm always happy to debate people with a different perspective, but when the starting point is so obviously mental why even engage at all? Note, I was replying to Mantis above, not Eddie.

Which holocaust are you referring to? The Armenian one? The Rwandan one? The Cambodian one? East Timor? The Jewish holocaust? NSSM 200? Or the largest holocaust in the history of humanity and the most successful? That of the native Americans? Thatcher is not responsible for all of these.... Great now we're going into tin-foil conspiracy territory. I think it skipped tin-foil, flew past fahrenheit 911 and went balls out straight into bat shit crazy. Still it's nice to know Thatcher wasn't a genocidal maniac and wasn't writing policy for the US national security council before she was our PM, or is Eddy saying she was... er, nurse!

That's true, Bliar has confirmed he is attending.

An environmentally friendly scenario I'd have thought you would approve of.

Even a Guardian conducted poll found a majority in favour overall of Thatcher's legacy.