Margaret Thatcher dies of a stroke.

[colhint]

Estimated cost of funeral is £10m + the £2m to get all the plebs back to Westminster yesterday.

That would pay the salary of 600 nurses for a year .

Absolute words removed

 

Isn't that about the same cost as a by election? Just think if she hadn't have died, and Milliband could have waited 2 years till the general election, before he decided he'd had enough, we could have another 1200 nurses

[villaajax]

Tories must be gutted she didn't have the decency to snuff it in the run up to the next election.

 

It was a stroke of bad luck for them.

[villadude]

**** sick of hearing about it all now, in fact I was sick of it the day she chucked a seven..

[StefanAVFC]

Estimated cost of funeral is £10m + the £2m to get all the plebs back to Westminster yesterday.

That would pay the salary of 600 nurses for a year .

Absolute words removed

 

Isn't that about the same cost as a by election? Just think if she hadn't have died, and Milliband could have waited 2 years till the general election, before he decided he'd had enough, we could have another 1200 nurses

 

I thought it was 1,500 nurses!?

[LondonLax]

Why is all government expenditure measured in nurses anyway? They seem to be an alternative currency.

[markavfc40]

 This funeral is being rammed down our throats and I for one hope it kicks off next weds

 

"Where there is harmony, may we bring discord."

 

I read somewhere today, may have been on here, that its actually the Tories and Thatchers supporters who are now insulting her memory with a tax payer funded funeral. It would have been more fitting to leave her where she is, and say: “If you can’t stand on your own two feet, you can't expect help from the state."

Edited April 11, 2013 by markavfc40

[peterms]

Why is all government expenditure measured in nurses anyway? They seem to be an alternative currency.

 

If we want an alternative currency, it would be better to use bankers.  Instead of carrying 1500 nurses around, you could carry just one banker, for the same cash equivalent.  How much more convenient would that be?

[StefanAVFC]

Why is all government expenditure measured in nurses anyway? They seem to be an alternative currency.

 

If we want an alternative currency, it would be better to use bankers.  Instead of carrying 1500 nurses around, you could carry just one banker, for the same cash equivalent.  How much more convenient would that be?

 

What's the conversion rate to oil barons? :<

[CI]

Well as distasteful as it may be for some, I think trouble is inevitable next Wednesday. For many , this will be their last chance to show how they really feel about this individual. Good luck to them I say.

[peterms]

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.

 

It's a pity if you stopped reading at that point, because the very next sentence goes on to state what Eddie thinks is Thatcher's specific responsibility, which you will be relieved to hear does not by any means include all the examples in the first para.

 

If you were to read on from that point, I suggest you would not be able to sustain the criticism you make here.

 

My invitation was to say which of the statements of fact in Eddie's post you felt were factually incorrect.  I think you've been thrown off the scent by the rhetorical opening para, but I'd still be interested in your view on what I'm asking.  I thought it was an interesting post which laid out some uncomfortable facts, laced with some invective which is hard for people of an opposing view to swallow.  But a response should surely get beyond the invective and deal with the facts, shouldn't it?

[Xann]

If we want an alternative currency, it would be better to use bankers.  Instead of carrying 1500 nurses around, you could carry just one banker, for the same cash equivalent.  How much more convenient would that be?

 

1500 nurses can carry you around.

[StefanAVFC]

Well as distasteful as it may be for some, I think trouble is inevitable next Wednesday. For many , this will be their last chance to show how they really feel about this individual. Good luck to them I say.

 

We get it. You advocate violence and the forceful protest of somebody's funeral. You don't need to say it 4 times.

[Mantis]

Well as distasteful as it may be for some, I think trouble is inevitable next Wednesday. For many , this will be their last chance to show how they really feel about this individual. Good luck to them I say.

 

Good luck to the police I say. If any protesters get violent I hope they're taken down with the full force of the law.

 

[peterms]

Well as distasteful as it may be for some, I think trouble is inevitable next Wednesday. For many , this will be their last chance to show how they really feel about this individual. Good luck to them I say.

 

We get it. You advocate violence and the forceful protest of somebody's funeral. You don't need to say it 4 times.

 

I think you misinterpret this.  CI will say for himself if he's actually advocating violence, but my take is that people who oppose the state funeral wish to protest, not break heads.

 

The funeral could and should have been a more low-key affair, as was planned and agreed.  There would have been little or no protest at the funeral, though probably plenty of comment in the media about the legacy of Thatcher - and rightly so.

 

Instead, it's been hijacked by the tory fanboys for what they assume will be temporary political advantage, and that has prompted a response.  The Queen has been wheeled out, against all protocol.  St Paul's has been commissioned, contrary to the express purpose of St Paul's, as Giles Fraser has explained.  Staff in the Foreign Office were told to wear full mourning dress, as though for a head of state and not a politician - quickly rescinded once the civil service top nobs told Lord Snooty to do one.  The dismal Tony Baldry raised a spurious point of order in the HoC in reply to Glenda Jackson's splendid speech on Thatcher, suggesting that only fulsome tributes should be allowed, never a word of critical truth, and was rapidly handed his arse by the Speaker.

 

It's a gratuitous, offensive attempt to transform a divisive, hateful class warrior into a figure of state.  It won't wash, and those who persist in this silly and childish game would be well advised to jack it in now.  If they persist in the coiffured flummery and their partisan attempt to pretend the nation is united in grief, and force this on an unwilling nation, it will end badly.  Their attempts to present this as the fault of those resisting their stupid propaganda will be held up to ridicule for a generation.

[peterms]

If we want an alternative currency, it would be better to use bankers.  Instead of carrying 1500 nurses around, you could carry just one banker, for the same cash equivalent.  How much more convenient would that be?

 

1500 nurses can carry you around.

 

Really?  I'd be up for that.  On a litter, or what?  Can you arrange it?

[StefanAVFC]

 

Well as distasteful as it may be for some, I think trouble is inevitable next Wednesday. For many , this will be their last chance to show how they really feel about this individual. Good luck to them I say.

 

We get it. You advocate violence and the forceful protest of somebody's funeral. You don't need to say it 4 times.

 

I think you misinterpret this.  CI will say for himself if he's actually advocating violence, but my take is that people who oppose the state funeral wish to protest, not break heads.

 

The funeral could and should have been a more low-key affair, as was planned and agreed.  There would have been little or no protest at the funeral, though probably plenty of comment in the media about the legacy of Thatcher - and rightly so.

 

Instead, it's been hijacked by the tory fanboys for what they assume will be temporary political advantage, and that has prompted a response.  The Queen has been wheeled out, against all protocol.  St Paul's has been commissioned, contrary to the express purpose of St Paul's, as Giles Fraser has explained.  Staff in the Foreign Office were told to wear full mourning dress, as though for a head of state and not a politician - quickly rescinded once the civil service top nobs told Lord Snooty to do one.  The dismal Tony Baldry raised a spurious point of order in the HoC in reply to Glenda Jackson's splendid speech on Thatcher, suggesting that only fulsome tributes should be allowed, never a word of critical truth, and was rapidly handed his arse by the Speaker.

 

It's a gratuitous, offensive attempt to transform a divisive, hateful class warrior into a figure of state.  It won't wash, and those who persist in this silly and childish game would be well advised to jack it in now.  If they persist in the coiffured flummery and their partisan attempt to pretend the nation is united in grief, and force this on an unwilling nation, it will end badly.  Their attempts to present this as the fault of those resisting their stupid propaganda will be held up to ridicule for a generation.

 

It's more that he's said it multiple times trying to provoke a reaction.

[Mantis]

 

 

 

Now people are comparing Thatcher's premiership to the Holocaust? Jesus **** Christ.

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!

 

Its Eddie... and what conspiracy theories have I mentioned? Washington consensus? Hard fact. NSSM 200? Hard fact? Rwandan genocide? Hard fact. Etc etc. The people who funded Hitler and Thatcher? The body of evidence agrees with me.

 

 

 

With regards to US policy, I am talking about her agreeing with the core themes... which she did... not that she decided on US policy. But she was in a position where she could say something about it, and she supported it.

 

And hey you wanna talk conspiracy theories? Everyone is a conspiracy theorist. 9/11 ... you are a conspiracy theorist if you think the american government conspired to blow the towers up, but you are also a conspiracy theorist if you reckon Bin Laden orchastrated it from a kidney dialysis machine in the American Hospital in Dubai... its a theory of a conspiracy, with an astonishing lack of evidence.... Chemtrails? They clearly occur and there is limited scientific reasoning behind them other than longevity of steam at different temperatures. HAARP? Are you seriously suggesting HAARP doesn't exist?

 

Some conspiracy theories are stupid. Like the Denver International Airport one. But others have the vast body of reasonable evidence supporting them, like 9/11, like JFK, like the existence of centres of power above our government (don't be a child and call it illuminati). At which point the conspiracy theory term becomes weaponised, and at that point as a reasonable human being you need to question why the term is so weaponised.

 

Look my long and wordy point is... Thatcher was mixed up in some pretty bad stuff. She was an ideological chick, but the main thrust of her idealogy was never ever to make the world a better place. It was to make the world a better place for a few. And this wasn't done just in England. Her policies (not just hers admittedly) went across the whole globe and caused a lot of problems that are still around today, and are worse than ever. 

 

And for the record you dropped the conspiracy theory bomb. I am still unsure where you got that from...

 

There are so many conspiracy myths in here I can't even be arsed to respond to them. I did chuckle a bit though when you said there is a "vast body of reasonable evidence" to the support the 9/11, JFK conspiracies etc.

 

There is no huge conspiracy where a shadowy group are secretly controlling the world and orchestrating all of the events within it. What a load of absolute nonsense.

Edited April 11, 2013 by Mantis

[CI]

No I'm not, I just am annoyed that this is being rammed down people's throats and we are having to contribute to and ideally play along with this whole sham. Disgraceful from Cameron and his flunkies.

[peterms]

 

 

 

 

Now people are comparing Thatcher's premiership to the Holocaust? Jesus **** Christ.

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!

 

Its Eddie... and what conspiracy theories have I mentioned? Washington consensus? Hard fact. NSSM 200? Hard fact? Rwandan genocide? Hard fact. Etc etc. The people who funded Hitler and Thatcher? The body of evidence agrees with me.

 

 

 

With regards to US policy, I am talking about her agreeing with the core themes... which she did... not that she decided on US policy. But she was in a position where she could say something about it, and she supported it.

 

And hey you wanna talk conspiracy theories? Everyone is a conspiracy theorist. 9/11 ... you are a conspiracy theorist if you think the american government conspired to blow the towers up, but you are also a conspiracy theorist if you reckon Bin Laden orchastrated it from a kidney dialysis machine in the American Hospital in Dubai... its a theory of a conspiracy, with an astonishing lack of evidence.... Chemtrails? They clearly occur and there is limited scientific reasoning behind them other than longevity of steam at different temperatures. HAARP? Are you seriously suggesting HAARP doesn't exist?

 

Some conspiracy theories are stupid. Like the Denver International Airport one. But others have the vast body of reasonable evidence supporting them, like 9/11, like JFK, like the existence of centres of power above our government (don't be a child and call it illuminati). At which point the conspiracy theory term becomes weaponised, and at that point as a reasonable human being you need to question why the term is so weaponised.

 

Look my long and wordy point is... Thatcher was mixed up in some pretty bad stuff. She was an ideological chick, but the main thrust of her idealogy was never ever to make the world a better place. It was to make the world a better place for a few. And this wasn't done just in England. Her policies (not just hers admittedly) went across the whole globe and caused a lot of problems that are still around today, and are worse than ever. 

 

And for the record you dropped the conspiracy theory bomb. I am still unsure where you got that from...

 

There are so many conspiracy myths in here I can't even be arsed to respond to them. I did chuckle a bit though when you said there is a "vast body of reasonable evidence" to the support the 9/11, JFK conspiracies etc.

 

There is no huge conspiracy where a shadowy group are secretly controlling the world and orchestrating all of the events within it. What a load of absolute nonsense.

 

So you're basically saying "It's evidently untrue, everyone knows it, in fact it's so obviously untrue it's not worth debunking.  Though of course I could if I wished provide a detailed rebuttal.  I just don't do so because it's, er, obviously not needed".

 

Is that it?

[Mantis]

The problem with these grand NWO/Illuminati conspiracies is that they're technically impossible to debunk. They're so big that supporters of said theories can (and do) simply wave away everything as being part of the conspiracy. That said, there is little to no evidence to support these absurd conspiracies and the burden of proof is on those supporting them.

 

What I will say though is that things like 9/11 and JFK have been debunked conclusively.