Tell Me :
Talk
hey seitan...although I share your view just give it a rest...she´s dead.
Statistics, statistics. It's not that simple. The rich got richer, the poor got poorer. There was a very nasty atmosphere about the 80s in Britain where success at any cost was admired, greed was good and it was all about the self. Ultimately, that ethos has never really left UK society - survey after survey shows it to be a pretty unhappy place where people have lost sight of what's really important. Everything has been sacrificed to the alter of consumerism. A desperate, insatiable type of consumerism that is trying and failing to fill the spiritual void. That is Thatcher's legacy. Where I differ from some in this thread is that I absolutely accept that she inherited a basket case of a country that needed change, I just don't think we ended up with anything any better.
I don't know where you're from but if it's the USA then you need to understand that the rich in the UK have none of the sense of philanthropy that they do there. They just keep everything to themselves.
In the parliamentary system, you don't need the majority of votes to form a government. 30% to 35% is often good enough. And you don't vote for your Prime Minister either (at least in the UK and Canada).
There's mixed reasons for that. First, Thatcher was elected in 1979. By 1981 because of a 100% increase in unemployment she was the Prime minister with the lowest rating of any PM ever - 25%. In 1980 the Labour party had elected 67 year old guy called Michael Foot as their leader. This was a bad move by Labour, he was frail and too closely associated with the unions who most of the papers were still blaming for the problems of the 70's. You could say that by early 1982 both parties were largely discredited. Some small element broke away from Labour and formed the Social Democrats who later transformed again into the Liberal Democrats that we have today as the 3rd party.
Then in 1982 Argentina invaded the Falkland islands. Britain got them back. Thatcher got a lot of kudos from that. She then won the 1983 election, I'd say because of that. (Other wise it would have probably have been a case of the lowest electoral turnout ever)....Michael Foot resigned.
Labour party is in disarray. They the voted in Neil Knnock as their leader. A University educated tough bloke from a coal mining family, a Welshman. He was loud and brash in his demenour and not popular again with the mainly English public. He contested Thatcher in the election in 1987 but lost, he wasn't liked and Labour still didn't have any coherant policies.
Thatcher's poularity was on the wane again as well through the introduction of oppressive policies based on race and sexul orientation but things wren't quite bad enough to vote Kinnock in. Personally I think Thatcher just won that one by default. Best of a bad bunch.
By 1989 though things were ramping up a gear. She'd introduced a thing called the poll tax. (Local taxes based on how many working people lived in a house. ie. 2 parents working plus 3 young but working sons paying £10 week each = £50. House next door getting the same external local services with just 2 adults working, £10 each = £20. result = wide spread rioting. She wouldn't back down. Alongside this the country was sliding into recession = ousted by her own party. Et tu Brutus.
John Major took over. He also beat Neil Kinnock in 1992 election due to Kinnock not being personally poular and party still in disarray.
Kinnock resigned as leader after that election. A guy called John Smith took over in 1992 but died 2 years later, succeeded temporarily by a woman called Margeret Beckett, Labour re-invented itself as New Labour under Tony Blair who of course ousted the Conservatives in 1997. Mainly because they'd got caught being greedy, sleazy and corrupt - some went to prison for their deeds. The rest as they say........
Thatcher was always popular in London and the Southeast where all the money got sucked to....(also - densley populated so lots of votes down there - it was the rest of the country that didn't like her...hence the word divisive is being used a lot on TV in recent days.
So, I'd say, she won the first one on a promise to sort things out
The second because of the Falklands and the third by default, as I say, considered best of a bad bunch, but as we know that was short lived, ousted mid-term by her own party...........
Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-11 04:44 by EddieByword.
Um, I think that was answered already...
EddieByword's analysis is more in-depth, but to make the point plainer: Thatcher never won more than 44% of the vote.
The British Parliamentary system means that winner takes all, even though most people voted against her. (I would expect those voting against her would have included most of the working class, but I don't have the numbers.)
Furthermore, the people never got to vote for her directly as Prime Minister - that selection is left to the party. In fact, you can become PM without even being elected to Parliament.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-11 07:52 by Angus MacBagpipe.
This sounds much like US politics of the time: Stronger Democratic candidates could have beaten Reagan in either 80 or 84 and Bush in 88. Unfortunatly Carter's failure to free the Iranian hostages in 80, and the weak candiates of Mondale and Dukakis in 88 led to an easy election, re-election and (some would say a third Reagan term) Bush's election in 88.
My thoughts exactly,Seitan.
So true about Blair.
Because it never is a two horse race.
Deliberately.
It's a shell game at the top.. they just have to split the opposition vote (which they did with the Liberal Democrats).
Most people didn't want her.
Most people didn't want David Cameron... the majority of people in Britain never voted for those policies.. in fact those policies were not even put forward at the election.
We live in a sham "democracy" that is easily manipulated by those above what we see.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-11 09:14 by GravityBoy.
No, the both the rich and the poor got richer.
Rubbish.
Absolute rubbish.
People have never been in so much debt.
That's a pretty incredible statement.
The same argument for Thatcher.
Just who did they leave it in "pretty good shape" for?
I look around Britain and I see it's very nice for a small number and a complete hellhole for the rest.
It's in "pretty good shape" if you're wealthy.
Are you sure you wanna post this, regarding fans from Chile on this board, and how they will take this?
The MPs debate on Thatcher in Parliament yesterday, one ex-Minister said "she believed in concensus as long as it agreed with her opinion".
..pretty common amongst politicians...even Obama....bla bla bla...
John Lydon has...but not Johnny Rotten...
What about Jewish fans or fans from Israel or the US? Comparing Thatcher to @#$%& or Bin Ladin or the closing mines to the Holocaust is perfectly normal according to many.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
shortfatfanny
()
Date: April 10, 2013 19:05
Quote
seitanQuote
mr_dja
Sorry Seitan, it wasn't my intention to set you off. Good luck with the "stupid and simple minded, narrow minded comments" (as long as BV's willing to let you rant).
Peace,
Mr DJA
Over & Out
hahahah..funny. - Ok, Her death is a tragic thing for her family & loved ones - if she had any, - I know Thatcher died with Alzheimer’s, the brain-degenerating disease in which the patient loses their faculty for memory. That can be seen as sad and tragic indeed, horrible even - but I'm more sad about the fact that so many people would like to erase public memory of Thatcher’s criminal legacy too..
hey seitan...although I share your view just give it a rest...she´s dead.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
kleermaker
()
Date: April 10, 2013 19:38
I agree with seitan, Gravity Boy and the like about their ideas and opinions regarding M. Thatcher and her devastating policy during such a long time. But the saddest thing is that she was succeeded by T. Blair, a labour politician who was expected to change Thatcher's politics drastically, but who in the end appeared to be a dedicated Thatcher epigone.
That was and still is such a dramatic and sad thing: Labour has become conservative and neo-liberal and a great promotor of wild-west capitalism. So sad that all big political parties are actually the same and interchangeable. They're all servants of the big capital, of the global plutocrats. Just the same in France, Germany, Holland and so on.
That was and still is such a dramatic and sad thing: Labour has become conservative and neo-liberal and a great promotor of wild-west capitalism. So sad that all big political parties are actually the same and interchangeable. They're all servants of the big capital, of the global plutocrats. Just the same in France, Germany, Holland and so on.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
rebelrebel
()
Date: April 10, 2013 23:58
Quote
Goldsmith
All Thatcher did was defeat communism and promote freedom. When she came to office the average U.K. citizen was 10% poorer than the average Frenchman. When she left the average U.K. citizen was 10% richer.
Yeah...life under her leadership must have been horrible...
Statistics, statistics. It's not that simple. The rich got richer, the poor got poorer. There was a very nasty atmosphere about the 80s in Britain where success at any cost was admired, greed was good and it was all about the self. Ultimately, that ethos has never really left UK society - survey after survey shows it to be a pretty unhappy place where people have lost sight of what's really important. Everything has been sacrificed to the alter of consumerism. A desperate, insatiable type of consumerism that is trying and failing to fill the spiritual void. That is Thatcher's legacy. Where I differ from some in this thread is that I absolutely accept that she inherited a basket case of a country that needed change, I just don't think we ended up with anything any better.
I don't know where you're from but if it's the USA then you need to understand that the rich in the UK have none of the sense of philanthropy that they do there. They just keep everything to themselves.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
slew
()
Date: April 11, 2013 01:49
If all of the Brits don't like her hown the hell did she continue to get re-elected??
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
slew
()
Date: April 11, 2013 01:53
I think that we "average" citizens in the US have become wary of the rich becasue of media and a few bad apples. The majority of rich people in the US are good people who put a lot back into their communities and the private work sector. I just wish the government would look at this over here instead of saying they can spend our tax dollars better than we can!
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Angus MacBagpipe
()
Date: April 11, 2013 02:20
Quote
slew
If all of the Brits don't like her hown the hell did she continue to get re-elected??
In the parliamentary system, you don't need the majority of votes to form a government. 30% to 35% is often good enough. And you don't vote for your Prime Minister either (at least in the UK and Canada).
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
uhbuhgullayew
()
Date: April 11, 2013 02:45
Quote
Jaggeresque
She must have seen the seating plan for Hyde Park...
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
EddieByword
()
Date: April 11, 2013 03:00
Quote
slew
If all of the Brits don't like her hown the hell did she continue to get re-elected??
There's mixed reasons for that. First, Thatcher was elected in 1979. By 1981 because of a 100% increase in unemployment she was the Prime minister with the lowest rating of any PM ever - 25%. In 1980 the Labour party had elected 67 year old guy called Michael Foot as their leader. This was a bad move by Labour, he was frail and too closely associated with the unions who most of the papers were still blaming for the problems of the 70's. You could say that by early 1982 both parties were largely discredited. Some small element broke away from Labour and formed the Social Democrats who later transformed again into the Liberal Democrats that we have today as the 3rd party.
Then in 1982 Argentina invaded the Falkland islands. Britain got them back. Thatcher got a lot of kudos from that. She then won the 1983 election, I'd say because of that. (Other wise it would have probably have been a case of the lowest electoral turnout ever)....Michael Foot resigned.
Labour party is in disarray. They the voted in Neil Knnock as their leader. A University educated tough bloke from a coal mining family, a Welshman. He was loud and brash in his demenour and not popular again with the mainly English public. He contested Thatcher in the election in 1987 but lost, he wasn't liked and Labour still didn't have any coherant policies.
Thatcher's poularity was on the wane again as well through the introduction of oppressive policies based on race and sexul orientation but things wren't quite bad enough to vote Kinnock in. Personally I think Thatcher just won that one by default. Best of a bad bunch.
By 1989 though things were ramping up a gear. She'd introduced a thing called the poll tax. (Local taxes based on how many working people lived in a house. ie. 2 parents working plus 3 young but working sons paying £10 week each = £50. House next door getting the same external local services with just 2 adults working, £10 each = £20. result = wide spread rioting. She wouldn't back down. Alongside this the country was sliding into recession = ousted by her own party. Et tu Brutus.
John Major took over. He also beat Neil Kinnock in 1992 election due to Kinnock not being personally poular and party still in disarray.
Kinnock resigned as leader after that election. A guy called John Smith took over in 1992 but died 2 years later, succeeded temporarily by a woman called Margeret Beckett, Labour re-invented itself as New Labour under Tony Blair who of course ousted the Conservatives in 1997. Mainly because they'd got caught being greedy, sleazy and corrupt - some went to prison for their deeds. The rest as they say........
Thatcher was always popular in London and the Southeast where all the money got sucked to....(also - densley populated so lots of votes down there - it was the rest of the country that didn't like her...hence the word divisive is being used a lot on TV in recent days.
So, I'd say, she won the first one on a promise to sort things out
The second because of the Falklands and the third by default, as I say, considered best of a bad bunch, but as we know that was short lived, ousted mid-term by her own party...........
Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-11 04:44 by EddieByword.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Happy Jack
()
Date: April 11, 2013 07:23
If Maggie was so unpopular with the working class, how come she got reelected (twice?)?
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Angus MacBagpipe
()
Date: April 11, 2013 07:38
Quote
Happy Jack
If Maggie was so unpopular with the working class, how come she got reelected (twice?)?
Um, I think that was answered already...
EddieByword's analysis is more in-depth, but to make the point plainer: Thatcher never won more than 44% of the vote.
The British Parliamentary system means that winner takes all, even though most people voted against her. (I would expect those voting against her would have included most of the working class, but I don't have the numbers.)
Furthermore, the people never got to vote for her directly as Prime Minister - that selection is left to the party. In fact, you can become PM without even being elected to Parliament.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-11 07:52 by Angus MacBagpipe.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Happy Jack
()
Date: April 11, 2013 08:17
I apologize, I didnt realize someone had already asked that question.Quote
Angus MacBagpipeQuote
Happy Jack
If Maggie was so unpopular with the working class, how come she got reelected (twice?)?
Um, I think that was answered already...
EddieByword's analysis is more in-depth, but to make the point plainer: Thatcher never won more than 44% of the vote.
The British Parliamentary system means that winner takes all, even though most people voted against her. (I would expect those voting against her would have included most of the working class, but I don't have the numbers.)
Furthermore, the people never got to vote for her directly as Prime Minister - that selection is left to the party. In fact, you can become PM without even being elected to Parliament.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Happy Jack
()
Date: April 11, 2013 08:22
Quote
EddieBywordQuote
slew
If all of the Brits don't like her hown the hell did she continue to get re-elected??
There's mixed reasons for that. First, Thatcher was elected in 1979. By 1981 because of a 100% increase in unemployment she was the Prime minister with the lowest rating of any PM ever - 25%. In 1980 the Labour party had elected 67 year old guy called Michael Foot as their leader. This was a bad move by Labour, he was frail and too closely associated with the unions who most of the papers were still blaming for the problems of the 70's. You could say that by early 1982 both parties were largely discredited. Some small element broke away from Labour and formed the Social Democrats who later transformed again into the Liberal Democrats that we have today as the 3rd party.
Then in 1982 Argentina invaded the Falkland islands. Britain got them back. Thatcher got a lot of kudos from that. She then won the 1983 election, I'd say because of that. (Other wise it would have probably have been a case of the lowest electoral turnout ever)....Michael Foot resigned.
Labour party is in disarray. They the voted in Neil Knnock as their leader. A University educated tough bloke from a coal mining family, a Welshman. He was loud and brash in his demenour and not popular again with the mainly English public. He contested Thatcher in the election in 1987 but lost, he wasn't liked and Labour still didn't have any coherant policies.
Thatcher's poularity was on the wane again as well through the introduction of oppressive policies based on race and sexul orientation but things wren't quite bad enough to vote Kinnock in. Personally I think Thatcher just won that one by default. Best of a bad bunch.
By 1989 though things were ramping up a gear. She'd introduced a thing called the poll tax. (Local taxes based on how many working people lived in a house. ie. 2 parents working plus 3 young but working sons paying £10 week each = £50. House next door getting the same external local services with just 2 adults working, £10 each = £20. result = wide spread rioting. She wouldn't back down. Alongside this the country was sliding into recession = ousted by her own party. Et tu Brutus.
John Major took over. He also beat Neil Kinnock in 1992 election due to Kinnock not being personally poular and party still in disarray.
Kinnock resigned as leader after that election. A guy called John Smith took over in 1992 but died 2 years later, succeeded temporarily by a woman called Margeret Beckett, Labour re-invented itself as New Labour under Tony Blair who of course ousted the Conservatives in 1997. Mainly because they'd got caught being greedy, sleazy and corrupt - some went to prison for their deeds. The rest as they say........
Thatcher was always popular in London and the Southeast where all the money got sucked to....(also - densley populated so lots of votes down there - it was the rest of the country that didn't like her...hence the word divisive is being used a lot on TV in recent days.
So, I'd say, she won the first one on a promise to sort things out
The second because of the Falklands and the third by default, as I say, considered best of a bad bunch, but as we know that was short lived, ousted mid-term by her own party...........
This sounds much like US politics of the time: Stronger Democratic candidates could have beaten Reagan in either 80 or 84 and Bush in 88. Unfortunatly Carter's failure to free the Iranian hostages in 80, and the weak candiates of Mondale and Dukakis in 88 led to an easy election, re-election and (some would say a third Reagan term) Bush's election in 88.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
odean73
()
Date: April 11, 2013 08:37
Quote
seitanQuote
BärsQuote
GravityBoyQuote
BärsQuote
GravityBoyQuote
Bärs
Thatcher has nothing to do with Pinochet's actions in Chile.
She condoned them and supported him.
See the video.
Because Pinochet supported UK in the Falklands war of course. His help was crucial for British victory.
What difference does that make?
Pinochet's regime was evil. Thatcher condoned it (see the video) and supported him in exile.
When you have led a nation in war you might understand the difference.
Britain regarded Pinochet’s killing spree as unseemly, and sanctioned his regime by refusing to supply it with weapons—that is, until Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister. I would like to know, - where was Thatcher's empathy for the people Pinochet killed in the name of anti-Communism. She preferred talking about his “Chilean economic miracle.” - yes, - money, money, money - The British arms firm BAE Systems had huge role in Pinochets fascist regime and brutal actions. In 1980, the year after Thatcher took office, she lifted the arms embargo against Pinochet; he was soon buying armaments from the United Kingdom.
In 1982, during Britain’s Falklands War against Argentina, Pinochet helped Thatcher’s government with intelligence on Argentina. And how ?? - According to a government commission report that included testimony from more than 30,000 people, Pinochet's government killed more than 3,197 people and tortured more than 29,000. - She condoned it and was always supporting him.
Pinochet's regime was responsible for various human rights abuses during its reign including murder and torture of all political opponents. This is what Thatcher called in front of the television cameras as "help during the Falklands campaign.” She also said, “It was you who brought democracy to Chile.” - Yes " democracy" - Oh, how I love the poetry of politicians, - Its interesting that killing people is just a "campaign" and fascist military junta is sign of democracy. And dont forget that Pinochet’s critics and opponents of the new regime were murdered in other countries, too.
Dont forget her role in destroying the civillian infrastrastructure in Iraq. When interviewed on TV she justified this saying it was intended to make conditions so bad for the civillian population that they would rise up and overthrow Saddam Hussein. This remarkable admission confirms her status as a war criminal, as waging war on civillian infrastructure is specifically outlawed by the Geneva convention. I THINK THAT WARMONGER IRON COW SHOULD HAVE DIED 50 YEARS AGO.
My thoughts exactly,Seitan.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
odean73
()
Date: April 11, 2013 08:42
Quote
kleermaker
I agree with seitan, Gravity Boy and the like about their ideas and opinions regarding M. Thatcher and her devastating policy during such a long time. But the saddest thing is that she was succeeded by T. Blair, a labour politician who was expected to change Thatcher's politics drastically, but who in the end appeared to be a dedicated Thatcher epigone.
That was and still is such a dramatic and sad thing: Labour has become conservative and neo-liberal and a great promotor of wild-west capitalism. So sad that all big political parties are actually the same and interchangeable. They're all servants of the big capital, of the global plutocrats. Just the same in France, Germany, Holland and so on.
So true about Blair.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: April 11, 2013 09:13
Quote
slew
If all of the Brits don't like her hown the hell did she continue to get re-elected??
Because it never is a two horse race.
Deliberately.
It's a shell game at the top.. they just have to split the opposition vote (which they did with the Liberal Democrats).
Most people didn't want her.
Most people didn't want David Cameron... the majority of people in Britain never voted for those policies.. in fact those policies were not even put forward at the election.
We live in a sham "democracy" that is easily manipulated by those above what we see.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-11 09:14 by GravityBoy.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Bärs
()
Date: April 11, 2013 10:41
Quote
rebelrebelQuote
Goldsmith
All Thatcher did was defeat communism and promote freedom. When she came to office the average U.K. citizen was 10% poorer than the average Frenchman. When she left the average U.K. citizen was 10% richer.
Yeah...life under her leadership must have been horrible...
Statistics, statistics. It's not that simple. The rich got richer, the poor got poorer.
No, the both the rich and the poor got richer.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: April 11, 2013 10:47
Quote
Bärs
No, the both the rich and the poor got richer.
Rubbish.
Absolute rubbish.
People have never been in so much debt.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: April 11, 2013 11:32
Quote
At least Pinochet (who was not a fascist btw) developed his country and left it in a pretty good shape
That's a pretty incredible statement.
The same argument for Thatcher.
Just who did they leave it in "pretty good shape" for?
I look around Britain and I see it's very nice for a small number and a complete hellhole for the rest.
It's in "pretty good shape" if you're wealthy.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 11, 2013 11:33
Quote
BärsQuote
seitan
Thatcher I THINK THAT WARMONGER IRON COW SHOULD HAVE DIED 50 YEARS AGO.
Politicians condone crimes of dictators all the time ffs. Look at all leftists who's been vocally praising various red dictators, totalitarian regimes and stalinist fascists like Che Guevara for 100 years. At least Pinochet (who was not a fascist btw) developed his country and left it in a pretty good shape. And Thatcher still had specific reasons for supporting him after his help during the Falklands war. No leftist has any moral right what so ever to criticize Thatcher for her relation to Pinochet.
Are you sure you wanna post this, regarding fans from Chile on this board, and how they will take this?
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: April 11, 2013 11:37
I don't see Mrs Thatcher as being a dictator, more like a concervative who stood up for being just that...
R.I.P. even if me neither would have liked to work at 'Maggies Farm'...
2 1 2 0
R.I.P. even if me neither would have liked to work at 'Maggies Farm'...
2 1 2 0
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: April 11, 2013 11:48
Quote
Come On
I don't see Mrs Thatcher as being a dictator, more like a concervative who stood up for being just that...
The MPs debate on Thatcher in Parliament yesterday, one ex-Minister said "she believed in concensus as long as it agreed with her opinion".
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: April 11, 2013 11:51
Quote
GravityBoyQuote
Come On
I don't see Mrs Thatcher as being a dictator, more like a concervative who stood up for being just that...
The MPs debate on Thatcher in Parliament yesterday, one ex-Minister said "she believed in concensus as long as it agreed with her opinion".
..pretty common amongst politicians...even Obama....bla bla bla...
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
beepee2
()
Date: April 11, 2013 11:57
Former Sex Pistol John Lydon says those now celebrating Margaret Thatcher's death are 'loathsome'.
John, famously known as Johnny Rotten when he was the singer in Punk icons The Sex Pistols back in the 1970s as Maggie was rising to power, added: 'I'm not going to dance on her grave.'
He also said: 'I was her enemy in her life but I will not be her enemy in her death.'
[www.dailymail.co.uk]
John, famously known as Johnny Rotten when he was the singer in Punk icons The Sex Pistols back in the 1970s as Maggie was rising to power, added: 'I'm not going to dance on her grave.'
He also said: 'I was her enemy in her life but I will not be her enemy in her death.'
[www.dailymail.co.uk]
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: April 11, 2013 12:08
John quite likes the Royal family now as well (BBC "Hard Talk" interview last year). He loved the royal wedding.
He sold out a long time ago.
"I'm a Celeb".
Disappointing.
He sold out a long time ago.
"I'm a Celeb".
Disappointing.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: April 11, 2013 12:11
Quote
GravityBoy
John quite likes the Royal family now as well (BBC "Hard Talk" interview last year). He loved the royal wedding.
He sold out a long time ago.
"I'm a Celeb".
Disappointing.
John Lydon has...but not Johnny Rotten...
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
StonedInTokyo
()
Date: April 11, 2013 12:56
Quote
seitan
Singer Morrissey's Scathing Letter to the Public About Margaret Thatcher: "A Terror Without an Atom of Humanity"
Morrissey can go suck a big one.
Re: O T Thatchers Dead
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: April 11, 2013 13:54
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
BärsQuote
seitan
Thatcher I THINK THAT WARMONGER IRON COW SHOULD HAVE DIED 50 YEARS AGO.
Politicians condone crimes of dictators all the time ffs. Look at all leftists who's been vocally praising various red dictators, totalitarian regimes and stalinist fascists like Che Guevara for 100 years. At least Pinochet (who was not a fascist btw) developed his country and left it in a pretty good shape. And Thatcher still had specific reasons for supporting him after his help during the Falklands war. No leftist has any moral right what so ever to criticize Thatcher for her relation to Pinochet.
Are you sure you wanna post this, regarding fans from Chile on this board, and how they will take this?
What about Jewish fans or fans from Israel or the US? Comparing Thatcher to @#$%& or Bin Ladin or the closing mines to the Holocaust is perfectly normal according to many.
This Thread has been closed
Online Users
Dan , doubledoor , erad , henrik87 , HollywoodStone , hot stuff , HouseBoyKnows , J-J-Flash , MisterDDDD , Nankstone , NICOS , philrock90 , RisingStone , Sici , tonyc , ttutone , vibrolux , willprefecture , wolundamo
Guests:
1413
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10