mudcat.org: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!

Related threads:
Lyr Req: Dedicated Follower of Thatcher (21)
BS: What qualities in Thatcher do you admire (130)
BS: Iron lady (100)
BS: Where now Thatcher haters? (453)
BS: Thatcher expenses (72)
BS: Nasty Thatcher rightly calls Palin nuts? (113)
BS: Margaret Thatcher's Birthday-13 Oct 1925 (149)
BS: Meryl Streep as Thatcher (37)
Mrs Thatcher's March by Vladimir O'Leary (1)
BS:Thatcher's Legacy (31)
carol thatcher death threats (281)
BS: Margaret Thatcher meets mudcatter (90)
BS: Mrs Thatcher had dementia (89) (closed)
BS: The last days of Thatcher (166)
BS: Thatcher is finally finished! (32)
BS: Who Should Play Thatcher ?. (51)
BS: Was Thatcher right? (125)
BS: Happy Birthday Mrs Thatcher-13 Oct 1925 (165)
Obit: thatcher (not) dead (55)
BS: Mrs Thatcher, the glory years. (27)
BS: Margaret Thatcher (43) (closed)
BS: Thatchers Revenge (7) (closed)
BS: Maggie Thatcher Day (122) (closed)
BS: Thatcher Statue Beheaded (42) (closed)
BS: Thatcher speaks no more (116) (closed)
BS: Statecraft - More critique of Thatcher (2) (closed)
BS: Thatcher's statue (64) (closed)
BS: Margaret Thatcher-any comments? (168) (closed)


Big Al Whittle 14 Nov 11 - 06:42 PM
Jack the Sailor 14 Nov 11 - 06:43 PM
BanjoRay 14 Nov 11 - 07:06 PM
GUEST,Enberto Uco 14 Nov 11 - 07:29 PM
Big Al Whittle 14 Nov 11 - 07:37 PM
katlaughing 14 Nov 11 - 07:47 PM
BTNG 14 Nov 11 - 08:00 PM
gnu 14 Nov 11 - 08:10 PM
BTNG 14 Nov 11 - 08:13 PM
Jack the Sailor 14 Nov 11 - 09:43 PM
Richard Bridge 14 Nov 11 - 09:51 PM
Jack the Sailor 14 Nov 11 - 10:57 PM
Black belt caterpillar wrestler 15 Nov 11 - 07:52 AM
GUEST,Shining Wit 15 Nov 11 - 08:11 AM
GUEST,Patsy 15 Nov 11 - 08:16 AM
Musket 15 Nov 11 - 08:17 AM
GUEST,Wesley S 15 Nov 11 - 08:29 AM
GUEST,redhorse at work 15 Nov 11 - 08:35 AM
theleveller 15 Nov 11 - 08:49 AM
MGM·Lion 15 Nov 11 - 08:52 AM
theleveller 15 Nov 11 - 09:13 AM
theleveller 15 Nov 11 - 09:16 AM
Big Al Whittle 15 Nov 11 - 09:22 AM
Big Al Whittle 15 Nov 11 - 09:46 AM
BTNG 15 Nov 11 - 09:47 AM
Bonzo3legs 15 Nov 11 - 10:02 AM
GUEST,Emberto Uco 15 Nov 11 - 10:25 AM
Big Al Whittle 15 Nov 11 - 12:03 PM
MGM·Lion 15 Nov 11 - 12:06 PM
Jack the Sailor 15 Nov 11 - 12:13 PM
BTNG 15 Nov 11 - 12:17 PM
Jack the Sailor 15 Nov 11 - 12:32 PM
Stilly River Sage 15 Nov 11 - 12:47 PM
BTNG 15 Nov 11 - 02:33 PM
fat B****rd 15 Nov 11 - 03:03 PM
Bonzo3legs 15 Nov 11 - 04:45 PM
BTNG 15 Nov 11 - 05:25 PM
GUEST,Wesley S 15 Nov 11 - 05:31 PM
Little Hawk 15 Nov 11 - 05:38 PM
GUEST,Wesley S 15 Nov 11 - 05:54 PM
BTNG 15 Nov 11 - 06:07 PM
Little Hawk 15 Nov 11 - 06:17 PM
BTNG 15 Nov 11 - 06:29 PM
Jack the Sailor 15 Nov 11 - 06:45 PM
Little Hawk 16 Nov 11 - 12:25 AM
Jack the Sailor 16 Nov 11 - 12:29 AM
theleveller 16 Nov 11 - 04:20 AM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 04:41 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 16 Nov 11 - 04:42 AM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 05:15 AM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 05:25 AM
Silas 16 Nov 11 - 05:35 AM
Big Al Whittle 16 Nov 11 - 05:36 AM
banjoman 16 Nov 11 - 05:59 AM
Big Al Whittle 16 Nov 11 - 06:37 AM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 06:46 AM
Big Al Whittle 16 Nov 11 - 08:41 AM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 10:06 AM
BTNG 16 Nov 11 - 10:12 AM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 10:23 AM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 10:28 AM
Big Al Whittle 16 Nov 11 - 11:06 AM
BTNG 16 Nov 11 - 11:12 AM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 12:11 PM
BTNG 16 Nov 11 - 12:20 PM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 12:22 PM
Silas 16 Nov 11 - 12:38 PM
BTNG 16 Nov 11 - 12:46 PM
BTNG 16 Nov 11 - 01:06 PM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 01:06 PM
Silas 16 Nov 11 - 01:14 PM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 01:16 PM
Silas 16 Nov 11 - 01:18 PM
Big Al Whittle 16 Nov 11 - 01:18 PM
BTNG 16 Nov 11 - 01:20 PM
GUEST,Emberto Uco 16 Nov 11 - 04:01 PM
Big Al Whittle 17 Nov 11 - 03:36 AM
goatfell 17 Nov 11 - 11:01 AM
Arnie 17 Nov 11 - 11:38 AM
BTNG 17 Nov 11 - 11:54 AM
GUEST,Teribus 17 Nov 11 - 02:57 PM
GUEST,Doc John 17 Nov 11 - 05:25 PM
BTNG 17 Nov 11 - 06:20 PM
Joe Offer 17 Nov 11 - 06:54 PM
Stilly River Sage 17 Nov 11 - 06:57 PM
BTNG 17 Nov 11 - 07:08 PM
Big Al Whittle 17 Nov 11 - 07:50 PM
BTNG 17 Nov 11 - 08:04 PM
Stilly River Sage 17 Nov 11 - 11:05 PM
BTNG 17 Nov 11 - 11:24 PM
Jack the Sailor 17 Nov 11 - 11:42 PM
Big Al Whittle 18 Nov 11 - 11:30 PM
Jack the Sailor 19 Nov 11 - 01:22 AM
Little Hawk 19 Nov 11 - 03:13 AM
GUEST,Teribus 19 Nov 11 - 03:41 AM
Big Al Whittle 19 Nov 11 - 04:21 AM
Big Al Whittle 19 Nov 11 - 04:31 AM
GUEST,Teribus 19 Nov 11 - 05:25 AM
Silas 19 Nov 11 - 05:34 AM
Little Hawk 19 Nov 11 - 06:07 AM
goatfell 19 Nov 11 - 07:48 AM
Big Al Whittle 19 Nov 11 - 09:35 AM
GUEST,Teribus 20 Nov 11 - 08:04 AM
Silas 20 Nov 11 - 08:25 AM
GUEST,Teribus 20 Nov 11 - 08:43 AM
Silas 20 Nov 11 - 08:57 AM
Little Hawk 20 Nov 11 - 12:49 PM
GUEST,Teribus 20 Nov 11 - 02:48 PM
BTNG 20 Nov 11 - 04:26 PM
GUEST,Teribus 20 Nov 11 - 11:35 PM
Big Al Whittle 21 Nov 11 - 01:54 AM
theleveller 21 Nov 11 - 06:51 AM
banjoman 21 Nov 11 - 07:49 AM
BTNG 21 Nov 11 - 12:58 PM
Greg F. 21 Nov 11 - 01:25 PM
BTNG 21 Nov 11 - 01:36 PM
Big Al Whittle 21 Nov 11 - 01:38 PM
GUEST,left of centre 21 Nov 11 - 03:56 PM
Little Hawk 21 Nov 11 - 04:45 PM
Peter K (Fionn) 21 Nov 11 - 06:33 PM
Jack the Sailor 21 Nov 11 - 06:40 PM
Big Al Whittle 21 Nov 11 - 07:25 PM
Little Hawk 21 Nov 11 - 11:32 PM
Big Al Whittle 22 Nov 11 - 05:43 PM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 22 Nov 11 - 06:04 PM
GUEST,Chingo Chump 22 Nov 11 - 11:13 PM
GUEST,Teribus 26 Nov 11 - 04:38 AM
GUEST,Teribus 26 Nov 11 - 04:58 AM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 05:02 AM
Musket 26 Nov 11 - 06:04 AM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 07:25 AM
GUEST,Teribus 26 Nov 11 - 11:28 AM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 11:55 AM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 01:49 PM
GUEST,Teribus 26 Nov 11 - 05:12 PM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 05:49 PM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 06:01 PM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 06:09 PM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 06:10 PM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 06:17 PM
Big Al Whittle 26 Nov 11 - 06:25 PM
GUEST,Teribus 27 Nov 11 - 08:54 AM
Big Al Whittle 27 Nov 11 - 09:56 AM
Greg F. 27 Nov 11 - 10:05 AM
Big Al Whittle 27 Nov 11 - 11:08 AM
GUEST,Teribus 27 Nov 11 - 12:06 PM
GUEST,Teribus 27 Nov 11 - 05:30 PM
Big Al Whittle 27 Nov 11 - 05:55 PM
MGM·Lion 28 Nov 11 - 12:28 AM
GUEST,Teribus 28 Nov 11 - 12:51 AM
GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser) 28 Nov 11 - 04:17 AM
Big Al Whittle 28 Nov 11 - 04:46 AM
MGM·Lion 28 Nov 11 - 06:36 AM
Big Al Whittle 28 Nov 11 - 07:47 AM
McGrath of Harlow 28 Nov 11 - 08:59 AM
MGM·Lion 28 Nov 11 - 09:54 AM
Little Hawk 28 Nov 11 - 10:43 AM
GUEST,Teribus 28 Nov 11 - 11:08 AM
Big Al Whittle 28 Nov 11 - 11:24 AM
GUEST,Teribus 28 Nov 11 - 11:53 AM
Big Al Whittle 28 Nov 11 - 01:35 PM
GUEST,Teribus 28 Nov 11 - 05:06 PM
Little Hawk 28 Nov 11 - 05:53 PM
Big Al Whittle 28 Nov 11 - 09:01 PM
GUEST,Teribus 29 Nov 11 - 01:05 AM
GUEST 29 Nov 11 - 02:28 AM
Little Hawk 29 Nov 11 - 02:42 AM
Jack the Sailor 29 Nov 11 - 02:47 AM
McGrath of Harlow 29 Nov 11 - 09:49 AM
Musket 29 Nov 11 - 11:23 AM
GUEST,Teribus 29 Nov 11 - 11:28 AM
Little Hawk 29 Nov 11 - 11:39 AM
Little Hawk 29 Nov 11 - 11:54 AM
McGrath of Harlow 29 Nov 11 - 01:32 PM
MGM·Lion 29 Nov 11 - 02:23 PM
MGM·Lion 29 Nov 11 - 02:28 PM
Little Hawk 29 Nov 11 - 04:51 PM
Musket 30 Nov 11 - 03:57 AM
Little Hawk 30 Nov 11 - 11:12 AM
McGrath of Harlow 30 Nov 11 - 05:16 PM
Little Hawk 30 Nov 11 - 05:22 PM
MGM·Lion 30 Nov 11 - 05:43 PM
Little Hawk 30 Nov 11 - 11:45 PM
MGM·Lion 01 Dec 11 - 12:16 AM
Little Hawk 01 Dec 11 - 11:20 AM
MGM·Lion 01 Dec 11 - 12:29 PM
Little Hawk 01 Dec 11 - 01:05 PM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Dec 11 - 01:55 PM
Little Hawk 01 Dec 11 - 02:24 PM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Dec 11 - 04:33 PM
MGM·Lion 02 Dec 11 - 05:32 AM
Little Hawk 02 Dec 11 - 09:12 AM
GUEST,punkfolkrocker 02 Dec 11 - 10:09 AM
McGrath of Harlow 02 Dec 11 - 05:34 PM
Little Hawk 02 Dec 11 - 06:15 PM
GUEST,punkfolkrocker 02 Dec 11 - 08:21 PM
Jack the Sailor 02 Dec 11 - 09:24 PM
Joe Offer 11 Dec 11 - 12:44 AM
GUEST,punkfolkrocker 11 Dec 11 - 12:53 AM
GUEST,punkfokrocker 11 Dec 11 - 12:55 AM
Little Hawk 11 Dec 11 - 01:31 AM
Jack the Sailor 11 Dec 11 - 01:39 AM
GUEST,punkfolkrocker 11 Dec 11 - 01:57 AM
Little Hawk 11 Dec 11 - 03:40 AM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:











Subject: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 06:42 PM

Just saw it on the news. Meryl Streep as Thatch!

Weird!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 06:43 PM

The dingo ate my Falklands!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BanjoRay
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 07:06 PM

John Wayne would have been better......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Enberto Uco
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 07:29 PM

Scene 1: Thatcher in shades on a motorbike with a pump action shotgun and a Uzi
storms the TUC conference barricades.

Scargill runs up to the roof for his helicopter while grinning henchmen
hurl grenades at Thatcher
as she does a wheelie with all guns blazing up the stairs.....................


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 07:37 PM

Just wonder if the Americans know what they're messing with. I can imagine parts of England where they might burn the cinema down.

Whatever you thought of her, the most divisive person in English politics since Thomas Cromwell.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 07:47 PM

No, Al, we've had our heads up our arses all these years.:-) (Don't forget, we've had a few of our own, too.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 08:00 PM

None as bad as Thatcher, not even Reagan on his worst day


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: gnu
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 08:10 PM

Ronny Raygun? A mental dwarf compared to Thatcher.

I want my Falkland Islands back!... imagine... Argentines fucking with the crown??? WHAT were they THINKING?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 08:13 PM

"Ronny Raygun? A mental dwarf compared to Thatcher.'

Yeah, I know....many are....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 09:43 PM

I hope Woody Allen plays John Major!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 09:51 PM

"I spit on your grave".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 10:57 PM

Yeah, Thatcher was wayyy worse than Raygun!!! I remember when she joked that she had launched a nuclear strike on the Soviets and shipped missiles to terrorists so that she could finance drug deals to prop up Central American despots.

That was Thatcher right? She was the Altzheimers patient who said "government is the problem" and doubled the US debt? Right?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 07:52 AM

I did wonder if they will have to build a soakaway drain around her grave when she eventually gets planted.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Shining Wit
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 08:11 AM

Jeremy Hardy once commented that her grave will be the biggest urinal in Britain and I have to say I was a bit disappointed with that joke. It'll be the biggest midden.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 08:16 AM

I did have a laugh about that one. Poor Meryl what did she do to deserve that?!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Musket
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 08:17 AM

A soakaway is the least thing it will need.

It had better have a sprung dance floor too. My knees are not so good. Neither are the knees of all my ex colliery colleagues.

I wonder if it will have bouncers, a bar and vodka special nights? The disco lights might look a bit disrespectful for the poor buggers in the same cemetery. Although, having her as a neighbour will be disrespectful enough.

At least, as black belt caterpillar wrestler points out, they won't need the expense of building a toilet.



Ruddy hell. I still feel the same, all these years later. Strange, and not altogether comfortable with my own thoughts. But I still can't moderate them or think differently.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 08:29 AM

Take a look. Here's the movie trailer:

The Iron Lady


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,redhorse at work
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 08:35 AM

Big Al: I think you're being a bit hard on Thomas Cromwell.

Mind you, his brother Oliver was a bit of a shit.................


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 08:49 AM

Christ almighty! Why would anyone in their right mind want to make a film about Bloody Thatcher? It would take a Hitchcock to portray the true evil of that woman.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 08:52 AM

"Oliver Cromwell was born at Cromwell House in Huntingdon on 25 April 1599, to Robert Cromwell and Elizabeth Steward. He was descended from Katherine Cromwell (born c. 1482), an elder sister of Tudor statesman Thomas Cromwell." wiki

Thomas was an advisor and favourite [tho later executed when fell out of favour] of Henry VIII. Oliver, as one sees here, a sort of great++ nephew of his. I suspect it was Oliver that Al meant.

Enjoying this thread no end: constantly entertained by the Pavlovian saliva-run-inducing effect that any mention of Thatcher has on the poor innocent doggies of Mudcat...

Woof-woof. Tee-hee ~

~Michael~

"Poor Meryl what did she do to deserve that?!" Why, Polly, she signed a contract. Actors like to eat, dontcha know. And some of them play all sorts of part. Bela Lugosi wasn't really a vampire, did you know that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 09:13 AM

Don't be such a prat, MtheGM, she destroyed the lives of thousnads of people up here in Yorkshire. Some of the communities have never recovered. That sort of comment would have you hanging from a lampost in Rotherham. (Hmmm....interesting vision that conjours up :))


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 09:16 AM

Or conjures, even.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 09:22 AM

No I meant Thomas. Dissolution of the monastries. Start of prot v Catholic squabble.

Seen by some as the first modern statesman, but known to his contemporaries as a 'foul cur'.

That guy. Very divisive.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 09:46 AM

'Actors like to eat, dontcha know'

I shouldn't think getting a crust for the table was uppermost in Meryls mind. Or Jim Broadbent's who is playing Dennis.

Must be a hell of a script to get Jim aboard.

The sheer weirdness unfolds.....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 09:47 AM

and Thatcher actually went to war, Sailor boy, or did that slip you "mind"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 10:02 AM

Surely they should have used a very ugly actress to play that hideous murdering cow thatcher.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Emberto Uco
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 10:25 AM

Yes, that was a problem with the BBC4 drama biog of the Thatcher younger years.

The actress was well too fit
and provoked all kinds of confusing and inappropriate male responses
to her depiction of the monsterous Mrs T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 12:03 PM

I seem to remember that Alan Clark fancied Mrs Thatcher.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 12:06 PM

You democratic, progressive lefty-bumholes-Mudcatters really do kill me~~

~~literally, it seems it would be, if you had your masturbatory-fantasy way.   For thinking you might just be an itsy-bitsy teensy-weensy little bit immoderate in your denunciations {"Most evil woman of C20", someone remarked not long ago, leaving Irma Grese & Rosemary West & Myra Hindley & Mme Ceausescu & [cont p94] nowhere!}, I m not only a self-evident prat~~

~~but you have fragrant fantasies of me hanging from a lamp-post - in Rotherham, yet ~~ oh the shame & disgrace!

Well, enjoy. My withers are unwrung & my neck unstretched. Have a good wank while you fantasise ~ wankers!

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 12:13 PM

I suspect that the film was green lighted during the "conservative resurgence" (my words) of 2010. I think some of you might be appalled to find that Thatcher is a hero in this country to the tea party crowd, and with the title "Iron Lady" that is very likely that the movie is a very flattering portrait of her.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 12:17 PM

"I think some of you might be appalled to find that Thatcher is a hero in this country to the tea party crowd'


To the surprise of absolutely nobody, she maybe hero to a small crowd in the USA, but The British lived through her regime...big difference between theory and practice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 12:32 PM

I think that "small crowd in the USA" would rival the current population of England. And on this side of the Atlantic, we did endure Reagan and Mulrooney.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 12:47 PM

Reagan's legacy laid the groundwork for the financial problems today. His Savings and Loan debacle (the deregulation of banking) was just the beginning. The tip of the iceberg, as it were. And he was a great pal with Mrs. Thatcher.

Meryl Streep will transform herself with her usual acting magic, so I'll wait for the reviews before I decide whether to see the film.

SRS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 02:33 PM

*sigh* By a small crowd I did mean The Tea Party membership or is their membership greater than anyone thought? Never thought I'd have to explain that....still why should it surprise me?

and....I knw ALL about living under the regime of Martin Brian Mulroney.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: fat B****rd
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 03:03 PM

There is much anger in certain circles that Meryl plays Mrs. T as a lonely old woman desecnding into dementia.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 04:45 PM

isn't she??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:25 PM

Couldn't happen to a nicer person


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:31 PM

I'm not surprised that Meryl would jump at the chance to play Thatcher. I'm sure it's an actors dream to play a part like that. Actors love to play disagreeable characters. And I'm sure she'll do a fine job.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:38 PM

Well, the 2 movies they made about Nixon were pretty cool. And Leonardo DiCaprio seems to have a fine one coming soon about J. Edgar Hoover. So why not one about Maggie Thatcher?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:54 PM

And don't forget - John Wayne once played Genghis Khan.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 06:07 PM

J. Edgar, is, apparently, already showing in Canada


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 06:17 PM

Excellent. I intend to see it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 06:29 PM

Cineplex I think, Hawk.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 06:45 PM

The "Tea Party crowd" swept the Republicans back into power in the 2010 election, there are tens of millions. I would wager that the number of people who would say that they admire Reagan is at least forty million, maybe up to twice that. That is the target market for a pro-Thatcher movie in this country.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 12:25 AM

Hmm. But is it a pro-Thatcher movie? Were the movies about Richard Nixon made in order to be pro-Nixon? I don't think so, but they were certainly interesting in portraying various sides of his rather tortured personality. He was a man who didn't quite manage to handle his inner demons, but still went far in life anyway. One could say the same of Howard Hughes. Flawed, but very interesting lives. How will Meryl Streep portray Margaret Thatcher? Streep herself is quite "liberal" politically, isn't she?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 12:29 AM

I've seen the trailer. The seem to be marketing it "pro thatcher."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: theleveller
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 04:20 AM

Oh dear, MtheGM - you're the one who's getting himself into an orgasmic lather. How very frustrated you must be - or is it something to do with your sense of humour bypass?

Trying to belittle the very real anger of those who suffered during the Thatcher reign of terror just makes you look small-minded.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 04:41 AM

OK ~ pax, leveller. I do have a soh really, mostly. Just seems to me that maybe you had left yours behind somewhere, with your somewhat hyperbolical revenge fantasies. I have been to Rotherham, believe it or not, & escaped unscathed and unhung. Not sure I raised this particular ? while there, but W Yorks people in my experience thoroughly deliteful (& in general more tolerant than you of other people's opinions): why, nearly 60 years ago I had a girlfriend who came from Keighley.

But 'reign of terror'? Bit hyperbolical again, eh? I don't try to belittle anyone's real anger: but it always does to realise that such anger is not universally shared; & you democratic lefties, you pious selfrighteous self-appointed spokespersons for the populace at large, as I have mentioned before once of twice maybe, can never reconcile yourselves to the fact that the Lady was democratically elected, on a free vote of the entire population from which the denizens of Rotherham were not excluded, not once, not twice, but three [count them ~ 3] times [3x].
So, in return for your 'small-minded' for me, how about 'anti-democratic' for you, huh?

〠☺~M~☺〠


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 04:42 AM

I have absolutely no time for Thatcher or the ideology of the party that she belongs to. But we should never forget that the many of the 'reforms' that she instituted came to full fruition under 13 years of a Labour government - who did very little to reverse them. There's no doubt that Thatcher, in representing money and greed, was evil but Labour, under Blair and Brown, were evil and hypocritical (and far too prone to bone-headed social engineering and illegal wars). The present government are just carrying on the Thatcher project with less hypocrisy and less silly social engineering. I suspect that we have the governments that we, collectively, deserve.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 05:15 AM

Anyway, lev, I thought you lefties were all for Reigns Of Terror ~~ a popular movement if ever there was one. Jacobins to a man, aintcher! Wot u think u r doing, using it as a term of abuse!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 05:25 AM

"hanging from a lampost in Rotherham". ~~ "reign of terror" ~~

Try being a bit consistent at least.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Silas
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 05:35 AM

The sooner she drops off the twig the better.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 05:36 AM

No MGM. there was nothing democratic about the way Thatcher acquired power.

As the Spycatcher book made clear. The right wing elements in this country subverted the democratic process. An unholy mix of the security services and Murdoch's evil empire. That's how they ditched Edward heath and captured the tory party. That's how she smeared and defamed the Labour government.

That's why she moved heaven and earth to suppress the book.

One of the most shameful things Blair did was to leave untouched the electoral system that that gave Thatcher nearly 60 percent of the parliamentary seats with less than 40 percent of the vote.

The areas in the the country that weren't voting for her felt the violence of her wrath. You southerners were quick enough onto the streets after a few months of the poll tax. Scotland had suffered that for an entire year already.

One of the most distressing things was to hear the very people , the very generation who had fought fascism, parrotting fascist nonsense - fifty pakis living in one council house all claiming benefits, and filling up the hospital wards. Most tories were bitterly ashamed of what she did to their party. But it was bloody difficult arguing with success. It was like the Germans generals - after Blitzkreig had succeded in toppling France, just a few short years after they had failed for four years.

None of which matters. If you didn't live in the afflicted areas of England - you simply have no idea of the trauma these places suffered. Sneering at the people who saw their communities devastated is not nice. Its like if you went to some earth quake zone - and sneered at the people left trying to pick up the pieces, with no option but living amonst the rat infested ruins.

Doubly so, because these were settled communities that people had lived in for many years and hoped that their children would live in too. Places with their own culture and values. Incidentally also the very places from where sprang many of these ballads and folksongs that you love.

But like I say, it doesn't matter. what is strange is that an aien culture feels that it has a handle on it - when we clearly don't.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: banjoman
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 05:59 AM

My greatest fear is about the pomp & lies that will abound when she does finally pop her clogs and is awarded a state funeral.
She has also passed her penchant for evil doings to her son "Sir" Mark Thatcher who is lucky not to be languishing in aan African Jail. I expect Mummy got him out of that one. Also, don't forget that David Cameron is quoted as saying that she will be remembered as one of this country's greatest Prime Ministers.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 06:37 AM

Mark Thatcher is the richest arms dealer in the world - with that kind of money, he no longer needs Mummy's help.

Dennis in many ways was the part of the equation that people missed or overlooked. Far from the being the drunken buffoon depicted in Private Eye, he was very rich and very intelligent and masterminded much of the Thatcher success story.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 06:46 AM

Al ~ Show me a PM in the last 60+ years elected with a majority [over 50%] of the total vote. Just not the way our system works. Attempts to change it, as you well know, do not meet with majority support. Either accept the results of our democracy, or, if unable to do so, live with them. I sneer at nobody ~~ sneering is alien to my nature. Or if I was, arguably, aqdopting a somehat scornful tone, it was not at the unfortunate colliers of Rotherham, the instability of whose employment was no fault of Maggie's, but at the bleeding♥-libs like theleveller who try to make political capital out of their unhappy plight. Their all-too-tickle livelihood would have gone whoever had been elected, and you well know it. But it is no good denouncing the clearly expressed will of the people either. Our democratic process was not 'subverted' ~~ it was simply employed in the way it works. If you don't like that way ~~ as you clearly don't ~~ then you are at perfect liberty under it to work for its alteration. But it is just silly to denounce it as undemocratic for not producing the result you would like; which would, in the long term, I repeat, not have saved the jobs of the Rotherham men anyhow.

You can get equally disappointing, to your sort of thinkers, results with the other sorts of system too: see the Palestine thread about what Begin's lot has done to Israel; & he was not elected on any sort of '1st past the post' of our kind, but by one of the Proprtnl Reprsntn pantomimes so many over your side are always agitating for.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 08:41 AM

The mining industry was perfectly sustainable. As was half a hundred other industries that bit the dust under monertarism.

What really buggered English industry was leadership at every level. management, unions....the lot!

What made the defeat of the mining unions especially poignant was the fact that all the kings horses and all the kings men were assembled to do the dirty on an uneducated sector of society.

as for democracy - it only works if a spirit of fair play is involved. Nixon was impeached for much less than the Thatcher faction got away with.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 10:06 AM

-The term Watergate has come to encompass an array of clandestine and often illegal activities undertaken by members of the Nixon administration. Those activities included "dirty tricks" such as bugging the offices of political opponents and people of whom Nixon or his officials were suspicious. Nixon and his close aides ordered harassment of activist groups and political figures, using the FBI, CIA, and the Internal Revenue Service. The activities became known after five men were caught breaking into Democratic party headquarters at the Watergate complex in Washington, D.C. on June 17, 1972.- wiki
.,,.,.
And you reckon 'the Thatcher faction' ever did anything comparable to that. Your prejudices are in danger of robbing you of the sense & judgment you were born with, Al. Who do you think you are ~~ Jim Carroll?

Democracy - "the worst possible system of government ~~ except for all the others." Now, who was it that said that?

We don't have 'uneducated sectors of society' ~~ not since 1870. How patronising can you get?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 10:12 AM

fortunately I've never taken MtheGM seriously so I always have a jolly good laugh at her/his postings *LOL*


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 10:23 AM

We aim to please, BTNG.

As I always sign "~Michael~" to at least my first post on any thread, don't get where your "his/her" comes from. Your meaningless initials, otoh, could mean just about bloody anyone? Martian, are you? Epicene? Big Tits No Good? Back To Novi Novgorod? Bottoms To Natalie Gibson?

I think we should be told -

❤♥☺〠~M~〠☺♥❤


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 10:28 AM

Or, anyhow, Novinov Gorod


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 11:06 AM

Well its a few years since i read the book, but the answer is 'yes'. The people behind Thatch got away with far more than Nixon, and the augean stables of MI5 never gets cleaned. USA is a far more open society - not a better one, but a far more open one.

And I think you have to stress - it was a faction behind Thatcher. You were a teacher when she was Minister of Ed - be honest, did you even suspect her of being very right wing at the time? I was a teacher and i thought she was really moderate compared to Shirley Williams.

And if you were a teacher, you probably know that we spent much of the 1970's begging for the resources, and setting up remedial reading departments for our country's massive illiteracy problem. All that went west, when Keith Joseph inaugurated the national Curriculum, and instead of dealing with the problems under our noses, we made illiterate kids sit in French and German lessons. Thatcher became the PM who insisted the nation follow a 1952 Grammar School curriculum.

Macregor the only Minister of Ed with balls to stand up to her was shipped off to count the bodies in NI, mostly caused by Thatch and Tebbit mouthing off.

I patronise no one, but half the country IS functionally illiterate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 11:12 AM

Being somewhat of the right wing, MtheGM (let's keep in formal,anything else infers something that isn't true) I was at first afraid I might offend you, but if these initials of mine do offend, too bad. Their meaning is actually available on the net, and I have Eliza Carthy to thank for them, she and the rest of The Imagined Village gang that is, so take it up with her, if you dare.

BTNG
(Bollocks To Nick Griffen)
childish but it works!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 12:11 PM

Eliza Carthy! Oh, no! I am trembling in my frilly french knickers!

"let's keep in formal,anything else infers something that isn't true" ~

I suppose you meant 'it', not 'in'

and 'implies' not 'infers'

Keep trying: I daresay you might get something right one day. Ooh, look! outside the window! flying piggy!

☠~M~☠


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 12:20 PM

I speak and write English the way I speak and write English, and have no need of lectures from the likes of you, I don't pretend my typing is perfect, nor do I intend to do anything about it.

and have looked up both infers and implies, both work equally as well

Keep trying MtheGM you might be something one day, but I doubt it, I really do doubt it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 12:22 PM

"Equally well", not "equally as well".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Silas
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 12:38 PM

Oh Dear Michael, be very careful that you don't grab the tiger by the tail here - always a dangerous route when you correct someones spelling or grammar.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 12:46 PM

It's not considered polite either...but I doubt MtheGM knows anything about that, it's all in the breeding, something MtheGM lacks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:06 PM

I wonder what the right are afraid of. I see no problem with making a film about "That dreadful woman" (to quote my mother, who was and is a Conservative). It just seems a matter of who should make the said film.

Just in case there some who haven't seen this:

The Iron Lady/Meryl Streep


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:06 PM

Listen, young man. I don't know what is eating you; or indeed much at all about you. But I gather from context that you are about the age of Eliza, who happens to be the daughter of two of my oldest friends, though both some years younger than me. I am, to be precise, just a few days over 79 & 6 months - 7 years older than Norma & 9 than Martin; so not likely to be around to plague you for too much longer. Meanwhile, just for a little while, go away and leave me to live out what can't be more than my few remaining years in some sort of tranquillity.

If you can't, do not trouble yourself to reply anyhow. Yours, along with very few others, is now added to the list of the Cat-names whose posts I shall not even trouble to read as I know there will be nothing in them worth my while reading.

As to my making something of myself: if you do not know who I am or what my long and distinguished critical and journalistic career with regard to the Folk-scene and the Theatre has comprised, then you had better do some homework. At my age, one tends naturally to be a bit of yesterday's man to be sure. But just try a bit of research.

And, Silas, butt out, you nosy-parkering little nuisance.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Silas
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:14 PM

Dear Micheal, you do have a fixation about your age, don't you? Sadly, age does not always bring wisdom. (or manners)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:16 PM

Maybe not ~~ but at least I can spell your name...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Silas
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:18 PM

Ahh....yes. Spelling again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:18 PM

I've always felt that frilly French knickers have an important part to play in the folk revival. damn good idea. lead by example - see if you can get some of the women to follow suit.

As always - we're right behind you Mike. (although not in the salacious sense).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:20 PM

Do research!!!! You're not worth my time, nor any effort required, MtheGM, and to be less polite than Silas, I don't give a fuck about your age.

Once more I am honoured, nay, overwhelmed, to be on such a select list


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Emberto Uco
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 04:01 PM

My mother is 79

She has suffered enough the real consequences of Thatcher and her sycophantic acolytes blight on our economy and society
to tolerate the like of MtheGM's petty antagonisms;

and she would certainly not be at all impressed by anyone of any age
behaving in such a pompous patronising egotistical manner.

Having said that, she can't stretch her pension far enough to afford the luxury
of computers and internet
to be able to join in this wankfest forum debate
with her more privileged better off silver surfer contemporaries.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 03:36 AM

see what I mean.....divisive!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: goatfell
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 11:01 AM

A horror film


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Arnie
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 11:38 AM

Bring back Spitting Image. The restaurant scene where Thatcher refers to the cabinet as 'the vegetables' will long live in my memory. The team behind SP would have a field day with the present lot.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 11:54 AM

There'a Two Sides To Everything
and

Idol and The Idol Worshiper


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 02:57 PM

Good heavens all the Lefties moaning as usual.

The great Al who would obviously have been delighted to pay £250 per ton of coal from Markham Main instead of buying it at £8 per ton mined open cast in Australia and delivered. How very nice to support Mr Scargill and keep him in a manner to which he and his fellow trade union bosses could rapidly become accustomed. Unfortunately the knock on effects for British business and the British people would have been disastrous.

Come Al tell us all how great times were in the 1970's - Ah the rolling power cuts, the rubbish in the streets, the IMF hand-outs, the three-day week. C'mon Al tell us all about it.

Let's see now Thatcher was elected to power in a landslide in 1979 - 32 years ago!!! - And you are still wittering on about it??. "Socialist" Parties have formed Governments since 1997 and have done what? (Apart from completely Fuck Up) - Oh of course "They weren't really "socialist" - They never are, nor ever will be you bloody idiots - because they will never work. Every Labour Government that has been elected since 1945 has successively ruined this country leaving it up shit creek without a paddle and the last lot were no exception, in fact they were so inept they even managed to make some of their predecessors look competent in a mediocre sort of fashion. But while mourning your lot remember it was Chancellor Brown (Gordon of Cartoon) who raided the pensions fund to buy votes and it was the same Brown who sold off British Gold Reserves at bargain basement prices, what an astute TWAT he was.

Who was it that pulled us out of the shit we were left in by Wilson, Heath and Callaghan? Margaret Thatcher and a bloody marvellous job she made of it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Doc John
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 05:25 PM

I can think of a 20th century dictator who 'pulled their country out of the shit it was left in' and who was democratically elected too. At least we were able to ditch Thatcher before whe went down a similar path.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 06:20 PM

All Teribus can do is insult, you know the saying..if you can dazzl'em with brilliance, baffle'em with bullshit...and Teribus you do that so well.

Oh, by the way I am not one of your dreaded socialists either, and my mother, God Bless her was and is a dyed in the wool capital "C" Conservative and she loathed and still loathes "That Dreadful Woman" as she referred to The Grocer's Daughter as.

When I think of her, I think of someone who had pretentions above her station in life, and was, in the end, swatted back down the social order, to where she belonged After all, all she was, was a tradesman's child wasn't she?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 06:54 PM

Here's the article from the Huffington Post:

    'The Iron Lady': Margaret Thatcher's Friends Say Meryl Streep Film Insulting, Inaccurate


    Margaret Thatcher is by far one of Britain's most polarizing figures over the last half century, and so it is no surprise that the upcoming film about her life is already causing debate and anger.

    Starring Meryl Streep as the former British Prime Minister and conservative icon, the film depicts both Thatcher's professional life, including her hold on power between 1979 and 1990, as well as her personal journey, which includes her rise to the top and the years following her exit from office. The film isn't out to the public yet, and only a limited number of people have seen it, but just the idea of it has some of her allies up in arms.

    "She was never, in my experience, the half-hysterical, over-emotional, over-acting woman portrayed by Meryl Streep," Norman Tebbit, a member of her cabinet and former Conservative Party head, wrote in the Telegraph of London. She could be difficult and demanding, he acknowledged, but not at all like the woman he has seen in trailers for the film.

    "I do not know whom the makers of the Meryl Streep film talked to. Perhaps Michael Heseltine or Geoffrey Howe, but certainly not me," he wrote; Heseltine was a member of Thatcher's cabinet who resigned and later stood against her in the Conservative Party election of 1990, while Howe was one of her top cabinet members before a demotion led to his resignation. "To judge the film from its trailer, they confined their inquiries to the Daily Mirror and perhaps Tim Bell's public relations firm."

    Bell, however, is also upset with the movie.

    "I can't see the point of this film. Its only value is to make some money for Meryl Streep and whoever wrote it," Lord Bell, one of Thatcher's key PR advisers, told the Telegraph. "I have no interest in seeing it. I don't need a film to remind me of my experiences of her. It is a non-event... It won't make any difference to her place in history of the fact of what she did."

    Streep, for her part, recently told the Daily Mail how honored she was to play Thatcher.

    "It was one of those rare, rare films where I was grateful to be an actor and grateful for the privilege of being able to look at a life deeply with empathy," she said in a glowing piece about the film's depiction of the former Prime Minister. "There's no greater joy."

    Political differences, Streep said, played no part in her portrayal.

    "I still don't agree with a lot of her policies," the Oscar winner said. "But I feel she believed in them and that they came from an honest conviction, and that she wasn't a cosmetic politician just changing make-up to suit the times. She stuck to what she believed in, and that's a hard thing to do."

    Reviews for the film have, thus far, praised Streep while questioning the full integrity of the script and story, a sort of split decision for the admirers of the actress and those personally offended by the the picture's veracity.

    "Streep, it transpires, is the one great weapon of this often silly and suspect picture," The Guardian's review offered. "Her performance is astonishing and all but flawless; a masterpiece of mimicry which re-imagines Thatcher in all her half-forgotten glory. Streep has the basilisk stare; the tilted, faintly predatory posture. Her delivery, too, is eerily good -- a show of demure solicitude, invariably overtaken by steely, wild-eyed stridency."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 06:57 PM

You're all not getting a great deal of discussion in here about the film in the thread title. Character assassinations, childish arguing, yes - there are some trolls being fed here.

Spelling and grammar is simply another form of "manners" - we agree to do these things in a certain way, but even when not following those rules you still understand what each is saying. Get over it.

And who gives a rat's ass if someone was a "grocer's daughter?"

I expect Meryl Streep will get an earful as she works on this film, but she'll rise above it. I hope this film surprises you all with it's veracity and quality.

SRS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 07:08 PM

"I expect Meryl Streep will get an earful as she works on this film'

exclusive to Silly River Sage: The film is ready for release

The Iron Lady: official website/blog

UK release date: 6th January 2012

The film's depiction of Thatcher has been criticised by her children, Mark and Carol Thatcher, who are reported to have said, "It sounds like some Left-wing fantasy

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if that's exactly what the film is
:-D


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 07:50 PM

The economic problems of the 1970's mainly sprang from the fact that petrol prices rose from twenty odd pence to £1.75 a gallon in a record time - due the OPEC countries getting their collective acts together.

Both Tory and Labour pre-Thatcher governments battled valiantly to save and sustain British industry.

Thatcher let the system go to hell. 28% of manufacturing industry gone in the second year of her first period of office. John Harvet Jones (hardly a red under the bed) called her policies pure insanity.

Teribus - anyone who voted for Thatcher was no patriot - not in my book. Your sneers of derision at the group of English workers who mined the coal that founded England's wealth speaks volumes.

Scargill and the TUC leaders of the 1970's weren't overbright. Any fool could see Thatcher's plan and how it would and ensnare them. She outwitted them easily. But they were bloody geniuses compared to you mate. At least they knew that the essence of making a business profitable involved keeping it in existence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 08:04 PM

It also appears teribus is all for "farming out" to countries outside of Britain, now that's NOT very patriotic is it, teribus? And you call yourself British!! HA!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 11:05 PM

BTNG, get a life. Change the tense. She got an earful. Big deal. Every thread where you participate soon falls apart from the intended topic as you abuse everyone who you don't agree with, turning it into a mud-slinging slug-fest that ends up about you. People will catch on eventually and stop feeding you - the troll.

SRS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 11:24 PM

and this thread is about the film The Iron Lady. Go ahead, disagree with me, that's your democratic right.

You're right, Al The TUC leadership of the time were definitely not rocket scientists, and Thatcher saw them coming, and took full advantage, history has shown the results. It appears that the whole confrontation with the miners is not in the film, I've checked cast lists and there is no one listed as playing the role of Scargill. They might get mentioned through others, of that I have no idea.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 11:42 PM

BTNG from the trailer, it is not hard to see why their family is upset. They are portrayed as whiners who did not want her to be Prime Minister.

From what I have seen she is portrayed as a strong willed woman who bravely did what was necessary to keep the unions and liberals from ruining Britain and the world. Reinforcing tea party ideal and the myths created about Reagan.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 11:30 PM

At this stage of the game, I really don't think we can afford to worry about the Yanks and the Tea party.

there are two questions facing the country.

1) Do we persist in the 'red in claw' policies which means we let businesses got to the wall, privatise wherever and whenever we can or do we prime the pump and try and help our few remaining businesses survive.

2) Do we tell America to get stuffed when it embarks on daft military adventures like the French do,. Or are the French being cheese eating surrender monkeys, and evading their responsibilities. Remember poor Harold Wilson who expressed some qualifications about the wisdom and practicality of the Vietnam war and got our economy turned into a punchbag for his temerity. Is our bread buttered better by letting them kill a few of our kids in uniform in some pointless altercation with people who have evaded education and civilisation for 600 years?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 01:22 AM

Seriously Europe and Canada, militarily you are fucked. If the USA elects a Republican, you will be forced to spend a fortune on a huge treasure wasting war to make Iran "Democratic." (ie a wholly owned subsidiary of Exxon) or if Obama stays in you will have to pay your share of NATO as if it were a real military alliance instead of a paper tiger where the US pays to protect you in exchange for "prestige." The US is in debt. It will no longer pay for prestige.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 03:13 AM

Sounds fairly accurate to me...only, we might get a huge treasure-wasting war with Iran even IF Obama stays in office. After all, that may be what his corporate bosses want him to do. And it would also be a marvelous way for him to utterly scupper the Republicans and ensure his re-election in 2012 by depriving them of their treasured favorite issue by scooping it right out from under them.

Don't underestimate such a possibility. Either of those 2 parties is stupid and greedy enough, in my opinion, to start such a disastrous war in order to get themselves elected. (Not that I'm implying Obama is stupid. He's not. But that hardly matters if the power structure around him decides to have him do something stupid...and we've already seen some examples of that.)

Americans tend to re-elect presidents who are engaged in hot wars (Afghanistan doesn't work anymore, cos it's lasted way too long and everybody's fed up with it now...but a BRAND NEW war with Iran would be a real rally-round-the-flag booster...for awhile) Why, it would be disloyal to abandon the "commander-in-chief" in such a crisis situation. (sarcasm)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 03:41 AM

So neither BTNG or Big Al can or want to attempt to tell us all how magnificent and great everything was before 1979. Having lived through those times I can assure you that there was nothing great about them at all.

By the bye Doc John, Hitler was never "elected" Chancellor of Germany - he was appointed by Hindenberg

Both agree that the likes of Scargill and the Trades Unions Leadership were no rocket scientists, both seem to consider them as what they actually were - downright buffoons. Yet they both seem to have been quite happy with this collection of clowns dictating to the elected governments of the day and wanted that practice to continue - Margaret Thatcher put an end to that game and thank God she did.

All down to petrol prices was it Al? so why did the same thing not happen about eight years ago when oil hit $145 per barrel. Someone else I think MtheGM stated quite rightly that British Industry was stuffed years before Margaret Thatcher came to power.

Britain's wealth made on coal?? You are joking aren't you, at best it was a component part of the equation no more, other countries had far more coal than the UK at the time and they had neither wealth or Empire. If there was ever any one thing that you could attribute Britain's wealth to, one thing that Britain had that no-one else did, then that one thing was her Royal Navy, if you doubt that then look at Britain's change in fortunes from 1694 onwards. The Navy secured the country from attack and allowed our merchants to trade unhindered, which fuelled both the agrarian and industrial revolutions which allowed our industries to flourish.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 04:21 AM

I suspect Teribus, it was down to which seats you were sitting in as to what you thought of the show.

If the Thatcher era was a good one for you, or even a tolerable one - I suspect you were not living in the eye of the hurricane. Try working in a slum school, and thenhaving that status taken away from you by you're wife getting disabled. then having the index linked allowances that you'd paid a huge fraction of yoour tiny salary eroded and taken away from you.

Then getting sneered at a Tory party conferences for being a scrounging bastard by Peter Lily in a Gilbert and Sullivan parodies

Then you get home, go to a folk club, and some middle class bastard tells you that your folk music isn't folk music any more.

That was how the 1970's and 1980's played out for me.

Like I say, if you got better seats to the Thatcher show - well done.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 04:31 AM

Oh yeh and on top of that some bloody Dave Spart character was telling you weren't a real socialist -so what he was going to do was stop Callaghan giving any election speeches by aggressive heckling - thu ensuring Thatcher's victory.

Sometimes I used to wonder if that nutcase running the TUC and the leftie eejits were MI5 plants. Lets face it Tricky Dickie was doing that sort of stuff across the pond in CREEP.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 05:25 AM

Would that be the same Callaghan as the Jim Callaghan of "What Crisis" Fame?? Al.

Every bloody "socialist" i.e. Labour Government that the UK has suffered has left the country poorer and in worse condition than it was when it came to power - The last period of Labour Governance under Blair and Brown was the worst of the lot, they succeeded in totally destroying the United Kingdom, and anyone who voted for them should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.

Oh Doc John, In 1982 Thatcher despatched British Troops in response to an attack and invasion of our territory by a foreign power. Blair committed British Troops to conflicts that lasted longer than the First and Second World Wars combined not to defend our country or our interests, but purely to support our position in NATO and the UN, his Chancellor and successor ensured that they went there under-funded, under-equipped and totally under-resourced. So if anyone was ever in danger of leading us down the path that you were talking about in your post it most certainly was not Margaret Thatcher.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Silas
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 05:34 AM

Well Teribus, good policy that, not allowing the facts to mess up a good rant.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 06:07 AM

It is true that Hitler was not elected Chancellor, but appointed to that position in a parliamentary coalition:

"After two parliament elections—in July and November 1932—had failed to result in a majority government, President Hindenburg reluctantly agreed to appoint Hitler chancellor of a coalition government formed by the NSDAP and Hugenberg's party, the German National People's Party (DNVP). As a concession to the NSDAP, Hermann Göring, who was head of the Prussian police at the time, was named minister without portfolio. So although von Papen intended to install Hitler merely as a figurehead, the NSDAP gained key political positions.

On 30 January 1933, Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor during a brief and simple ceremony in Hindenburg's office. Hitler's first speech as Chancellor took place on 10 February. The Nazis' seizure of power subsequently became known as the Machtergreifung or Machtübernahme.

As chancellor, Hitler worked against attempts by his political opponents to build a majority government. Because of the political stalemate, Hitler asked President Hindenburg to dissolve the Reichstag again, and elections were scheduled for early March. On 27 February 1933, the Reichstag building was set on fire,[134] and since Marinus van der Lubbe, a Dutch independent communist, was found in the burning building, a communist plot was blamed for the fire. The central government responded with the Reichstag Fire Decree of 28 February, which suspended basic rights, including habeas corpus. Activities of the German Communist Party were suppressed, and communist party members were arrested, forced to flee, or murdered.[citation needed]

Besides political campaigning, the NSDAP used paramilitary violence and spread of anti-communist propaganda on the days preceding the election. On election day, 6 March 1933, the NSDAP increased its result to 43.9% of the vote, gaining the largest number of seats in parliament. However, Hitler's party failed to secure an absolute majority, thus again necessitating a coalition with the DNVP.

On 21 March 1933, the new Reichstag was constituted with an opening ceremony held at Potsdam's garrison church. This Day of Potsdam was staged to demonstrate reconciliation and unity between the revolutionary Nazi movement and Old Prussia with its elites and perceived virtues. Hitler appeared in a tail coat and humbly greeted the aged President Hindenburg.[136]

In the Nazis' quest for full political control—they had failed to gain an absolute majority in the prior parliamentary election—Hitler's government brought the Ermächtigungsgesetz (Enabling Act) to a vote in the newly elected Reichstag. The legislation gave Hitler's cabinet full legislative powers for a period of four years. Although such a bill was not unprecedented, this act was different since it allowed for deviations from the constitution.[136] Since the bill required a ⅔ majority to pass, the government needed the support of other parties. The position of the Centre Party, the third largest party in the Reichstag, turned out to be decisive: under the leadership of Ludwig Kaas, the party decided to vote for the Enabling Act. It did so in return for the government's oral guarantees of the Catholic Church's liberty, the concordats signed by German states, and the continued existence of the Centre Party.[137]

On 23 March, the Reichstag assembled in a replacement building under turbulent circumstances. Several SA men served as guards inside, while large groups outside the building shouted slogans and threats toward the arriving members of parliament. Kaas announced that the Centre Party would support the bill with "concerns put aside", while Social Democrat Otto Wels denounced the act in his speech.[138] At the end of the day, all parties except the Social Democrats voted in favour of the bill—the Communists, as well as several Social Democrats, were barred from attending the vote. The Enabling Act, along with the Reichstag Fire Decree, transformed Hitler's government into a de facto dictatorship."


So, the Nazis in fact never did get a majority mandate from the German people. What they did was to take over the government from within by clever political maneuvering and intimidation, and then establish a dictatorship.

******

It is also true that the Royal Navy was THE essential instrument in securing Britain's overseas empire and the wealth of the nation. If you are the dominant sea power in the world, you are also securely positioned to quickly move armies where they are most needed, to dominate trade and commerce, and thus enrich yourself. A number of other nations had a vigorous attempt at doing the same thing...Spain, Holland, Portugal, Sweden, and France, for example, but Britain superceded all of them in that game. After 1588, the Spanish never regained their former naval position of strength. After Trafalgar, no one could seriously challenge British dominance of the sea.

The next really serious threat came in the early 20th century, when the Kaiser of Germany attempted to build a fleet to rival Britain's, and that was probably the key factor in Britain eventually going to war against the German Empire in 1914. Britain won that naval conflict quite handily...and went on as the top naval power...but was having great difficulty affording to maintain such a navy. And the USA was rapidly overtaking Great Britain in that regard...and could afford to do so.

This led to an international naval agreement in the 20s to limit construction of capital ships (and to constrain the ambitious Japanese, who were also building a large fleet of new warships). Those agreements rebounded mainly to the benefit of the USA, as far as I can see, giving the USA naval parity with the UK, but they also gave the British some relief from having to participate in a frightfully costly naval race. The people who were most troubled by the agreement were the Japanese, and they began seeking ways around it (such as converting some new battleship hulls to aircraft carriers...which turned out to be one hell of a good idea...and secretely violating the treaty by concealing the real tonnage and other technical knowledge of some of their new ships).

In any case the naval race presently started up again in the 30s and the British soon found themselves in another world war, one which ended Great Britain's premier position as the greatest naval power in the world, utterly destroyed the very dangerous Japanese Navy, and passed the torch of Number 1 Naval Power to the prosperous USA.

And so it has remained until now. British economic dominance was not ended by the scrapping of most of the British fleet...the fleet's glory days were themselves ended by the decline of British financial power in the wake of 2 terribly costly World Wars, and the USA took over Britain's former role, in effect.

The Pax Britannica of the later 1800s had given way to what might have been termed the Pax Americana...if it had only been more peaceful...but it wasn't, as it involved an almost 50-year Cold War between the Western Alliance and the Communist Bloc.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: goatfell
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 07:48 AM

say this stuff about how good thatcher was to the people that she helped out of a job and say to them she was lovley


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 09:35 AM

Admitted Blair was a sod.

However if you want expend the spring in your mortal coil, lining up with the shitheels and bullies - I feel you are mistaken Teribus.

I wish you peace and enlightenment.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 08:04 AM

Really Silas? What "facts" do you wish to dispute? The only people ranting here are the usual suspects whose Pavlovian traits rush to the fore at the mention of a woman's name who left power over twenty years ago.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Silas
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 08:25 AM

"mention of a woman's name who left power over twenty years ago."

And some people are still living with the misery of the awful legacy she left in her wake.

There was no 'attack' until she sunk an Argentinian ship that was 200 miles outside the exclusion zone and sailing away from the area anyway. That was nothing short of murder - a real war crime for which she should have been tried.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 08:43 AM

"There was no 'attack' until she sunk an Argentinian ship that was 200 miles outside the exclusion zone and sailing away from the area anyway." - Silas

What was that you were saying about never letting facts get in the way of a good rant Silas?

Argentine Invasion and occupation of the Falkland Islands 2nd April, 1982

The sinking of the ARA Belgrano 2nd May, 1982

The Argentine troops all 600 of the initial attack force plus the thousands then sent to occupy the islands between 2nd April and 2nd May were what Silas - TOURISTS

Sinking the Belgrano a war crime?? NOPE - just plain good sense and very effective it was too. Or perhaps you would have preferred it to have seen even greater numbers of British troops killed?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Silas
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 08:57 AM

You are talking bollocks. There was never a shot fired till she sank the belgrano and isn't it funny the way that the ships log for HMS Conqurer went 'missing'?

And all just as the party poll ratings were flagging - coincidence? Hardly.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 12:49 PM

Well, the Argentinian generals were trying to build themselves some political capital at home by stirring up a frenzy of patriotism and distracting their public from much more pressing domestic issues. This was a cynical move on their part, surely done strictly for their own benefit, not for the benefit of the average Argentinian. They gambled that they could get away with it....a throw of the dice...and they lost.

As to whether the Falklands should belong to Argentina or Great Britain, that's strictly a matter of national opinion. I can fully understand why the Argentinians feel they should own those islands, but they should not have taken military action over it, they should have continued engaging in peaceful negotiation. It's possible that one day the British will give (or sell) those islands to Argentina if they decide that the expense of keeping them is too much to bear.

From Thatcher's point of view, she did the right thing in this case, I think (I'm not referring to the attack on the Belgrano...that was probably not necessary to secure a military victory)...but referring simply to her decision to take military action against the Argentinian invasion, period. To not do so would have been almost inconceivable, seems to me. You don't just stand aside and say, "Oh, all right...take it, then..." when someone invades one of your colonial possessions and occupies it, specially if you are a nation with a proud military tradition like Great Britain's.

Was Thatcher opportunistic in using the situation to boost her own popularity? Sure!!! What politician wouldn't? Any other British prime minister would, I think, have done the same thing...and if not, well, he would have been crucified for not doing so, called a coward or a wimp, and shortly have been voted out of office.

The Argentinian generals may have been emboldened by the thought that a woman was leading Great Britain, thinking that a woman wouldn't have the resolution to go to war. If so, they were very stupid men indeed! ;-) Women who have attained to high office generally make the most resolute of war leaders. They defend their country like a mother defending her children, and that's no joke.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 02:48 PM

Oh?? I think that it is you who are talking bollocks Silas.

"There was never a shot fired till she sank the belgrano"

So there was no battle fought between the 23 Royal Marines on South Georgia on the 3rd April that resulted in one Argentine Helicopter being shot down (GPMG Fire), one ARA Corvette damaged (Over 200 hits from small arms fire plus one direct hit from a 84mm Carl Gustav anti-tank Rocket), 3 Argentines killed and 9 wounded.

Not bad for never a shot fired eh??

Still Silas never let the facts get in the way of a good story no matter how badly or inaccurately told. Personally son I'd rather deal in the truth.

"As to whether the Falklands should belong to Argentina or Great Britain, that's strictly a matter of national opinion. I can fully understand why the Argentinians feel they should own those islands, but they should not have taken military action over it, they should have continued engaging in peaceful negotiation. It's possible that one day the British will give (or sell) those islands to Argentina if they decide that the expense of keeping them is too much to bear." - Little Hawk

So the wishes of the people who have lived there for generations count for nothing - interesting take on things - goes directly against everything that the United Nations is supposed to stand for - Right of self-determination.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 04:26 PM

so, Teribus, if The Falklands decided they wanted nothing to do with neither Britain or Argentina, you'd fully support their decision to go it alone?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 11:35 PM

Yes


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 01:54 AM

what has all this to do with anything. She caused the war by withdrawing the battleships that had hitherto discouraged the Argies. They took their withdrawal as tacit consent to invade - or at least virtual indifference to the fate of the Falklands.

as for the phoney deflationery economic policies dressed up as economic prudence. Only complete pillocks fell for the shopping basket tripe and the last refuge of a scoundrel type flagwaving then.

Still Cameron is proving that you can still fool part of the people most of the time. all you need is an uneducated population divided by racism and petty snobbishness, and a villainous nature to execute it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: theleveller
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 06:51 AM

Yesterday mrsleveller took our daughter and a friend to the cinema in Castleford, one of the Yorkshire coalfield towns that bore the brunt of the colliery closures in the 1980s an 90s and is still feeling the effects. When a trailer for the Thatcher film came on it was greeted with a chorus of boos and catcalls. Memories of what that bloody woman and her cohorts did is still alive amongst those who suffered most. To say that it's just a Pavlovian reaction is utter stupidity and profound ignorance.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: banjoman
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 07:49 AM

Lets bring this thread back to earth. I was thinking what music could be played at Thatcher's funeral. Lots of suggestions, but my favourite was from The Wizard of OZ " Ding Dong the wicked witch is dead" Any other suggestions?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 12:58 PM

no


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 01:25 PM

"It sounds like some Left-wing fantasy.It wouldn't surprise me in the least if that's exactly what the film is.

As opposed to the right-wing fantasy that Thatcher forced Britain to live and experience first hand.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: BTNG
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 01:36 PM

Greg F respond with all sorts of babblings, but then I realized something, you had taken a single line completely out of contexted, I then realized it really wasn't worth my time.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 01:38 PM

'so, Teribus, if The Falklands decided they wanted nothing to do with neither Britain or Argentina, you'd fully support their decision to go it alone?

Yes'

Well naturally - look how sensible and understanding Thatcher was to the Irish, the vast majority of whom wanted the English army to bugger off out of the North of that country.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,left of centre
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 03:56 PM

"If only we had her back again"   a conservatist of the real order with a big C..We will not see her like again.............thank fuck.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 04:45 PM

Teribus - You misconstrued my comments. I was entirely sympathetic with the wishes of the Falkland Islanders themselves to remain in the British Commonwealth. I was entirely opposed to Argentina's unprovoked invasion. I agree with you that the wishes of the local population are absolutely paramount in such a situation, and that their right of self-determination is the most important consideration by far.

When I said that I understood why the Argentinians feel they should own those islands....I did not say that I sympathized with their viewpoint. I did not. Their notions of territorial proximity to that area being a pretext for annexing it are NO justification for ignoring the clear wishes of the inhabitants of that area.

In brief: We are in agreement on this one! ;-D If you still wish to argue about something, it'll have to be something else.

****

I also wish to add, just in case anyone on the Left now mistakenly thinks that I adore Margaret Thatcher and all she stands for....NOPE! I detest her general political philosophy and attitude. I am opposed to most of the things she did. But I think she was quite justified in taking military action to recover the Falklands.

****

Big Al suggests that she deliberately enticed the Argentinians into invading those islands so she could have a "lovely little war" and boost her political fortunes. Hmm. Interesting theory. Positively Machiavellian, if true! It's a delightful way to look at it if you wish to consistently hate Maggie Thatcher under any and all conditions, no matter what, simply on principle! ;-D But I have no opinion one way or the other about it at this point. I'm not saying it couldn't possibly have been so. I'm just saying, "I don't know", and I have no opinion about it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 06:33 PM

Is Thatcher dead yet?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 06:40 PM

Peter, that website is Cruel, Primitive and Nauseating. In a world that claims to have progressed past the stone age, I don't understand why it hasn't been banned.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 07:25 PM

No I didn't think she enticed the Argentinians. Galtieri's regime was a pretty scary with all sorts of territorial demands.

I simply think she was cutting expenses in an area where there wasn't any fat on the bone for her to cut - certainly given the warmongering talk coming out of Argentina at the time.

I think many of her cuts were ill thought out. Not as ill thought out as the extravagances - like the National Curriculum. But ill thought out.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 11:32 PM

I agree with that wholeheartedly, Al.

Regarding draconian cuts to the military...I still think it's a damned shame that not ONE of Great Britain's surviving WWII battleships was preserved as a national memorial after the war. They could at least have saved the Warspite, if nothing else. Or the Renown. Or one of the KGV's. Those ships were such cultural icons, so symbolic of British naval history, that it amazes me that they couldn't save one of them in honor of what they did.

The Japanese have saved one of theirs from the classic era of the pre-dreadnoughts: The Mikasa, Admiral Togo's flagship in the Russo-Japanese War. Thankfully, it did not get bombed and destroyed in WWII (It played no military part in that war, but the Allies might still have wrecked it merely out of spite. I'm glad they did not. Such historic vessels, once lost, are irreplaceable.)

The Americans, being financially prosperous after the war, had both the money and the pride to turn several of their capital ships into permanent memorials. Good for them. I wish the British could have managed to do the same.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 05:43 PM

I'm going anyway. i love Streep doing funny voices.

You always go - wow that was clever!

Whether she's an Aussie fighting offf Dingoes, or Sophie in a prison camp.    the voice is always funny.

Doing Thatcher for two hours, that's got to be a real comedy turn.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 06:04 PM

Me too. I figger it'll be good entertainment. I offered to buy Streep a drink one time and she turned me down, but I ain't holdin' no grudges. I did it out of sympathy, not lust! ;-D Ook! Ook!

Now, if it had been Angelina Jolie...that woulda been a whole different story.

- Chongo


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Chingo Chump
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 11:13 PM

You tried to buy Meryl Streep Angelina Jolie??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 04:38 AM

"She caused the war by withdrawing the battleships that had hitherto discouraged the Argies. They took their withdrawal as tacit consent to invade - or at least virtual indifference to the fate of the Falklands." - Big Al Whittle

Arguably one of the most idiotic things I have ever seen in print.

Here by the way was the Battleship that was going to be withdrawn - she was actually still down there when the Argentines attacked and invaded (She took the 23 Royal Marines from Naval Party 8901 to South Georgia - remember them the ones who took part in that non-existant battle on the 3rd April in which 9 Argentine Sailors/marines were killed) - look at her fearsome fire-power (2 x 20mm Oerlikon cannons WWII vintage stuff) - what a deterrent:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Endurance_(1967)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 04:58 AM

I did say that that quote fro Big Al in my last post was the most idiotic thing I ever heard - well this other contribution from him comes remarkably close - If this shows your string of logic and your reasoning and you say that you were a teacher, then thank F**K you are nowhere near a classroom now:

Big Al Whittle Date: 21 Nov 11 - 01:38 PM

BTNG had asked me this question:

'so, Teribus, if The Falklands decided they wanted nothing to do with neither Britain or Argentina, you'd fully support their decision to go it alone?

To which I simply answered Yes

Big Al then quotes all of that and comes in with -

"Well naturally - look how sensible and understanding Thatcher was to the Irish, the vast majority of whom wanted the English army to bugger off out of the North of that country."

What is the connection Big Al???

By the bye whilst talking about "vast majorities"

What vast majority are you talking about Big AL?

1: "the vast majority" of the people in the Republic of Ireland at the time couldn't have given a monkey's, and that remains equally true today.

2: "the vast majority" of the people in Northern Ireland at the time wanted to remain within the United Kingdom - hold a referendum there today and you will find that that still remains to be the case.

High time that you started to address reality.

PS Big Al: As a teacher I would have thought that you would have known that no English Army has existed since 1707.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 05:02 AM

Arguably....

Yeh if you had the stamina to argue with a bloke who contrives to be on the right wing of the right wing every contentious issue known to humanity.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Musket
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 06:04 AM

I note from the website mentioned above that she is still alive and just turned 86.

Assuming that there is a chance the party plans may be still a long time in the organising, can anybody tell me how long champagne (cheap stuff mind, all I wish to spend on her behalf) lasts if stored correctly and turned once in a while?

It's just that I bought the two bottles of £1.99 Asti Spumanti a few years ago, (I call them Margaret and Arthur) and wondered if they are still capable of being drunk, especially if either of the buggers refuse to shuttle off this mortal coil for a while yet?

There is an argument to buy a decent Bollinger as the first sip once I hear the news will taste like nectar so it may as well be one that actually does? Advice required please.

I have worked out what to wear at the disco being organised on her tomb, and assuming it has, as I have mentioned before, a sprung dance floor, I might be refused entry by the bouncers if I wear my old pit boots. (I still have the buggers, survived many house moves. But can I find that kettle I bought in 1986? Can I buggery.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 07:25 AM

Teribus, my opinions may be arguable - but you know I am not isolated in my opinion by the facts. Whereas you, yourwself are a wag and a scoundrel and I am full of love for you and my fellow man.

This is beacuse, this weekend I have a great time mapped out.

Tonight - concert with Dick Gaughan - socialist and guitar picker
Tomorrow night -Clive Carrol - humourist and guitar picker.

You will not disturb my aura of contentedness.

As you very well know I was a shit at teaching - never taught anybody anything. Certainly can't teach you much.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 11:28 AM

"but you know I am not isolated in my opinion by the facts"

The fact that you are not isolated in your opinion only indicates that there are others as misinformed as yourself (judging by the complete and utter rubbish you have attempted to introduce to reinforce your opinion)

Withdrew a "Battleship" - utter bollocks on two counts:

1: It had not been withdrawn in fact it was actually down there on station - I knew her Commanding Officer and talked to him extensively about the run up to and the actual conduct of operations commonly referred to as The Falklands War.

2: HMS Endurance was no "warship" let alone a "battleship"

All Britains ills were due to a gallon of petrol costing £1.75??? It costs £1.30 a LITRE now.

Socialists all they seem to have a capacity for is spreading poverty and despair and guess what Big Al - suits you down to the ground because the mantra of the socialist is - ITS ALWAYS SOMEBODY ELSE'S FAULT - they have never ever been any good at accepting responsibility for any of their misdeeds - We are deeply in the shit now because of 13 years of Liebour rule with the likes of Blair and Brown in charge.

If merely stating that observation puts me to the right of the right then your compass needs checking - it is normally called telling it as you see it.

Youself, BTNG, Silas and others have had ample opportunity to tell us all how great things were before 1979, yet you cannot come up with anything apart from agreeing with me that Scargill and the leadership of the TUC were complete and utter clowns. Between 1974 and 1979 they had destroyed the country and driven us to the IMF for a hand-out when was the last time that that had happened - how many times has it happened since?

You go on telling yourself lies Al, doesn't matter how many times you tell them, and it doesn't matter how fervently you believe them they will still be lies. I prefer to deal in the truth.

Enjoy your concerts


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 11:55 AM

'I prefer to deal in the truth.'

yeh you and every other extremist. the trouble with people who believe they have an exclusive insight into the truth is that that very belief betrays a lack of judgement and good sense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 01:49 PM

An account of how Callaghan defeated the Argies with no loss of life, but by attending to business in a way which a dilatory twerp like Thatcher could never aspire to.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4597581.stm

Keep on conning yourself that you're the sole curator of the truth, there are some idiots who think they are sole curators of the English folk tradtion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 05:12 PM

Callaghan defeated the Argies so comprehensively in 1977 they invaded in 1982 - Well done Sunny Jim "Crisis! What Crisis?" Callaghan.

How did he do it? By figuratively "sending in the gunboats". By the way there was no way on earth that the Argentines were going to do anything about the Falklands in 1977, how or why do I know that? How can I state that with absolute certainty? Because HMS Ark Royal was still in commission the last Fleet Aircraft Carrier operated by the Royal Navy.

If anything gave the Argentines the green light as you suggested earlier it was when the Labour Government ordered the decommissioning and scrapping of Ark Royal, without a comparable replacement, she paid off on the 14th February 1979 - The Conservatives with Margaret Thatcher as their leader were elected on the 3rd May, 1979.

What is the matter with the truth Whittle? Does it disturb the lie of your fondly held "myths". I notice that not a single one of my statements have been successfully challenged and after explaining the time lines and recorded facts Silas (Of "no shots fired" fame) seems to have gone awfully quiet.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 05:49 PM

Its not that the facts you state are uncontrovertible - its just that we lived through it. It unfolded in front of our horrified eyes. It would be interesting to know where you were - you certainly weren't paying any bloody attention to what was going on under your nose.

I will try to provide chapter and verse with wikipedia, but its BLOODY boring. Everyone saw it happen.

Nothing wrong with the truth - your version of the truth is highly suspect however.

Neither me nor Ian are red hot socialists - we just know a complete bastard when we experience one - and Thatcher was just that.

Yes, petrol has gone up 100% in the last forty years. In the 1970's, it went up more than 500% in less than five years. Bit of a difference.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 06:01 PM

Fom History of the Falkland Islands

The withdrawal of a Royal Navy support vessel from regular Falklands duty suggests to the Argentinians that British interest in the islands is perhaps declining. Meanwhile the Argentinian leader, General Galtieri, needs some impressive national achievement to bolster his unpopular regime. The recovery of the Malvinas in time for 1983 (the 150th anniversary of the British invasion) would fit the bill perfectly. The general decides to take a chance.


Read more: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ac51#ixzz1er5KZZ6F


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 06:09 PM

From David Kenney's account of the recapture of South Georgia

Galtieri's seizure of the Falklands could not have been worse timed for Margaret Thatcher. Race riots in English cities, high unemployment and back bench grumbling had eroded her dominance over the Conservative Party and the House of Commons. After the Falkands fell she fired her Foreign Secretary, useful and necessary under the circumstances, but had to accept as a replacement Francis Pym(1) whose hawkishness towards the Argentineans remained in doubt until war's end. Thatcher and Pym shared a mutual dislike and mistrust. Her Foreign Office had commited that gravest of burocratic blunders, it had gestated a minor perplexity into a major crisis. She could not repose confidence in her intelligence community after its failure to assess accurately Argentina's overt preparations for war.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 06:10 PM

More from Kenney's account

From Thatcher's own party the Falkland Islands lobby shouted: "I told you so" so stridently that a Foreign Office spokesman was moved to retort that: "Air Commodore Frow (the lobby's spokesman) has no official standing whatever.The crisis is entirely a matter for the British government."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 06:17 PM

socialism today

The conflict was prepared, however, by a series of blunders by British imperialism. Despite Argentina's long-standing claim to the islands and recent threats from Galtieri, in 1981 Thatcher's government announced the withdrawal of the British naval warship, Endurance, from the South Atlantic. Her government took no action when scrap metal contractors landed on neighbouring South Georgia with an Argentinean naval escort in March 1982 – and Thatcher was completely taken by surprise when Argentinean forces occupied the Falklands/Malvinas on 1 April


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Nov 11 - 06:25 PM

So lets see. That's a naval attache, the Falkland Islands lobby of the Tory party and History today, and the point is succintly expressed and precis-ed by the Socialist Worker - which I don't expect you to agree with - but they seem to agree with everybody else -except you Terribus.

Its all the others who are out of step, its just our Willy who's marchng right.

What makes you think all these people are wrong, whilst you - who really doesn't seem to have much actual recollection - you just spout your assessment of the capabilities of Endurance - well you can't blame me. you're in a minority of two. You and the brain cell owned collectively by Daily Mail readers everywhere.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 11 - 08:54 AM

Wrong button hit too early, but nevertheless:

Big Al - In response to your multiple posts:

www.historyworld.net - An entertainment channel - What they provide and you quote with such alacrity is an opinion not a fact. Not a fact because if it were then the Auxiliary Ice Patrol Ship HMS Endurance would have indeed been withdrawn, the Argentine Generals would have waited until 1983 (If they had then the islands would now be known as Las Malvinas - because exactly as we find ourselves today the Royal Navy would have had no aircraft carriers to provide the degree of air support required mount an opposed amphibious landing).

Anyway let us take a bit of a better look at the lead up to the invasion shall we:

Point 1:
"In the period leading up to the war, and especially following the transfer of power between military dictators General Jorge Rafael Videla and General Roberto Eduardo Viola in late-March 1981, Argentina had been in the midst of a devastating economic crisis and large-scale civil unrest against the military junta that had been governing the country since 1976."

Absolutely FUCK ALL to do with anything that had been happening in the UK or who was in power in the UK - TRUE?

Point 2:
"In December 1981 there was a further change in the Argentine military regime bringing to office a new junta headed by General Leopoldo Galtieri (acting president), Brigadier Basilio Lami Dozo and Admiral Jorge Anaya. Anaya was the main architect and supporter of a military solution for the long-standing claim over the islands, calculating that the United Kingdom would never respond militarily. In doing so the Galtieri government hoped to mobilise Argentines' long-standing patriotic feelings towards the islands and thus divert public attention from the country's chronic economic problems and the regime's ongoing human rights violations.

So Admiral Jorge Anaya was a close confidente of Margaret Thatcher was he? Had the idea just struck him because Maggie had told him I need a bit of a boost in the polls at home? How bloody ridiculous do you wish to make yourself look - Again the above had nothing whatsover to do with the UK or the British Government - what you have is one senior Argentine military officer making an assessment on a possible response, the driver however was what was happening inside Argentina - had he stuck to his original plan it would have succeeded. Tell me Big Al how do you think the population of the islands almost entirely British would have handled Galtieri's Junta's human rights violations - No Argentines have ever actually permanently settled on the Falkland Islands (as opposed to the British who colonised the uninhabited Islands in 1833 - so they've been there for 178 years)

Point 3:
"The newspaper La Prensa speculated in a step-by-step plan beginning with cutting off supplies to the Islands, ending in direct actions late 1982, if the UN talks were fruitless."

Their newspapers speculated about it? Wonder if the authors of any of those articles interviewed Mrs Thatcher, or indeed any member of the British Government - My guess Big Al is that NO THEY DID NOT.

Point 4:
"Admiral Jorge Anaya was the driving force in the Junta's decision to invade."

What not Thatcher???

A little footnote on Anaya:
" "A basic assumption underlying the conflict was that the British were, in the opinion of the war's main architect, Admiral Jorge Anaya, unworthy heirs to a glorious heritage, the men mainly maricones...to call a man a maricón does not question his heterosexuality; but it definitely impugns his physical and moral courage. Anaya was Naval Attaché in London from January 1975 to January 1976...He returned to Argentina, making no attempt to conceal his contempt for all things British."

A further footnote Big Al - Tell us what Government was in power in the UK between 1974 and 1979, the Government that was in power while Admiral Jorge Anaya was present in the UK forming his opinion and cultivating his contempt for all things British. I'll save you the trouble - It was smiling boy himself wasn't it - your very own Jim "Crisis-What-Crisis" Callaghan - a Labour Government.

Point 5:
"The ongoing tension between the two countries over the islands increased on 19 March when a group of Argentine scrap metal merchants raised the Argentine flag at South Georgia, an act that would later be seen as the first offensive action in the war. The Argentine military junta, suspecting that the UK would reinforce its South Atlantic Forces,[15] ordered the invasion of the Falkland Islands to be brought forward to 2 April."

About which you quote the Socialist Worker as stating:
"Her government took no action when scrap metal contractors landed on neighbouring South Georgia with an Argentinean naval escort in March 1982"

Which shows how much they know, or have the honesty or integrity to report events factually.

The Argentine Scrap merchants landed on South Georgia (Care to tell us what Argentines claim to South Georgia is based on?) on 19th March 1982. In the South Atlantic British Forces consist of the Ice Patrol Ship (Note: Ice Patrol Ship not battleship Big Al) HMS Endurance and Naval Party 8901 (68 Marines + 11 Sailors). So if the Socialist Worker is correct how did it come to pass that on the 3rd April, 1982, 22 Royal Marines from Naval Party 8901 managed to kill 3 Argentine Sailors and wound a further 9, shoot down an Argentine helicopter and damage an Argentine Navy Corvette?? After all it did say that the Thatcher Government took no action didn't it?

Now let me see the distance between Stanley and Lieth Harbour, Grytviken, on South Georgia is about 1,300 n.m. OK Big Al you were a teacher:

A ship leaves point A and travels to point B 1,300nm away travelling at 12knots how long will it take the ship to reach point B?

Big Al's Answer: 1,300 / 12 = 108 hours 20 minutes or 4days, 12hours and 20minutes

Let's take a look at the time line

19th March, 1982 Argies land on South Georgia, the leader of the British Antarctic Survey reports the matter to Stanley who inform London - Who order the despatch of HMS Endurance to South Georgia with 22 Royal Marines from Naval Party 8901 - So much for doing nothing eh Big Al?.

Obviously it takes time for the Endurance to get to Stanley to embark the Marines and it takes time for the Marines to get their stores and equipment together. So give them 24 hours which would bring us to 22nd March - On that day the Argentine Government instructed their Ice Patrol Ship to depart but the Leader of the BAS spotted Argentine personnel still on the island, Endurance is ordered to evacuate by force if necessary all Argentine personnel from South Georgia. Admiral Anaya orders two Argentine Navy Corvettes to the seas between the Falklands and South Georgia their orders being to intercept HMS Endurance.

So the earliest HMS Endurance could have arrived at Leith Harbour, Grytviken would have been around mid-day on the 27th March. But Endurance couldn't sail directly could she, she had three Argentine naval vessels looking for her (the two corvettes chasing her from behind and the Argentine Ice Patrol Ship ahead of her) Endurance arrived and landed the Royal Marines on 31st March then withdrew to sea to act as communications link.

2nd April the Argentines invaded the Falklands

3rd April the Battle of Grytviken occurred - bet the Socilaist Worker didn't report it - otherwise their lies about no action being taken by the British Government would have been exposed wouldn't they Big Al?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 27 Nov 11 - 09:56 AM

I can't speak for the Socialist Worker. I'm not a reader. However the action you describe was certainly reported in every other newspaper. Silas was mistaken on that point, but it was a minor error.   No need to make meal out of it. I used to live near Lympstone nad have a high regard for thr Marines , but an action by a dozen or so of them doesn't amount to a rebuttal of the facts that everyone knows, and which you are trying to avoid.

Namely that Thatcher buggered up and gave the impression somehow that she wasn't going to defend The Falklands. Then the British armed forces had to pull her chestnuts out of the fire, and then she tried to get the disfigured and wounded ones banned from the victory parade. Complete bastard!

And yes I had an education. Please stop sneering at the fact. and telling me that i didn't live through what I lived through. Every bugger in England read (those of us with an education to read) voraciousloy throughout the campaign, and were glued to our radios and tv news bulletins.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Nov 11 - 10:05 AM

Al-

Terrible Teribus has been a Thatcher apologist and myth-maker since his first posting years ago. I think everyone is familiar with his constant stream of bullshit in this regard.

Don't waste your time debating the intellectual equivalent of a Holocaust denier - it only legitimizes his untenable position.

Best,

Greg


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 27 Nov 11 - 11:08 AM

I know that Greg, I just wish I could lead Terribus onto the sunlit uplands of reality.

I think Jonathan Aitken was the first minister to lose his job under Thatcher. Someone asked if Thatcher had an open mind about the middle east.

Aitken thought for a moment and said - not so an open mind, more sort of completely vacant.....


anyway, it got back to her, and they slipped him the black spot.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 11 - 12:06 PM

"a rebuttal of the facts that everyone knows, and which you are trying to avoid.

Namely that Thatcher buggered up and gave the impression somehow that she wasn't going to defend The Falklands."


Now let us see how the above lines up with the facts

The impression that Britain would not have the guts to defend the Falklands was firmly formed in the mind of the architect of scheme, Admiral Jorge Anaya, sometime between January 1975 and January 1976.

Margaret Thatcher and her Conservative Goverment came into power after the election in May 1979. They came into office to take over the complete and utter shambles left by Labour and their Lib-Dem Pact partners. As we have seen in the last twelve months the pattern has been repeated with a Labour Government leaving behind economic chaos that forces decisions on the incumbent Government. Hence the defence cuts announced by John Nott in 1981.

To say that Margaret Thatcher caused the Falklands War is absolute arrant nonsense - here are your exact words:

"She caused the war by withdrawing the battleships that had hitherto discouraged the Argies"

So the Argentines only cooked up this plot to invade the Falklands and South Georgia between John Nott announcing the withdrawal of service of HMS Endurance in the Defence review of July 1881 and the 19th March 1982?? What are you insane? Have you any idea how long it takes to prepare, plan, equip and train for such an enterprise? You need a damn sight more time than eight months. The UK response ("The Empire Strikes Back" I think the Headlines screamed) was rapid purely because we are in NATO and at that time were at all times fully prepared to respond to a Soviet attack in Europe at short notice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 11 - 05:30 PM

"I'm not a reader. However the action you describe was certainly reported in every other newspaper. Silas was mistaken on that point, but it was a minor error."

He is not the only one though is he Big Al - would you like me to list the "things" you believe to be true but could not possibly be on the subject of the Falklands War taken from our exchanges so far.

Big difference between the likes of yourself, your fellow travellers and myself is that if I am shown to be in error I normally own up to it and done so several times on this forum.

I will stick with reality and truth - you carry-on believing your lies and myths - trot them out here I will pull you up on them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 27 Nov 11 - 05:55 PM

not really. you haven't faced the reality of the situation

1) On Labour's watch - the Argentinians were firmly told it was not a good idea to invade the Falklands

2) On Thatchers watch, they got the impression they could get away with it. So they did.

You don't address that incontravertible fact, except with bluster and bullshit and childish abuse from tory tabloids (Sunny Jim 'Crisis what crisis...'). Its a childish level of debate and I'm getting sick of it. Coupled with total bloody nonsense - the majority of people in the Republic of Ireland don't want a united Ireland.....oh yeh. try saying that down the Irish centre.

Terribus - you are living in an alternative universe mate. Join up for crissake.

Thatcher thoroughly fucked up everything. The main thing being her own party, which she filled with toadies and time servers.

I AM NOT a fellow traveller. My family has fought for this country, and worked honestly in it and for it. Some of them have served as Tory councillors - but even those hated bloody Thatcher. Just what is writing these licences in your head to abuse people? Whatever it is - its something not too healthy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 12:28 AM

I meant to stay out of this ~ fed up with young people in their 20s/30s telling me I have no future & will never make it, obviously thinking I am same age as them, & then asserting that they don't give a fuck how old I am or what I have achieved when I tell them I'm a slightly earlier generation [80 in coming year] & of my not inconsiderable CV which now in past not in future, which presumably contains not that much apart from death ~~

But feel must point out, yet again to Al & such, that for all the hatred which they asseverate she incurred from absolutely everyone in the known & unknown unlverse inc Al's Tory mates! ~~

the fact still remains that over a 12 year period [a record?], she was re-elected on a free vote of the entire nation, not once, not twice, but three [count them - 3!] times.

Now, again, all you great supporters of freedom & democracy: let us hear what you have to say to get your thick heads around that simple & incontrovertible fact.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 12:51 AM

"On Labour's watch - the Argentinians were firmly told it was not a good idea to invade the Falklands"

LOL did you read the BBC article that someone provided a link for? Read the final paragraph - The Lord Chancellor's advice to Calaghan's Government regarding the military assets sent to "excercise" down in the South Atlantic - Something to the tune of - If while you are down there and you see an Argentine, run away - firmly told indeed What a bloody joke!!!

The perception that the British would not fight for the Falklands was formed long before Thatcher or the Conservatives came to power.

As for the people of the Republic of Ireland wanting a United Ireland? That is not how you put it in the original post where you brought that up was it? As an asperation the people of the Republic of Ireland have voted to leave whether Ireland is ever united up to the people of Northern Ireland who have to vote for it first.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 04:17 AM

Apparently the film is going to have a 12A certificate - which means it's unsuitable for children and miners.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 04:46 AM

MGM - if you lived in a tory constiuency - or most of the south - you can have simply no idea of Thatcher and how she is viewed.

I can think of only the bubonic plague, or maybe the Duke of Cumberland post Culloden, who excites a similar reaction in people normally quite measured in their reactions. Maybe Cromwell in ireland.

Try to get a hold of this. there were these communities of hard working, not terribly well educated people No money had been spent on educating them, and in truth by the time they were fourteen the boys knew they were going down the pits, the girls knew that the lucky ones were going to marry miners. Lots of ther industries and businesses depended on these pits.

Thatcher comes along. No real plan for redevelopment. She doesn't say she is going to close all the pits down (she wouldn't have got elected if she had stated her intention) - although this is clearly the intention.

She closes the pits for whatever reason.

In double quick time, communities and families break up People see their kids (who would have had mortgages and families) begging on the streets, preyed upon the hard drug selling criminals. Cheap booze and the television with a Chinese torture of drip drip dripping images of affluence into the living room do the rest. watch the jeremy Kyle show for the amusing results.

In a way, i'm glad for you that you don't get it. But these are the communities that you sing about in your trad folk songs Trimdon Grange, byker Hill, etc. Show them some respect.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 06:36 AM

Al ~~ Do not mistake my point. Please believe:- I have no disrespect for the communities you mention. I am not attempting even to defend MT's policies; I was/am not a particular supporter of her at the time or retrospectively. But you do not address my point that her election record demonstrates that she was fulfilling the common & popular will, and not only of the S & the Home Counties; and not once but again & again: if you claim to be an upholder of democracy, then you really must not continually evade this point in this fashion. It was the miners' misfortune, it seemed/seems to me, to have a prickly, undiplomatic, aggressive leader who thoroughly alienated the populace at large from the justice of the cause he was supposed to be upholding ~ & largely at that by adopting an ad hominem [ad feminem?] approach to the leader they had elected of their own free untrammelled democratic will. Surely it is not her memory that should incur all this continuing obloquy, but Scargill's?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 07:47 AM

I suppose there was Richmond in Yorkshire and York itself - but I can't think of anywhere else that she actually dared to go announced - outside of the home counties.

I remember one weekend i was down in Looe and thanks to her accomodation of our Euro partners - every fishing boat in the harbour was in the hands of the bank manager. cornwall is Lib Dem country of course. She took care of the constituencies that took care of her.

Scargill is perceived as dim and uncomprehending. Thatcher as clever and evil.

I think that's probably right. Scargill - Prince Rupert, or the Earl of Stafford and Thatcher - The Witchfinder General. I think that's how histories of the period will work out.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 08:59 AM

I remember the day they chucked her out - going round with a happy sesnsation, and every now and then remembering why it was there. And hearing the hoots of joy, and the cars honking, and everyone you met had a smile on their face. And this was down in the South of England.

Of course the downside is that a grateful nation rewarded the Tories for doing the dirty deed by re-electing them, and by the time Labour was elected it was run by a spruced up Thatcher clone...

But I feel there is something misplaced about the "I hate Thatcher" thing - the real blame lies with the minority of voters (and remember it always was a minority) who voted her back into power twice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 09:54 AM

It is always a minority, McG ~~ since 1945, there has not been a single govt supported by an actual numerical majority of the electorate: a factor of our first-past-post constituency-based system; but PR has never been a popular alternative. So I don't think you can make much political capital of that.

I still feel the obloquy in which she is held to be unjust. Scargill was more malign than foolish, imo; and the idiot hyperbolical denunciations we keep hearing ["most evil woman of C20", some fool wrote on a thread not long since, genuinely appearing to feel she outranked Irma Grese of Elena Ceausecu or Myra Hindley in evil! - what a fatuous formulation] rub me up intolerably. She has become a mere scapegoat for the idiocy of the leftie opposition: a boo-figure bogey-woman for the unthinking or won't-think mob mentality.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 10:43 AM

It sounds like a situation similar to ours in Canada. Governments don't get elected by a majority here either, because there are a multipicity of parties, and no one of them can secure a true majority of the voting but they CAN secure a majority of the seats.

And there is only ONE that gets the vote of the "conservative" sector of the population (which is in the minority here)....so THEY've been winning the elections, despite the fact that about 60% of the public doesn't WANT them!

That's not democracy. What it is, I'm not sure, but it's definitely not democracy.

If the center-left in this country were to combine into a single party, the right would have little or no hope of forming a government. Unfortunately, the center-left is divided into 3 different parties, so the right has been winning the elections by default, despite the fact that only about 40% of the public wants them to. The public can't do much about it, because the number one concern of any political party is to perpetuate its own existence (and secure power)....so the inertial forces against those 3 center-left parties swallowing their foolish pride and surrendering a bit of their old identity by joining forces is immense.

They'd have to think of the common good before themselves!!! :-D

As for the conservatives, their primary wish is to do everything the USA wants them to, including sending Canadian forces to fight in pointless wars that are not in the interest of the Canadian public. Why do they do this? Because they are being paid handsomely to do it, that's why.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 11:08 AM

"Try to get a hold of this. there were these communities of hard working, not terribly well educated people No money had been spent on educating them"

Exactly the same amount of money was being spent educating them as was spent being educating everyone else. What you have in life are choices, some hard, some easy, some through necessity.

Odd thing about the Home Countries of my childhood, amongst the poor in Scotland and in Wales there was this terrific respect for education and the benefits a good education could bestow. Our family had friends who were from minimg communities in the North East, in Methil (Fife) and guys I played rugby against down in South Wales. The common thing you heard in Methil and in Wales from miners was, "No son of mine will go down the pit", most ended up going all the way through higher education and on to university, those that didn't went through apprenticeships with day release courses and night school. In the North East not once did I ever hear anybody say that - it was the easy option to go down the pit. Met quite a few who went to the Royal Navy and into the Royal Marines.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 11:24 AM

Chris woodhead (was ever a man so aptly named!) was in The Times at the weekend saying that the system in the 1950's was right. Just the top ten percent passed A level - regardless of how clever the entrants were and the quality of their answers.

So really, in the days you were talking about Teribus - education was never going to be an infallible route out of the pits. Certainly I knew some pretty clever miners who got bugger all out of their years in a sump sec. mod. it was an exclusive system.

In truth English education is still pretty much - one size fits all. A Canadian exchange teacher at our sec mod was disgusted at the way we wasted our children's talents. made no real provision for educating working class non academic kids.

I hate the way there are all these performance arts places - as though they're all going to win the X factor.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 11:53 AM

"Certainly I knew some pretty clever miners who got bugger all out of their years in a sump sec. mod. it was an exclusive system.

In truth English education is still pretty much - one size fits all."


Ah yes the English Comprehensive System - one size fits all - introduced in 1965 by??? - Harold Wilson's Labour Government.

There was nothing wrong with what it replaced, but to enact some social engineering experiment they destroyed a perfectly good system, many today wish that we could return to it - you reward excellence - a thing that "old" Labour would never acknowledge, mind you their leadership didn't mind taking advantage of it - straight out of Animal Farm.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 01:35 PM

Well the aim of comprehensively educating the population is a noble one that I subscibe to.

THe fault lies with clinging onto all the old garbage from the past.

the Grammar school i attended was a dump by any standards. We had a reunion of four of us a year or two back - we'd all done reasonably well - despite differing fortunes.

But we all agreed it was a crap preparation for life. They took the top 18% of the population. Of those about five kids a year got to university, and it was just geared up for those five.

the rest of us just had to make out as best we could.

The trouble is with education experts - they think they are too bloody clever by half. thus you get the nonsense of that National Curriculum. And of course you can always get lickspittles like Woodhead to step into line and rubber stamp it. No one has the balls to say - this is rubbish. Well its in no ones interest - cept the kids, and they don't count.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 05:06 PM

I agree that providing someone a comprehensive education is a wonderful thing - what a pity Harold Wilson's Comprehensive Education crusade couldn't deliver it. Too busy making everyone equal (great pity that in life, and I mean all forms of it, nobody is equal), too busy being non-competitive (when the reality is that life is extremely competitive), too busy social engineering for "the party's" benefit. There is only one political party that strives to maintain the downtrodden masses - the socialist Labour Party because they need their voters kept where they want them and where they can manipulate them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 05:53 PM

The point of any sensibly organized and responsible society (and political order) is NOT to make everyone equal, because that's impossible.

It is to ensure that everyone has equal protection under the law, equal civil rights, and equal opportunity to get an education, get a job, find housing, get medical care, etc. How they make use of those equal opportunities is entirely up to them, and that's where you will see that some do much better than others, because people are not equal in their talents, abilities, and motivations.

That's perfectly natural. You can have a socialist system where some will do far better than others, because they apply themselves to the opportunities around them far better than others.

You can also have a capitalist system where that happens.

And you can have a mixed system of capitalism and socialism where that happens.

I'm in favour of the latter.

It is an oft-repeated canard of the political Right that the Left wants to "make everyone equal". That is not true, it's never been true, and it simply cannot happen, because more motivated, determined, and capable people WILL do better and get farther in ANY system, regardless of whether it is leftist, rightist or centrist in nature.

The problem with the right wing movements that have arisen in the wake of the Reagan era is not that they encouraged competition. Genuine, honest competition is good. It is that they encouraged rampant corruption through de-regulation of lending institutions and they encouraged a rich corporate elite to run wild, commit fraud, and do completely irresponsible things to society just to enrich itself further...at the expense of the middle class and the public in general.

This was not just irresponsible. It was criminal. And we are seeing the results of that criminal behaviour all around us.

That was initiated by the political Right under Ronald Reagan...but does the political Left have clean hands? Hardly! The political Left has been playing ball with those same corporate elites since the 1980s...but is continually pretending not to. The large political parties have all been bought out long ago by the financial elites, regardless which side of the spectrum they pretend to be on.

Obama, supposedly an opponent of the Right, is using financial advisors who came straight from the corporate ranks of those who were responsible for the 2008 financial meltdown in the USA, which was a pyramid scheme that finally collapsed in on itself. I don't believe for a moment that Obama represents any real alternative to what preceded him. He just talks as if he did.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Nov 11 - 09:01 PM

Well Harold was allright in some ways. I got my degree from the Open University - now thats an idea that wouldn't have occurred to a tory as long as they had a hole in their arse.

Bit of a shit in others, i suppose.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 01:05 AM

The first six paragraphs of your last post I absolutely agree with

"It is an oft-repeated canard of the political Right that the Left wants to "make everyone equal". That is not true, it's never been true, and it simply cannot happen, because more motivated, determined, and capable people WILL do better and get farther in ANY system, regardless of whether it is leftist, rightist or centrist in nature."

That on other hand I do not. Not true, never true?? That has not been the experience in the UK. Labour Government means massive explosion in the Public sector and strangulation of the Private sector. The only trouble with that is that a large Public sector will never promote growth and prosperity and only increses the costs which a diminishing Private sector must pay. With Labour you always get "Big Central Government" and more regulation and more legislation than you can shake limp dick at - none of it encourages anything, capable people do get further but that is inspite of a socialist government than because of it.

Ah so Reagan caused the financial melt down did he?? It had nothing whatsoever to do with the collapse of the Sub Prime Mortgage market, which always existed and rubbed along quite nicely until during Bill Clinton's second term the two main mortgage brokers in the USA "Fanny & Freddie" were told to broker mortgages for people who should never have been lent money in the first place - commonly know as bad risks. This was done backed by a false impression given by the Clinton administration that the money for these loans would be guaranteed by the US Federal Bank. Only one thing wrong with all of that - the Federal Bank had made no such agreement.

In fact the "Fed" knew nothing about it until things started to come apart and people were borrowing money based on the supposed increased value of their properties (now you had all these bad risks playing at being financial gurus - driven by their greed, their necessity or by their stupidity). By this time GWB was in his second term and when the banks and Freddie & Fanny approached his administration and the "Fed" to stand by their guarantee they said "What Guarantee? Nothing whatsoever to do with us".

What should have happened was that GWB should have got the Fed to jump in then, right at the start, had he done so there would have been no meltdown at all and it would have been a damn sight cheaper for the US.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 02:28 AM

Harold also kept us out of Vietnam.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 02:42 AM

I quite agree that the Clinton administration was deeply complicit in helping to cause the financial meltdown, and I agree with your comments about the Sub Prime Mortgage market.

I don't blame just Ronald Reagan for what has happened. I blame EVERY American administration and president since 1980 for what has happened, Clinton no less than the others. I am not taking sides on that between Democratic and Republican administrations, because I think they're both in it up to their ears.

As I know little about the activities of British Labour governments, past or present, I can't comment on that. What you say about Labour may be correct. My general impression, though, is that none of your political parties are worth a damn, and I'd say exactly the same about the Canadian political parties and the American political parties: not one of them is worth a damn. They are not serving the general public. They all pretend to, but they are not doing so. They are serving their rich friends and cronies in the financial and business elite who fund their political campaigns and who work with them (and control them) once they are in office.

And they are quite happy to play off various different sectors of the public against each other which is where all the hoopla about "left" and "right" comes in. It allows them to divide and conquer. As long as they can keep you and Big Al and millions of others like you fighting with and detesting each other as long as you live over the imagined Left/Right divide, they've got you right where they want you.

You always seem to notice when I sharply criticize the Right. But you seem not to notice when I sharply criticize the Left. Or at least you don't make any mention of it. Why is that? Does it not register on your radar?

I also agree with you that "What should have happened was that GWB should have got the Fed to jump in then, right at the start"...but I don't regard the Fed as an honest protector of the American public. Nevertheless, Bush did not take decisive action, and he should have.

As for Obama, I am not impressed at all with him either. He seems a lot like Bush all over again to me (although he doesn't look or sound like Bush). He just mostly does what Bush would probably do in the final analysis. I suspect that's because they really work for much the same entrenched interests...and their so-called parties are a 2-headed sham...one that works brilliantly to divide a frightened public and keep them naively imagining that the next presidential "election" will deliver them from the gangsters they are ruled by.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 02:47 AM

>>
I quite agree that the Clinton administration was deeply complicit in helping to cause the financial meltdown,<<

That is the second stupidest thing I have read on this thread. The Stupidest was Teribus talking about Reagan being to blame. The Bush had eight years to stop that runaway train. What they did was add more cars and disable the breaks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 09:49 AM

My point about Thatcher never having the support of a majority of voters was to forestall the frequent claim that most people voted for her, so serve them right.

The fact that governments that it is almost unheard of for governments in Britain to have majority support is something that they should always take into account in ruling, and modify their behaviour to reflect it - when they act and talk as if they did have majority support they should always be challenged.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Musket
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 11:23 AM

And for those who thought democracy was over rated....

Mind you, my views of Th*tcher apart, I must take a little bit of issue with Al's comment about lads in mining communities being not so well educated. I appreciate you were trying to do so, but the statistics were not quite as bad as you think.

When I got my engineer's ticket (basically a HNC called AMEME (hons) it sounded good but at Manton pit back then, the other electricians included twenty odd BSc, a smattering of MSc and to my recollection, eight of us were chartered engineers. I ended up with a PhD, and my son, who also used to work down the pit is presently researching his. Every lad down the pit since the mid '60s had spent a year minimum at college before even taking out labouring jobs such as haulage.

it was a skilled job regardless of what you did and that became part of the problem. Highly intelligent skilled people but the training and qualifications were not much use outside of mining. That's the awful legacy, lack of transferable skills when industry as a whole was on its knees.

That's why her lack of understanding of her own citizens caused so much hardship and grief.

That's why she felt she could call her own citizens "the enemy within."

That's why I hope she rots in Hell.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 11:28 AM

Hang about:

"The Stupidest was Teribus talking about Reagan being to blame." - Jack the Sailor

Where and when did I ever say that anything about Reagan being to blame? My only mention of Reagan was to ask a question:

"Ah so Reagan caused the financial melt down did he??"

And of course Reagan DID NOT.

As far as politics go I think that much to your surprise you would find that you and I Little Hawk would on most things find ourselves very much in agreement.

"It allows them to divide and conquer. As long as they can keep you and Big Al and millions of others like you fighting with and detesting each other as long as you live over the imagined Left/Right divide, they've got you right where they want you.

You always seem to notice when I sharply criticize the Right. But you seem not to notice when I sharply criticize the Left. Or at least you don't make any mention of it. Why is that? Does it not register on your radar?


I am not fighting with Big Al and most certainly do not detest him, he is in all probability a very nice bloke and if his songs and music are anything to go by extremely enjoyable and entertaining company.

I would describe myself a A-political, but I will react when people make statements that I believe to be inaccurate or downright incorrect.

I am in accord with MtheGM when he said:

"I still feel the obloquy in which she is held to be unjust. Scargill was more malign than foolish, imo; and the idiot hyperbolical denunciations we keep hearing ["most evil woman of C20", some fool wrote on a thread not long since, genuinely appearing to feel she outranked Irma Grese of Elena Ceausecu or Myra Hindley in evil! - what a fatuous formulation] rub me up intolerably.

She has become a mere scapegoat for the idiocy of the leftie opposition: a boo-figure bogey-woman for the unthinking or won't-think mob mentality."


She had a job to do and was asked to it by the British electorate. She was a leader who actually provided leadership. Currently in the USA they have a President who is incapable of leading - I know for certain which is the more dangerous.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 11:39 AM

Ah, well, exactly the same thing happens in Canada, McGrath. The Conservatives, elected to a majority with only about 40% public support, act as if they had a majority mandate for the Canadian public.

Face it, political parties are corrupted institutions who seek power because they want it, and who do everything possible to retain power once they get it, and who will sell their souls to the highest bidder without a flicker of remorse. A political party is a gang. It's easy to corrupt a gang...just offer them a lot of money and let them rule the local turf.

But do not expect them to be public servants. They serve themselves.

I honestly believe that the only way to solve this sordid situation is to do what was done previously with the absolute monarchies which governed most of the word. Get rid of political parties. Disband them. Have indepedents run for office everywhere, people who are not connected to any political party organization, people who only represent themselves, their personal ideas and experience, and all of whom are funded equally from the public purse and who all get equal media coverage. And make elections much shorter and fare less costly than they presently are...like about 2% of the present cost. And do not divide the government into partisan blocs, but have it be an assembly of equals...as it once was, for example, in Athens...or as it is now in various city governments. I think that political parties should be done away with entirely.

This proposal, I imagine, will be met with hoots of derision from various quarters and I will be told it's an impossible idea.......

........which is just the sort of reaction I'd have gotten from a lot of conventional minds in 1650 if I'd proposed getting rid of the absolute (or otherwise) monarchs who governed much of Europe and replacing them with publicly elected assemblies of representatives.

Fine. (shrug) I'm just freely expressing my own ideas. I don't expect them to change the world. I'm not going to lose any sleep if a variety of people here disagree with them or if they are not adopted by the world around me. I'm just one person, and I'm just talking, period. And that's what everyone else here is doing too, just talking, and that's fine with me. That's normal. It's nothing to get in fights with each other about, cos that doesn't solve anything either.

If we disagree....fine. Okay. No sweat. Life goes on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 11:54 AM

Teribus - Those were interesting and reasonable comments on your part in that last post. I might be called apolitical too, because there's no political party out there that I have any faith in anymore. I'm disgusted with both the "Right" and the "Left"...and not much impressed by "the center" (if there is one).

I didn't much care for Margaret Thatcher, but I do agree that she provided genuine leadership, no question about that...and that Obama does not do so. In the case of Canada, Pierre Trudeau certainly provided genuine leadership. That doesn't necessarily mean one had to like the way he governed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 01:32 PM

Twice since the war we've had governments elected with majorities in Parliament who had actually received fewer votes than the party that came second.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 02:23 PM

It happens to be the system we have, Kevin; so you are going to have to live with it. You know there have been numerous polls &c to test how popular another system would be: never been anywhere near a majority for trying anything else.

It's probably a bit like democracy in general ~~ who was it who described democracy as "the worst possible system - except for all the others"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 02:28 PM

Answer ~~~

-Churchill's famous dictum: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947)-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Nov 11 - 04:51 PM

"never been anywhere near a majority for trying anything else."

That, MtheGM, is because most of the public haven't given any serious thought to the alternatives, they don't even understand the alternatives, the powers that be have made sure to tell them VERY LITTLE about the alternatives, and most people are afraid of change, therefore they vote to maintain the status quo which they are familiar with.

Most dogs react exactly the same way to any suggested change in their established routines! ;-)

Sheer ignorance and inertia are what are maintaining the public's tacit consent to the spectacularly undemocratic political processes we are presently living under.

It won't change until it breaks under the weight of its own dysfunctionality, in my opinion. And there's no guarantee that that will result in something better.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Musket
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 03:57 AM

Well, she certainly had something or I wouldn't be rattling on about her entry on the civilisation wall of shame.

I am apolitical, I sympathise with some of the stances on both sides of the economic argument, I speak highly of some Tories, also of some Labour politicians..

So here I am, many years on, and still cannot even bring myself to even consider a single redeeming feature of the bitch. (See? If it were about anybody else, I wouldn't use such terms.) So there has to be something..

I have had my photo taken with Bliar at No.10, been invited to many receptions there and other Whitehall places, garden parties etc. In some ways, a part of the establishment, having held public office. So I do tend to at least try to be rational. But her? Never. I can't even bring myself to sound rational about her.

Is that a fault in me or a fault in her? Methinks the later, all the same.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 11:12 AM

I gather you would not have considered marriage, then, had she been available?



;-D


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 05:16 PM

You missed the point I was making MtheGm, which is that we should never allow any government (or their supporters) to claim falsely that they have majority support just because they have won a parliamentary majority with a plurality (or even a minority) of popular votes.

That is a separate matter from whether a different system of voting might be preferable.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 05:22 PM

Well put.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 05:43 PM

I got your point perfectly well, Kevin. You failed to get mine, which is that happens to be the way we are governed. Someone elected three times hand-running under our system is, within our system, the choice of the people: it is mere pissing-in-the-wind bitching to deny this on fatuously inapplicable statistical grounds which there is no popular will whatever to emend. By your reckoning, we have had no government since 1950 with a mandate from the electorate to govern. Isn't it amazing how much more stable our governments have been over the period than those of all those other places with the marvellously fair, fully-representative systems whose governments survive for all of 10 minutes on a good day!

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 11:45 PM

So you like that status quo, MtheGM? Have you found it to your benefit in some way? Not implying anything nasty by that, I'm just wondering. You appear to be pleased with the results of the present political system.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 12:16 AM

LH ~ I have expressed no opinion as to whether or not I 'like' it. I am sure that, like almost all human states, it has its pros & its cons. And it happens to be the one we have. And the general consensus as to its operation & effectiveness would seem, I repeat, from all polls, surveys, &c, to be that it ain't broke so why fix it?

This, I reiterate, is no expression of my own 'liking' or otherwise'; but simply an expression of the facts of the status quo, to the realities of which had we not all better adjust as it isn't going to alter any day soon?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 11:20 AM

We have all already adjusted to the realities of the situation, MtheGM. We live with those realities.

I myself stated that it's probably not going to change soon, because people (like dogs, monkeys, etc) strenuously resist change. They're afraid of it...and they're also victims of their own inertia.

Corrupt ruling systems can take great comfort in the above weaknesses of the human population, because it helps keep them in power longer. ;-) A lazy and unresponsive public are easily dominated by an elite few.

Our present political systems are flawed, obviously...as are all political systems. They lie somewhere between the possible extremes, which is to say: They could be a lot worse than they are. And they could be a lot better than they are.

Why are you taking issue with certain people here discussing ways in which our present political systems could be improved upon? What is harmful in doing so? How does it indicate a disconnect with "reality" to so?

Or is it that you are just trying to win the ongoing argument that you're having with McGrath? If so, you're engaged in what amounts to a never-ending feedback loop which will only end when one or another of the participants gets too bored with the whole thing to continue. ;-)

And when I get too bored with it, you won't hear any more from me about it either. ;-)

That's the way it works here.

When it's all over, though, no one will have won anything.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 12:29 PM

Yeah, sure, anything you say. Cool it. I agree with every word you say ~~ except I didn't even realise I was having any sort of argument with McGrath, ongoing or otherwise.

Did you, Kevin?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 01:05 PM

Maybe "argument" was the wrong word.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 01:55 PM

Nothing wrong with arguments, so long as they aren't quarrels.

No disagreement that "this is the way we are governed" in England at least, and to a lesser extent for the other parts of the United Kingdom, where the devolved administrations aren't based on the same strange system.

The term "mandate" is one I dislike, because it tends to imply that governments act in accordance with their electoral manifestos, which isn't generally true. And I do not accept that it can ever be true to say that a government reflects "the popular will" merely because they succeeded in winning a parliamentary majority.

For example, the present government has a majority which is based largely on the fact that many people voted deliberately voted to keep out the Tories.

That doesn't mean it isn't "legitimate" - but it should mean that they should claim ti represent majority opinion, unless in certain circumstances they can demonstrate that that is the case.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 02:24 PM

Yeah, sure, a government is legitimate if it was elected according to the present system of "first past the post"...but it isn't legitimate for that government to pretend that it has the support of a majority of the people when it plainly does not...and to behave as if it had a mandate based upon the will of a majority of the people.

However, politicians are anything but scrupulous. ;-D They play the game to win. Once they have power, they are certainly not inclined to share it.

Again, you could say the same about Alpha dogs, couldn't you?

I'd like to think humanity could do better than that, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to happen.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 04:33 PM

Obviously I mean to say they shouldn't claim to represent majority opinion. But I doubt if that correction is really needed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 Dec 11 - 05:32 AM

--Yeah, sure, a government is legitimate if it was elected according to the present system of "first past the post"...but it isn't legitimate for that government to pretend that it has the support of a majority of the people when it plainly does not...and to behave as if it had a mandate based upon the will of a majority of the people.


I mean to say they shouldn't claim to represent majority opinion.--

.,,. I see the points you are both making, obviously. But would point out that these anomalies in the mandate to govern [or whatever word you might prefer, K] are obviated by the fact that everyone knows that they are subsumed within the system; it is accepted that, having won the election under the system which obtains, they represent what is accepted as the popular will ~~ in the sense that there is manifestly no popular appetite to alter this system, whose results are acceptable to the populace, otherwise there would be such appetite; wouldn't there?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Dec 11 - 09:12 AM

What worries me is that cattle who are marched to a trough every day of their lives and who have never seen grass appear content to eat ground-up corn meal spiked with a variety of drugs and hormones, because they don't know any better. They appear to be giving consent to the arrangement, but do they have a real choice under those circumstances?

The fact is, they'd be far better off out on a natural meadow, eating grass and other plants, as cows did for hundreds of thousands of years until some agri-corporations got the idea of raising them in factory farm conditions.

I think the present public is in a somewhat analogous position, like domesticated animals who don't know or understand what's happening to them. And their leaders are analogous to the boards of directors and CEOs of the agri-corporations.

That's not a healthy situation for the general public, to put it mildly. They imagine themselves to be free, but they are not.

The complete abolition of political parties would go a long way toward fixing our present political system, in my opinion, but I don't expect to see it happen any time soon. "First past the post" would cease to have much relevance if there were no political parties, because a legislature or parliament would not be divided into competing partisan power blocs which jockey against one another, it would be an assembly of independent equals who would have to debate and compromise amongst each other, and they would not be beholden to a party structure or a party line. Each could think and act freely. I think that would be far more likely to produce a real functioning democracy than is the case with a partisan system.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 02 Dec 11 - 10:09 AM

"Each could think and act freely"


errrmm..

or Each could be bribed and bought off individually by corporate lobbyists and maintain a facade of acting freely... ????


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Dec 11 - 05:34 PM

"The popular will" is the kind of terminology typically used by dictatorships. I don't trust the term.

Governments don't operate according to "the popular will" - they operate by what seems like a good idea at the time, taking into account what they think might help to shape things so that they get elected next time (and what might help their political careers along the way).

Insofar as "the popular will" enters into the picture what matters is the actual picture at the moment, not back in the last election.

The last election, and any promises that may have been made in the manifesto or during the election, are past history, at times useful to dredge up for rhetorical purposes, but at other times best forgotten and obscured.

What led the Tory bigwigs to ditch Thatcher was not whether there was or wasn't wasn't any "mandate" for the poll tax in the previous manifesto, it was the explosion of anger in the streets, expressed in plummeting Tory votes in by-elections etc.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Dec 11 - 06:15 PM

punkfolkrocker - "or Each could be bribed and bought off individually by corporate lobbyists and maintain a facade of acting freely... ????"

Yes, I anticipated that response coming from someone. And it is a possibility. Definitely. And it would certainly be attempted by the corporate lobbyists. And in some cases it would certainly succeed.

But do you see that if an elected legislator was an independent person free of any "party line" pressure from a centralized party top brass, that that person would be freer to think for themselves and represent their constituents, rather than becoming a passive puppet of the party line? A legislator could act independently then according to conscience and not be punished by the party for doing so, which is what happens now.

And I think the lobbyists would find it harder to corrupt the system in that case...since they wouldn't be so easily able to corrupt it "from the top down", which is how they do it now. They'd have to deal with every single legislator, and there would likely be some who would be honest, and expose and draw attention to what was going on. Without a party top brass to whip them into line, they wouldn't be so afraid to speak out.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 02 Dec 11 - 08:21 PM

hi.. Little Hawk ..

seeing as you are the person I most respect at mudcat, I'm in no way having a go at you..

and it would be a great alternative system..

But, in my limited knowledge and understanding, a serious underlying flaw
is the nature & profile of politicians clinging to power under the existing party system.

They would be exactly the same individuals who would seek election to power as independents.

They'd all emerge from exactly the same limited gene pool and sociocultural family backgrounds.

The absence of any formal parties would not stop them quickly gathering in informal groupings
bonded by blood ties and shared social histories & educational networking...

with shared ideological inclinations, ambitions and ultimate selfish goals...

and they'd still bamboozle the electorate to ensure lesser educated and connected candidates from blue collar backgrounds
failed to win seats in Govt.


still wouldn't trust them..


sorry, it's nearly 30 years since I graduated my degree on this sort of thing and turned my back on academia
and I frustatingly can't remember anymore of teh vocabulary or words and concepts..

But I'm sure you know where I'm heading with this...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 02 Dec 11 - 09:24 PM

Little Hawk is in that rarest group of political thinkers. The Defeatist Utopians.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 Dec 11 - 12:44 AM

Here's an opinion piece that was published in the New York Times on December 7. The author is British, so don't blame us Americans for it.

Bring the Iron Lady Back


By RICHARD VINEN

MARGARET THATCHER has long been reviled by the British left, so much so that the singer Elvis Costello once fantasized about stomping on her grave in his 1989 song "Tramp the Dirt Down." But Mrs. Thatcher achieved more than any other British peacetime prime minister of the 20th century. It is rumored that, when she dies, she will receive a state funeral — an honor rarely accorded to anyone except monarchs. There are also plans for a public celebration.

Her life is the inspiration for a new movie that opens later this month, starring Meryl Streep as "The Iron Lady." It chronicles Mrs. Thatcher's divisive policies as prime minister as she led Britain through the economic doldrums of the 1980s. It was a time when the country faced financial ruin and politicians were compelled to make hard choices.

Mrs. Thatcher was a tough, adversarial leader. She was never liked, even by those who supported her policies, and she was hated by those who opposed her.

Yet her political style may be just what Britain needs right now. The country is in the midst of an economic crisis that will force the government to make difficult, unpopular decisions. And that is what Mrs. Thatcher did so well. Facing long-term economic decline and the brooding menace of the Soviet Union, she broke the trade unions, sold off nationalized industries and helped imbue British capitalists with a confidence that they had not felt since the death of Queen Victoria.

She was at her best when the odds seemed against her or when she had clear enemies. In 1982, she sent an armada to fight the Argentines in the Falkland Islands. And in 1984-85, she held out against a strike by the National Union of Mineworkers, which had been powerful enough to bring down a government 10 years before.

Although Mrs. Thatcher has become a respected symbol of statesmanship outside Britain, she remains a reminder of social division within it. In 2008, the future foreign secretary, William Hague, sought to reassure American officials that he and David Cameron, soon-to-be prime minister, were "Thatcher's children." When his comment leaked, the Labour opposition seized upon it, keen to circulate the quote in the hopes that it would stir up old anti-Thatcher feelings. And despite being in power today, Conservative leaders still worry that they are associated with the bitterness of the Thatcher years. They speak of changing their image as "the nasty party" and the need to "detoxify the brand."

One reason British politicians feel uncomfortable with Thatcherism is that Britain has been relatively prosperous in the last two decades, at least in part because of things the Thatcher government did: tax cuts, financial-sector deregulation and weaker unions all made Britain a more attractive place to do business.

A new generation of politicians who grew up in an age of prosperity has ceased to think of politics in terms of hard choices and scarce resources; Mr. Cameron belongs to that generation. He was just 12 years old when Mrs. Thatcher came to power in 1979 and he became leader of the Conservative Party in 2005, when the current economic storms seemed almost unimaginable. Even when Mr. Cameron became prime minister last year, the financial crisis still felt, to most of the British electorate, like something short-term and vaguely unreal.

But British politics has lost something with its post-Thatcher embrace of consensus and optimism. Thatcherism was a galvanizing force. It mobilized right-wingers to do things, such as selling off huge state-owned corporations, that many of them would once have considered impossible. It also mobilized the left to develop radical alternatives: during the 1980s, the Labour Party veered toward support for unilateral nuclear disarmament and increased state intervention in the economy.

Unlike today, voters in 1983 faced clear choices. A vote for Thatcher's Tories was a vote for large-scale privatization; a vote for Labour was a vote for socialism. A Conservative vote meant keeping Britain in the European Economic Community; a Labour vote meant withdrawal. A Tory vote meant stationing American cruise missiles in Britain; a Labour vote meant that they would be stopped.

There are no longer such clear-cut choices. Explicit talk of class interests and inequality have been replaced by a vaguer and less divisive language of "fairness" and "equal opportunity."

The major political parties look remarkably similar today. All are led by clean-cut 40-somethings who blend social liberalism (support for same-sex marriage and opposition to the death penalty) with acceptance of the free market. Indeed, the Conservatives now find themselves governing with strange bedfellows, in a coalition with the small Liberal Democrat Party, whose president recently described Thatcherism as "organized wickedness." Mrs. Thatcher hated coalitions. She most likely would have preferred to lose an election than to govern without an outright parliamentary majority.

Unlike Mr. Cameron, Mrs. Thatcher came to power at a time when people felt desperate. This desperation, and the sense that she might be the last chance to restore Britain's fortunes, accounted for much of her success.

Thatcherism was not an alien invasion. It reflected a consensus by many members of the British establishment that things could not go on as they were. This is why so many supported Mrs. Thatcher's policies, even when they disliked her personally.

Mr. Cameron is certainly a more likable figure than Mrs. Thatcher, but likability may not be enough when the British people realize that their current predicament — requiring government spending cuts at a time of rising unemployment and financial chaos in Europe — is actually worse than the crisis when Mrs. Thatcher came to power in 1979.

In these circumstances, it will take a bracing dose of Thatcherite ideological confrontation to revive British politics.

Richard Vinen, a professor of history at King's College, London, is the author of "Thatcher's Britain: The Politics and Social Upheaval of the 1980s."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 11 Dec 11 - 12:53 AM

hey joe..

a fairly astute and concise neutral summary..

until the last sentence..

"it will take a bracing dose of Thatcherite ideological confrontation to revive British politics."

fair few of us brits would turn it round and question..

"will it ???"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,punkfokrocker
Date: 11 Dec 11 - 12:55 AM

"must it !!!???"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Dec 11 - 01:31 AM

punkfolkrocker - Your suggestions of how the rich elite and the powers that be could go about corrupting a system with no political parties are perfectly reasonable.

To abolish political parties, however, would be a step in the right direction, but not a cure-all. Another step in the right direction would be to fund candidates' campaigns from the public purse...all equally...and at very modest expenditure, rather than the incredible spending than is presently done on political campaigns. Another step in the right direction would be to give ALL candidates equal media coverage, and NOT to allow personal attacks to be made on other candidates, but only to allow clear statements of a candidate's own policy proposals and their ideas about what they would do once in office. Another step in the right direction would be to limit political campaigns to a relatively brief period of time, such as 1 month or 6 weeks.

Canadian election campaigns are already limited to a relatively brief period of time, and it has worked very well. USA election campaigns are stretched out over almost 2 years! And at unbelievable expenditure and unbelievable damage to the mood of the country. That means that only the VERY rich (or their friends...meaning their willing tools) can possibly afford to run for office.

I propose these various ideas, not because I think there's ANY chance of them being adopted in the forseeable future in the USA.

(There isn't.)

But for this reason alone: If I see what I believe is a truth, I speak it. If I see what I believe is a good idea I speak it.

Period.

I am not a Utopian, I am simply someone who points out the existing realities I see around me, and who speaks the truth as I see it regarding alternative possibilities to those realities.

I have no hope, not a shred of hope that the corrupt American political system will ever reform itself, anymore than I'd have had hope of the Nazis or the Romans (in their late declining imperial period) reforming themselves. I believe the USA will end up as they did, bringing itself down to destruction through its own corruption and imperial megalomania, and I hope I'm not anywher near the USA when that finally happens. It may happen slowly. It may happen quickly. But it will happen.

And I will STILL speak the truth as I see it, regardless, because the truth itself deserves to BE spoken for its own sake.

And I would hope that others would do the same.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Dec 11 - 01:39 AM

Evidence that you are a Utopian? You would say this as if you thought it were possible.

"but only to allow clear statements of a candidate's own policy proposals and their ideas about what they would do once in office."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 11 Dec 11 - 01:57 AM

hey LH.. you're [a bit] older and [very much] wiser than me..


but..

I was by chance educated out of my social class sufficiently enough to eventually & finally understand
the ultimate frustrating cruel limitations of

'glass ceilings'.............................

.. public state funded campaigns and media access would & should be a positive step up
for politicaly minded educated blue collar outsider candiates like my kind..

but nothing compared to the unlimited additional private secret hidden funding
and incestuous media networking always available to the rich opposition...

sorry, I lost my faith in the honour and integrity of govt a long time ago...


But i still fiercely believe in persuading new young voters how important it is for them
understand the empowering right to vote..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Yanks make a Thatcher film!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Dec 11 - 03:40 AM

It is definitely possible, Jack, but probably not in a society that holds the cynical philosophies and empty beliefs of present-day America (and most other places).

You first need people growing up with a far better and wiser set of beliefs than the present addictions to money and material wealth, and that takes time...and very inspired leadership...to set the example of something better and wiser in front of those who are growing up.

It most definitely IS possible for people to accomplish that. That's why I believe in it. It has BEEN accomplished at certain times in the past, here and there.

*****

punkfolkrocker - I get what you mean about the glass ceilings. You're right about that.

I have also "lost my faith in the honour and integrity of govt a long time ago...". You bet I have. I have equally lost faith in the honour and integrity of political parties. (although there are many very good and well intentioned people working for them)

What I have not lost faith in is the inner Spirit and Heart of humanity. Those will never die. The innate spirit and heart in individual human beings is greater than government, greater than money, greater than institutions, greater than organized religions and hierarchies, and that spirit and heart in each one of us is what I place my faith in. It's in you. It's in me. It's in every human being at some level...if they will only make use of it, and if their love can overcome their fear.

I believe people are inherently good. I do not accept a cynic's dark view of humanity. I believe life is inherently good. We're all a part of life, and what is best in us WILL triumph. That is what I put my faith in...human beings themselves, not human-created laws, governments, and institutions.

I put up with those and I deal with them (laws, governments, institutions) as best I can...because I must, for the time being...and because it's the sensible thing to do for the time being...but that doesn't mean I believe in them. They're temporary. They're mostly arbitrary. People will still be around when they're all gone. People will still be around when money is gone.

Have a look at the ruins of ancient Egypt, Assyria, Persia, Greece, Rome, Meso-America...all their rules, laws, authorities, and institutions are long gone, but we human beings are STILL here. And we'll be here long after the present set of authority structures have crumbled into dust, and their weapons into rust.

What I find hope in is not our great ruling authority structures, or our foolish political systems, but the people I personally know and love...family, friends, co-workers, those I know from direct experience. That is where hope lies as far as I'm concerned, and I make new friends all the time, mostly through music. I have no reason to feel any sense of defeat...the human connections I believe in grow stronger every day.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 24 January 4:40 AM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.