It was a bit of an odd statement.

I can totally see why some people would think Thatcher was bad for the country. They are wrong, but that's mainly due to lack of intelligence and/or knowledge on their part.

Do history? Some of us lived it, cockle. Which is why we're immune to your particular line of revisionist bullcrap.

The most amusing thing about some posts on this thread is that they somehow see Thatcher as being a figurehead for the rich elite, somehow stamping on the working class.

They couldn't be more wrong.

Thatcher was all about breaking down so called "class barriers". Opportunity for all replaced "the old boys networks".

Of course the Socialists were terrified of this (as were some members of the Tory party to be fair).

If working class people were given opportunity, and a route to a more affluent future, they may not vote for a monkey with a red rosette. Given a monkey had better policies than the Labour party at the time this was a real worry.

Labour has a vested interest in keeping the status quo. It is terrified of the removal of the working class. Maggie on the other hand encouraged it.

Now of course not all of the working class wanted take the leap. They wanted a nice safe job in a Nationalised industry. What they didn't appreciate was that their job was effectively paid for by other members of society and was not needed. A very simple concept but one that many on here still cannot grasp.

No need for the patronising tone "pickle". Some of us also lived through it.

Presumably you also "lived" the power cuts, the sh*t piling up in the street, the dead not being buried, the continuous tag of "the sick man of Europe"

Or do you have a selective memory?

This was very true, emphasised by the Labour party of the time moving as far to the left during her reign as they dare, a policy that clearly didn't work.



You should have used the word "had" rather than "has", the present tense is very much untrue as the current Labour party bears no resemblance to any Labour party that existed during or prior to Thatchers era.

Nope. An agnostic is simply someone who accepts that there is no evidence to prove the existence or otherwise of a god or gods. They can still believe in one or not. Agnosticism is not a stance in itself, it modifies either theism or atheism.

This may helphttp://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c123/RealKosh/AgnosticvGnosticvAtheistvTheist.jpg" >

Where does anti theist fit in?

My memory is fine. As is my ability to comprehend what I read and respond accordingly rather than just jump in with both feet and make myself look a tit.

As an example, would you care to tell me what my opinion of Thatcher and/or the period immediately before her election was? Or did you just see me sparring with a comedy wind-up account and jump to some conclusions?

Probably the most vile thread I have ever read on here. Some people should be ashamed.

I personally think Arthur Scargill was a petty crook and a gangster who intimidated people into joining his big struggle. I had and still have no sympathy for miners who IMO were greedy self serving men who didn't give a toss about anybody but themselves.

That said when Scargill dies I will not rejoice and when one of the few remaining niners dies in a pit accident I won't take any pleasure from it I will be saddened.

This is because I'm a human being and accept life is never black and white and that all but the biggest monsters like Stalin (of whom Scargill is a fan) most people do what they do for what they see as the best of reason.

Now show some dignity, humanity and decency and rise above it or remain the pigs you appear.

Its always funny to see someone take the moral highground by defending some pretty awful stuff.

Scargill was a total p1ll0ck, even many lefties agree with that.
But the strike was not the death knell.
The strike was in protest against the death knell.
Thatcher brought in McGregor and paid him £1m to close down most of the pits (Scargill got that bit right) and THAT is what the strike was about.
You have confused cause and effect.

The suffering and misery for the majority of the population at the time was caused by the greedy and selfish unions undemocratic industrial action. If there was misery for the strikers that was self inflicted. The unions mishandling of the situation brought on a popular tidal wave against them that they have never recovered from and is why they have since vilfied Mrs Thatcher in an attempt to cover over their failures and guilt in the same manner that Scargill tried to cover over his bald head. Both failures. Mrs T in her final years made errors but it should be remembered that it was the Conservative party and not the public that ousted her.

Dennis Healey was one of the architects of the disaster that required the IMF bail out and led to the Winter of Discontent. I think you can discount what that pompous oaf said as it showed how out of touch he was for saying it and you for quoting it. May I remind you how popular she was as the people of this country swept her to power for 3 straights election wins on the trot.

The country needed a radical overhaul and in undertaking this task she naturally made enemies from the sector that felt the most pain. If you wish to believe just one negative aspect of her leadership thats up to you. But the history books will show there were two sides to the lady and the positive one was by far the most important.

So where were you working in the 70's then?

I was just watching Margaret Thatcher on the BBC iPlayer, and Neil Kinnock didn't have anything positive to say about Scargill at all when it got around to the miners strike, basically putting all the blame on him.

I take it you are referring to the awful greed from the undemocratic unions that almost brought the whole UK to a halt in the 70's?