The6Bells

But hoping Thatcher dies in a horrific fire is OK by you? What a fucking cunt.

Hopefully your grannie died in just that manner, it's what people like you deserve. Assuming she wasnt't so ashamed to have you as a grandson she hadn't already slit her wrists.

And by that logic, you can judge Cameron's policies of today without reference to anything Gordon Brown did. In a word, nonsense.

You should never believe a word anyone says if they're the sort of person who can in all seriousness come up with crap like 'the Belgrano was not a threat' or 'the Belgrano was retreating'. These things are proveably false using both Argentine and British primary sources from the time, and has been backed up by serious military historians since. It's basically like trusting the word of someone who tells you the holocaust never happened, it really is that much of a massive distortion of basic historical fact.

Like Happy Face, if you're going to talk about another country, do some basic research first. Spain's economy was fucked by the trade union bound left, who'd been in power most of the time since the end of Franco and had ruled for 7 years until being kicked out with their worst ever election result in 2011.

That would be the same bloke who said he was going to reverse the austerity measures and go for a spend for growth strategy like the US? Did you even do the most basic of research before coming out with this bullshit?

A double-digit % rise in unemployment, taking it to levels not seen for 17 years. Violent union organised protests over the closure of a steel plant, the last major employer in a depressed area of the country Thatcher's Britain? Nope. France. 2013. Under a social democrat president. Who likes nothing more than to tax the rich to solve all the country's problems. So suck it up all you Thatcher haters (and that goes for all the scuzzy Scousers who might be browsing this week). You're gonna need a bigger boat. A whole lot bigger.

I think that's what probably suits you. Me, I prefer reality. Some loved her, some liked, some didn't care, some disliked, and some hated. But most respected her. She spurred a reaction more than her predecessors or successors, but that only goes to show she was getting shit done. The haters gonna hate, they're just never going to get people to believe they represent anywhere close to half the nation.

Or....they just didn't hate Thatcher as much as you think, or in the numbers you think. Only action would have proved your point, inaction proves nothing. Claiming that people who hated Thatcher would remotely care if the right wing press think they're scum is frankly just make believe bullshit. And there were plenty of things all these supposedly decent objectors could have done that wouldn't have made them look like 'scum' and thus fall into the evil press' trap, it's just inconvenient for bullshit peddlers like yourself that all the incidents of actual 'protest' in the sense of go out and acutally do or say something, have all been proper scummy.

I can hardly be gutted that something you didn't even know was going to happen, didn't happen, not least when you claim the reason it didn't happen is some Orwellian fantasy rather than anything you can actually prove (got any examples of people who are inhuman scum wrongly being labelled as such by the press?).

Well, it's gone from 'divided a nation' to 'not liked by large parts of the UK but not enough to do anything about it' in pretty short order, all apparently because we still live in a nation where police brutality is the norm and the press are simply an organ of state mind control, so yes, if it's between me and the people trying to shovel that crap, I'd say I am the one with reality on his side.

Some? Try many.

LOL. Surely it goes - kettle - set upon - beat up? In reality though as we all know if we're not being intentionally retarded, it goes kettle - wait - wait - release slowly - justify your actions to a judge because some of the wankers still think you violated their human rights, even though by now 'protestor' tactics have gone well past the point that even the ECJ wouldn't frown on the use of water cannon.

People predicted major protests. People hoped for major protests. They did not come to pass. The conclusions are obvious, the excuses feeble. Social media is irrelevant, all it tells us is that even when being coordinated and egged on, less then a stadium full of people were moved enough by Thatcher's time in office to spend 79p on a 'protest song'. In the context of a supposedly 'divided nation', that's pathetic.

One was a "lot worse" than the other? No, not even close. Let's try and say it with some actual sense of perspective - one involved implementing policies that favoured individualism over dependence on the state, the other involved brainwashing the masses that they were racially superior than the minitories who were to blame for all their ills and were thus rounded up and ghettoised, before eventually being gassed. And North Korea? One involved coppers hitting miners with wooden trunches, while they threw bricks at them, while the other involves suppressing protest without any violence at all - after all who needs violence when you know that as soon as you turn up to a protest, the best outcome is a life sentence in a labour camp. Your intent with these comparisons was obvious, but it backfired because not only were they utterly ridiculous, all it really showed was how ignorant you are of both what happened in terms of policy and protests, as well as your inability to see any of the other less, far less, ridiculous comparisons you could have made.