General Chat

AnnC is right - there will be parties. I spoke to one of my high postage friends today who invited me to one tomorrow night. She said it had nothing to do with Lady T - just wanted to have a party and tomorrow seemed a good day.

Does seem to me to be a bit tasteless to have a party on the day of this rather high profile funeral, so I made my excuses and left. I hope the papers don't pick up on these parties and make a big thing of them. :-(

I think you are right Roy.
One of the hardest hit areas was North Staffordshire and it is still reeling from it and very much deprived even now.

I am surprised that a coachload of miners would go down to London to protest.

But that was exactly what I was wondering, Roy. Have not heard of any groups going down from South Wales, but my ear is not as close to ground as I sometimes think it is. :-)

Lot of pits were closed by (Edit under, not by) Wilson, Heath and Callaghan. And some were still being opened over that period. Cannot remember when all the coal and steel closed down in Black Country. Baggeridge was quite late closing, I think. But you may be right, Roy - all may have been closed before 1979.

Once again John - read !!!
That is not what Roy said.

John, Please read my post again I never said quote; "coachload of miners would go down to London to protest" :-|

What I said was Quote;,,,,, "I was offered a place on a coach leaving Yorkshire full of ex miners who intend paying there respects, Not all Yorkshire miners feel the same way, some actually thought she did them a favour"

Roy

Ever feel exasperated, Roy?

Errol, Yep,

John Sometimes your beyond contempt

Roy

Sorry, chums. Misunderstood. Assumed they intended to protest.

My original question was about this "rabble" that are expected to appear tomorrow. Was anyone aware of any groups from the old industrial areas who are planning to protest in London. I assumed Roy was giving an example - must not assume :-(

oh for heaven's sake - I don't think anyone actually said that a rabble was expected to appear.
People said that it was a possibility, or that they hoped it would not happen etc etc.
Mere surmising, that's all.
sheesh sometimes it's worse than teaching the reception class!

Roy what was the general concensus of opinion in your area?
(are you actually in Yorkshire?)

Johnluv, I think it's time you popped off to bed - or specsavers!

"I wonder if the unruly and despicable rabble who may show their heads over the parapet tomorrow have even stopped to consider for one second that apart from the utter and shameful disrespect, whilst they are causing their problems they are taking personnel away from the job of protecting those in attendance." (Errol)

Have since been told (AnnC) that the unruly and despicable rabble are those having parties tomorrow and celebrating. Well, it may happen. I doubt it will prevent a dignified and good day for those who want to see the funeral go off without major incident.

Lady T is not as popular as David Cameron, Andrew R T Davies and others think she is, but am sure even her bitterest opponents will not get involved tomorrow out of respect for her family, the Queen and Prince Philip and the foreign dignatories that will be attending. Plenty of time to say our piece after tomorrow.

Errol, The position here in Yorkshire "Yes I am as Yorkshire as you can get" It's pretty much the same mixed bag but Ive not heard much bad said about her I suspect that the majority against her are saying nothing possible respect for the dead? but I do no that some are keeping quiet for fear of intimidation from the old militants who still worship Scargill

Roy

What is the quote for John?
I really think you are misinterpreting - is it deliberate or cannot be helped?

May I also point out that some people have admitted they will be there and will turn their backs on the funeral procession as it passes.

Yes Roy, those old militants still command an element of fear even today.

Errol. It cannot be helped :-( :-(

I was reading the thread and had just seen some rather moving posts (Paula's was last of several) then you came in and put up the post I have copied. I simply did not understand what you meant, and AnnC explained what you meant by "unruly and despicable rabble".

Not sure why it then had to develop like it did, but thanks everyone for the oxygen I so crave - NOT :-|

I believe the post that you so helpfully copied had a direct relevance to the thread actually.
You are coming across as being antagonistic again in my opinion and that is not what this thread is about at all.
Please do not bring down what has been a very informative, thought provoking and intelligent thread.

I was asking you (as a student might ask a teacher) what you meant, Errol. Are questions automatically antagonistic? Don't think I agree with anything you have written or any of your views about Mrs Thatcher, but I will defend to the death your right to your opinions.

After this funeral, there will be a biography written by Charles Moore which is due to be published in a couple of weeks time and I should imagine it will be mainly pro the Iron Lady. I should think there will be at least one book that will suggest she was not the best peace time Prime Minister. I am sure we will both want to read the biography and any other book, and amend our opinion of her record if persuaded. That is what us educational types with broad minds tend to do, is it not?

I won't even rise to the bait.

Just to give John and everyone else a flavour of what the unions thought in 1974 when they forced a general election and take note of the union rep who states and I quote; He believes his members should profit from their labour and then says that he wants his members to have the right to buy one of each? "Rolls Royce and a £20,000 house" in 1974

I live near Denaby

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBWrmB9Ry_8

I paid £2,500 in 1974 for my first house

Roy