Robbo Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 Seems King Arthur was wrong when he accused Maggie of having a hit list of 70 pits,( which Maggie always denied). It has now been revealed that the hit list was actually 75 pits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egbert Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 So Maggie was telling the truth then! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P J Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 So Maggie was telling the truth then! Hardly..... At the time, Scargill claimed that the government had a long-term strategy to destroy the industry by closing over 70 pits. Not only did the Government deny this but McGregor went on to write to every member of the NUM claiming Scargill was deceiving them by making this claim and that there were no plans to close any more pits than had already been announced. However, Cabinet Papers released in 2014 clearly document McGregor's stated wish to close over 70 pits, which clearly suggest that Scargill was right and that McGregor concealed his intentions by deceiving the NUM and that the Thatcher Government colluded with him in this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Shock horror!! Employer hid his industrial strategy from a Trade Union leader!! Whatever next? :roll: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P J Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Shock horror, Thatcherite deliberately or ignorantly misses the point. The Government and McGregor lied and smeared Scargill at the time and for years afterwards. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 I wouldn't waste your breath PJ, he is blind and cannot see!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 The point being what? That the head of the NCB didn't reveal his plans to the leader of the NUM? Why should he? I see the usual suspects are fighting yesterday's war. :lol: Get over it chaps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P J Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 The point being what? That the head of the NCB didn't reveal his plans to the leader of the NUM? Why should he? I see the usual suspects are fighting yesterday's war. :lol: Get over it chaps. When the information was only made public THIS WEEK it isn't yesterdays war but tomorrows justice with luck. here are a few links to some of the smears,cover ups and lies that this bunch of lying, corrupt, self serving low lives allowed and abetted on their watch. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25549596 http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/nov/22/miners-strike-orgreave-bloodiest-battle As you are aware there3 are more of these such as Belgrano, Hillsborough, the Libyan Emassy murderers set free etc. Your heroine was a vile, power crazy, excuse for as human being, get over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 She's also dead. Get over it. Allegations from the BBC and the Grauniad. Really reliable sources those two :lol: :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P J Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Ding Dong, still not over my hangover after that party. The information being discussed is from Cabinet Records, some of it in thatchers own hand so hardly up for such easy dismissal, even by a true blue worshipper such as you, and I think you will find that these "allegations" are made across the media not just the 2 sources named (both of which you have quoted in the past) it isn't the beeb that's lying here is it :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Your mud throwing is working Asp, you might try to face the facts, just saying Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Excuse me, who is throwing mud here? I'm just trying to bring some reality to your hysterical outpourings. So what if it's true that the plan was to close 70 or 75 pits, the reality soon became obvious when those pits were closed. And the inconvenient truth for the miners was that by 1988, after two thirds of the mines that had been operating before the strike had been closed, the mining industry was producing as much coal with a third of the workforce as had been produced before the strike. Economic reality hurts, but it's all history now, and all your villification of the people involved at the time will not change a thing. Get over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Vilification of the Wicked Witch, a Prime Minister you respected, but as more truth about her emerges we are finding she was the the wicked witch we new her to be, and your ground becomes more shaky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 And your shaky point is? Now we know the "truth" all the mines will reopen, Scarghill will be crowned King and all the miners will get back pay to 1982 (with allowance for inflation). Dream on. History is written by the victor not the whinging loser I'm afraid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 No the mines will not re open, miles to expensive, but the Prime Minister you admired isn't the saint you thought, and actually the bitch most of the rest of us thought. Not the sainted lady, The Bitch!!!, Looks like her own Cabinet papers are giving her up, shame you still can't see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy51 Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 I think that is why the 30 years rule exists , to expose the truth of the legacy of some of our politicians or their decisions only after they are dead....or so they can't defend themselves ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 No the mines will not re open, miles to expensive, but the Prime Minister you admired isn't the saint you thought, and actually the bitch most of the rest of us thought. Not the sainted lady, The Bitch!!!, Looks like her own Cabinet papers are giving her up, shame you still can't see. She was so unpopular in fact that she only won 3 elections. "most of the rest of us" would appear to have been a minority then. You really are a sad and bitter man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbo Posted January 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 As popular as Tony Blair then, winning through lies and deceit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sha Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 So they can't defend themselves? or so that they won't have to account for their actions? If Thatcher's lies and deceit had been revealed at the time would she have got / retained her title and the perks that went with it? She did well on her dirty deeds and no doubt many more will be revealed. Arthur Scargill was unfairly slandered at the time, when in fact he was the truth teller and Thatcher was the low life liar! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sha Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 I agree with you Robbo, Tony Blair was full of lies and deceit - as is Cameron and co. and probably all those others clambering after power. But I don't think any to date have been anywhere near as evil as Thatcher and her crew,- though revelations in another 30yrs could show otherwise! Whist nothing can now be done to revert what has gone in the past, these revelations are of the most extreme importance to the future in that they should be shocking enough to make people realise that things need to change! A PM and govt officials are paid by the people to represent the people and govern the country in the interests of the people. So what the hell is going on? There needs to be some radical changes in freedom of information. We should be entitled to have the full facts of what is going on - at the time it is happening and not 30 years down the line. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peridot1 Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Asperity - if you really want to sound credible then you should not use Ancient Rome or Cicero as your mantra and I speak as a classics combined graduate. Rome only grew rich on the capture of other states and the subjugation of it's populations and enslavement of them, usually into domestic households or galleys and that is how it's Treasuries grew rich. Does that sound familiar...? Rome was top heavy with Senators and Consuls who took what they could and lived like Gods - again familiar...? Rome did not need to give aid to foreign lands as they ruled most of them and as for hard work this was done by the vast majority of the people in their Empire whilst the well - off lived the life of luxury. Does this ring any bells too...? If not it should as it bears a horrible resemblance to today... Rome's decadence and wanton lifestyle of the ruling class was ultimately it's downfall and not the necessity for a balancing of the books or a restraining of the public purse or curtailment of foreign aid (though I do agree curtailment of foreign aid should be done under the present "austerity" programme). Rome's downfall also has strange parallels with today in that we are ruled apparently by an elite of exclusive public schoolboys who have been members of "The Bullingdon Set", mingle with newspaper phone hackers and none of whom seem to have degrees remotely relevant to their ministerial portfolios. Decadence at it's height before a fall... Thatcher's winning of three elections is nothing other than a statistic. Statistics have been defined as " lies, damn lies and statistics". She is not fit to live in the same room as Attlee, who had only one term in office and achieved far more of constructive benefit to humanity than Thatcher ever would have done . She may have won three elections but that does not prove that her policies were right. People are not described as sheep for nothing and history is now beginning to judge the results of her policies in a less favourable light. Sadly her legacy lives on despite her death and if that could be imagined, in an even worse form under the present government. I have a picture of her with my mother who she had reduced to penury through making her sell her house for Alzheimer's care. Finally you 've probably gathered I don't like your views and I have also seen that you like to insult people who disagree with you both as a class and individually. If you choose to do that to me I will take appropriate action which will include seeking to have you removed from the site. People come on here as a form of relaxation, not to have views rammed down their throat that are now beginning to fly in the face of history's judgement and be called names. Good Day and a Happy New Year. Peridot 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sha Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 What a refreshing start to the New Year! Happy New Year Peridot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Asperity - if you really want to sound credible then you should not use Ancient Rome or Cicero as your mantra and I speak as a classics combined graduate. Rome only grew rich on the capture of other states and the subjugation of it's populations and enslavement of them, usually into domestic households or galleys and that is how it's Treasuries grew rich. Does that sound familiar...? Rome was top heavy with Senators and Consuls who took what they could and lived like Gods - again familiar...? Rome did not need to give aid to foreign lands as they ruled most of them and as for hard work this was done by the vast majority of the people in their Empire whilst the well - off lived the life of luxury. Does this ring any bells too...? If not it should as it bears a horrible resemblance to today... Rome's decadence and wanton lifestyle of the ruling class was ultimately it's downfall and not the necessity for a balancing of the books or a restraining of the public purse or curtailment of foreign aid (though I do agree curtailment of foreign aid should be done under the present "austerity" programme). Rome's downfall also has strange parallels with today in that we are ruled apparently by an elite of exclusive public schoolboys who have been members of "The Bullingdon Set", mingle with newspaper phone hackers and none of whom seem to have degrees remotely relevant to their ministerial portfolios. Decadence at it's height before a fall... Thatcher's winning of three elections is nothing other than a statistic. Statistics have been defined as " lies, damn lies and statistics". She is not fit to live in the same room as Attlee, who had only one term in office and achieved far more of constructive benefit to humanity than Thatcher ever would have done . She may have won three elections but that does not prove that her policies were right. People are not described as sheep for nothing and history is now beginning to judge the results of her policies in a less favourable light. Sadly her legacy lives on despite her death and if that could be imagined, in an even worse form under the present government. I have a picture of her with my mother who she had reduced to penury through making her sell her house for Alzheimer's care. Finally you 've probably gathered I don't like your views and I have also seen that you like to insult people who disagree with you both as a class and individually. If you choose to do that to me I will take appropriate action which will include seeking to have you removed from the site. People come on here as a form of relaxation, not to have views rammed down their throat that are now beginning to fly in the face of history's judgement and be called names. Good Day and a Happy New Year. Peridot Wow!! You really don't like anyone with a different view to your own do you Mr Peridot! As for me insulting anyone who disagrees with me as a class - well what class do you suppose I am? Sorry to disappoint you and your "classics combined graduate" (whatever that is) opinion, but I am a working man and working class. The posters on here who I mainly disagree with seem to be very able to give as good as they get, and probably (for the most part) better. I could even imagine enjoying a discussion over a pint with them. Anyway, sod it, I will save you the bother of "SEEKING TO HAVE" me removed from the site by leaving it voluntarily. What would be the point of me giving my opinion on a site which doesn't tolerate disagreement. Goodbye WWW, it has been, for the most part, enjoyable. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Asp, your quote from Cicero, is not from Cicero it was made up for a book Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Asp, plenty of room for everyone on this forum, it would be a sad day if you left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.