Deucalion Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 It's gone quiet. Do you know what? I'm not even going to turn the TV on next Wednesday for fear of putting my foot through the screen!!
Guest Basildon Fox Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 It's gone quiet. Do you know what? I'm not even going to turn the TV on next Wednesday for fear of putting my foot through the screen!! I think you will find that people are just bored of the vitriolic shite now.
Fox92 Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Statue? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/margaret-thatcher/9980659/Calls-for-a-statue-to-honour-Margaret-Thatcher-in-Trafalgar-Square.html
The Doctor Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Statue? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/margaret-thatcher/9980659/Calls-for-a-statue-to-honour-Margaret-Thatcher-in-Trafalgar-Square.html That would be destroyed with days.
Simmo86 Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Statue? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/margaret-thatcher/9980659/Calls-for-a-statue-to-honour-Margaret-Thatcher-in-Trafalgar-Square.html Fitting tribute
Babylon Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 I have to say that the opposition to the anti-Thatcher brigade is of much worse quality today compared with yesterday. At least yesterday people were defending her based on thinking her policies were right, rather than this unconvincing 'but she was an old lady' act. You cannot tell people how to feel about things. If people are happy that Thatcher is dead, then that is how they feel. Get used to it! They probably have valid reasons to be angry. What you should be considering is. why are some people so keen to revel in the demise of this particular ex-prime minister? Other ex-prime ministers have died without all this. Maybe, just maybe Thatcher does deserve what her corpse is getting? Thatcher's dead, I'm glad, and unrepentant I'm glad. No pathetic moralising is going to change that. A miner I can probably understand being glad, some unwashed student (seemingly a high proportion of those doing the celebrating) not even out of his dads balls when Thatcher was in power I don't really get myself.
Charl91 Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 A miner I can probably understand being glad, some unwashed student (seemingly a high proportion of those doing the celebrating) not even out of his dads balls when Thatcher was in power I don't really get myself. "But Thatchers policies have ruined Britain for generations to come, so we have a right to be angry". Bollocks to that. It seems fine enough to me. My uncle has worked down the mines his entire life ('till a few weeks back at least) and though he might not be her biggest fan, even he isn't nearly as bitter and twisted with hate as lots of those who weren't born at the time. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at all this pretentious fake outrage.
Webbo Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 He doesn't, he really doesn't. Not even when hypocritical Mods go onto other forums to call him a cvnt - he still doesn't care. Not even when people complaining about the gif he posted re-post his gif to demonstrate how upset they are with his gif...not even then does he care. Why am I a hypocrite Dags? Try to answer the question this time.
Deucalion Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 A miner I can probably understand being glad, some unwashed student (seemingly a high proportion of those doing the celebrating) not even out of his dads balls when Thatcher was in power I don't really get myself. I don't follow your reasoning here. If a miner had children then they would be pretty traumatised by what happened in the 80s. Then, there children would be too. Anger and resentment is passed on down the generations. Would you suggest that a black person in the US would have no legitimacy in being angry about racism and slavery? Or a young Jew should be nonplussed about the Holocaust? Or a Palastinian kid should live and let live about their treatment at the hands of Israel? If you had to directly experience things to be upset by them, then I personally think the world would be a much worse place. It is also no surprise to me that people can celebrate a death for political reasons. Many people will kill for political reasons.
Charl91 Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Would you suggest that a black person in the US would have no legitimacy in being angry about racism and slavery? Or a young Jew should be nonplussed about the Holocaust? Or a Palastinian kid should live and let live about their treatment at the hands of Israel? Yes - because they're similar situations to the Thatcher years. lol
Deucalion Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Why am I a hypocrite Dags? Try to answer the question this time. I don't think your a hypocrite. You are just consistently wrong...about everything !! ... ... ... ...
Babylon Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 I don't follow your reasoning here. If a miner had children then they would be pretty traumatised by what happened in the 80s. Then, there children would be too. Anger and resentment is passed on down the generations. Would you suggest that a black person in the US would have no legitimacy in being angry about racism and slavery? Or a young Jew should be nonplussed about the Holocaust? Or a Palastinian kid should live and let live about their treatment at the hands of Israel? If you had to directly experience things to be upset by them, then I personally think the world would be a much worse place. It is also no surprise to me that people can celebrate a death for political reasons. Many people will kill for political reasons. Firstly I rather doubt all these people are suddenly sons of minors. I'm nearly 34 and don't know one or even anyone that knows one. So I'm not having they are all suddenly part of the down trodden. Secondly, I'm not sure closing down mines losing shit loads of cash each year is really comparable to any of the things you mentioned, and I'm not really sure any of her other policies are either.
harwich fox Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37Cmzvt549Y Liverpool fans chanting When Maggie Thatcher Dies v Sunderland
Deucalion Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Yes - because they're similar situations to the Thatcher years. lol I have read several books by a nasty Tory recently. He is Max Hastings, the same Max Hastings who was the first Briton into Stanley during the Falklands War and has first hand experience of many wars during the 20th Century as a war correspondent. In one of his books, 'All Hell Broke Loose', about WWII, he says that his intention was partly to get first hand testimony about how war actually felt to those who participated, often without any choice. He states that he made no moral judgement about whose experience was worse. For instance, he spoke to housewifes in Britain who complained of rationing, German people under British bombs, and Jews being oppressed by the Nazis. His conclusion was that the degree of suffering was not important. What was important was people's lives being changed for the worse and them being put in unfamiliar, uncomfortable and frightening situations without them being able to do a thing about it. Therefore, in the opinion of Max Hastings, all suffered equally, regardless of any subjective judgement made by an observer. I think the nasty old Tory shows wisdom here which your glib retort and smileys suggest you are a long, long way from achieving.
Charl91 Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 His conclusion was that the degree of suffering was not important. What was important was people's lives being changed for the worse and them being put in unfamiliar, uncomfortable and frightening situations without them being able to do a thing about it. Therefore, in the opinion of Max Hastings, all suffered equally, regardless of any subjective judgement made by an observer. I think the nasty old Tory shows wisdom here which your glib retort and smileys suggest you are a long, long way from achieving. But it's bollocks isn't it. Someone who loses a job isn't suffering nearly as much as someone who endured the holocaust, no matter what spin you want to try and put on it. What a feeble argument. The phrase "first world problems" seems rather apt here. Not every 'problem' is equal to another. I'd rather be unemployed then suffer torture on a daily basis. Which would you prefer, or do you believe them to be equal? Is someone that accidently breaks their new ipad suffering as much as someone who is disabled for their entire life? Or would you like to spin your way out of this one? Wisdom my ass. Controversy sells, but it doesn't mean he was right.
Uncle Albert Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37Cmzvt549Y Liverpool fans chanting When Maggie Thatcher Dies v Sunderland That party will be 3pm Saturday.
Deucalion Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 But it's bollocks isn't it. Someone who loses a job isn't suffering nearly as much as someone who endured the holocaust, no matter what spin you want to try and put on it. What a feeble argument. The phrase "first world problems" seems rather apt here. Only to an observer. This is your judgement on how much someone should be 'suffering'.
ousefox Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Good article in my opinion. Despite Chavez being as far left as she was right, the way her death has been reported has been very different. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/08/margaret-thatcher-death-etiquette
Charl91 Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Only to an observer. This is your judgement on how much someone should be 'suffering'. And do you believe that if a person had experienced both A) being jobless and B) being in the holocaust, that they would agree that it was the same degree of suffering? First world problems.
Deucalion Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Good article in my opinion. Despite Chavez being as far left as she was right, the way her death has been reported has been very different. http://www.guardian....death-etiquette 'Demanding that no criticisms be voiced to counter that hagiography is to enable false history and a propagandistic whitewashing of bad acts, distortions that become quickly ossified and then endure by virtue of no opposition and the powerful emotions created by death. When a political leader dies, it is irresponsible in the extreme to demand that only praise be permitted but not criticisms.' From the above link. Good article.
Charl91 Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 'Demanding that no criticisms be voiced to counter that hagiography is to enable false history and a propagandistic whitewashing of bad acts, distortions that become quickly ossified and then endure by virtue of no opposition and the powerful emotions created by death. When a political leader dies, it is irresponsible in the extreme to demand that only praise be permitted but not criticisms.' From the above link. Good article. I don't disagree. I don't believe only praise should be given to people just because they died. But there is a difference between "criticism" and "going out on the lash to celebrate someone's death". One is fine, the other is being an obnoxious cvnt.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 Has ANYTHING ELSE happened in the past 24 hours? Cos I sure as hell can't find it on the news. Maybe this is just cover for the North Korean invasion?
Deucalion Posted 9 April 2013 Posted 9 April 2013 And do you believe that if a person had experienced both A) being jobless and B) being in the holocaust, that they would agree that it was the same degree of suffering? First world problems. You really think you are on to a winner here don't you? When in fact all you are doing is demonstrating that you don't understand the point, or for that matter, human beings. I will repeat, more in hope than expectation that you will open your mind a little. To an observer, the suffering of the Holocaust is worse. To the experiencer, the suffering is ... suffering.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.