Thatcher Claims £500k Expenses In Five Years

[JFKvsNixon 11]

Those statements were made as part of a settlement. Our government had them say it to prevent Thatcher being arrested for war crimes, which she should have been.

 

Rubbish. The warship was sunk whist attempting to carry out a military operation, in a conflict started by the Argentines. If you want to blame someone for the loss of life in the conflict, blame the person who ordered the Argentinean military to invade the Falklands in the first place.

 

It's madness for you not to accept that you were the military aggressors in the conflict, and to portray the Argentine military as the victims of a crime.

[Donmac 10]

You must have a source for all this drivel any chance you can post a link.

 

Go do some research . Sloth is not a virtue.

[denlin 12]

Three day weeks under Thatcher? Are you sure?

 

Ok that bit was started by Heath but led to this

 

Throughout the early 1970s, particularly in 1972 and 1973, the British economy was troubled by high rates of inflation. One of the government's strategies to tackle this was to cap pay rises. This caused unrest amongst trade unions in that wages were struggling to keep pace with prices. This extended to most industries, most notably an industry where there was a powerful union – coal mining.

 

By the middle of 1973, the National Union of Mineworkers had encouraged their members to work to rule – as a result, coal stocks slowly dwindled. The global effect of the 1973 oil crisis also drove up the price of coal. The Heath government entered into negotiations with the NUM, to no avail. To reduce electricity consumption, and thus conserve coal stocks, a series of measures were announced on 13 December 1973 by Heath, including the "Three-Day Work Order", more commonly known as the Three-Day Week, which was to come into force at midnight on 31 December. Commercial consumption of electricity would be limited to three consecutive days each week.[1] Heath's objective was business continuity and survival. Rather than risk a total shutdown, working time was reduced with the intent of prolonging the life of available fuel stocks.

 

In the February 1974 general election the Conservative campaign emphasised the dispute with the miners and used the slogan "Who governs Britain?" The election resulted in the Conservatives losing seats and Labour becoming the largest party in the Commons, but without an overall majority. Heath failed to secure sufficient parliamentary support from the Liberal and Ulster Unionist MPs, and Harold Wilson returned to power for his third term. The normal working week was restored on 8 March, but other restrictions on the use of electricity remained in force.[1] A second general election was held in October 1974 and saw Labour gain a majority of three seats.[2]

 

When the next general election was called in May 1979, Labour reminded voters of the Three-Day Week in the election campaign, with a poster showing a lit candle and bearing the slogan "Remember the last time the Tories said they had all the answers?"[3] The tactic failed, however, to prevent a Tory election win which made party leader Margaret Thatcher prime minister.[4] Her campaign benefited from the Winter of Discontent, in which a wave of strikes the previous winter had crippled the country.[5]

 

[edit] Notes

[Donmac 10]

Rubbish. The warship was sunk whist attempting to carry out a military operation, in a conflict started by the Argentines. If you want to blame someone for the loss of life in the conflict, blame the person who ordered the Argentinean military to invade the Falklands in the first place.

 

It's madness for you not to accept that you were the military aggressors in the conflict, and to portray the Argentine military as the victims of a crime.

 

If you have bothered to read all this thread you will find that I am correct. Any shipping outside the exclusion zone was not a threat. That is why the exclusion zone was set where it was. You are being ridiculous.

Would we have set an exclusion zone where ships outside it posed a threat?

That would have been idiosyncratic.

Edited October 30, 2011 by Donmac

[MrSmith 10]

Go do some research . Sloth is not a virtue.

 

I had assumed you was reciting your drivel from some obscure website, but it looks like cyclone was right and you are just making it up.

[azazel666 10]

The only reason the old cow made war on Argentinians was she was under the deluded idea that there was oil out there and the cash register started clanging, let's not try and pretend she cared about the Falkland people when she had no regard for the people of this country. I hope she lives a long time and suffers, there'll be dancing in the streets when she goes for those of us who remember what she actually did

 

The islands, the people, everything associated with it are British territory. What would you have had happen. Pass it to the Argies immediately they start rattling their sabres?

 

Also, to say she had no regard for the people on the mainland here is also rubbish. What do you think she became a politician for? Purely because she wanted to line her own pockets? She had controversial ideas, but that's another debate.

 

People try to picture the lady as some evil old hag with £ signs for pupils. She isn't.

[JFKvsNixon 11]

If you have bothered to read all this thread you will find that I am correct. Any shipping outside the exclusion zone was not a threat. That is why the exclusion zone was set where it was. You are being ridiculous.

 

I think you need to find out a bit more what an exclusion zone entails, it's there mainly for the benefit of neutral nations. Under international law the heading or location of hostile naval vessels has no bearing on it's status.

 

The Argentinean government was aware of this and this was backed up with message passed via the Swiss embassy before the sinking of the Belgrano, informing them that the exclusion zone will not be the limit for British action.

 

Blame your government for your hostile military aggression that cost the lives of good men on both sides.

[denlin 12]

People try to picture the lady as some evil old hag with £ signs for pupils. She isn't.

 

Yes she is, she stole milk from schoolchildren, brought Britain to it's knees for monetary gain, once she discovered there was no oil in the Falklands she pulled the troops out and left the Falklanders to fend for themselves. How can you defend the indefensible? I know people who had their own businesses in mining communities that went to the wall as consequence of miners dispute because all their customers were miners, there were serious knock on effects for a lot of people

Edited October 30, 2011 by Andy
fixed quotes

[choogling 14]

Lady Thatcher, the former prime minister, has claimed more than £500,000 in expenses in the last five years, despite her ill health.

Marvellous isn't it how politicians still manage to milk the system even when no longer in politics.

 

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/thatcher-claims-500k-expenses-five-years-075709097.html

 

She deserves every penny and more a great leader, get well soon Maggie.

[denlin 12]

She deserves every penny and more a great leader, get well soon Maggie.

 

:rant::rant:

[azazel666 10]

 

Yes she is, she stole milk from schoolchildren, brought Britain to it's knees for monetary gain, once she discovered there was no oil in the Falklands she pulled the troops out and left the Falklanders to fend for themselves. How can you defend the indefensible? I know people who had their own businesses in mining communities that went to the wall as consequence of miners dispute because all their customers were miners, there were serious knock on effects for a lot of people

 

If the Argies had been threatening the troops would have been back there as quickly as transport could get them there.

 

Stole milk from schoolchildren. A very dramatic statement that. The withdrawal from school children actually started under Labour. I admit I had to go away and check that bit......

[AJ sheffield 11]

:rant::rant:

 

Calm down dear.