One of Thatcher’s legacies in a tweet:
Reuters Top News @Reuters
British PM Cameron cutting short visit to Europe to return to Britain after death of Thatcher: spokesman
What a bitch. Great that Nelson Mandela outlived her.
Back to Main
April 8, 2013
Thatcher
Comments
There is a definite sense of jubilation in the air in London today. Ding dong indeed.
Posted by: Carpworld | Apr 8 2013 14:16 utc | 1
“What a bitch”. You are such a kind man, Mr B.
But I sense great jubilation in Argentina!
As the American investor (manipulator?) Jim Rogers once noted dismissively of her: Thatcher got lucky because UK discovered North Sea oil during her tenure.
Posted by: nakedtothebone | Apr 8 2013 14:24 utc | 2
Being greeted with joy here in Ireland. Sun is shining. Birds are singing. And we no longer have to share the air with that old hag.
Of course have to share the Morrissey song Margaret on the Guillotine or another Irish song by John Mc Cullagh I’ll Dance on your Grave Mrs Thatcher
Posted by: Colm O’ Toole | Apr 8 2013 14:28 utc | 3
Wow! Just found out on here. Fantastic news, she changed the face of UK society for the worse. We still live with her legacy.
Posted by: Billy Boy | Apr 8 2013 14:42 utc | 4
Ah yes, one of Thatcher’s legacies… The beginning, in the UK, of the attack on the working class.. There will be no tears shed by me over her passing.
Posted by: ben | Apr 8 2013 14:48 utc | 5
Thatcher was Reagan on steroids – eine uberweib – complete with tights and red cape.
Posted by: maus | Apr 8 2013 15:02 utc | 6
“Imagine you lived in a country where there was a pretense of democracy; elections were still held, congress still sat down and debated legislation, and politicians continued to make rousing populist speeches—only it was all just for show. In truth, the nation was run, not just by a very small number of people, but for an even smaller number. Got that? Now, think about what happens if that very small number of people aren’t representative of a broad spectrum of views, but are entirely composed of people with very similar social positions and very similar goals. That’s not just a democracy in peril. That’s not a democracy.”
“Now go to the window and greet this country.”
This is about the USA, but Thatcherism has turned the UK into the same kind of nation.
From DU Underground.
Posted by: ben | Apr 8 2013 15:32 utc | 7
As per the BBC:
“Margaret Thatcher dies following a strike”
http://t.co/uY9dZ3AREr
Love your mandela jibe, although he’s not far from dead.
The day isn’t over, we can live in hope.
Posted by: david | Apr 8 2013 15:39 utc | 8
Someone put it very nicely on twitter:
“We can have her funeral handled by the lowest bidder. It’s what she would have wanted.”
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Apr 8 2013 17:22 utc | 9
Cameron has been “to Europe” attempting to disassemble the European Union, an action of which Thatcher would approve.
“(A unified) ‘Europe’ is the result of plans. It is, in fact, a classic utopian project, a monument to the vanity of intellectuals, a programme whose inevitable destiny is failure: only the scale of the final damage done is in doubt.”– Margaret Thatcher
“Eine uberweib”
Isn’t it “das weib” and not “die?”
Just curious.
P.S I guess it’s true: only the good die young.
Posted by: Lysander | Apr 8 2013 17:46 utc | 12
“P.S I guess it’s true: only the good die young.”
In which case Mr Mandela must be an thoroughly bad individual 😉
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 8 2013 17:53 utc | 13
If Elvis Costello isn’t booked on the first available LA-Heathrow flight after her funeral, I personally will never forgive him
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Znn5a-88tY 🙂
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 8 2013 17:57 utc | 14
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDr8cnH6-SU
I’ll say this much in her favour – she inspired some pretty good tunes over the years
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 8 2013 18:01 utc | 15
“Working class communities were devastated in Britain because of her policies.,” he said.
“Margaret Thatcher will be especially remembered for her shameful role during the epic hunger strikes of 1980 and 81.
“Her Irish policy failed miserably.
Her role in international affairs was equally belligerent whether in support of the Chilean dictator Pinochet, her opposition to sanctions against apartheid South Africa; and her support for the Khmer Rouge.”
Northern Ireland First Minister Peter Robinson paid tribute, (well, he would, wouldn’t he) describing Baroness Thatcher as “undoubtedly one of the greatest political figures of post-war Britain and she changed the face of our United Kingdom
IMHO Blair was worse than Thatcher – I’d say when the final tally is in, Blair will have been responsible for the deaths of far more people, both in the UK and Internationally, than was Thatcher.
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 8 2013 18:09 utc | 16
Thatcher refused to support sanctions against apartheid South Africa and the Zionist-influenced mainstream is profusely mourning her passing because Zionists have a common cause in enabling Apartheid both in South Africa and Israel. After all Israel was a weapons technology supplier to South Africa and has a flourishing Apartheid operation of its own going on.
Posted by: kalithea | Apr 8 2013 18:10 utc | 17
Thatcher’s worst activities were not in foreign policy. In the case of South Africa, what do you expect? White South Africa was not yet ready to die. The Falklands, that was OK. Argentina has no better right to the islands than anyone else.
Rather the problem was in domestic policy. Not even in the destruction of British industry that took place. The film The Full Monty is a good illustration of what happened. Much similar loss of industry has also happened in France. Rather, it was the re-establishment of the idea that the workers are the enemy, and have to be beaten down. That existed in 19th century Britain, and should have been avoided. That is one thing that Germany has done better. Cooperation between workers and management is necessary.
Thatcher wasted Britain’s oil wealth on paying unemployment benefits. Now it is gone. It should have been spent on preparing Britain’s future. So Britain is now a country where only financial services have value, which could disappear tomorrow.
Posted by: alexno | Apr 8 2013 19:07 utc | 18
Well, today I could see the most perfect coincidence on Le Monde website.
Headline : “Thatcher is dead”
Newsfeed at the bottom : “PM Cameron bets on cuts on social spendings”.
Posted by: Rhysa | Apr 8 2013 19:22 utc | 19
thatcher was a horrible person who did all kinds of evil in the world
calling her a “bitch” is still misogyny.
it doesn’t make it not misogyny just because she was the hellspawn bent on crushing the underclasses.
Posted by: isis | Apr 8 2013 19:48 utc | 20
I will only post this once (I hope). Go to the hell as a Russian comrade said about “lady” thatcher! I say good riddance to that gnawed out buck tooth old whore. I hope they dig up her remains and dump ’em in the ocean alongside Osama’s remains. Her son is a wicked chip off the old weed as well, immoral, wicked and throroughly rotten to the core. Burn in the hell ya old whore!!!
Posted by: Fernando | Apr 8 2013 20:13 utc | 21
I would certainly agree that Blair and Cameron are sons of Thatcher. As I said above, it was the greatest mistake of Thatcher to regard the working class as the enemy, that is to throw the poor back into the condition of the 19th century. The poor are always with us, and encouragement to participate is better than beating them down. Myself as one of the poor.
Posted by: alexno | Apr 8 2013 20:21 utc | 22
What a ridiculous Uber-PC statement
But calling her a “bitch” is actually an insult to female dogs every where
and if you must insist on bandying about words that begin with “mis” then calling her a bitch would merely be something like “mis-Thatchery” or something similar. It could only ever be “misogyny” if he had said something like “women are bitches”.
It’s perfectly acceptable, though admittedly quite rude and often quite intentionally offensive, to call someone a “bitch” when that person so very clearly fits the definition
bitch (bch)
n.
1. A female canine animal, especially a dog.
2. Offensive
a. A woman considered to be spiteful or overbearing.
b. A lewd woman.
c. A man considered to be weak or contemptible.
3. Slang A complaint.
4. Slang Something very unpleasant or difficult.
As anyone can see “bitch” can apply to both men and women.
Definition 3 can apply to anyone regardless.
Funnily enough one almost never hears anyone complain about “misandry” when male-only pejoratives (eg: “you complete dickhead!”, to offer just one everyday example 🙂 are uttered.
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 8 2013 20:27 utc | 23
Fernando said, “I hope they dig up her remains and dump ’em in the ocean alongside Osama’s remains.”
But Fernando, The Iron Lady was not Muslim which makes her in-eligible for a sacred Muslim Sea Burial
Posted by: HIlmi Hakim | Apr 8 2013 20:27 utc | 24
C’mon. At least she dealt pretty well with the labor unions and striking miners.
Posted by: Michal | Apr 8 2013 20:28 utc | 25
and: Do you REALLY think OBL’s remains were dumped in the ocean?
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 8 2013 20:29 utc | 26
C’mon. At least she dealt pretty well with the labor unions and striking miners.
So what’s to admire? The destruction of British industry?
Posted by: alexno | Apr 8 2013 21:16 utc | 27
Fine Hilmi, let’s flush her. The old turd was a smelly infested sack of poop who caused more harm than good. The old whore is still causing problems! What is good/bad way to dispose of her foul remains?
Posted by: Fernando | Apr 8 2013 22:05 utc | 28
pretty good smack-down of Thatcher http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/04/08/the-queen-mother-of-global-austerity-financialization/
The Iron Lady was convinced she was rebuilding England’s economy, while in reality it was only getting richer from London’s outlaw banks. Throughout the world, the damage wrought by this financialized economy has been immense. By “liberating” national money from the constraints of taxing authorities, the Middle East stopped much of its projects for industrial development. After 1990 the Soviet bloc was deindustrialized to become an oil, gas and mining economy. And for Britain, trillions of dollars in global tax revenues that could have been used for industrial and social development were routed though London, where the UK has lived off the fees from this free-for-all. So despite Mrs. Thatcher’s admiration for Milton Friedman, famous for claiming that There Is No Such Thing As A Free Lunch, she made Britain’s economy all about obtaining a free lunch – eaten by the world’s financial managers who flocked to its shores.
Posted by: ruralito | Apr 8 2013 22:18 utc | 29
She is the opposite of Blair and for a better world- Obama. The Iron Lady may be loathed by many, but she stood strong, had balls, did the job. Would like to see Obama take on the Unions. No middle ground (Safe hiding) with her, no flip flopping, she stood her ground; like her or hate her, she was a lioness, not playing the popular vote…
As for the Miners, it had a economic reasoning. The National Coal Board received the largest amount of public subsidies going to any nationalised industry: by 1984 the annual cost to taxpayers of uneconomic pits had reached £1 billion.
Would you rather: Hillary or Thatcher? At least with the latter you knew where you stood, it was in your face, direct and rigid, she may be seen as an bitch (Comments) but not a hyena mutated fox – I would rather have the Iron Lady than the jilted wife!
Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev ended the Cold War, where Obama is trying to rekindle it.
Posted by: Kev | Apr 9 2013 0:21 utc | 30
Kev said
***Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev ended the Cold War, where Obama is trying to rekindle it.***
This is a completely skewed version of history. Thatcher, Reagan and Gorbatchev were not trying to end the cold war they were trying to win their own ideology. Ending the cold war was a by-product of their policy not the goal. Gorbatchev was cheering for a reformed communism, Thatcher and Reagan for the return of the capitalism without boundaries. Obama is trying to preserve and “reform” the shaky “trickle down economics” of Reagan/Clinton/Bushs he has inherited.
Confounding the by-product of a policy with the policy itself is a sign of confusion and it’s clearly displayed by your promotion of a (non-existant) personal character as a substitute to a sane and wise policy for the country.
Posted by: ATH | Apr 9 2013 1:00 utc | 31
Thatcher was just another US drone. Her most outstanding achievements were:
– introducing the Brits to US-style Totalitarian Corporatism via union-busting (notably for Murdoch)
– Privatisation (of Council dwellings, leading directly to the current shortage of affordable housing in UK)
– and the one-size-fits-all Military-Solution-as-the-only-option meme.
She was also a good friend of the violent, thieving, murdering, lying, racial supremacists in Jewish Occupied Palestine – which, all on its own, tells us all anyone needs to know about what an amoral, nasty and desperate tool she was.
Good riddance.
She belongs in Hell with all her (bespoke) “friends”.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 9 2013 3:24 utc | 32
@ATH#47
So Obama now does not only blame Bush, but as you suggest, Reagan/Clinton/Bush(s)? I know he love’s to blame, but you cant keep doing that; it’s wearing thin. By-product or not, it transpired, a fact, and during their watch – During Obama’s watch; utter Anarchy that is now spreading to the Asian pacific while getting a Nobel Prize before doing so…
All we see is Obama doing his best and determined to prove once more that Keynesian economics doesn’t work in the home front and Drones don’t make you friends i.e. moving from the ‘Bush’ Jr. era of extrajudicial detention into Obama’s extrajudicial killing is not by any means progress for humanity.
You may be a fan of Obama, all I see is someone trying to re-write history through speeches and pointing fingers while heading to greater War’s to make his mark.
Lastly, your last paragraph, can you rewrite, it just confusing reads like utter garbage and a oxymoron.’Confounding the by-product of a policy with the policy itself is a sign of confusion’ – Huh???
Posted by: Kev | Apr 9 2013 4:11 utc | 33
@kev
Here you go a simple sentence for you to understand:
Obama is following the same economic and foreign policy overall which was initiated by Reagan (and Thatcher in UK) and pursued by Clinton and Bush. This policy is in a failure point right now.
Posted by: ATH | Apr 9 2013 4:51 utc | 35
47) It was Gorbachev who ended the cold war, Reagan and Thatcher thought they had won. It does not work that way. Them loosing just takes longer.
Posted by: somebody | Apr 9 2013 5:29 utc | 36
Perfidious Albion was destroyed through her financialization of British economy and destruction of the manufacturing. I am eternally grateful to her that she humbled that island. The musing by Ambassador Murray is very interesting in this regard: http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/04/margaret-thatcher
@ATH -I am all for a discussion, but not seeing your angle ‘Obama is trying to preserve and “reform” the shaky “trickle down economics” of Reagan/Clinton/Bushs he has inherited.’ Reform or preserve -For or against?
As the programming language, ATH is an insufferable language to work with; It’s logic is composed of nothing but infinite loops, or at best, loops of effectively interminable construction.
Dogs chase their tails for a few reason, one reason; in the belief that dogs need to connect their front end to their back end in order to feel connected -Making an argument for arguments sake is much the same. At least put in some content that is weighted rather that speculative or incoherent. I read like I eat, I look, taste and either savour or spit out, it can be simple or complex, just needs the right balance not coloured dressing or sprinkles of parsley.
Obama – one second a socialist, the next a capitalist, then a dictator; he is shape shifting to suite agendas – The Iron Lady stuck to her guns, wrong or right, she had her morals and ethics, and bigger balls than Obama for sure. Both Reagan and Thatcher saved the economics of their respective countries during their seats. She strong armed the US to support the Falkland War, she was ‘not’ a puppet, just a equal. One must remember it was France that supplied Argentina with missiles at that time; she sorted that out, she was Iron, no mincing of words or action; you just don’t see that today.
She was ahead of he time, in 91 she knew the Euro zone would fail as it is today. Between the US and UK, it was the first decent relation, likewise UK and Russia.
Barry – What did he do? He immediately had the federal government spend $1 trillion in stimulus spending. He raised 20 taxes in Obamacare. He piled new regulations on energy, and stopped new jobs by shutting down possible drilling in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. He added a new entitlement spending program—Obamacare—without reforming any existing programs. Expanded War and made sure military caps would be expunged via plan ‘B’ the Asian Pacific push – No reform there! Under Reagan, lower taxes, reducing the growth of government spending, a stable currency and less regulation created 9.6 million jobs and increased the economy by 18.5 percent and the end of the cold War.
@Somebody, winner? Look at it as transformation – The official data of the end of the Cold War around 1991 when USSR was broke up, Mikhail Gorbachev declared the beginning of “perestroyka” (reorganization), so no more USSR! The Carter-Reagan military buildup did not defeat the Soviet Union it did assist in the end, and it also prolonged the Cold War. Gorbachev’s determination to reform an economy crippled in part by defense spending.Ronald Reagan obligated the Soviet Union to increase its military spending to the limits of insupportability, it was more a economic War; American military buildup simply worsened the Soviet economic quandary; the same could be said for the US today, it is facing the very same danger, and China is playing that very game, but on the flip side so is the US by disruption of trade and buying time.
Posted by: Kev | Apr 9 2013 6:04 utc | 39
Margaret Thatcher’s privatization schemes were like starting a game of Monopoly in which most players get $50 while a priveleged few get $10,000, already own Free Parking and have their own permanent “Get out of jail free” cards.
Posted by: ralphieboy | Apr 9 2013 7:15 utc | 40
Thatcher … Cameron … Mandela.
Connection?
As South Africa’s apartheid regime began to collapse, attention shifted to the nine nuclear bombs Israel had given it. The US was to decommission them. But Thatcher sent Cameron to buy three illegally. John Bredenkamp sold them to him, and then, after they had been flown to Oman, stole them back.
Nobody knows where they ended up.
Posted by: Bob Jackson | Apr 9 2013 7:48 utc | 41
@Bob, funny part of the world but with countless countries and countless connections -Africa. Victor Bout,Tony Buckingham, Tony Spicer, Simon Mann and Mark Thatcher etc. Had a chat with one of Bout’s Pilots who was looking at Business in Sierra Leone. In the 1980s, Israel and South Africa were collaborating to develop nuclear weapons using Sierra Leonean diamonds to get round the UN arms embargo. A Russian Israeli, Shabtai Kalmanovich in bed with Marc Rich, also brought in American money launderers, drug traffickers and arms dealers. The web is massive, even if you go downtown in Sierra Leone a few of those actors are still haunting the Bars like Roger Crooks, a US arms dealer, part of a scheme originated in Houston in the mid-1990s by a “Texas gang” to ship rifles, rocket launchers, plastic explosives, mines and other weapons from Sierra Leone to Northern Ireland – Even the IRA were in these waters, training and smuggling.
One of the worst is a little nasty fella, Israeli, he sold to both sides, gloried in the War, still doing the same now, wheeling dealing; Zeev Morganstein, but I see a deal where he screwed over a gent from SA managed to get his own back recently.
One of Bouts associates has recently been picked up by the US,Richard Ammar Chichakli, ‘Chika’is a American Syrian funny enough!
Posted by: Kev | Apr 9 2013 9:57 utc | 42
Steady lads. Getting overexcited looks childish. She is irrelevant now. Move on.
Colm o Toole is wrong. There is no singing and dancing in Ireland over the death of Thatcher. We have much more interesting things to do.
Boindub
Posted by: boindub | Apr 9 2013 11:05 utc | 43
@Bob – As i understand; the then 10 units US & Co gift to Israel, but not all, some ended up (3)in Iran, some or one thought to be stowed in Iraq at one point (WMD chase), also one thought to be routed into Libya; the rest is logical (Or not) as in transfer of these weapons to Syria, as for who, when and how; lips sink ships. So in a nutshell, Israel and Iran are still stalemated in the chess game played from many sides and both Nuclear capable, all part of the Cold War and beyond. The Dr. David Kelly saga springs to mind. By 1975, Israel had already built as many as 50 plutonium bombs at its Dimona reactor opened in 1962. In 1963, President Kennedy demanded they close what he called a “weapons facility” but was murdered soon after. No other American president has mentioned Dimona since.
@Bo, She is part of history, and not forgotten either side, liked or disliked, the fact she bore reaction just proved her impact and an enigma; it’s perspective depending on the side of the wall and it’s writing. Whatever she stood for, got to give her the respect, she followed through and lived not to tell the tales…
Posted by: Kev | Apr 9 2013 11:55 utc | 44
In that -Argentina, Pleased with the poodle you bought for cheap? Is it unusually strong, with rat eyes? Congratulations, you’re the proud owner of a ferret on droid.
Pet sellers at Buenos Aires’ largest bazaar are passing off ferrets (bargainous) as pedigree dogs (ruinous). Vets who’ve studied the animals say they’re standard white ferrets that’ve been fed steroids since birth to increase their size. Cute, not so much, but do bear in mind that the Adopt a Ferret website says that ferrets can be “playful” and “affectionate.”
Just how could they tend sheep on the Island, they would be Cow mutants, furry horned bullysheepbeef, just wrong; we have horse burgers instead; Maggi lives on- RIP…
Posted by: Kev | Apr 9 2013 12:11 utc | 45
@ 60: “Whatever she stood for, got to give her the respect”
Can if you wish, as for me, nope.
Posted by: ben | Apr 9 2013 14:05 utc | 47
@Ben#62/63
A moronic blog -It is idiotic; utter trash, did you even bother to read it?
All I can suggest is, at very least; don’t give a link that is polluting cyber space and infringing on tabloid territory/rights by being entirely daft!
Read up, learn and come back; also think she achieved more that=n you or I even did -Respect due!
Posted by: Kev | Apr 9 2013 14:50 utc | 48
Thatcher was first elected in 1959 -> MP Finchley. Heath nominated Thatcher as a Minister in 1970. Then she became leader of the Opposition, and was finally PM 1979-1990. (>wiki)
Long career. The contra forces were not enough to ever move her out or sideways or downwards … She was successful because she represented a large chunk of Brit public opinion, in conjuctions with certain events (N Sea oil) or if one likes, managed to manipulate it, gather adherence.
She was not a military dictator, but an elected official in a Republic — Constitutional Monarchy.
At fault is the whole ‘democratic’ structure, the power nexus and its management. The media. The banks, the corporations, etc.
The same system saw Blair come to power.
Of course she was disgusting. So why did she hold power for so long?
Posted by: Noirette | Apr 9 2013 15:29 utc | 49
So why did she hold power for so long?
Because “Democracy”, as practiced in the present dispensation, requires lots of cash and a fawning press.
Posted by: ruralito | Apr 9 2013 15:58 utc | 50
“So why did she hold power for so long?”
Because Thatcher and Reagen made the first signs of senile dementia or Alzheimer’s a fashion in national leadership. Since then it’s become a prerequisite. In the US, if you can act like a Southern preacher with the first signs of dementia, you got it made. I can’t even imagine how rewarding it must be for their handlers and elite supporters.
Posted by: Mooser | Apr 9 2013 16:40 utc | 51
She never won a majority of British voters. She won because of the majority in a district gets all British MP seat system – the party with the largest part of seats which has a majority or can get a majority coalition automatically gets their leader nominated as prime minister – , the weakness and split of Labour and the rise of the LibDems. Labour was going the way of the dodo and Tony Blair finished it off for good.
Posted by: somebody | Apr 9 2013 17:08 utc | 53
Quite ironic
On May 2, 1978, Margaret Thatcher gave a press conference in Tehran. She called for the production of a neutron bomb.
Thatcher claimed she brought down the Soviet Union (SU). What a load of crap. The horrible financial situation in the SU broke the back of the SU. Like the disastrous financial situation in the US will break the back of the US as well.
Posted by: Willy2 | Apr 10 2013 0:09 utc | 56
Re: questions about why Thatcher stayed in power so long.
I’m not sure, but…why in the name of all that’s decent has Clegg stayed with Cameron to keep that creep in power so long? Allowing recession into recession, all in the name of austerity?
Egads.
Posted by: jawbone | Apr 10 2013 0:12 utc | 57
“but…why in the name of all that’s decent has Clegg stayed with Cameron to keep that creep in power so long?”
Because Lil’ Nicky Clegg was put into the leadership role in the LibDems by the machinations of the Security Services.
He’s doing EXACTLY the job he was put there to do.
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2012/09/spooky-man-says-sorry.html
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 10 2013 6:42 utc | 58
Excerpt:
” From Paddy Ashdown onwards, and possibly before for all I know, the Security Services/Military ‘clique’ in the Brit establishment has controlled the Lib Dems.
Paddy Ashdown was their man, which he proved during the ‘Rape of Yugoslavia’.
After Pantsdown came Charles Kennedy. It appears Kennedy was a bit too much of a wild cannon for the SS/military clique.
Kennedy was kicked out after ‘revelations’ about his drinking – of course his actual real opposition to the Iraq Slaughter had nothing to do with ‘the powers that be’ wanting to shut him up (end sarcasm) – his ousting was so well-coordinated it had to qualify as a conspiracy – IMHO a Security Services conspiracy.
SO after him came the security services/Military-connectedMenzies Campbell.
His ‘election’ was a strange one indeed. After the media and Security Services conspired (IMHO) to oust Kennedy, they then proceeded to conspire to nobble every other candidate, bar Campbell
EVERY other candidate was kyboshed along the way, usually by embarrassing ‘revelations’ leaked to the media.
Once again this appeared to be so well-coordinated it had to qualify as another conspiracy – IMHO another Security Services conspiracy – or if you like – a continuation of the same conspiracy which ousted Kennedy.
Since it was obvious to me at the time that Campbell hadn’t a hope in hell of attracting voters to the Lib Dem camp, since most people wouldn’t vote for him in a fit, I remarked to many that he was intended merely as a place-holder until some murky forces could better-position their own candidate to take over from the doddery old Campbell, with a view to challenging the other two parties – so as to continue the illusion that the UK is an actual real-live ‘Democracy™'”
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 10 2013 6:46 utc | 59
cnnt’d
“Lo and behold, within a week or two of Campbell’s ‘election’, little Nicky Clegg, previously a complete non-entity, was fast rising in stature within the media and therefore the party (or vice-versa, makes no difference)
So I immediately surmised that Clegg was the Security Services plant to take over and run the Lib Dems – so as to continue the illusion that the UK is an actual real-live ‘Democracy™'”
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 10 2013 6:48 utc | 60
@yah, think you got it all wrong with Nick; he just moved in the right circles, right family and right positions for the post; lobby, media and political background for 2 decades. Wrote articles in the right publications, sound knowledge of the EU and beyond; young, hungry – He never just came for nowhere, far from it.
Posted by: Kev | Apr 10 2013 8:02 utc | 61
“@yah, think you got it all wrong with Nick.”
Well, you think wrong.
I’m damned certain I got Lil’ Nicky pretty much 100 percent correct.
Oh he had the right family connections alright, lots of murky connections – eg:
” On 27 April 2010, The Times reminds us that Nick Clegg’s great-great-aunt, Baroness Moura Budberg, was a Russian spy. (Is there a bit of the baroness in Nick Clegg?)
She died in 1974.
MI5 spied on her for more than 30 years.
She was “charming, unreliable and ruthless.”
“No one ever knew whose side she was really on.”
She was suspected of spying for the Germans during the First World War.
A letter to Dick White, head of MI5, specifically described her as a Soviet agent.”
If she were a SovietAgent she most likely was protected by Victor Rothschild, whom many strongly suspect was the 5th man in the Philby/Burgess-ring. V.R’s influence on the UK SS lasted long long after the Philby/Burgess ring was discovered.
” He never just came for nowhere, far from it. “
Absolute nonsense. Complete and utter – you simply stating that really does not make it so.
Clegg was pretty much a complete non-entity until just after Menzies Campbell’s elevation to LibDem leader (once EVERY other candidate had been politically-assassinated by the Brit Security Service’s operatives in the UK Media)
There was hardly so much as ONE member of the UK public that could have told you who or what a Nick Clegg was, prior to his Media-backed elevation within LibDem circles.
Basically you’re just disagreeing for the sake of it. Your counter-argument is completly without substance.
Posted by: yah . . . But | Apr 10 2013 17:43 utc | 62
From Xymphora (there’s a link in this intro but it accurately reflects the feelings of sane people toward the Rusty old servant of Totalitarian Capitalism…
“Ken Loach Wants Thatcher’s Funeral Privatized” Just float the coffin in a sewage pond and fire a rocket propelled grenade at it. Funeral, cremation, and fireworks all at once. Send the bill for the grenade to the 1% she worked for.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 10 2013 18:57 utc | 63
Well Maggie dies, but true evil lives; Henry Kissinger, but wikileaks may just take a bite into his dealings.
@Yah -I don’t know why you obsessed with Mr. Clegg, he is nothing veil other than a politician (OK, that can be reason enough). But in the last 20 years he worked the political arena, far from some invisible character as you outline. Granted he chopped and changed, he was an conservative in his younger years, then again Blair’s (Religious nutter with his odd foundation) Labor party acted like a very conservative entity! Clegg has more pedigree and political experience than Obama by far, and no ‘shady’ past unlike Obama, Clegg worked his way into the post, and the Lib’s worked on this for some time, Clegg was reared for the post in many ways, or fitted the profile of a 2ic in a coalition. Your energy should go to how ‘Obama’ became the most powerful political figure in the World, and not on an obsession with Clegg.
I read his articles in the Telegraph, Guardian etc many times over many years, he was always in the political arena, be it UK or EU with the EU commission. All with direction and intent.
I feel where you are confused ‘From nowhere’ and rather it is the simple outlook in UK as in the US, we have 2 party races “only” – Who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats, many would say ‘Who are the Libdem’s? or they would have replied “Don’t know”. In many people’s heads the idea their was a third choice is not there, one they had not thought much about before.
I recommend you read the Clegg coup, gives some great insight. http://www.andrewlownie.co.uk/authors/jasper-gerard/books/the-clegg-coup
Posted by: Kev | Apr 11 2013 0:47 utc | 64
First line from your pro-Clegg blurb
“The Clegg Coup is an insider’s account of a rise to power that horrified the political establishment.”
hahahaha
Some people are so gullible that the only accurate description of the level of their gullibility would be “Moronically Gullible”
Mr Pro-European himself – currently propping up a Gov’t that is extremely anti-European.. Gosh . . How’d THAT happen? Très Ironic, non?
Some of us out here, Kev, have the intelligence to judge Clegg on his actions, and not on his rhetoric. Rhetoric is cheap, anyone can say anything they want, words cost nothing.
His actions are all that count.
And when one considers that two-ex leaders of the LibDems were ex military and both were Security Services connected (definitely, provably in the case of Campbell – most probably in the case of Ashdown) then claims that the LibDems might represent some sort of “threat” to the UK political establishment are an hilarious farce, and anyone making such claims should be treated with the derision they so richly deserve IMHO.
You keep believing in fairytales, Kev. I guess it beats reality anyday, eh?
Posted by: yah . . .but | Apr 11 2013 5:44 utc | 65
Perhaps, Kev, you’d be so kind as to provide us with concrete examples of when and where Lil’ Nicky’s ACTIONS have threatened the UK Political establishment.
Remember: I’m looking for ACTIONS now, Kev, not Rhetoric.
Posted by: yah . . .but | Apr 11 2013 5:52 utc | 66
“Your energy should go to how ‘Obama’ became the most powerful political figure in the World, and not on an obsession with Clegg. ”
seriously Kev,
only a completely
pompous asshat
would write a sentence
so condescending
as that.
Posted by: yah . . .but | Apr 11 2013 6:06 utc | 67
Yah, Your funny – He is a politician, of course you get rhetoric, backtracking, I even mentioned he was a conservative at one point; nothing new there. On topic though – Maggie stuck to her guns; rare in politics.
I still don’t understand where you were trying to go with this, are you saying that Clegg is a Mi5/SS plant, trained in secrecy, and part of the World New Order and will become the evil overlord of the EU with a white Kitty on his lap? –
Away from that, as we will agree to disagree – This is comical; and I am not sure if I laugh and feel that I fell asleep and woke in an alternate reality:
Judge Allows Prosecution To Call Bin Laden Seal 6 Team Member In WikiLeaks Case.
The kicker; Name: John Doe, disguised, and in civilian clothing. In other words someone giving evidence who no one can identify or validate –A Kangaroo Court.
To make things worse the evidence he will produce will be used but no information can be given on how it was obtained or if factual as the operation and it’s member(s) cant divulge information. In other words, whatever this Mr. Doe states; is the truth, nothing but the truth, and may not be subject to being discredited or questioned.
Who is the Judge? Judge Dredd! At least it’s not Clegg…
Posted by: Kev | Apr 11 2013 7:35 utc | 68
Well thanks for the answers re. Maggot, one could knit them together into some narrative, and yet…Anyway I know several ppl who loathed Thatcher and voted for Cameron. I must be getting old. – 🙂 –
Posted by: Noirette | Apr 11 2013 14:49 utc | 69
Of the 20 positions in Thatcher’s cabinet, Jews held the five most important positions, with Lord Victor Rothschild as security adviser. So serious was this seen in MI6 that a Foreign Office memo was sent to Thatcher saying she must be seen as “even handed and not totally pro Jew”. Lord Victor Rothschild oversaw all domestic and foreign intelligence, and it has been said that it was his decision to sink the General Belgrano and Thatcher simply did as she was told.
Posted by: hans | Apr 11 2013 15:19 utc | 70
So basically Kev your latest evasive bluster-filled comment would be your strangely elusive way of admitting (without appearing to) that, despite all your blustering-bullshit to the contrary, you cannot actually provide any examples of Clegg’s ACTIONS being any sort of threat to the Brit Political Establishment.
This despite the fact that you posted a blub, as some sort “evidence” to contradict what I have already stated, whose very first line declared that Lil’ Nicky Clegg had “rocked” the UK Pol Establishment.
“I still don’t understand”
Well, yes.
Clearly you don’t.
TBH – that was fairly obvious
Posted by: yah . . .but | Apr 11 2013 18:06 utc | 71
like I said earlier, Kev, you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing.
You clearly have nothing useful nor interesting to add.
Posted by: yah . . .but | Apr 11 2013 18:07 utc | 72
@Hans#70,
In adult life Rothschild declared himself to be an atheist although born a Jew. His connect (Spy ring) was more from his Cambridge years and being one of ‘The Cambridge Apostles’, also known as the Cambridge Conversazione Society. So was Eddie Marsh (private secretary to Winston Churchill and patron of the arts). In the nineteenth century, the circle was widely influential and particularly powerful in politics (up until the Great War, thirty-four Apostles–or fourteen percent–were Members of Parliament; one even became a member of the U. S. House of Representatives. Between 1979 and 1982, several Apostles were exposed as having belonged to a Communist spy ring that flourished from the 1930s to the 1960s. At least four men with access to the top levels of government in Britain were accused of having passed information to the KGB. Guy Burgess, an MI6 officer and secretary to the Deputy Foreign Minister, and Anthony Blunt, an MI5 officer and art adviser to the Queen, were Apostles. Another Apostle, Leo Long, probably was involved as well. They also were for the most part a very ‘Gay’ group, sodomy was part of the rituals apparently?
Pertaining to Thatcher,and a humorous tit-bit, the Conservative government threatened to “veto” a BBC Panorama programme about MI5 and MI6 because it planned to reveal details about how they operated and question their public accountability; The documents include letters from the heads of MI5 and MI6, speculation about Anthony Blunt and Kim Philby’s role in the death of the wartime Polish emigre leader General Sikorski, the Holocaust denier David Irving and suggestions that the swashbuckling actor Errol Flynn was a Nazi agent.
Some of Thatcher’s favourite books (Self confessed); ‘The Fourth Protocol’ and Spycatcher. Like both Heath and then Thatcher, Callaghan was deeply suspicious of the miner leader Arthur Scargill, Under Thatchers shout MI5 had obtained a Home Office Warrant (HOW) in 1973, believing that he was a Communist sympathiser. In that, Thatcher pushed P.O. box 500 more than they pushed her.
The Belgrano, I remember the day, I was only a lad in 82′, but it was news and often discussed. Thatcher and her War Cabinet agreed to a request from Admiral Lewin, the Chief of the Defence Staff, to change the rules of engagement and allow an attack on the Belgrano outside the exclusion zone. After consultation at Cabinet level Thatcher agreed that Commander Wreford-Brown should attack the Belgrano – I never knew or heard Rothschild was involved, in fact he was distanced from her circle? It does not gel, more so after the unmasking of Blunt in secret in 1964 and again in public by Margaret Thatcher in 1979, Rothschild was questioned by Special Branch because of his friendship with the outed double agent, she chased his connections. Thatcher seemed to see it as his conflict of loyalties was not between Whitehall and the Lubyanka, but his country of birth and his family’s Zionist dreams seems more logical.
@Yah, Apart from ripping off all your collective thoughts from a very lame blog; you need to get out more – best if stop reading the ‘Sun’ also.
Posted by: Kev | Apr 11 2013 23:36 utc | 73
when all you have is bullshit and bluster, I guess adding more bullshit and bluster probably seems like a good idea to try and hide the fat that you’re full of shit
Posted by: yah . . but | Apr 12 2013 6:19 utc | 74