Thatcher - poor judgement
Discussion
jogger1976 said:
I think that all politicians are in some way flawed personalities. The nature of the job means you have to be a strong personality with a thick skin/big ego.
I also think that the longer someone stays in power, for example Thatcher or Blair, the more out of touch, and in some senses, "untouchable" they may feel. This is when mistakes are made and judgement goes out of the window.
Add in an Establishment that doesn't really give a toss about the ordinary man and woman in the street unless it suits their agenda, yet seems blinded by celebrity, wealth and power. Is it any wonder things like this happen?
For a real insight into how Saville manipulated the system, using various governments, the NHS, and BBC, this is an eye opening, if rather grim read http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/bookrevie...
This will make an interesting read for sure. Within the publicity for the book the author alludes to Saviles connections with Police hierarchy as well as his closeness with Royal's. I also think that the longer someone stays in power, for example Thatcher or Blair, the more out of touch, and in some senses, "untouchable" they may feel. This is when mistakes are made and judgement goes out of the window.
Add in an Establishment that doesn't really give a toss about the ordinary man and woman in the street unless it suits their agenda, yet seems blinded by celebrity, wealth and power. Is it any wonder things like this happen?
For a real insight into how Saville manipulated the system, using various governments, the NHS, and BBC, this is an eye opening, if rather grim read http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/bookrevie...
crankedup said:
The Don of Croy said:
crankedup said:
unrepentant said:
She knew that Peter Morrison was a paedophile, it was very well known in Westminster and she was advised about it. Didn't stop her from making him her PPS though. I just think that in the past 30 years attitudes have changed.
And whilst some PH'ers go into a frenzy (why not) over those kiddy fiddlers recently caught, it appears 'out of bounds' to criticize those in power that allowed them to get away with it. Not only that but Honour at least one of them! And some have the neck to call me a hypocrite.Now it may upset a few dedicated followers of their perceived great and good being pulled for a little bit of debate, which in some POV's is warranted, but that's life. If you want to have a debate about some other political leaders gaff's, go ahead, no worries for me!
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
The Don of Croy said:
crankedup said:
unrepentant said:
She knew that Peter Morrison was a paedophile, it was very well known in Westminster and she was advised about it. Didn't stop her from making him her PPS though. I just think that in the past 30 years attitudes have changed.
And whilst some PH'ers go into a frenzy (why not) over those kiddy fiddlers recently caught, it appears 'out of bounds' to criticize those in power that allowed them to get away with it. Not only that but Honour at least one of them! And some have the neck to call me a hypocrite.Now it may upset a few dedicated followers of their perceived great and good being pulled for a little bit of debate, which in some POV's is warranted, but that's life. If you want to have a debate about some other political leaders gaff's, go ahead, no worries for me!
TankRizzo said:
More tedious made-up anti-Thatcher crap from the forum's biggest Thatcher-hater. Yawn. How unsurprising to also find creaking Derek jumping on his stained yellow horse and come galloping to Crankers's rescue.
Very emotive strong term 'Thatcher - Hater'. You need to be careful with the use of such terminology, at least make sure that you are undeniably accurate with such a description.The truth is that I hate nobody, people must do something so awful for others to hate individuals! In my situation expressing as I do from time to time, it is Thatchers Policies, or at least some of them, that I intensely dislike and disagree with. (Some of those ill judged policies still impacting on Society today). Big difference between hate of person and intensely dislike,disagree with policies.
Derek 'jumping on the bandwagon', is that really how you interpret his interjection into a public forum?
You don't consider that he may just be voicing his opinion, like other forum posters?
You seem to have a problem accepting the democracy of free speech? What a sad individual you make yourself sound.
crankedup said:
TankRizzo said:
More tedious made-up anti-Thatcher crap from the forum's biggest Thatcher-hater. Yawn. How unsurprising to also find creaking Derek jumping on his stained yellow horse and come galloping to Crankers's rescue.
Very emotive strong term 'Thatcher - Hater'. You need to be careful with the use of such terminology, at least make sure that you are undeniably accurate with such a description.The truth is that I hate nobody, people must do something so awful for others to hate individuals! In my situation expressing as I do from time to time, it is Thatchers Policies, or at least some of them, that I intensely dislike and disagree with. (Some of those ill judged policies still impacting on Society today). Big difference between hate of person and intensely dislike,disagree with policies.
Derek 'jumping on the bandwagon', is that really how you interpret his interjection into a public forum?
You don't consider that he may just be voicing his opinion, like other forum posters?
You seem to have a problem accepting the democracy of free speech? What a sad individual you make yourself sound.
For some threads it's enough just to see the topic to know exactly how they are going to unfold.
Cranked; Thatcher bad.
Most of PH; some polishing her picture, some with hand in their pocket; Bad cranked, MT is bestest thing ever.
Entertaining, nevertheless.
ETA; TankIdiot; don't have kids.
Cranked; Thatcher bad.
Most of PH; some polishing her picture, some with hand in their pocket; Bad cranked, MT is bestest thing ever.
Entertaining, nevertheless.
ETA; TankIdiot; don't have kids.
NoNeed said:
crankedup said:
TankRizzo said:
More tedious made-up anti-Thatcher crap from the forum's biggest Thatcher-hater. Yawn. How unsurprising to also find creaking Derek jumping on his stained yellow horse and come galloping to Crankers's rescue.
Very emotive strong term 'Thatcher - Hater'. You need to be careful with the use of such terminology, at least make sure that you are undeniably accurate with such a description.The truth is that I hate nobody, people must do something so awful for others to hate individuals! In my situation expressing as I do from time to time, it is Thatchers Policies, or at least some of them, that I intensely dislike and disagree with. (Some of those ill judged policies still impacting on Society today). Big difference between hate of person and intensely dislike,disagree with policies.
Derek 'jumping on the bandwagon', is that really how you interpret his interjection into a public forum?
You don't consider that he may just be voicing his opinion, like other forum posters?
You seem to have a problem accepting the democracy of free speech? What a sad individual you make yourself sound.
There has to be some minor policies introduced by her Government one would think, but I struggle to re-call any of merit TBH.
One policy that I did consider to be ill considered was the selling off of Council Houses, especially when the stock sold was not replaced. The few upsides of the policy, imo, were sold stock areas were generally uplifted (in aesthetic terms). It released families from the apron strings of Council's, and it gave the families a degree of inspiration and responsibility. So some strong upsides but the downsides,imo, are some families made a purchase but were ill equipped to be property owners. Fraud was apparent with people cashing in by tempting genuine tenants to purchase their subsidised home only to lose their homes within five years to the unscrupulous. Young people today are unable to access Social Housing due to shortage of stock, the funds from sales were ring-fenced with new stock building not permitted within the scheme.
Therefore, on balance I personally strongly disagreed with the scheme, despite the fact that my Parents Inlaw purchased their Council home at a heavily discounted price.
league67 said:
For some threads it's enough just to see the topic to know exactly how they are going to unfold.
Cranked; Thatcher bad.
Most of PH; some polishing her picture, some with hand in their pocket; Bad cranked, MT is bestest thing ever.
Entertaining, nevertheless.
ETA; TankIdiot; don't have kids.
Yes, I'm a very naughty boy Cranked; Thatcher bad.
Most of PH; some polishing her picture, some with hand in their pocket; Bad cranked, MT is bestest thing ever.
Entertaining, nevertheless.
ETA; TankIdiot; don't have kids.
crankedup said:
Odd! why would I want to do such a thing? For the most part I found the policies of her Government to be entirely disagreeable to my political philosophy at that time. Nothing that I have read or heard of since then has provoked me to re-consider.
There has to be some minor policies introduced by her Government one would think, but I struggle to re-call any of merit TBH.
One policy that I did consider to be ill considered was the selling off of Council Houses, especially when the stock sold was not replaced. The few upsides of the policy, imo, were sold stock areas were generally uplifted (in aesthetic terms). It released families from the apron strings of Council's, and it gave the families a degree of inspiration and responsibility. So some strong upsides but the downsides,imo, are some families made a purchase but were ill equipped to be property owners. Fraud was apparent with people cashing in by tempting genuine tenants to purchase their subsidised home only to lose their homes within five years to the unscrupulous. Young people today are unable to access Social Housing due to shortage of stock, the funds from sales were ring-fenced with new stock building not permitted within the scheme.
Therefore, on balance I personally strongly disagreed with the scheme, despite the fact that my Parents Inlaw purchased their Council home at a heavily discounted price.
what's odd is that you can't find any positives despitr her being in office for over 10 years, yes you mention one but then disagreed with yourself.There has to be some minor policies introduced by her Government one would think, but I struggle to re-call any of merit TBH.
One policy that I did consider to be ill considered was the selling off of Council Houses, especially when the stock sold was not replaced. The few upsides of the policy, imo, were sold stock areas were generally uplifted (in aesthetic terms). It released families from the apron strings of Council's, and it gave the families a degree of inspiration and responsibility. So some strong upsides but the downsides,imo, are some families made a purchase but were ill equipped to be property owners. Fraud was apparent with people cashing in by tempting genuine tenants to purchase their subsidised home only to lose their homes within five years to the unscrupulous. Young people today are unable to access Social Housing due to shortage of stock, the funds from sales were ring-fenced with new stock building not permitted within the scheme.
Therefore, on balance I personally strongly disagreed with the scheme, despite the fact that my Parents Inlaw purchased their Council home at a heavily discounted price.
ellroy said:
Well apart from most of North Yorkshire, Cheshire, Lincolnshire, Cumbria, rural Northumbria among others.
Apart from those areas of the North you're right.......
And for many of the other areas of the North, the tories have never been electable. Labour could trot out a decrepit donkey with a red rosette and it would have been voted in. Indeed, if they had, we'd have been better off!Apart from those areas of the North you're right.......
(I'm from Yorkshire btw, should anyone believe this is a North<>South thing. From one of the redder than red parts of it too).
http://m.thedrum.com/opinion/2015/02/27/what-preve...
What prevented me exposing Jimmy Savile's crimes to the world - former Sunday Mirror editor Paul Connew
...
includes this bit
...
At the Sunday Mirror, for example, we twice tried to expose Tory grandee Sir Peter Morrison over his importuning of young boys in public lavatories and elsewhere. Morrison, a flamboyant Old Etonian barrister MP from an aristocratic political dynasty, was (like Jimmy Savile) a particular favourite of Margaret Thatcher who made him deputy chairman of the Tory party, a junior minister and the role of her ill-fated campaign manager when she tried to hang on as party leader and prime minister in 1990.
During the early and mid 90s we were alerted by police sources outraged that Morrison had been arrested but not prosecuted over his proclivities, in one case blatantly pulling rank and demanding to see very senior officers. Subsequently, to the chagrin of young arresting officers, no charges were brought and the paperwork associated with Morrison’s arrest ‘disappeared’. For the sake of their careers, our young police sources dared not go public, leaving us with only one longshot option, confronting Morrison and trying to get a confession. Inevitably, the seasoned lawyer branded it all ‘fantasy’ and issued dire legal threats. But how times change…with some Tory grandees, including Lord Tebbit, now acknowledging how Mrs Thatcher had been warned of rumours about Morrison’s activities even before she made him the party’s deputy chairman.
Mrs Thatcher’s former Scotland Yard personal bodyguard, DCI Peter Strevens (sic) now acknowledges he told the PM face to face about the persistent rumours about Morrison and under-age boys before she appointed him deputy chairman.
What prevented me exposing Jimmy Savile's crimes to the world - former Sunday Mirror editor Paul Connew
...
includes this bit
...
At the Sunday Mirror, for example, we twice tried to expose Tory grandee Sir Peter Morrison over his importuning of young boys in public lavatories and elsewhere. Morrison, a flamboyant Old Etonian barrister MP from an aristocratic political dynasty, was (like Jimmy Savile) a particular favourite of Margaret Thatcher who made him deputy chairman of the Tory party, a junior minister and the role of her ill-fated campaign manager when she tried to hang on as party leader and prime minister in 1990.
During the early and mid 90s we were alerted by police sources outraged that Morrison had been arrested but not prosecuted over his proclivities, in one case blatantly pulling rank and demanding to see very senior officers. Subsequently, to the chagrin of young arresting officers, no charges were brought and the paperwork associated with Morrison’s arrest ‘disappeared’. For the sake of their careers, our young police sources dared not go public, leaving us with only one longshot option, confronting Morrison and trying to get a confession. Inevitably, the seasoned lawyer branded it all ‘fantasy’ and issued dire legal threats. But how times change…with some Tory grandees, including Lord Tebbit, now acknowledging how Mrs Thatcher had been warned of rumours about Morrison’s activities even before she made him the party’s deputy chairman.
Mrs Thatcher’s former Scotland Yard personal bodyguard, DCI Peter Strevens (sic) now acknowledges he told the PM face to face about the persistent rumours about Morrison and under-age boys before she appointed him deputy chairman.
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
The Don of Croy said:
crankedup said:
unrepentant said:
She knew that Peter Morrison was a paedophile, it was very well known in Westminster and she was advised about it. Didn't stop her from making him her PPS though. I just think that in the past 30 years attitudes have changed.
And whilst some PH'ers go into a frenzy (why not) over those kiddy fiddlers recently caught, it appears 'out of bounds' to criticize those in power that allowed them to get away with it. Not only that but Honour at least one of them! And some have the neck to call me a hypocrite.Now it may upset a few dedicated followers of their perceived great and good being pulled for a little bit of debate, which in some POV's is warranted, but that's life. If you want to have a debate about some other political leaders gaff's, go ahead, no worries for me!
NoNeed said:
crankedup said:
Odd! why would I want to do such a thing? For the most part I found the policies of her Government to be entirely disagreeable to my political philosophy at that time. Nothing that I have read or heard of since then has provoked me to re-consider.
There has to be some minor policies introduced by her Government one would think, but I struggle to re-call any of merit TBH.
One policy that I did consider to be ill considered was the selling off of Council Houses, especially when the stock sold was not replaced. The few upsides of the policy, imo, were sold stock areas were generally uplifted (in aesthetic terms). It released families from the apron strings of Council's, and it gave the families a degree of inspiration and responsibility. So some strong upsides but the downsides,imo, are some families made a purchase but were ill equipped to be property owners. Fraud was apparent with people cashing in by tempting genuine tenants to purchase their subsidised home only to lose their homes within five years to the unscrupulous. Young people today are unable to access Social Housing due to shortage of stock, the funds from sales were ring-fenced with new stock building not permitted within the scheme.
Therefore, on balance I personally strongly disagreed with the scheme, despite the fact that my Parents Inlaw purchased their Council home at a heavily discounted price.
what's odd is that you can't find any positives despitr her being in office for over 10 years, yes you mention one but then disagreed with yourself.There has to be some minor policies introduced by her Government one would think, but I struggle to re-call any of merit TBH.
One policy that I did consider to be ill considered was the selling off of Council Houses, especially when the stock sold was not replaced. The few upsides of the policy, imo, were sold stock areas were generally uplifted (in aesthetic terms). It released families from the apron strings of Council's, and it gave the families a degree of inspiration and responsibility. So some strong upsides but the downsides,imo, are some families made a purchase but were ill equipped to be property owners. Fraud was apparent with people cashing in by tempting genuine tenants to purchase their subsidised home only to lose their homes within five years to the unscrupulous. Young people today are unable to access Social Housing due to shortage of stock, the funds from sales were ring-fenced with new stock building not permitted within the scheme.
Therefore, on balance I personally strongly disagreed with the scheme, despite the fact that my Parents Inlaw purchased their Council home at a heavily discounted price.
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
The Don of Croy said:
crankedup said:
unrepentant said:
She knew that Peter Morrison was a paedophile, it was very well known in Westminster and she was advised about it. Didn't stop her from making him her PPS though. I just think that in the past 30 years attitudes have changed.
And whilst some PH'ers go into a frenzy (why not) over those kiddy fiddlers recently caught, it appears 'out of bounds' to criticize those in power that allowed them to get away with it. Not only that but Honour at least one of them! And some have the neck to call me a hypocrite.Now it may upset a few dedicated followers of their perceived great and good being pulled for a little bit of debate, which in some POV's is warranted, but that's life. If you want to have a debate about some other political leaders gaff's, go ahead, no worries for me!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff