Salmond admires Baroness Thatcher

[Therapist]

Are there no depths to which this attention seeker will not sink? Incapable of creating winning policies of his own, he resorts to basking in the reflected glory of Baroness Thatcher, Britain's second greatest Prime Minister.

 

Meanwhile Labour, who could have made some political capital out of this, resort to spouting their tired old left wing cliches.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7576801.stm

[this_is_my_story]

Are there no depths to which this attention seeker will not sink? Incapable of creating winning policies of his own, he resorts to basking in the reflected glory of Baroness Thatcher, Britain's second greatest Prime Minister.

 

Meanwhile Labour, who could have made some political capital out of this, resort to spouting their tired old left wing cliches.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7576801.stm

 

What?

[Therapist]

What?

 

1. Sir Winston Churchill

2. Baroness Thatcher

 

Fact.

[Craigieboy]

Thatcher was a cow.

 

Someone should have burned the witch.

 

.

[Toggie88]

What he actually said was that her economic policies were ****e but her social policies weren't as ****e...but still ****e.

 

Misquoted I think you'll find.

[Toggie88]

1. Sir Winston Churchill

2. Baroness Thatcher

 

Fact.

 

I've got utter hatred for both of them. The second one more so.

[Therapist]

What he actually said was that her economic policies were ****e but her social policies weren't as ****e...but still ****e.

 

Incorrect. It's very clear that Baroness Thatcher owns Fat Alex.

[Toggie88]

Incorrect. It's very clear that Baroness Thatcher owns Fat Alex.

 

Yes because that makes sense. :confused:

[this_is_my_story]

1. Sir Winston Churchill

2. Baroness Thatcher

 

Fact.

 

I trust you're either:

a) On the wind-up (and not particularly good at it)

or

b)Mentally impaired/challenged/currently under the influence of strong class-A drugs.

 

Please reply, if only to advise of which is applicable.

[this_is_my_story]

What he actually said was that her economic policies were ****e but her social policies weren't as ****e...but still ****e.

 

Misquoted I think you'll find.

 

Exactly.

[Therapist]

I've got utter hatred for both of them. The second one more so.

 

What do you hate about Sir Winston Churchill Togster? Saving us from the scourge of Nazism?

[makateer]

I trust you're either:

a) On the wind-up (and not particularly good at it)

or

b)Mentally impaired/challenged/currently under the influence of strong class-A drugs.

 

Please reply, if only to advise of which is applicable.

 

 

[this_is_my_story]

 

 

Bit cryptic... however, I'm sure I'll see the funny side if it's in there somewhere!

[makateer]

Bit cryptic... however, I'm sure I'll see the funny side if it's in there somewhere!

 

Cryptic? Could it be any more obvious? It was the answer to your question.

[Deek]

There was a lot to admire about Mrs Thatcher, although she did have some faults.

 

But she had bigger balls than every Prime Minster has since.

[this_is_my_story]

Cryptic? Could it be any more obvious? It was the answer to your question.

 

Duh! Blonde moment...

[joe kickass2]

I've got utter hatred for both of them. The second one more so.

 

Churchill was a product of his time, the last of the grand imperialists. Which phase of his life do you hate so much? His early military exploits, the Liberal years, his disaster at the Admiralty, his adventures in the trenches when he threw his lot in with the front line infantry, communism should be strangled at birth - if only, the wilderness years, how he inspired a nation to stand up against a seemingly invinsible and ruthless enemy? Consider his jelly kneed contemporaries who wanted to sue for peace.

 

Please don't come out with the miners and soldiers non event. Or his imperialism as it's pointless taken out of context.

 

Thatcher on the other hand was plain lucky. Oil, Falklands and world economic recovery happened at a fortunate time for her. Her negligence with

Scotland will mean no right of centre representation here for a generation.

So we have to put up with SNP and Labour, cheers.

 

1) Winston.

2) Atlee, not for his industry nationalisation, but for his educational and health reforms.

[King of the North]

Are there no depths to which this attention seeker will not sink?

 

I often wonder...

[Therapist]

I often wonder...

 

 

Good to have you onside mate.

[The Vulture]

What do you hate about Sir Winston Churchill Togster? Saving us from the scourge of Nazism?

 

Many people in Australia and NZ are not keen on Winston Churchill because of his role in Gallipoli. It was his tactics that when put into place led to the slaughter of ANZAC soldiers on the Turkish coast.

 

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/gallipoli.htm

 

I also read a newspaper article once about him ordering troops to shoot at Welsh miners who were on strike when he was Home Secetary. This was a while ago, so details are hazy.

[Toggie88]

What do you hate about Sir Winston Churchill Togster? Saving us from the scourge of Nazism?

 

I no real problem with most of Churchill's decisions. However the one that I do have is from more of a personal point of view. The internment of thousands of Italians on the Isle of Man and of course the Andora Star. It was panic move and a totally wrong one. Two of my Great Grandfathers and my great uncle were interned on the isle of Man. One of my Great uncles was on the Andora Star.

 

The police burst into one of my Great Grandads home and didn't even give him enough time to take off his slippers. All of sudden Italians were seen as the enemy within, houses were ransacked, shops had their windows smashed in. My Great Grandmother didn't lock her door at night because she said that there was no point in having to fix a kicked in door.

 

It was a ridiculous situation. A lot of internees had children fighting in the war. In one surreal case the prison guard on the Isle of Man was the son of one of the prisoners.

 

That's why I have a beef with Churchill.

 

For what it's worth my favourite is Lloyd George - founder of the wealth care state (liberal reforms).

[joe kickass2]

Many people in Australia and NZ are not keen on Winston Churchill because of his role in Gallipoli. It was his tactics that when put into place led to the slaughter of ANZAC soldiers on the Turkish coast.

 

 

Fair point but in the context of the Somme, Ypres, and four years of machine gun fodder tactics, it was same old same old for the poor bloody infantry (sorry, ww2 name).

 

The miners thing was nearly 100 years ago, not his finest hour (sorry) but compared to others in the international arena at the time, not exactly Czar Nicholas II.

[joe kickass2]

I no real problem with most of Churchill's decisions. However the one that I do have is from more of a personal point of view. The internment of thousands of Italians on the Isle of Man and of course the Andora Star. It was panic move and a totally wrong one. Two of my Great Grandfathers and my great uncle were interned on the isle of Man. One of my Great uncles was on the Andora Star.

 

The police burst into one of my Great Grandads home and didn't even give him enough time to take off his slippers. All of sudden Italians were seen as the enemy within, houses were ransacked, shops had their windows smashed in. My Great Grandmother didn't lock her door at night because she said that there was no point in having to fix a kicked in door.

 

It was a ridiculous situation. A lot of internees had children fighting in the war. In one surreal case the prison guard on the Isle of Man was the son of one of the prisoners.

 

That's why I have a beef with Churchill.

 

For what it's worth my favourite is Lloyd George - founder of the wealth care state (liberal reforms).

 

 

Can't argue about that. From your position.

[Deek]

Can't argue about that. From your position.

 

I think you can argue about it though from outwith Toggies position. We were at war with Italy and had to take steps to prevent the enemy within. One spy in our midst could have cost thousands of life's. It was necessary and the right decision at the time.

[Therapist]

However the one that I do have is from more of a personal point of view.

 

Proper historians - and intellectuals such as me - do not let minor personal quibbles get in the way of assessing someone's place in history. I suggest you learn to do the same.

 

What would you suggest Sir Winston should have done? Surrender the civilised world to the Axis powers so your great grandmother didn't get her front door booted in?

[Therapist]

One spy in our midst could have cost thousands of life's.

 

Careless talk costs lives.

 

Loose lips sink ships.

 

Fact.

[The Doctor]

Are there no depths to which this attention seeker will not sink? Incapable of creating winning policies of his own, he resorts to basking in the reflected glory of Baroness Thatcher, Britain's second greatest Prime Minister.

 

Meanwhile Labour, who could have made some political capital out of this, resort to spouting their tired old left wing cliches.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7576801.stm

 

Funnily enough, I saw this on the news and my first thought was "That'll confuse Therapist".

[Boab Mugabe]

Someone like Baroness Maggie is what is needed right now. A leader with the fortitude and foresight to do the right thing when needed.

 

Andrew Marr's analysis of the 80s on his History of Modern Britain programme was one of the most balanced I've seen on her reign, a far cry from the lopsided lefty rancour we see today in any reference to her time as PM . It's pretty rare that you hear the other side of the coin when it comes to any talk of the Tory government in the 80s.

 

There were winners and losers as a direct result of those policies (as with any change to economic policy) but you only ever hear the sob stories and not those who were able to improve their lives immensely thanks to the new freedoms and incentives they acquired.

 

My quality of life would be poorer if it wasn't for her policies, of that I am sure.

[John S]

Are there no depths to which this attention seeker will not sink? Incapable of creating winning policies of his own, he resorts to basking in the reflected glory of Baroness Thatcher, Britain's second greatest Prime Minister.

 

Meanwhile Labour, who could have made some political capital out of this, resort to spouting their tired old left wing cliches.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7576801.stm

 

As ever, you demonstrated your naivety early in your post.

 

Stopped reading after that, not worth my time.

[Therapist]

My quality of life would be poorer if it wasn't for her policies, of that I am sure.

 

Same here Cap'n.

 

When I look at Therapist Towers I can trace its origins back to the money I started to accumulate doing multiple share applications and "stagging" the likes of British Airways, British Telecom, etc etc. From a wider perspective she also changed the UK economy from relying on uncompetitive heavy industry and coal mining to a much more dynamic service based economy.

 

God bless Baroness Thatcher.

[The Vulture]

She was asked what her greatest legacy was, her answer was 'New Labour'.

[davemclaren]

She was asked what her greatest legacy was, her answer was 'New Labour'.

 

Going by this thread her greatest legacy was Therapist.

[MrBones]

As Frankie Boyle said, when thatcher dies, there'll be 5 million Scots with spades voulenteering to dig her straight to hell

[this_is_my_story]

As Frankie Boyle said, when thatcher dies, there'll be 5 million Scots with spades voulenteering to dig her straight to hell

 

Precisely.

[this_is_my_story]

]Someone like Baroness Maggie is what is needed right now[/b]. A leader with the fortitude and foresight to do the right thing when needed.

 

Andrew Marr's analysis of the 80s on his History of Modern Britain programme was one of the most balanced I've seen on her reign' date=' a far cry from the lopsided lefty rancour we see today in any reference to her time as PM . It's pretty rare that you hear the other side of the coin when it comes to any talk of the Tory government in the 80s.

 

There were winners and losers as a direct result of those policies (as with any change to economic policy) but you only ever hear the sob stories and not those who were able to improve their lives immensely thanks to the new freedoms and incentives they acquired.

 

My quality of life would be poorer if it wasn't for her policies, of that I am sure. [/quote']

 

I'll correct that for you:

No, someone completely unlike her is what is needed right now. As for the rest of your post... words fail me.

[MrBones]

I think anyone who has lived through the Thatcher years, living in Scotland, cannot possibly think Thatcher was anything other than Satan

[shaun.lawson]

Are there no depths to which this attention seeker will not sink? Incapable of creating winning policies of his own, he resorts to basking in the reflected glory of Baroness Thatcher, Britain's second greatest Prime Minister.

 

 

I'm delighted to see that you clearly agree with my assessment that Clement Attlee was Britain's greatest Prime Minister. I mean, who else could it possibly be...?

[shaun.lawson]

She was asked what her greatest legacy was, her answer was 'New Labour'.

 

Just as New Labour's greatest legacy is... David Cameron.

[Charlie-Brown]

Churchill and his group were so hell bent on wanting to destroy the German empire and prevent a european power developing to rival the British Empire that in his quest not only did he destroy Germany but he bankrupted Great Britain as well however he also failed in his main ambition in that the USA and more worringly Soviet Russia became the dominant World & European powers - indeed half of Europe was enslaved by the Soviets for 40 years after the 4 years of terror the Nazi's created in the East.....in terms of real-politik then Churchill was an abysmal failure in terms of achieving the opposite of what he intended......after the war realising his grave mistake and the new found power of Stalin's Russia which he had helped to create he famously said "We slaughtered the wrong pig"......

[shaun.lawson]

1. Sir Winston Churchill

2. Baroness Thatcher

 

Fact.

 

Ah yes - Winnie. Given none of us know enough about earlier twentieth, nineteenth or eighteenth century Prime Ministers, the one thing I think can be said with some confidence is that, post-1940, Britain's greatest Prime Ministers have been Churchill, Attlee and Thatcher - because I think you define greatness according to impact and legacy. I disagree with an absolute ton of what Maggie the Milk Snatcher did - but even I, in my Guardian reading, lily-livered, bleeding heart liberalism can see that she made a huge impact.

 

Someone like Tony Blair, on the other hand, was an extraordinary politician, but disappointing PM, because with the size of the majorities he enjoyed, and the goodwill he had at first, he didn't achieve anywhere near enough: and aware of how historians would be likely to judge him, blew his whole legacy on one solitary place: Iraq.

 

But I digress. You may like to ask descendants of the victims of the Black and Tans, the miners, the fallen at Gallipoli, the Indians he tried to starve into submission or the Kurds he ordered gassed as to their views on Churchill - but there is no doubt he was a truly great man, nor of the admiration he inspired for this country across the world. One thing though. I did my undergraduate degree at the University of East Anglia in Norwich - and there, one of my favourite lecturers was John Charmley, the leading revisionist historian on Churchill.

 

Charmley, incidentally, grew up in a Liverpool dockyard, but was so embarrassed by this that he turned himself into a right wing toff, who pronounced rather as 'rawther' and mentality as 'montalitay', so I think you two might get on (); but the central thrust of his thesis was as follows. Given the Nazis would have foundered on the impossibly inhospitable Russian winter anyway, and that they were sunk the moment Hitler made one of the most bizarre decisions ever in world history - to declare war on the US - what difference did Britain's role actually make to the war's outcome? And given our efforts bankrupted us, leading to years of post-war austerity while others on the continent enjoyed far better economic conditions, and the beginning of the end of the Empire, how did we benefit?

 

Where I disagree with him is I think by staying in the war as long as we did, and bemusing Hitler (who couldn't understand why we'd declared war over Poland in the first place, nor why were prepared to fight our fellow Anglo-Saxons), we forced him into blundering into opening a second front against the Soviets. Documents from around that time indicate that Hitler's chief motivation was, by quickly defeating Stalin, to deprive us of our last hope, so forcing us to sue for peace - and it's worth pointing out that Churchill himself privately assumed the Red Army would be no match for Germany. But if Hitler hadn't declared war on the US, Roosevelt would have been too busy turning all their resources to fighting Japan to help us, and I think we'd have been lost.

 

I strongly suspect too that Hitler was reluctant to go for broke against us because he wasn't comfortable fighting a people he admired, and whose blood he regarded as much the same as the Germans' anyway. I'm sure the resulting hesitancy played at least some part in us being able to evacuate from Dunkirk, and affected other generals such as Rommel. Overall, it's probably fair to say, as Winston himself famously did, that "Britain provided the time, America provided the money, and Russia provided the blood" - but by the end of the war, we were no longer first among equals, and having gone to battle in order to rescue Poland and Czechoslovakia from Nazi tyranny, we ended up, er, leaving them to endure Soviet tyranny instead. Indeed, I'd argue that the war wasn't truly won until 1989!

 

None of this is to play down the greatness of the man, nor the sacrifices made by the forces or people. I must admit to have caught my heart swelling with pride on many occasions when reading accounts of the war, and especially of 1940-41, when we genuinely did stand alone. And if the war hadn't been won, and my grandmother liberated from Mauthausen concentration camp, I wouldn't even be sat here writing this. I just think there are many interesting questions and debating points posed by our role. Churchill, of course, ended up himself victim of what, I still believe, was the most sophisticated election result in history: the right man for war was no longer the right man for peace, so the electorate chose Labour to at last implement a true welfare state, ushering in the second of the three great post-1940 Prime Ministers in the process.

[shaun.lawson]

Churchill and his group were so hell bent on wanting to destroy the German empire and prevent a european power developing to rival the British Empire that in his quest not only did he destroy Germany but he bankrupted Great Britain as well however he also failed in his main ambition in that the USA and more worringly Soviet Russia became the dominant World & European powers - indeed half of Europe was enslaved by the Soviets for 40 years after the 4 years of terror the Nazi's created in the East.....in terms of real-politik then Churchill was an abysmal failure in terms of achieving the opposite of what he intended......after the war realising his grave mistake and the new found power of Stalin's Russia which he had helped to create he famously said "We slaughtered the wrong pig"......

 

I agree: especially on the point that our main reason for fighting Hitler was our long-held belief in the continental balance of powers: an ever expanding Germany was clearly an imperial threat to Britain. However, it was certainly a just war - it was as just a war as you could ever conceive of - and I can't for the life of me see how we could have fought Stalin instead. Stalin's USSR was no threat internationally prior to 1945; and only they had the resources and especially manpower with which to defeat the Third Reich.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I think anyone who has lived through the Thatcher years, living in Scotland, cannot possibly think Thatcher was anything other than Satan

 

Yep, they accursed her name as they bought their council house and took part in the privatisations.

 

I think Salmond was spot on in what he said though but no one else has commented on something that he did during that time (see below). The 80s were a decade Britain had to go through. Its heavy industry was a basket case and had to go thanks to decades of incompetent management and communist unions. The only losers, as usual, were the worker who simply wanted to do their job and earn a living. They saw their jobs being undercut by the Far East because the management didn't have a clue how to move forward and the unions were calling them out on strike every five minutes.

 

Now, Salmond does stand accused of humbug - he was kicked out of Parliament by the Speaker during Nigel Lawson's budget of 1988 when the higher rate of income tax was reduced to 40p leading to cries of "Shame!" from the Nats. I suppose he does now accept that given that I don't believe the Nats have any plans to raise income tax in an independent Scotland.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I agree: especially on the point that our main reason for fighting Hitler was our long-held belief in the continental balance of powers: an ever expanding Germany was clearly an imperial threat to Britain. However, it was certainly a just war - it was as just a war as you could ever conceive of - and I can't for the life of me see how we could have fought Stalin instead. Stalin's USSR was no threat internationally prior to 1945; and only they had the resources and especially manpower with which to defeat the Third Reich.

 

I disagree with your analysis. It wasn't their manpower that defeated Hitler. It was Hitler failing to learn the lessons of Napoleon.

 

It is clear, though, that Hitler did respect Britain. Indeed, he hoped that Britain would stay out of any war given that he regarded Britain as an Aryan country. However, given the relationship with France, there was no way Britain could stand aside when the war commenced.

[shaun.lawson]

I disagree with your analysis. It wasn't their manpower that defeated Hitler. It was Hitler failing to learn the lessons of Napoleon.

 

It is clear, though, that Hitler did respect Britain. Indeed, he hoped that Britain would stay out of any war given that he regarded Britain as an Aryan country. However, given the relationship with France, there was no way Britain could stand aside when the war commenced.

 

It's also true that, up until March 1939, all Hitler's foreign policy moves could be explained away as classic Versailles revisionism, and no different to what any other German nationalist had demanded. Until the rest of Czecholslovakia was annexed, that is: now, there was no way it could be excused at all, leaving Britain and France with no option other than to guarantee Poland.

[joe kickass2]

Ah yes - Winnie. Given none of us know enough about earlier twentieth, nineteenth or eighteenth century Prime Ministers, the one thing I think can be said with some confidence is that, post-1940, Britain's greatest Prime Ministers have been Churchill, Attlee and Thatcher - because I think you define greatness according to impact and legacy. I disagree with an absolute ton of what Maggie the Milk Snatcher did - but even I, in my Guardian reading, lily-livered, bleeding heart liberalism can see that she made a huge impact.

 

Someone like Tony Blair, on the other hand, was an extraordinary politician, but disappointing PM, because with the size of the majorities he enjoyed, and the goodwill he had at first, he didn't achieve anywhere near enough: and aware of how historians would be likely to judge him, blew his whole legacy on one solitary place: Iraq.

 

But I digress. You may like to ask descendants of the victims of the Black and Tans, the miners, the fallen at Gallipoli, the Indians he tried to starve into submission or the Kurds he ordered gassed as to their views on Churchill - but there is no doubt he was a truly great man, nor of the admiration he inspired for this country across the world. One thing though. I did my undergraduate degree at the University of East Anglia in Norwich - and there, one of my favourite lecturers was John Charmley, the leading revisionist historian on Churchill.

 

Charmley, incidentally, grew up in a Liverpool dockyard, but was so embarrassed by this that he turned himself into a right wing toff, who pronounced rather as 'rawther' and mentality as 'montalitay', so I think you two might get on (); but the central thrust of his thesis was as follows. Given the Nazis would have foundered on the impossibly inhospitable Russian winter anyway, and that they were sunk the moment Hitler made one of the most bizarre decisions ever in world history - to declare war on the US - what difference did Britain's role actually make to the war's outcome? And given our efforts bankrupted us, leading to years of post-war austerity while others on the continent enjoyed far better economic conditions, and the beginning of the end of the Empire, how did we benefit?

 

Where I disagree with him is I think by staying in the war as long as we did, and bemusing Hitler (who couldn't understand why we'd declared war over Poland in the first place, nor why were prepared to fight our fellow Anglo-Saxons), we forced him into blundering into opening a second front against the Soviets. Documents from around that time indicate that Hitler's chief motivation was, by quickly defeating Stalin, to deprive us of our last hope, so forcing us to sue for peace - and it's worth pointing out that Churchill himself privately assumed the Red Army would be no match for Germany. But if Hitler hadn't declared war on the US, Roosevelt would have been too busy turning all their resources to fighting Japan to help us, and I think we'd have been lost.

 

I strongly suspect too that Hitler was reluctant to go for broke against us because he wasn't comfortable fighting a people he admired, and whose blood he regarded as much the same as the Germans' anyway. I'm sure the resulting hesitancy played at least some part in us being able to evacuate from Dunkirk, and affected other generals such as Rommel. Overall, it's probably fair to say, as Winston himself famously did, that "Britain provided the time, America provided the money, and Russia provided the blood" - but by the end of the war, we were no longer first among equals, and having gone to battle in order to rescue Poland and Czechoslovakia from Nazi tyranny, we ended up, er, leaving them to endure Soviet tyranny instead. Indeed, I'd argue that the war wasn't truly won until 1989!

 

None of this is to play down the greatness of the man, nor the sacrifices made by the forces or people. I must admit to have caught my heart swelling with pride on many occasions when reading accounts of the war, and especially of 1940-41, when we genuinely did stand alone. And if the war hadn't been won, and my grandmother liberated from Mauthausen concentration camp, I wouldn't even be sat here writing this. I just think there are many interesting questions and debating points posed by our role. Churchill, of course, ended up himself victim of what, I still believe, was the most sophisticated election result in history: the right man for war was no longer the right man for peace, so the electorate chose Labour to at last implement a true welfare state, ushering in the second of the three great post-1940 Prime Ministers in the process.

 

 

Nothing like a long winded undergraduate red brick university response.

Just kidding, found it quite interesting.

[shaun.lawson]

Nothing like a long winded undergraduate red brick university response.

Just kidding, found it quite interesting.

 

Undergraduate? I am offended.

[chester copperpot]

Thatcher was a cow.

 

Someone should have burned the witch.

 

.

 

 

 

Easy tiger, bit harsh. Thatcher sorted out many things in this country, unfortunately the policies she introduced have not been carried through by subsequent governments.

[coppercrutch]

 

I also read a newspaper article once about him ordering troops to shoot at Welsh miners who were on strike when he was Home Secetary.

 

So Churchill not only lived life on the edge, drank too much, boshed the Nazis and abused ugly birds.........He also shot strikers !!

 

Legend.

 

Interesting thread this. Some knowledgeable historians in our midsts. Always good to learn new stuff. I also admire Thatcher, you don't have to agree with all her policies to know she was a great leader.

 

Got me thinking though, you could say the same thing about Hitler. Undoubtedly one of the World's most impressive leaders, shame he was a ****. Same could be said of many other great leaders, Kubla Khan etc...

 

Why are so many great leaders evil gits at heart ? Any thoughts ?

[Therapist]

Some knowledgeable historians in our midsts.

 

They are much more likely to be accomplished Googlers.

[brownkg]

So Churchill not only lived life on the edge, drank too much, boshed the Nazis and abused ugly birds.........He also shot strikers !!

 

Legend.

 

Interesting thread this. Some knowledgeable historians in our midsts. Always good to learn new stuff. I also admire Thatcher, you don't have to agree with all her policies to know she was a great leader.

 

Got me thinking though, you could say the same thing about Hitler. Undoubtedly one of the World's most impressive leaders, shame he was a ****. Same could be said of many other great leaders, Kubla Khan etc...

 

Why are so many great leaders evil gits at heart ? Any thoughts ?

 

straying back into dodgy ground again I see careful mate! and as to the witch helping us all by encouraging stagging what do you all think has got us into this credit crunch morass in the first place? oh that'll be all the testosterone fuelled city traders playing at betting and getting bonus's the size of small countries thrown there way whether they fail or not and sailing into the sunset leaving joe public to pick up the mess.

On a more personal note went to see Mark Thomas last night (excellent praisworthy person) but shamed myself by accidently spending some money with "beetroot blue" you just can't escape the fat fascists:sad: