Just got back from St Clement Danes; crowd was 15 deep on both sides of the road. I saw:
1 perfectly executed funeral procession 2,500 people respectfully watching said funeral procession 2 very confused tourists 1 placard 3 idiots jeering (later got given a severe rollicking from a 70 year old, ex-RAF pilot. They left without so much as a whimper; I sensed many others in the crowd would have backed up the pilot if push came to shove.)
Given the proximity to LSE (100m away) I was relieved and pleased at the respect shown.
Indeed the most obvious lesson which jumps out of the international comparison tables is that economies which run sound public finances have better growth and lower unemployment that those who are profligate.
If, by austerity, you mean reductions in public borrowing, then in British economic history, 1946-49, 1968-70, 1976-79, 1982-89, 1993-2001, all stand out as periods of austerity in which there was also respectable economic growth.
" ... escorted into the cathedral to meet the Bishop of London and the Archbishop of London."
Archbishop of London? The Telegraph truly is an awful paper these days.
In fairness, live blogging is one thing where errors are inevitable. Having done a few for The Times on the Premier League football, you just have too much to do to get everything right straight off. You have to rely on people spotting them so you can go back.
Let's conclude this absurd debate. F W De Klerk said, on Channel 4 last week, that "Thatcher was a fierce opponent of apartheid, however she understood the complexities of South Africa better than most politicians".
But maybe the lefty insects on here believe they know more about the ending of apartheid than the man who ended apartheid.
Tsk. He was only SA president and Nobel Peace Prize winner.
Bet he never made an advert near the Victoria and Alfred Waterfront.
Criminal side of the family arrives. UK one of the countries Mark Thatcher still allowed to visit.
I can't say I'd particularly condemn someone for plotting the overthrow of the President of Equatorial Guinea.
Britain once had a base on Bioko, the island part of Equatorial Guinea. It was leased from the Spanish from 1827 to 1843.
A masterly post, Cap'n Doc, fully within the best traditions of the site. You really should have trained as a mathematician rather than a biochemist.
Ahoy, there Mr Llama! Thanks for the kind words. I wonder how many PBers are aware that Britain held Buenos Aires, the Argentine capital, ever so briefly (46 days!) in 1806, or Montevideo, Uruguay, from Feb to Sep 1807? Belike and all that...
with Thatcher's death, there are three vacant spaces for companions in the Order of the Garter - there are currently 21 companions instead of the maximum 24.
Is this usual? Does HM usually wait for a few to drop off, and then invest them (*) into the order in one go?
Or (tin-foil hat placed atop head) might she be waiting to allow her successor to choose a few when he takes power?
(*) Is 'invest' the right word for joining the Order?
Criminal side of the family arrives. UK one of the countries Mark Thatcher still allowed to visit.
I can't say I'd particularly condemn someone for plotting the overthrow of the President of Equatorial Guinea.
Britain once had a base on Bioko, the island part of Equatorial Guinea. It was leased from the Spanish from 1827 to 1843.
A masterly post, Cap'n Doc, fully within the best traditions of the site. You really should have trained as a mathematician rather than a biochemist.
I wonder how many PBers are aware that Britain held Buenos Aires, the Argentine capital, ever so briefly (46 days!) in 1806, or Montevideo, Uruguay, from Feb to Sep 1807?
gives full dates, not all companions, but I can still spot several double appointments and at least two triples: Westminster, Brockwell, and Aberavon; e.g. Kingsdown, Ashburton, Stephen.
England held Tangiers as a colony for over 20 years in the 17th century.
For those who are interested in such matters, there's a sporcle quiz challenging you to list all the countries which contain territory that at one time was part of the British empire. When I last looked, more than 100,000 people had tried this and not one has yet got all of them right:
That rather over-eggs the pudding. It was a few select buildings that were torched, including the White House (note on urban myth here - the White House is *not* so called because of the whitewash applied following its burning; it was already known by that name before 1814).
It is one of the more intriguing 'what ifs' of history, asking what would have happened had Wellington been sent to North America to sort out the War of 1812, following peace with France after Napoleon's exile.
Which brings us back to today's theme, as Wellington was another former PM to be given a ceremonial funeral (full State in his case). I rather suspect that the responses to last week's poll about the appropriateness of a ceremonial funeral might have been different had the figures chosen for comparison been Pitt, Palmerston, Gladstone, Disraeli (who was offered but refused a state funeral) and Churchill, rather than members of the recent Royal Family.
with Thatcher's death, there are three vacant spaces for companions in the Order of the Garter - there are currently 21 companions instead of the maximum 24.
Is this usual? Does HM usually wait for a few to drop off, and then invest them (*) into the order in one go?
Or (tin-foil hat placed atop head) might she be waiting to allow her successor to choose a few when he takes power?
(*) Is 'invest' the right word for joining the Order?
Maybe HM just feels that there aren't people of sufficient calibre around at the moment.
England held Tangiers as a colony for over 20 years in the 17th century.
For those who are interested in such matters, there's a sporcle quiz challenging you to list all the countries which contain territory that at one time was part of the British empire. When I last looked, more than 100,000 people had tried this and not one has yet got all of them right:
with Thatcher's death, there are three vacant spaces for companions in the Order of the Garter - there are currently 21 companions instead of the maximum 24.
Is this usual? Does HM usually wait for a few to drop off, and then invest them (*) into the order in one go?
Or (tin-foil hat placed atop head) might she be waiting to allow her successor to choose a few when he takes power?
(*) Is 'invest' the right word for joining the Order?
Maybe HM just feels that there aren't people of sufficient calibre around at the moment.
To be fair to those Tories who knifed her,she was half pissed and half mad at the end.
Had Ollie Letwin not persuaded her of the benefits of the poll tax it could all have been different of course.
half pissed and half mad at the end.
So was Churchill, maybe it's a pre-requisite for greatness. Tony got worried because he drank a G&T every night and thought he might be an alchy, he'll never make it.
Oh regarding Tangiers, that would have come under Charles II's dowry, starting in 1662 though it had to be abandoned in 1684 due to a Moroccan invasion.
Also joint Anglo-French-Spanish admin from 1923-1940 and 1945-56.
Tim, my gramp is 82 and going downhill fast with vascular dementia. When he dies I'll give you a shout so we can have a good laugh at his funeral. We can get pissed and shout abuse at my Nan.
I won't mind. I'll even fetch you from Norris Green.
Oh regarding Tangiers, that would have come under Charles II's dowry, starting in 1662 though it had to be abandoned in 1684 due to a Moroccan invasion.
My man was sent to help supervise the blowing up the fortifications before it was abandoned. However, he seems to have spent much of the time whoring and boozing in Gibraltar.
Tim, my gramp is 82 and going downhill fast with vascular dementia. When he dies I'll give you a shout so we can have a good laugh at his funeral. We can get pissed and shout abuse at my Nan.
I won't mind. I'll even fetch you from Norris Green.
He'll even dance on the grave if you ask him nicely.
I don't think getting emotional at a funeral will do him any harm. As much as you hate him and spend your entire life (and I mean entire) trying to ridicule him.
Thatcher on South Africa in a 1986 TV-AM interview with Adam Boulton -
"There are some people who say nothing has worked yet, therefore sanctions will work. Sanctions have not worked throughout history. They will not work in a country like South Africa, a country of enormous internal resources, with a strong economy, an immense coastline through which goods can get in and out. They would be likely, as many of our South African friends tell us, be damaging not helpful, and they would be likely to get just the wrong reaction from the South African Government to the one which we want. There is no point in going to see a person that you are trying to persuade and saying: "Look! Unless you do this, we shall threaten you with other measures." That does work with the government of South Africa. There is some point in trying to say: "Look! You know change has to come about. You yourselves have called apartheid outmoded. We say it is more than outmoded; we think it is wrong. So try the path of dialogue. For that, you must release some of the black African leaders who are detained"—some of them are not, they are perfectly free, others are detained—"and enter into negotiations." It is worth trying. No, it does not hit out. There are some people in life who do like to hit out. They are not the people who get best results."
This interview seems to have been lost by all except the Margaret Thatcher Foundation (the only place it's reported in full). I wonder why...
So Geroge Osborne and David Cameron aren't allowed to cry, shut their eyes or smile at a past memory/humourous aside at a funeral. Really, grow up Tim.
I'm pretty sure every funeral in the country would have pictures of one person struggling to avoid blubbering while another smiles at an anecdote. Indeed, I would say that my grandma's funeral would have had a s lar picture of me and my cousins. I don't think this is particularly damaging for anyone other than making people laughing at mourners at a funeral look rather pathetic.
Just stopped by - post disqus/new ids etc only signed up & in to say :
The usual suspects are giving a near perfect performance of why I've stopped coming here regularly. Sad or sick, I don't know, but enjoy yourselves as the band here dwindles.
JonnyJimmy - I don't think anyone has forgotten that the government paid lip service to the anti-apartheid cause, while continuing to treat apartheid South Africa as a "normal country" and an ally.
@gabyhinsliff: now think state funeral exactly right. appropriate, not grandstanding; musically perfect; lack of crowd on street more eloquent than protest
Tim, you're full of good betting tips and sometimes decent political observation, but this morning you are being very sad and pathetic. Man cries at funeral, really Tim, take a good long look in the mirror.
@Alanbrooke "Your mates in North Korea did it so much better"
I suspect my mates in North Korea would have done something pretty similar.
No no Roger, what we have here is british understatement, you need wailing crowds and agitprop and eventual embalming in your own mausoleum to make it a real leftie funeral. How's Lenin ?
Some of the comments on this thread are truly vile. How anyone can seek to make a political point about emotions on display by guests at a FUNERAL is beyond me.
It says a great deal about those that indulge in it. Their mothers would be proud.
"what is not widely known nor acknowledged is that the apartheid government valued Thatcher as a worthy political opponent and “true friend of South Africa”. Thatcher’s loathing of apartheid on moral grounds, as well as her conviction it made “economic nonsense”, was well understood in Pretoria"
Can anyone imagine Mother Theresa organizing something like this for herself?
No, but then again I can't imagine Mother Theresa becoming the first elected female leader in Europe, winning three elections in a row, rescuing Britain from the grip of violent and destructive unions, ending the divisive Them and Us attitude in industry, getting rid of selfish union practices and their obsession with 'differentials', sweeping away the disgrace of the closed shop, ending bonkers subsidies for loss-making industries, ending the lunacy of the telephone network being run by a dinosaur organisation under which it was a criminal offence to put an extension lead on a phone, restoring our freedoms, ending Exchange Controls, sweeping away government control of prices and incomes, ending runaway inflation, transforming Britain from the 'sick man of Europe' to one of Europe's leading economies, sweeping away the old-boy network and restrictive practices of the City, winning back the Falklands, or contributing to the fall of the Iron Curtain.
According to the BBC - there were reps from over 170 countries - but the USA couldn't manage one official. Shame on them.
Dan Hannan is spot on.
"Let's review the evidence. President Obama received from Gordon Brown a pen-holder made from the timbers of a Royal Navy anti-slavery vessel, and reciprocated with DVDs. He silkily downgraded the UK from "our closest ally" to "one of our allies". He gave the Queen an iPod full of his own speeches. He used the Louisiana oil spill to attack an imaginary company called "British Petroleum" (it has been BP for the past decade, ever since the merger with Amoco gave it as many American as British shareholders).
He sent a bust of Winston Churchill back to the British Embassy. He managed, on his visit to West Africa, to refer to the struggle for independence, but not to the Royal Navy's campaign against slavery. He has refused to acknowledge our presence in Afghanistan in any major speech. He has even come dangerously close to backing Peronist Argentina's claim to the Falkland Islands. There's no getting away from it: Barack Obama doesn't much like Limeys... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100067261/why-barack-obama-doesnt-much-care-for-britain/
Thatcher on South Africa in a 1986 TV-AM interview with Adam Boulton -
"There are some people who say nothing has worked yet, therefore sanctions will work. Sanctions have not worked throughout history. They will not work in a country like South Africa, a country of enormous internal resources, with a strong economy, an immense coastline through which goods can get in and out. They would be likely, as many of our South African friends tell us, be damaging not helpful, and they would be likely to get just the wrong reaction from the South African Government to the one which we want. There is no point in going to see a person that you are trying to persuade and saying: "Look! Unless you do this, we shall threaten you with other measures." That does work with the government of South Africa. There is some point in trying to say: "Look! You know change has to come about. You yourselves have called apartheid outmoded. We say it is more than outmoded; we think it is wrong. So try the path of dialogue. For that, you must release some of the black African leaders who are detained"—some of them are not, they are perfectly free, others are detained—"and enter into negotiations." It is worth trying. No, it does not hit out. There are some people in life who do like to hit out. They are not the people who get best results."
This interview seems to have been lost by all except the Margaret Thatcher Foundation (the only place it's reported in full). I wonder why...
Economic sanctions are rarely benign. Excess deaths from infant mortality etc in the Iraq sanctions period between the gulf wars probably were over a million. It is quite possible that these exceed all the deaths due to violent action in both wars. Putting a country under economic siege can be brutal, and like Saddams Iraq or Kims North Korea just reinforce the regme by making people dependent on it and justifying centralisation and oppression.
Sporting and political sanctions are fine; but Mrs T was right to oppose economic sanctions against South Africa. Her policy of constructive engagement was part of the ending of the old regime.
Comments
1 perfectly executed funeral procession
2,500 people respectfully watching said funeral procession
2 very confused tourists
1 placard
3 idiots jeering (later got given a severe rollicking from a 70 year old, ex-RAF pilot. They left without so much as a whimper; I sensed many others in the crowd would have backed up the pilot if push came to shove.)
Given the proximity to LSE (100m away) I was relieved and pleased at the respect shown.
So I am told.
Bet he never made an advert near the Victoria and Alfred Waterfront.
I wonder how many PBers are aware that Britain held Buenos Aires, the Argentine capital, ever so briefly (46 days!) in 1806, or Montevideo, Uruguay, from Feb to Sep 1807? Belike and all that...
Is this usual? Does HM usually wait for a few to drop off, and then invest them (*) into the order in one go?
Or (tin-foil hat placed atop head) might she be waiting to allow her successor to choose a few when he takes power?
(*) Is 'invest' the right word for joining the Order?
http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-04-17/margaret-thatcher-funeral-security/
Some notes on the service.
http://www.heraldica.org/topics/orders/garterlist.htm
gives full dates, not all companions, but I can still spot several double appointments and at least two triples: Westminster, Brockwell, and Aberavon; e.g. Kingsdown, Ashburton, Stephen.
compare http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_members_of_the_Order_of_the_Garter
For those who are interested in such matters, there's a sporcle quiz challenging you to list all the countries which contain territory that at one time was part of the British empire. When I last looked, more than 100,000 people had tried this and not one has yet got all of them right:
http://www.sporcle.com/games/zeppelinoid/countries_of_the_british_empire
Sly asides from B of L.
It is one of the more intriguing 'what ifs' of history, asking what would have happened had Wellington been sent to North America to sort out the War of 1812, following peace with France after Napoleon's exile.
Which brings us back to today's theme, as Wellington was another former PM to be given a ceremonial funeral (full State in his case). I rather suspect that the responses to last week's poll about the appropriateness of a ceremonial funeral might have been different had the figures chosen for comparison been Pitt, Palmerston, Gladstone, Disraeli (who was offered but refused a state funeral) and Churchill, rather than members of the recent Royal Family.
So was Churchill, maybe it's a pre-requisite for greatness. Tony got worried because he drank a G&T every night and thought he might be an alchy, he'll never make it.
Also joint Anglo-French-Spanish admin from 1923-1940 and 1945-56.
I won't mind. I'll even fetch you from Norris Green.
http://order-order.com/2013/04/17/watch-funeral-service-begins/
Need a Kleenex?
We need to maintain impartiality and balance on PB.
"There are some people who say nothing has worked yet, therefore sanctions will work. Sanctions have not worked throughout history. They will not work in a country like South Africa, a country of enormous internal resources, with a strong economy, an immense coastline through which goods can get in and out. They would be likely, as many of our South African friends tell us, be damaging not helpful, and they would be likely to get just the wrong reaction from the South African Government to the one which we want. There is no point in going to see a person that you are trying to persuade and saying: "Look! Unless you do this, we shall threaten you with other measures." That does work with the government of South Africa. There is some point in trying to say: "Look! You know change has to come about. You yourselves have called apartheid outmoded. We say it is more than outmoded; we think it is wrong. So try the path of dialogue. For that, you must release some of the black African leaders who are detained"—some of them are not, they are perfectly free, others are detained—"and enter into negotiations." It is worth trying. No, it does not hit out. There are some people in life who do like to hit out. They are not the people who get best results."
This interview seems to have been lost by all except the Margaret Thatcher Foundation (the only place it's reported in full). I wonder why...
http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/106208
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/politics/2013/04/simple-courage-decision-leftist-tribute-thatcher
The usual suspects are giving a near perfect performance of why I've stopped coming here regularly. Sad or sick, I don't know, but enjoy yourselves as the band here dwindles.
Pathetic.
Can anyone imagine Mother Theresa organizing something like this for herself?
They were the ones who approved this.
Roger hated it.
That is all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9shSgKbdON8
I suspect my mates in North Korea would have done something pretty similar.
It says a great deal about those that indulge in it. Their mothers would be proud.
I see tim has now progressed to bitching about the expressions people are having at a funeral. Welcome to the mindset of the left in Britain.
Also Sam's obviously fed him a few too many pies.
Indeed, some are. Apparently the financial crisis was her fault.
"what is not widely known nor acknowledged is that the apartheid government valued Thatcher as a worthy political opponent and “true friend of South Africa”. Thatcher’s loathing of apartheid on moral grounds, as well as her conviction it made “economic nonsense”, was well understood in Pretoria"
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2013/04/09/thatcher-the-commonwealth-and-apartheid-south-africa/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_parliamentary_election,_2013
Dan Hannan is spot on.
"Let's review the evidence. President Obama received from Gordon Brown a pen-holder made from the timbers of a Royal Navy anti-slavery vessel, and reciprocated with DVDs. He silkily downgraded the UK from "our closest ally" to "one of our allies". He gave the Queen an iPod full of his own speeches. He used the Louisiana oil spill to attack an imaginary company called "British Petroleum" (it has been BP for the past decade, ever since the merger with Amoco gave it as many American as British shareholders).
He sent a bust of Winston Churchill back to the British Embassy. He managed, on his visit to West Africa, to refer to the struggle for independence, but not to the Royal Navy's campaign against slavery. He has refused to acknowledge our presence in Afghanistan in any major speech. He has even come dangerously close to backing Peronist Argentina's claim to the Falkland Islands. There's no getting away from it: Barack Obama doesn't much like Limeys... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100067261/why-barack-obama-doesnt-much-care-for-britain/
Here you go Andrea
http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/trending-blog/joan-collins-spotted-at-margaret-thatcher’s-funeral
Sporting and political sanctions are fine; but Mrs T was right to oppose economic sanctions against South Africa. Her policy of constructive engagement was part of the ending of the old regime.
Merely a statement of fact.
I don't think any serious media outlet will use it to openly mock as people on Twitter and you have.
Do you?