Jump to content

Recommended Posts

glasshalffull Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> wee quinnie wrote

>

>

>

>

> Blimey he had me fooled for all those years, I

> thought he was a man........


I could be wrong, but I don't think anyone has tried to justify a state funeral on the grounds of gender!

glasshalffull Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You are wrong, it's not a state funeral and I was

> highlighting the fact that you were wrong in

> stating he met the same criteria. He clearly

> doesn't on the basis of gender.



Thanks for pointing out my "errors". This is a state funeral in all but name, and everyone knows it. As for the gender issue - you might also cite they were different religions, or y'know being completely different people.


All i am saying is the basis for this ceremonial funeral is that Thatcher was re-elected more than once, and she was PM during a time of conflict/wartime. Surely this is the case for Blair.

Blair wasn't a revolutionary. He was in a Labour Party sense, but not in the national sense. He simply extrapolated Thatcherism into a somewhat more human form.


Like it or loath it, Thatcher fundamentally changed the country.


He led the country into some conflicts, but all of them were as part of a coalition led by the US.


Blair didn't get near-assassinated (a la Brighton Bombing) and the gender issue has been noted above.


So, his Tone-ship will probably not get a ceremonial funeral like this.

He's a former 'New Labour' PM.


As a working class boy I was actually quite proud to see someone from a working class background given such a send off.


Whatever you thought of her politics MT was a conviction politician. This has been highlighted by her detractors over the past few weeks. No one could accuse TB of being a conviction politician.

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No state funeral - neither was Princess Di.


To be fair, at least Maggie was a national leader, rather than someone who just ponced around in designer dresses shagging anything with a pulse and a wallet.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > No state funeral - neither was Princess Di.

>

> To be fair, at least Maggie was a national leader,

> rather than someone who just ponced around in

> designer dresses shagging anything with a pulse

> and a wallet.



I am in no way a fan of the royals but I don't think as many people actively resented her getting a ceremonial funeral. (I'm finding it really hard not to say "State funeral" - because if it's paid for by the state wtf wouldn't you call it one?)

wee quinnie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > JohnL Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > No state funeral - neither was Princess Di.

> >

> > To be fair, at least Maggie was a national

> leader,

> > rather than someone who just ponced around in

> > designer dresses shagging anything with a pulse

> > and a wallet.

>

>

> I am in no way a fan of the royals but I don't

> think as many people actively resented her getting

> a ceremonial funeral. (I'm finding it really hard

> not to say "State funeral" - because if it's paid

> for by the state wtf wouldn't you call it one?)


A state funeral requires a "laying in state" which didn't happen so thus - it was not a state funeral.

woodrot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> who will cry REAL TEARS at ToneB's funeral like

> Gideon does ?



http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/330909292355?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_from%3DR40%26_sacat%3D0%26_nkw%3D330909292355%26_rdc%3D1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I read somewhere that it was to be an Orleans Smokehouse, opening in December, which seems unlikely
    • There are "plans" to build more reservoirs, with physical work yet to be started, with the first hoped to be completed by 2036, and a second by 2040, then time is needed for them to fill so add at least another 12 months on. However, if the 1.5 million homes are built by 2028, each averaging 2 people occupying them.(some will be more, some will be less) then thats 3 million people showering, bathing and using water.  Therefore there is a massive demand that will strain our current inferstructure between 2028 and 2037 (nearly ten years) plus all those homes will need electricity, as the ambition is to phase gas usage out, which will take just as much time to reinforce the network to cover, let alone add in the ability to cope with green production electricity that needs to be moved from wind and solar farms to where it is most needed.  Therefore, is the current plan to build more homes, regardless of where they are,  potentially going to have serious ramifications on already creaking networks ? 
    • SDCAS is doing important work and needs our help - please consider supporting them at this difficult time. 
    • Cheers for that. Surprising to see it's over 25 years since it closed.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...