M. H. Thatcher State Funeral Petition.

[History]

A petition signed and sent to No10 read:-

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to not support a state funeral for Baroness Thatcher.”
“Baroness Margaret Hilda Thatcher is not deserving of a state funeral. To deem her worthy of such an honour is to overlook a host of awful things, like her support for General Augusto Pinochet, and to overlook many more deserving candidates.”

Government response

Thank you for your e-petition.

In the event of the death of any former Prime Minister, the Government is responsible for liaising with the family and representatives of the deceased about arrangements for a suitable service of remembrance, including any administrative support from the Government. For reasons which we hope will be understood, it would not be appropriate to make any comment about detail of any discussions.

[bill]

A petition signed and sent to No10 read:-

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to not support a state funeral for Baroness Thatcher.”
“Baroness Margaret Hilda Thatcher is not deserving of a state funeral. To deem her worthy of such an honour is to overlook a host of awful things, like her support for General Augusto Pinochet, and to overlook many more deserving candidates.”

Government response

Thank you for your e-petition.

In the event of the death of any former Prime Minister, the Government is responsible for liaising with the family and representatives of the deceased about arrangements for a suitable service of remembrance, including any administrative support from the Government. For reasons which we hope will be understood, it would not be appropriate to make any comment about detail of any discussions.

Your point being ?

I thought Ionns was the only person who posted extracts from news articles without an accompanying comment.


Who are the undersigned ??

Who cares ??

[History]

Your point being?

No point. Just thought I would post it as a matter of interest.

Who are the undersigned ??

An independant poll conducted by a group to guage public opinion on the matter and emailed at random for a reaction

Who cares ??

Don't suppose anyone does but I thought that admin would be satisfied with the odd post from local members to help the stats.

As your posts are of much more interest than mine I'll leave you to it. I'm sure the members will be flocking in to read them.

It's all yours.

[EMDEE]

It's interesting that almost 20 years after leaving Downing Street, the mere mention of Margaret Thatcher can raise such passions in both directions. She was possibly the most radical Prime Minister of the 20th Century, whether one agreed with her policies or not.

[ionnsaigh]

On the day it happens - all of Scotland should take part.
Collectively we can shut down Scotland - as a mark of respect.

Join the Shut Down Scotland Campaign

[Bertie]

Well done Bill. It looks as if another genuine contributor has been chased off the forum because of a few glib comments. Surely if the post was of no interest to you it could just have been ignored by you, an action which you have personally advocated in the past. Instead you chose to belittle the contribution and, in doing so, have made History ask himself why he bothered. I think his post is equally as relevant as any of the others that are currently under debate. Just my opinion.

[ionnsaigh]

Hear hear.

[bill]

Well done Bill. It looks as if another genuine contributor has been chased off the forum because of a few glib comments.

I doubt very much if History will be chased off the forum due to my reply.I see you have been a member of the forum for a lot longer than most of us,so no doubt you have read a lot worse.

Surely if the post was of no interest to you it could just have been ignored by you,

If you were to check further down the index page of Speakers Corner you will find a thread started by me entitled Baroness Thatcher.If you were then to read that thread, you will see that I am the only forum member to support Mrs. Thatcher.

Instead you chose to belittle the contribution and, in doing so, have made History ask himself why he bothered. I think his post is equally as relevant as any of the others that are currently under debate. Just my opinion.

History's post is infact only a "cut and paste" and not what I would call a post.There is no accompanying comment from History as to where the article came from,who sent it to Downing St.or who signed it.

I am still at a loss to why he posted it.

[Bertie]

I'm at a loss as to why many of the topics are posted but it doesn't stop me enjoying the ongoing debate that ensues. And it is certainly not about support for or against Mrs T. It's simply that I feel some threads can get stopped in their infancy by an off the cuff remark seemingly undermining what the poster is trying to achieve. Your comment may not put History off from contributing again but he may think twice about how his contributions will be received, and that would be a shame.

[Govangirl]

Haven't been on for a week but great to see the ongoing banter doesn't change! Logged on to Hubby's laptop today to catch up even though I promised I wouldn't do it for the whole of my holiday.
Anyway, as History is one of the more intelligent posters on here, I very much doubt too that there will be any notice taken. And because History IS so astute I always thought it was a SHE.

[Bertie]

I too wondered that GG and swithered before writing "he" but, like you, I enjoy reading his/her contributions and would hate to see them lost to the Forum. Hope the hols are going well.