So, again, thank you. It is good to read the words of a decent,
humane, poster.

Thank you for a well reasoned exposition although I am not sure I am
really quite as genteel as you portray!
I share your assessment of Harold Wilson, considering him as - well,
slippery is the kindest epithet I can think of. There is only one
other prime minister who, in my opinion, shared that characteristic
but as he is still in the land of the living, I will not name him.


Go on!, he's a politician they have armour plated hides!, gotta be
TB;?...

Guy Gorton

--
Tony Sayer

wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:42:58 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:


I share your assessment of Harold Wilson, considering him as - well,
slippery is the kindest epithet I can think of. There is only one
other prime minister who, in my opinion, shared that characteristic
but as he is still in the land of the living, I will not name him.


Go on!, he's a politician they have armour plated hides!, gotta be
TB;?...

Interesting difference between them two ,For all his faults Harold
Wilson resisted the calls from the USA to commit British forces to
fight in their scrap with North Vietnam. TB couldn't have been more
eager.

Wilson also resigned earlier than expected, not after years of pressure
from his deputy.

On 12/03/2014 21:23, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:42:58 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:


I share your assessment of Harold Wilson, considering him as - well,
slippery is the kindest epithet I can think of. There is only one
other prime minister who, in my opinion, shared that characteristic
but as he is still in the land of the living, I will not name him.


Go on!, he's a politician they have armour plated hides!, gotta be
TB;?...

Interesting difference between them two ,For all his faults Harold
Wilson resisted the calls from the USA to commit British forces to
fight in their scrap with North Vietnam. TB couldn't have been more
eager.

Wilson also resigned earlier than expected, not after years of pressure
from his deputy.


Probably due to oncoming ill-health.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On 12/03/2014 21:39, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 12/03/2014 21:23, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:42:58 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:


I share your assessment of Harold Wilson, considering him as - well,
slippery is the kindest epithet I can think of. There is only one
other prime minister who, in my opinion, shared that characteristic
but as he is still in the land of the living, I will not name him.


Go on!, he's a politician they have armour plated hides!, gotta be
TB;?...

Interesting difference between them two ,For all his faults Harold
Wilson resisted the calls from the USA to commit British forces to
fight in their scrap with North Vietnam. TB couldn't have been more
eager.

Wilson also resigned earlier than expected, not after years of pressure
from his deputy.


Probably due to oncoming ill-health.

Not because he was a KGB agent who was going to be overthrown in a
revolution led by Mountbatten? Or something.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:42:58 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

I share your assessment of Harold Wilson, considering him as - well,
slippery is the kindest epithet I can think of. There is only one
other prime minister who, in my opinion, shared that characteristic
but as he is still in the land of the living, I will not name him.

Go on!, he's a politician they have armour plated hides!, gotta be
TB;?...

Interesting difference between them two ,For all his faults Harold
Wilson resisted the calls from the USA to commit British forces to
fight in their scrap with North Vietnam. TB couldn't have been more
eager.

Yes, I suddenly saw Harold Wilson in a new and better light then.

Wilson also resigned earlier than expected, not after years of pressure
from his deputy.

Probably the Alzheimer's diagnosis.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:28:47 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 12:23:50 PM UTC, MB wrote:
On 11/03/2014 11:34, Albert wrote:

I love the quote from Bob about Thatcher: 'I won't shed one single tear
over her death. She destroyed the NHS and destroyed industry in this
country and as far as I'm concerned she can rot in hell.'

I get quite amused at all the ranting about people destroying the NHS.
All kinds of people have been screaming about it for as long as I've been
politically aware, and yet I've yet to see a hospital refusing to treat
someone without doing a credit check first. To be honest, after the best
part of 40 years of "this government is destroying the NHS", if a future
government actually did decide to destroy it, chances are no-one would
notice until way too late, because of all the existing noise.

We can hope that the NHS is now a fixture in the United Kingdom. I
certainly appreciate its availability for my parents.

It is an interesting comparison how disrespectful the 'Left' are to
anyone on the Right who dies but all the comments from Crow's opponents
have been very respectful as happened when another figure of the extreme
Left died, Michael Foot.

Michael Foot is a man with whom I profoundly disagreed, and yet
admired. I am happy he never became PM. But in the words of the
late John Enoch Powell "He is [was] not a humbug". He truly believed
in his cause.

I doubt whether we will see any calls for a national holiday to
celebrate his funeral or T Shirts about dancing on his grave. Perhaps
the Left should remember this next time some well known figure on the
Right dies but on their past record I doubt it.

One can but hope. Do not hold your breath on that one. Manners seem
to be alien to many of your fellow travelers.

The way some on the Left act is frankly embarrassing to anyone who
actually cares about progressive social policy. Ranting and screaming
and abuse do not progress the agenda of equality and acceptance and
celebration of diversity.

One would not want to intrude on the left's private family angst. :-)

I still do not understand why so many people here in Yorkshire think she
was some kind of evil demon for denying their children the "right" to
go down the nearest coal mine and suffer a life of toil and industrial
disease.

Simply put Mrs. Thatcher turned off the money spigot. For years
British Coal, British Steel, British Leyland et al had become money
absorbing blotting paper, and a national embarrassment. The lady said
"no more". This was the right thing to do. Britain now buys
inexpensive coal from Eastern Europe, and makes marketable cars
(Nissans, Hondas, BMW Minis, etc.)

Or that it's somehow a breach of someone's human rights to have
to "get on their bike" and go and look for work elsewhere if there isn't
any in the locality. But lots of people still express those views, decades
later. To me this is strange, going where the opportunities are just seems
the natural thing to do.

It is the normal thing to do. Although a robust economy is a good job
market. The way Leeds has maintained its wealth, changing from the
schmutter center, to become a financial center, is admirable,
Bradford, not so much.

Young people should be encouraged to be mobile. But, families with
children have complex obstacle to overcome.

In the late eighties I was running a successful business selling my
services as a contract program. I did very well until Nigel Lawson
damaged the economy playing with European "snake", the forerunner of
the Euro. Then the market dried up. No one was developing there IT
systems.

Mr. Tebbit had advised "get on your bike". So I moved north, making
complex arrangements for my better half and four school age children
to follow. The effect on my family was anything but good. So, IMHO,
labor mobility is only appropriate for some, not all.


--

http://www.991fmtalk.com/ The DMZ in Reno

On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:28:47 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Corrected version.

On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 12:23:50 PM UTC, MB wrote:
On 11/03/2014 11:34, Albert wrote:

I love the quote from Bob about Thatcher: 'I won't shed one single tear
over her death. She destroyed the NHS and destroyed industry in this
country and as far as I'm concerned she can rot in hell.'

I get quite amused at all the ranting about people destroying the NHS.
All kinds of people have been screaming about it for as long as I've been
politically aware, and yet I've yet to see a hospital refusing to treat
someone without doing a credit check first. To be honest, after the best
part of 40 years of "this government is destroying the NHS", if a future
government actually did decide to destroy it, chances are no-one would
notice until way too late, because of all the existing noise.

We can hope that the NHS is now a fixture in the United Kingdom. I
certainly appreciate its availability for my parents.

It is an interesting comparison how disrespectful the 'Left' are to
anyone on the Right who dies but all the comments from Crow's opponents
have been very respectful as happened when another figure of the extreme
Left died, Michael Foot.

Michael Foot is a man with whom I profoundly disagreed, and yet
admired. I am happy he never became PM. But in the words of the
late John Enoch Powell "He is [was] not a humbug". He truly believed
in his cause.

I doubt whether we will see any calls for a national holiday to
celebrate his funeral or T Shirts about dancing on his grave. Perhaps
the Left should remember this next time some well known figure on the
Right dies but on their past record I doubt it.

One can but hope. Do not hold your breath on that one. Manners seem
to be alien to many of your fellow travelers.

The way some on the Left act is frankly embarrassing to anyone who
actually cares about progressive social policy. Ranting and screaming
and abuse do not progress the agenda of equality and acceptance and
celebration of diversity.

One would not want to intrude on the left's private family angst. :-)
I still do not understand why so many people here in Yorkshire think
she
was some kind of evil demon for denying their children the "right" to
go down the nearest coal mine and suffer a life of toil and industrial
disease.
Simply put Mrs. Thatcher turned off the money spigot. For years
British Coal, British Steel, British Leyland et al had become money
absorbing blotting paper, and a national embarrassment. The lady said
"no more". This was the right thing to do. Britain now buys
inexpensive coal from Eastern Europe, and makes marketable cars
(Nissans, Hondas, BMW Minis, etc.)

Or that it's somehow a breach of someone's human rights to have
to "get on their bike" and go and look for work elsewhere if there isn't
any in the locality. But lots of people still express those views, decades
later. To me this is strange, going where the opportunities are just seems
the natural thing to do.

It is the normal thing to do. Although a robust economy is a good job
market. The way Leeds has maintained its wealth, changing from the
schmutter center, to become a financial center, is admirable,
Bradford, not so much.

Young people should be encouraged to be mobile. But, families with
children have complex obstacle to overcome.

In the late eighties I was running a successful business selling my
services as a contract programmer. I did very well until Nigel Lawson
damaged the economy playing with European "snake", the forerunner of
the Euro. Then the market dried up. No one was developing their
systems.

Mr. Tebbit had advised "get on your bike". So I moved north, making
complex arrangements for my better half and four school age children
to follow. The effect on my family was anything but good. So, IMHO,
labor mobility is only appropriate for some, not all.
--

http://www.991fmtalk.com/ The DMZ in Reno

"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11 Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant; around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?

In article ,
(Jim Hawkins) wrote:

"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11 Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant; around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?

Suspected heart attack on the BBC; aneurism and massive heart attack
according to reports I saw on Twitter.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

"Jim Hawkins" wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11 Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant; around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bob-crow-de...father-1439794