..and I know she was terrible 99% percent of the time. What I meant was that often you see people flaming her that don't particularly know much about the history of what she did or why she was terrible, most of the time it's "dur dur dur marget thatcher is evil dur dur dur"
(, Fri 6 Mar 2009, 23:13, Reply)
but at the time I didn't know what a politician was.
So, for the reasons you state, I wanted to look into why 'MT evil, dur dur dur', so asked around; looked into it, etc. etc.
There were strikes, low productivity as a result, an inefficient and costly mining industry that wasn't benefitting the economy.
Then there's the strikes in response to poor policy; the blatent discrepencies in the accounting that justified closure of the mines, and generally very, very poor economic theory and practice from the Conservative party at this time (Milton Freeman, how wrong you were) - economics added on at the end in order to justify power-plays in politics.
My conclusion: If she had a cock she'd be a tosser.
Also that a lot of the union leaders were trying to be their own little socialist revolutionaries, with all those union subscription fees going to their wonderful offices and downright control of the labour market - little Stalins in the making a lot of them.
(, Fri 6 Mar 2009, 23:21, Reply)
is still valid today.
mr woodley, for one , is still in that mould much to the detriment of those who still pay a weekly fee.
he is a cock.
(, Fri 6 Mar 2009, 23:30, Reply)
just surf down this board for people's 'bold and unqualified' statements about people or eras that they don't know; I guess it's only human nature to speak boldly
I'm off to photograph Leopards tomorrow afternoon, so ultimately couldn't now care; though I know what you mean :)
(, Fri 6 Mar 2009, 23:28, Reply)
that went downhill pretty sharpish!
i think i will take some pics tomorrow, fuck knows what of though, but my camera is unused for over a week now, and i am getting shaky.
(, Fri 6 Mar 2009, 23:38, Reply)
that is a seriously good picture.
what kind of kit do you use?
( guesses at cannon, nikon guys/gals are normally not as ostentacious)
and here is a pic of a tigger with a £5 lens
/3219/2795814781_2ccfaa2476_o.jpg" width="667" height="1000" alt="cats love dead birds!!" /(, Sat 7 Mar 2009, 0:09, Reply)
took me the nineties to figure out I was unhappy with the person I was, and then all of a sudden the beauty of animals did it's thing, and I have felt better as a human ever since
Edit: fixed oops
(, Sat 7 Mar 2009, 0:17, Reply)
it needs to be big to appreciate it.
its an epic shot.
(, Sat 7 Mar 2009, 0:29, Reply)
Monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey monkey.
(, Sat 7 Mar 2009, 13:08, Reply)
pure magic.
on a side note, womem, dont drive
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jji1D1CI5D0
(, Sat 7 Mar 2009, 0:26, Reply)
bit more mundane tomorrow, still should be wonderful
(, Fri 6 Mar 2009, 23:39, Reply)
flipping heck,
my glass is £100, and £70 of that is a 70-210 i never use. other £30 is random m42 stuff of car boots :) i love shit lenses!*
*doesnt mean i dont want to be able to afford good ones
(, Fri 6 Mar 2009, 23:54, Reply)


