Margaret Thatcher

PuterkidPuterkid Posts: 9,795
Forum Member
Whilst it's been all over social media and newspapers, has anyone seen reference to the allegations that MT was involved in covering up for her (vegetables) peadophile ministers? Not seen TV news, but notice any mention is completely absent from the BBC news website.

I guess even the suggestion is embarrassing after the post humus declarations of sainthood by the current government, who sanctioned and paid for an equally embarrassing funeral for her not long ago.

Personally I always detested her politics, and I see the way this country has gone, and the dreadful policies of the current lot, as a direct consequence of her initiation of the destruction of community in this country. But even I would be shocked if she had sank this low.

If it is found that she was indeed involved in a cover up, a lot of people are going to have to rethink their hero worship!
«13

Comments

  • Pisces CloudPisces Cloud Posts: 30,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Thatcher could be quite ruthless, and so I can quite believe that she'd help to cover something like this up if she thought it would bring the government down. I'd say the same about Blair as well.
  • InspirationInspiration Posts: 62,705
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Why is it not on the BBC website? Might be something to do with the fact there is no evidence she even knew or was told? Just because one of her party wrote to her doesn't mean she actually got to see any it. And even if she did see it, there is the problem of evidence, which the accuser didn't have. So it's a bit of a leap to go from what we have to the suggestion Thatcher actively covered anything up. Parliament doesn't quite work like that. I suspect dodgy things were going on. But it's a bit early to accuse a former PM of coving it up on BBC News.

    Oh and the "embarrassing funeral" cost 1/10th of what they said it would.
  • RaferRafer Posts: 14,231
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I very much doubt it.
    The attitude was at the time and still is to protect the establishment. If there was a pedo ring it would have been dealt with one way or the other before it got to the PMs office. The whips office would be as far as anything would get.
  • DiscombobulateDiscombobulate Posts: 4,242
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Puterkid wrote: »

    If it is found that she was indeed involved in a cover up, a lot of people are going to have to rethink their hero worship!

    As someone has come out today and made accusations against an unnamed senior politician in Tony Blair's Government perhaps the time will come when a lot of people have to rethink their hero worship of him.

    Seriously though this is a topic that should be above party politics and people making new posts to try and smear one party or another is not going to help sort out this matter is it ?
  • PuterkidPuterkid Posts: 9,795
    Forum Member
    As someone has come out today and made accusations against an unnamed senior politician in Tony Blair's Government perhaps the time will come when a lot of people have to rethink their hero worship of him.

    Seriously though this is a topic that should be above party politics and people making new posts to try and smear one party or another is not going to help sort out this matter is it ?

    I was not making this a party political issue and agree it is above and across all parties. I can't help it that MT was a Tory PM, and I would have made the same point about the lack of publicity if it was TB who was in the papers etc yesterday.

    It's actually you who has made this into a party political point!
  • solenoidsolenoid Posts: 15,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The way allegations are being thrown around at the moment, it seems every establishment figure ever, knew something about paedophile gangs but kept quiet.
  • DiscombobulateDiscombobulate Posts: 4,242
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Puterkid wrote: »
    I was not making this a party political issue and agree it is above and across all parties. I can't help it that MT was a Tory PM, and I would have made the same point about the lack of publicity if it was TB who was in the papers etc yesterday.

    It's actually you who has made this into a party political point!

    Well Tony Blair is in the papers hence my post. So sorry but your post does not hold true IMO
  • Jol44Jol44 Posts: 21,048
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Speaking in general the 1980s aren't being painted in a good light at all.
  • Jol44Jol44 Posts: 21,048
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As someone has come out today and made accusations against an unnamed senior politician in Tony Blair's Government perhaps the time will come when a lot of people have to rethink their hero worship of him.

    Seriously though this is a topic that should be above party politics and people making new posts to try and smear one party or another is not going to help sort out this matter is it ?

    You're the one making it party political, no one else.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 255
    Forum Member
    Why is it not on the BBC website? Might be something to do with the fact there is no evidence she even knew or was told? Just because one of her party wrote to her doesn't mean she actually got to see any it. And even if she did see it, there is the problem of evidence, which the accuser didn't have. So it's a bit of a leap to go from what we have to the suggestion Thatcher actively covered anything up. Parliament doesn't quite work like that. I suspect dodgy things were going on. But it's a bit early to accuse a former PM of coving it up on BBC News.

    Oh and the "embarrassing funeral" cost 1/10th of what they said it would.

    She new what was going on. Really stupid for people to say otherwise.
  • Cg_EvansCg_Evans Posts: 2,039
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I dont believe for a second Thatcher would cover up child abuse JMHO

    And Im not a Thatcherite at all

    Blair apparently issued a d notice on a paedophile investigation which apparently included some members of govt

    http://www.tpuc.org/blair-covering-up-paedophile-scandal/


    Now, he may have done this for a general reason rather than keep govt names out the papers but I have yet to see anything that incriminates Thatcher
  • 2shy20072shy2007 Posts: 52,579
    Forum Member
    So no statue or bank holiday then?
  • ImpingerImpinger Posts: 3,744
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lucius12 wrote: »
    She new what was going on. Really stupid for people to say otherwise.

    ha ha! You're own stupidity clearly knows no bounds, to you, anyway. :D
  • EddietheEagleEddietheEagle Posts: 194
    Forum Member
    In my opinion, Margaret Thatcher was not the person to tolerate or make excuses for that kind of behaviour. Of all the politicians in the modern era, I would say she was the least likely of all to engage in any cover-up of child abuse.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 255
    Forum Member
    Impinger wrote: »
    ha ha! You're own stupidity clearly knows no bounds, to you, anyway. :D

    Ok I respect what you have said. We will just have to agree not to agree...........:D
    Ok no bounds?
  • ImpingerImpinger Posts: 3,744
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    In my opinion, Margaret Thatcher was not the person to tolerate or make excuses for that kind of behaviour. Of all the politicians in the modern era, I would say she was the least likely of all to engage in any cover-up of child abuse.

    That's pretty much my opinion of her as well. I'm beginning to see a pattern mind you of 'let's blame the dead one'.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 255
    Forum Member
    In my opinion, Margaret Thatcher was not the person to tolerate or make excuses for that kind of behaviour. Of all the politicians in the modern era, I would say she was the least likely of all to engage in any cover-up of child abuse.

    Please!!!! Did you know her? Look the record up. who was her private sec 1989-90. Good for him he is now dead and the Lady PM and her husband. Please don't comment unless YOU KNOW what happened to those boys:cry:
    Does the PEDO Private Sec. come to mind? NO not to You. YOU are VERY LUCKY, That guy was a bad person and our first and only "lady" PM BLOODY NEW what was going on and her husband new too.
    You KNOW Nothing, Thank God, BUT please don't defend what you don't know
  • Cg_EvansCg_Evans Posts: 2,039
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lucius12 wrote: »
    Please!!!! Did you know her? Look the record up. who was her private sec 1989-90. Good for him he is now dead and the Lady PM and her husband. Please don't comment unless YOU KNOW what happened to those boys:cry:
    Does the PEDO Private Sec. come to mind? NO not to You. YOU are VERY LUCKY, That guy was a bad person and our first and only "lady" PM BLOODY NEW what was going on and her husband new too.
    You KNOW Nothing, Thank God, BUT please don't defend what you don't know

    hang on a second, even if her private secretary was involved, how does that prove she was in the know?
    he may have managed to silence things before they got to her

    btw who was this paedo private secretary?

    Dont get me wrong EVERYONE involved should be exposed IMO from top to bottom for their decrepit corruption and evil deeds and prosecuted if alive and stripped of all honours if dead

    And I think the bloody queen should get her finger out here as well!! Whats the point sitting on your throne if members of your govt are raping kids!!!!
  • RaferRafer Posts: 14,231
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Cg_Evans wrote: »
    hang on a second, even if her private secretary was involved, how does that prove she was in the know?

    Because clearly if you are a paedo, the first thing you do is tell your boss. I don't believe it for a second. The only way Mrs T would have known would have been if the whips told her. There's no reason for them to do so. Their role would have been to protect the pm by putting distance between her and any problem. If there were criminal activity the whips would have referred it to the appropriate organisation.
  • tim59tim59 Posts: 47,188
    Forum Member
    I hope there is no truth in these stories of as i think it will have a very negitive out come for british Politics in general terms and the knock on effect could be felt for years, and it does not matter if you liked the women or not, but this whole thing could be the biggest can of worms ever opened on politics in the uk.
  • ImpingerImpinger Posts: 3,744
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lucius12 wrote: »
    Please!!!! Did you know her? Look the record up. who was her private sec 1989-90. Good for him he is now dead and the Lady PM and her husband. Please don't comment unless YOU KNOW what happened to those boys:cry:
    Does the PEDO Private Sec. come to mind? NO not to You. YOU are VERY LUCKY, That guy was a bad person and our first and only "lady" PM BLOODY NEW what was going on and her husband new too.
    You KNOW Nothing, Thank God, BUT please don't defend what you don't know

    Well, if you know something the rest of us don't, then it's not us you should be telling about it.

    PS: it's "Knew".
  • Jol44Jol44 Posts: 21,048
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The claims being made should be investigated by the new inquiry.
  • Jol44Jol44 Posts: 21,048
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    In July 1990, one-time Health Secretary Edwina Currie wrote in her diary:

    ‘One appointment in the recent reshuffle has attracted a lot of gossip and could be very dangerous.

    ‘Peter Morrison has become the Prime Minister’s PPS. Now he’s what they call a “noted ........” with a liking for .............. She either knows and is taking a chance, or doesn’t; either way, it’s a really dumb move.’


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2689462/Did-Maggie-know-closest-aide-preying-age-boys.html
  • Jol44Jol44 Posts: 21,048
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If she didn't know, it's despicable to tarnish her name with such.

    Hopefully any investigation will look deeply into the recent allegations made in the media.
  • James1953James1953 Posts: 4,840
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Cg_Evans wrote: »
    I dont believe for a second Thatcher would cover up child abuse JMHO

    And Im not a Thatcherite at all

    Blair apparently issued a d notice on a paedophile investigation which apparently included some members of govt

    http://www.tpuc.org/blair-covering-up-paedophile-scandal/


    Now, he may have done this for a general reason rather than keep govt names out the papers but I have yet to see anything that incriminates Thatcher

    I've not heard about that before

    If that article is true, it would be mind blowing.

    Didn't realise there was a cover up with regard to Dunblane
Sign In or Register to comment.