Skip to content or view screen version

Thatchers state funeral - Warning: scare tactics in use

fitwatcher | 10.04.2013 08:33 | Policing | Repression

If things run to form, there will be lots of stories in the days to come about pre-emptive arrests, and heavy policing for Thatchers funeral. Intervention and deterrence - otherwise known as scaring people away from protest - is now an established police tactic. But it only works if we get scared.

The police will not want to deal with protests during Thatchers funeral. The Tories will give them a lot of shit if the rich and idiotic cannot mourn their leader in dignity and serenity. And protests will look bad on the telly.

I suspect there are thousands of people out there who think that having a party is not enough. They want to be there at her state funeral. They want to protest at the injustice of Thatcher parading her wealth and status through the streets of London, when so many live and die in poverty as a result of her policies. And because she should have been locked up for war crimes and aiding and abetting war criminals.

In advance, the police will probably be rolling out the old deterrent tactics - vague warnings of preventative arrests, monitoring social media, knowing who the 'usual suspects' are. Plus threats of heavy policing and not tolerating protest, perhaps even plastic bullets! Some of this may be factual, some just bollocks. Most of it will be designed to stop protest before it even starts.

Its always good to know and understand how the police operate, and to take security precautions when they are needed. But fear that stops us acting is a bad thing. Especially fear that stops us organising ourselves.

Dont buckle under the scare tactics. See you all on the streets.

fitwatcher

Comments

Hide 4 hidden comments or hide all comments

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Actually

10.04.2013 08:45

I think people have got better things to do than protest a funeral.

Active


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Protest

10.04.2013 08:51

I suppose the fact that those objecting to Thatcher have been raised in a country with prosperity, excellent health care, good schools and the rest as a Direct Result of her policies is lost on them

protester


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Poverty

10.04.2013 08:57

@protestor

Have you read the UK's child poverty statistics recently?

Q+A


Good riddance to Thatchers filth.

10.04.2013 09:35

Personally, I find it truly sickening that these political suckers can not only take a salary for selling US all out at every fucking opportunity, but that they want a happy retirement and a lavish funeral to stamp their place in history at our expense.

It doesn't occur to them that the damage they do is actually felt by people. All they care about is the money and the fame.

Now the conservative party have no money because people have abandoned their memberships and its the same for Labour and the crones in the wings.

And the best they can do is to conduct polls in the vain hope that the people who are unaffected by their policies will give them something to argue with in the newspapers and on TV.

"Oh you know its not that bad you know...here are the opinions of the people that our policies were designed to miss this time around...you see, those people complaining are just whining as they always do. We are right at the end of the day as we always are".

Right now, they are holding up the opinions of those who weren't alive during the Thatcher era, those who were too young to know any better, those who have been conditioned to believe that the people who were beaten had it coming to them...all mixed in with tiny few who thought Thatcher was adorable.


May she and her ilk rot in hell, and may the treacherous clan that spend their lives apologizing on her behalf stink to death in the pit next to her.

Go to her chariot procession and let the bastards know that we do not forget...and we do not forgive.

A decent British citizen, one of many.


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

How about not turning up?

10.04.2013 10:17

That woul really surprise and possibly dissapoint The Daily Mail and The Express.

Dan Factor


Ideas

10.04.2013 14:33

Here's an idea why not look at the life you lead now, the freedom from Soviet dictatorship, the well funded Health Service, the high standard of living you have and thank Margeret Thatcher for giving it to you.

Before her there were daily strikes,Trade Unions who thought they ran the country, the dead laying unburied, power cuts and massive decline. She saved this country and you are too stupid to understand how.

Ideas man


Some rules of demonstrating -

10.04.2013 14:47

I've been on dozens of demos & never got close to being nicked, IMHO rules of demonstrating are -

1. Keep looking over your shoulder and constantly scanning the horizon for potential threats

2. Never go into a confined space (indoors or outdoors) unless you can see a clear exit

3. Stay constantly aware of what the cops are up to

4. Move quickly to avoid any potential kettling, but only run as a last resort (running attracts attention)

5. Don't rush to be "part of the action" until you've scanned the scene to asses potential hazards

6. Point cameras in cops faces at every available opportunity

7. Look down, look away, cover your face (with a scarf or placard etc) EVERY time you see a camera pointing at you

8. Be polite and friendly to the cops if they're actually talking to you, but always say "what's your name mate", "what station do you work at" etc instead of answering any questions

9. If you see anyone being arrested, film the coppers' faces and ID numbers (it doesn't always work but several times I've got people released from arrest by doing that, and if the victim gets hurt your evidence could be critical)

10. Dress neutral (boring colours) but don't go dressed like you've come to cause trouble.

11. Buy your travelcard with cash and take enough money to get cabs etc if you need to make a quick escape

Stay safe :)

2013


debunking the ridiculous

10.04.2013 15:03

"Here's an idea why not look at the life you lead now, the freedom from Soviet dictatorship..."

hmm?!

"..the well funded Health Service..."

WTF?!? The one she tried to cut and privatise you mean?

"...the high standard of living you have and thank Margeret Thatcher for giving it to you."

Hang on, I'm meant to thank someone who made the gap between rich and poor bigger than ever has given me a high standard of living?!? Gave her mates in the City a high standard of living you mean!

"Before her there were daily strikes,Trade Unions who thought they ran the country, the dead laying unburied, power cuts and massive decline."

You mean there were Trade Unions who actually had the balls to stand up for their members' interests, instead of being trampled on by the government and bosses, right? And what is this ridiculous nonsense about bodies lying around, FFS, I've never heard such hyperbole!

"She saved this country and you are too stupid to understand how."

How much of this stuff you're spouting is based on your actual direct life experience? Did YOU witness these supposed "dead lying unburied". Has YOUR standard of living got noticably better? Did the Trade Unions ever do anything to harm YOU, personally?

Or is this just some parroted propaganda you've absorbed from reading too many tabloids, which you now feel like regurgitating without even thinking about it?

TBH I think you're the stupid one.

h


Goodbye & Good Riddance

10.04.2013 17:27

Where there was harmony, she brought discord. Where there was truth, she brought error. Where there was faith, she brought doubt. And where there was hope, she brought DESPAIR.  http://www.facebook.com/protestatfuneralprocessionofthatcher

BigMac32


Debunking the debunking the ridiculous

10.04.2013 18:19

"Here's an idea why not look at the life you lead now, the freedom from Soviet dictatorship..."

hmm?!
>>> Far point, she was one of contributors so I assume you do not disagree

"..the well funded Health Service..."

WTF?!? The one she tried to cut and privatise you mean?

>>>> Also true. Between 1981 and 1989 funding for the NHS rose by 24% in real terms

"...the high standard of living you have and thank Margeret Thatcher for giving it to you."

Hang on, I'm meant to thank someone who made the gap between rich and poor bigger than ever has given me a high standard of living?!? Gave her mates in the City a high standard of living you mean!

>>>>The general standard of living for the UK population grew by 14% during her term as PM, point proven

"Before her there were daily strikes,Trade Unions who thought they ran the country, the dead laying unburied, power cuts and massive decline."

You mean there were Trade Unions who actually had the balls to stand up for their members' interests, instead of being trampled on by the government and bosses, right? And what is this ridiculous nonsense about bodies lying around, FFS, I've never heard such hyperbole!

"She saved this country and you are too stupid to understand how."

How much of this stuff you're spouting is based on your actual direct life experience? Did YOU witness these supposed "dead lying unburied". Has YOUR standard of living got noticably better? Did the Trade Unions ever do anything to harm YOU, personally?

Or is this just some parroted propaganda you've absorbed from reading too many tabloids, which you now feel like regurgitating without even thinking about it?

>>>> I think you just proved the point made - you are too stupid to understand it

fact giver


more facts

10.04.2013 19:14

Before Thatcher....... I seem to remember that the country didn't have enough money to keep the power stations going so small businesses like hair dressers were only allowed to open 4 days a week

This was about the time the country was going to the IMF with its cap in its hand to be continually fooked for all eternity.,

Instead.... they sold assets (privatetised) to raise cash. Got the country back in the black and created an industry that actually paid the bills rather than running at a loss with stupid subsidised mines etc.

Yes, no one wanted to put people out of work..... but things had to change in order to survive
No one can run a country at a loss forever. Without change it would be like a bunch of Zebras sat at an empty watering hole moaning about how there is a draught instead of actually getting off their backsides and adapting to the environment by moving their fat asses

oh dear - the world changed and you couldn't cope


Subsidies

10.04.2013 19:18

Thatchers legacy was the destruction of the coal industry. Not for commercial reasons but for spite. Even though we won the strike and had the entire country behind us she used the army and the pigs to drive us out of existence as a punishment for standing up to her in 1979 and 1980.

Son of a miner


Some clarity for the confused!

10.04.2013 19:48

"Before her there were daily strikes,Trade Unions who thought they ran the country, the dead laying unburied, power cuts and massive decline. She saved this country and you are too stupid to understand how."

Things were not as bad as that. That's just what Conservatives like to say to justify what they did.

I lived through Thatcherism and the Conservatives and lived in a community with a community spirit. All the men went off the work in the morning because they had jobs to go to. That all came to an end under the Conservatives. Now I live in a community and nobody knows anybody else. Most people say they work from home and everybody, everybody is claiming benefits.

Everything Thatcher said she believed in has now collapsed and come to nothing. She said she wanted the country to become a nation of homeowners. All she did was sell off the housing stock to speculators who work tirelessly to push the cost of houses up as high as they can in the pursuit of profits. All that matters, is that profit is as high as it can be. Houses were turned from the criticality of a roof over your head, into the playthings of an irresponsible class of selfish morons and decorating addicts. They even make TV programmes out of that now. Very very very few people benefit from this.

She said she would give everybody the right to buy shares in businesses but all that did was open up businesses for a quick profit. All the shares were bought up and before long, they were all in the hands of the few. The vast majority of those who bought shares sold them within days and weeks, as the Conservatives knew they would. Very very very few people benefited from this.

She said that she wanted to create wealth for all hard working people and give everybody the right to set up there own businesses so people could be their own boss. Most small businesses in the UK fail because they are trying to compete with megalitic corporations and have less than a snowballs chance in hell of surviving at all. Those that cannot work as hard as the Conservatives want them too, are simply spat at and condemned as useless, poor or feral. Very very very few people benefit from this.

She and her supporters claimed to have defeated Communism and the Soviet Union, but the Russians put that down to the Chernobyl disaster. They should know of course. When the Berlin Wall came down, the UK was caught short and had no idea what was happening. Only after it had been reported did the yanks and Conservatives rush to try to take the credit for it. On the basis of that and that alone, do we presently live with the myth that it was all down to Thatcher and Reagan.

She kept us hostile to Europe and opened us up to the US. At a time when Europe is in the ascendency and the empire is in decline.

At the end of her facetious reign, the Conservative Party had been completely destroyed in Scotland and Wales and were only barely alive in England.

Her legacy is as dead as she is.

anonymous


'anonymous' - wrong again

11.04.2013 06:14

Things were not as bad as that. That's just what Conservatives like to say to justify what they did.

MASS UNEMPLOYMENT, FUNDING FOR HEALTH SERVICE CUT BY LABOUR,

I lived through Thatcherism and the Conservatives and lived in a community with a community spirit. All the men went off the work in the morning because they had jobs to go to. That all came to an end under the Conservatives. Now I live in a community and nobody knows anybody else. Most people say they work from home and everybody, everybody is claiming benefits.

THE WORLD CHANGES - LIVE WITH IT RATHER THAN LOOKING BACK TO SOME IMAGINED 'GOLDEN AGE'

Everything Thatcher said she believed in has now collapsed and come to nothing. She said she wanted the country to become a nation of homeowners.

SHE SUCCEEDED - WE ARE

All she did was sell off the housing stock to speculators who work tirelessly to push the cost of houses up as high as they can in the pursuit of profits.

THE HOUSING STOCK WAS SOLD TO THOSE WHO LIVED IN IT

All that matters, is that profit is as high as it can be. Houses were turned from the criticality of a roof over your head, into the playthings of an irresponsible class of selfish morons and decorating addicts. They even make TV programmes out of that now. Very very very few people benefit from this.

PEOPLE DO NOT BENEFIT FROM HAVING A NICER HOUSE ? GET A GRIP

She said she would give everybody the right to buy shares in businesses but all that did was open up businesses for a quick profit.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH MAKING A PROFIT FOR WORKING PEOPLE ?

All the shares were bought up and before long, they were all in the hands of the few.

THESE WERE STATE OWNED INDUSTRIES OWNED BY ONE SHAREHOLDER - THE STATE NOW THEY ARE OWNED BY MILLIONS

The vast majority of those who bought shares sold them within days and weeks, as the Conservatives knew they would. Very very very few people benefited from this.

ANY FACTS TO BACK THIS UP ? NO THOUGHT NOT

She said that she wanted to create wealth for all hard working people and give everybody the right to set up there own businesses so people could be their own boss. Most small businesses in the UK fail because they are trying to compete with megalitic corporations and have less than a snowballs chance in hell of surviving at all.

UTTER RUBBISH, THE FAILURE RATE FOR SMALL BUSINESS START UP IS 32% AFTER 12 MONTHS

Those that cannot work as hard as the Conservatives want them too, are simply spat at and condemned as useless, poor or feral.

WHAT ?


She and her supporters claimed to have defeated Communism and the Soviet Union, but the Russians put that down to the Chernobyl disaster.

THEY COULD POUT IT DOWN TO CHEESE SANDWICHES BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THE SOVIET UNION FELL BECAUSE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO LIVE IN ONE PARTY DICTATORSHIPS.

When the Berlin Wall came down, the UK was caught short and had no idea what was happening.

NOW YOU ARE JUST MAKING STUFF UP. TRY READING HANSARD WHERE THERE ARE THREE REPORTS OF STATEMENTS IN THE HOUSE OF PARLIMENT PREDICTING IT.

Only after it had been reported did the yanks and Conservatives rush to try to take the credit for it. On the basis of that and that alone, do we presently live with the myth that it was all down to Thatcher and Reagan.

IT'S NOT A MYTH, ITS A FACT. REAGAN AND THATCHER INSTIGATED POLICIES THAT LED DIRECTLY TO THE FALL OF THE SOVIET EMPIRE

At the end of her facetious reign, the Conservative Party had been completely destroyed in Scotland and Wales and were only barely alive in England.

THAT WOULD BE THE SAME CONSERVATIVE PARTY THAT CONTINUED IN POWER AFTER HER RESIGNATION FOR TWO MORE TERMS, LED TO THE LABOUR PARTY HAVING TO CHANGE ITS ENTIRE CONSTITUTION TO BEAT IT AND WHICH IS IN POWER NOW ?

Has a name


Thatcher saved us from the Soviet union?

12.04.2013 11:57

at a time when the Soviets were bankrupt and loosing theyre grip?

i think most of the people are forgetting that Thatcher sanctioned death sqauds in the UK, the Loyalists in NI all had her stamp of permission, and there is shit loads of evidence saying the security services had blood on its hands, its on her lap.

i aint joking, im gonna dig that bitch up.

joe blogs


Clarity of understanding, no deficits here.

12.04.2013 15:52

"MASS UNEMPLOYMENT, FUNDING FOR HEALTH SERVICE CUT BY LABOUR"

Something else the Conservaties like to say to justify what they did. Mass unemployment got to around 3 million in 1979 through to 1983 which of course wasn't the case when you had guaranteed employment in the nationalised industries before Thatcher came to power and privatised the state. Only then did mass unemployment actually start. Ever since then, the "cons" have been cooking the books to under-report the actual unemployment figures. Unemployment right now stands at almost 5 million but this isn't reported because the larger part of those unemployed are now in the Working Tax Credit band of social engineering, meaning that they are technically down as working so aren't included in the unemployement figures. The Conservative party are the party of unemployment. Cutting funding for healthcare has been done by every party for one reason or another. Only the Conservatives have made a profession for themselves from it.

THE WORLD CHANGES - LIVE WITH IT RATHER THAN LOOKING BACK TO SOME IMAGINED 'GOLDEN AGE'

And by exactly the same token, the world changes against those who live on the back of offering that up as an excuse for what the Conservatives have been doing. Yes, indeed, the world changes and you have a glimpse of that change in the public reaction to Thatchers death and the mindless fawning over her passing by her most adoring wet's. In fact, the Conservatives used this very excuse to justify the privatisation of British industry in the late 70's as critics complained that the people were being robbed of thier own property. The old nationalised order of 1945 was simply dismissed by the Conservatives. Now the Conservatives are being dismissed in turn.

THE HOUSING STOCK WAS SOLD TO THOSE WHO LIVED IN IT

No, initially those who lived in those properties were those who bought the properties. But speculators moved in and bought them in order to rent them out at a profit, as part of their property businesses. Now we have a property owning business class who own large numbers of properties all for the purpose of garnering a profit. The people who live in those houses are no better off and are not in a position to buy those properties because they are too expensive. In London, many people live in town houses that have been broken up into flats in which rents are five, six and seven times higher than what the property should be charging. What used to be the downstairs living room, is now a flat in itself. In some of those flats, you cannot move or even dry your washing. Thatcher and the Conservatives have driven the quality of life down for the majority in the cities. Property owned by businesses for renting out privately does not equate to a property owning nation. Those properties were built for the poor, now it is the rich who use them to create the "new poor".

WHAT'S WRONG WITH MAKING A PROFIT FOR WORKING PEOPLE ?

The initial proposal was to create a share-holding nation in which the nationalised industries would remain in the hands of those that owned those industries. Thatcher came along and sold those industries back to the people that already owned them. She stated time and time again that she had done this to deliver higher profits for shareholders and if the public re-purchased those industries, they would be better off. In practice, those that bought shares sold them almost immediately at a miserable profit. The public bought into the scam, and then sold out of it within days week and months. A new megalitic class of speculators moved in and hoovered up the shares and before long, the industries that the British people had owned, were now owned by non British and Conservative ideological speculators. We had been robbed.

THESE WERE STATE OWNED INDUSTRIES OWNED BY ONE SHAREHOLDER - THE STATE NOW THEY ARE OWNED BY MILLIONS

The majority of all nationalised industries were state owned assets and the shareholding model did not apply. Only when the industries were privatised did the government become a shareholder in its own property. Up until that point, those state assets acted as corporate entities but were protected by the government. This allowed high empoyment and at one point, over 2 million people worked in those industries. The Conservative party drove those industries into decline by parametising all economic problems and focussing them onto the nationalised assets. They had been doing this regularly since 1945. In the 1970's and through to the 1990's, the Conservatives simply continued the long policy af deregulation which was the ideological plank they had been commited to since the second world war.

UTTER RUBBISH, THE FAILURE RATE FOR SMALL BUSINESS START UP IS 32% AFTER 12 MONTHS

That is the rate which is measured after 12 months of trading. In the first 12 months, the vast majority of all business start ups fail because they cannot compete against larger corporations.

THEY COULD POUT IT DOWN TO CHEESE SANDWICHES BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THE SOVIET UNION FELL BECAUSE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO LIVE IN ONE PARTY DICTATORSHIPS.

At the height of the Chernobyl disaster, almost one third of the entire Russian nation was involved in some activity that was connected to the clear up operation and operations to prevent contamination to the wider Russian population. Had this event occured in the United Kingdom, this disaster would have been enough to cause widespread abandonment of the United Kingdom and the exodus of the majority population toward Europe or the America's. The nation would have becaome a failed state within hours with the government either being swamped with emergency requests or simply abandoning the country. Chernobyl was a disaster on such a scale that the USSR could not remain intact and broke into pieces. This process took place many many months before the Berlin Wall was symbolically destroyed. The USSR had already collapsed when Thatcher and her Conservative wet's finally figured out they might act with the Whitehouse to attempt to take the credit for it. In Afghanistan, one Osama Bin Laden also tried the same stunt claiming that the Mujahedin were responsible for the collapse as a result of their fight against USSR forces in Afghanistan. This was a complete nonsense and nothing more than a media led stunt.

NOW YOU ARE JUST MAKING STUFF UP. TRY READING HANSARD WHERE THERE ARE THREE REPORTS OF STATEMENTS IN THE HOUSE OF PARLIMENT PREDICTING IT.

There certainly was a conscience understanding that Chernobyl was a very serious disaster that would seriously undermine the USSR and that fact was routinely voiced among Conservative and Labour backbenchers during the period. However, their status as backbenchers ensured that the Thatcher government would not act for fear of being guided by minor party figures. This ensured that Thatcher would not recognise the series of events that eventually led to the symbolic destruction of the Berlin Wall. Only after the wall was being picked apart by Berliner's, did the Whitehouse and Downing Street sit up and take notice.

IT'S NOT A MYTH, ITS A FACT. REAGAN AND THATCHER INSTIGATED POLICIES THAT LED DIRECTLY TO THE FALL OF THE SOVIET EMPIRE

Thatcher and Reagan instigated policies that had an effect in the United Kingdom and the United States. Very few if any of those policies had any effect on the USSR in real terms. Had Chernobyl not have taken place, nobody in their right might would claim that those policies on there own were enough to bring down an entity the size of the USSR. Had Chernobyl not have happened, these Thatcherite and Reagan polices would have been brushed away with ease by the politburo.

THAT WOULD BE THE SAME CONSERVATIVE PARTY THAT CONTINUED IN POWER AFTER HER RESIGNATION FOR TWO MORE TERMS, LED TO THE LABOUR PARTY HAVING TO CHANGE ITS ENTIRE CONSTITUTION TO BEAT IT AND WHICH IS IN POWER NOW ?

In Scotland and Wales, the Conservative party are almost extinct and have no chance of recovery at all. If they had a presense in either country, the Conservatives would certainly not have allowed narratives of devolution to have developed.



No, it is not acceptable to continue with entertaining these feeble narratives which the Conservative, and to some extent, Labour parties form in order to continue justifying what is a collective attempt to pick at the public finances in order to stay wealthy while the economic policies they have been following cast the rest of us into progressive austerity of wealth. It is clear that the excuses they give routinely bend, twist and infantilise the truth of history into spurious versions of history that have little to do with fact, and even less to do with honesty. This is revisionism and it can't stand.

Thatcher's legacy is not what we have been told it is. We are right to reject it.

anonymous


Hide 4 hidden comments or hide all comments