| You can tell….. 11:57 - Jul 11 with 3722 views | BelsteadCav |
You can tell a lot about a person by how they react when someone dies. |  |
| |  |
| You can tell….. on 15:32 - Jul 11 with 1193 views | Zx1988 |
This sums it up perfectly:
"Ann Widdecombe has died, and the police are investigating her killing. Let's deal with that first, because it matters: whoever did this should face justice, the investigation is ongoing, and nobody decent celebrates a violent death. Not this one, not any.
But something else is happening now, and it's the thing that always happens. The tributes have arrived. "National treasure." "Force of nature." The Prime Minister calls her loss huge, twice, in case once wasn't enough. And under all that warm fog, an actual career is being quietly repainted.
So, for the record, since records are apparently negotiable this week.
This is the Prisons Minister who defended chaining pregnant women to hospital beds in 1996, explaining that the restraints came off once labour was confirmed. Not before. Hospitals, she noted, were not secure places. A woman in labour, she implied, might make a run for it.
This is the MP who voted against an equal age of consent, against repealing Section 28, who defended conversion therapy, and who in 2019 mused that science might one day find an answer to people being gay. The answer to people being gay, historically, has been that they're gay, but she held out hope.
She used her maiden speech in the European Parliament to compare Brexit to slaves rising against their owners. She told Honda workers losing their jobs that factories close all the time. She told people who couldn't afford cheese that the solution was a sandwich without cheese in it. And she was one of five MPs to vote against the Climate Change Act, on the grounds that she'd looked out of the window and everything seemed fine.
None of this is gossip. It's Hansard, and broadcast archive, and her own proud repetition. She built two careers on it, one making the laws and one being applauded for having made them.
You can regret a violent death and still decline to mourn the record. Those are different activities. The people she spent forty years legislating against understood the difference long before this week, mostly because they were given no choice.
No celebration here. Just a polite refusal to attend the canonisation."
Let's not participate in the post-mortem re-writing of the history of someone who, by all reasonable yardsticks, held some truly reprehensible views that have no place in modern society. |  |
| |
| You can tell….. on 15:42 - Jul 11 with 1126 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| You can tell….. on 15:32 - Jul 11 by Zx1988 |
This sums it up perfectly:
"Ann Widdecombe has died, and the police are investigating her killing. Let's deal with that first, because it matters: whoever did this should face justice, the investigation is ongoing, and nobody decent celebrates a violent death. Not this one, not any.
But something else is happening now, and it's the thing that always happens. The tributes have arrived. "National treasure." "Force of nature." The Prime Minister calls her loss huge, twice, in case once wasn't enough. And under all that warm fog, an actual career is being quietly repainted.
So, for the record, since records are apparently negotiable this week.
This is the Prisons Minister who defended chaining pregnant women to hospital beds in 1996, explaining that the restraints came off once labour was confirmed. Not before. Hospitals, she noted, were not secure places. A woman in labour, she implied, might make a run for it.
This is the MP who voted against an equal age of consent, against repealing Section 28, who defended conversion therapy, and who in 2019 mused that science might one day find an answer to people being gay. The answer to people being gay, historically, has been that they're gay, but she held out hope.
She used her maiden speech in the European Parliament to compare Brexit to slaves rising against their owners. She told Honda workers losing their jobs that factories close all the time. She told people who couldn't afford cheese that the solution was a sandwich without cheese in it. And she was one of five MPs to vote against the Climate Change Act, on the grounds that she'd looked out of the window and everything seemed fine.
None of this is gossip. It's Hansard, and broadcast archive, and her own proud repetition. She built two careers on it, one making the laws and one being applauded for having made them.
You can regret a violent death and still decline to mourn the record. Those are different activities. The people she spent forty years legislating against understood the difference long before this week, mostly because they were given no choice.
No celebration here. Just a polite refusal to attend the canonisation."
Let's not participate in the post-mortem re-writing of the history of someone who, by all reasonable yardsticks, held some truly reprehensible views that have no place in modern society. |
Indeed. The news channels have all been saying things like "forceful," "outspoken," "robust views," "sometimes controversial" etc... all tiptoeing around the truth so as not to offend. It's like the food equivalent of "an acquired taste", which we all know means "fecking awful". |  |
| |
| You can tell….. on 15:52 - Jul 11 with 1094 views | GlasgowBlue |
| You can tell….. on 12:29 - Jul 11 by vapour_trail |
Many deaths have been reacted to in different ways on these pages.
Thatcher. Saddam. McGuiness.
All were celebrated by different people on here, including some of those clutching their pearls most earnestly yesterday and this morning.
Yesterday there wasn’t celebration, but there was certainly reflection on how a woman had lived her life. The subsequent news of how she met her end is of course horrific. |
Funny you should mention Martin McGuiness. I had many reasons to loathe and detest him. I knew people who lost their lives under his orders.
However, on the RIP thread started by someone on here the day he died I felt it appropriate to speak about the positive steps he took in order to unite the two communities in the north of Ireland when he renounced violence and worked towards peace.
Now MM was a far more substantial and complex character than AW. Most people who opposed her views would find any redeeming features to talk about.
In that case I think it is best to say nothing rather than dance on her grave.
I have a lot of reasons to despise Corbyn. On the day he dies I will either keep a dignified silence or say how sad it is for his family. [Post edited 11 Jul 16:02]
|  |
| |
| You can tell….. on 16:09 - Jul 11 with 1075 views | Zx1988 |
| You can tell….. on 15:42 - Jul 11 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Indeed. The news channels have all been saying things like "forceful," "outspoken," "robust views," "sometimes controversial" etc... all tiptoeing around the truth so as not to offend. It's like the food equivalent of "an acquired taste", which we all know means "fecking awful". |
It really stretches the definition of 'controversial' as well.
Controversial is claiming that Battenberg is a God-Tier food.
It is not claiming that there is something tangibly wrong with the mental/physical make-up of the LGBTQIA+ community, and expressing hope that, one day, they'll be able to be cured of their affliction. | |
| |
| You can tell….. on 17:15 - Jul 11 with 992 views | ReneLeBlanc |
You can tell a lot about a person when their thread is a word for word copy of a Charlie Kirk tweet too. |  | | |
| You can tell….. on 17:22 - Jul 11 with 967 views | Swansea_Blue |
| You can tell….. on 15:32 - Jul 11 by Zx1988 |
This sums it up perfectly:
"Ann Widdecombe has died, and the police are investigating her killing. Let's deal with that first, because it matters: whoever did this should face justice, the investigation is ongoing, and nobody decent celebrates a violent death. Not this one, not any.
But something else is happening now, and it's the thing that always happens. The tributes have arrived. "National treasure." "Force of nature." The Prime Minister calls her loss huge, twice, in case once wasn't enough. And under all that warm fog, an actual career is being quietly repainted.
So, for the record, since records are apparently negotiable this week.
This is the Prisons Minister who defended chaining pregnant women to hospital beds in 1996, explaining that the restraints came off once labour was confirmed. Not before. Hospitals, she noted, were not secure places. A woman in labour, she implied, might make a run for it.
This is the MP who voted against an equal age of consent, against repealing Section 28, who defended conversion therapy, and who in 2019 mused that science might one day find an answer to people being gay. The answer to people being gay, historically, has been that they're gay, but she held out hope.
She used her maiden speech in the European Parliament to compare Brexit to slaves rising against their owners. She told Honda workers losing their jobs that factories close all the time. She told people who couldn't afford cheese that the solution was a sandwich without cheese in it. And she was one of five MPs to vote against the Climate Change Act, on the grounds that she'd looked out of the window and everything seemed fine.
None of this is gossip. It's Hansard, and broadcast archive, and her own proud repetition. She built two careers on it, one making the laws and one being applauded for having made them.
You can regret a violent death and still decline to mourn the record. Those are different activities. The people she spent forty years legislating against understood the difference long before this week, mostly because they were given no choice.
No celebration here. Just a polite refusal to attend the canonisation."
Let's not participate in the post-mortem re-writing of the history of someone who, by all reasonable yardsticks, held some truly reprehensible views that have no place in modern society. |
I thought she was supposed to be a spinster and abstainer, whilst all the while she was going round handcuffing women to beds? The sly little minx!
(Too much and not enough respect?) [Post edited 11 Jul 17:23]
|  |
| |
| You can tell….. on 18:50 - Jul 11 with 889 views | baxterbasics |
| You can tell….. on 15:32 - Jul 11 by Zx1988 |
This sums it up perfectly:
"Ann Widdecombe has died, and the police are investigating her killing. Let's deal with that first, because it matters: whoever did this should face justice, the investigation is ongoing, and nobody decent celebrates a violent death. Not this one, not any.
But something else is happening now, and it's the thing that always happens. The tributes have arrived. "National treasure." "Force of nature." The Prime Minister calls her loss huge, twice, in case once wasn't enough. And under all that warm fog, an actual career is being quietly repainted.
So, for the record, since records are apparently negotiable this week.
This is the Prisons Minister who defended chaining pregnant women to hospital beds in 1996, explaining that the restraints came off once labour was confirmed. Not before. Hospitals, she noted, were not secure places. A woman in labour, she implied, might make a run for it.
This is the MP who voted against an equal age of consent, against repealing Section 28, who defended conversion therapy, and who in 2019 mused that science might one day find an answer to people being gay. The answer to people being gay, historically, has been that they're gay, but she held out hope.
She used her maiden speech in the European Parliament to compare Brexit to slaves rising against their owners. She told Honda workers losing their jobs that factories close all the time. She told people who couldn't afford cheese that the solution was a sandwich without cheese in it. And she was one of five MPs to vote against the Climate Change Act, on the grounds that she'd looked out of the window and everything seemed fine.
None of this is gossip. It's Hansard, and broadcast archive, and her own proud repetition. She built two careers on it, one making the laws and one being applauded for having made them.
You can regret a violent death and still decline to mourn the record. Those are different activities. The people she spent forty years legislating against understood the difference long before this week, mostly because they were given no choice.
No celebration here. Just a polite refusal to attend the canonisation."
Let's not participate in the post-mortem re-writing of the history of someone who, by all reasonable yardsticks, held some truly reprehensible views that have no place in modern society. |
Yet pretty much anyone who knew her or spent time with her, from what I heard via extensive radio coverage yesterday, described her as a kind and intelligent woman who was a joy to be around. That included political opponents and those who did not share her fundamentalist stances on certain social matters. Ken Clarke said even when you'd spent hours arguing an opposite view with her, you came away from the experience with a more positive view of AW. |  |
| |
| You can tell….. on 19:08 - Jul 11 with 860 views | ReneLeBlanc |
| You can tell….. on 18:50 - Jul 11 by baxterbasics |
Yet pretty much anyone who knew her or spent time with her, from what I heard via extensive radio coverage yesterday, described her as a kind and intelligent woman who was a joy to be around. That included political opponents and those who did not share her fundamentalist stances on certain social matters. Ken Clarke said even when you'd spent hours arguing an opposite view with her, you came away from the experience with a more positive view of AW. |
Be that as it may, the counter point to that is that it may say more about them and the shallowness of their convictions than it does about the quality of her character. Sadly, too many in politics seem to approach it as a kind of game, and when you boil it all down they don’t really stand for much of any substance.
Another possibility - when a public figure has a microphone shoved in their face and are asked for comment perhaps they don’t want to cause themselves any issues by saying something that can be used against them.
I’d be interested to hear the testimony of members of the LGBTQ community or the migrants she demonised to compare and contrast. Perhaps they do not share such a positive view. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| You can tell….. on 19:17 - Jul 11 with 832 views | blueoutlook |
| You can tell….. on 12:44 - Jul 11 by jayessess |
"You shouldn't celebrate someone's death" is a principle.
"You shouldn't celebrate someone's death, unless they were a really terrible person" is a subjective argument as to who qualifies. |
I wouldn’t celebrate anyone’s death, Im not saying I like everyone but I’d never celebrate anyone’s death. I’m rather superstitious that way. I never think any good would come of it. I think it’s best to keep your thoughts to yourself sometimes. |  | | |
| You can tell….. on 19:20 - Jul 11 with 822 views | Zx1988 |
| You can tell….. on 18:50 - Jul 11 by baxterbasics |
Yet pretty much anyone who knew her or spent time with her, from what I heard via extensive radio coverage yesterday, described her as a kind and intelligent woman who was a joy to be around. That included political opponents and those who did not share her fundamentalist stances on certain social matters. Ken Clarke said even when you'd spent hours arguing an opposite view with her, you came away from the experience with a more positive view of AW. |
That's the part of this eulogisation that I'm really starting to dislike.
"Yes, she had heinous views, but she was so polite and articulate in putting them forward", as if it somehow absolves her of her record.
Ken Clarke may very well take that point of view. I'm sure it may be very different for anyone who's suffered, or watched a loved one suffer, as a result of her views. | |
| |
| You can tell….. on 19:38 - Jul 11 with 785 views | Libero |
| You can tell….. on 12:26 - Jul 11 by BelsteadCav |
H is still alive isn’t he
How the hell can you compare those two deaths?
What the hell is wrong with you? |
Because both were disgusting monsters - just in a very different font. |  | | |
| You can tell….. on 19:40 - Jul 11 with 776 views | Libero |
| You can tell….. on 17:15 - Jul 11 by ReneLeBlanc |
You can tell a lot about a person when their thread is a word for word copy of a Charlie Kirk tweet too. |
Another rancid scumbag who people leapt to the defence of when he died, these are bizarre times. | | | |
| You can tell….. on 19:49 - Jul 11 with 740 views | urbanpenguin |
| You can tell….. on 11:59 - Jul 11 by BelsteadCav |
You’re just answered my question
Some of the comments yesterday were horrific |
You didn't pose a question. |  |
| |
| You can tell….. on 20:24 - Jul 11 with 691 views | Kropotkin123 |
| You can tell….. on 12:15 - Jul 11 by BelsteadCav |
People I know, Yes of course
But when someone in the public eye dies I’ve never laughed or made fun of the person
Even if I don’t agree with them, it’s called respect |
I didn't for the same reason. But I also don't agree with putting people who spread hate, and sow division in our country, on a pedestal.
I also see you act disrespectfully at other times, hence why the first reply you get is "do not feed the troll". I don't think respect should be reserved for death, you can apply it in life. |  |
| Submit your 1-24 league prediction here -https://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/514096/page:1 - for the opportunity to get a free Ipswich top. | | Poll: | Would you rather | | Blog: | Round Four: Eagle |
| |
| You can tell….. on 20:54 - Jul 11 with 624 views | GlasgowBlue |
| You can tell….. on 19:08 - Jul 11 by ReneLeBlanc |
Be that as it may, the counter point to that is that it may say more about them and the shallowness of their convictions than it does about the quality of her character. Sadly, too many in politics seem to approach it as a kind of game, and when you boil it all down they don’t really stand for much of any substance.
Another possibility - when a public figure has a microphone shoved in their face and are asked for comment perhaps they don’t want to cause themselves any issues by saying something that can be used against them.
I’d be interested to hear the testimony of members of the LGBTQ community or the migrants she demonised to compare and contrast. Perhaps they do not share such a positive view. |
Just wait until you find out your namesake Michael Foot was a close personal friend of Enoch Powell. [Post edited 11 Jul 20:57]
| |
| |
| You can tell….. on 20:58 - Jul 11 with 629 views | Sarge |
Thanks Charlie.
You can also tell a lot about a person by how people react when they die | | | |
| You can tell….. on 21:00 - Jul 11 with 625 views | Mullet |
| You can tell….. on 18:50 - Jul 11 by baxterbasics |
Yet pretty much anyone who knew her or spent time with her, from what I heard via extensive radio coverage yesterday, described her as a kind and intelligent woman who was a joy to be around. That included political opponents and those who did not share her fundamentalist stances on certain social matters. Ken Clarke said even when you'd spent hours arguing an opposite view with her, you came away from the experience with a more positive view of AW. |
She spent her time with the political classes. The mainly white privileged and rich. She wasn’t Princess Diana mingling with AIDs patients, refugees and the like.
The fact she pointed her vitriol outwards and downwards and never to people’s faces is exactly why she is so loathed. |  |
| |
| You can tell….. on 21:08 - Jul 11 with 600 views | ReneLeBlanc |
| You can tell….. on 20:54 - Jul 11 by GlasgowBlue |
Just wait until you find out your namesake Michael Foot was a close personal friend of Enoch Powell. [Post edited 11 Jul 20:57]
|
Was that supposed to be a reply to someone else? I’m not following. You made a similar comment yesterday though. Getting a bit weird. | | | |
| You can tell….. on 21:15 - Jul 11 with 578 views | Clapham_Junction |
| You can tell….. on 18:50 - Jul 11 by baxterbasics |
Yet pretty much anyone who knew her or spent time with her, from what I heard via extensive radio coverage yesterday, described her as a kind and intelligent woman who was a joy to be around. That included political opponents and those who did not share her fundamentalist stances on certain social matters. Ken Clarke said even when you'd spent hours arguing an opposite view with her, you came away from the experience with a more positive view of AW. |
I will never understand why some think that politicians' personal manner somehow makes up for their actions. It's like saying 'Yes, Mobutu Sese Seko had thousands of his opponents executed and stole $5bn from the Congolese people, but he was lovely chap to talk to at dinner parties and always held the door open for old ladies'.
People used to say Ben Gummer was a lovely guy because you could have a nice chat with him in the Greyhound, and somehow all the awful things he voted for in the Commons were irrelevant to his character. |  | | |
| You can tell….. on 21:22 - Jul 11 with 542 views | Mullet |
| You can tell….. on 21:15 - Jul 11 by Clapham_Junction |
I will never understand why some think that politicians' personal manner somehow makes up for their actions. It's like saying 'Yes, Mobutu Sese Seko had thousands of his opponents executed and stole $5bn from the Congolese people, but he was lovely chap to talk to at dinner parties and always held the door open for old ladies'.
People used to say Ben Gummer was a lovely guy because you could have a nice chat with him in the Greyhound, and somehow all the awful things he voted for in the Commons were irrelevant to his character. |
It’s the whole “Hitler liked dogs” thing innit | |
| |
| You can tell….. on 21:35 - Jul 11 with 481 views | noggin |
| You can tell….. on 21:22 - Jul 11 by Mullet |
It’s the whole “Hitler liked dogs” thing innit |
Ronnie and Reggie loved their old mum. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
