From: vulgarandmischevious on
Charlie <nospam(a)all.ta> wrote:

>The miners' strike was ghastly, of course, but was provoked by
>Scargill's swivel-eyed intransigence.

It wasn't, you idiot.
From: Charlie on
On 05/03/2010 02:07, vulgarandmischevious wrote:
> Charlie<nospam(a)all.ta> wrote:
>
>> The miners' strike was ghastly, of course, but was provoked by
>> Scargill's swivel-eyed intransigence.
>
> It wasn't, you idiot.

Policy of some pit-closures announced, which would cost jobs. Instead
of negotiating, strikes started immediately. No strike ballots were
called, in defiance of the law (whatever you may think of that law). It
escalated very quickly, and Scargill assumed that he could bring the
country to a standstill. Aware of his nature, from bitter experience
(!), gubmint had stockpiled coal and converted some power-stations to
run on oil. It was his intransigence, fuelled by having whipped the
Tories before, that ran the strike out for an entire year and brought
about the complete destruction of the coal industry. Even The Guardian
and Mirror, normally sympathetic to workers' rights, were against the
strike, largely because of Scargill's refusal to back down from his
entrenched position.
From: Ace on
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 19:07:13 -0700, vulgarandmischevious
<vulgarandmischevious(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>Charlie <nospam(a)all.ta> wrote:
>
>>The miners' strike was ghastly, of course, but was provoked by
>>Scargill's swivel-eyed intransigence.
>
>It wasn't, you idiot.

Certainly seemed that way at the time.

Of course, we all know that he was actually just a pawn in Maggie's
game of squahing the unions, or at least we've been told it so often
it must be true. But she wouldn't have been able to get away with it
if it weren't for twats like Scargill who thought they should be able
to do as they pleased.



From: Mick Whittingham on
In article <DdqdnUCa3YOZkQ3WnZ2dnUVZ7oydnZ2d(a)bt.com>, Charlie
<nospam(a)all.ta> writes
>On 04/03/2010 16:41, steve auvache wrote:


>
>And they were abandoned soon after WW2. We still don't have identity
>cards, although the current mob want to impose them on us.
>

I'll wager it's a lot closer than you think if they got in again.
--
Mick Whittingham
'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.'
William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2.
From: Charlie on
On 04/03/2010 20:49, Mick Whittingham wrote:
> In article <DdqdnUCa3YOZkQ3WnZ2dnUVZ7oydnZ2d(a)bt.com>, Charlie
> <nospam(a)all.ta> writes
>> On 04/03/2010 16:41, steve auvache wrote:
>
>
>>
>> And they were abandoned soon after WW2. We still don't have identity
>> cards, although the current mob want to impose them on us.
>>
>
> I'll wager it's a lot closer than you think if they got in again.

I would be on the same side of that wager!