Idiotic thickos. Yes, another thread!!!

Agreed - stupid.

I was surprised, or may be not come to think of it, how the BBC covered this story early on today. They said something like, "There was a little vandalism and a little bit of stealing went on". SO THAT'S ALRIGHT THEN IS IT. NOOOOO. IT IS NOT.

I would bet that if any of the 'vandalisers and thieves' were not taken to a police station but put into a room and asked what they know about Margaret Thatcher they would say "well nothing much really". Idiots who use any excuse to show how b----y thick they are.

In Bristol 7 police officers were injured and 1 is still in hospital. These idiots set up sound systems in a residential street and started throwing things when police asked them to turn the music off at around 12.30. No thought given to the people living in the street who had to be up early for work or who were trying to get young children to sleep.

Mindless idiots.

Sadly we all probably think there will be more of this to come upto and possibly beyond wednesday of next week.

They will espouse not spending money on a funeral whilst they destroy small businesses and upset people and their property. They couldn't care less who will be forced to pay for the damage they cause will they, because it won't be them paying will it!!!!

I agree with everything said on this thread.

In fact, they are so stupid that they probably don't even know whose death they are supposed to be 'celebrating'. Idiot is too fine a word for them,

It's a minority of fools, bores and loonies. Tiresome but of no significance.

I'm afraid that something like a ceremonial funeral could spark off something like the summer riots of two years ago.

I'm sure it will. For some, any excuse is good enough.

Disgraceful behaviour by a few troublemakers.

Can't they see the damage they are doing - this will be used by the right to further demonise the 'left' and the 'poor'- moronic.

And further confirms that those organising the funeral have totally misjudged public opinion in many areas. Getting the tax-payer to pay for a massive state like funeral and the huge security cost- is likely to seriously provoke - I am quite sure a riot is being planned as we speak. Cameron has, again, totally misjudged the situation.

They are confirming all the terrible things said about the 'un-deserving poor' - they couldn't do better or more to further the cause of welfare reforms (:

One of the roles of the government should be contingency planning. It was perfectly obvious that when she died there would be some trouble - probably hard to know how much I admit. It was also obvious that any trouble would be exacerbated by a certain type of person 'rent a mob' who join in any protests - look how some of the Occupy protests were hi-jacked. Now the decision for the Queen to go is adding fuel to the fire. Why is she going? I really really don't understand it - MT is no Churchill. The Falklands was not WW2.

Bluebell

That's the trouble you have your views and others have theirs. There are some who don't understand why not.

Yes but my point is that there should have been some thought about the funeral arrangements and the large number of people who do not feel she deserves it. Why are the pro MTers getting it all their own way? There should be some restraint - she is a divisive figure .

That will always be the case though won't it. Some did not want the Jubilee. Some did not want the Olympics. Some will say the Queen does not deserve a state funeral. Some just want, well I won't say it.

Nobody says you h ave to understand it Bluebell. It's likely to be the Queen' s own choice. None of our business.

Perhaps j8 - that it shows that neither Mr Cameron, nor the Queen and her entourage, have their finger on the pulse of the nation- and that is very dangerous. I pray that my predictions won't come true, but I am VERY concerned about next Wednesday turning into hell on earth for Britain.

What the queen does as head if state is very much my business - it's my state!!!

Surely the Queen could be represented by another high ranking Royal? Even though I supported the decision to go to war over the Falklands, bluebell is right. It didn't turn MT into another Churchill. Those who want to cause trouble have a whole week to organise themselves. It's a very dangerous situation.

Margaret Thatcher's time as Prime Minister was full of conflict. We don't need any of it back again now she has died.

Prince Andrew would be a good representative. He served in the Falklands and it's about time he did something worthy.

Your state Bluebell?! Delusions of grandeur there I think.

I think it's up to the Queen whose funeral she goes to. Perhaps she liked the old girl.

But Merlot, neither her or a rep is ok- the queen does not go to dead pms funerals -Churchill was a completely acceptable exception - because of the war. It looks so political doesn't it? And it's too late now. I don't know if there will be more trouble and of course I hope not but I think all the decisions about the funeral are a kick in the teeth to a lot of decent people . As you say she was a very divisive pm - she never united the country and only ever served the interests of certain groups. So I need to know why the hell is the queen going if not to provoke trouble . If it were convention to go to all dead pms funerals , that would be ok but once you pick and choose, you are asking for trouble.