I note also that his body is to be cremated, which used not to be what happened with Catholics that ultra-montane and pious. It amuses me to think that a man who condemned so many people to unknown fates and nameless graves will himself be scattered to the winds, lest someday the vengeful do something appropriate to his corpse.
Normally, I would disapprove of desecration of the dead - it's just tacky - but there is always an exception in relativist morality, I find.
Which reminds me, we must all make plans for when Thatcher dies to disrupt all the piety and hypocrisy she will get from the media and the political Establishment.
I plan to drink champagne in the streets with my friends, as we did when she fell.
Anyone who was under the delusion that the Tories have changed their spots needs to check out their new Family Values stuff. Not a word, you understand, about how Conservative economic and industrial policies destroyed social cohesion and industry across whole tracts of the country - no, of course, it is all about people living together instead of getting married...
It needs to be remembered that Ian Duncan-Smith - ex-leader who has produced this - is a Catholic and close to various American neocons. An interesting clue to his research is that he cites the figure of 0.5 for the proportion of LGBT people, though as an excuse for regarding us as irrelevant to his concerns rather than otherwise. This is a figure much loved by the American Right as a way of minimizing our importance and based on some dodgy research - as I recall, the issue is that it was a cold-call phone poll by middle-aged white women cold callers and was not geographically loaded to take account of the resettlement of many LGBT people from the country to the city and from red states to blue. It is indicative of the level of his research.
Not that I regard the numbers game as all that crucial to questions of civil rights and equality...
I see that the Iranians are having their Holocaust denial jamboree and signalling it as much in terms of teasing the West about our commitment to free speech as of the way that the moral capital of the Holocaust has had a role in the oppression of the Palestinians.
What Holocaust denial is, is not so much a use of free speech as incitement to violence - how many people deny it who don't want to kill Jews, gypsies and queers on general principles? It is also an abuse of historical fact and the process of historical scholarship.
I don't, myself, favour bans, though I can see why the French and the Germans might think it an appropriate discipline given their past. I do favour the regular and condign mocking of people who believe in Holocaust denial, an intellectual position which makes most UFO true believers look wholly rational; I was very happy when the intellectual bankruptcy of David Irving was exposed in a British court of law when he was silly enough to sue a genuine scholar.