Europe should cancel all flights to and from this extremely paraniod
part of the world and let the bastards starve! All they want is to
fill up their databases and keep tabs on not only their own but the
rest of us too. Come on Europeans, do as Wolfy and I, boycott the
sods!
Europe is biggest threat - US security chief
Wednesday, 16 January 2008 07:35
The US Secretary for Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, has said
terrorists from Europe now represent the biggest terrorist and
security threat to his country.
Mr Chertoff said it was important to increase checks on travellers
from Europe to the US.
He said most people could now enter the US without being screened and
he wanted tighter security regulations to be imposed.
.
|
|
| User: "psychogaray" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
16 Jan 2008 04:59:51 AM |
|
|
"WH" <bollogs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:868c31ae-df7f-4c9d-8553-f3b92b7f62e2@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Europe should cancel all flights to and from this extremely paraniod
part of the world and let the bastards starve! All they want is to
fill up their databases and keep tabs on not only their own but the
rest of us too. Come on Europeans, do as Wolfy and I, boycott the
sods!
Europe is biggest threat - US security chief
Wednesday, 16 January 2008 07:35
The US Secretary for Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, has said
terrorists from Europe now represent the biggest terrorist and
security threat to his country.
Mr Chertoff said it was important to increase checks on travellers
from Europe to the US.
He said most people could now enter the US without being screened and
he wanted tighter security regulations to be imposed.
Gee, isn't that the same guy who was at home with his wife, relaxing, while
Hurricane Katrina slammed into New Orleans?
What's he still doing in office?
garay ;)``
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
16 Jan 2008 10:39:04 AM |
|
|
On 16 Jan, 10:44, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Europe should cancel all flights to and from this extremely paraniod
part of the world and let the bastards starve! All they want is to
fill up their databases and keep tabs on not only their own but the
rest of us too. Come on Europeans, do as Wolfy and I, boycott the
sods!
Europe is biggest threat - US security chief
Wednesday, 16 January 2008 07:35
The US Secretary for Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, has said
terrorists from Europe now represent the biggest terrorist and
security threat to his country.
Mr Chertoff said it was important to increase checks on travellers
from Europe to the US.
He said most people could now enter the US without being screened and
he wanted tighter security regulations to be imposed.
I used to have a hard time entering Communist satelite Countries in
the 70's, Chris. That was a time when the UK put your occupation on
the passport for all to see! Crazy thing, it meant I was inevitably
denied access...all Border guards believed UK Police were spies! When
the Passport Office removed that, then travel was a lot easier.
I mention that, because yes, you are so right about the US at the
moment. I actually changed a current passport..at high cost... to one
that would satisfy US Immigration, one with biometric chip hidden in
the eye of the official photograph.
Seems that isn't the only requirement now. All arrivals from Europe
have to be fingerprinted before admission.
I have no concerns about that, other than a general feeling of unease
as to what exactly they use the information (fingerprint and bio-
metric data) for. It still shouldn't bother me, but it does..simply
through a breech of confidence in a Government as paranoid as this one
is.
In another thread, good old Stevie said I was 'welcomed' here.
Gosh...some welcome being fingerprinted on arrival.
I've been re-thinking that visit to NASA, much as I would like to go
there. I would have combined that with a day or two on a Casino ship
to Bermuda and back to Fort Lauderdale. If I don't go there, well, it
will be simply due to this paranoid behaviour on the part of the
Authorities. After all, I would have been travelling via Detroit, and
a 9 hour flight culminating in fingerprinting is hardly 'welcoming' me
to America.
Perhaps America has no reliance on Tourism? Suprising if that is so,
it must generate a lot of money.
I doubt that it will be my money though...their insular protectionism
and fear is a bit too much.
I think I'll start looking at alternatives.
Ricky
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
16 Jan 2008 07:53:09 PM |
|
|
On Jan 16, 8:39 am, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
In another thread, good old Stevie said I was 'welcomed' here.
No -- what I said is that I no longer think you should be *welcome*
here. Anyone who believes Americans deserved to die (because *we* had
it coming) should no longer be welcome here. It would be an insult to
the family members of people who died that day to have you walking
around here, with you believing their family members had it coming.
Please, enjoy your vacation time somewhere else -- and that goes for
eric, too.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
16 Jan 2008 09:11:59 PM |
|
|
On 17 Jan, 01:53, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
No -- what I said is that I no longer think you should be *welcome*
here. Anyone who believes Americans deserved to die (because *we* had
it coming) should no longer be welcome here. It would be an insult to
the family members of people who died that day to have you walking
around here, with you believing their family members had it coming.
Please, enjoy your vacation time somewhere else -- and that goes for
eric, too.
At it again. Playing with words to suit yourself. You know perfectly
well that I fully answered your 'deserve to die' question. It is a
statement that you have contorted, twisted and applied it to
individuals. It is a statement that refers to your Country, and the
statement was 'Had it coming', not 'deserved to die'.
Yes, America 'had it coming'. Your policies make your Country a
target. That is why you 'had it coming'.
Your policies still anger other Nations, and they provoke further
desire for reprisals. A less grasping, less authoritarian approach
would reverse the statement into, 'You didn't have it coming'.
I have no idea if the people in the towers deserved to die or
otherwise. I'm suprised at you. Surely, God had decided they deserved
to die, or decided he would like them to surround his ethereal throne
singing psalms for eternity. It's all 'God's plan anyway..what are you
moaning about?
You wriggle and twist, alter and change to your convenience. Hell, I
wish you had been in the top floor of the tower when the plane hit it.
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
16 Jan 2008 10:34:43 PM |
|
|
Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Playing with words to suit yourself.
Monkey's like our woofy here play with their feces.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "psychogaray" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 01:13:48 AM |
|
|
"Werewolfy" <Werewolfy1@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:120ceae9-4a42-41e1-af8a-fd8cb898dab4@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On 17 Jan, 01:53, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
No -- what I said is that I no longer think you should be *welcome*
here. Anyone who believes Americans deserved to die (because *we* had
it coming) should no longer be welcome here. It would be an insult to
the family members of people who died that day to have you walking
around here, with you believing their family members had it coming.
Please, enjoy your vacation time somewhere else -- and that goes for
eric, too.
At it again. Playing with words to suit yourself. You know perfectly
well that I fully answered your 'deserve to die' question. It is a
statement that you have contorted, twisted and applied it to
individuals. It is a statement that refers to your Country, and the
statement was 'Had it coming', not 'deserved to die'.
Yes, America 'had it coming'. Your policies make your Country a
target. That is why you 'had it coming'.
Your policies still anger other Nations, and they provoke further
desire for reprisals. A less grasping, less authoritarian approach
would reverse the statement into, 'You didn't have it coming'.
I have no idea if the people in the towers deserved to die or
otherwise. I'm suprised at you. Surely, God had decided they deserved
to die, or decided he would like them to surround his ethereal throne
singing psalms for eternity. It's all 'God's plan anyway..what are you
moaning about?
You wriggle and twist, alter and change to your convenience. Hell, I
wish you had been in the top floor of the tower when the plane hit it.
Werewolfy
It was simply their time to go, Wolfy. No more worthwhile use to man or God
here. God decides such matters and influences the mass murderers' minds to
do his bidding. We must accept this supposedly loving ethereal genius with
his mysterious cruel ways and inexplicable tyranny. All we do is die for his
morbid judgemental desires, or
suffer mightily on earth for being flawed, but if we're real good and
obedient, and mentally flagellate ourselves enough, we get to live forever
in some smiley bright-eyed netherworld, where little Swiss chocolate
crucifixes and cherry-peppermint harps float and swirl around us like
luminous dandelion puffs --
always reachable for a delicious delightful snack by hand or by flapping our
glowing gossamer wings.
garay ;)~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 09:31:43 AM |
|
|
On Jan 16, 11:13 pm, "psychogaray" <psychovi...@comcast.net> wrote:
"Werewolfy" <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:120ceae9-4a42-41e1-af8a-fd8cb898dab4@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On 17 Jan, 01:53, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
No -- what I said is that I no longer think you should be *welcome*
here. Anyone who believes Americans deserved to die (because *we* had
it coming) should no longer be welcome here. It would be an insult to
the family members of people who died that day to have you walking
around here, with you believing their family members had it coming.
Please, enjoy your vacation time somewhere else -- and that goes for
eric, too.
At it again. Playing with words to suit yourself. You know perfectly
well that I fully answered your 'deserve to die' question. It is a
statement that you have contorted, twisted and applied it to
individuals. It is a statement that refers to your Country, and the
statement was 'Had it coming', not 'deserved to die'.
Yes, America 'had it coming'. Your policies make your Country a
target. That is why you 'had it coming'.
Your policies still anger other Nations, and they provoke further
desire for reprisals. A less grasping, less authoritarian approach
would reverse the statement into, 'You didn't have it coming'.
I have no idea if the people in the towers deserved to die or
otherwise. I'm suprised at you. Surely, God had decided they deserved
to die, or decided he would like them to surround his ethereal throne
singing psalms for eternity. It's all 'God's plan anyway..what are you
moaning about?
You wriggle and twist, alter and change to your convenience. Hell, I
wish you had been in the top floor of the tower when the plane hit it.
Werewolfy
It was simply their time to go, Wolfy. No more worthwhile use to man or God
here. God decides such matters and influences the mass murderers' minds to
do his bidding.
So you have the same philosophy as the terrorists. No big surprise
there.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
16 Jan 2008 10:55:28 PM |
|
|
On Jan 16, 7:11 pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 01:53, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
No -- what I said is that I no longer think you should be *welcome*
here. Anyone who believes Americans deserved to die (because *we* had
it coming) should no longer be welcome here. It would be an insult to
the family members of people who died that day to have you walking
around here, with you believing their family members had it coming.
Please, enjoy your vacation time somewhere else -- and that goes for
eric, too.
At it again. Playing with words to suit yourself. You know perfectly
well that I fully answered your 'deserve to die' question. It is a
statement that you have contorted, twisted and applied it to
individuals. It is a statement that refers to your Country, and the
statement was 'Had it coming', not 'deserved to die'.
Let's review -- first of all, nearly 3000 people died in those
terrorist attacks. Secondly, you say we had it coming. Again -- nearly
3000 people died, and you say we had it coming. It's you who is doing
the wriggling and the twisting. Try as you might, you can't separate
these two facts:
fact #1: nearly 3000 people died.
fact #2: you believe we had it coming.
If you believe we had it coming, you believe those people deserved to
die. Your continued wriggling and twisting is ridiculous.
Yes, America 'had it coming'. Your policies make your Country a
target. That is why you 'had it coming'.
Your policies still anger other Nations, and they provoke further
desire for reprisals. A less grasping, less authoritarian approach
would reverse the statement into, 'You didn't have it coming'.
You're still speaking in meaningless generalities and platitudes
(triteness). Still unable to come up with anything specific?
I have no idea if the people in the towers deserved to die or
otherwise.
You could only think they didn't deserve to die if you didn't think we
had it coming. But since you do think we had it coming, it just
naturally follows that you think they deserved to die. To deny that is
to wriggle and twist, which I'm sure you'll continue to do.
I'm suprised at you. Surely, God had decided they deserved
to die, or decided he would like them to surround his ethereal throne
singing psalms for eternity. It's all 'God's plan anyway..what are you
moaning about?
I don't accept your twisted definition of God's "plan." I don't
believe God planned those 9/11 terrorist attacks. I don't believe God
thought those people deserved to die. I do believe the terrorists
believe that, however. So why should I accept what the terrorists
believe? What's your purpose in preaching, to me, your twisted
perception of God's behavior -- a God you don't believe in in the
first place? Please explain (though of course you won't -- you'll
ignore and delete this paragraph from your reply, I'm sure).
You wriggle and twist, alter and change to your convenience.
No, it's you who is wriggling and twisting.
Hell, I wish you had been in the top floor of the tower when
the plane hit it.
Yes I know -- and I wish you a long and healthy life. I prayed for you
(with you permission) when you had a health issue arise. That's the
difference between you and me, Ricky. You wish death and suffering on
people for their words, while I wish good health and long life for you
and everyone who posts here.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
16 Jan 2008 11:32:41 PM |
|
|
Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
Let's review
"Birds of a feather flock together."
You're replying to a med-deprived personality disorder.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 06:31:01 AM |
|
|
On 17 Jan, 04:55, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 16, 7:11 pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 01:53, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
No -- what I said is that I no longer think you should be *welcome*
here. Anyone who believes Americans deserved to die (because *we* had
it coming) should no longer be welcome here. It would be an insult to
the family members of people who died that day to have you walking
around here, with you believing their family members had it coming.
Please, enjoy your vacation time somewhere else -- and that goes for
eric, too.
At it again. Playing with words to suit yourself. You know perfectly
well that I fully answered your 'deserve to die' question. It is a
statement that you have contorted, twisted and applied it to
individuals. It is a statement that refers to your Country, and the
statement was 'Had it coming', not 'deserved to die'.
Let's review -- first of all, nearly 3000 people died in those
terrorist attacks. Secondly, you say we had it coming. Again -- nearly
3000 people died, and you say we had it coming. It's you who is doing
the wriggling and the twisting. Try as you might, you can't separate
these two facts:
fact #1: nearly 3000 people died.
fact #2: you believe we had it coming.
If you believe we had it coming, you believe those people deserved to
die. Your continued wriggling and twisting is ridiculous.
Yes, America 'had it coming'. Your policies make your Country a
target. That is why you 'had it coming'.
Your policies still anger other Nations, and they provoke further
desire for reprisals. A less grasping, less authoritarian approach
would reverse the statement into, 'You didn't have it coming'.
You're still speaking in meaningless generalities and platitudes
(triteness). Still unable to come up with anything specific?
I have no idea if the people in the towers deserved to die or
otherwise.
You could only think they didn't deserve to die if you didn't think we
had it coming. But since you do think we had it coming, it just
naturally follows that you think they deserved to die. To deny that is
to wriggle and twist, which I'm sure you'll continue to do.
I'm suprised at you. Surely, God had decided they deserved
to die, or decided he would like them to surround his ethereal throne
singing psalms for eternity. It's all 'God's plan anyway..what are you
moaning about?
I don't accept your twisted definition of God's "plan." I don't
believe God planned those 9/11 terrorist attacks. I don't believe God
thought those people deserved to die. I do believe the terrorists
believe that, however. So why should I accept what the terrorists
believe? What's your purpose in preaching, to me, your twisted
perception of God's behavior -- a God you don't believe in in the
first place? Please explain (though of course you won't -- you'll
ignore and delete this paragraph from your reply, I'm sure).
You wriggle and twist, alter and change to your convenience.
No, it's you who is wriggling and twisting.
Hell, I wish you had been in the top floor of the tower when
the plane hit it.
Yes I know -- and I wish you a long and healthy life. I prayed for you
(with you permission) when you had a health issue arise. That's the
difference between you and me, Ricky. You wish death and suffering on
people for their words, while I wish good health and long life for you
and everyone who posts here.
For the last time. "You had it coming" concerns itself with your
Nation. Your Nation is the 'You', not any individual.
Christ you are thick, imagine a factory has financial problems.
Warnings of future misery are given, but ignored. Their financial
policies were such that caused the inevitable collapse of their
Company. That company could be said to 'Have had it coming'.
No one says the workers in the plant deserved their misery associated
with the collapse.
Now for Christ's sake, read that which is written and refrain from
placing your own Miss goody two-shoes interpretation on it.
Yorkshire people have a saying. 'Give over'...it means don't be silly
all your life. Well Steven, 'Give over'. You don't wish me well at
all. You dislike me. You search for any small point to grasp and try
to sting me with the nettles of your own poisonous mind.
Christian? You?.....'Give over' Steven.
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 07:05:06 AM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 1:31=A0pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 04:55, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 16, 7:11 pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 01:53, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
No -- what I said is that I no longer think you should be *welcome*
here. Anyone who believes Americans deserved to die (because *we* ha=
d
it coming) should no longer be welcome here. It would be an insult t=
o
the family members of people who died that day to have you walking
around here, with you believing their family members had it coming.
Please, enjoy your vacation time somewhere else -- and that goes for=
eric, too.
At it again. Playing with words to suit yourself. You know perfectly
well that I fully answered your 'deserve to die' question. It is a
statement that you have contorted, twisted and applied it to
individuals. It is a statement that refers to your Country, and the
statement was 'Had it coming', not 'deserved to die'.
Let's review -- first of all, nearly 3000 people died in those
terrorist attacks. Secondly, you say we had it coming. Again -- nearly
3000 people died, and you say we had it coming. It's you who is doing
the wriggling and the twisting. Try as you might, you can't separate
these two facts:
fact #1: nearly 3000 people died.
fact #2: you believe we had it coming.
If you believe we had it coming, you believe those people deserved to
die. Your continued wriggling and twisting is ridiculous.
Yes, America 'had it coming'. Your policies make your Country a
target. That is why you 'had it coming'.
Your policies still anger other Nations, and they provoke further
desire for reprisals. A less grasping, less authoritarian approach
would reverse the statement into, 'You didn't have it coming'.
You're still speaking in meaningless generalities and platitudes
(triteness). Still unable to come up with anything specific?
I have no idea if the people in the towers deserved to die or
otherwise.
You could only think they didn't deserve to die if you didn't think we
had it coming. But since you do think we had it coming, it just
naturally follows that you think they deserved to die. To deny that is
to wriggle and twist, which I'm sure you'll continue to do.
I'm suprised at you. Surely, God had decided they deserved
to die, or decided he would like them to surround his ethereal throne
singing psalms for eternity. It's all 'God's plan anyway..what are you=
moaning about?
I don't accept your twisted definition of God's "plan." I don't
believe God planned those 9/11 terrorist attacks. I don't believe God
thought those people deserved to die. I do believe the terrorists
believe that, however. So why should I accept what the terrorists
believe? What's your purpose in preaching, to me, your twisted
perception of God's behavior -- a God you don't believe in in the
first place? Please explain (though of course you won't -- you'll
ignore and delete this paragraph from your reply, I'm sure).
You wriggle and twist, alter and change to your convenience.
No, it's you who is wriggling and twisting.
Hell, I wish you had been in the top floor of the tower when
the plane hit it.
Yes I know -- and I wish you a long and healthy life. I prayed for you
(with you permission) when you had a health issue arise. That's the
difference between you and me, Ricky. You wish death and suffering on
people for their words, while I wish good health and long life for you
and everyone who posts here.
For the last time. "You had it coming" concerns itself with your
Nation. Your Nation is the 'You', not any individual.
Christ you are thick, imagine a factory has financial problems.
Warnings of future misery are given, but ignored. Their financial
policies were such that caused the inevitable collapse of their
Company. That company could be said to 'Have had it coming'.
No one says the workers in the plant deserved their misery associated
with the collapse.
Now for Christ's sake, read that which is written and refrain from
placing your own Miss goody two-shoes interpretation on it.
Yorkshire people have a saying. 'Give over'...it means don't be silly
all your life. Well Steven, 'Give over'. You don't wish me well at
all. You dislike me. You search for any small point to grasp and try
to sting me with the nettles of your own poisonous mind.
Christian? You?.....'Give over' Steven.
Werewolfy- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
LOL Wolfy...hehehe!
It's like talking to a banana isin't it...a particularly stupid one at
that! That's why I decided to ignore the tosser...it's like pissin'
against the wind trying to talk sense to him.
WH
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 08:31:31 AM |
|
|
On 17 Jan, 13:05, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
LOL Wolfy...hehehe!
It's like talking to a banana isin't it...a particularly stupid one at
that! That's why I decided to ignore the tosser...it's like pissin'
against the wind trying to talk sense to him.
Grins Chris. Sums it up in a short sentence...a banana. A very
selective banana who choose's with great care which section to pounce
upon, which section may be interpretated in a way that he can attack
the writer. Next comes a huge volume of 'You said this' and 'I said
that', all of which could be countered, but the quantity of the
archived messages quoted out of context, makes that a Herculean
task...and a task that is simply not worth the bother.
The frightening thing is that banana's are usually found in
bunches..very big bunches. What an awful thought!
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 09:46:39 AM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 5:05 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
It's like talking to a banana isin't it...a particularly stupid one at
that! That's why I decided to ignore the tosser...it's like pissin'
against the wind trying to talk sense to him.
"Sense" from you? Should the following be considered to be "sense"
from you?
WH wrote:
There's no middle man between the
patient and their physician in these "socialist" health services. No
one counting the pennies, (or rather trying to save a few bob).
Secret NHS plan to ration patient care
By Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor
[excerpt] Patients are being denied appointments with consultants in a
systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money, The Times
has learnt.
Leaked documents passed to The Times show that while ministers promise
patients choice, a series of barriers are being erected limiting GPs'
rights to refer people to consultants.
The documents reveal that health trusts across London have drawn up
plans to establish panels that will "monitor" how many patients are
referred to hospital by GPs. Local health trusts have been told that
they must cut GP referral rates to those of the lowest 10 per cent
nationally. This, the document claims, would save =A325 million a year
in the capital.
Consultant-to-consultant referrals are also being limited, in many
cases denying patients a second opinion.
Patients who use hospital accident and emergency units to obtain care
that could be provided by GPs are also targeted. Emergency care
practitioners in A&E departments will "redirect" 40-70 per cent of
patients back to GPs or walk-in centres. Hospitals that treat people
who ought to have been sent to their GPs will not be paid. [end
excerpt]
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1057-1742007,00.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 10:18:40 AM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 4:46=A0pm, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 5:05 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
It's like talking to a banana isin't it...a particularly stupid one at
that! That's why I decided to ignore the tosser...it's like pissin'
against the wind trying to talk sense to him.
"Sense" from you? Should the following be considered to be "sense"
from you?
WH wrote:
There's no middle man between the
patient and their physician in these "socialist" health services. No
one counting the pennies, (or rather trying to save a few bob).
Secret NHS plan to ration patient care
By Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor
[excerpt] Patients are being denied appointments with consultants in a
systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money, The Times
has learnt.
Leaked documents passed to The Times show that while ministers promise
patients choice, a series of barriers are being erected limiting GPs'
rights to refer people to consultants.
The documents reveal that health trusts across London have drawn up
plans to establish panels that will "monitor" how many patients are
referred to hospital by GPs. Local health trusts have been told that
they must cut GP referral rates to those of the lowest 10 per cent
nationally. This, the document claims, would save =A325 million a year
in the capital.
Consultant-to-consultant referrals are also being limited, in many
cases denying patients a second opinion.
Patients who use hospital accident and emergency units to obtain care
that could be provided by GPs are also targeted. Emergency care
practitioners in A&E departments will "redirect" 40-70 per cent of
patients back to GPs or walk-in centres. Hospitals that treat people
who ought to have been sent to their GPs will not be paid. [end
excerpt]
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1057-1742007,00.html
You don't understand the article you twat. The NHS is in tatters since
the thatcher policies of the late 70's and through the 80's when the
right wing conservatives had power in GB. The health service should,
according to the Thatcher doctrine, make money...i.e. make a profit.
In Thatcher's world, very like your own mind you, nobody should get
anything for nothing. Free NHS for everyone was stopped. The health
service was 'made more effective' which means in your world, less
people doing more work. Private health insurance was encouraged. The
NHS never recovered from that...and that's what Blair and the Labour
govt. inherited when they took power. The article you're referring to
is in a subtle way discussing this. Seeing as you haven't a fuckin'
clue about British politics you wouldn't/didn't notice this.
The article is not about someone who sits and considers the
applications from doctors as to who should and shouldn't get to see a
specialist. It's people looking afterwards to see if doctors were
needlessly referring patients to specialists...i.e. patients who
didn't need to be sent to specialists. It also talks about A&E
departments wasting time and resources treating patients who are not
sick or who could just as easily talked to their GP. It's about
wasting resources...not saving money as they do in America. "Hey, no
you can't see a specialist because...blah blah blah...meaning we're
not splashing out despite the fact that you pay for it in your
insurance.
See douglas the article you posted and what it's about is completely
different to the yankie system...eons apart. But as I mentioned, you
have to know what the ***** you're talking about to understand
that...obviously you don't.
Now *****-off!
WH
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 10:25:02 AM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 8:18 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 4:46 pm, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 5:05 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
It's like talking to a banana isin't it...a particularly stupid one at=
that! That's why I decided to ignore the tosser...it's like pissin'
against the wind trying to talk sense to him.
"Sense" from you? Should the following be considered to be "sense"
from you?
WH wrote:
There's no middle man between the
patient and their physician in these "socialist" health services. No
one counting the pennies, (or rather trying to save a few bob).
Secret NHS plan to ration patient care
By Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor
[excerpt] Patients are being denied appointments with consultants in a
systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money, The Times
has learnt.
Leaked documents passed to The Times show that while ministers promise
patients choice, a series of barriers are being erected limiting GPs'
rights to refer people to consultants.
The documents reveal that health trusts across London have drawn up
plans to establish panels that will "monitor" how many patients are
referred to hospital by GPs. Local health trusts have been told that
they must cut GP referral rates to those of the lowest 10 per cent
nationally. This, the document claims, would save =A325 million a year
in the capital.
Consultant-to-consultant referrals are also being limited, in many
cases denying patients a second opinion.
Patients who use hospital accident and emergency units to obtain care
that could be provided by GPs are also targeted. Emergency care
practitioners in A&E departments will "redirect" 40-70 per cent of
patients back to GPs or walk-in centres. Hospitals that treat people
who ought to have been sent to their GPs will not be paid. [end
excerpt]
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1057-1742007,00.html
You don't understand the article you twat. The NHS is in tatters since
the thatcher policies of the late 70's and through the 80's when the
right wing conservatives had power in GB. The health service should,
according to the Thatcher doctrine, make money...i.e. make a profit.
In Thatcher's world, very like your own mind you, nobody should get
anything for nothing. Free NHS for everyone was stopped. The health
service was 'made more effective' which means in your world, less
people doing more work. Private health insurance was encouraged. The
NHS never recovered from that...and that's what Blair and the Labour
govt. inherited when they took power. The article you're referring to
is in a subtle way discussing this. Seeing as you haven't a fuckin'
clue about British politics you wouldn't/didn't notice this.
The article is not about someone who sits and considers the
applications from doctors as to who should and shouldn't get to see a
specialist. It's people looking afterwards to see if doctors were
needlessly referring patients to specialists...i.e. patients who
didn't need to be sent to specialists. It also talks about A&E
departments wasting time and resources treating patients who are not
sick or who could just as easily talked to their GP. It's about
wasting resources...not saving money as they do in America.
Look at the first line in the article: "Patients are being denied
appointments with consultants in a systematic attempt to ration care
and save the NHS money, The Times has learnt."
"A systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money," it says.
What part of "save the NHS money" are you having difficulty
understanding?
<snip remainder of your silly wriggling and twisting>
.
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 03:50:34 PM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 5:25=A0pm, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 8:18 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 4:46 pm, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 5:05 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
It's like talking to a banana isin't it...a particularly stupid one =
at
that! That's why I decided to ignore the tosser...it's like pissin'
against the wind trying to talk sense to him.
"Sense" from you? Should the following be considered to be "sense"
from you?
WH wrote:
There's no middle man between the
patient and their physician in these "socialist" health services. No=
one counting the pennies, (or rather trying to save a few bob).
Secret NHS plan to ration patient care
By Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor
[excerpt] Patients are being denied appointments with consultants in a=
systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money, The Times
has learnt.
Leaked documents passed to The Times show that while ministers promise=
patients choice, a series of barriers are being erected limiting GPs'
rights to refer people to consultants.
The documents reveal that health trusts across London have drawn up
plans to establish panels that will "monitor" how many patients are
referred to hospital by GPs. Local health trusts have been told that
they must cut GP referral rates to those of the lowest 10 per cent
nationally. This, the document claims, would save =A325 million a year=
in the capital.
Consultant-to-consultant referrals are also being limited, in many
cases denying patients a second opinion.
Patients who use hospital accident and emergency units to obtain care
that could be provided by GPs are also targeted. Emergency care
practitioners in A&E departments will "redirect" 40-70 per cent of
patients back to GPs or walk-in centres. Hospitals that treat people
who ought to have been sent to their GPs will not be paid. [end
excerpt]
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1057-1742007,00.html
You don't understand the article you twat. The NHS is in tatters since
the thatcher policies of the late 70's and through the 80's when the
right wing conservatives had power in GB. The health service should,
according to the Thatcher doctrine, make money...i.e. make a profit.
In Thatcher's world, very like your own mind you, nobody should get
anything for nothing. Free NHS for everyone was stopped. The health
service was 'made more effective' which means in your world, less
people doing more work. Private health insurance was encouraged. The
NHS never recovered from that...and that's what Blair and the Labour
govt. inherited when they took power. The article you're referring to
is in a subtle way discussing this. Seeing as you haven't a fuckin'
clue about British politics you wouldn't/didn't notice this.
The article is not about someone who sits and considers the
applications from doctors as to who should and shouldn't get to see a
specialist. It's people looking afterwards to see if doctors were
needlessly referring patients to specialists...i.e. patients who
didn't need to be sent to specialists. It also talks about A&E
departments wasting time and resources treating patients who are not
sick or who could just as easily talked to their GP. It's about
wasting resources...not saving money as they do in America.
Look at the first line in the article: "Patients are being denied
appointments with consultants in a systematic attempt to ration care
and save the NHS money, The Times has learnt."
"A systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money," it says.
What part of "save the NHS money" are you having difficulty
understanding?
<snip remainder of your silly wriggling and twisting>- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
By the way, show me a journalist who doesn't melodramatize the first
sentence or two in their article to attract attention. Exactly what
has been done in this article you twat!
WH
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 11:07:34 AM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 5:25=A0pm, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 8:18 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 4:46 pm, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 5:05 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
It's like talking to a banana isin't it...a particularly stupid one =
at
that! That's why I decided to ignore the tosser...it's like pissin'
against the wind trying to talk sense to him.
"Sense" from you? Should the following be considered to be "sense"
from you?
WH wrote:
There's no middle man between the
patient and their physician in these "socialist" health services. No=
one counting the pennies, (or rather trying to save a few bob).
Secret NHS plan to ration patient care
By Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor
[excerpt] Patients are being denied appointments with consultants in a=
systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money, The Times
has learnt.
Leaked documents passed to The Times show that while ministers promise=
patients choice, a series of barriers are being erected limiting GPs'
rights to refer people to consultants.
The documents reveal that health trusts across London have drawn up
plans to establish panels that will "monitor" how many patients are
referred to hospital by GPs. Local health trusts have been told that
they must cut GP referral rates to those of the lowest 10 per cent
nationally. This, the document claims, would save =A325 million a year=
in the capital.
Consultant-to-consultant referrals are also being limited, in many
cases denying patients a second opinion.
Patients who use hospital accident and emergency units to obtain care
that could be provided by GPs are also targeted. Emergency care
practitioners in A&E departments will "redirect" 40-70 per cent of
patients back to GPs or walk-in centres. Hospitals that treat people
who ought to have been sent to their GPs will not be paid. [end
excerpt]
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1057-1742007,00.html
You don't understand the article you twat. The NHS is in tatters since
the thatcher policies of the late 70's and through the 80's when the
right wing conservatives had power in GB. The health service should,
according to the Thatcher doctrine, make money...i.e. make a profit.
In Thatcher's world, very like your own mind you, nobody should get
anything for nothing. Free NHS for everyone was stopped. The health
service was 'made more effective' which means in your world, less
people doing more work. Private health insurance was encouraged. The
NHS never recovered from that...and that's what Blair and the Labour
govt. inherited when they took power. The article you're referring to
is in a subtle way discussing this. Seeing as you haven't a fuckin'
clue about British politics you wouldn't/didn't notice this.
The article is not about someone who sits and considers the
applications from doctors as to who should and shouldn't get to see a
specialist. It's people looking afterwards to see if doctors were
needlessly referring patients to specialists...i.e. patients who
didn't need to be sent to specialists. It also talks about A&E
departments wasting time and resources treating patients who are not
sick or who could just as easily talked to their GP. It's about
wasting resources...not saving money as they do in America.
Look at the first line in the article: "Patients are being denied
appointments with consultants in a systematic attempt to ration care
and save the NHS money, The Times has learnt."
"A systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money," it says.
What part of "save the NHS money" are you having difficulty
understanding?
<snip remainder of your silly wriggling and twisting>- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Save the NHS money by not wasting resources. As I said if you knew
about British politics you'de be able to read between the lines and
understand. You don't and can't...simple. You're doing what I said
before, taking a sentence word for word and not reading the whole
thing as a whole. A sentence can include words that mean something
individually, but depending on how you put them together they can mean
something completely different. You just can't grasp that. That's why
you cannot grasp what Wolfy mean't when he said that the yanks "had it
coming". I, and I'm quite sure most people on this NG, understand
exactly what he means with that. You don't, you are getting stuck on
individual words and you're just not capable of understanding them
when used in a sentence. A thick fuckin' yank! Textbook yank to all of
us icke yanks!
Now as I said...*****-off!
WH
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 12:24:03 PM |
|
|
On 17 Jan, 17:07, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I, and I'm quite sure most people on this NG, understand
exactly what he means with that. You don't, you are getting stuck on
individual words and you're just not capable of understanding them
when used in a sentence. A thick fuckin' yank! Textbook yank to all of
us icke yanks!
He does Chris. He chooses to ignore that understanding, and to search
out ways to belittle others.
The Steven's of this world don't fool me for a second, I know what
he's up to, and his ego is the driving force. I am beginning to
believe that, after all, it isn't his fault though. It's all to do
with the Demon that has entered his body and which must be exorcised
immediatly. The best sort of exorcisms may be found in the Congo area,
as per the article you posted. A good whipping, flogging, shaking and
a few incantations will soon rid the Douglas of this terrible entity.
Perhaps he should be 'dunked'...thrown into fast flowing water. The
Demon will hold him up and we will all know of his possession. Of
course, he might drown, and we can declare him to be innocent. It
won't be a bad thing, he will be with his Lord and, as Doc writes, may
even have some pretty gossamer wings to flap throughout eternity.
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 07:47:36 PM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 10:24 am, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 17:07, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I, and I'm quite sure most people on this NG, understand
exactly what he means with that. You don't, you are getting stuck on
individual words and you're just not capable of understanding them
when used in a sentence. A thick fuckin' yank! Textbook yank to all of
us icke yanks!
He does Chris. He chooses to ignore that understanding, and to search
out ways to belittle others.
Who have I belittled? Have a created fictional stories about anyone
here, having no other purpose than to belittle someone? No, I haven't.
Yet I also notice you had nothing to say when that actually has
happened on this group. Your false indignation is very selective,
isn't it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 08:13:26 PM |
|
|
On 18 Jan, 01:47, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 10:24 am, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 17:07, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
=EF=BF=BDI, and I'm quite sure most people on this NG, understand
exactly what he means with that. You don't, you are getting stuck on
individual words and you're just not capable of understanding them
when used in a sentence. A thick fuckin' yank! Textbook yank to all of=
us icke yanks!
He does Chris. He chooses to ignore that understanding, and to search
out ways to belittle others.
Who have I belittled? Have a created fictional stories about anyone
here, having no other purpose than to belittle someone? No, I haven't.
Yet I also notice you had nothing to say when that actually has
happened on this group. Your false indignation is very selective,
isn't it?
Only three questions. Gosh, you're slipping.
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 01:17:54 PM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 7:24=A0pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 17:07, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
=A0I, and I'm quite sure most people on this NG, understand
exactly what he means with that. You don't, you are getting stuck on
individual words and you're just not capable of understanding them
when used in a sentence. A thick fuckin' yank! Textbook yank to all of
us icke yanks!
He does Chris. He chooses to ignore that understanding, and to search
out ways to belittle others.
The Steven's of this world don't fool me for a second, I know what
he's up to, and his ego is the driving force. I am beginning to
believe that, after all, it isn't his fault though. It's all to do
with the Demon that has entered his body and which must be exorcised
immediatly. The best sort of exorcisms may be found in the Congo area,
as per the article you posted. A good whipping, flogging, shaking and
a few incantations will soon rid the Douglas of this terrible entity.
Perhaps he should be 'dunked'...thrown into fast flowing water. The
Demon will hold him up and we will all know of his possession. Of
course, he might drown, and we can declare him to be innocent. It
won't be a bad thing, he will be with his Lord and, as Doc writes, may
even have some pretty gossamer wings to flap throughout eternity.
Werewolfy
LOL. ***** it Wolfy you just beat me to it. I was just gonna refer to
that Congo exorcist thingy using the douglas as the possessed. It's
probably too good for him though. He should probably be given a bottle
of holy water and told to sit in a corner somewhere and let the holy
water keep him alive for a year or so, no grub and a lashing now and
again. Suffer till death sneaks up and whips him away. Or maybe his
god would intervene...seeing as he is, according to him, such a good
person...usch!
WH
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 02:21:42 PM |
|
|
On 17 Jan, 19:17, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 7:24=EF=BF=BDpm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 17:07, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
=EF=BF=BDI, and I'm quite sure most people on this NG, understand
exactly what he means with that. You don't, you are getting stuck on
individual words and you're just not capable of understanding them
when used in a sentence. A thick fuckin' yank! Textbook yank to all of=
us icke yanks!
He does Chris. He chooses to ignore that understanding, and to search
out ways to belittle others.
The Steven's of this world don't fool me for a second, I know what
he's up to, and his ego is the driving force. I am beginning to
believe that, after all, it isn't his fault though. It's all to do
with the Demon that has entered his body and which must be exorcised
immediatly. The best sort of exorcisms may be found in the Congo area,
as per the article you posted. A good whipping, flogging, shaking and
a few incantations will soon rid the Douglas of this terrible entity.
Perhaps he should be 'dunked'...thrown into fast flowing water. The
Demon will hold him up and we will all know of his possession. Of
course, he might drown, and we can declare him to be innocent. It
won't be a bad thing, he will be with his Lord and, as Doc writes, may
even have some pretty gossamer wings to flap throughout eternity.
Werewolfy
LOL. ***** it Wolfy you just beat me to it. I was just gonna refer to
that Congo exorcist thingy using the douglas as the possessed. It's
probably too good for him though. He should probably be given a bottle
of holy water and told to sit in a corner somewhere and let the holy
water keep him alive for a year or so, no grub and a lashing now and
again. Suffer till death sneaks up and whips him away. Or maybe his
god would intervene...seeing as he is, according to him, such a good
person...usch!
WH- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Grins Chris. Great minds and all that!
I have to see Danielle in France sometime, and she lives not that far
from Lourdes. I could bring back a special bottle of Lourdes Holy
Water..that would do the trick!
Actually, talking about 'Holy Water', I had a friend once in the UK
who often went to Ireland. He would bring back bottles of 'Holy Water'
too. Always brought me one. This was a very special water...Poteen.
God but that's powerful stuff!...;)
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
| User: "psychogaray" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 03:06:41 PM |
|
|
"Werewolfy" <Werewolfy1@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:728f74e3-5b48-46a9-8c2c-b48d55483996@v29g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On 17 Jan, 19:17, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 7:24?pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 17:07, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
?I, and I'm quite sure most people on this NG, understand
exactly what he means with that. You don't, you are getting stuck on
individual words and you're just not capable of understanding them
when used in a sentence. A thick fuckin' yank! Textbook yank to all of
us icke yanks!
He does Chris. He chooses to ignore that understanding, and to search
out ways to belittle others.
The Steven's of this world don't fool me for a second, I know what
he's up to, and his ego is the driving force. I am beginning to
believe that, after all, it isn't his fault though. It's all to do
with the Demon that has entered his body and which must be exorcised
immediatly. The best sort of exorcisms may be found in the Congo area,
as per the article you posted. A good whipping, flogging, shaking and
a few incantations will soon rid the Douglas of this terrible entity.
Perhaps he should be 'dunked'...thrown into fast flowing water. The
Demon will hold him up and we will all know of his possession. Of
course, he might drown, and we can declare him to be innocent. It
won't be a bad thing, he will be with his Lord and, as Doc writes, may
even have some pretty gossamer wings to flap throughout eternity.
Werewolfy
LOL. ***** it Wolfy you just beat me to it. I was just gonna refer to
that Congo exorcist thingy using the douglas as the possessed. It's
probably too good for him though. He should probably be given a bottle
of holy water and told to sit in a corner somewhere and let the holy
water keep him alive for a year or so, no grub and a lashing now and
again. Suffer till death sneaks up and whips him away. Or maybe his
god would intervene...seeing as he is, according to him, such a good
person...usch!
WH- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Grins Chris. Great minds and all that!
I have to see Danielle in France sometime, and she lives not that far
from Lourdes. I could bring back a special bottle of Lourdes Holy
Water..that would do the trick!
Actually, talking about 'Holy Water', I had a friend once in the UK
who often went to Ireland. He would bring back bottles of 'Holy Water'
too. Always brought me one. This was a very special water...Poteen.
God but that's powerful stuff!...;)
Werewolfy
I wonder how Holee Water would work for hemorrhoids?
garay
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 03:09:26 PM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 9:21=C2=A0pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 19:17, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 7:24=EF=BF=BDpm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 17 Jan, 17:07, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
=EF=BF=BDI, and I'm quite sure most people on this NG, understand
exactly what he means with that. You don't, you are getting stuck on=
individual words and you're just not capable of understanding them
when used in a sentence. A thick fuckin' yank! Textbook yank to all =
of
us icke yanks!
He does Chris. He chooses to ignore that understanding, and to search
out ways to belittle others.
The Steven's of this world don't fool me for a second, I know what
he's up to, and his ego is the driving force. I am beginning to
believe that, after all, it isn't his fault though. It's all to do
with the Demon that has entered his body and which must be exorcised
immediatly. The best sort of exorcisms may be found in the Congo area,=
as per the article you posted. A good whipping, flogging, shaking and
a few incantations will soon rid the Douglas of this terrible entity.
Perhaps he should be 'dunked'...thrown into fast flowing water. The
Demon will hold him up and we will all know of his possession. Of
course, he might drown, and we can declare him to be innocent. It
won't be a bad thing, he will be with his Lord and, as Doc writes, may=
even have some pretty gossamer wings to flap throughout eternity.
Werewolfy
LOL. ***** it Wolfy you just beat me to it. I was just gonna refer to
that Congo exorcist thingy using the douglas as the possessed. It's
probably too good for him though. He should probably be given a bottle
of holy water and told to sit in a corner somewhere and let the holy
water keep him alive for a year or so, no grub and a lashing now and
again. Suffer till death sneaks up and whips him away. Or maybe his
god would intervene...seeing as he is, according to him, such a good
person...usch!
WH- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Grins Chris. Great minds and all that!
I have to see Danielle in France sometime, and she lives not that far
from Lourdes. I could bring back a special bottle of Lourdes Holy
Water..that would do the trick!
T'would I suspect! :-) That fuckin' Lourdes place is such a fuckin'
joke though don't you think? A great marketing thingie though to get
all these poor sods looking for a cure for whatever. Millions every
year visiting the place. Plenty of dosh being spent :-)
Actually, talking about 'Holy Water', I had a friend once in the UK
who often went to Ireland. He would bring back bottles of 'Holy Water'
too. Always brought me one. This was a very special water...Poteen.
God but that's powerful stuff!...;)
Uisce Bheatha as Gaelige! <<=3D=3D (Fire water in Irish...(Poteen)). Drank
it a couple of times years and years ago, but I left the place when I
was 18 and that kinda put a stop to any later "experiences". But yes I
know exactly what you're referring to. :-) Bit like Greek or Turkish
Raki...without the anniseed, sp? Better than a gun for blowing yer
brains out :-) Fucks ones legs up too for some reason.
Be good now Wolfy, don't let that douglas wind you up too much :-)
WH
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 07:37:15 PM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 9:07 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 5:25 pm, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 8:18 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 4:46 pm, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 17, 5:05 am, WH <boll...@hotmail.com> wrote:
It's like talking to a banana isin't it...a particularly stupid on=
e at
that! That's why I decided to ignore the tosser...it's like pissin=
'
against the wind trying to talk sense to him.
"Sense" from you? Should the following be considered to be "sense"
from you?
WH wrote:
There's no middle man between the
patient and their physician in these "socialist" health services. =
No
one counting the pennies, (or rather trying to save a few bob).
Secret NHS plan to ration patient care
By Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor
[excerpt] Patients are being denied appointments with consultants in=
a
systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money, The Times
has learnt.
Leaked documents passed to The Times show that while ministers promi=
se
patients choice, a series of barriers are being erected limiting GPs=
'
rights to refer people to consultants.
The documents reveal that health trusts across London have drawn up
plans to establish panels that will "monitor" how many patients are
referred to hospital by GPs. Local health trusts have been told that=
they must cut GP referral rates to those of the lowest 10 per cent
nationally. This, the document claims, would save =A325 million a ye=
ar
in the capital.
Consultant-to-consultant referrals are also being limited, in many
cases denying patients a second opinion.
Patients who use hospital accident and emergency units to obtain car=
e
that could be provided by GPs are also targeted. Emergency care
practitioners in A&E departments will "redirect" 40-70 per cent of
patients back to GPs or walk-in centres. Hospitals that treat people=
who ought to have been sent to their GPs will not be paid. [end
excerpt]
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1057-1742007,00.html
You don't understand the article you twat. The NHS is in tatters since=
the thatcher policies of the late 70's and through the 80's when the
right wing conservatives had power in GB. The health service should,
according to the Thatcher doctrine, make money...i.e. make a profit.
In Thatcher's world, very like your own mind you, nobody should get
anything for nothing. Free NHS for everyone was stopped. The health
service was 'made more effective' which means in your world, less
people doing more work. Private health insurance was encouraged. The
NHS never recovered from that...and that's what Blair and the Labour
govt. inherited when they took power. The article you're referring to
is in a subtle way discussing this. Seeing as you haven't a fuckin'
clue about British politics you wouldn't/didn't notice this.
The article is not about someone who sits and considers the
applications from doctors as to who should and shouldn't get to see a
specialist. It's people looking afterwards to see if doctors were
needlessly referring patients to specialists...i.e. patients who
didn't need to be sent to specialists. It also talks about A&E
departments wasting time and resources treating patients who are not
sick or who could just as easily talked to their GP. It's about
wasting resources...not saving money as they do in America.
Look at the first line in the article: "Patients are being denied
appointments with consultants in a systematic attempt to ration care
and save the NHS money, The Times has learnt."
"A systematic attempt to ration care and save the NHS money," it says.
What part of "save the NHS money" are you having difficulty
understanding?
<snip remainder of your silly wriggling and twisting>- Hide quoted text =
-
- Show quoted text -
Save the NHS money by not wasting resources.
Yes, ration care to save money. This started when you wrote the
following: "There's no middle man between the patient and their
physician in these "socialist" health services. No one counting the
pennies, (or rather trying to save a few bob)." Now you say, "Save the
NHS money by not wasting resources." You said there is no middle man
between patient and physician, yet someone must be counting pennies if
there is an effort to save the NHS money. Which is it? Please explain.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 08:17:34 PM |
|
|
On 18 Jan, 01:37, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
Yes, ration care to save money. This started when you wrote the
following: "There's no middle man between the patient and their
physician in these "socialist" health services. No one counting the
pennies, (or rather trying to save a few bob)." Now you say, "Save the
NHS money by not wasting resources." You said there is no middle man
between patient and physician, yet someone must be counting pennies if
there is an effort to save the NHS money. Which is it? Please explain
He said so I said because he said someone said. What is this...Oh yes,
Steven's standard technique for arguing.
I remember your saying that when he said the same as you said, then
you said that wasn't what you said.
Impossible. 'Give over' Steven.
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
17 Jan 2008 09:05:33 PM |
|
|
On Jan 17, 6:17 pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 18 Jan, 01:37, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
Yes, ration care to save money. This started when you wrote the
following: "There's no middle man between the patient and their
physician in these "socialist" health services. No one counting the
pennies, (or rather trying to save a few bob)." Now you say, "Save the
NHS money by not wasting resources." You said there is no middle man
between patient and physician, yet someone must be counting pennies if
there is an effort to save the NHS money. Which is it? Please explain
He said so I said because he said someone said. What is this...Oh yes,
Steven's standard technique for arguing.
I showed *exact* quoted words. Meanwhile, just below, you continue
with your usual style of meaningless generalities.
I remember your saying that when he said the same as you said, then
you said that wasn't what you said.
Show something specific -- if you're able.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
18 Jan 2008 06:44:35 AM |
|
|
On 18 Jan, 03:05, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
I showed *exact* quoted words. Meanwhile, just below, you continue
with your usual style of meaningless generalities.
There was nothing 'meaningless' about my generalities. The opposite in
fact, they were full of 'meaning'.
Your *exact* quotes are also your *selective* quotes. I don't discuss
things in your way, I talk from memory alone, from experience alone. I
have no need to *quote*, *cite* etc. An argument, a discussion, is
about opinion.
You have been honoured with mine. All I see from you are demands for
other people's words.
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
18 Jan 2008 09:49:35 AM |
|
|
On Jan 18, 4:44 am, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 18 Jan, 03:05, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
I showed *exact* quoted words. Meanwhile, just below, you continue
with your usual style of meaningless generalities.
There was nothing 'meaningless' about my generalities. The opposite in
fact, they were full of 'meaning'.
Full of your feelings. Feelings are emotions, and require no thought.
All you have to do is "feel" it, and that's good enough for you,
regardless of the actual facts.
Your *exact* quotes are also your *selective* quotes. I don't discuss
things in your way, I talk from memory alone, from experience alone. I
have no need to *quote*, *cite* etc. An argument, a discussion, is
about opinion.
You have been honoured with mine. All I see from you are demands for
other people's words.
I'd like to see some *specifics* to back up your "feelings," that's
all.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: Stay away! |
18 Jan 2008 01:23:46 PM |
|
|
On 18 Jan, 15:49, Steven Douglas <dste...@flashmail.com> wrote:
"Feelings are emotions, and require no thought."
Really? Who told you that? *cite*please.
"All you have to do is "feel" it, and that's good enough for you,
regardless of the actual facts."
Really, where did you find that? *Cite* please.
"I'd like to see some *specifics* to back up your "feelings," that's
all."
YOU talk about 'feelings', not me. I talk about opinion...a conclusion
reached through a variety of ways, a wide selection of experience and
information known. Why did you change my word, 'opinion' into your
word, 'feeling'?
I'm so pleased that when I next see a person sobbing, then they have
not thought about anything in particular..it's only an emotion and
requires no thought. Yes, sadness, happiness all require no thought at
all.
You say some very silly things you know.
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
