Bradley Manning: Wiki Leaker.

Further to the blind, Tone, have a look at what Churchill says about ID cards in 1952 when he abolished them. Fucking Churchill, a man who, to break a strike in Liverpool exactly one hundred years ago, sent a gunship up the Mersey and ordered it train its guns on the densely populated area of Anfield, which of a day would be full of solely women and children, ready to blow up his own citizens.

Not exactly a champion of the people, yet he saw that identity cards in peacetime were nonsensical and he would "set the people free"

Bert wrote: Fucking Churchill, a man who, to break a strike in Liverpool exactly one hundred years ago, sent a gunship up the Mersey and ordered it train its guns on the densely populated area of Anfield, which of a day would be full of solely women and children, ready to blow up his own citizens.

Here's another one to any fucker who's denigrating the Health Service.

They always churn out "looks at it, it's the third biggest employer in the world" as if that's some sort of indicator of reason for making it smaller.

For one, it isn't. The number would exclude around a dozen national defence provisions globally and if they're excluded because they're essential government, then you can discount our NHS on the same premise.

Go back to the three, though.
WalMart and the Indian Railways

No-one is asking for ASDA to be closed or fewer trains to run in India. And the difference also is if in India, you never travel, you never use the rail. In the USA, if you wish to shop, it is the land of opportunity and choice and you need never visit Walmart.

Every last fucking one of us has a provision in this country of healthcare from the cradle to the grave. You don't even have to opt in - it's there for fuck all. It's a system that, because it works on the premise of not being a funds-generating business, is interested in getting you well. Any other system (and Bevan was spot on) is sick as it will profit on your illness and in practice will benefit from you being sicker longer.

And that's the model slaphead is aspiring to.

I'd have accepted maybe a gunship in the prevailing times, Tone, birth of a labour movement and so forth, but he went for the human shields.

Spectacularly, I believe everyone just went "well go on then, fuckface". Jesus, there'd still be relics from the ship in circulation now if they'd fired after 75,000 dockers had swarmed over it, butchered the crew and stripped it for parts

Bert wrote: butchered the crew and stripped it for parts

Bert wrote:Here's another one to any fucker who's denigrating the Health Service.

They always churn out "looks at it, it's the third biggest employer in the world" as if that's some sort of indicator of reason for making it smaller.

For one, it isn't. The number would exclude around a dozen national defence provisions globally and if they're excluded because they're essential government, then you can discount our NHS on the same premise.

Go back to the three, though.
WalMart and the Indian Railways

No-one is asking for ASDA to be closed or fewer trains to run in India. And the difference also is if in India, you never travel, you never use the rail. In the USA, if you wish to shop, it is the land of opportunity and choice and you need never visit Walmart.

Every last fucking one of us has a provision in this country of healthcare from the cradle to the grave. You don't even have to opt in - it's there for fuck all. It's a system that, because it works on the premise of not being a funds-generating business, is interested in getting you well. Any other system (and Bevan was spot on) is sick as it will profit on your illness and in practice will benefit from you being sicker longer.

And that's the model slaphead is aspiring to.

Bert: I'm not really up to speed on the NHS but haven't problems arisen within it since the introduction of 'League Tables' or whatever they are called?
If NHS Trust Hospitals are expected to show a profit or work within the perameters of a budget then, through the very nature of business, this could equate to ensuring that a positive financial performance is achieved at the expense of the well-being of some patients in the quest for cost effectiveness and a higher rating?

pp

You get a sick patient well and discharged, PP, he's not on the books. The fitter you are, the less you cost. That becomes a resource you can divert elsewhere.

Any system that charges an individual per second is not going to be overly interested in curing the individual but increasing the seconds. The interest is to keep the individual sick enough to milk but fit enough to not lose in a terminal way. That same interest would clog up beds, fill surgeries and strain capacity here.

There's little a league table will prove in the NHS other than possibly quality of care. Like it or not, any hospital under attack will always have a community around it and it becomes a focal and political point, especially in the big cities, and remarks relating to comparators will always be irrelevant in the face of say, a postcode lottery - there's no point saying a Glasgow hospital is underperforming in comparison to one in Woking because through too may social differences, the 63-year-old man in Woking is on average looking forward to getting on for another couple of decades. The Glaswegian has exceeded his average lifespan for area by nine years if he's from the East End. The two areas are going to have completely different approaches because the 53-year-old in Woking is likely to be pretty well and has a third of his life in front of him. The Glaswegian is anything from short of breath to suffering a major trauma and all stages in between.

It doesn't help a government for it to highlight the social disparity of 26 years life expectancy in NHS statistics because the NHS responds to the patient need and not the underlying social need. Glasgow needs help in that scenario and putting a table together that details it in black and white is not in Slaphead's interests, just as it wasn't in the previous lemons in the job who, to their eternal shame, were Scots as well.

all very interesting but back to the OP he released stuff he shouldn't, he broke his rules of employment, he broke the law and he is a traitor - in china as PP said his family would already have paid for the bullet used and moved on

Abdul Kowalski wrote:all very interesting but back to the OP he released stuff he shouldn't, he broke his rules of employment, he broke the law and he is a traitor - in china as PP said his family would already have paid for the bullet used and moved on

Get a grip you mug

Abdul Kowalski wrote:all very interesting but back to the OP he released stuff he shouldn't, he broke his rules of employment, he broke the law and he is a traitor - in china as PP said his family would already have paid for the bullet used and moved on

If that's the case, they'd have tried him instead of trying to continually add bits.

He isn't in China, he's in a country that has a pretence towards liberty, democracy and freedom of choice. Depending on the relevant employment law as well, he may be covered by whistleblowing conditions if his employer is breaking the law.

There might be a crime on the statute books but there is no treason any more or there'd be no government. We are betrayed daily by cunts going to primary legislation because they don't agree with things they've been left, things that are fair but just don't fit the autocratic cunts. They end up before Europe and Europe tells them to stop being a spoilt cunt and they stamp their feet in response and then refuse to poo on the potty.

That's treason.

lovely words and all that Bert and as much as i'd like to wear a kaftan, smoke drugs and live in a field painting protest signs and saying 'peace' to anyone who came within a mile of my daisy chain stall, it's a different world out there

you can't employ people in govt, military or security positions and let them break rules, do what they want and release things they shouldn't, you can wrap it up in a million different fluffy scenarios but you know it's really bollocks, anyone who thinks people like him should release that sort of info and not get severely punished are more mental than a downs pensioner suddenly afflicted by acute alzheimers

Abdul Kowalski wrote:lovely words and all that Bert and as much as i'd like to wear a kaftan, smoke drugs and live in a field painting protest signs and saying 'peace' to anyone who came within a mile of my daisy chain stall, it's a different world out there

you can't employ people in govt, military or security positions and let them break rules, do what they want and release things they shouldn't, you can wrap it up in a million different fluffy scenarios but you know it's really bollocks, anyone who thinks people like him should release that sort of info and not get severely punished are more mental than a downs pensioner suddenly afflicted by acute alzheimers

No point in talking all the hippy shit, Abdul, it's not my background. I'm considered social filth under every government since I achieved majority, irrespective of education, skills and capacity for reason. I'm not unduly bothered by the assessment, but unlike the workers in Tressell's RTP (and I talk of that not from an ideological point of view but a historical point) I don't revel in that filth. In a meritocracy, the country would make use of intellect and capacity and not sons and daughters going back to the Civil War.

Government is full of people who "break rules" in all honesty, and you well know it. The problem is that when someone gets seen slamming someone else's dick in the door, they hide behind the full weight of position rather than the position of right and wrong. The law is hurled at such people because they can't afford the law.

In China they could kill the kid because there's little to come by way of repercussion. Can't do that in the land of the free. People will make noises and the US government is interested in inciting its own people by showing lesser foreigners burning their flags. It doesn't have the stomach for its own citizenry burning its flag and it being seen by lesser foreigners.

Governments still have not twigged that they are now more accountable than they have ever been. They're trying to avoid that accountability and it is naive to assume that they can persist in that. The world has changed. The surveillance culture that has been created worldwide also works as an information superhighway (oh no he didn't... Yes, I did, I said it) that means there are precious few secrets any more.

We are constantly told to "embrace change". Well that now cuts both ways, and any government trying to stop this change might as well get down the beach and try and shout the tide away. Middle East nations are coming round to it, even Gaddafi, nonsensical as it is to blame a dead man for the uprisings, realises that you can't win a war any more by controlling the press because the press aren't the only concern, anyone who has a mobile phone has a window to the world.

The Yanks should have got wise to this when their troops got a lift around Somalia in a CNN 'copter - there are no countries, only corporations and loyalty is at the level now of the Pepsi Challenge

On the health issue, though, this:

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/235258/Why-we-are-all-living-longer/

We're living longer, not so much in the US.

There are any number of reasons - we have access to free healthcare whereas a poor American will be effectively left to die and that again is from the cradle to the grave. Our intent is the cure and not the maintenance of a revenue stream by keeping a patient sick enough to spend. However, if you want a reason for the US dying younger than us, consider one thing.

Fat.

It's a mortal sin to eat fat in the USA. Chocolate is brittle shit, 11% cocoa solids is a disgrace, fat is sucked out of any number of foodstuffs and replaced because fat is seen as evil.

Troble is, they replace it with sugar. Powdered sugar on French toast, bacon and syrup, the entire country is mental because sugar replacing fat is a killer. Why? Sugar has 4/9ths the mass/calorific value of fat - you can have more than twice as much sugar as a replacement. That's as maybe, but fat is essential in the diet, whereas refined sugar has no nutritional value whatsoever. Fats have absorbed within them essential minerals that are not absorbed through any other dietary medium. Fat-soluble minerals missing from a diet will cause the issue of mineral deficiency. Would that reduce life expectancy? You can't expect to say no to that.

In summary, we eat slightly better shit than the US. And that's why we live longer