BBC Andrew Marr - Gordon Vows To Fight For Himself ....errr Britain.
allanbonnetracy
He said the Tories had got ''everything'' wrong on the economic
crisis, and would make the situation worse by cutting public spending
too early.
Mr Brown contrasted what he called Conservative promise of
"austerity", saying: "We are the only party that can take the country
from recession to growth."
You can just see Mandy and Alistair with their heads in their hand s
over this.
The idiot is still in full ‘crisis what crisis’ mode pretending there
doesn’t have to be any pain when we all know that’s precisely what,
behind the scenes, they’re planning but won’t say.
Basically, he’s taking us all for fools again, like he always does,
and that’s what makes him the idiot believing he can get away with
it.
Typical vein arrogant socialist believes only he knows and knows
better.
But the real disgrace was Marr letting him off the hook on how he
intends to tackle the public sector spending deficit.
Allowing him to get away with the complete bollocks notion that
raising taxes on the rich and a national insurance hike will be enough
to do the job and allow the government to carry on spending more on
the most popular services.
The BBC should hang its head in shame. Brown’s tax proposals (don’t we
need even more taxation like a hole in the head) will hardly scratch
the surface of all the debt.
The economic damage alone caused by that NI hike will do way more harm
than good and shows just where Brown’s delusional priorities are,
putting his precious spending as a higher priority than raising the
money to pay for it.
You wouldn’t mind so much if it was your mother asking you to hand
over your wage packet, to put safely away in the Post Office, through
fear you’ll spend it all on beer, fags and fruit machines.
But, this is more like your bookies loving piss head of an alcoholic
father that’s promising to invest it wisely for you, when you know all
he will do is flash it around down the pub trying to impress all his
mates.
Paul Cummins
<6bc51dda-3f3b-4d62...@k23g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
allanbo...@ireland.com (allanbonnetracy) wrote:
> The idiot is still in full `crisis what crisis� mode pretending
> there
> doesn�t have to be any pain when we all know that�s precisely what,
> behind the scenes, they�re planning but won�t say.
And we're in a winter of discontent:-
Strikes from Postal Workers, Transport workers, Refuse Workers etc.
Councils not doing their jobs.
Recession and jobless totals on the rise
Interest rates oin the rise (for borrowers) without commensurate
improvements for savers.
Police acting like the law does not applt to them.
And a labour fuckwit presiding over it all.
1979 all over again...
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
Robbie
Ah, but 1979 had a bad winter with loads of snow which we aren't
having.. oh, there's that too!
Now all we need are dead bodies being put in warehouses like they did in
Scouse land in early 1979 and we're back to those dark days.
allanbonnetracy
When Labour won the election in 97, after eighteen years in
opposition, they only won it because obviously the Tories had f**ked
up and on condition that they were very much on license.
The license said that they had changed into a party capable of moving
into the next century having moved on away from all that post war
socialist student union idealist baggage that had resulted in
draconian taxation, a chaotic (over large) interfering state and a
basket case economy.
No more red flag, no more beer and sandwiches with the unions, no more
taxes, no more politics of envy and, if not quite greed is good,
certainly not averse to a large dose of prosperity.
Blair was supposed to be the sort of socialist the electorate could
vote for i.e. he wasn’t a socialist.
Trouble was, we got Brown an unreformed, in denial, all Tories are
bastards, big state socialist with a highly selective revisionist take
on the history of the 70s, designed to fit in comfortably with his
ideology.
The country never wanted Brown and, if Blair and his party had known
what was good for them, they should have seen to it that he was dealt
with and not allowed to be so indulgently arsey for ten years because
he thought he should have been PM.
Unfortunately, they found the self-destruct instead and now a history
of abject economic failure is repeated.
The best chance Labour has is to lose this next election because if
they win, for sure, they will face oblivion at the one after such is
the pain to come.
As it is now, they will likely lose and will do well to be ever
trusted with power again.
If it was eighteen years last time how long this time?
A. J. Moss
> Well that’s easy - f**k off.
>
> He said the Tories had got ''everything'' wrong on the economic
> crisis, and would make the situation worse by cutting public
> spending too early.
Forwarded with no implied intent to endorse or affirm these claims:
http://www.notbornyesterday.org/brownhealth.htm
EXCLUSIVE:
ESTABLISHMENT 'COLLUDING IN PLIGHT OF SICK MAN BROWN'
* WORSENING OBSESSIVE COMPULSIVE DISORDER
* SEVERE DEPRESSION CONTROLLED BY DANGEROUS DRUGS
* FAILING SIGHT IN 'GOOD' EYE
A Political Wing special
"The Prime Minister of Great Britain is a man too ill to be holding
the Office." This was the conclusion last week of a senior civil
servant liaising regularly with Gordon Brown. For reasons which
will become clear, the person involved will not go public with the
evidence for this conclusion. The same applies to a high-ranking
Treasury official who told us "In both a physical and mental sense,
the Prime Minister is a very sick man, seriously disabled." Three
years ago, an Opposition MP told nby "He is on extremely heavy doses
of cutting-edge anti-depressants, but so far they have made little
difference". And during the last fortnight, another high-ranking
government source claimed "He is now on pills which restrict the
foods he can eat and what he can drink. He is losing the sight of
his good eye quite rapidly. It's a mess, and nobody knows what to
do".
Rumours have circulated about Gordon Brown's health for a number of
years. As long ago as 2004, Simon Heffer wrote in the Spectator that
he displayed many signs of Asperger's syndrome: humourlessness, lack
of irony and obsessional behaviour patterns. Nby itself ran a long
piece in February 2007, predicting fairly accurately how Brown's
rigid responses to given situations would prove to be inappropriate,
and his behaviour in the end dysfunctional. We noted at the time
'If the Labour Party can organise seventy-three signatories to a
document of intent named 'Anyone but Gordon', then there must be
something about the man which might make him unfit to be Prime
Minister'. In fact, we had already been advised by then that the PM
had been on large doses of SSRI anti-depressants - the class of
drugs derived from Prozac.
The overall story is well known in lobbyist circles. A senior member
of this group told us that "Brown is in a very dark place. Sarah
[his wife, Mrs Brown] has begged him on several occasions to seek
help, but he resists most offers of advice." Yet another popular
journalist said "I'm afraid all the stories about him throwing things
around and screaming at secretaries are entirely true. He behaves
impeccably in public and can really turn on the charm when he needs
to in private - but inside the bunker he behaves appallingly. He's
also binging on junk food late at night - you can see he's gaining
weight".
However, our investigation suggests that there is a more important
reason for the PM's weight gain: that he may well be on a different
class of antidepressant drugs, for which ballooning weight is one of
the least dangerous side-effects.
These drugs are called Mono Amine Oxidase Inhibitors (MAOIs). Before
the arrival of Prozac derivatives, they were the first line of attack
when dealing with severely depressed patients. But a senior physician
told us last month "A GP would have to be insane to prescribe MAOIs
these days - SSRIs are safer, with far fewer side-effects. Apart from
anything else, it's almost impossible to get hold of them".
This is indeed correct. In 2003, SKB withdrew their MAOI brand-leader
Parnate because of the dangers it represented, and also because SSRIs
had none of the disadvantages. However, at the time several regional
mental health units reported that for some patients, SSRIs were
nowhere near as effective.
Thus there is evidence that, having tried and seen no help from the
newer generation of drugs, Gordon Brown has now been put onto MAOIs.
If this is true, then he is indeed in a desperate state - as we shall
explain.
This evidence was handed to us inadvertantly. The senior source
referred to at the start of this piece mentioned "the latest nonsense
- a huge list of things he can't eat or drink because of the drugs
he's on... most importantly, cheese and Chianti". Every doctor in
Britain would recognise these contraindications instantly: for they
are the two great verbotens for people taking MAOI drugs.
As long ago as 2001, prescribing psychiatrists described MAOIs as
'the last resort now we have better drugs'. However, for all their
downsides (several thousand people around the world have died as a
result of ignoring the dietary advice re MAOIs) this older class of
drugs has one huge advantage: for severe depression and obsessive
compulsive disorder it remains very effective.
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) is relatively common. Most of
us display some obsessive features in everyday life, but under
stress a minority of people become borderline or actual OCD in
their behaviour, and need medication to control both this and the
depression which almost always presents soon afterwards. The most
obvious symptom is a compulsive need to carry out functions such
as hand-washing or counting almost incessantly. (The Asperger's
syndrome 'Rain Man' personality displays these too, but the two
conditions are easily separable on other bases. Our view is that
Brown has OCD, not Asperger's syndrome.)
Gordon Brown's symptoms are obvious when viewed in this light: the
constant repetition of phrases, and an almost embarrassing (for his
Party) need to spray every Parliamentary answer with statistics.
Lifting out of poverty, the Tories are the do-nothing Party, global
problems require global solutions - these and myriad others have
been repeated over and over ad nauseam. Equally, the six million
lifted out of poverty, twelve million helped by mortgage benefits,
two million new jobs created: when interrogated, these figures often
prove to be illusory, but they - and the constant speech repetition -
represent Brown's unconscious means of controlling the severe anxiety
that accompanies depression with OCD.
We have no means (as yet) of proving his use of MAOIs, although
the 'long list of forbidden foods' is the nearest one will get to a
smoking gun - short of a written, signed diagnosis or prescription.
We also cannot be certain how long the PM has been taking them, but
the remark 'the latest nonsense' suggests that this is a relatively
recent development. On average, a heavy dose of MAOI therapy would
start to display some results within twenty days to six weeks.
Gordon Brown has reportedly returned from 'easily his longest break
from Downing Street' feeling 'very much refreshed and up for it'.
It is more than likely he took the uncharacteristically long break
on medical advice. And it will be interesting to note whether his
behaviour changes.
One feature unlikely to change is the increasingly obvious difficulty
he has finding his way to and from podiums, and lack of peripheral
vision. This (according to a senior, medically-trained source) is the
result of failing sight in the one eye he has left. We found so many
confirmations of this story from so many sources, it seems to us
impossible for it to be pure invention. It appears to be universally
recognised in the Cabinet and upper echelons of the Civil Service.
So: here we seem to have a man (unless huges cadres of non-colluding
senior people are liars) on a rarely used, dangerous drug to control
his mental state - and getting close to a stage of serious disablement
in relation to his eyesight. As this would clearly make any such
person wholly unfit to fulfil the Premiership - especially in the
dangerous, broken world we now inhabit - why hasn't the story broken
more widely? Why hasn't the Opposition leapt on it? In answering
this question, we need to delve into the murkier waters of Gordon
Brown's psyche - and the cynical guessing-game that passes for
public service in the House of Commons... on all sides.
Brown rules by fear and smear. He always has done, and it is the
main thing he is known (and hated) for in the Labour Party. A former
Cabinet Minister told nby in early 2008 "Nobody ran against Gordon
because nobody could face the slur, innuendo and blackmail that
would go with it. When he gets going, Brown and his little coterie
of spinners are animals". Several similar observations appeared in
national newspapers during late 2007. There has also remained the
rumour that even Blair himself eventually fell foul of this, and
left not of his own volition but as a result of threats from the
Brown camp. That must remain as conjecture: but given his alleged
track record of not entirely legal actions, Blair would have had a
lot to be frightened about.
The PM evokes a certain degree of loyalty from close confidantes,
but the main reason why no Brown staffer has broken ranks is that
this would mean the end of the meal-ticket: either Brown would
fall, or he would deny... and bury the whistle-blower. Luncheon
Vouchers are also behind the remaining silence in the Parliamentary
Party as a whole. Two senior Lobby correspondents have confirmed
to us in the last three weeks that "even the most anti-Brown camp
think there's no alternative to Brown". Nearly all Labour
backbenchers now expect a rout, but think that if Brown were ousted
they would be wiped out. Comically, the exact opposite view pertains
in the Tory Shadow Cabinet, where "they're so terrified of Labour
dumping Brown, they'd do anything to leave him precisely where he
is".
This bears further examination on a number of levels. Three of our
sources confirmed the general view that the parlous state of Brown's
health is well-known among Conservative bigwigs. That they collude
in an allegedly dangerously ill man remaining in charge of Government
(purely to ensure their own victory) is selfish cynicism of the worst
kind - and a damning charge to which, if and when the truth of this
matter comes to light, they will have no defence. It also reinforces
the electorate's feeling that senior Cameron Tories are woefully
lacking in confidence - or convincing alternatives to what the
Government is doing.
As to whether Brown is a liability or an asset for voters, the latest
poll (30.8.09) in the Guardian showed that Brown's ratings have
actually fallen as 'signs' of economic green shoots have become
apparent. In short, when it comes to the Machiavellian 'keep him
where he is' strategy, New Labour have called it wrong. As ever,
they are probably being too clever for their own good.
Perhaps more disturbing is the passive political bias (and dereliction
of Constitutional duty) represented by the obvious collusion in any
cover-up about the Prime Minister's health problems throughout the
senior ranks of the Civil Service. One of the main sources of this
story told us, "It's a farce, and utterly disgraceful. There isn't
a mandarin in Whitehall who's unaware of Brown's condition - they
tittle-tattle the tale wherever they go, dining out on their inside
knowledge, and yet won't lift a finger to bring it to the public's
attention. We are being let down at every turn by the spineless
Establishment running this country".
One can appreciate how a similar situation developed from 1935
onwards in relation to the King's relationship with Mrs Simpson.
But it is hard to understand why the press - especially the right-
wing press - haven't had a harder go at nailing this story in 2009.
The tabloids are too busy shouting threats into celeb letter-boxes,
and the more liberally inclined papers may well share the New Labour
view that loyalty is their duty at this stage of the game; but that
seems unlikely - and what of Dacre at The Mail, or the Telegraph,
still fresh from its huge success in blowing the lid off the expenses
scandal?
The answer usually comes back 'there's no physical evidence, and
it's an easy story to deny - to dismiss as just another anti-Brown
smear campaign'. But perhaps the clues about MAOI usage by the
Prime Minister make it much harder to deny....and much easier to
get written confirmation. For if it's true, Brown's entourage must
be sending out strict dietary requirements ahead of his regularly
catered public engagements; one could even monitor what he eats on
such occasions.
Not Born Yesterday lacks both the sources and resources to do this
job. The sole purpose of this piece is to get matters to a stage
where the story is out in the public domain, such that the real
people who count in Britain - the voters - can make their own minds
up about it. And - who knows? - to create a situation in which the
Opposition might at last do its duty, and question the PM's fitness
for office on these well-known (if not as yet well-documented) bases.
©2009 Not Born Yesterday and John Ward.
abelard
<ajm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) is relatively common. Most of
>us display some obsessive features in everyday life, but under
>stress a minority of people become borderline or actual OCD in
>their behaviour, and need medication to control both this and the
>depression which almost always presents soon afterwards. The most
>obvious symptom is a compulsive need to carry out functions such
>as hand-washing or counting almost incessantly. (The Asperger's
>syndrome 'Rain Man' personality displays these too, but the two
>conditions are easily separable on other bases. Our view is that
>Brown has OCD, not Asperger's syndrome.)
captain queeg
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Swift
s.com>, allanbonnetracy <allanbo...@ireland.com> writes
>Well that’s easy - f**k off.
>
>He said the Tories had got ''everything'' wrong on the economic crisis,
>and would make the situation worse by cutting public spending too early.
>
>Mr Brown contrasted what he called Conservative promise of "austerity",
>saying: "We are the only party that can take the country from recession
>to growth."
The man's away with the fairies, the sooner he's sectioned the sooner
reality will return to the government, hang on, that would get rid of
the Tories best recruiter, belay that last order.
Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
Ste
>
> Mr Brown contrasted what he called Conservative promise of
> "austerity"
I preferred the rhetorical phrasing: "we are the party of aspiration,
while the Tories will be the party of austerity".