- PM signals first NHS constitution. The Hippocratic Oath is thereby declared nonfunctional in the UK with harm dispensed based upon life style decisions made by medical professionals who will refuse to treat based upon their subjective judgement. This is a convenient means to cover up a dysfunctional NHS. Think of the money savings that this will provide.
- Perception of police 'a concern'. Is this as a result of the pay dispute or the fact that Sir Ian Blair, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, has been in the not necessarily gratuitous limelight of late. Whatever the reasons I fully support such a public debate because I have a great deal to say which I believe will benefit policing in this country and enable police officers to do a more effective job for the public at less risk. However, I've said it all before and keep on saying it, but no one listens. Will this "public debate" be like the others?
1. PM signals first NHS constitution. As I've experience the NHS for the better part of the past decade, this means Big Brother intrusion and control over everyone's life with the threat of withholding medical treatment to be used as the stick. The Hippocratic Oath will not be recognised any longer as valid. Apparently, this proposed NHS constitution will replace it.
BBC News Tuesday, 1 January 2008, 10:06 GMT
PM signals first NHS constitution
 Gordon Brown said patients admired NHS doctors and nurses |
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has signalled his intention to press ahead with a constitution for the NHS.
It would set out for the first time the rights and responsibilities linked to entitlement to NHS care.
Mr Brown's comments came in a New Year message to NHS staff ahead of the 60th anniversary of the health service.
He said a constitution - which was first suggested by former PM Tony Blair - would help secure its future for another 60 years.
In a letter to NHS staff, Mr Brown said a fundamental review of the taxpayer-funded health service was under way.
And he said changes could be enshrined in an NHS constitution, setting out the "rights and responsibilities" linked to entitlement to NHS care.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7166429.stm
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: Big Brother's Police Force To Get a Constitution Recognising Police Power Shift to the NHS
Date: Tuesday 01 January 2008 12:18
From: Gary D Chance
To: news24@bbc.co.uk
"It would set out for the first time the rights and responsibilities linked to entitlement to NHS care."
This leaves the NHS wide open to political manipulation and confounds the very essence of the health care profession as it has developed in western civilisation since the time of Hippocrates. Such a monolith as the NHS will fall apart as a result.
Hippocrates ". . . is credited with greatly advancing the systematic study of clinical medicine, summing up the medical knowledge of previous schools, and prescribing practices for physicians through the Hippocratic Oath and other works."
People will simply vote with their feet and stop getting health care which will result in a further decline in the society overall including its economic activity which will be reflected in social regression to an sociological primitive state.
Treat people like infants, and they will remain irresponsibly dependant upon the dictates of authority without developing any sense of responsibility at all. No constitution will provide for responsibility when there is a stick attached for a healthy life style as a predicate for medical care. Dr Gregory House will be shown to be right as people become worse liars than ever.
I've watched the underclass of this environment where I live being sustained without any improvement due to the roll out of abusive violence from the NHS into the community supporting and sustaining 24/7 surveillance technology for nine years and four months including medical experimentation along with surreptitious medication completely outside a hospital environment.
How will this be stopped under this proposed constitution, or will it be increased?
There are those who have a vested interest in maintaining an underclass in a ghetto environment without development. It provides an experimental lab to study human behaviour for those who pretend that what they are doing is for a scientific objective that only enriches them based upon dirty data while supporting career advancement as it pays overtime.
The no-hoper criminal and antisocial personality types seek this activity as well to preserve and protect themselves at the expense of those in the rest of the environment. Like the bully in the classroom these violently disposed repressed and repressive people who have not developed seek to ensure that no one else matures and develops properly either.
Society's standards are thus turned upside down with the NHS acting as the agent to create and sustain this inversion as I've directly experience for almost a decade. This becomes a convenient scapegoat mechanism for those in power to sustain their power. It's classic game playing at the social political level.
"Gordon Brown said patients admired NHS doctors and nurses."
That's not entirely true. Like every organisation especially one as large as the NHS, there is a normal distribution spectrum of character types and personalities from the good the bad.
Where in this constitution will there be a process to address the abuses from the sadistic and violent NHS personnel who enjoy the benefit for themselves of dealing out harm to people under the guise and protection of health care?
"Mr Brown said better care and higher standards over the past 10 years had reduced waiting times and saved thousands of lives."In my direct experience during the past decade NHS personnel have directly participated and caused to happen extreme personal injury to me including grievous bodily harm which has necessitated further NHS intervention.
Instead of saving life, there has been a consistent and deliberate effort to destroy my life from NHS intervention in the community supporting the surveillance technology abuse and participating in its destructive usage.
"He said plans for 2008 involved tackling hospital infections and improving access to care."
Does this mean rolling out NHS care into the community further by including remote diagnosis with the use of surveillance technology and surreptitious medication intended to do as much harm as possible?
"Mr Brown's comments were welcomed by Dr Gill Morgan, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, which represents more than 95% of NHS organisations.
"But she warned: "In this jubilee year, we must resist the urge to tinker with further structural changes and concentrate on ensuring excellent technical treatment is twinned with responsive care tailored to individual needs and experience." "
Just exactly what does this mean?
In my direct experience it has meant using the NHS as a police force to suppress the reporting of problems which impact the safety and health of the community to the detriment of all. This is what has actually happened in my direct experience. Will this now become more widespread for the future?
The NOVA translation of the Hippocratic Oath (bold emphasis added):
"I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygeia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:
"To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art - if they desire to learn it - without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else.
"I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.
"I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.
"I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.
"Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.
"What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.
"If I fulfill this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot."
Apparently, the medical profession no longer subscribes to the principles of the Hippocratic Oath especially those points emphasised above as I've experience directly for over eight years 24/7.
What are the rights and responsibilities of the medical professionals, and why are they not included as part of the emphasis of this proposed NHS constitution?
Instead, only the patient is singled out as the malfeasant who needs to be warned about a healthy life style with medical care potentially withdrawn if the arbitrary and capricious standards dictated by the local medical professionals are not heeded. Challenge the power and authority of a local tyrant doctor, and s/he could roll out the worst against such a recalcitrant person who refuses to submit and learn proper obedience to the absolute rule of the medical professional. Believe me. There are any number of these aberrant personality types in the medical profession. Give them half an opportunity, and they will interpret such a "constitution" as a tyrant's charter.
This opens the door for the NHS to deny treatment and become a killer organisation.
*****End of the Email*****
2. Perception of police 'a concern'. Sir Ian Blair has called for a debate on terror in November 2005 after the summer of the London terrorist attacks. I had a great deal to say about that. Now the Home Secretary refuses to abide by a legitimate and binding arbitration decision with regard to police pay denying them £30 million or some 0.6% of the pay award from arbitration. Sir Ian Blair has a point as he appears to go over the heads of this bosses in the Home Office to the public.
What does the public want and what does the public think about policing in light of this effort to lord it over the police with a pay increase decision? Whose money is it anyway? Does the public want police distracted by this very petty decision in light of the extreme threats which face this country along with the multitude of very serious violent issues and problems which occur continuously.
Just last night a 16-year-old was murdered in Leicester, and early this morning an 18-year-old was murdered in north London. Other such violent incidents included a Man shot in the stomach during an attack in Liverpool, three were wounded in Manchester along with a Murder probe after a man was shot dead and worst of all a woman police officer was wounded by a shotgun blast in the line of duty involving a viciously violent armed robbery yesterday morning in Lancashire. These are the tip of the iceberg reflecting the seriousness of what is happening below the surface of the water.
While I might be negatively critical of the fact that totally invasive surveillance technology abuse has been carried out against me 24/7 for nine years and four months with the extensive involvement of the police for many years. I have brought this to the attention of everyone including the police continuously for all these years in order to stop this abuse and redirect this waste of police resources so that there can accrue an overall benefit to the public by stopping this extreme abuse of power. My question is why hasn't this occurred?
A police officer was stabbed nearby in October 2005 just a month before Sir Ian Blair called for a public debate on terror in a speech in November 2005. The police have been held up to ridicule and made to look like fools in this environment by the criminals whom I reported for their crimes. The extraordinary abuse of police resources including thousands of emergency responses for nonsense and nonexistent reasons makes a mockery of policing because the police themselves cannot detect and determine this abuse for what it is and bring it to a halt at any point in all these years including the present.
This has led to the fact that the police are derided as tools of the criminal by these criminals themselves who abuse and exploit them for their own criminal objectives about which I deal continuously in this web journal. When the police operate with and on behalf of the criminal, the entire environment degenerates into one of increased violent, criminal and antisocial behaviour. The standards become that of the criminal, and the police force is criminalised. If the police cannot use surveillance technology for all these years and get it right, there is something seriously wrong with the police themselves.
This becomes an internal management problem for the police themselves. It does not mean that all coppers are bent. It only means that some coppers using surveillance technology in this environment are bent. It's up to the police themselves to use surveillance technology effectively to determine precisely what is happening. If it is being used exclusively against me as a brutal weapon to pervert the course of justice, it is up to the police to manage themselves in such a way as to detect, determine and stop such abuse.
What happens as a result of failing to do so emerges as further antisocial behaviour and criminal activity which grows as those youths grow up in this kind of environment with these standards. They learn to behave in a manner which they consider all right because they can get away with it, and they see those in authority approving and doing the same thing. Thus, there is a fog created about nature of the real problem because the police also become burdened with growing antisocial problems that might not otherwise occur. They are failing to get at the core of the problem.
A public debate is most certainly required to bring all these issues based upon the facts of occurrences to light in order to understand where the real problem rests. Does it rest with society at large, the management of the police or some combination of these? What is missing which creates a situation where everyone turns to the police for everything? What is not working so that the police are sought, and why are they being sought? The answers can only come from individual case studies of situations like this one where there are facts to highlight the problems from many angles.
BBC News Tuesday, 1 January 2008, 11:08 GMT
Perception of police 'a concern'
 Sir Ian Blair called for a debate on policing in 2005 |
The Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair has voiced his concerns about the public's perception of the role of the police in society.
Speaking on the BBC's Today programme he said the police were expected to do "absolutely everything" and that was a "very, very wide mission".
Mr Blair also said "in terms of deciding who should have the voice, I don't think we've made that right yet".
He said he was still working to bring about a public debate on policing.