Gascoigne on ITV4


Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not implying that in any way whatsoever.

I'm simply responding to your accusation that I'm just looking for an argument, which is ludicrous.

You need to go back and look at what I actually said and you'll find you're wrong.

So if you were not looking for an argument, why would you be making the entirely fictitious claim that Gascoigne's doctors do not seem to think he suffers from mental illness? I will ask you again, what evidence do you have for this? And I will tell you again, you have none because you have pulled this nonsense out of the top of your head. Show me the evidence. You don't have any, so you are trying to avoid it by saying that I am just being 'confrontational', which by your own argument is part of participating in a forum. You know, a forum when people present different ideas and can expect to be confronted over them? Unless you think it is just a forum where you make statements to the open air and everybody just lets them go around without passing any comment?

Frankly, when people make groundless statements such as those you have produced in this thread, you need to be confronted.
 
So if you were not looking for an argument, why would you be making the entirely fictitious claim that Gascoigne's doctors do not seem to think he suffers from mental illness? I will ask you again, what evidence do you have for this? And I will tell you again, you have none because you have pulled this nonsense out of the top of your head. Show me the evidence. You don't have any, so you are trying to avoid it by saying that I am just being 'confrontational', which by your own argument is part of participating in a forum. You know, a forum when people present different ideas and can expect to be confronted over them? Unless you think it is just a forum where you make statements to the open air and everybody just lets them go around without passing any comment?

Frankly, when people make groundless statements such as those you have produced in this thread, you need to be confronted.

You need to calm down and I'll happily respond to you.

You're asking me questions then answering them yourself, you're completely misquoting what I've said then repeating it as fact.

If nyone is looking for n argument, it's you.
 
You need to calm down and I'll happily respond to you.

You're asking me questions then answering them yourself, you're completely misquoting what I've said then repeating it as fact.

If nyone is looking for n argument, it's you.

I am perfectly calm. Where is this evidence that Gascoigne's doctors do not believe he is mentally ill? Stop making excuses and avoiding the question and answer it.
 
I am perfectly calm. Where is this evidence that Gascoigne's doctors do not believe he is mentally ill?
Stop making excuses and avoiding the question and answer it.

Just calm yersel down and stop stamping your feet.

If you want a discussion you can have one but I'm not about to be railroaded by someone getting carried away with themselves.

I'm perfectly happy to debate my points but not when you twist what I've said, as you've done below.

"Where is this evidence that Gascoigne's doctors do not believe he is mentally ill?"
 
There's a big problem with Gascoigne mate, he's a compulsive liar .... these stories change every time he tells them.

The kid didn't die on a football pitch, he was playing in the street, his parents ignored the doctors.

It was nothing to do with Gascoigne's 'instructions' in the same way that he never actually met 'his best mate Raoul Moat'.

The lad who was hit by a car wasn't his best mate either, as he sometimes claims, it was the younger brother of a casual friend.

And he didn't die in Gascoigne's arms with no one else around as he claims.

I know this because I've had to defend my posts, on previous threads, and these things always crop up.

.

Good point well argued, but if these are complete delusions, does that not indicate an unbalanced and unwell mind?
 
Just calm yersel down and stop stamping your feet.

If you want a discussion you can have one but I'm not about to be railroaded by someone getting carried away with themselves.

I'm perfectly happy to debate my points but not when you twist what I've said, as you've done below.

"Where is this evidence that Gascoigne's doctors do not believe he is mentally ill?"

You are not being railroaded, you are being asked to substantiate a claim you made. You are just making excuse after excuse to avoid it. You can not substantiate it, it is a baseless hunch you are trying to present as fact, in spite of it being completely contrary to what is in the public domain.
 
You are not being railroaded, you are being asked to substantiate a claim you made. You are just making excuse after excuse to avoid it. You can not substantiate it, it is a baseless hunch you are trying to present as fact, in spite of it being completely contrary to what is in the public domain.

"Gascoigne's doctors do not believe he is mentally ill?"

I never made that claim, you've claimed I've said that, as well as various other things.

I suggest you go back and calmly read what I actually said and not what you imagine I've said.

I'm more than happy to debate with anyone but not when I'm being misquoted time after time.

Good point well argued, but if these are complete delusions, does that not indicate an unbalanced and unwell mind?

This is part of the problem mate, I'm not qualified to make that judgement unlike some of the amateur psychiatrists on here ;)

I've met a few lads who were compulsive liars, wallet forgetters in the pub, incapable of keeping appointments/wives/ friendships, etc but I wouldn't say there were seriously mentally ill.

People keep claiming Gascoigne has all kinds of mental illnesses but the qualified doctors, who examine him when he's been sectioned, always let him out.

I can't reasonably disagree with people who've actually met him, examined him and found him fit to be released without further treatment.

They're entitled to confine him but, for some reason, choose not to.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do you think these professionals would allow a seriously mentaly ill person to just walk away?...

TBF I'd rather take the word of trained psychiatrists over the likes of Andy Townsend.
"Gascoigne's doctors do not believe he is mentally ill?"

I never made that claim, you've claimed I've said that, as well as various other things.

I suggest you go back and calmly read what I actually said and not what you imagine I've said.

I'm more than happy to debate with anyone but not when I'm being misquoted time after time.



This is part of the problem mate, I'm not qualified to make that judgement unlike some of the amateur psychiatrists on here ;)

I've met a few lads who were compulsive liars, wallet forgetters in the pub, incapable of keeping appointments/wives/ friendships, etc but I wouldn't say there were seriously mentally ill.

People keep claiming Gascoigne has all kinds of mental illnesses but the qualified doctors, who examine him when he's been sectioned, always let him out.

I can't reasonably disagree with people who've actually met him, examined him and found him fit to be released without further treatment.

They're entitled to confine him but, for some reason, choose not to.

You claimed that being sectioned and then being released was evidence that the doctors do not believe he has a mental illness. But that is wrong. If you get sectioned you are almost definitely suffering mental illness, but you do not need to be deemed 'cured' to be released. You are simply ignorant of the basics and spouting off baseless nonsense and then trying to avoid the crux of the matter when the glaring weaknesses in your argument are pointed out to you.
 

You claimed that being sectioned and then being released was evidence that the doctors do not believe he has a mental illness.


But that is wrong. If you get sectioned you are almost definitely suffering mental illness, but you do not need to be deemed 'cured' to be released. You are simply ignorant of the basics and spouting off baseless nonsense and then trying to avoid the crux of the matter when the glaring weaknesses in your argument are pointed out to you.

See, you're misquoting me again :rolleyes:

This is what I actually said, not what you imagine I said ...... didn't I just suggest you go back and read it again.

"He's been sectioned many times, examined by professional people and released without any request for further treatment.

Surely, if he's a real danger to himself or others he'd be confined which is well within their powers."

That isn't saying I know what the doctors believe any more than you do ..... only the doctors know what they believe.

I didn't claim what you've just said, you're wrong again.

As for your claim that 'If you get sectioned you are almost definitely suffering mental illness' .... you're wrong. This is what the NHS has to say which contradicts you .....

"The police have powers to enter your home, if need be by force, under a section 135 warrant. You may then be taken to a place of safety for an assessment by an approved mental health professional and a doctor. You can be kept there until the assessment is completed, up to a maximum of 72 hours."

It's obvious that the police aren't professionally qualified to judge the mental health of people.

Many of the cases, where police intervene, are because people are intoxicated, not mentally ill.

Thery're sectioned as a precaution.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top