Peter Reynolds

The life and times of Peter Reynolds

Cameron On Cannabis Part 4

with 144 comments

You can see the previous instalment here: Cameron On Cannabis Part 3

I received a further reply from Mr Cameron’s office.

Click To Enlarge

As a reminder, there are four crucial issues involved:

Mr Cameron, Do You Care?

Mr Cameron said that cannabis is:

1.”incredibly damaging”

2. “very, very toxic”

3. “and leads to, in many cases, huge mental health problems”

And then, with regard to medicinal cannabis, he said:

4. “That is a matter for the science and medical authorities to determine and they are free to make independent determinations about that.”

These are all inaccurate and false statements. Mr Cameron should correct them immediately.

So I have written to him again.

Dear Mr Cameron,

Since I wrote to you about your Al Jazeera YouTube interview and your statements about cannabis, the Legalise Cannabis Alliance has changed its name to Cannabis Law Reform (CLEAR) and registered as a political party.

We are determined to put cannabis back on the political agenda and to expose the misinformation and propaganda that maintains prohibition.  We are a new, energetic team of professionals. We know the media and we know the science.  We are not going to put up with the irrational and scaremongering attitude to this issue which has persisted for so long.

The statements you made about cannabis in your interview were inaccurate and misleading.  That is incontrovertible fact.  You must correct them. You are the prime minister of our nation and you must speak the truth.

In your reply dated 7th March you said that “…the Home Office is best placed to respond…” but you spoke the words and we have determined by Freedom of Information request (Home Office reference CR17931) that you were not advised by the Home Office on this question.  These were your words and yours alone.  Please Mr Cameron, will you now meet with me so that I can explain to you the scientific facts and the awful injustice, particularly to the sick and unwell, as well as the waste of billions in public money that your government’s policies sustain?

It cannot stand that our prime minister can speak untruths without correcting them.  Please deal with this Mr Cameron. This is not going away.  Cannabis is used by millions of British citizens every day, in many cases for the very effective relief of illness. We are reasonable, responsible, respectable citizens and we demand that you give this issue proper attention!

Please meet me Mr Cameron. Authoritative research proves that a tax and regulate regime for cannabis would produce a net £6 billion per annum benefit for Britain and massively reduce all health and social harms.

Most importantly though, please correct the inaccurate and misleading statements you made on YouTube.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Reynolds

Many thanks to my commenter, Bob the Wisemaster, who made the FOI request. The full response from the Home Office, disavowing any knowledge of Mr Cameron’s words can be seen here.

What next? More letters to Mr Cameron please. Write to him again. Tell him that he must correct his inaccurate statements. Keep up the pressure!

144 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. You said “please” too often IMO.


    April 5, 2011 at 12:38 pm

    • Yes Derek,

      So unlike Peter !

      The Debt Collector

      April 5, 2011 at 1:20 pm

  2. He’ll do exactly what he did about the student protests and last weeks union protests, nothing.
    Democracy does not exist in this country we’re governed by the ex-public school mafia who have their money invested in oil and pharmaceuticals, they certainly have no conection with the electorate, I have friends who’re teachers, a paramedic, 2 policemen, builders, truck drivers, office workers, nurses, business owners Male, female, black white, old and young, we’re all employed respectable tax paying members of society untill we light up a spliff, then apparently we become dangerous criminals who need locking away for the protection of the public, we are the public? it’s us isn’t it?

    Tony Ward

    April 5, 2011 at 12:44 pm

  3. Brilliant! Please keep up the good work. 🙂



    April 5, 2011 at 1:00 pm

  4. @ Peter,

    I think citizen’s participation like the letter you have sent is vital if we want politicians to realise that they no longer have a place to hide behind and are accountable to us, their constituency.

    Incidentally, using the FOI to get an answer from the Home Office shows the way to force politicians and those in high official offices to behave responsibly.

    Talking of which, below is a copy of the message I sent to Baroness Meacher and Dr Evan Harris a couple of weeks ago asking for advice as to the options available to ordinary citizens to force the UK government to publicly discuss their drug policies.

    We need to put pressure on the government to discuss the issue and tell them that they cannot keep ignoring the evidence.


    Back in January 2011 The Irish Times newspaper published the following article:

    I am the author of a blog whose main objective is to explore and discuss issues concerning the liberalisation and regulation of drugs. One of my concerns is trying to find out ways to force Parliament to discuss the current UK drug policy.

    The ideal situation would be one where Parliament could designate an independent body with a mandate to assess the current drug policy (something akin to an Impact Assessment, say) and if possible, to make their recommendations legally binding.

    Since I am neither a lawyer nor an expert in constitutional or parliamentary issues, I would sincerely appreciate your advice as to what venues are available, if any, to force the said discussion. For instance:

    1. Does a mechanism similar to the one mentioned in the article above exist in our legislation?

    2. Could a Private Member’s Bill be used to this effect?

    I would like to thank you in advance for your help and look forward to your reply.
    Yours sincerely,

    Gart Valenc

    Gart Valenc

    April 5, 2011 at 1:26 pm

  5. obviously Mr Cameron is a busy person but does the person who sent this reply really think that we believe he has no free space to speak to the public between now and 2015?
    i think not

    pete KD

    April 5, 2011 at 1:30 pm

  6. Might I recommend cc’ing or rewriting the issue to Nick Clegg about this letter, lib dems have always been up on the idea of ending the prohibition of cannabis. They’re the best shot we have at the moment. Torys have too many old fashioned roots and supporters. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks… But you can certainly put them down.


    April 5, 2011 at 6:22 pm

    • I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you, Phuxahe. Nowadays, the LibDem are running like headless chickens away from many of the issues they seemed so keen on before. In all fairness, being the junior partner in the coalition is a powerful straitjacket to deal with. One shouldn’t lose sight of that fact, either.

      Gart Valenc

      Gart Valenc

      April 5, 2011 at 7:59 pm

      • Nigel Farage would be a better bet: I’ve heard him calling for a Royal Commission on drugs on a couple of occasions.


        April 5, 2011 at 8:47 pm

    • I have wrote to Nick Clegg, several times about this with no response.


      April 5, 2011 at 8:25 pm

  7. Go Peter! We have faith in you. You are our champion.


    April 5, 2011 at 7:51 pm

  8. “to expose the misinformation and propaganda that maintains prohibition”… I came across a group of student nurses today that had to do a ‘health display’ on Cannabis, with the motif of ‘say no to cannabis’. After a half-hour debating their ‘facts’ and writing a very long suggestion for their ‘suggestion box’ it became clear that they were just doing this for their grade and had been told that they were NOT allowed to show any of the positives of cannabis as this is ‘promoting it’, even though they disagreed with a lot of the information they ‘had’ to provide (some more than others). In the end I got them to agree that as they weren’t presenting balanced and fair information what they were effectively promoting was propaganda and not health info, which can actually make matters worse (i.e. when people try cannabis for the first time, find out they have been lied to they can try other, harder, drugs etc.). They are now going to challenge their superiors as to why this is the case and discuss it in their report and presentation.

    Interestingly enough a stand next door on ecstasy was allowed to distribute harm-reduction info (sip water, don’t polydrug etc.), does that have something to do with Bob Ainsworth’s ‘sneaky’ harm reduction measures?

    Either way, the level of dis-information, propaganda and lies is so unbelievably pervasive. I knew it was, but don’t think I realised just how badly until my encounter today. Peter, I once again commend you for your work against the thought police!! We have to hold those spreading this BS to account!


    April 5, 2011 at 8:05 pm

  9. Keep up the pressure Peter, we have to remember he is (disregarding political spin) an intelligent human being who recognises prohibition doesn’t work. He’s just bullshitting to stay on the right side of the tabloids, if we keep up the pressure this will be realised and he may (miraculously) revert to his old stance, and/or be very humilated, so it’s a win/win situation for reform, really.

    E. Tricker

    April 5, 2011 at 8:20 pm

  10. “…owing to the enormous pressures on his diary…”

    Is he using it to prop up the corner of his bookcase, or something?


    April 5, 2011 at 8:52 pm

  11. Excellent use of the FOIA!


    April 5, 2011 at 9:51 pm

  12. His diary is full – of appointments with other people that went to his school/university. Or he’s deciding who to bomb/invade next.

    Afterall “we’re all in this together”.

    Mr Bimble

    April 5, 2011 at 11:41 pm

  13. these letters will never be answered by the pm directly and peter imo i doubt you will ever get the meeting and if you do you will not be allowed to ask the questions you want and as long as theres an oil crisis in the middle east this issue will forever be swept under the carpet so to speak i love your enthusiasm but 40 years of MODa speaks for itself it aint gunna change anytime soon


    April 6, 2011 at 1:59 pm

  14. After what the Dep Pm has said to the Mexicans – can we count on him?


    April 6, 2011 at 3:34 pm

  15. BTW Peter, you know I’m a fan of your work but, I consider your picture of Cameron with his departed, disabled son and the caption ‘does he care’ to be in very poor taste. I appreciate you are making a stand but really…is that necessary.
    I’m sure you will either ignore me or rebuke me but man, where is the spirituality in that.


    April 6, 2011 at 9:16 pm

    • I understand your point Nick and I did consider it but when you see regularly, as I do, the enormous relief that cananbis can bring some people who are very, very unwell, and that this man fails even to address the issue with any respect or concern whatsoever, then I thought it was justified. That part of Mr Cameron is the part that we need to reach to make him realise the cruelty and error of his ways.

      Peter Reynolds

      April 7, 2011 at 6:15 am

      • I agree with Peter.
        Mainstream politics is about deceit, double-dealing and downright dishonesty.
        That is a lovely photograph of Cameron and his late son, and anyone would have sympathy with his loss.
        However, (and I’m not saying that Cameron exploited his late son for political advantage) this is also the image he seeks to project to the public whilst he is putting their livelihoods at risk, doing the bidding of whoever it is who tells him what to do. It is a false image of him, as he is, presumably, lying about cannabis, and obviously doesn’t care that seriously ill people risk upto 14 years in prison in order to obtain their medicine.
        We’re not dealing with ‘Dave’ – that’s a comedy TV channel.


        April 9, 2011 at 10:25 pm

      • Hmm… meant to post that a bit lower down. Never mind.


        April 9, 2011 at 10:27 pm

    • Peter – was just about to add this point. Disgracefully inappropriate when you’re trying to promote yourselves as a serious political party. Don’t you have kids?

      Politicising the man’s dead son only means that you’re never likely to get a meeting at No 10.

      Cockney Copper

      April 7, 2011 at 10:54 am

      • No Cockney, I don’t accept that at all. I’m not politicising DC’s son, I’m politicising DC’s care or rather lack of it.

        I sympathise enormously with the terrible combination of love and tragedy that was his son’s short life. However, DC fails entirely to give even consideration to the fantastic transformational effect that medicinal cannabis has on some people’s lives.

        I know only too well the flak that politicians get but I’m not insulting him or telling lies or misinforming. His refusal to care about at least tens, possibly hundreds, of thousands of people who gain relief from medicinal cannabis is just unacceptable.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 8, 2011 at 12:12 pm

      • Peter – I understand the point you’re trying to make and I agree there is some merit to it, but using this picture with the strap line you have is just plain wrong, and you discredit yourself by doing so.

        Cockney Copper

        April 9, 2011 at 12:55 pm

    • After just a quick Google search I read that Cannabis with high CBD content can control Epilepsy siezures, and I’m sure some of you know that Muscular Spasticity is an agonising condition that effects Cerebral Palsy sufferers (amongst others). Can anyone guess the name of a herbal cure that has been known to work wonders for these people ?

      Does anyone know what illnesses Mr Camerons’ late son suffered with ?


      April 7, 2011 at 9:09 pm

      • I’ve spent hours searching the net – can’t find anything!


        April 9, 2011 at 10:36 pm

  16. Peter,

    In view of what is said in the recent The Economist’s article mentioned by Rory above,

    I am wondering if you, and anybody interested in finding a rational solution to the so-called drug problem, could join me in sending messages to both Nick Clegg and David Cameron asking them to state in unambiguous terms what their current position about the War on Drugs policies is.

    Gart Valenc

    Gart Valenc

    April 7, 2011 at 12:01 pm

  17. Peter, I see the LCA website is down. When will the new website be up? And under what name?


    April 7, 2011 at 4:06 pm

  18. Peter,

    You quite obviously are. Why else would you put up a picture of a man kissing (for what have been the last time) his baby?

    Not good taste; and I agree with Cockney Copper, it is not going to help your crusade.

    The Debt Collector

    April 8, 2011 at 2:38 pm

    • Why are you deliberately misinterpreting my message when I have made it perfectly clear. What is the point of that DC?

      To repeat: I’m not politicising DC’s son, I’m politicising DC’s care or rather lack of it. Cameron’s refusal to care about at least tens, possibly hundreds, of thousands of people who gain relief from medicinal cannabis is just unacceptable.

      Peter Reynolds

      April 8, 2011 at 2:45 pm

      • So, two DCs in one comment.

        But have they ever appeared together in the same room at the same time? I think we should be told.


        April 8, 2011 at 10:06 pm

      • Yeah, they were both beating the s**t out of some poor wheelchair bound medicinal cannabis user to get his dealer’s name.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 8, 2011 at 10:34 pm

      • No Peter,

        I am in debt recovery, not Vice and Drugs squad. (bet that’s a releif to you !)

        In any case, in debt recovery you can’t beat people up, not unless you are a Police Officer; may be a Bailiff or Customs Officer.

        As for satire, your comments are far from satire, perhaps drug induced dillusion?

        The Debt Collector

        April 10, 2011 at 9:08 pm

      • I do agree with you….the wheelchair bound are just pity with this situation..they must take heed of it…


        April 26, 2011 at 11:55 pm

      • Yeah..I agree with only ends up that the wheelchair-bounded will be at a disadvantage…


        April 27, 2011 at 3:37 am

  19. No Peter,

    I am not deliberately misinteroreting your comments: that is the way your are projecting yourself. And I can’t be the only one inview of the comments placed on this thread regarding your reaction to the death of Camerons infant.

    A lot of what you say is by inference and whilst you dislike me intensley becuase I am not as enthusastic at getting high, your comment was in appropriate.

    On another issue, I am referring your comment (anonymously) regarding the use of Cannabis in the control of epilepsy to the British Epilepsy Association (Epilepsy Action) to see if they can confirm your statement. Certainly in the 45 years of having the condition, Cannabis was never reccommended to my parents or I as a form of control.

    However, I do admit that Phenotyl was later found to be more dangerous than when it was first discovered as a controlling drug for epilepsy back in 1927.

    The Debt Collector

    April 8, 2011 at 2:55 pm

    • Obviously you are deliberately misinterpreting when you know full well that I have clarified my position repeatedly.

      I don’t dislike you at all! I find it difficult to understand why you frequently take different positions on subjects but you’re entitled to chop and change your views as you wish.

      I’d be more than happy to discuss the use of cannabis in epilepsy. In fact, I’ll find the organisation you mention and send them an email now! It won’t be anonymous!

      Peter Reynolds

      April 8, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    • Peter did not make the anonamous comment. I did.

      Just a few quick snippets from the UKCIA website, found in under 3 minutes using the google search terms epilepsy and cannabis.

      “In 1949 Davis & Ramsey administered THC to 5 institutionalized children who were not responding to the standard treatment (phenobarbital and phenoytin). One became entirely free of seizures, one almost completely free of seizures, while the other three did no worse than before.”

      “In 1975 Consroe et al. described the case of young man whose standard treatment (phenobarbital and phenytoin), didn’t control his seizures. When he began to smoke cannabis socially he had no seizures. However when he took only cannabis the seizures returned. They concluded that ‘marihuana may possess an anti-convulsant effect in human epilepsy’.”

      “Cunha et al (1980) reported a study on 16 grand mal patients who were not doing well on conventional medication. They recieved their regular medication and either 200-300mg cannabidiol or a placebo. Of the patients who received the cannabis product, 3 showed complete improvement, 2 partial, 2 minor, while 1 remained unchanged. The only unwanted effect was mild sedation. Of the patients who received the placebo, 1 improved and 7 remained unchanged.”

      I kinda read this as when everything else failed cannabis did the trick!

      You will find more on the beneficial effects of cannabis for epilepsy sufferers on the GW-Pharma and many other websites with just a quick google search if you are prepared to take the time to educate yourself, yet don’t want to spend the time it takes to plough through all the peer reviewed medical journals and publications to source the articles yourself.

      At least you haven’t tried to disprove the theraputic and pain-relief effects to SF, MS, Cancer etc… sufferers yet.

      Had Mr Camerons son grown into adulthood, he would have never been able to look him in the face knowing he had worked so hard to stop him and fellow sufferers from getting the medicine they need so badly to ease their pain and suffering and make their life worth living again.


      Consroe, P.F., Wood, G.C. & Buchsbaum, H. (1975) Anticonvulsant Nature of Marihuana Smoking. J.American Medical Association 234 306-307

      Cunha, J.M., Carlini, E.A., Pereira, A.E. et al. (1980) Chronic Administration of Cannabidiol to Healthy Volunteers and Epileptic Patients. Pharmacology 21 175-185

      Davis, J P., & Ramsey, H.H. (1949) Antiepileptic Action of Marijuana-active Substances. Federation Proceedings 8 284-285


      April 8, 2011 at 5:50 pm

  20. I have to say Peter, that picture does seem in poor taste. Matters such as that should not be used in a blog about a largely unrelated topic in my opinion.

    You are, of course, free to do so and my opinion doesn’t really matter if you’re auteuring this thing, so I guess I’m saying ignore me …if you want!


    April 9, 2011 at 12:23 am

  21. Talking of medicinal cannabis, Cameron once said in his youtube interview that is was “for science and the medical authorities to determine [if it has proven medicinal properties] and that they’re free to make independent determinations about that”.

    What I would like to know is why he is restricting/prohibiting research into cannabis and what happens when the majority of the scientific community and respectable medical authorities agree that cannabis has medicinal properties?

    yumita yumara

    April 9, 2011 at 12:35 am

  22. I’m surprised by the response of a couple of people here on the image used. While i applaud their morality and to a point agree wholeheartedly on what they are saying,lets get perspective here.

    Have you already forgotten the media rhetoric used by governments past and present to keep cannabis users down?

    Personally i think the use of camerons pic in this way is MORE than justifiable. If it were me i would’ve probably gone a step further. However that’s probably why i’m not in peters position.

    The cannabis campaign ( in the world according to me ) over the years has got too “nice”. People have proven for too long they can construct decent well thought out debates on the subject of the law on cannabis. All that remains IMHO now is the back bone to play the media and the government at their own game.
    The gloves are off its time to stop been nice and play by the oppositions rules, let them have some of their own medicine as it were.


    April 9, 2011 at 11:06 am

    • Thank you Jimbob. When I look at the lies and wholly false villification I have been subject to over the last few weeks and contrast that with a man who is prime minister and clearly implicated in deliberate misinformation and denial of medicine to very sick people, well, I’m even more sure the use of the picture of DC and his son is perfectly fair.

      We don’t need to tug, we need to WRENCH at Mr Cameron’s heartstrings to get him to speak the truth about cannabis – but most urgently to permit it for those who need it as medicine.

      This isn’t a game. Many people, even those in the cannabis community do not understand the transformational effect that cannabis can have on some people’s lives, enabling them actually to live a life rather than being trapped in pain and suffering. When you see such transformation in front of your own eyes, then the fight for medicinal cannabis becomes a righteous crusade against the forces of darkness and David Cameron needs to wake up and realise he is on then wrong side!

      Peter Reynolds

      April 9, 2011 at 11:51 am

  23. here here! The eton bred puppet can lie through his teeth to millions of people ,,,,putting a pic up of him and his son isnt remotely evil compared to what the puppet is involved in,,,they attack us all the time trying to create the reality to suit their ends,,everbody should focus their anger on cameron and his lie machine,end of.


    April 9, 2011 at 1:24 pm

    • Er, regrettably Martyn and Duncan, I am not an offspring of an Eaton “Bred”;(Secondary Modernd school on the edge of a city) live in a one bedroom flat, epileptic and 1 Class A drug and two Class C drugs to control my epilepsy. I am more likely to die of renal failure than epilepsy. Unemployed for one year, so nominal income.

      As for Cameron’s Son, I agree his death shouldn’t have been brought in to the Politcal limelight, many children die or are badly affected by extreme medical conditions.

      I have no immediate family left alive, I have nearly killed myself twice with epileptic seisures (which doubtless both you and Peter will be saddended that the events did not end in my death), so don’t jump to conclusions or get up set because I disagree with your views.

      Do you see smoking cannabis as a Social division ?
      Or is it that people dare to take the opposite opinion, which upsets you?

      Incidentally Peter, thanks for the link to the site regarding the effects of Cannabis on epilepsy. I will be taking advice from my neurologist, and perhaps you may have a covert yet; however whether I will be granted a prescription is debatable. Perhaps you could send me a cutting.

      The Debt Collector

      April 9, 2011 at 2:55 pm

      • What are you talking about DC? Please don’t get yourself upset. I bear no ill will towards you at all.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 9, 2011 at 5:01 pm

      • DC, I am surprised that you prefer to take one Class A and two Class C drugs rather than the one Class B-but-shouldn’t-be-there cannabis.
        You said earlier that you have had epilepsy for 45 years, and it seems quite serious. Yet those prescription medicines don’t seem to be doing you any good at all!
        I think you know that cannabis would be a much better treatment for you to use, but you seem to be wracked by fear or guilt, or something. Did you have a strong respect for the law instilled into you when you were being brought up?
        Many people grow their own cannabis – if you have ever been to the Hemp Fair, you will have seen what a big business the home-grow industry is. Most of them do it without being discovered, but obviously need to be discreet.
        If the thought of this appals you, then why don’t you visit a GP in Holland, for example, get him to write you a prescription for cannabis, then go to a pharmacy, where they will recommend the best strains for your condition. Then you can see if it works for you.
        Oh,I live in a one-bedroom flat, too.


        April 9, 2011 at 11:30 pm

      • PJ,

        I do NOT CHOOSE to take the medication I desrcibe, it was prescribed to me by a neurologist to control my epilepsy. As I have said elsewhere, I would prefer NOT to be on any form of medication, but the risk of having another near fatal event is one I do not wish to take.

        As for statement about the “good” it is doing me; actually the three drugs, as much as I dislike them, have meant that I have not had a seisure for over three years now. The only side effect is that my short term memory has been damaged by the epilepsy.
        However, I understand (and I stand corrected by Peter perhaps) that Cannabis can affect short-term memory as well.

        Regrettably due to financial restricitions I cannot visit Holland, but if you would like to provide me with the address of said GP, I would gladly communicate with him.

        As for the residential status, that was a matter brought up by someone who made the sweeping assumption that I was from a monied backgroud and could afford a large residence, which regrettably is far from the truth and I felt need to be clarified.

        The Debt Collector

        April 10, 2011 at 2:35 pm

      • Post script to my comment to PJ.

        To qulaify the status of my epilepsy. I had febrile convulsions in infancy, up to the age of 5, then a life threatening one when I was seven. That was when I was placed on Phenytol (Phenobarbitone), in those days given out like sweeties, and what turned out to be an adult. I was on it for six years and nearly became addicted; it was only by fluke that it was discuvered that I was on it too long after passing our in a Surgery where a Tyfoid, Polio and Smallpox vaccinations had been administered. Basically the National Health Service had not read the original Neurologist’s notes that I was only supposed to be on that dose of 12 months and then weaned off to see if there was a threshold.

        A fellow epilpetic who is roughly the same age as me had the same issue, except he was not caught in time and weaned off as I was. He cannot be taken off the drug now.

        Interstingly, and perhaps unsurprisingly I did not have another fit after the phenytol dose was incrased.

        It was 24 years later that I relapsed and that first seisure was the one which nearly killed me. (I went in to a Status Epilepticus fit, which basically means you cannot stop fitting) I rolled my tounge and the jaw clamped it down blocking the airway. I am only alive because a member of staff in the office dangerously put his fingers in my mouth to pull the tongue forward and I nearly took his fingers off.

        I was placed on the drugs I have mentioned before and although I experienced a series of fits later, one falling out of a railway carriage “barn doors” and nearly falling across a live rail. Another going headlong down my local High Street, nearly losing my sight, and again rolling my tounge and almost suffocated. Ironically it was a 15 year old who came to my aid despite the fact that the street was crowded and many adults walked past telling her I was drunk, despite the fact I was convulsing.

        The drugs I take are up to the level they are now and so far I have been seisure free. So hopefully there will be no need for cannabis, but as I say I will run it past my Neurologist and see if the presciption is transferrable and whether he has come across the study which you have shown me.

        Again, thanks for drawing my attention to it.

        The Debt Collector

        April 10, 2011 at 3:30 pm

      • Hello DC.

        I see that you still have difficulty differentiating between PeterR and DuncanR, the latter of whom has not commented on this thread.

        Should you still be confused, please try to read, digest and understand my explanation in the comments here.

        Maybe you should change your medication….


        April 10, 2011 at 10:37 am

      • Nobbly, my comment wasn’t addressed to you. And as for the use of PeterR and DuncanR, I was referring to a commment which DuncanR had made on another site.

        Until you understand epilepsy, or spoken to a neuroligist about medications available, you are not actually in a position to recommend a change in prescription, Do you have a medical training, you patronising illegitimate.

        The Debt Collector

        April 10, 2011 at 2:22 pm

      • Are all epileptic’s as rude as you are? You seem to have missed the “empathy” training classes.


        April 10, 2011 at 4:30 pm

      • Tipple read comment, which was in response to Nobbly Sam’s assertion that I should change medication.

        His comment was equally agressive and unnecessary, as for changing medication, I do not believe he is a position to comment unless he is medically qualified. This is not a question of rude but making a proper enquiry. And as far as your comment to me: “are all epileptics like you” is equally unncessary and certainly rude. Further you clearly have no knowledge of epilepsy.

        Actually there are over 30 different types of epilepsy ranging from absences to the extreme convulsive types. There are varying types of drugs, some of which are particularly unpleasant. Different people react to different medications and some need a combination to control the seisures.

        My comment to you was that you were making an assumption about a subject that clearly you have neither first hand experience nor read about. My suggestion that you speak to someone who has an indepth knowledge was not rude, it was a recommendation.

        I have no empathy indeed sympathy about drugs, I dislike them all and certainly the ones I take for epilepsy: particularly Clonazepam

        The Debt Collector

        April 10, 2011 at 5:26 pm

      • I did know a child at my school who died after a convulsion, it was shocking for all of us. I was also at a party where another epileptic was rushed to hospital after “throwing a fit” as they used to say.

        Yes, you are correct in that I don’t really have an indepth knowledge about your condition but you don’t know about my problems in life, having to live with a thyroid problem etc. I don’t swagger around the internet “pissing people off” about it though.

        I found your manner slightly offensive & wished to comment, offer you some advice as to “tone it down” a little.

        That said, I enjoy a spliff from time to time & think Peter is argueing his case very well indeed.


        April 10, 2011 at 6:25 pm

      • My apologies DC, I had forgotten that any form of irony, satire or sarcasm does not seem to register with you.

        In that case, I shall withdraw my feeble attempt at humour, and make no further comment.


        April 10, 2011 at 8:32 pm

      • Now if you do that Nobbly, I ‘m going to have to pick a very nasty fight with you, just to get you back.

        How much do you owe him?

        What did you spend it on?

        Sex and drugs? (I would have done)

        Come on, confess! (slap, tickle, slap!)

        Give me another bruise or I’ll have your credit rating blacklisted!

        Peter Reynolds

        April 10, 2011 at 8:46 pm

      • Nobbly, you last comment to me was rather like the pot calling saucepan tarnished !

        The Debt Collector

        April 10, 2011 at 5:08 pm

      • In which way?


        April 10, 2011 at 6:08 pm

      • DC, have you seen this on the Daily Telegraph website today?

        “Cannabis could be used to treat epilepsy”

        Peter Reynolds

        April 10, 2011 at 1:54 pm

      • Thanks for the link Peter, and I have now read the article about the use of Cannabis in the control of epilepsy.

        However, I did note that there was a candind qualification to the statement which says : “Cannabis is thought of being a treasure trove of compounds that could be used for pharmacological development. We have a list of around a dozen potential candidates for epilepsy and have tested three that show promise.”

        You will note the term compounds. That does not mean the smoking of the the leaf, merely the extraction of certain chemicals or chains which make up the plant’s structure: subtle difference. Also 12 people is a very small sample and only 25% of those had positive reactions; that means 9 people didn’t.

        However if those compounds can be formed in to a tablet which makes the drug (and it is still a drug)effective, safe and less expensive that would be a big leap forward in my confidence.
        That said, I would like to see a greater sample say 1000 patients on a placebo basis before I am totally convinced.

        But thank-you for directing me to the article, it was of interest.

        The Debt Collector

        The Debt Collector

        April 10, 2011 at 3:04 pm

  24. Hi Peter. Hope you are well. I agree with permitting the use of drugs for medical but not recreational purposes.

    Anyway, well done for challenging the latest barrage of untruths and spin from the latest face representing the same old interests. Modern power doesn’t give a toss about the great unwashed. The letter is not under consideration and it was guaranteed he would not give you time for a rational discussion because it doesn’t (currently) agree with that of his (and that of his financial bosses) opinions and agenda.


    April 10, 2011 at 4:19 am

    • @lwtc247

      Who is the PM’s financial boss BTW?

      Cockney Copper

      April 10, 2011 at 10:29 am

    • Iwtc247 – why don’t you agree with recreational purposes? Just out of curiosity?


      April 10, 2011 at 10:47 am

    • I imagine you live alone? Why can’t I have a little fun sometimes? If I smoke in my own home why must I be labelled a criminal?

      Party-pooper’s representing the same old interests. You’re so bleedin’ boring.


      April 10, 2011 at 7:54 pm

  25. Peter

    Just out of interest, are you lobbying for cannabis (or some medicinal derivative) to be legalised for GPs to prescribe, or the wholescale decriminalisation of it?

    Cockney Copper

    April 10, 2011 at 10:33 am

  26. My personal predictions (for what it’s worth);

    1: Ain’t never gonna happen.
    2: From what you’re saying there would appear to be lots of empirical evidence to support this so I can see this happening soon.
    3: …would by necessity follow on from 2.
    4: No idea.
    5: You appear to be doing this already.

    However, if I ever see you walking round with a big reefer, I’m gonna lock your arse up!!

    Cockney Copper

    April 10, 2011 at 11:00 am

    • I use cannabis in the privacy of my own home and that’s the way it should be. Street drinking of alcohol is quite properly outlawed in many places. I support that. I support responsible use of cannabis by adults where no possible harm or concern can be caused to others.

      Peter Reynolds

      April 10, 2011 at 11:17 am

    • “However, if I ever see you walking round with a big reefer, I’m gonna lock your arse up!!”

      Bet you wouldn’t say that to a Rastafarian, you appear to be the archetype “pick on the easy targets” type of police we see all too often today.


      April 10, 2011 at 4:36 pm

      • Nice, subtle attempt to call me a racist, but you’re wrong.

        You, however, need to recognise a (poor) attempt at humour when you see it.

        Cockney Copper

        April 11, 2011 at 12:31 pm

      • p.s. You really need to learn to comment / contribute to the debate without making snide remarks.

        Cockney Copper

        April 11, 2011 at 1:33 pm

    • your a ****************

      1. your not in charge nor have any influence
      2. any medical cannabis system will be abused by the rest of us
      3. you cant keep it off the streets as it is
      4. you dont know anything about industrial hemp because as i said your a retard
      5. yes he is and retards like you wont accept what truth he tells because your a ******* retard


      June 6, 2011 at 9:34 pm

      • I won’t tolerate that sort of language. Next time you’ll be barred.

        Peter Reynolds

        June 6, 2011 at 9:39 pm

      • Whilst Jason makes some valid comments, there is no need to move in to the realms of lible and slander,

        As you are fully aware I dislike the idea of Cannabis being taken off the Class C Register and you know my feelings about drugs as a genre.

        To refer to you as a “Retard” is defamatory and libelous, and whilst I have no say in the matter and DO NOT support your efforts to have cannabis made widely available; equally I respect your right to express in a rational way and without resorting to Slander and Libel.

        Since it is your site, it is nor for me to say, but I think on this occasion your consideration of access of the orgirinator of the message @ 21:34 may be justified.

        The Debt Collector

        June 6, 2011 at 10:13 pm

  27. If recreational use of cannabis by adults was permitted,the sky would fall in,,,also the moon is made from cheddar,,and the earth is flat,,and the government is your friend.


    April 10, 2011 at 12:17 pm

  28. if people want to demonize cannabis from within a prohibition model then they should do so without blaming the side effects of prohibition on the substance ,since when did funding and supporting a policy based on its own caused collateral damage become a good idea ! built on lies it has all the aspects of a con trick

    the lie tipper

    April 10, 2011 at 1:36 pm

  29. @Cockney Copper
    “My personal predictions (for what it’s worth);
    1: Ain’t never gonna happen.”

    Im real interested to know why you think so?…, not been funny or w/e .., If you genuinely are a copper i would love to know your point of view on this one.


    April 10, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    • jimbob

      It’s not a Policing issue, it’s simply a political one, but off the top of my head….

      1) The inertia need to decriminalise any controlled drug would be absolutely massive. Any political party would need an overwhelming mandate to have the authority and confidence to do it. I can’t see any one polictical party having that sort of mandate for many, many years (if ever).

      2) Political intransigence. Why should they? What’s the up-side? How do they look good doing it? They don’t. All they would get is bad press – ‘soft on drugs’ etc etc.

      3) Despite some people using cannabis to self-medicate for relief from chronic illnesses, most people just smoke cannabis for recreational purposes. No politician is going to put their neck on the line for a drug that’s is (mainly) smoked, with the associated medical risks for that.

      Cockney Copper

      April 11, 2011 at 1:25 pm

      • Take a look at this Cockney:

        We now have authoritative research that proves a tax and regulate regime on cannabis would produce a net gain to the UK economy of at least £6 billion per annum. That’s £1 per gram tax, VAT, reduction in law enforcement costs, costs of regulation, healthcare, etc, etc. Not only that but it would cut out all the harms of the boom in “cannabis factories”, human trafficking, etc and free up law enforcement resources to concentrate on real crime.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 11, 2011 at 1:40 pm

      • You can argue that there’s a financial upside for the government, but that still doesn’t hide the fact that it requires political will to do it. That’s the hurdle for you.

        In addition, why should anybody go and buy their cannabis from a shop, when they can simply continue to grow their own cheaply at home and avoid the tax etc?

        Cockney Copper

        April 11, 2011 at 3:58 pm

      • CLEAR would support a licensing system for growing at home – a maximum of six mature plants, perhaps £50 per annum?

        You’re absolutely right of course that we have to convince politicians on a number of issues. Aside from medicinal use, where the present policy is just indefensible (and will shortly be subjected to judicial review), I think the appalling waste of money on prohibition and criminalising a huge proportion of the population ought to mean something.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 11, 2011 at 4:12 pm

      • “why should anybody go and buy their cannabis from a shop, when they can simply continue to grow their own cheaply at home” – for the very same reason that most people don’t brew their own beer or grow their own vegetables, its easier to buy directly. Growing Cannabis, whilst I’m sure is not particularly difficult requires some investment in time and money. Most people, just as with home brewed beer, simply cannot be bothered and prefer the convenience of getting a known-quality product at a shop… that is why a legal market will not miss out much on tax due to people growing their own. Plus, if you licence it as Peter suggested the government would still make money..


        April 11, 2011 at 4:21 pm

      • I have to disagree that no-one would buy it from shop’s. I for one, would ideally love to grow my own medical strains. And then go to the coffeeshops for social gatherings, different stains. Similar to how the older generation treated pubs years ago. Just a nice place to be.

        When you consider that it cost about £20 to make 40 pins of ale and is unbelievable simply. Yet i know no-one who does it, as its far more convenient to buy than make. Just like cannabis would be.

        Also i agree with that six MATURE plants would be a great idea. I would possibly say it should cost a little more than £50. Thats too low per annum imo.

        Personally i though a figure of around 120 – 240pa would be more likely to get more non users on board. Thats only £10 – £20 per month for a user (It would be good it this could be waived/reduced for low earners)

        Stuart P

        April 11, 2011 at 5:57 pm

      • Interesting.., cheers.


        April 11, 2011 at 1:41 pm

      • Cockney Copper, the government can get the general public to buy pretty much (but not everything) anything they want. Raise tuition fees? No problem. Go to war without all the facts? Sure! Massive cuts beyond what is required whilst simultaneously giving tax breaks to the richest? Of course.

        ‘If’ the government really wanted to, they could change views in a way positive to decriminalisation. The evidence is there that prohibition doesn’t work and regulation does. However, decriminalisation is different to full legalisation regarding international treaties, but it is looking as though a US state will legalise next year. That would be in contravention of the single convention, and could start the unravelling of the entire prohibition lie. What we need to do is bring the issue to the fore, make it so that people understand the REAL issues so when it comes there is far less fear. It is fear that drives prohibition, and hopefully one day it will be fear that destroys it.. politicians at the front of this will stand to gain.

        Cannabis is so widely used, and mostly without any problems, that the will to decriminalise wouldn’t be as great as say, for ecstasy. Pretty much everyone has either tried it or know someone who has, the mental leap to decrim isn’t that far…

        with point 3, its funny how they won’t put their necks on the line for smoked cannabis, but will defend cigarette companies rights to brand their packs, display it in front of kids etc.. “historical and cultural presidents” all over again. At some point the public will wake up.. maybe we just need to shout louder…


        April 11, 2011 at 2:21 pm

      • *should have said the “will REQUIRED to decriminalise”


        April 11, 2011 at 2:28 pm

  30. First of all, I should say that I don’t have any cannabis, I don’t smoke any cannabis, and I don’t grow any cannabis. So as far as it’s possible to do so, I can say what I think on the subject without undue fear.
    With 40 years of experience of smoking the plant, it’s plain to me that every seed shop is monitored, every hydroponics store is monitored, and every web forum is monitored. In addition, most towns of any size have an official dealer, who works hand in hand with the police to enable them to know who’s smoking. The official dealer never gets busted, and the entire system is bent. The smoker has two choices. The first is to go without. The second is to break the law, in which case they are as corrupted as are those within the system. It’s about money, and it’s about control. Govt. won’t change this until they see clear evidence that the money and other benefits arising from cannabis sales will benefit them more than the money and other benefits arising from alcohol, because the two are opposing forces. A rise in cannabis use means a fall in alcohol consumption. Unfortunately cannabis has other less desirable effects including the loss of the will to work, and an unfortunate rise in the general level of intelligence in the population. I think that about sums it up. Good luck with your campaign. I may decide to start up a similar educational effort myself, unless something more interesting turns up.

    hugh jones

    April 10, 2011 at 7:10 pm

    • We’re coming to get you Hughie!

      Peter Reynolds

      April 10, 2011 at 7:18 pm

      • I thought as much you rotter!

        hugh jones

        April 10, 2011 at 7:39 pm

      • Well I notice you don’t deny it. I’ve bought a few packets of seeds in the dim and distant past, and in at least two cases I’ve been tracked. In one shop up north a bloke with a large backpack immediately came and stood next to me and apparently scanned me for my mobile phone signal, because two weeks later I had a pair of plainly bogus cold callers at the door, one of whom photographed me. I’m not an especially paranoid person, and I have no doubt about the truth of this. I know who to expect at the door, and I know a genuine cold caller when I see one. I’m guessing that agencies use this sector of the market for training purposes. Do me a favour and don’t attempt to deny that monitoring exists. That leads me to the question of why you choose to fail to acknowledge this, and logically on to what your position is on that. Are you aware that this blog is monitored? Do you think that agencies would need to crack your security in order to discover who posts? The same goes for lca and ukcia of course, and uk420 and all the rest of them. That’s why I stay clean as the law stands. Who is the isp there at lca? Do you run your own servers? Do you think WordPress is “safe”? BTW that reply of yours above was quite unhelpful really, wasn’t it? Don’t you do straight talking old boy? Either post this comment and come up with a civilised reply, or kindly do the other thing.

        hugh jones

        April 12, 2011 at 9:43 pm

      • I think you have to recognise that anything you post anywhere can be traced if the effort is applied. Each individual has to take responsibility for themselves.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 12, 2011 at 10:33 pm

      • Excellent answer.

        hugh jones

        April 13, 2011 at 12:07 am

      • “scanned me for my mobile phone signal” and “agencies use this sector of the market for training purposes”.

        Hugh, you really have been watching too much late night TV.

        Cockney Copper

        April 13, 2011 at 6:16 pm

      • Thanks for your interest. I don’t really have anything to add to the debate so I’ll leave that with you. Best of luck.

        hugh jones

        April 13, 2011 at 8:05 pm

    • Hugh – you’re conspiracy theories about the Police and dealers being in cahoots is utter rubbish.

      It does, however, sound the basis for a good novel.

      Cockney Copper

      April 11, 2011 at 2:03 pm

      • I would agree with your assessment of that CC. As we know, there’s frequent pilfering of drugs from evidence stores and you may get found with a quarter and only charged with an eighth but I think these are relatively trivial matters. However, the branch of law enforcement where there is undoubtedly widescale corruption and drug running is HM Prison Service. Nearly all drugs in prisons are brought in by prison officers and this is a deeply corrupt and corrupting activity.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 11, 2011 at 3:05 pm

      • Again, I suspect that the weight discrepancies are down to officers being off-hand when booking drugs into the property store.

        If I’ve seized some drugs, when I’m entering the items into the property system I need to include the weight of the drugs. Since I don’t have access to any scales I ‘ll put in a guestimate. It’s only an indicative amount at that stage, not evidential.

        If the case goes to court, often the drugs will then be accurately weighed & tested in a lab, and you get the real evidential weight.

        Drugs being stolen by Police officers from property stores is almost non-existent as far as I’m aware.

        I can’t comment sensibly on drugs in prisons as I have no experience of it.

        Cockney Copper

        April 11, 2011 at 4:55 pm

      • I have only ever been busted once when I was 17 (not in the UK). I had six tabs of acid. I was charged with three. I have heard the same story from many people over and over again. I have to disagree with you on this. I believe it happens all the time.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm

      • Ah well there you go – not in the UK.

        The Police in the UK are all paragons of virtue don’t you know.

        Cockney Copper

        April 11, 2011 at 5:40 pm

      • Of course officer.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 11, 2011 at 7:11 pm

      • Good idea CC.

        hugh jones

        April 11, 2011 at 7:35 pm

  31. Don’t worry Nobbly, I’ll just sequestrate you instead !

    The Debt Collector

    April 10, 2011 at 9:10 pm

  32. Firstly id like to say. Peter you have my full support. Things have picked up a gear or 5 with regards to LCA/CLR and I admire your determination. Keep up the good work mate.

    Secondly with regards to the picture used, DC choose to put that picture out there to show his compassionate and caring side. Peter is simply using the picture to show that he is appealing to that side of DC. It works well as he is obviously very concerend with his son, just like we are with the law.

    Stuart P

    April 10, 2011 at 9:57 pm

  33. “These are all inaccurate and false statements. Mr Cameron should correct them immediately.”

    He would be failing to follow his job spec if he followed such advice. This is the man that continued the tripartite CO2 scams and expanded on them.

    [Got here from a link in comment to ]


    April 10, 2011 at 11:35 pm

  34. i had a disgusting excuse for an officer take a little bit of weed off me,,,then attempt to push me into abusing him by telling me, “nice stuff mate,im going to enjoy that after my shift”…police and government are human and are quite capable of being dirty.


    April 11, 2011 at 6:01 pm

  35. Hi Peter, thanks for your response to my last post. I get what you were doing but, suspect that the only emotion Cameron would have would be one of rage. Still, I could be wrong, I often am!
    Cockney Copper’s posts have been interesting. I find the line the police, on a personal level, take a little difficult.. Surely, wrong is wrong and right is right. If we take the example of an overseas dictator enforcing rules through various aids, be they right or wrong, according to western principles (those we impose by air raids) they are to some degree complicit and accountable for their actions. We all know, smoker or not, that the current laws are immoral as they amplify the problems and harms. So, are those who enforce immorality complicit??

    I have known in the past, members of the police. They seem happy to nik as the laws insists however, turn blind eye’s to their mates? Is this right? I think not. I would love to engage with CC on this subject.

    I appreciate that it is not officially the role of the police to make policy but enforce it. But, if i was in this sort of position I would sooner resign than uphold immoral policies. CC this is not an attack, I’m not the attacking kind, I’m curious..


    April 11, 2011 at 7:26 pm

    • Without wishing to patronise CC at all, I always rather like intelligent policemen. They have a very, very difficult job to do and the best are extremely valuable members of society. Tom Lloyd, ex-Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire who I have met three times recently is a extremely intelligent, capable and shrewd man. I also met Chief Constable Tim Hollis of Humberside and he is a true leader of men with a mind like a razor. They are pragmatists and have a job to do. The police are as much victims of prohibition as those that use cannabis.

      I am really optimistic about the election of police commissioners. I think it could transform both the effectiveness ofand public support for policing.

      CC, LEAP is a fascinating and fast-growing organisation which now has a UK branch:

      Peter Reynolds

      April 11, 2011 at 8:08 pm

      • Tim Hollies stood shoulder to shoulder with Gordon Brown when Brown moved cannabis back to class B, and he described pot smokers as car thieves and burglars on a live news show. He has repeated this often in the press, and has vowed a relentless and robust attack on pot smokers “because cannabis is a big concern in communities”. He may be entertaining, but “pragmatic”? I doubt it.
        I’m curious to know what he had to say in the recent debate Peter

        Carl Wagner

        April 12, 2011 at 2:19 pm

      • I’m astonished at that information Carl because his tone and attitude were totally different at the debate. One of the most memorable points he made was that his own children are at the prime age for experimenting with drugs and did he want to go to war with his children and their friends? No not at all he said and he seemed perfectly onside that the explosion in cannabis farming is a harm of prohibition and not of cannabis.

        Thanks for the information.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 12, 2011 at 3:46 pm

      • Tim Hollis and I did BBC Look North live 4/5 years ago. He described pot smokers as addicts, and said “I use that word deliberately”. Whatever his view now, this was it then

        Carl Wagner

        April 12, 2011 at 4:44 pm

      • Thanks again for the further information. I’m going to write to him!

        Peter Reynolds

        April 12, 2011 at 4:57 pm

      • There MUST be a mechanism to call to account our elected when they cock up? They do work for us, I know they like to think its the other way around but, surely there must be something in our constitution?


        April 12, 2011 at 6:36 pm

      • Yeh Nick there is… don’t vote for them again!!

        Here’s to hoping AV comes in…


        April 12, 2011 at 9:12 pm

    • Nick – Politicians make up the laws, the Police are simply empowered to uphold or enforce those laws, occasionally with some discretion, but usually not.

      You may think the law in relation to cannabis is immoral, I don’t particularly, I’m just mildly ambivalent about it. I don’t read Peter’s blog because I’m pro decriminalisation, I read it to educate myself better to the issues, and occasionally comment and share my poor sense of humour.

      I don’t need convincing that Peter sitting in the privacy of his own home smoking cannabis is a not a great social peril. However, I do see plenty of examples where I think cannabis use does cause social harm, particularly with kids and people with mental health issues. Should that prevent responsible adults using cannabis? Maybe not.

      The law is frequently an ass, but expecting me to quit my job every time I think that, is a bit steep. I think having to pay stamp duty to the government when I buy a new house is immoral. Should I refuse and live in a caravan?

      Cockney Copper

      April 12, 2011 at 8:36 pm

      • You put it perfectly CC. Of course, the truth is that what I advocate is actually much stricter control than exists now. It is much easier for kids to get cannabis now than to get alcohol. There is no help for people with mental health issues now because they’re scared to admit they use cannabis. A regulated system would be much safer than what we have now.

        Peter Reynolds

        April 12, 2011 at 8:43 pm

  36. Could not agree more. I think the majority of the police do a stunning job in very difficult circumstances. I don’t envy them at all. Some of the things they must see…. I’m not police hating but CC seems reasonable apart from the I’ll nik you humor (similar to that of a bully joking about hitting someone) he does appear intelligent.

    Hypocritical behavior is what I’m hedging at. If a person takes on a role like that of being a police person they should do it because they are REAl about helping victims etc etc. To enforce immoral laws is hypocritical if this is your reason for joining.


    April 11, 2011 at 8:56 pm

  37. Drags usas? Lock tha fahkin’ cahnts ap!

    cockney wanker

    April 11, 2011 at 11:48 pm

    • Bollocks!


      April 11, 2011 at 11:52 pm

    • Eloquent post pjmcneill. You’re obviously someone worth listening to.

      Cockney Copper

      April 12, 2011 at 8:53 pm

      • Sorry, Cockney, no offence meant: your name just made me think of the Viz character, which I think is very funny!

        I was hoping to post it anonymously, as I had just removed the ‘cube’ avatar from my new Gravatar account (which I now regret opening, as it has fouled up my Disqus account, where I have a different username and avatar).

        In the event, it obviously took some time to take effect, as the cube came up, giving me away – hence the testicular transfixion.


        April 12, 2011 at 10:09 pm

  38. I was challenged by this comment from hugh jones:

    “Unfortunately cannabis has other less desirable effects including the loss of the will to work, and an unfortunate rise in the general level of intelligence in the population.”

    Perhaps the “loss of the will to work” hugh is talking about is really code language for loss of the tolerance for doing what someone with more money than brains tells me to do and calling that “work”.

    Similarly in schools one hears of “attention deficit”– which may mean being less interested in what others are saying than in the pop-ups of LEAP Long-term Episodic Associative Performance out of the dynamic unconscious, a positive stimulus to different work than some authorized taskmaster is assigning for you but work nonetheless.

    The trick is to find performance time– off the moneymeter or without teacher approval/school credit pending– when you can do the Inspirational work cannabis is capable of fueling in you. Guess what– he plant itself has delivered a hint: it (or God, whatever you prefer to believe) has shaped its own leaflets to resemble a Hand (with fingers on it etc.). Now (if you’ve just had a toke) look at your hands, find some vigourous expressive work they’d like to do, and yes, fantacize a bit about how you can even make such occupation “sustainable” by developing a product or service that can be sold for a modest reward. This handworkisement of the individual is not so much a “withdrawal” from a work world organized around earning cash through servility and surrender, or from “apple-polishing” a teacher, rather it is a maturation of something inside you that man’s best friend (vegetative– Cannabis not Canis) wants to help mature and express itself in the media of art and treeconomics.


    April 11, 2011 at 11:58 pm

  39. Can DC get anything right??? Doesnt look like it.


    April 12, 2011 at 2:00 am

    • 26 IS a big number Stuart. It would require at least three workshops and a think tank to be able to generate a number like that.


      April 12, 2011 at 6:30 pm

    • The figures might not be right, but I think the sentiment certainly is.

      Cockney Copper

      April 12, 2011 at 9:18 pm

      • Couldn’t agree more.Shame.


        April 13, 2011 at 7:26 pm

  40. When push comes to shove, all they care about is getting re-elected. If AV comes in, and you can carry as many or more first preferences as LCA did in their day, then you may indeed have a bargaining position. Of course that’s a few years away, unless Cleggie does something interesting.
    In reply to tokedesigner earlier, yes of course you’re right. I meant: “the loss of the will to slave all day at worthless and degrading activities aimed at maximising profit at the expense of the working man and woman.”

    hugh jones

    April 12, 2011 at 10:51 am

  41. Btw is anyone doing the ‘light up the sky’ Chinese lantern thing on the 20th?


    April 12, 2011 at 8:04 pm

  42. GW Signs Exclusive Licence Agreement to Commercialise Sativex in Australia, Asia, Middle-East and Africa

    yes… “very, very toxic” indeed


    April 12, 2011 at 10:18 pm

    • I posted this on FB today:

      Very unwise, dishonest and and misleading words from the MD of GW Pharma.

      And I’ve also emailed my personal contact at GW expressing my concern about Justin Gover’s words.

      Peter Reynolds

      April 12, 2011 at 10:30 pm

      • New Scientist is where I originally saw the link, but yes the comments were a bit concerning.. “Medical marijuana is an approach of the past.” aka buy OUR product not the free ‘stuff’ you can grow, but which also works.

        Is crazy that they can just take the bud, refine it a little, put it in alcohol, repackage it and claim it is a completely different product… Doesn’t Sativex have an increased time between taking it and the patient feeling the effects as opposed to smoking? Les Iverson in his lecture demonstrated that although he didn’t like smoking (but also talked about e.g. vapourisation) it was a highly efficient and effective method of ingesting the active compounds.

        Either way, the scheduling of Cannabis surely HAS to change in light of all this, sooner rather than later? Sativex is a whole-plant based product!!!


        April 12, 2011 at 11:04 pm

  43. The world view playlist on the right of the full interview has all the clips of the seperate questions,with peoples comments obviously,,,however ,the “marijuana ” clip has been removed from the playlist,,,all others still present……?


    April 14, 2011 at 12:57 pm

    • Thank you for that information Martyn. That is something I believe we can take heart from.

      Peter Reynolds

      April 14, 2011 at 1:41 pm

  44. […] You can see the previous instalment here: Cameron On Cannabis Part 4. […]

  45. WHAT IS FRIGHTENING IS THAT IT IS COMMON SENSE TO ACCEPT THE WORLD THE WAY IT NATURALLY IS. Yet all these politicians see fit to globally outlaw certain plants and mushrooms. That is clearly mad. That is why it is fruitless arguing with them about it. They must obviously have another agenda as to why they are making certain plants and mushrooms illegal. They make themselves look ridiculous by not explaining this agenda. Yet they continue. Hence their agenda must be in their best interests and not in ours. If their hidden agenda were publicly explained, we would overthrow the governments enforcing these ridiculous rules.

    Pemberton Carmichael

    April 22, 2011 at 11:49 pm

  46. […] You can see the previous instalment here: Cameron On Cannabis Part 4. […]

  47. […] with 137 comments […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: