Advertisements

Peter Reynolds

The life and times of Peter Reynolds

Posts Tagged ‘liar

LibDem Conmen Should Be Expelled From Parliament

with 10 comments

Liars, Conmen And Cheats

I support the tuition fee proposals.  They seem very fair to me and I can’t see that any prospective student can have any complaint about the terms offered.

However, if you’re an MP and before the election you signed a pledge to vote against any increase in tuition fees then you have no choice.  It doesn’t matter if you’re a minister or if the economic situation is worse than you thought it was.  This is black and white.  It’s clear cut.  There can be no argument.  If you break your signed commitment then you have to go.

If you seek to evade your commitment or fudge the issue then you compound your crime.  And I see no reason why it should not be a crime.  In civil law it is a clear breach of contract but it is much more serious than that.  It is obtaining a seat in parliament on false pretences.  It wasn’t a vague promise made in the heat of the election campaign.  It was a written agreement.

Nick Clegg, Vince Cable and all their cronies who have broken their word should be frogmarched out of parliament and charged with criminal deception.  They should all go to jail.  Not for a long time.  Six months will do but each and every one of them is a proven liar, conman and cheat.  They have no honour.

Unless parliament takes this action to preserve its integrity, then its reputation will sink even lower.  It sets the most appalling example to the country and any MP who allows this scandal to persist without action is an accessory after the fact.

Shame on you, you weak and pathetic cowards.  You disgrace yourselves and our country.

Advertisements

Spectacular Spectator Drivel On Cannabis

with 13 comments

Melanie Phillips

A Zionist, Labour supporting, Daily Mail journalist – it’s hardly a good start is it? I should have known better than even to start reading her article in The Spectator.

This woman is a dangerous liar and propagandist.  Astonishingly, with breathtaking hypocrisy in promoting the most dangerous of drugs, The Spectator describes itself as “Champagne for the brain”.

Here is her article, reproduced without kind permission of The Spectator and my letter to the editor in response.

Yesterday morning, BBC Radio Four’s Today programme broadcast an interview with a professor of neuropharmacology, Roger Pertwee. Prof Pertwee was making an eyebrow-raising suggestion – that cannabis use should be licensed. His argument was as incoherent as it was irresponsible. He maintained, repeatedly, that all he wanted to do was to reduce the harm done by cannabis – from dangers which he appeared to define merely as smoking an adulterated form of the drug, or getting lung cancer from smoking it. So he wanted to restrict it to people whom it ‘wouldn’t harm’. They would use it in other ways than smoking it, so they wouldn’t get cancer. They would go along to their GP who would pronounce them fit enough to use it.

Hello?!?

What about the harm that we know is done by cannabis itself to the brain — to cognition, to memory, to motivation, to personality? What about the tremendous increase in psychosis caused by cannabis use? What about the harm it does to other people in the user’s ambit?

Yes, said Prof Pertwee, indeed, his scheme wouldn’t reduce the harm done by cannabis itself.

What about all those millions more young people who would start using the drug and become addicted and do themselves and other people all that harm?

Yes, stammered Prof Pertwee, that would indeed be an enormous problem with his scheme. But all he wanted to do was, er, to reduce the harm. And when he’d chased his own tail round that pointless circle a few times, he fell back on ‘all I want to do is stimulate discussion’.

In short, it was a stupid and dangerous idea which even in its own terms made no sense whatever. Why on earth was this professor of neuropharmacology spouting such self-evident drivel on the BBC that even he himself had to keep demurring at his own argument?

What the BBC didn’t tell us was that Prof Pertwee was not some dispassionate expert who just happened to breeze into the studio with a cockeyed idea about turning GPs into cannabis pushers.

Prof Pertwee is Director of Pharmacology of GW Pharmaceuticals – which has a special Home Office licence to market a cannabinoid medicine called Sativex which is used to treat certain medical conditions.

His embargoed press release even said of his proposal:

‘I think this might be the way forward, but it might not work…  It depends on a private company being willing to produce a branded product’.

But it’s his own company which is best placed to do just that! In other words, the Today programme – as a result of its own lazy and frivolous bias in favour of drug legalisation,  which presumably meant it didn’t do due diligence in researching its interviewee because he had the Correct Opinion on drug policy – was played for a sucker by Big Pharma. It was used to give prime air-time to a piece of commercial advocacy which was passed off as a neutral policy discussion. Except that the product being promoted here wasn’t soap powder, but a drug that enslaves.

Who needs cannabis when the Beeb is so dopey already?

—– Original Message —–
From: Peter Reynolds
To: letters@spectator.co.uk
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 11:20 AM
Subject: Melanie Phillips, The Dopey Beeb, 15th September 2010

Dear Sir,

The disgraceful display of ignorance and propaganda about cannabis by Melanie Phillips cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged.

Her biogtry plumbs new depths of scandalous nonsense.

In the 1930s they used to say that cannabis makes white women promiscuous with black men. Ms Phillips continues on this shameful path of crass misinformation. She needs to do some research before inflicting her ignorance on readers any further.

I agree that Professor Pertwee was incoherent but he is an academic, not a professional communicator.  At least he was dispensing facts. Ms Phillips’ diatribe was, to say the very least, economical with the truth.

Cannabis does not harm the brain or damage cognition, memory, motivation or personality – at least no more than breathing oxygen does and a whole lot less than any other recreational drug.  The phrase “tremendous increase in psychosis” is just a bare-faced lie and that it harms “other people in the user’s ambit” is the very worst sort of journalistic hogwash.

By all means, Ms Phillips, wallow in your own deluded opinion but don’t use your position to spead such wicked, dangerous nonsense.  You should be ashamed of yourself!

Authoritarian scaremongers, political cowards and cheap scandal-seeking journalists have been urging scientists to prove that cannabis is harmful for well over 100 years.  They haven’t succeeded yet.  On the contrary, all the latest research proves that cannabis is a remarkably benign substance yet with some extraordinary medicinal properties. The endocannabinoid system, which was only discovered in 1998 is now known to be fundamental to life and good health.  The only source of cannabinoids outside the body is the cannabis plant.

I used to have time for Melanie Phillips and some degree of respect for her opinion.  I see now that she is just the same as any tabloid hack who cares not one jot for the truth, merely for cheap sensation and worthless rhetoric.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Reynolds

Keir Starmer – The Next Lord Widgery?

with 11 comments

No Better Than A Terrorist

The scandalous decision not to prosecute PC Simon Harwood over the death of Ian Tomlinson is reverberating right across the world.

British justice has become a laughing stock and our proud history of freedom, liberty and fairness is heaped with derision – and deservedly so

When the establishment needs to dissemble and misinform it calls on its tame lawyers and paper tiger figureheads.   Keir Starmer, the DPP, is clearly angling for his peerage and his place on the government roster of professional liars, deceivers and propagandists.

In 1972, when British soldiers murdered protestors on the streets of Londonderry, they wheeled out Lord Widgery who produced a report of such crass dishonesty and fundamental deception that it took a further enquiry lasting 12 years and costing £200 million to expose it as nonsense.

When millions across the world have witnessed the unprovoked assault from behind on Ian Tomlinson, they have wheeled out Keir Starmer, another tame QC, to demonstrate a complete absence of integrity and deliver a deeply corrupt, manipulative and unforgivable decision not to prosecute.

In the last 50 years more than 1,000 people have died while in police custody in the UK but not a single policeman has been prosecuted.

Is it any wonder that we have pond life like Raoul Moat feted and worshipped by the underclass when they suffer under the yoke of police oppression, when they see no justice nor fairness nor hope?

The truth is that PC Simon Harwood and Raoul Moat are two peas from the same pod.  Police websites, such as the notorious Inspector Gadget, reveal serving police officers’ attitudes just as perverse as those that supported the Raoul Moat Facebook page.  The police are completely out of control, ineffective, mismanaged and corrupt.

It took 30 years for the Metropolitan Police to admit that one of its officers was responsible for the death of Blair Peach.

The suggestion from the extreme left is that we are being softened up and desensitised against a future where with swingeing public expenditure cuts we can expect to see riots in the streets and more police violence.  I don’t buy this conspiracy theory but I am desperately worried for the future of British justice when men like Keir Starmer are in charge.

It isn’t just incompetence.  It isn’t just misjudgement.  There is clear intent to pervert the course of justice.  He knew that the six month limit on bringing a charge of common assault was passing.   He knew that the conflict between expert evidence was for a jury to determine.  He knew that never was it more essential “in the public interest” for a prosecution to be brought.

Keir Starmer is every bit as dangerous to the fabric of our society as any terrorist or subversive.  Look at how many lives Lord Widgery’s behaviour was responsible for.  Look at how his lies prolonged the violence and fed the divisions within Northern Ireland.  The same thing is happening all over again.

PC Simon Harwood, Raoul Moat, Keir Starmer.  They are all the same.  They are all a danger to society.   They should all be behind bars.

There Are Lies, Damned Lies And Then There’s Gordon Brown

with one comment

How he has the bare faced cheek to claim that he’s been saying “for months” that the banks should have been more tightly regulated!!  The man has been incredible for some time but even for him this latest, astonishing volte face is truly astounding.

The Big Fibber

Our Prime Minister is nothing short of a liar.  When he appears tonight on the first ever great TV debate let us hope that his true colours are revealed.  Messrs Cameron and Clegg have the opportunity to drive home the coffin nails into Gordon Brown’s premiership.  Let them strike hard and true.  The country needs relief from this shabby little man, his putrid ideas and his shameful politics.

Written by Peter Reynolds

April 15, 2010 at 2:20 pm

Smellie Not Guilty Verdict Stinks

with 14 comments

No!  No!  No!  I do not believe it!  This has to be one of the greatest travesties of justice ever inflicted on the British people.  Sergeant Delroy Smellie who beat Nicola Fisher with the back of his hand and his baton at the G20 protest has been acquitted of assault.  This is an outrage, a bad and sad day for Britain.  The man is a bully, a brute and a liar.  He is a violent criminal who should go to jail for at least two years.

Thug

We all saw it, in full colour on our television screens.  The man is an unmitigated thug.   There can be no doubt in the mind of any reasonable person.  The video evidence is entirely conclusive.  The excuses put forward in his defence are manifest nonsense.  District Judge Daphne Wickham who made this disgraceful decision is either corrupt or dumb.  Her ruling flies in the face of common sense, reason and fairness.  Her comments as detailed here are absurd.  We should not stand for this.  There should be protest on the streets, questions in the House and an immediate appeal against the verdict.

Bad Apple

So, on the same day that guilty verdicts were delivered in the first trial without a jury for 350 years, we see the true colours of our increasingly cowardly and politically controlled judicial system.  British justice is a laughing stock.  It has no value any more, at all.

All the decent and honourable police officers out there must realise that this decision damages them beyond repair.  Who will stand up for justice now?  Who can we trust?