Tory economic advisor is crack smoker

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Tory economic advisor is crack smoker

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 4 of 4 << First < 1 2 3 4

jamiemartin721 Reading 02 Jun 15 10.27am
Quote Superfly at 01 Jun 2015 5.09pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 4.16pm You do have to wonder though, who tries cocaine and thinks, I like that, but what it really needs is to be so intense I'd sell everything I own and suck me some cocks for just one more rock. And only last for about 10 minutes. Dannyh is like that. Some say he'd possibly be worse if he ever tried drugs. Dannyh is so straight he'll suck a cock to prove it. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 02 Jun 15 10.27am

Quote Superfly at 01 Jun 2015 5.09pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 4.16pm

You do have to wonder though, who tries cocaine and thinks, I like that, but what it really needs is to be so intense I'd sell everything I own and suck me some cocks for just one more rock.

And only last for about 10 minutes.

Dannyh is like that. Some say he'd possibly be worse if he ever tried drugs.

Dannyh is so straight he'll suck a cock to prove it.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Steptoe 02 Jun 15 8.09pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 1.03pm Quote derben at 01 Jun 2015 12.53pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 12.43pm Quote derben at 01 Jun 2015 11.30am Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 11.07am Quote derben at 01 Jun 2015 9.58am Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 9.14am Quote derben at 31 May 2015 9.36pm Of course he should go. So its not freedom of expression and personal choice? I thought it wasn't your belief that the state should be intervening in the choices of individuals and businesses. If its outside work and isn't affecting his daily work, surely its up to him? Even if its ill advised, somewhat dangerous and addictive (not really a problem on his income). Freedom of expression and personal choice within the law of course, as you well know. You think taking crack cocaine would not affect his daily work? When taking the crack, he was in possession of a Class A drug - a criminal offence. Just shows how low society has sunk when people are saying he does not need to resign. Edited by derben (01 Jun 2015 9.59am) Conviction for possession requires that you can prove the person in question was in possession of a controlled substance beyond reasonable doubt. Oddly this has resulted in being high not being an offence of possession. The idea that someone has to resign on the say so of evidence presented by a newspaper is questionable in the extreme. Given the duration of a crack high, and the high metabolisation of cocaine, provided he isn't using it all of the time, then it could very conceivably have no impact on his work, in the same way that getting drunk on a Friday doesn't mean you'll be s*faced on the Monday. The absurdity of the moral imperative drive of society is that someone who may well have been doing their job perfectly well, and benefiting society can be ousted from that position on the basis of what other people think are acceptable forms of recreation drug use. If he was getting smashed on whiskey every night no one would give a fk. If someone advising the Chancellor of the Exchequer has the lack of judgement to take crack cocaine, then the wisdom of his advice must be suspect to say the least, of course he should go. On the say so of the tabloid media, seems fair and just and right. No, after it being looked into, apparently there is film. Of course, if he has done it, he should simply resign of his own accord. Or join the Liberal Democrats, they in need of someone who knows how to get a party back on track. If it was me, I'd claim it was produced from dimethocaine - which isn't illegal in the UK. Crack is simply cocaine separated from the hydrochloric salt base (to lower its vapourisation point). Dimethocaine can be purchased legally in the UK, and is indistinguishable from cocaine without chemical analysis (its less potent, but has been widely or used to adulterate cocaine in the UK). Edited by jamiemartin721 (01 Jun 2015 1.07pm) Edited by jamiemartin721 (01 Jun 2015 1.09pm) Didn't the government just make everything illegal though, apart from food, cigs and booze or propose to do so?
Alert a moderator to this post

Steptoe

02 Jun 15 8.09pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 1.03pm

Quote derben at 01 Jun 2015 12.53pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 12.43pm

Quote derben at 01 Jun 2015 11.30am

Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 11.07am

Quote derben at 01 Jun 2015 9.58am

Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 9.14am

Quote derben at 31 May 2015 9.36pm

Of course he should go.

So its not freedom of expression and personal choice? I thought it wasn't your belief that the state should be intervening in the choices of individuals and businesses.

If its outside work and isn't affecting his daily work, surely its up to him? Even if its ill advised, somewhat dangerous and addictive (not really a problem on his income).

Freedom of expression and personal choice within the law of course, as you well know. You think taking crack cocaine would not affect his daily work? When taking the crack, he was in possession of a Class A drug - a criminal offence. Just shows how low society has sunk when people are saying he does not need to resign.

Edited by derben (01 Jun 2015 9.59am)

Conviction for possession requires that you can prove the person in question was in possession of a controlled substance beyond reasonable doubt. Oddly this has resulted in being high not being an offence of possession.

The idea that someone has to resign on the say so of evidence presented by a newspaper is questionable in the extreme.

Given the duration of a crack high, and the high metabolisation of cocaine, provided he isn't using it all of the time, then it could very conceivably have no impact on his work, in the same way that getting drunk on a Friday doesn't mean you'll be s***faced on the Monday.

The absurdity of the moral imperative drive of society is that someone who may well have been doing their job perfectly well, and benefiting society can be ousted from that position on the basis of what other people think are acceptable forms of recreation drug use.

If he was getting smashed on whiskey every night no one would give a f**k.

If someone advising the Chancellor of the Exchequer has the lack of judgement to take crack cocaine, then the wisdom of his advice must be suspect to say the least, of course he should go.

On the say so of the tabloid media, seems fair and just and right.

No, after it being looked into, apparently there is film. Of course, if he has done it, he should simply resign of his own accord.

Or join the Liberal Democrats, they in need of someone who knows how to get a party back on track.

If it was me, I'd claim it was produced from dimethocaine - which isn't illegal in the UK. Crack is simply cocaine separated from the hydrochloric salt base (to lower its vapourisation point).

Dimethocaine can be purchased legally in the UK, and is indistinguishable from cocaine without chemical analysis (its less potent, but has been widely or used to adulterate cocaine in the UK).

Edited by jamiemartin721 (01 Jun 2015 1.07pm)

Edited by jamiemartin721 (01 Jun 2015 1.09pm)

Didn't the government just make everything illegal though, apart from food, cigs and booze or propose to do so?

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 02 Jun 15 9.07pm
Quote Steptoe at 02 Jun 2015 8.09pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 1.03pm Quote derben at 01 Jun 2015 12.53pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 12.43pm Quote derben at 01 Jun 2015 11.30am Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 11.07am Quote derben at 01 Jun 2015 9.58am Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Jun 2015 9.14am Quote derben at 31 May 2015 9.36pm Of course he should go. So its not freedom of expression and personal choice? I thought it wasn't your belief that the state should be intervening in the choices of individuals and businesses. If its outside work and isn't affecting his daily work, surely its up to him? Even if its ill advised, somewhat dangerous and addictive (not really a problem on his income). Freedom of expression and personal choice within the law of course, as you well know. You think taking crack cocaine would not affect his daily work? When taking the crack, he was in possession of a Class A drug - a criminal offence. Just shows how low society has sunk when people are saying he does not need to resign. Edited by derben (01 Jun 2015 9.59am) Conviction for possession requires that you can prove the person in question was in possession of a controlled substance beyond reasonable doubt. Oddly this has resulted in being high not being an offence of possession. The idea that someone has to resign on the say so of evidence presented by a newspaper is questionable in the extreme. Given the duration of a crack high, and the high metabolisation of cocaine, provided he isn't using it all of the time, then it could very conceivably have no impact on his work, in the same way that getting drunk on a Friday doesn't mean you'll be s*faced on the Monday. The absurdity of the moral imperative drive of society is that someone who may well have been doing their job perfectly well, and benefiting society can be ousted from that position on the basis of what other people think are acceptable forms of recreation drug use. If he was getting smashed on whiskey every night no one would give a fk. If someone advising the Chancellor of the Exchequer has the lack of judgement to take crack cocaine, then the wisdom of his advice must be suspect to say the least, of course he should go. On the say so of the tabloid media, seems fair and just and right. No, after it being looked into, apparently there is film. Of course, if he has done it, he should simply resign of his own accord. Or join the Liberal Democrats, they in need of someone who knows how to get a party back on track. If it was me, I'd claim it was produced from dimethocaine - which isn't illegal in the UK. Crack is simply cocaine separated from the hydrochloric salt base (to lower its vapourisation point). Dimethocaine can be purchased legally in the UK, and is indistinguishable from cocaine without chemical analysis (its less potent, but has been widely or used to adulterate cocaine in the UK). Edited by jamiemartin721 (01 Jun 2015 1.07pm) Edited by jamiemartin721 (01 Jun 2015 1.09pm) Didn't the government just make everything illegal though, apart from food, cigs and booze or propose to do so? Next week, the rest of the world seems to be waking up to the reality that the war on drugs isn't just a failure, its made things worse and wastes a fortune to achieve nothing Meanwhile the Conservative Party are going against the tide and seem to be on a plan to ban any and all legal highs. The predictable consequence of this will be that the drop in drug use they've been so proud of will disappear (as people move back to illegal drugs). Because... Well no one is actually sure, the evidence proves the approach is more harmful than the drugs, costs society more and inflict more misery on non-drug users (and for the billions spent reduces the drugs in circulation by between 1 and 10 percent (customs reckon 10% the Police reckon around 1-2%). The economist reckons that the UK currently spends about 12bn a year on weed. 12bn that goes straight into the pockets of criminals. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 02 Jun 15 9.07pm

Quote Steptoe at 02 Jun 2015 8.09pm