Thought of the day…


23 responses to “Thought of the day…

  1. How apt. And perfectly true. As we have observed.

  2. Dioclese once again thank you for providing a platform for free speech without having a “hissy fit” when you see a different view to you own,no ifs or buts, lame excuses, comment moderation , or censoring .

    Thanks for allowing my opinions to be seen which inlcude supporting health advice on smoking.

    Well done that man.


  3. Well said and very true.

  4. He also said,
    “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes.”

    So there ya go. Innit?
    I too am in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes, though I reckon Sir Winston and I would disagree on which 'tribes' are uncivilised and therefore warrant a spritzing of Sarin at our whim.

    The Tutor, bless his ever-so Caucasoid soul, reacts as if hit by one of Churchill's Lachrymatory shells every time he hears this,

    See what I must tolerate?

  5. Churchill was a man of his time and judged accordingly. His war record outweighs his faults in my book.

  6. Gah! This lack of editing ability is annoying. “should be judged accordingly…”

  7. Is that what you genuinely belive you do here Ricky?

    The reason I ask is since the beginning of this year you’ve wished physical harm on Pat, you tried to blackmail and then threatened Longrider, you very regularly attempt to belittle Clark at Forest and you’ve attempted to ridicule Davis and Puddlecote.

    In fact since this year started I have seen not one constructive “health” statement from the pseudonym “Ricky”.

    I mention this because there is no possibility whatsoever of any relaxation to the smoking ban in any part of the UK; certainly not within the life of this government. To my mind you have absolutely nothing to fear from any of these people and no just cause to wish them any harm. Can you give me one very good reason why you do so?

    Is anything you say at this site something you would say to any of them in real life? If so, why do you not take the time to establish your own blog, allow comments and build up your own followers? You have the freedom to do so. Explain why you don’t.

    Without having precise details, I strongly suspect that many of the links into this blog come from Puddlecote and Longrider in that order. Therefore they’re really web buddies of Dioclese, do you ever consider how small and cheap that must make Dioclese feel? How he must so often wish he could get out from under his rather naive belief that freedom of speech must be protected, even if at the back of his mind he knows perfectly well that you very frequently abuse that privilege.

    If Dioclese were to be taken up for inciting hatred and violence because of your coments, would you be prepared to stand up and take the fall, because Pat most certainly has just cause to make that claim?

    Would it terribly presumptuous of me to ask if you comment on this blog because you believe you can get to a wider audience than if you stared your own blog?

    There are seven questions I’d like you to answer Ricky.


  8. 1. Pat Nurse and her safe smoking Campaign is physical harm…I wish she would stop for own health.

    2.Longrider has been stalking me for years accusing me of breaking the law with no proof…I have never posted on his site, he stalks me…..I took the piss to fight back against the bully with nothing whatsoever to blackmail or threaten him except his own demons and nightmares he regularly publishes. I do not know his employer/client details nor his….its a case of mistaken identity.

    Longrider is self employed so therefore I cannot contact anyone, he states his clients know about his blog so its all a bit silly really isint it….and he will not stop, and I will continue to never post on his site.

    3. Clark/Puddlecote/Davis….yes absolutely I do belittle them…..should blog hosts be exempt from my opinion or is it public figures/celebrities /politicians only?

    4.I do not wish anyone harm, I do not fear these people…for crying out loud, I will not be silenced on my opinions about smoking denial and hypocrisy , just like those bloggers will never cease attacking health workers and health advice..its freedom of speech both ways not just what you want to hear .

    5. Since this year started you may well have seen no constructive health statements from me, plenty in previous years though., however I did give a link to a video showing the effects of smoking for 40 years…does that count?.

    6. I am happy to post on others sites like many other poster do without having their own site.

    7. There is no violence whatsoever, nor am I inciting it…..if anyone thinks otherwise then they should got to the police, perhaps you can show me this violence?. Blog hosts /bloggers that publish content for the public should not be exempt from criticism …they belittle/take the piss/destroy professional reputations as a hobby…Debs Arnott is savaged viciously week in week out …but of course that's ok aint it.

    8. yes I would get a wider audience here than my own blog…..although its terribly obvious that you want me put in a corner where I can't be heard….freedom of speech is a bit of a bugger aint it.

    9. Inciting violence/stand up and take the fall!!!….how dramatic and funny. Ask Dioclese about those things I don't answer for him, if anyone has any claim to make about anything then put up or shut up….I will not be silenced by those naive comments.

    You seem to be getting in a bit of mucking fuddle and grasping at anything to silence me…why not try and debating the points I make, or as virtually everyone else does ignore me or refuse to debate. Its been like that for years with no problems and will continue.

    Pro smoking bloggers are full of hypocrisy, denial, lies, bollocks…..I know they want me silenced, your effort is another piss poor fail.

    Rickie not Ricky


  9. Dioclese 26 august 2013.

    “Your point about 'my gaff, my rules' is a valid one. If you enforce such a policy then you are effectively introducing censorship and that destroys the very thing you profess to support. In my view, that's a form of hypocrisy and you might gather from my posts on here that hypocrisy gets right up my nose”.

    It gets right up my nose too especially when Libertarian defenders of freedoms spew that out.


  10. Asmodeus:

    You should pop over to ….is a cunt.

    Incitng hatred and violence always welcome.

    Quick Draw Mcaw said .

    “allegedly peaceful muslims have been busy showing the world that, far from being peaceful, they are actually devolved, stone age, violent, uncivilised, sub-human scum”.

    “As far as I’m concerned, Merkel is the anti-Christ. She needs to be taken out.

    then pop on to the next thread and then the one after and then the the one after that…you get the picture, I have never heard a squeak out of anyone about that blog…cos its celebs and politicians most of the time.

    Hypocrisy stinks.


  11. Oh I forget the comments:

    Here is a selection about Merkel and Muslims: from different posters.

    Hopefully she’ll die before this happens.

    I will happily pull the trigger myself.

    What she doesn’t realise or care about is that all western European countries are having a shit time with trying to cope with the influx of goat rapists.

    It is horrific to think that women can’t go for a night out without these genetic throwbacks molesting them.

    And you’re dead right, this cunt needs a bullet straight between the eyes.

    I won't publish more on other recent threads on other “cunts”…it gets a little distasteful.


  12. Sigh… Here we go again.

    I am not stalking you. I have never stalked you. You certainly stalked me and a number of others over the past few years. Indeed, your comments here demonstrate the Churchill quote admirably. You are happy to spill your bile, but as soon as anyone dares to contradict you, they get hissy fits, foot stamping temper tantrums, threats and blackmail.

    As for breaking the law – you indulged in threats and blackmail on this site a few days ago. Those threats were in breach of the malicious communications act and constituted blackmail under the theft act. The evidence is here, in your own words. Trying to wriggle out of it with the “it was only a joke” nonsense fools no one who has passed puberty. It certainly would not fool a police officer investigating a complaint.

    As for the rest of the utter, utter spiteful shite you have spewed; as Dioclese is wont to say TLDNR.

  13. Dioclese and I disagree on this one. I will happily allow on-topic disagreement. I will not put up with someone hijacking my site – that I pay for – to post long, off-topic screeds about their pet subject.

    I am not obliged to, and there is no hypocrisy, nor is there any censorship. Freedom of speech applies to governments, not individuals or businesses and it is that principle that libertarians argue for, not the right to post utter shite on a website.

    Anyone who wants a soapbox can set one up. No one is obliged to provide them with a platform. Freedom of speech means the freedom to speak without being arrested, it does not mean the freedom to be heard and it does not mean the right to a platform. People running websites have a choice. Most choose a light touch approach to moderation. Some allow everything and anything and some allow none. Their gaff, their rules.

    Whether gets up your nose or Dioclese's nose makes no difference, that is the fact of the matter.

  14. Oh and Pat Nurse's health is none of your damned business. Your faux concern makes your comments all the more offensive.

  15. “those threats were in breach of the malicious communications act and constituted blackmail under the theft act”, and inciting hatred and violence, I had no idea I had been such a cunt, I thought I was defending myself against serious accusations of law breaking several years ago that I did not comit

    I reckon that will silence me for sure, looks like I'm fucked after all…no more freedom of speech, no more views on smoking, no standing up to bullies.

    Post your glorious victory on your website Longrider.

    I will await the Police. I would like to make one plea, can I still post views on celebrities and politicians and maybe the odd post on Ambush Predator about chavs and their dogs.

    Perhaps the Internet decency and morals panel could show some mercy and allow some freedom of speech as long as its properly regulated/censored and all that.

    Libertarians I beg you.


  16. Let's clarify a few things here shall we?

    (1) “…is a cunt” is not my blog – I just help run it. The policy over there is different to Dioclese. There is a disclaimer on the site that clearly states the views of the posters are their views and not necessarily ours

    (2) There is a clear 'our blog, our rules' statement. If you find the content offensive, I refer you to the title of the site. It really shouldn't be a surprise.

    (3) We don't offer free speech over there. We block trolls and remove / moderate comment that are over the top on grounds of encouraging terrorism, racism, religious hatred, liable, defamation etc etc.

    As regards this blog, I'm beginning to get a bit pissed off at all the off topic bollocks being spouted here. I don't mind the odd but of off topic stuff, but if you want a soapbox then start a site of your own and I'll give you a link on my blogroll and tell you how to do it like I did for Flaxen Saxon. I'll even come and comment over at yours. I might even tell you you're a cunt – provided you allow free speech of course!!!

    Yes, I support free speech but this continued wrangling and off topic bullshit is beginning to try my patience. Kindly moderate your behaviour and respect this site for what it offers…

  17. 'liable'? FFS! 'libel'

    I see the point about lack of editing in the comments. And the bloody speel chucker!

  18. @ Rickie

    Many thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. Much appreciated.

    Please do not labour under the impression that I want you to quit commenting, all I sought was your justification for your statement

    “my opinions to be seen which include supporting health advice on smoking”.

    You see it’s like this Rickie, ASH on their website state they are not against smokers’ or smoking and the only place in the UK where health professionals do name individuals is Tobacco Tactics – and then only with their reasons for doing so.

    You go far further than that, you seem to like to get very personal with what seemed to me to be without just cause. I do not however agree with your claim that you do not wish anyone harm.

    “Abdul Haroun should be chained to Pat Nurse as a punishment” is exactly just that in my opinion.

    Nevertheless I take on board that:

    1) This is a convenient platform for you.

    2) What you’re really trying to do is get across your opinions about smoking denial and hypocrisy.

    Thank you again,


  19. Pingback: Freedom of Speech redux – Longrider

  20. @Rickie:

    A blogger may choose to moderate posts and remove any they don’t care for, but that is NOT censorship.

    Have you been arrested for your comments? Have you been sent to Siberia, or taken quietly out the back and shot? Have you been imprisoned, gagged, tortured, or faced any other *government* sanction over your posts?

    No. You haven’t been “censored”. Censorship is something only a government can do.

    What has usually happened is that a blogger has posted an article on a particular topic, and you’ve come along and posted some completely irrelevant stuff that has nothing to do with said topic, thus hijacking the post for your own ends. This is not illegal, but neither is it polite, respectful, or in any way pleasant behaviour. It’s downright rude, and some people have a low tolerance for rudeness.

    Low tolerance for rudeness or bad behaviour do NOT equate to “censorship”, “hypocrisy”, or any kind of violation of your freedom of speech, because that right ONLY applies to governments.

    Nobody’s stopping you visiting or, signing up for a new, free, account, and starting your own soapbox. That really is all it takes. It’s not even remotely difficult. You can be up and running in a couple of minutes.

  21. “Libertarians I beg you.”

    From Mr. Libertarian himself, Murray Rothbard:

    “Take, for example, the “human right” of free speech. Freedom of speech is supposed to mean the right of everyone to say whatever he likes. But the neglected question is: Where? Where does a man have this right? He certainly does not have it on property on which he is trespassing. In short, he has this right only either on his own property or on the property of someone who has agreed, as a gift or in a rental contract, to allow him on the premises. In fact, then, there is no such thing as a separate “right to free speech”; there is only a man’s property right: the right to do as he wills with his own or to make voluntary agreements with other property owners.”

    Not complicated.