Peter Hitchens

Tubby Isaacs · **Posted:** Sun Jan 29, 2012 8:12 pm

satnav wrote:

I don't really see what his problem is with double jeopardy. At present if you are convicted of a crime and then new evidence emerges to cast doubt on the conviction you can appeal against the conviction and a new trial can be ordered. So what's wrong with having a system whereby someone who is found not guilty being retried if new evidence subsequently emerges. Equally a not guilty verdict could be called in to question if evidence emerges that a jury has bee nobbled or that the prosecution case was undermined because a few bent coppers tampered with evidence to help a defendant evade prosecution.

Retrials after jury trials were already allowed.

crabcakes_windermere · **Joined:** Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:56 pm **Posts:** 2082

That latest column is an extraordinary effort in sour grapes. They listen to Branson but not me, but I KNOW what's right! - waah! I didn't like a film lots of other people did, so it's the other people who are wrong - waah! Answering my petty nitpick isn't top priority for a new Prime Minister - waah! People believe Richard Dawkins rather than my particular brand of repressive, stifling, prejudiced superstition - waah!

How old is he again? 6?

Bones McCoy · **Joined:** Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:08 am **Posts:** 7342

crabcakes_windermere wrote:

That latest column is an extraordinary effort in sour grapes. They listen to Branson but not me, but I KNOW what's right! - waah! I didn't like a film lots of other people did, so it's the other people who are wrong - waah! Answering my petty nitpick isn't top priority for a new Prime Minister - waah! People believe Richard Dawkins rather than my particular brand of repressive, stifling, prejudiced superstition - waah!

How old is he again? 6?

It's the golden cleric acceptance speech, but not as funny.

bluebellnutter · **Posted:** Mon Jan 30, 2012 2:45 pm

"And now we move onto liars.."

Big Rob · **Posted:** Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:24 am

The problem being is that most of the people Hitchens attacks are actually way more successful and talented than he could ever be.

I mean anyone who hates themselves enough can be a demagogue for the mail, by spouting crackpot theories to appeal to ill informed crackpots, can make some cash. The only thing you have to do is hate yourself enough.

That self hatred got Littlejohn all the way to managing to live next door to Mickey Mouse...

Big Rob · **Posted:** Sun Feb 05, 2012 11:38 pm

How come China has no ADHD?

Quote:

The made-up complaint ADHD apparently doesn’t exist in China.

The horrible drugs used to numb the poor children who are scandalously ‘diagnosed’ with ADHD are not available there.

And yet somehow, Chinese boys and girls manage to behave in class.

ADHD Affects over 15 Million Chinese Children

Hitchens fact. Pulled straight from his delusional idiotic ass.

Bones McCoy · **Joined:** Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:08 am **Posts:** 7342

Big Rob wrote:

How come China has no ADHD?

Quote:

The made-up complaint ADHD apparently doesn’t exist in China.

The horrible drugs used to numb the poor children who are scandalously ‘diagnosed’ with ADHD are not available there.

And yet somehow, Chinese boys and girls manage to behave in class.

ADHD Affects over 15 Million Chinese Children

Hitchens fact. Pulled straight from his delusional idiotic ass.

"How come" (from a chap who went to a nice school) warrants a "Welcome to the valleys" spear tackle.

Big Rob · **Posted:** Mon Feb 06, 2012 12:08 am

Well I am taking a stab at your meaning and whether or not you were being facetious.

Hitchens is an idiot who spouts idiotic nonsense on subjects he knows shag all about. He claims 'free speech', which is fair enough, however that means he is free to spout ill informed and irresponsible crap (which is what he is doing here). Free speech does not mean that you should not take the consequences of spouting such crap.

Maybe there is a controversy and I would like to hear it. However Hitchens laughable views on mental health should be exposed to ridicule when all he does is cherry pick facts in order to confirm his own cognitive bias.

tonysk14 · **Joined:** Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:44 pm **Posts:** 232

Big Rob wrote:

Well I am taking a stab at your meaning and whether or not you were being facetious.

Hitchens is an idiot who spouts idiotic nonsense on subjects he knows shag all about. He claims 'free speech', which is fair enough, however that means he is free to spout ill informed and irresponsible crap (which is what he is doing here). Free speech does not mean that you should not take the consequences of spouting such crap.

Maybe there is a controversy and I would like to hear it. However Hitchens laughable views on mental health should be exposed to ridicule when all he does is cherry pick facts in order to confirm his own cognitive bias.

He was on Start the Week this morning whittering on about his favourite thesis, that being that the Conservative Party isn't conservative at all, and that Iain Duncan Smith is a dangerous left wing liberal who will destroy the country. Personally I think IDS and his idiotic millionaire friends will destroy the country , but not for the reasons that the twunt Hitchins believes.

crabcakes_windermere · **Joined:** Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:56 pm **Posts:** 2082

His column this week in sentences:

I know some people with knighthoods that I slightly let slip I am jealous of. I think you should only get awards for killing and war (however, if offered I'd probably take one).

I don't believe something is real, therefore it isn't, even if evidence provided by people who understand said thing says otherwise.

If some people don't do exactly as I say then they are simply not listening/deluded rather than forming their own opinion.

My digibox is broken and/or I get a poor reception. This is the somehow the fault of falling standards on television.

Even though the Tories aren't that popular, I think everyone should demand a super-strength Tory party, which I predict *will* be wildly popular. I will do nothing to help bring this about however other than repeatedly complain it hasn't been done yet.

I think families who hate each other should be forced to stay together under the premise of helping children, but actually because I just like appearances to be kept up and think the concepts of suffering in silence and making do with ones lot for decades are somehow dignified rather than bone-numbingly stupid. Oh, and I don't like gay people, or religious people who don't persecute gay people but actually treat them as people.

Big Rob · **Posted:** Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:33 am

crabcakes_windermere wrote:

If some people don't do exactly as I say then they are simply not listening/deluded rather than forming their own opinion.

Ha!!!

If you agree with me then I will give you a lot of compliments. If you disagree with me I will poison your name.

Nutshell.

Messianic Trees · **Joined:** Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:50 pm **Posts:** 2843

How does the State get away with grooming 13-year-old girls for illegal underage sex?

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... z1m9ZP1iIL

Waterstones · **Joined:** Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:26 pm **Posts:** 298

He comes across to me as someone whose pissed off that people liked to hear what his brother had to say rather what he had to say.

ACG · **Posted:** Sun Feb 12, 2012 6:18 pm

Messianic Trees wrote:

How does the State get away with grooming 13-year-old girls for illegal underage sex?

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... z1m9ZP1iIL

pre-clicking prediction

it doesn't, this will be some utter balls about either sex educaition, avaliable contraception, or possibly even something like a social trend that actually doesn't have anything to do with "the state" in the first place

ok then, away go...

one line into the article, and...the correct answer is "avaliable contraception". i'd reward myself with a biscuit or something but i actually feel a bit depressed after that.

Big Rob · **Posted:** Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:08 am

I love it when Peter Hitchens uses a term like totalitarian, when he spends all time arguing that we would all be better off having his values hoisted upon us.

Time for your meds Pete.....

Peter Hitchens

Who is online