Monthly Archives: November 2008

the void is hibernating …

But thought we’d give a quick heads up on the latest hysteria from Talking (bollocks) About Cannabis.

Old trout Debra Bell is claiming that their phoneline for concerned parents will be launched on January 12th next year so as soon as the number is published we will duly distribute it far and wide around the internet so you can give them a call and let them know what you think.

In the meantime you can contact them here.

Debra and co are currently seeking funds for theur shonky organisation with the first priority being  “in particular we need our current voluntary Director to be paid”.

And the current voluntary director is, you guessed it, Debra Bell.  So give genorously folks in the knowledge that every penny you spend will go straight into the pocket of Debra Bell! With her husband a lowly Barrister help the impoverished Bells to beat the credit crunch this Christmas.

She really does need some more crystals if she’s going to save the world.

By the way William, if you are out there, and we won’t come looking, but we’re now pretty sure that you could have your dear old mum up in court under the Human Rights Convention “Right to a Private Life” and could also be in for a hefty sum in a libel action.

Meanwhile we’ll be challenging the Charity Commission’s claim that the information on their daft website is backed by experts – beginning with contacting Professor Robin Murray, cunningly and thoroughly dishonestly quoted on their website in a vain attempt to suggest that a leading Prof’ supports the unscientific drivel they continue to spout about cannabis.

So that’s us done, probably until the New Year, although Grumpy Old Anarchist may be making an appearance if we can get him out of bed.

ps anarchy may be breaking out in Iceland

pps the BNP are threatening various folk for linking to the original link of their membership list which Antifa have in a PDF file here.


Dear Duncan

Dear Duncan

Thank you for your response.  Having sought legal opinion I will be taking this through the complaints procedure in due course.

In your statement you note:

“I am satisfied that the charity has appropriate systems to ensure the accuracy of the information it provides. The information on the charity’s website is produced and endorsed by a variety of experts in the field of drugs misuse.”

I would be grateful if you could tell me who are the people that the Charity Commission regards as experts as the only organisation involved in drug misuse (Addaction) appear to have withdrawn their endorsement of Talking About Cannabis.

All the other advisors are members of anti-drug pressure groups with no scientific or healthcare credentials.

Furthermore I will be adding in my complaint that I believe the organisation to be acting illegally in publishing the intimate details of the life of Debra Bell’s son, William.

This is in clear breach of Article 8 of the Human Rights act enshrining the right to privacy and may meet the threshold for criminal libel.

I hope to have my complaint with you shortly.


johnny void

Now Charity Commission Talk Bollocks About Cannabis

This isn’t over.

Dear Johnny Void
Talking About Cannabis
Following my e mail of 3 September 2008, I have now completed my assessment regarding whether or not the above organisation has been correctly registered.

My assessment has focussed on the following two main areas of concern raised by you:
That the information provided by the charity is factually inaccurate
That the organisation is established primarily for political purposes.

I have obtained information to evaluate these concerns and consulted with colleagues including legal colleagues.

I have concluded that the organisation “Talking about Cannabis” has been correctly registered as a charity on the following basis.

I am satisfied that the charity has appropriate systems to ensure the accuracy of the information it provides.

The information on the charity’s website is produced and endorsed by a variety of experts in the field of drugs misuse. (like fucking who, school teacher Mary Brett!)
The organisation has demonstrated from the information on its website and supplied with its application that it is established for education and research regarding cannabis and the relief of suffering among cannabis users for the public benefit.  These are charitable purposes.

The charity has supported one campaign regarding cannabis, (and that’s all it’s done) which it has demonstrated from information it has supplied it is able to do as part of furthering its charitable purposes.

The organisation’s secretariat role for the All Party Parliamentary Group on Cannabis and Children APPG is administrative.

This is a cross-party group with no allegiance to one particular party. The members of the group consist of 10 Labour, 10 from the opposition – 7 Conservative, 2 Lib-Democrats and 1 Cross-bencher.

The Group’s purpose is “To inform members of both Houses of Parliament, and using sound scientific and medical evidence, to raise awareness and stimulate debate about the impact of cannabis on children and young people”.

I am satisfied that the charity is not primarily established for a political purpose.

I do understand that this response will be disappointing for you.

If you are dissatisfied with our service and or decision you could consider whether our complaints procedures available on our website are applicable.

There is no further action for me to take now.

Yours sincerely
Jane Cooke

the void might be moving to the other website by the way, we’re not sure yet.