- The Weed Blog https://www.theweedblog.com
Share.

What Is The True Story Of The UK Cannabis Activist Group ‘CLEAR’?

75
clear uk cannabis

image via: clear-uk.org

Is There More Than Meets The Eye With UK Activist Group ‘CLEAR’?

If you follow TWB regularly, than you know that I like to highlight activist groups. I feel that hardworking people need to have their pursuits recognized so they will want to continue to contribute. A funny thing happens from time to time. I will post something about a group (always with good intentions), and the comments will fire up with explosive allegations and accusations. To me, it’s just as important to highlight people’s efforts that deserve it as it is to highlight groups that need to be called out. The last thing we need is people pretending to be doing stuff for the movement, when all the while they are just trying to fulfill their greedy desires.

If there is an article that exemplifies this commenting phenomenon it would have to be the article that I posted back in February. It was titled, ‘What Is UK Cannabis Activist Group ‘CLEAR’? It seemed like a straight forward article at the time. We get a lot of hits from the UK, so I Googled ‘UK cannabis’ to see if I could find some groups there to highlight. The first one I came across was CLEAR. About an hour after the article posted, I saw a comment on another article from what appeared to be an older gentleman commenting under the name Peter Reynolds. I vividly remember looking at it and thinking, ‘sweet, we finally are getting the older demographic!’ It turned out to be the head of CLEAR, who was poking around my website apparently.

After his comment, comments started flooding in like a hurricane on that particular article. Some comments were in favor, some comments were against, but almost all of them were full of fire and fury. Ninjasmoker and I were hanging out watching the drama unfold at the time. We got a hate e-mail asking us how we could ever support such an evil group, and I explained to them that I had no idea who they were or why they were evil or not. I simply shared the public information that was available.

But now my curiosity is going. It has been going since the comments started coming in on that article. I’m a very curious person, so I must know more. I keep asking friends online from the UK about it, and they always say that they don’t want anything to do with it for fear of retribution from Peter Reynolds. One reader suggested that I stop asking about it, because Peter Reynolds has censored a lot of stuff on the internet, and I could be picking a fight with a very powerful person. I then explained to the friend that messing with powerful people that are giving the marijuana movement a bad name is my FAVORITE thing to do most of the time. The friend asked how I could be so brave. I told him it’s the American way. We say what we want with our middle finger in the air and our other hand clutching a burning joint.

So what do you say UK? Anyone out there want to speak their mind about this topic? Anyone out there want to defend CLEAR? All view points are welcome. Unlike sites in the UK, The Weed Blog will not censor anything. We believe in freedom of speech at The Weed Blog, so have at it. Anyone that wants to try to bully us will get blasted as hard as we can give it to them :) I’m curious to hear what people have to say and what links they have to provide on both sides of the debate.

Share.

About Author

Johnny Green

75 Comments

  1. jason ravenall on

    Im jason ravenall and my daughter lola sat on my face while my girlfriend charmaine ward was pretending to be asleep.

  2. I don’t case about Clear really, but amazed at the goings on, so democracy, how will you know these emaiuls represent real members – perhaps one person has joined dozens of times with different accounts for this very purpose? 

    Is it not obvious what my obsession is? I am for the liberation of humanity from the enslavement that the so-called ‘war on drugs’ actually is; the subjugation of humanity to control consciousness.

  3. It is indeed sad that the so-called elected leader has alienated so many campaigners and tokers, gays and those that originate from outside the UK, and a year after taking his office has created so much bad feeling and division – and not yet contested one single election.

    Reynolds needs to go, Janice Wells and Mark Palmer, the two yes-men that he has kept on his committee having thrown off everyone that disagreed, they need to go too, we need to replace the CLEAR proposal that growers and users be made to pay with a policy based upon Rights – and bring back the alliance – the one positive thing that Reynolds seems to have done is re-unite the campaigners, united against him and his policy of semi-prohibition.

  4.  well that sort of attitude won’t win support – kick out those that disagree, refuse to listen to anyone outside or the petty party – throw abuse – if you are not Reynolds himself, you write just like him and who cares anyway, you’re just a fictitious name, unlike Darryl Blicker who is a real person.

    Clear claims to represent the interests of all cannabis users yet will only listen to those that pay and agree!!

  5.  aha so you’re not really called Jimmy Bobbins are you – you are in fact too scared to use your own name – but it does not take long to see who you really are? 

    you talk about democracy yet your party has thrown out or driven away all the campaigners opposed to the leader or the policy – same sort of democracy applied by most tyrants – Hitler, Hussein, Gadafi, all got rid of the opposition before the vote.

    Irrespective of the vote, in any case, so much damage has been done by Mt Abuse -t is unlikley to be repaired, CLEAR is now dead in the ater, working more in the interests of the taxman than the tokers – YOU have not only alienated the works (campaigners0 you have alienated gays, those of different ethinicity, MP’s and other campaigning groups like the SSDP.

    REYNOLDS is exposed.

  6.  So go tell that to Reynolds who damaged the Legalise Cannabis Campaign and has consistently offended the campaigners, driven them out of CLEAR and censored their opinions – he even tried to destroy the whole history of the LCA – Reynolds must go to bring unity.

  7.  Oh Darryl and others are free to do their campaigning for what they want including getting rid of Reynolds and including getting rid of bad policy – the CLEAR policy of making users and growers pay for what is their Rights – and we will carry on campaigning despite Reynold’s censorship, expelling people from the party, chucking people of his committee and threatening to sue them.

  8.  Trouble is Jimmy that those “buffoons” are actually the majority of the active UK cannabis campaigners

  9.  Trouble is Jimmy that “these buffoons” consist of dozens of UK cannabis activists, people that put their necks on the line, people that stood up for others, people that were natural born leaders – and the trouble is that Reynolds acts like a petty tyrant devaluing the efforts of others by stating that he sees nobody else in the whole UK capable of doing his job -  he’s right of cause if his real “job” was to destroy the UK cannabis campaign

  10.  Do you really think that a “leader” that has publicly expressed his racists and homophobic views and called most of the UK campaigners liars, thrown off his committee more dedicated activists than he has left, is a good public face for the UK cannabis campaign?  He has caused more division than ever.

  11. Jimmy Bobbins on

    Look CLEAR is a democratic party. The members will vote, and if that’s a yes, it will be the end of it. Execs were kicked out for truly disgraceful behaviour – really hateful vindictive stuff. It’s funny because on the CLEAR members forum dissent isn’t shot down, but everyone generally is in total agreement that the campaign against Peter is completely wrong. Those people doing it are not painting themselves in a good light. Hateful shit generally isn’t an indicator of a good person. Would would want to follow those pushing constant hate?

    While those haters keep on hating there will always be choppy waters. Why can’t they stop therefore? Why can’t you, or them, leave CLEAR alone? Why are they willing to harm the campaigns of complete strangers? That’s what I can’t understand. What is their obsession with CLEAR that they don’t care that their bullying actions are harming the campaigns of decent people? What is your obsession Darryl? Tell me, because I’m genuinely interested.

  12. Jimmy Bobbins on

    Darryl, does “gushing unequivocal support” just mean disagreeing with you, because that’s all I’m doing. I don’t think I’ve extolled Peter’s leadership qualities, good or bad, at all on this thread – bar saying that I have only ever seen him handle himself with decorum when I came across him on local news sites and that he has been subjected to bullying. 

    That’s hardly “gushing unequivocal support”. Look back for yourself if you don’t believe me. What I’ve done is point out that CLEAR’s member’s will decide if Peter is good enough, not bullies on the net.

    Everyone doesn’t have to tow the bullies’ line. I’m not going to thanks. I don’t want to have to condone or defend hateful behaviour constantly. That’s your problem not mine.

  13. Jimmy Bobbins on

    Then feel free to campaign for those things then Darryl. The campaign doesn’t need critics, as it’s name suggests, it needs campaigners. I wouldn’t limit volunteers to “extraordianry people doing amazing things” things either. I certainly wouldn’t berate genuine campaigners for not being so – it’s just your opinion don’t forget, and people are just doing their best.. Or are you auditioning for a stage production of Jerry Maguire or something?

  14. Isn’t it obvious there are so many dissenters that its untenable even if people who are left (in the dark) still vote for the same thing?  Democracy never helped minorities anyway, what we have is democracy subjugating a minority group for advantage with our drug user policies – that’s why we have one law ostensibly for some drug users and a complete let off for others – its majoritarian abuse of power.  You have complete control over the voting process, the information people are given, all dissenters are barred from comments at Clear, many people were kicked out including the exec – even if I could take you at your word that it was fair with proper opportunity for dissenters to make their minds known to all and sundry, and believe me I would have to be smoking crack and see a complete UN observing team in place to do so, if Reynolds still controls Clear then people will still not settle behind him, it will never be settled – the only hope is for him to be a consultant to Clear or to work with others – whilst he controls it it will always be on choppy waters – that’s not my threat, its just a view based upon the logic of the situation I see before me of persons so aggrieved that they simply are prepared to work tirelessly to see him gone – its important to people, it’s their ambitions, hopes and dreams – they are not going to have someone insist, someone they dont like, that he is the fucking leader and spokesperson because 20 people were duped at the LCA to go for it.  Why would anyone want to do a job like this against so much contempt for them doing it?  It must be a paycheck or a massive ego issue.

  15. We don’t want normal campaigners doing normal things – we want extraordianry people doing amazing things. we want people in the US inspired by what we do, heaven knows most of them are are crap right now.  Raise your sights, raise your game, it always was a soft option to get support for sick people, but that was never your real mandate – you have to fight for all peace-loving people or your names not lovepeaceguru.  Lets declare an amnesty for all peaceful prisoners of the war on some drug users. That is something worthy and tangible, not some half-baked scheme to define wattage of home grows for a payment – its not working, do something more incisive, think about the people who you insist on representing and fight for their rights goddamnit.

  16. I don’t care who you are, its what you say that counts, which is very little other than gushing unequivocal support for Reynolds. The database is of medical cannabis users which was collected by reynolds under the guise of running the BMCR and Clear.

  17. Jimmy Bobbins on

    Sorry Darryl, it just seems pointless debating with you if you can’t get past the fact that I’m not Peter Reynolds. I have no idea what you are on about with “data for patients”. If your blinkered ignorance can’t get past that first hurdle then really, what is the point?

  18. Jimmy Bobbins on

    Brilliant, well like I said, if you don’t agree with CLEAR, no worries, live and let live, start your own campaign for what you believe in. I’m guessing no-one will try and harm your campaign. Please could you therefore not harm our campaign. We are working hard at CLEAR for positive change and we all rather be fighting ignorance rather than nick pickers who are supposedly from the cannabis community themselves. 
    Peter Reynolds position will only be untenable if CLEAR’s members vote it so soon, not because people on the net like you say so. I don’t know where you are from, but our recent forefathers fought and died for democracy. I’d like to uphold that tradition for them at least therefore, regardless of your views to the contrary.

  19.  Presumably if you know what you are doing anything is possible – there used to be something online where you could send an email from anyone you liked and it was untraceble – people were sending emails from Richard Bransons’ personal address, even the givernment depts and posing as doctors emailing their friends they had the clap – as I say, you can be Jimmy Bobbins for all I care or Carla Margam or whatever – the real issue I am concerned about is Clear adopting a business model and undermining the cause for actual rights and fundamental liberties – the rest is frankly a very big distraction.  You, sorry peter said he was open to all kinds of suggestions of where to take clear, but it was a con, it was a fait accompli from the start, and people like me were said to be the enemy of the cause – shame the cause was using sick people to push for a particular agenda to make cannabis medicines available for market opportunities.  That’s waht Clear is, a group who want to extend commercial licensing for cannabis products – if you had come clean about that, then it could have been OK in its own terms, but you had to collect data for patients and pose as a cannabis users rights group having taken over the LCA – this isn’t right in my book, the liberty of people is much more important than the plan to profit.

  20.  And you have picked up on one thing out of all the points and only addressed that, you haven’t said anything about any core issues Peter or not, just some hyperbole about ‘truth’ – if there was any integrity to your posturring I wouldn’t be complaining, I would welcome it.

  21.  Well pass it on to the person who you have decided to emulate and support with unquestionning loyalty – as I keep saying, I don’t care about anything really other than policy.

  22.  It doesn’t matter who you are really as far as this goes – my only concern is Clear’s policy in the light of my complaints – that’s what I am on about, and as far as the comments about Reynolds is concerned, well, he is claiming to be the leader and I think that seems untenable although I am not even a member and never have been. Clear policies are very dubious Reynolds seems to ‘own’ Clear really.

  23. Jimmy Bobbins on

    How do you possibly explain the things below Darryl if I’m not me; a person with completely different experiences and knowledge to Peter Reynolds? Are you fingers currently in your ears Darryl, repeating over and over “He MUST be Peter Reynolds. He MUST be Peter Reynolds”? That won’t make it so I’m afraid Darryl, however much you want it to. 
    By denying the truth so blatantly, how are you different at all to those pushing ignorance Darryl? You can’t be surely. You appear to be on the opposite side Darryl. We are on the right side here; we push the truth not ignorance. The truth is our best weapon. It’s what makes us unstoppable, it’s the reason we know we are going to win.
    You can never win with ignorance Darryl. 

  24. Jimmy Bobbins on

    My intimate knowledge of the acid house revolution, in particular the Blackburn warehouse parties, and my constant posting on a local Blackburn newspaper site, all wasn’t enough to convince you I wasn’t Peter Reynolds I take it?
    As far as I was aware Peter didn’t take part in the acid house revolution at all, and he’s from down south not up north. Why would he constantly post on a local Blackburn site, with many posts unrelated to cannabis, going back years? It makes no sense.Then there is my posting as Jonnolad on the main Blackburn Rovers fans website also going back years. Peter isn’t even a football fan (soccer over here), let alone a Rovers fan. Why would he post there then and how does he do so so knowledgeably? How can Peter ever be Jonnolad? He can’t I’m Jonnolad. Go here, I’ve just posted “Hi Darry Bickler” as Jonnolad. How could Peter do this? Incidentally you’ll notice on that thread that they think I’m a premier league player because I defend him so much (sound familiar Darryl?).http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php/t… Then there are my recent posts as Phat Freddy on UK420, a username also going back years. How can I be Peter if I can do that? That’s enemy territory surely, and they can easily check from IPs that I’m not Peter. 
    Stop living in denial Darryl and stop justifying your actions by pretending I am someone who I clearly am not. Get on with your own campaign, and stop trying to stop other people’s. Those people are decent normal nice people – why would you campaign against them?

  25. Jimmy Bobbins on

    Good – campaign for yourself for what you believe in. You are completely deluded thinking I’m Peter though, I’ll copy my post from below, proving beyond doubt once again that I’m not. Those looking at this impartially, who don’t know either of us, can clearly see beyond doubt I’m not – it simply can’t be the case with my accounts on different forums going back years.
    Please therefore stop living in denial, and justifying your actions on the basis of it. You cannot be a reasonable or even nice person continuing your actions on the basis of it.

  26. I’m interested in progressing the debate, I’m not campaigning against persons per se, I’m campaigning against ideas I don’t agree with, it’s nothing to do with hate from my point of view – I don’t think Clear have presented a coherent progressive policy at all. If you demanded an immediate amnesty for all peaceful drug users that would be a start, the end of all drug based arrests except for the most anti-social activities. Who is the enemy indeed? I think its the government and their business interests, the ACMD and all the other govt lackies who don’t do their job, the impotent judiciary allowing the courts to become complicit in this outrage and also the public where they carry on with the same old tired rhetoric – campaign groups need to move it on or they just act as escape valves to dissipate dissent into hot air waffle. That’s why I insist that we adopt the correct intellectual basis for opposition, forget war on drugs, forget regulating drugs, forget medical cannabis and forget cannabis as well – it’s really not about any of these things, it is about a war on people and controlling their minds via access to modified mind states, what we ought to be pressing for is absolute repsect for the sovereign peaceful human being no matter what their personal chemistry unless they cause real problems – and then we move to regulate those problem causing persons more forcefully.

    Yes we can have a regulated market for cannabis as well, but we must respect people wanting to do their own thing, and this is idea of licensing products is not the place to start – we must not accept dangers that don’t exist or are probably less than other risks we are allowed to pursue, why you tried to make cannabis user regulation so much more stringent than alcohol is beyond me. We must start with getting people out of prison, stopping the runnaway train towards non-impairment based drug testing everywhere, stop the police raids, stop the police and councils ruining people’s jobs, families and tenancies, stop the new law on drug driving as this will extend police powers much much more,  

    I am only interested in pressing for respect for liberty and equality – peaceful people self-medicating with cannabis ought to be left well alone, we don’t need licenses and we don’t want fancy products when herbal cannabis will do.  As I said before, if Clear will represent people on a liberty-based ticket, rather than arguing for controls where they are not needed, I would be happy to support it.  Right now I don’t see any common ground, you are not targetting the actual issue. You think its about regulating cannabis for God’s sake, we are talking about rescuing freedom for peaceful persons, if you must regulate persons, regulate the one’s who cause problems. I’m really not interested in the Medicine wheel project and business op’s – freedom before profit, show your liberty credentials and I will support you, carry on with this corporate model and I won’t.  BTW – I can hardly believe this outfit is being run in a Mafia-esque way, and fancy calling the police, threatening civil law suits all the time.  It shows me that you really don’t get this, this isn’t about the world of cut throat business or even politics, people want to be represented by someone who ‘gets it’ – we don’t want lawyers, police and official bodies nosing around – we want some freedom and respect, face it, it’s not going to happen with Clear/Reynolds, and that is certainly not my doing, it’s your own fault for acting like an arse and being completely the wrong sort of person to front this issue – it’s simply something you don’t understand. You could probably sell all kinds of stuff, but this is not your bag, you really have absolutely no feel for the people you claim to represent (whether they like it or not). I cannot believe you are still insisting on this vote when one thing is obvious, you cannot cohere the voices because hundreds don’t like you. For me, its not personal Peter, I just don’t like the policies.

  27. Jimmy Bobbins on

    You are 93% sure you are talking to Peter? Get a grip. My intimate knowledge of the acid house revolution, in particular the Blackburn warehouse parties, and my constant posting on a local Blackburn newspaper site, all wasn’t enough to convince you I take it?
    As far as I was aware Peter didn’t take part in the acid house revolution, and he’s from down south not up north. Why would he constantly post on a local Blackburn site, with many posts unrelated to cannabis, going back years? It makes no sense.Then there is my posting as Jonnolad on the main Blackburn Rovers fans website also going back years. Peter isn’t even a football fan (soccer over here), let alone a Rovers fan. Why would he post there then and how does he do so so knowledgeably? How can Peter ever be Jonnolad? He can’t I’m Jonnolad. Go here, I’ve just posted “Hi Darry Bickler” as Jonnolad. How could Peter do this? Incidentally you’ll notice on that thread that they think I’m a premier league player because I defend him so much (sound familiar Darryl?).http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php/topic/24819-keith-andrews/page__st__500 Then there are my recent posts as Phat Freddy on UK420, a username also going back years. How can I be Peter if I can do that? That’s enemy territory surely, and they can easily check from IPs that I’m not Peter. 
    Stop living in denial Darryl and stop justifying your actions by pretending I am someone who I clearly am not. Get on with your own campaign, and stop trying to stop other people’s. Those people are decent normal nice people – why would you campaign against them?

  28. Jimmy Bobbins on

    Yes, but who is the enemy? Who’s time needs taking up debating with? Those pushing ignorance or those pushing change?
    Too many people are miffed by what I have done as well? My blog? What are you talking about? I don’t and I have never had a blog in my entire life. Stop generalising about CLEAR and justifying your behaviour by pretending I am someone I’m not. CLEAR is lots and lots of separate members, and you are campaigning against them – you are campaigning against genuinely decent people who are trying to campaign against ignorance but instead have to battle against supposedly fellow cannabis campaigners. How can you be on the side of positive cannabis change if you constantly battle other campaigners? Why not just run your own campaign how you see fit, instead of damaging other people’s campaigns?The “sock puppet” allegations have been proven false time and again, but it doesn’t seem to matter to those blinkered and who want to blindly continue with their hate campaign,regardless of whether they are harming normal nice people.A vote from CLEAR members will definitely suffice as well thanks. We are a democracy and we will have spoken. I suggest you move to the middle east or somewhere if you aren’t happy with democracy. Why are you so interested instead in CLEAR and harming it’s positive message and campaign?

  29.  I am vocal against Transform, Branson etc and nearly all the ‘great and the good’ because I seek to transform the debate to something more incisive – its not personal at all.  When you say damage the campaign, Clear is a politcal party, isn’t that what democracy is, to fight a battle of ideas in a contentious way?  I am not playing dirty, in fact I regret making these observations about your blog etc because most of your opposition are focussed on this – they actually think your Clear plan and work is sound, tarred only by faux pas and offensive conduct.  Like I say, its the Clear plan that concerns me, I think its completely misconceived and you have destroyed much of the movement and set it back years, so I will stick with that – I have to say like George Galloway said to Saddam Hussein – I salute your indefatigabality – but this is not going to end well.  You cannot force yourself on the public and too many people are miffed at what you have done. Have the grace to step backwards and then try and prove yourself worthy if you must.  I am not sure if a Clear members vote will suffice – most people have left because they couldn’t bear it, and given some allegations about sock puppets and fraud – then I’m afraid nobody will believe the result anyway any more than UN monitors trust some supposedly corrupt regime anywhere in the world.

  30. Well it’s impossible to be 100% certain, but I am 93% sure that I am speaking with Peter.  I will say you are exceptionally thick skinned – I am amazed you still want to do this job, but really if you care about ‘the cause’ you would agree to take a different role, certainly not going around insisting that you represent all cannabis users.  My concern is purely for the cause of human emancipation and escape from the desperate inprisonment of our minds and bodies.  If Clear had anything at all useful to say towards my goal, I would support it 100% – but it doesn’t, that’s my gripe.  I am less concerned about the blogs and dressing gown stuff as it’s not directly relevant (although if you must be the leader then I suppose you must expect some extra scrutiny).  What I am concerned about is that Clear have trashed anyone from saying anything about the true liberty issues at stake here with endless snipes of being hopeless hippies and not living in the real world, yet when people talk about
    “regulating or legalizing cannabis” they really fall into a trap – this is what nI have said before – there is no
    “war on drugs” …the so-called “war on drugs” is not a war on pills,
    powder, plants, and potions, it is war on mental states – a war on
    consciousness itself – how much, what sort we are permitted to
    experience, and who gets to control it. More than an unintentional
    misnomer, the government-termed “war on drugs” is a strategic decoy
    label; a slight-of-hand move by government to redirect attention away
    from what lies at ground zero of the war – each individual’s fundamental right to control his or her own consciousness.

    We need to re-frame this debate, cannabis is a plant, it does not have
    legal agency and therefore cannot be legal or illegal – law controls us. It is bigger than even the whole cannabis community, its
    about rescuing a sensible amount of freedom for peaceful folks, what I
    call establishing a proportionate threshold for interference into
    liberty. It actually doesn’t start with a view about cannabis, its a
    view about the person, forming an outcome-based assessment of the misuse
    of any drugs before crossing into that personal space.

    Whilst you are entitled to your view, I am entitled to oppose it – the reason why you object is not so much a commitment to a genuine ideology, but a eye on a prize that involves selling out the libertarian principles – that’s why I oppose it, because it opposes what I believe in. This is muc too important to be run as a business venture, appealing to greed whether that be for govt taxes, license fee or healthcare at the point of a gun.  It’s obvious you can’t make profit from rescuing real liberty, you want to control the tap and make hay, well all I can say is if you shift the policy towards a libertarian one I will support you – I will even let the ‘curse the evil jews’ comment you made on your blog be forgotten.  If you help the cause I will support  it – my objections are ALL BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCE. 

  31. Jimmy Bobbins on

    You are not wrong Simon. Battling these buffoons has now gone State side, and it is preventing normal campaigners doing normal campaigning. 

  32. Jimmy Bobbins on

    No problem Darryl. Campaign yourself for what you believe in. Don’t damage other people’s camapigns though. It’s not fair and it’s not nice.

  33. Jimmy Bobbins on

    Look at what you have just posted in your last paragraph; personal, silly, unsubstantiated, unrelated, vicious hate filled abuse. Do you not even realise you are pushing hate yourself? I know the abuse that Peter has been subjected to,because I have personally experienced it too. It is nothing short of vicious bullying. No-one is doing that to you. Why do you think it’s OK to do that to other people though? How can you be a nice person if you do these things?
    Your accusations against Peter are one’s formed by a committee of hate, where you are constantly looking for anything to twist. The irony is that the hateful stuff being posted against Peter and other CLEAR members is clear and unequivocal – it doesn’t need any twisting – it is simply hate filled bullying. Go onto UK420 and look for yourself on the CLEAR thread. It’s plain for anyone to see.CLEAR is a democratic political party. Just like other decent political organisations, including and especially here in the United States, that means that it’s members can vote for change when they want to. Peter Reynolds has called a leadership vote. The members of CLEAR will vote on his leadership. If CLEAR’s members vote to keep Peter, could you please then leave CLEAR alone? If not, why not? You can’t be a genuine cannabis campaigner if all you do is try and damage another ongoing successful campaign, Please campaign positively like you claim you are going to do, otherwise you will be an enemy of cannabis change (if you aren’t one already sadly with your constant damaging hate).

  34. Jimmy Bobbins on

    If you are campaigners then campaign. The only campaigning I have personally seen from this camp is against CLEAR though. That’s not campaigning, it’s damaging another campaign and the hard work that decent hard working campaigners put in. You are damaging the cannabis cause not helping it.

  35. Jimmy Bobbins on

    Am I a sock puppet account Darryl? Are you completely in denial Darryl? I can easily publish abuse here that I have been sent by those who attack Peter Reynolds and CLEAR. I am a complete stranger to these people, yet they send me hate filled abuse, but I’m supposed to believe those people are on the right side? Pull the other one Darryl.
    If you think the CLEAR agenda is misconceived then please leave CLEAR alone. Why can’t you do that? Why is your campaign solely one against CLEAR? Why aren’t you campaigning yourself for change to the cannabis laws? Why are you instead deliberately attacking an ongoing campaign? Why do you not care if you are therefore damaging other people’s hard work campaigning for cannabis change?
    If you don’t believe in CLEAR, no problem, please leave us alone. You campaign for what you believe in, and we’ll campaign for what we believe in. Live and let live I say, we certainly won’t try and damage your campaign, so please stop trying to consistently damage ours. It isn’t fair and it isn’t nice.

  36. It’s the message that’s the most abhorrent!  He has vilified the whole concept of rescuing exactly what we need, that is respect for our rights as human beings to have peaceful rights of self-determination. He has replaced that with an agenda to regulate all our activities for people who qualify first by being ill or possibly by buying a license and agreeing to all kinds of surveillance and specific bureaucratic requirements.  This was sold as the only possible hope for some improvement in the lot of cannabis users.  It’s all IMO the wrong perspective, it ought to be about stopping the persecution and obsessive policing of people who cause no harm to others, treating them a bit like people who enjoy a drink, letting them brew their own as well, do what they like as long as its not stupid.

    But the real reason we were told we had to agree to this agenda is that people want to make money out of drugs, so we have to pay tax and have a structure that creates business opportunities for corporate enterprises wanting to sell health care, effectively using all the state’s coercive justice measures to protect business and vested interests.  This is a terrible way to start a campaign – people are being persecuted for no good reason and it is wrong. We should fight this as upstanding citizens, not try to cut some deal based upon greed, profit for the few, cannabis-use rights just for the sick and license payers. It’s about ourselves, why should we put up with being controlled over what we peacefully do with our own bodies that does no harm to others?  Why should our horizons be determined by resignation to some drug dealing protection racket, when all we need is minimal regulation addressing misuse of drugs causing real harm?  I say we need a new organisation that recognises what is at stake here – we are being conned by governments and half-witted reform initiatives alike, the issue is the freedom to think!

  37. Simonchorley on

    Looks like the in fighting has come from Peter trying to control Clears message.  I think he’s right to do this.  One issue and only one issue is the way to approach this.  Therefore you fit the one issue into the world as is.  With Tax and the Corporate world.  Corporate power is another issue.
    We all need our platform and Clear is a good one for Peters sort of approach.  We all do bad things when defending ourselves and as such we should move on quickly.
    HOPE WE CAN KEEP FOCUSED, STOP INSULTING AT EACH OTHER AND FIGHT THIS INJUSTICE

  38. What absolute twaddle!!! If CLEAR and Peter Reynolds really were the stalwarts of democracy then why on earth would Peter suspend two legitimate exec members for tabling a motion of no confidence!!?? Peter did that unilaterally and then said it was his right to decide how to run CLEAR as he was leader…when challenged about the unconstitutional and illegitimate way he’d gone about this he just dismissed the constitution as irrelevant. The fact of the matter is CLEAR and Peter Reynolds will soon both be completely irrelevant, and for me that day couldn’t come soon enough!

    His ignorant, seemingly homophobic, racist, anti-semitic, most certainly islamophobic rants and blogs have not only offended me, my friends, and members of the cannabis community but also my FAMILY!! Peter refused to apologise and said if anyone was offended then it was their own fault for not having the intelligence to realise that he was being purposefully inflammatory and controversial!! He then emailed me using the word paki, in jest, but for me it was further evidence of the man’s ineptitude and lack of decency and respect for others.

    His ads on sex sites don’t concern me, whatever his personal fetishes they are of no concern to me as long as what he does is between consenting adults and not actual school girls which appear to be his particular predilection! I’ve wasted enough valuable time and energy on the idiot and would rather go back to focusing my energy on something positive………….

  39.  the trouble is that we are talking about a campaign leader who through his attitudes, comments, abuse and threats has split off and alienated so many possible supporters – we need somebody to unite us again and draw support from all tokers including those of various ethnic backgrounds and various lifestyles many of whom were offended by Reynold’s racist and homophobic blogs – we also need a leader that tells the truth and fights for our interests, if we need one elected at all.

  40.  all very well holding a vote after so many have been kicked out of the party for opposing your master… and to say “These people are lying to you” is an insult in itself not to 1 or 2 dissenters but to many dozens of people will legitimate grievances all of whom were members, campaigners and activists.  Do you not see that Reynolds is th4e cause of all that?

  41. Come on Peter (or his messenger); the real problems include these allegations amongst many others:

    1. Reporting people to the police for challenging you.
    2. Having no empathy with drug users, you sound like you are reciting a compendium of fairly tedious facts about cannabis statistics.
    3. Selling out the whole libertarian basis of the movement in preference for a business model seeking to milk regulation options for profit.
    4. Having very naff personal dating websites online.
    5. Publishing a blog which is likely to be construed as having anti semitic, racist and hompohobic content.
    6. Threatening people who quit or take issue with your autocracy.
    7. Having numerous sock puppet accounts to create artificial support.
    8. Misrepresenting the Clear membership numbers vastly.
    9. Having your politics UK award revoked and investigated.
    10. Threatening people with legal action and professional complaints without just cause.
    11. Attacking other campaigners with abuse.
    12. Dismissing executive members form Clear for asking for a vote of no confidence.
    13. Losing confidential data from the BMCR and Clear concerning members private details.
    14. Accusing dissenters of having had too much cannabis!

    Apart from that, the whole Clear agenda is misconceived – its not cannabis law, it’s about people and their rights.

  42. Jimmy Bobbins on

    One thing I’d like to add is that just on a campaigning level – from the UK to the US – is that I genuinely think we are on the cusp of real change at the moment. We have the truth on our side – you can’t keep that down, not forever, not any more. Science and logic hold sway in all other areas of our governable life. It’s been like that since the enlightenment hundreds of years ago. Logic and reason will hold sway with our cannabis laws too. When the first walls of ignorance come tumbling down with legalisation, it will be like a dam breaking. Someday soon we’ll look back and laugh at the draconian way they treated cannabis users (and get angry and try and forgive what they did to people in genuine need of course).
    Keep the faith. The times they are a changin’.

  43. Jimmy Bobbins on

    One thing I’d like to add is that just on a campaigning level – from the UK to the US – is that I genuinely think we are on the cusp of real change at the moment. We have the truth on our side – you can’t keep that down, not forever, not any more. Science and logic hold sway in all other areas of our governable life. It’s been like that since the enlightenment hundreds of years ago. Logic and reason will hold sway with our cannabis laws too. When the first walls of ignorance come tumbling down with legalisation, it will be like a dam breaking. Someday soon we’ll look back and laugh at the draconian way they treated cannabis users (and get angry and try and forgive what they did to people in genuine need of course).
    Keep the faith. The times they are a changin’.

  44. Jimmy Bobbins on

    No offence, but Jeez it sounds like you’ve got the wrong end of the stick Johnny Green.
    Right, here’s what I know: First off I’ve been campaigning for cannabis change for a few years now, completely independently to any organisation. It’s fair to say I was inspired by Jack Herer’s work, which led me to look up Lester Grinspoon and others. Anyway I started campaigning on local news sites in the UK where there were cannabis stories (God bless Google news feed!); spreading the good word, hopefully changing minds, battling ignorance with the truth.That’s where I came across Peter Reynolds, doing the same thing as me, working hard it seemed, always with a positive message – if anything he was more restrained than me when it came to debating with goons. Anyway a couple of months ago, some people turned up on the local news sites I was campaigning on, and their only message was one of hate about Peter Reynolds. Proper bullies, completely negative in what they had to say, never positive. I pointed out that they were damaging the cannabis cause in general, and I asked them nicely to stop, but they just couldn’t it seems. That’s regardless of the fact that they are doing far more harm to the cause than those pushing ignorance even. When I’ve been campaigning recently they’ve been constantly accusing me of being other people; Peter Reynolds himself mostly. It seems to be a constant justification for their sick actions – that CLEAR is only Peter Reynolds not other members. But the truth is it is obviously other people, all campaigning themselves, all hoping for change. They’ve personally sent me, a complete stranger, hate filled private messages on Facebook. Who does that?They have also stooped to bizarrely low levels. Contacting people’s employer’s for their own selfish vindictive ends – to hope that person gets into trouble, to hope that person lose their job. That’s the kind of intimidation the other CLEAR execs have to put up with, just for continuing to support Peter Reynolds. It’s sick. Take a look for yourself on the UK420 pages, cannabis news, the CLEAR thread that’s got a sticky. Real venomous hate. No-one has attacked them personally, but they constantly attack people personally themselves. Personal attacks is their main armoury. Anyway, following crazy stuff a few weeks ago, where people like Chris Bovey and other ex-execs, attempted to damage CLEAR as much as they could – harming an ongoing cannabis campaign – Peter Reynolds has now called for a vote of confidence from CLEAR’s members. CLEAR is a political party – exactly like you we believe in democracy. We, the members, will vote on Peter’s leadership. Those people who have deliberately and consistently attacked CLEAR can’t ever hope to be part of it surely though. We would have entered Bizarro world for that to happen – wouldn’t we? We are quite aware of the message these people have constantly pushed. If we back Peter that should be the end of it though. Some people don’t seem happy with that though. Ask yourself – could those people ever be on the right side if they aren’t happy with a normal, free world taken for granted, democratic system? These people have no plans, only schemes, sadly. That’s as far as I can tell anyway. I’m just a normal bloke with no ulterior motive than changing the world for the better. These people are lying to you it seems, Johnny Green. To quote a great song; don’t believe the hype, it’s a sequel, as an equal can I get that through to you? Look at what these people do from a positive perspective, I genuinely can’t see much. When it comes to pushing hate though; man they’ve got a load of that.

  45. Your passion is infectious but might it be more productive to unify around key principles that actually connect with real human rights issues?  When people talk about “legalizing cannabis” they really fall into a trap – you see there is no “war on drugs” …the so-called “war on drugs” is not a war on pills, powder, plants, and potions, it is war on mental states – a war on consciousness itself – how much, what sort we are permitted to experience, and who gets to control it. More than an unintentional misnomer, the government-termed “war on drugs” is a strategic decoy label; a slight-of-hand move by government to redirect attention away from

    what lies at ground zero of the war – each individual’s fundamental right to control his or her own consciousness. 

    We need to re-frame this debate, cannabis is a plant, it does not have legal agency and therefore cannot be legal or illegal – law controls you, me, us.  It is bigger than even the whole cannabis community, its about rescuing a sensible amount of freedom for peaceful folks, what I call establishing a proportionate threshold for interference into liberty. It actually doesn’t start with a view about cannabis, its a view about the person, forming an outcome-based assessment of the misuse of any drugs before crossing into that personal space.

  46. I was banned from Clear and removed me from his friends list for asking why Chris Bovey had gone on PUK to complain about him. He has surrounded himself with racist bigots whose personal opinions do not sit with myself, therefore, I would not like to be associated with such an odious man and suggest others do the same. Creating division of the Cannabis Community is strengthening the prohibitionist resolve…..

  47. Iain Cockhill on

    We are cannabis activists. All that matters is the inevitable legalisation of cannabis in all its forms. It is not about ego’s or making money from ventures such as CLEAR. The LCA (Legalise Cannabis Alliance) was not a failure, but a small step on the road to progress.
     We are all commiting crime each day just by lighting a joint or smoking a pipe. ALL that matters is that we stick together and unite against the establishment, ensure we ‘weed’ out those whose intentions are financial or subversive and remember our one true goal: To make Cannabis legal! ….and I salute you all who are reading this, keep up the good fight, although at times it feels as though we are swimming against the tide, the tide will turn as it already is doing. The last US poll indicated 50% for cannabis legalisation and 48% against, with 2% apathy or indifference. The recent drive in California for legalisation was so close I could almost smell the glory, even over the pond in the UK. We are a powerful force for good, and cannabis legalisation is a huge part of that force. The plant cannot speak for itself but its effects on the soul has driven each and every one of us here to fight the good cause. So for now we are commiting crime but the future can only bring prosperity. Those individuals, however, who are jumping on the band wagon in the hope of making personal profit from the legalisation process will be named and shamed, and you know who you are! Peace and Love in a War Torn World X

  48.  Apparently Peter Reynolds thinks I am running some sort of group conspiracy to oppose him – he is wrong, again, with his false accusations – I am not part of any group running against him, I am personally against him, his leadership, his abusive attitudes and his policies

  49. Darryl Blicker thinks anyone that thinks Reynolds is the problem is missing the point and that CLEA policy is itself the problem.

    Although I agree that CLEAR policy, created by Reynolds, IS a major problem and should be scrapped … nevertheless having a leader like Reynolds who refuses to debate and tries to eliminate any member that disagree – and his attitude – are a major problem – GET RID OF REYNOLDS then sort out CLEAR.  BTW Darryl, although I disagree with you on certain issues, YOU would make a far better leader.  You just have to learn to talk gentler to campaigners that don’t understand your points or may not yet agree 100%

  50. I was warned by a lot activists about Peter Reynolds a long time ago now and to be honest I took everything with a pinch of salt, at the time I had one concern and that was cannabis and unless people had questions to ask me about cannabis I wasn’t interested in the slightest to any other questions unless it was about cannabis, when I questioned some executive members about all this infighting with other cannabis activists I was told that it’s the same sort of thing that happened between the LCA and other group activists a long time ago so I didn’t even bother looking into it any  further which is very unusual for me as I like to know a lot about a person before giving that person 100% commitment, I even told Peter Reynolds to keep his blog up, simple reason I said this was: if you write something and it gets criticised and you cant take being criticised you shouldn’t be in the position you find yourself in, I still had not bothered to read the blogs at this stage, but I started to have little warning signs in my mind go off now and then so decided to read of his blog with my wife, we were very shocked at what we read so I questioned him about it, his response was dont believe what you read as a lot of it has been edited by hackers blah blah blah, another question I asked was did LCA know about your blogs before you were elected leader, his reply was yes they did and they were not concerned about the blogs, I started to have my doubts with this man they called Peter Reynolds and started to read the dozens of messages I started to get and a lot of these messages were from Clear members both gay and straight, I also phoned Derek Williams and Chris Bovey up and asked them if they had read his blogs and told Mr Williams that if these blogs are true and I start getting tarred with the same brush that Peter Reynolds is getting tarred with I will be out of here, then we had the Sanj incident, I seconded Mark Palmer’s motion suspend Sanj from the exec, this is when I started to witness some evilness in the way he spoke and name called people via emails, that night I prepared my letter of resignation as I wanted nothing further to do with Peter Reynolds, I woke the next morning to a FB message regarding Sanj that made me flip below is a copy of the said conversation….Since my resignation I have been called a Coward twice and reported to the police by Peter Reynolds along with a host of other cannabis activists here is the email confirming this:

    You have been reported to the police under crime reference number C12D12966 for criminal conspiracy and multiple offences under the Computer Misuse Act 1990. Addresses and phone numbers that I am aware of have been provided to the police. You will see on the CLEAR Facebook page that we have unequivocal, documentary proof of your actions. Peter Reynolds+44(0)1305833516+44(0)7880872022peter@peter-reynolds.co.ukwww.peter-reynolds.co.ukpeterreynolds@clear-uk.orgwww.clear-uk.orgwww.facebook.com/ClearUKSome of the people he has reported to the police are medical growers some of these growers have had to stop growing and go back on prescribed drugs due to fear of the police calling at the door to question them and thus finding cannabis making it then possible for a full search of premises resulting in arrest and possible jail term……this is NOT ON, this man is not what we the cannabis user/grower want representing us Peter ReynoldsI see Sanj is promoting the idea that he asked you two “to support the motion and free me from the constraints of being on the Exec.”Please don’t get into a row but I think you need to make clear that you support the executive’s decision of your own free will.Peter7 January
    Des Humphreythis is gone on way to far, I am now writting my letter of resignation7 January
    Peter ReynoldsCheers Des. Thanks. That;s what I get for all my work is it?7 January
    Des HumphreyI have spoken to every person that I have requited to Clear, none are happy, this has gone way to far7 January
    Peter ReynoldsSo you’re giving Buffry, Ditchfield and Sanj exactly what they want? Unbelievable.I’m quite sure many are unhappy. So am I. This is the time for courage and determination in the face of the enemy.I’m very hurt by that Des. Please think about it for a few days first.Sanj’s behaviour has been disgusting. He is clearly mentally unbalanced. Please stand firm!7 January
    Des Humphreymy discission has been made, I have stood by you all through this, but when I speak to people who are personal friends around my area 15 of them, and all are not happy about certain issues, things must be wrongi have people asking me if its ok to post this and post that, people are afraid to say what is what….thats not right7 January
    Peter ReynoldsI agree. What have I done against you Des? I have always supported you 100%. You will have let me down very badly if you go through with this. All my efforts has gone into the cause. It is others who have behaved badly, not me.Just four people have been deleted and banned in the past month so once again,the whole thing is hysteria, falsehood and exaggeration promoted by those against us. Don’t be taken in Des.Anyway, I have had enough. I am exhausted and stressed out and now I have my friends letting me down.Why do I bother?

  51. A lot of wonderful activists threw their support in behind Peter Reynolds in the beginning, only to be trashed and threatened by him when they expressed any disagreement. It’s too bad he became such an energy drain. 

    Of course everybody has continued campaigning individually and in other groups, but the cause isn’t helped at all by Peter Reynolds’ continued claim to be a spokesperson. I hope we’ll be able to move forward without him soon. 

    For now, if anybody is still on the fence, they can check out the many illuminating links here: http://www.campaign.mondialvillage.com/links.html

  52. Peter’s history starts earlier than Clear don’t forget the BMCR debacle before hand

  53. If you want a good and thorough introduction to the Peter Reynolds saga, see Sarah McCulloch’s
    excellent blog posts. She was subjected to vile misogynistic and transphobic attacks by Peter. Other highlights include evidently faking his credentials, his very own shockingly racist and homophobic blog posts (too many orientals and predatory gays!), ousting his critics from CLEAR single handedly, and so much more!

    http://www.sarahmcculloch.com/blog/?s=peter+reynolds (Read from the bottom up)

  54. This should be about civil rights, not personalities. Having said that, going to the police should only be for when it is unavoidable to stop a greater evil – this man has absolutely no congruence with any issue surrounding drug users. He talks like someone who has swotted up a compendium of data and statistics, he has sold out the public’s need to rescue some dignity and liberty by surplanting the alliance of activists with some business model of regulation.  Clear is really than one man’s business ambition. Whoever came up with Nu_Clear needs to speak to someone from Saatchi and Snatchy though, fancy building a new movement based upon the hapless Clear name, its almost flattery for Reynolds’ small business.  It wasn’t even an acronym that worked – one day people will wake up and realise what this is about!

  55. All of my questions to CLEAR have gone unanswered. That’s fine if I’m blocked now, that’s why I put this article up here. There will be no blocking, whether it’s for or against CLEAR.  I am still trying to fit my head around this.  But I want everyone to trust that this is a free marketplace for ideas, for or against, so have at it!

  56. I pretty much concur with Alun and I’m sorry I ignored his warnings about this maniac last year when he let it be known his feelings.

    I would like to correct one thing, I never made a substantial financial contribution to CLEAR. The only financial contribution I made was in the form of paying one of my employees €650 to code and design the CLEAR web site. I made no further contributions.

    At first, Peter was very friendly towards me, presumably as I had him made a pretty decent web site for free. Against my better judgment I agreed to be co-opted onto the CLEAR exec, although I might add I was completely unaware of his racist blogs or bullying. I saw his other side to Reynolds first hand when I too started to question his behaviours and judgement. I probably should have left back at Christmas time when it first really kicked off, but I had suffered a TIA resulting in a partial loss of sight at the time and was more interested in restoring my health. I also admit it was a bit fascinating to have a front row seat in this circus and the antics of this lunatic.

    I’m sure you all already know the story of how Reynolds sacked and expelled myself and Greg de Hoedt from CLEAR because we tabled a vote of no confidence in his leadership. I got my official letter of expulsion in the post this week signed by der Führer himself, although I’m not sure why he sent that, since I already told him I did not want to be a member of a party lead by a racist homophobic bully. The twat also called the police on me, although I laughed this off, I was really annoyed he had also done the same to an ex-army wheelchair bound medicinal user and also to a young 24 year old lad diagnosed with MS. Purely sickening, the man is utterly vile. It is to my shame I did not speak out earlier.

  57. Token ma weed on

    To find out what he is like for yourself ask him a question on the CLEAR site or CLEAR Facebook page about if he still stands by his racist and homophobic comments . It’s safe to say that you won’t get an answer and he will block you from leaving comments then label you a troll and liar . If this does happen anyone here just join the trolls and liars club on Facebook our numbers are growing everyday thanks to the communist ” dick ” tator Peter Reynolds .

  58. Anyone who thinks Reynolds is THE problem misses the point.  The whole ethos of Clear is wrong with or without him, the ‘cannabis issue’ sells us all out from what is essentially a civil rights issue into a festishised discussion about a plant.  Reynolds threw out the whole libertarian element to campaigning because there is no profit in it, he replaced it with a business model and failed us all.  However, anyone who wants to rescue it and revamp it ought to know the real problem. 

  59. Peter Reynolds is the problem, and CLEAR is being run by a leader who wrote the theme tune, sang the theme tune and designed the t shirt.. it is a tin pot political party, whose leader is prone to outrageous drunken outbursts, which have included bad mouthing and threatening just about every existing cannabis campaigner who has dared to question him. He has a stalwart following of a few, and a much larger group of people who have called for him to stand down.

  60. Glynwilliams68 on

    It would seem alot of folks are unable to comment as there seems to be a glitch,,they can see the comments, but there’s no comment box showing????

  61. Having been there right at the start – and before – I can give you quite a full picture of what has happened.  I am happy to answer questions

    The Legalise Cannabis Alliance (LCA) was founded as a UK political party in 1999 and candidates fought in over 80 elections between then and 2006.  Then it was  decided that due to change in the political climate, LCA would de-register and continue to be active as a pressure group.

    Unfortunately that, as well as the downgrading of cannabis from class B to class C, meant many activists lost direction and focus and the impetus seemed to fall away — until the end of 2010, when this man Peter Reynolds suddenly appeared on the scene, joined the LCA and put himself forward as leader promising to re-register the LCA as a party again.

    What he actually did was very different to that though.

    Reynolds made anew part called the Cannabis Law Reform party – with new policy, constitution, emblems, web site, fliers and structure – trying also to destroy most of the history and work of LCA and the activists by closing the forum, removing the website and trying to legally preventing others from referring to it – to the point of threatening arrest and legal action.

    Soon after that, April 2010, Reynolds published an email accusing me of hacking into the web site and changing the passwords.  Of course I had no need to hack even if I knew how, as I already had passwords and had reluctantly been working as webmaster.  He also accused me of conspiring against him.

    At the first meeting, Reynolds and his “team” then voted Don Barnard, who was a well known and long tern activist in the LCA and before, off the team for refusing to accept all the changes he proposed.  He, Reynolds, was supported in this by Janice Wells, Mark Palmer and Stuart Warwick.

    Reynolds seems to have then engaged in a programme of systematically offending almost all the previous LCA candidates and helpers, Lezley and Mark Gibson, Ingo Wagenknecht, Clara O’Donnell, Winston Matthews, Chris Baldwin, John Wakelin, Carl Wagner – Jeff Ditchfield, Sybil Lucas-Brewer, Stuart Wyatt, UK420 … far too many to list here.

    When they objected, he threw them off the CLEA facebook page and openly accused them of being “liars”, openly declaring that some of them were drug dealers.  As CLEAR members started asking questions, Reynolds threw them out of the party.

    He appointed others to join his team, but most did not last long.  Sanji, having canvassed CLEAR members for their opinions, was thrown out.  Several others have now been thrown out including Chris Bovey who enabled the CLEAR web site and made a substantial financial contribution.

    Reynolds claimed that CLEAR had over 5000 paying members until it was revealed that there were only about 600.

    Having promised to contest as many elections and by-elections as possible, Reynolds explained that there was not enough money!   They had spent a small fortune on a report form the Independent Drug Monitoring Unit (IDMU) which he used to proposed that instead of full legalisation there should be a system of licensing for home-cultivation similar to the TV licence (where it is a criminal offence not to buy one) and that those that buy be charged an additional tax. 

    CLEAR policy seems now to be “make the growers and users pay”.

    Reynolds said in Cardiff last year that if CLEAR did not have 10,000 members by Spring 2012, he would resign – but now he says he sees nobody in the UK “capable” of doing his job.

    It seems to me that Reynold’s real job is to cause division and destroy the UK cannabis campaign.

    We know from his own mouth that he has a criminal conviction for what he called “the crime of dishonesty” although he will not explain what that means.  We know he had serious financial problems.  We know that he was once charged with assaulting his wife, and although not convicted, he was kept on remand in prison for some months – so whatever happened it was obviously a serious issue – now he claims that his wife actually assaulted him.

    It summary, in my personal opinion, Reynolds behaves like a con-man and a petty-tyrant – whilst claiming that CLEAR is democratic, he throws out those that disagree with him.  Whilst claiming to represent the interests of all cannabis users he wants to make growers and users pay.

    My advice is to stay well away from Reynolds and CLEAR.

    You can see the history of LCA and CLEAR here:
    http://www.ccguide.org/lca/lca.php

  62. Michellebarnett62 on

    I can add a little something,as an ex member resigned, due initially to Peter Reynolds  insult/block/ban /delete tactics on ANYONE who questions his pro corp license policy and his motives for this,He was proven to have links to American outfit “The Medicine Wheel”, But not only that,he has threatened members and medi users that seek to question his methods and policy alike with police action, yes I did say POLICE,, how can this be right,How can a man that purports to represent cannabis users inform on them to the police ? Then we come to the what in my experience with him and was probably the catalyst of his recent problems, his blatant racist and homophobic  diatribe that was his blog.,which he later made private did a little editing and then shouted that the screenshots of the original text was forged.. lets get this straight,they were not forged as can be proven,,There is no democracy in Clear, as was proven when the executive sacked him recently, (watch the vid),, The only thing not right about Clear is Peter Reynolds and the sad few right wing supporters he has left, People need to ask themselves and do a little research on Mr Reynolds before supporting him and what he actually is representing….My bet is it isn’t what you think…

Leave A Reply