Peter Reynolds

The life and times of Peter Reynolds

ISMOKE Magazine Issue 1

with 42 comments

My warmest congratulations to my good friend Nuff Said on the first edition of his new magazine, ISMOKE.

Go to the online version here where it is also possible to download and print a hard copy.

The contents of issue 1 are:

  • Lead Editorial – Nuff Said
  • Cannabis In The News: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly
  • Proposition 19 & The Wild West – Jason Reed
  • An Interview With Peter Reynolds – Nuff Said
  • Cannabis In Cartoons – Nuff Said
  • The Politics Of  Cannabis – Peter Reynolds
  • A Word From The LCA – Alun Buffry
  • ISMOKE Would Like To Hear From You
  • Stateside: Why Are We Behind Our American Cousins? – Nuff Said
  • What Are You Smoking With?
  • UK Drug Policy Is A Contradictory Mess, Stuck In The 1970s – David Morris
  • Will Somebody Think Of The Children? The Problems Caused By Prohibition – Cure Ukay
  • My Story: How I Was Treated As A Self-Medicating Cannabis User – Tina Silva
About these ads

42 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. GREAT WORK! Must say I was concerned to read about Dr Raabe, WTF the government is thinking adding in a little religion, god only knows!

    Nick

    February 2, 2011 at 3:46 pm

  2. BTW..Your so right about Hash Peter. Its so hard to find these days, its such a shame. If you even ask for it here and in London your looked at kind of funny.

    Nick

    February 2, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    • You are such a f*****g t****r! No one wants hash when they can get fresh bud. And you wouldn’t know hash from what comes out your shill ass. Man, everyone knows you smoke what you can get. No wonder everybody looks at you ‘kind of funny': you are a deceitful trouble-making c**t.

      Rupert Tiger

      February 2, 2011 at 6:01 pm

      • Thanks for your opinion. How old are you 15? Sounds like you’ve a limited intelligence responding like that. Those of us who actually know what we are talking about enjoy the variety. Not sure how that makes me a ‘deceitful trouble making c**t’ as you so beautifully put it but, who understands the mind of adolescence’s anyway? If you ever go to Amsterdam where choice is abundant I recommend you should try it. BTW..It was Peter who mentioned hash in an article in Ismoke. Am I to take it that you direct the same of adolescent anger at him too? My, my, are you grumpy today..do you need a little sleep or a drinky??

        Fool!

        Nick

        February 2, 2011 at 6:11 pm

      • No, I want some bud or some hash. And leave the sanctimonious bullshit about Amsterdam at the door; I lived there five years. And no I only here address my 48-year old adolescent anger at you, you lousy f*****g fraud.

        Rupert Tiger

        February 2, 2011 at 6:15 pm

      • Really, how very interesting! A 48 year old acting like a teenager? And I’m a ‘Lousy F*****g Fraud’ too. Gosh! This is turning into an odd day. Tell me.. When did you start being so angry ?? What went wrong in your life ? Or, is it that you are simply justifying the macho ‘Tiger’ bit of your posted name. I still think your a little grumpy and would benefit from a nap. Its most odd a smoker acting in such a ridiculous manner. Life must have shat all over you bud !? Think positive..work hard and everything will turn out good!

        Nick

        February 2, 2011 at 6:23 pm

      • There’s precisely the difference between us. We don’t all need to work hard for it, your way, for it to work out. We just want the weed freed so we don’t all have do what you want; we want to do what we want, our way. Without the Police shill-style pettiness.

        I must say there is absolutely nothing about you and your posts that in any way; linguistically, sociologically, psychologically resonate with the cannabis culture or mentality. You are by every measure known to experienced smoker a fraud. You are truly frightened of cannabis.

        Rupert Tiger

        February 2, 2011 at 6:32 pm

      • Rupert, firstly, I’ve not told you anything about myself nor am I here to make friends with you or try to impress YOU in anyway shape or form. I’m not sure why you have chosen to make your attack on me today, I’m sure you have your own justifiable reasons. As for being ‘frightened’ of cannabis, this too is a strange as I’m not sure I’d be on Peters blog if this was the case. I’ve smoked for about 22 odd years..so, not really that frightened of it? Where I live and certainly back in London I know good people who DO give a choice so, asking for Hash is only considered a little odd as the current trend is for bud. I suspect you struggle to get.. that’s not my problem fella and your attack is foolish, uneducated and generally ignorant. BTW, ignore my posts if they offend you so.

        Nick

        February 2, 2011 at 6:42 pm

      • It’s just that I don’t believe you. You’ve got no mellowness about you. No anger tempered with knowledge, no toughness no smoothness, just pettiness. If you’ld really smoked for 22 years you wouldn’t be so easily wound up. You keep mentioning ‘Peter’ as he were a referent God; can’t you make your own stand alone statements?

        Rupert Tiger

        February 2, 2011 at 6:50 pm

      • Believe what you want Rupert. I promise that I don’t care if you believe me and you don’t actually know me so your assumptions are ridiculous and base at best. I do think very highly of Peter as for the past 20plus years I’ve found it hard, if not impossible to find anyone who I agree with on most subjects especially that of weed. If I appear a little irritated re-read your first post.. certainly not a chilled response to a harmless comment my friend. Your clearly so full of wisdom yourself ( undoubtedly angry but tempered with knowledge (haha)) that you will draw your own conclusions. I don’t claim to be wise so I’ll defer to your greater wisdom. I would say though that YOUR anger and aggression are in paradox to a smokers way of life to my mind.

        Nick

        February 2, 2011 at 7:00 pm

      • Not necessarily, just more precisely focussed.

        Rupert Tiger

        February 2, 2011 at 7:02 pm

      • I love me bud me, medicate 6 times a day – but that didn’t stop me from fetching back 4 different types of hash from Holland in November. Calm down man! you’re both angry & wrong – a v. bad combination!

        Ronnie James

        February 3, 2011 at 4:42 pm

  3. Wow! Thanks for that.

    Unlike most people I am always interested to hear of the great benefits of cannabis both to our medical and our collective psychological health.

    Maybe now our GP’s have become compelled to administer their own budgets and prescriptions, maybe those most enlightened now might prescribe the free herb. Maybe deregulation and Conservatism might have its benefits after all.

    Rupert Tiger

    February 2, 2011 at 5:53 pm

  4. Rupert, please don’t use foul language.

    Peter Reynolds

    February 2, 2011 at 6:27 pm

    • OK, I agree. But I reserve the right to say otherwise whatever I want to say.

      Rupert Tiger

      February 2, 2011 at 6:33 pm

  5. Absolutely Superb! A huge well done to all those involved!

    I’d love to see this in Smiths! Ideally covering the trash celeb drivel the masses are bomdarded with.

    And Rupert, I assume, you haven’t smoked some of the fine Hashes available in Holland ;-) There is most certainly a place for both the beauty of the Bud and the sweetness of Hash…

    Bob

    February 2, 2011 at 6:32 pm

    • I certainly agree, and the best I ever had was from Christiania in Copenhagen. It was called Pollen, it was five times the prices of normal cake, it was soft and light yellow, and very crumbly. It was the pure essence, the very finest first collection of the very finest plants from Morocco.It was the greatest thing in the world. And if you can get some please send me some. Other than that I would still rather have good fresh bud; skunk, widow, cheese, whatever, it’s all good. I couldn’t agree more. Peace!

      Rupert Tiger

      February 2, 2011 at 6:40 pm

  6. Not Alcohol, and not the usual range of controlled Drugs . . .

    but another fine example of how prohibition (in any its forms) has not only failed to stop use, but has also labelled as a criminal, a characters that could otherwise be a role model for others to follow !

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12329957

    Cupid Stunt

    February 2, 2011 at 6:34 pm

    • The ‘Bhutan situation’ is pretty stupid, buuut, it will give us another model to compare education/treatment to prohibition i.e. “look what happened in Bhutan when they made tobacco illegal.. priests were getting arrested in their temples…”. It is utterly ridiculous and short-sighted, but we must use their failure to the advantage of the cause.

      Jake

      February 2, 2011 at 7:40 pm

  7. ‘Not necessarily, just more precisely focussed.’

    Behaviour like calling names and making unfounded personal snipes is not really ‘Precisely Focused’ dude. Its pure aggression tinged with hate. I’m lucky as I have no hate but, I do recognise it when I hear it. I feel sad that I’ve offended you so. We are all different dude, so, you shouldn’t expect someone to fit into a certain stereotype. I’m not sure what or how you think a smoker should act but, I live with a pretty clear conscience and I know that I am genuinely kind to all who I meet and interact with. Its true that for me has made me a better person and i comment hear because i thought i shared a common interest with many of the contributors. As for what you termed ‘toughness and smoothness’ etc again, being the big man doesn’t really fit the scene to my mind? Clearly we don’t understand each other. You can’t win them all I’ve found.

    Nick

    February 2, 2011 at 7:28 pm

    • Maybe, but I just happened to recall the first time we met (26th Dec, 2010). The first time I posted a comment, and this is precisely what you said:

      “Time to stop smoking Rupert. You strike me as one who’s belief in their own intelligence has clouded all vision.

      AIDS and 911 conspiracy theory’s… I suspect your a little paranoid and spend too much time thinking on what if’s.”

      Hurts doesn’t it, when you get attacked out of nowhere? Dude! Not so funny is it?!

      Rupert Tiger

      February 2, 2011 at 8:49 pm

  8. I take it all back… The bit about being sad. I’ve re read that thread and still hold to my forma evaluation. I remember you now! Your highly aggressive and I’m not going to use the term dude because your not one! Clearly a bit mixed up aren’t you. And to think I was asking myself it it was me. That’s a smoker for you!!! Far too in touch with my own feelings and concerned for the feelings of others.

    Nick

    February 2, 2011 at 9:04 pm

    • Go and f**k yourself, all of you. Despite what I agreed to about not swearing, if this demented trash is the quality of the debate and person here, f**k you all. You now have your precious ‘Peter’ all to yourself. F**k you and f**k off.

      Rupert Tiger

      February 2, 2011 at 9:16 pm

      • “Demented trash” seems an adequate enough description but, better still, how about “foul-mouthed, demented trash”?

        Peter Reynolds

        February 2, 2011 at 9:35 pm

      • I’m so pleased you’ve spoken! I really did think it was me for a second. Really sorry I keep getting embroiled in fights with … lets say, the angry misguided. I know I’m taking it off subject and I hate tension like this but can’t help react to unpleasantness. Sorry Peter.

        Nick

        February 2, 2011 at 9:40 pm

  9. Bye xx

    Nick

    February 2, 2011 at 9:19 pm

  10. yes that rupert tiger was really off line. A very stupid person indeed.

    wondered what blog I had stumbled on for a second

    Architect

    February 2, 2011 at 11:03 pm

  11. Excellent publication, great read. At last a well produced canna mag, really pro design, as said it would great sitting beside some of the dross in Smiths. Very informative, I just wish we could get this out to every Daily Mail reader out there, hey, how about an insert? :-)

    Huge respect to everyone involved.

    Peter, any news from LCA yet re members poll to re-register as a political party? I was just thinking how much more active your own blog is compared to the tired old LCA forum, you’re doing a grand job mate.

    Shame about that flare up in the comments, it really does not help our cause ‘rupert tiger’, this is not what we wan visitors to read is it?

    Lee Gramson

    February 3, 2011 at 9:22 am

  12. At least he got the hash from Christiania in Copenhagen being the best thing ever right…

    Been there done that – it’ll never happen here :-(

    I’d never consider smoking UK street hash as due to prohibition and criminals its so adulterated you might as well smoke some dogshit.

    Prohibition needs to be stopped even if legalisation doesn’t follow as criminals and the government departments that enforce prohibition are the only ones to make money out of it.

    The only problem is the LCA will just be another “raving loonie party” to the media & their past record doesn’t instill much confidence. Transform, DEA & Norml have a far more credible media standing.

    What we need is more Baroness Meacher’s banging the drum of “prohibition is bad”.

    http://www.theyworkforyou.com/search/?pid=13885&pop=1#n4

    Mr Bimble

    February 3, 2011 at 8:18 pm

    • Mr Bimble,

      The LCA is in the process of exciting change. Last week it voted to re-register as a political party and to elect a leader. I am standing in that election and I have put forward a radical manifesto to the membership.

      Peter Reynolds

      February 3, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    • I completely agree with you Mr Bimble. What we need is more members of the House of Lords and MPs bringing up the subject in relation, possibly, to criminalisation being a basic breach of human rights and the increased harm to society as a result of prohibition. To my mind this is the best possible approach.
      At the moment I personally don’t see the LCA making much headway although, I would be interested to see Peters manifesto and indeed, Peter at the tiller. I think it is their only hope!

      I’ll say this now and please don’t jump down my throat as I’m looking at this from a marketing perspective but, what we need is ‘Joe Normal’ to lead (i don’t mean your not unique Peter but you look normal is what I’m trying to get at). I know I run the risk of offending other just as worthy and decent members of society but, they almost need to be wearing suits if you will, to actually get across the message that this is not a minority past time ..’Its normal just like me’. We are trying to sell to the greater middle class ie those who bother to vote the most. We are selling a concept and when doing so you look at your target audience and identify what makes them tick and react. What the middle classes react to is ‘good decent middle class folk who they can relate to’. Please don’t mistake this as my personal snobbery its simply the way to sell this concept to our particular required audience. If for example we have the many of the usual more creative, and exotic looking individuals trying to sell the concept to these ‘middle classers’ the message will be lost as they will only see how different they are to them. The message is lost and so is the opportunity.
      Again, please don’t mistake my comments as anything other than a clinical analysis of someone who is a marketeer.

      Nick

      February 3, 2011 at 9:42 pm

      • Please gentlemen, see the interview with me and my article “The Politics Of Cannabis” in the new ISMOKE magazine. You can also read my efforts on the LCA forum. My manifesto for the leadership sets out a programme which I hope all cannabis users and supporters will unite behind in a effort to achieve real change through a professionally managed campaign.

        Peter Reynolds

        February 3, 2011 at 10:05 pm

      • I’ve read your article Peter and totally agree with all that you say. This is the only practical way forward. The fight needs to be on even ground and as such it is so important that ‘Normal People like them’ are discussing the topic in an open, honest and controlled manner.
        It would be great if P.R. agency could be funded by the membership of the LCA. As I know you know, its not what, its who you know and a good independent P.R. consultancy will be able to get through doors due to their existing connections. You mentioned ‘Legalise’ and ‘Cannabis’ as words that promote fear. Again, in total agreement. Regulate and placing back into government control ( which does not in fact exist ),are also powerful terms. In fact the change of law WOULD make them controlled and safer to the end user. Maybe a parallel could be draw in relation to the dangers of the moonshine culture and its damaging effects on health. I think also that a concentration on case studies of those who’s lives have been ruined ie crim. record etc would be a good path. If we could find some ‘Good middle class boys and girls’ who, other than this innocent past time live fore-filled lives that have been wrecked by being branded criminals, this would help. Those for example that had custodial sentences. As much as anything though we need ‘normal people’ like some of those who have appeared in some of the documentary’s to be used as shining example of the harm that does not occur to most of us. These individuals do have to be clean a whistle though to ensure they are not undermined.

        Nick

        February 4, 2011 at 10:07 am

      • I know exactly what you mean. Much like ethan nadelmann working in the usa, an articulate, well presented, quick thinking spokesperson is needed. Maybe most of all they need to keep their head and their manners in some ridiculously stupid arguments.

        Transform strike me as particularly professional when it comes to things like that.

        Sam

        February 3, 2011 at 11:55 pm

  13. I feel this is a good change for the LCA.

    All the best and much respect from me to you!!!

    architect

    February 3, 2011 at 10:25 pm

  14. I’ve just watched Part two of the ‘Cannabis: Whats the Harm.’ It pointed out exactly what we all know in as much as the industry is being run by hard core criminals however, I must say that it was distressing that no suggestions for solutions to the problem were made.
    Its a clear no brainer that its here to stay and that prohibition plays directly into the hands of these criminal gangs be they Vietnamese, British, Dutch or Jamaican. I find it sooo frustrating that we stick to a prohibition that does not even deliver a 1% solution to the problem. When will someone in power have the heart, honour, common sense, common decency, courage and strength of character to do what needs to be done to prevent the harms programmes like these portray. My heart whales in anguish at the pain and suffering these policies result in.

    Nick

    February 4, 2011 at 2:05 pm

    • Unfortunately Nick, the days of politicians taking a stand for what is actually right as opposed to what the tabloids say are long gone… we, the people, will have to force change (and that includes those in the US/Latin America).. only then, with a chance of coming out on top will you see a politician with ‘courage’… such is the state of politics these days.. sickening.

      Jake

      February 4, 2011 at 4:45 pm

      • I know your right Jake but, it still saddens me to my core that humanity on this subject and others seems to be intent on self harm. When I was younger I credited humanity with a degree of wonder at what we can achieve in the name of good. These days I see little but suffering in so many walks of life caused only by our selves and the greed that seems to motivate us. Don’t get me wrong I know that there are a great many, millions in fact, of us who are good and whole in spirit but never do we see these qualities in our so called leaders. So frightened they seem of doing the right thing and risking all in the name of good. Surely these are the qualities that should prompt us to vote them in but even then we seem to simply comply with what we see our social class dictates. I’m not liberal I’m Tory but, I did think for a split second that a coalition of Conservative with a dash of Liberal would be good for us all yet the liberal is so diluted and the Tory so smug and righteous that again we are failed.

        Check this song as sung by Johnny Cash. To my mind it kind of sums up politics and the failure of Humanity to do real and universal good.

        BTW I am a happy person but the smoke I fear sometimes gives me a depth I could really do with out:

        Nick

        February 4, 2011 at 5:35 pm

      • We share the same politics Nick and the same shattered dreams. I was so optimistic about the coalition but I realise now that it is just an excuse for even more behind the scenes government and it reinforces the part elected oligarchy between politiains and the media.

        They’re all in it together and we’re left out in the cold.

        Peter Reynolds

        February 4, 2011 at 6:20 pm

      • Yes, its such a wasted opportunity.

        Jesus, I can be such a miserable bastard sometimes :)

        We do however have the six nations starting tonight!

        Nick

        February 4, 2011 at 6:48 pm

      • I too had high hopes for the coalition. Unfortunately for me it proved to be the straw that broke the camels back and I distrust pretty much every politician now and question their motives whenever they say anything.

        They are all ‘career politicians’, most likely aiming for non-exec, CEO or lecture circuit roles after politics so won’t make waves for the public good whilst in office. Most of them studied PPE or history at one of the ‘posh’ universities, 95% have no technical/scientific skills so use ideology to fill the void of evidence. Its no wonder we are where we are regarding not only drug policy, but pretty much every policy. Could you even imagine a politician going against public support for public good such as Roy Jenkins’ reforms as Home Secretary in the 1960’s!! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Jenkins http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Offences_Act_1967).

        That being said, for our cause we need a different angle of attack, such as via the LCA (although I agree that a re-brand/name change would pragmatic). We know we have won the intellectual/scientific debate hands down, we now have to win the emotional debate – highlight medical cases, highlight stories of promising young people whose lives have been ruined by a criminal record, show the stupidity of prohibition and compare it to alcohol/tobacco and show how other countries with more liberal laws haven’t had the sky fall in.. There are too many vested interests directing policy, but the biggest one is staying in power – and changing public opinion is the best way to swing those interests in our favour – make it unacceptable to continue what we have and the ‘leaders’ will follow… but I’m sure I’m just preaching to the choir here! Ok, rant over :-)

        Jake

        February 5, 2011 at 1:06 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 131 other followers

%d bloggers like this: