This isn't the first time we've been flabbergasted by Lord Falconer's assisted suicide fiction.

George Pitcher has written an excellent article that was published in the Daily Mail - UK a few days ago. Pitcher is writing about the new assisted suicide bill that is being promoted by Lord Falconer, the same politician who organized a fake study on assisted suicide that was paid for and published earlier this year by the assisted suicide lobby, similar to the Royal Society of Canada report that was published in November 2011. The following article was published under the title: This isn't the first time we've been flabbergasted by Lord Falconers assisted suicide fiction.

The article follows:

George Pitcher

Lord Falconer of Thoroton yesterday published his latest draft Bill to have assisted suicide legalised in the UK. His case might be summarised thus: 'I chaired a commission, comprised of my euthanasia-lobby mates, which unsurprisingly concluded that it was a frightfully good idea. I have, therefore, advised myself to present a Bill to Parliament.'

What has gone largely unremarked is that 'Right' Charlie Falconer has publically and entirely misrepresented the medical profession on this issue. He told The Times yesterday: 'The position of the British Medical Association [on assisted suicide] was now neutral rather than opposed'.

The truth? The BMA remains strongly opposed to the legalisation of any form of voluntary euthanasia or assisted suicide and even rejected a motion aiming to push its position from 'opposed' to 'neutral' as recently as last week at its annual meeting. What bit of this headline currently running on the BMA's website does Falconer fail to understand: 'BMA continues to oppose legalising assisted suicide'?

I gather that Frances Gibb, The Times' legal editor and author of the erroneous piece, apologised for the error and told flabbergasted doctors that she had 'trusted Lord Falconer to know what he was talking about.'

Big mistake. 'Right' Charlie has form. He has consistently misrepresented the law on euthanasia and assisted suicide and convened an entirely bogus 'commission' on the subject which was boycotted by many of the more respectable members of the House of Lords.

There's a very clear term for what Falconer told The Times yesterday about British doctors: It's a fiction.

There are, of course, further offences to be taken into consideration. As Lord Chancellor, Falconer advised the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, on the legality of invading Iraq.

No one, least of all Parliament, should take any notice of what this buffoon has to say, on assisted suicide or anything else.

Lords leaping into a euthanasia review are like a pair of turkeys reporting on Christmas

George Pitcher has written an interesting and funny letter concerning the Falconer Dying in Dignity commission in the UK which is composed of pro-euthanasia/assisted suicide members and funded by the euthanasia lobby.

Pitcher's article in the UK Telegraph is titled: Our two Lords leaping into a euthanasia review are like a pair of turkeys reporting on Christmas. Pitcher states:

I was on radio last week to argue against the two peers who have done most to introduce euthanasia legislation to the UK – Lord Falconer on BBC Radio 5 Live and Lord Joffe on BBC Radio Wiltshire.

Joffe, it seems to me, wants to replace the comprehensive (and independent) House of Lords report that accompanied his own euthanasia bills in 2005 with Falconer’s entirely bogus and just launched “Commission on Assisted Dying” (bogus because it’s simply a euthanasia campaign group in thin disguise). During the course of our radio conversation, Joffe accused me of “inventing” stories. I had just said that Holland euthanised those who could not ask for it, including new-born babies.

So I went back to the 2005 Joffe Report, which did most to blow Joffe’s bill out of the water, and there it was – Irene Keizer, a senior policy officer at the Dutch Ministry of Health, said this in evidence to the committee:

“There are some cases in which it is not careful euthanasia, but in most cases are people who are not able to make a request because they are not seen as being able to make a request – for instance, people who are suffering from a psychiatric disease or people who are in a coma. Also new born babies are not capable of making a request.”

There’s more than that, but the point here is that Lord Joffe accuses me of “inventing” evidence that was in the very House of Lords report that accompanied his own bill. Doesn’t fill you with confidence, does it?

Lord Falconer is a cannier old bird. He asked me on-air to give evidence to his “Commission”. This is schoolboy-level politics, but is nevertheless a cunning tactic. If I give evidence to his “Commission” I am granting it some credibility. If I refuse, then how can I object to its findings?

But its findings are already a done deal, of course. To recap: not only is Lord Falconer a well-known advocate of euthanasia, who has tried to introduce it into legislation in the Lords, but he is chairing the “Commission”. At the last count, nine of the 12 “Commission” members are on record as supporting some change in the law to allow some form of euthanasia in the UK (the remaining three are best described as neutral-to-wobbly, so there are no actual opponents of a change in the law here). The “Commission” is bankrolled by Sir Terry Pratchett, the novelist who believes those of infirm mind should be put to death, and sponsored by the death-on-demand lobbyists Dignity in Dying.

In what circumstances, exactly, is this bunch of euthanasia enthusiasts likely to come up with a report that says “Y’know, it turns out we were quite wrong and have changed our minds. Euthanasia is a wicked and ghastly institution and there’s no need for a change in the law.” No, it’s a bunch of like-minded people deciding that they’re right and publishing a report to “prove” it.

You’ve got to hand it to Falconer – he’s a chutzpah champion. This is the man, after all, who advised Tony Blair on the lawfulness of the Iraq war. Last week, as he launched his “Commission” he described it as “objective, dispassionate and authoritative” and even called it “independent”.

There is an alternative view and it’s this: No it isn’t. It’s like putting together a collection of turkeys to decide whether Christmas should be changed. Or asking the Belvoir Hunt whether the fox-hunting ban should be repealed. And asking Prince Charles to chair.

I know several peers have written to Lord Falconer asking him to consider his position. By parading the “Commission” as an exercise of the Lords, he is bringing it into disrepute. Since I’ve been asked to give evidence to his “Commission” I will be writing to him too. I will publish my letter here.

Dignity in Dying proves that it lives in the same fantasy world as Ray Gosling

Last Februay 16, Ray Gosling, a British reporter admitted on a BBC program that he had killed his gay lover many years earlier and then stated he had "no regrets."

Link to the newsweek article about the story: http://www.newsweek.com/2010/02/18/the-compassionate-killers.html

Last week we learned that Ray Gosling has now admitted that he made up the story. He admitted that he never killed a gay lover. He stated that his story got out-of-control.

Link to an article on Ray Gosling's lie: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/aug/20/ray-gosling-charged-partner-aids

Now for the reason for this blog comment. George Pitcher wrote an excellent comment on this issue that was published in the Telegraph on August 20. I thought it was thought provoking and worth republishing.
------------------------------------------

Dignity in Dying proves that it lives in the same fantasy world as Ray Gosling

When veteran documentary-maker Ray Gosling fessed up mawkishly in a BBC documentary last February to smothering a gay lover some 20 years ago, I wrote here that I didn’t believe a word of it. It never rang true and, frankly, it was very odd that the BBC should broadcast his confession just ahead of the new prosecution guidelines on assisted suicide being published by the Director of Public Prosecutions. Now it emerges that the DPP is prosecuting Gosling for wasting police time, a six-month investigation having concluded that he made the whole thing up.

Anyone with any sense was highly sceptical of Gosling’s overtired and emotional claims at the time. But not so pro-euthanasia lobby group Dignity in Dying. Its chief executive, Sarah Wootton, was keen to milk Gosling’s story for all it was worth and had this to say in the wake of his “revelations”:

“The law is out of step with what society needs and wants. This case yet again demonstrates that this is a real and present problem, which can affect us all. Crucially, Ray Gosling’s loved one was terminally ill and clearly asked for help to die when he was suffering unbearably at the end of his life.This illustrates a need for formal assisted dying legislation to help those who want choice at the end of life, as well as protect people who may be vulnerable to coercion.”

Or, alternatively, this case shows no such thing because it was all made up.

Meanwhile, Jo Cartwright, Dignity in Dying’s press officer let it be known In The Independent that Gosling “was just one of many people in Britain living with the consequences of helping someone to die, often suffering higher rates of psychological damage and suicide” and echoed Wootton by adding solemnly:

“This highlights that there is an issue and a real and present problem with people having to get involved in the end of their loved one’s lives. But if you had safeguarded assisted dying, friends and families would not have to go through this. A retrospective police investigation would be pointless.”

Not as pointless, presumably, as a police investigation into something that never happened, but which Ms Cartwright swallows whole and believes “highlights that there is an issue and a real and present problem.”

So red faces all round at Dignitas in Dying. Of course the BBC should have checked that there was some validity in poor Gosling’s claims before airing them and that just shows how slack is the Corporation’s standards of verification when it comes to its support for one of its ultra-liberalising causes, such as euthanasia and assisted suicide.

But as for Dignity in Dying…well, if hard cases make bad law, invented cases should obviously not make law at all. This case was as fabricated as as its “stringent conditions” for assisted suicide, its ludicrous distinctions between “assisted dying” and euthanasia and its ridiculous claims that “helping people to die” will in some way protect the weak and vulnerable. But Dignity in Dying evidently will jump on any bandwagon, however absurd, to achieve its aims.

Meanwhile, the medical and legal professions, as well as the police and the legislature, deal with the real world. And Gosling, Wootton, Dignity in Dying and the rest of the cull-the-dying mob should be put in a corner somewhere safe with their fantasies, to protect the rest of us.

Link to George Pitcher's comment in the Telegraph: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/georgepitcher/100051146/dignity-in-dying-proves-that-it-lives-in-the-same-fantasy-world-as-ray-gosling/