Professional liars in reverse order of dishonesty. @tabloidtroll @zelo_street

4. Sales people and marketers

It is there job to mislead and lie to create sales and a positive image the lowest on the rung of professional liars as there are laws controlling how dishonest they can be.

3.  Politicians

Lying comes as a natural part of the job it has to be done on a almsot daily bassis because if they really said what they though then ordinary people would be able to run succesful political campaigns. They have some restrictions because if the lie is too big and blatant there can sometimes be serious repercussions.

2 political press officers and spin doctors

Same as politicians but with less restrictions on their behaviour as they can give "off the record" and un-attributable quotes.

1 Tabloid Journalists

Utterly devoid of moral behaviour they not only lie for profit but believe that they are somehow special and superior to you and me. Just look at the leveson enquiry you will not see a bigger pit sociopathic self justification "in the public interest". A perfect example is the twitter account @tabloidtroll AKA Dennis Rice who engages in vicious and slanderous campaign against those such as @zelo_street who point out there dishonesty. He is even desperate enough to use someone else's terminal ilness as a "weapon" against @zelo_street its not much of a weapon as @zelo_street never mocked  there ilness, It's just another example of Tabloid journalists special little world that only they inhabit.

Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor launches hypocritical and dishonest attack.

Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor the monster who protected paedophile and exposed more children to them has launched a rather hypocritical attack on secularism.

Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: "Cardinal Murphy O'Connor is simply echoing the Vatican's familiar and untrue line that 'secularism' is the enemy of religion. It is certainly the enemy of power-seeking religion, as with the Vatican's present version of Catholicism, but it upholds the rights of religious believers to practise their faith freely and without hindrance. His presentation of Christianity as being under attack is a familiar one and still completely unconvincing. It is part of a wider campaign to reassert Catholic influence."

Mr Sanderson continued: "Murphy O'Connor says that the 'high priests' of secularism can't guarantee freedom from violence or immorality.

"But we should never forget that Mr Murphy O'Connor himself was guilty of disgracefully covering up some of the most horrific crimes of a paedophile priest when he was Archbishop of Arundel and Brighton – allowing the perpetrator to continue abusing children in other parishes. Why Murphy O'Connor was never brought to justice over this remains a mystery."

It is the same old lie again, by claiming that they are not allowed to discriminate or have special privileges over others then they believe they are being discriminated against. Also there world is do blinkered and singular that they are constantly going on about the high priests or secularism and atheism. Hate to point this out but there are no high priest or Holy Book of either.

Message to William Hague Stop moaning and get a real job you overpaid hypocrite.

Someone who lives a privileged and easy lifestyle with minimum effort required has complained that others aren't working hard enough, what a hypocrite what a fool.

No to AVs three dishonest claims, actually they are outright lies.

The No to AV campaign has 3 main reasons to vote no to AV. One a complete distortion the other two are outright lies. But the whole no to AV campaign has been one of dishonesty and fear mongering from the start.

AV is costly

“The change to AV will cost up to an additional £250 million. Local councils would have to waste money on costly electronic vote counting machines and expensive voter education campaigns. With ordinary families facing tough times can we really afford to spend a quarter of a billion pounds of taxpayers' money bringing in a new voting system? Schools and hospitals, or the Alternative Vote – that's the choice in this referendum.”

If they think a onetime £250 million cost is going to stop education or health care they have not got a clue about how much those actually cost. Healthcare costs £110 Billion a year or about 440X the one of cost for AV. Education costs are approximately £84 billion a year about 336X the one of cost of AV Clearly the claim that it is schools and hospitals or AV is a complete and disgraceful lie.

Cancelling the unnecessary trident replacement at a minimum would save a £24 Billion one of cost and who knows how much per year in maintenance. By doing so you could spend £250million on AV and have over £23 Billon extra to spend on schools and hospitals. Or use that money to buy conventional military equipment that has a genuine use and is under our control unlike trident and its potential replacement.

AV is complex and unfair

“The winner should be the candidate that comes first, but under AV the candidate who comes second or third can actually be elected. That’s why it is used by just three countries in the world – Fiji, Australia and Papua New Guinea. Voters should decide who the best candidate is, not the voting system. We can't afford to let the politicians off the hook by introducing a loser's charter.”

Under AV the most popular candidates win First past the post allows for unpopular and weak leaders who are elected with less than majority support. The reason only three countries use it is because it is an anathema to weak careerist politicians who rely on the first past the post system It would have taken heavy campaigning from the non political class to get AV passed in those countries. The suggestion that the politician who comes second or third gets in is ludicrous. Under AV a politician must get a substantive majority (over 50% of the vote) and therefore be a true winner, a truly popular leader. First past the post means a politician can get in with an un-substantive majority (under 50% of the vote) now that is a real losers charter.

AV is fairer and the suggestion it is too complicated is insulting the intelligence of everyone in this country. Filling out the census form is a lot more complicated and it’s not hard. Australians have been using it successfully sin 1918 they don’t think it is complicated at all.

AV is a politician's fix

“AV leads to more hung parliaments, backroom deals and broken promises like the Lib Dem tuition fees U-turn. Instead of the voters choosing the government, politicians would hold power. Under AV, the only vote that really counts is Nick Clegg's. We can't afford to let the politicians decide who runs our country.”

Australia introduced to alternative vote in 1918 since then they have had 2 hung parliaments in 1940 and 2010. Since 1918 our first past the post has also produced three hung parliaments in 1929, 1974 and 2010. Looking at the facts it shows a hung parliament is slightly less likely under AV not more likely. Therefore political deals are actually more likely under first past the post but that is why career politicians and extremists oppose AV. As for the suggestion that the only vote that counts is Nick Clegg is just a bizarre and outright lie.

Av is to the careerist and extremist politician as garlic is to a vampire that is why so many of the UK’s political failures and extremists are against it.
So there you have it the no to campaigns three main arguments against AV one distortion of reality two outright lies

Yellow journalism

Former Daily star reporter accuses the paper of yellow journalism. I am completely surprised that a low grade tabloid would resort to misinformation and demonization of a minority to increase sales. It really is time for some sort of honesty law to compel newspapers to tell the truth and present evidence for their stories or they have a good sized banner declering that they are infact writting fiction. No good comes from yellow journalism and all our papers practice it at some point to improve sales and revenue.

Just another politician

After the humiliating defeat in court of the BNPs racist policy of only allowing indigenous people in. Nick Griffin said "we recognise legal reality, so we have done it and now, for one thing, they can't call us racist any more."

Hey I just found a pound coin on the floor you can’t call me poor anymore. Will anyone actually fall for this? Just because they were forced to change one blatantly and overtly racist policy does not suddenly turn them into non racists just like me finding a pound coin doesn’t make me rich. Perhaps if they had done this willingly and started to get rid of there other policies it might be believable.

Of course the really silly thing is that as a self proclaimed Anglo Saxon Nick Griffin is not indigenous to Briton either and technically could not have joined the BNP. Infact the only people who can are of welsh decent and some of Cornish decent anyone who claims to be an Anglo Saxon is not indigenous. Isn't time to admit that Nick Griffin is just another politician who is a bit more dishonest than most and who is using Racism and bigotry to fuel his ambition and desires.