Sycophantic Hypocrite Numero Uno – Peter Checksfield

Peter Checksfield. He has stated he is in favour of the new Tesco superstore proposed at Arlington, Margate. He also has said several times on both the No and Yes Facebook pages relating to that development that people should be civil and that insults are not a good way to debate differing viewpoints. I certainly agree with the latter – making unfounded, insulting and potentially libellous accusations against people only results in making the writer of such comments appear weak and lacking in intellectual substance.

Which is why I find it highly curious that Peter’s protestations against rudeness and bad language only extend to those openly stating opposition to the proposed Tesco superstore development; he quite rightly mentioned and criticised a comment by someone on the No page which likened Eric Pickles to a Dr Who monster and implied he was ugly, merely because of his weight, but then he Likes and responds to (without any caveats or reservations) comments made by the Yes page’s admins and John Hamilton, which variously describe people as “senile”, “delusional”, “village idiots”, “gobby northerners” (a term Peter himself uses), “dumb bitch”, “clueless dullard”, “clueless busybodies”, “worthless” and let’s not forget, the highly disparaging term “nimbys”.

It is this last characterisation that Peter seems to have embraced wholeheartedly. Peter states his belief on John Hamilton’s blog that Toby Pengelly implied that Peter “was being paid by Tesco”:

in spite of the fact that not only did Toby Pengelly immediately write a second post on Facebook, qualifying that his prior comment did not implicate Peter at all, but that Peter saw and Liked that comment:

As you can see by the timestamps on both John Hamilton’s blog and Facebook, Peter Checksfield was most definitely aware of Toby Pengelly’s qualification of his remark, yet still chose to comment that it was implied that Peter was somehow a corporate shill and to decry that implicit statement, along with making his own implication that as a non-resident of Thanet Toby Pengelly cannot possibly have any valid input on the matter at all. Disingenuous behaviour at best.

Also, quite how a non-resident can be a “nimby” as well, I’m not quite sure – ‘Not In My Back-Yard’ by its very definition relates to locality, so if someone is belittled for not having that apocryphal back-yard, I don’t see how the derogation applies.

Finally, Peter compounds all of these above ‘errors in judgement’ on the Yes Facebook page, when after complaining that it was implied that he was a Tesco shill (despite him having seen and acknowledged a response that that wasn’t the point of the prior comment), he then feels it acceptable to state that anyone who questions the Tesco superstore proposal at Arlington in any way does not wish Margate to succeed:

So anyone who has quite legitimate questions about any of this development – whether it concerns traffic, the size of the store, the legitimacy of the actions by Freshwater and the council, or indeed anything else – as far as Peter would have it are people who do not want Margate to succeed. The implication made by Peter there is that individuals should not dare to question or even apply any thought to any kind of proposals – from business (big or small), from private individuals, from the council, from central government – or to investigate whether activities are being carried out in the best interests of the residents. If you have any concerns – they are not legitimate and you do not wish success for Margate.

Peter Checksfield – sycophant to John Hamilton, who says he agrees that people should be free to not be insulted and that such puerile behaviour is not acceptable:

Unless, of course, the victims happen to support the No page – in which case they’re completely fair game and he won’t even bat an eyelid as vicious, unfounded accusations are bandied about.

Glad you’re a man of principle, Peter.

Advertisements

52 thoughts on “Sycophantic Hypocrite Numero Uno – Peter Checksfield

  1. OMG, is that really him? He shops in the Tesco where I work, and I don’t think I’ll ever be able to look him in the eye again!

  2. On say Yes to Arlington he has been running a campaign against Louise Oldfield’s award winning B&B in Hawley Square examples of which include “gouging, fleecing, and who would pay £200 a night” when he himself says “Any decent businessman maximises his opportunity of income” John Hamilton – talking sense and cutting through bullshit Friday, 21 June 2013 05:31:00 BST on Big News Margate. btw have linked my blog http://pleasurama.blogspot.co.uk/ to yours. Can you add mine Barry James

  3. Hello Geoffrey, this makes fascinating reading. On the John Hamilton issue, you do know he is a very well known local troll who has been a pain in the backside for a number of local protest groups going back well over 2 yrs now. Quite why Checksfield has jumped on the bandwagon is curious though. Nice to see others out to expose these idiots though.

    • Hi margatemadness,

      I’m glad you like it. Now that I’m back in the country (and have wrested control away from the person (un)known who tried to lock me out of my own account) more posts and critiques will follow. John has certainly been busy in my absence!

      Geoff

  4. I don’t think Peter has jumped on any bandwagon, as he’s been campaigning for Tesco for years via my Margate Architecture blog. He may be misguided and I disagree strongly with his stance over this, but please let’s not twist the truth to our own advantage here. Thank you.

  5. Barry, it was actually the fictional “John Hamilton” who made those hurtful and nasty comments, not Peter Checksfield. Or are you suggesting that they’re the same person? I doubt it somehow.

    • sorry I was talking about Hammy not Peter that started the comments about your B&B if that wasnt clear then I apologise

      • Hello Geoff.

        I know this is your blog, but do you really think that carrying on squabbles like this is the right answer? If the press sees this then it can do as much harm to our own campaign as to those who oppose it. Instead we should keep things positive.

        Much love.

        Helder

      • This is to Helder, as for some reason I have no ability to Reply directly to your comment (if only I was the admin…)

        Update: How odd – no Reply button for your comment Helder, but my reply went after yours anyway…

        I see your point and in many ways was content to let John Hamilton’s viciousness speak for itself. The reason why I began this was because others were starting to pay attention only to what John said and taking it as fact – this gives people the chance to write rebuttals of his accusations and nasty comments, in an environment which cannot be controlled by him (in spite of the recent attempts by a certain IP address to lock me out of my accounts while I was away).

        Geoff

    • Hi “Me!” – I agree that Photoshop is wonderful, unfortunately I have neither the time nor the inclination to spend hundreds of hours and pounds learning how to use it!

  6. Hi Geoff, Do you have the figures for how much these delays and protests have cost us? I’ve asked on other blogs but no-one has responded yet.

      • Hi Julie,
        My apologies for not replying sooner – I have been out of the country for several days and only got back this morning. I have no association with any of the Pro or Anti movements (beyond thinking that John Hamilton is a vicious troll) so unfortunately cannot answer your question. I would suspect that no-one would have an exact figure as yet unless a Freedom of Information Request were to be submitted.

        I’m not sure who that would need to be submitted to though. I can provide links to advice for making FoI Requests if that would be of any help?

        Geoff.

    • Hi Kimmi,

      I’m sorry that Peter was dissed – having to suffer insults is not pleasant; hence the reason why I started pointing out John Hamilton’s posts and Peter’s curious acceptance of John’s verbal abuse of others. I felt I was strenuously exact in avoiding terms which would cause Peter undue offence, but I do apologise if he took any too badly.

      Geoff

      • we ‘ve got ur address of sum1 so url b able to tell him urself soon! LOLZ!

      • Hi Kimmi,

        I look forward to meeting Peter and/or yourself in person. Any preferences for tea, coffee, etc? Let me know and I’ll make sure suitable refreshments are available.

        Also, probably a good idea to make sure the address is accurate – wouldn’t want you to go knocking on the wrong door! Although obviously don’t post the whole thing – don’t want you to be in breach of the Data Protection Act! Plus, what with the on-going police investigation over the hacking, might give them another line of enquiry!

        How about you post the last number of the house, followed by the last letters of the street name? For example:

        “123 Example Street” would be “3, e, t”.

        Once you’ve done that, let me know what day and time and I’ll make sure I’m in for your visit.

        All the best,

        Geoff

  7. Don’t expect a reply anyone, the UTTER TWAT has had his account closed due to complaints and he can’t login HAHAHA!!!!

    • Fortunately John, that is not the case. I was merely away for a few days and unable to reply. As you can see, I have logged in (and regained control of my account after the illegal access to that and my email account, from an IP address which seems strikingly familiar to me…) and can post with abandon.

      And I find it amusing that you have decided to copy/paste my trap post below, pretending to be me: I would never in a million years stoop to using a Yahoo email account. And that IP address looks very familiar 😉

  8. Spam? U fukin moron its ur site that’s the problem! And lies? Prove it then! U always tell others to give proof so how about u show some once for once in ur miserable pathetic fukin life! Prove that the people u banned from the facebook page are what u say they are, or ur nuthin but a fukin sad old lying man.

    • Unlike John Hamilton, I *do* run a blog that welcomes free speech, even if that speech is just my own poorly-worded, abusive trap post quoted back at me, from an email address I do not own (but made to look like I do).

      Therefore, I won’t even be deleting this post, despite its absolute irrelevance.

      Again, that IP address is looking mighty familiar…

  9. I genuinely pity you Geoff. That you are naive enough to be taken in my the nimbys and gougers of Margate is a given, as the low quality of your blog, and attacks on me show very nicely.

    But to try to garner support from the very dishonest morons that I have exposed as being SO wanting SO often, such as Barry “i wouldn’t know evidence if it punched me unconcious” James and Ian “i will get media coverage by climbing onto the backs of disabled children” Driver, you simply underline what a joke you are my boy 😉

    Now off you fuck there’s a good boy 😉

    • Hi John.

      You misunderstand. I have not attempted to garner support nor woo anyone. The whole point of this blog is to reveal your inaccuracies, lies and misrepresentations in an arena which you do not have control over and therefore cannot silence (as you regularly do on your blog and your “Yes to Tesco’s at Arlington…” facebook page). And to permit those who you attempt to silence the opportunity to respond and present their side of the story.

      If you were a reasonable man who could debate and argue with other people who hold differing viewpoints to your own, then this blog would not exist. As it stands, you launch personal attacks upon anyone who seems to hold a different view to yours and dismiss it all as some great leftie-liberal, socialist conspiracy, when in fact it is a disparate group of individuals who happen to share some similar views on all kinds of different matters.

      Your posts, comments and articles speak for themselves. You are merely a rude person who feels protected by the anonymity afforded by the Internet to write vicious, unfounded attacks, who has surrounded himself with sycophantic stooges who reinforce your own very mistaken sense of importance. You also ignore or belittle those who debate with you and who make exceedingly valid points, or you delete their comments altogether, in a crass display of censorship spurred on by fear (just like when you deleted the poll from the “Yes…” facebook page; when it didn’t provide the result you were hoping to engineer, you erased it from existence). A man of stronger conviction would allow previous failures to remain.

      I see you also appear to have employed a proxy to mask your IP address and place it in a different location (I sincerely doubt you happened to be commenting from that location in real life). Best of luck to you with that.

      All the best, Geoff.

  10. well done Geoff. doubt he will give up. mind you it is funny he has never attempted to refute my Pleasurama blog nor has he even once tried to post on it.

    • Why bother James, you have posted neither post nor proof of wrongdoing, hence nothing to refute really.

      Now of course, it seems that when you make further accusations that you couldn’t prove against Cardy’s, their legal people showed you to be the lying fool we always knew you were.

      Poor ole James, bitched by everyone with a keyboard, again 😉

      • Barry,

        Note how John resorts again to insults and innuendo, rather than providing that which he himself constantly demands of others; proof.

        The fact that he only responds thusly proves that all his accusations are baseless, otherwise he would have posted definitive evidence instead of repeating the same lies.

        Geoff

      • Simply treating James with the derision he clearly deserves 😉

        Nice of you to try to defend poor ole James though, he needs it!

      • Barry seems more than capable of defending himself, John. Just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy (as if that really needed highlighting any better than you already do yourself).

      • don’t really understand just what proof he has that ant solicitors have ever been in touch

      • Safe to say that he has none, Barry. John seems single-mindedly obsessed with demanding proof from others, yet never reciprocates. Just one of his many and varied hypocrisies.

  11. Have they not then James? Your once again un supported accusations against Cardy’s were correct were they, or were they simply your usual stock in trade, bullshit that this time you were rightly forced to remove.

    That’s what happens when you write bullshit accusing others of wrong doing with no evidence, they bitch slap you, as I have for months, it seems others have now done behind the scenes, or perhaps you would like to repeat your bullshit about Cardy’s again…

    No no Barnes, James needs a LOT more help than a dumbfuck like you can provide my boy 😉

    • Barry,

      John’s getting delusions of grandeur again! I’d say he’s been roundly beaten by you and me (and many others), so quite how that means he was able to “bitch slap you… for months) is a mystery. Perhaps if he could offer proof of this? But we all know John has no proof.

      Maybe that’s why he keeps demanding it of others, so he can steal it as his own, like the insults and everything else (seeing as John can’t actually come up with any original material and has to rely on hand-outs).

      Geoff

      • The allegation from Hammy was Cardy’s solicitors had somehow been in touch. That is not true. So if he has some proof of that then he needs to produce it. Again Hammy post something on my blog refuting anything I have written or get back on your wheel and do something useful for once

  12. Barnes, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    That deals with your post in it’s entirety.

    Oh really James, me thinks you post yet more bullshit trying to cover your original bullshit. Now tell us all James, when was it that you made many claims about Cardy’s and were forced to remove them all, immediately my boy? Seems you LOVE to post bullshit with no evidence, but it seems you messed with someone prepared to bitch slap you legally aswell as online.

    As yet, your tragic blog contains nothing worth refuting as you have posted no claims with any evidence of wrong doing James, Seems all you have is bullshit, innuendo and outright lies where your evidence should be.

    Perhaps you should ,stick to trying to attract children to tell stories to..

    • Barry,

      Notice how John resorts yet again to infantile ridicule and insults? He says you apparently “LOVE to post bullshit with no evidence” but cannot present a single shred of proof that you did so. He also presents no evidence about Cardy’s solicitors, so resorts once again to insults.

      If he had proof, he would post it. The fact that he does not and can only return to childish behaviour proves he has nothing. But then, did we really expect anything else from him?

      Geoff

      • Interesting that you persist with your silliness. Maybe you should check with Cardy’s solicitors yourself, whoever they are. Maybe then you can say sorry for your poor research.

  13. When dealing with childish “minds” such as your Barnes, best I try to keep it down to your level, hence;

    Barnes, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    That deals with your post in it’s entirety again.

    Maybe you would like to re state the bullshit claims and lies posted against Cardy’s that you slapped down SO completely for making James…

    That’s what happens when you post bullshit about people who have a bog stick James, they beat you like the bitch you are, for the rest of our’s amusement.

    Now, perhaps you would like to repeat the accusation you made against Cardy’s 🙂 Maybe they won’t act against you for your total lack of “research”.

    Forensic accountant, hahahahahahahahahaha yea right, you’re simply EVERONE’s bitch James 😉

    • Barry,

      See how he proves my point (yet again) about deflecting attention through insults? If he had proof, he would have posted and crowed about it long before now; instead he chooses to make accusations with no evidence, hoping that repetition will make the lies stick.

      Geoff

  14. Bless, you Barnes, trying to deflect from James’s lies being exposed AGAIN won’t help the poor ole fool 🙂

    Now, what were you saying about Cardy’s James, not got the balls to repeat it…. 😉

    • So, offered ample opportunity to provide evidence of his accusations and John resorts yet again to insults and deflection. If proof existed, John would have posted it. The fact he does not speaks volumes…

  15. Bless, you Barnes, trying to deflect from James’s lies being exposed AGAIN won’t help the poor ole fool 🙂

    Now, what were you saying about Cardy’s James, not got the balls to repeat it…. 😉

    What were the accusations you made against Cardy’s James… Those accusations you removed when they bitch slapped you…

    • See Barry,

      John makes up accusations that you presented accusations against Cardy, then John makes up accusations that you had to remove them because of legal action, then makes up accusations that you won’t repeat your original accusations.

      Which only appear in his head, have never been posted anywhere and certainly were not forcibly removed.

      I mean if they were, John would have posted proof of it by now.

  16. Bless, you Barnes, trying to deflect from James’s lies being exposed AGAIN won’t help the poor ole fool 🙂

    Now, what were you saying about Cardy’s James, not got the balls to repeat it…. 😉

    What were the accusations you made against Cardy’s James… Those accusations you removed when they bitch slapped you…

  17. My copying and pasting is all that’s required to illustrate your worthlessness Barnes, and James’s lies 😉 Quite endearing how you try to protect the poor dumb fuckwit though 🙂

    Bless, you Barnes, trying to deflect from James’s lies being exposed AGAIN won’t help the poor ole fool 🙂

    Now, what were you saying about Cardy’s James, not got the balls to repeat it…. 😉

    What were the accusations you made against Cardy’s James… Those accusations you removed when they bitch slapped you…

    But we know Barnes, poor ole James won’ t be posting his lies again as that would actually require him to have some in the first place… 😉

  18. Barry,

    Note again how John hopes that people won’t notice that he refuses to copy/paste proof of his accusations but instead just copy/pastes his previous lies in the vain hope that repetition will make the accusations stick.

    Genuinely very funny!

    Geoff

  19. My copying and pasting is all that’s required to illustrate your worthlessness Barnes, and James’s lies 😉 Quite endearing how you try to protect the poor dumb fuckwit though 🙂

    Bless, you Barnes, trying to deflect from James’s lies being exposed AGAIN won’t help the poor ole fool 🙂

    Now, what were you saying about Cardy’s James, not got the balls to repeat it…. 😉

    What were the accusations you made against Cardy’s James… Those accusations you removed when they bitch slapped you…

    But we know Barnes, poor ole James won’ t be posting his lies again as that would actually require him to have some in the first place… 😉

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