Monday, 30 November 2009
Sunday, 29 November 2009
And from the intro:"In this conscientious, painstaking and scholarly review of the literature, Richard White has validated my scepticism. The book is encyclopaedic in its content. Among the many topics embraced is ‘detection bias’ whereby the notion that smoking causes cancer is now so ingrained that the possibility of lung cancer when doctors examine non-smokers is overlooked; they are not expecting to find cancer and so do not investigate appropriately. Researchers still do not know precisely how, or indeed whether, smoking causes cancer or any of the other diseases attributed to it; they have struggled with weird and wonderful experiments to try and produce tumours in laboratory animals and failed dismally. The chemicals in tobacco smoke are similar to those in traffic fumes, except that in traffic fumes the concentration is much higher; cigarette smoke is therefore less toxic than the air we ordinarily breathe."
"Until the 1950s almost nobody would have suggested smoking was harmful, let alone deadly. Doctors even recommended smoking...What is widely overlooked, ignored, or just not known is that a very definite health establishment exists, to which organisations like the National Health Service (NHS) and Cancer Research UK belong. Within this health establishment are the researchers and scientists who depend upon funding for their research. There is now a bandwagon, so to speak; any anti-smoking study is guaranteed to receive grants, and guaranteed to get exposure. Thus, the bigger picture begins to emerge and we can see that scientists and researchers are almost forced to churn out anti-smoking studies, regardless of how bogus they are."From the press release:
- How did the anti-smoking movement begin and why has it grown so large?
- Why are there only statistical links between tobacco consumption and disease?
- Why were all the longest-living people smokers?
- What interest does the pharmaceutical industry have in supporting the anti-smoking movement?
‘Smoke Screens: The Truth About Tobacco’ is the culmination of years of research into tobacco consumption. The book explores everything from the scientific links between smoking and illness to smoking trends between the social classes. It also examines fundamental issues such as detection bias and answers the pertinent question of ‘Why was there a surge in lung cancer rates in the 1930s?’
The book delves into the interests of the pharmaceutical industry and the cancer research organizations to determine whether they have vested interests in the ostracisation of smokers and, if so, where those interests lay. Including extracts from a variety of Surgeon General Reports and an anti-smoking magazine from 1917, ‘Smoke Screens: The Truth About Tobacco’ leaves no stone unturned and provides an encyclopaedic view into one of the largest issues in society today. With global smoking bans now in place and the World Health Organisation declaring a global war against tobacco smoking, the book is timely and relevant. With over a billion smokers worldwide there is potential for this book to be a milestone in recent history.
Saturday, 28 November 2009
I have lifted this from Frank Davis. This speaks volumes to me, a proud smoker.
Bravo Frank, bravo.Perhaps the most telling event of my visit to Spain took place shortly after I'd got back to England. I'd met up with a friend of mine for a dinner at a restaurant, and at the end of it he pulled out a packet of cigarettes and fingered one, saying how he'd like a smoke. And I said that if he was in Spain, he could smoke one, and no-one would bat an eyelid. And I started rolling a cigarette to take outside. Next thing I knew my friend had stood up and was waving his arms around frantically. It took me a few seconds to figure out why: once I'd rolled the cigarette, I'd simply put it in my mouth and lit it, in the middle of a crowded Indian restaurant. I just did what came naturally. I hadn't planned on doing it. If he hadn't drawn my attention to it, I probably wouldn't have noticed for a minute or two.
That wouldn't have happened a week ago. And it showed how easily two and a half years of conditioning under Britain's draconian anti-smoking regime was erased by just five days in Spain. It takes an effort to not smoke. A smoker has to keep on telling himself, "No, I mustn't smoke". It requires constant self-denial to not smoke. It's much easier to just light a cigarette. And that means that smoking is the default activity, the natural activity for smokers. It's what they will do, left to themselves. If the pressure to not smoke ever relaxes, smokers will go back to smoking. It takes a really big effort by smokers to not smoke. And they'll give up making the effort given half a chance. Or a few days in Spain.
It's a rather strange thought, but the British smoking ban only works because British smokers make it work. They work very hard at making it work, saying No to themselves all day. And two and a half years into the ban, they have to work just as hard as they did on day one of the ban. It doesn't get any easier.
If antismokers hoped that, after several years of restraining themselves, smokers would find that not smoking came naturally, they're profoundly mistaken. Smoking remains the default, natural activity for smokers. And it takes a continual effort on their part to not smoke. Non-smoking doesn't come at all naturally. And that means that smoking bans are very fragile things, that can all too easily come apart. Smoking bans are sandcastles: they look solid, but from the moment they're constructed they're starting to fall down. They require a continual effort of repair to prevent them reverting to the natural state of sand.
Why do Britain's smokers go on doing restraining themselves? Well, because it's against the law, mostly. But also because they half believe that passive smoking really does kill people. And if it doesn't kill anyone, it's because they have been told that it's an antisocial pastime. And it's also because they feel they really should give up smoking, like so many people they know have done. And it's because they're convinced that the future will non-smoking, and smoking will soon be as much a thing of the past as spitting or keeping pet dogs. And it's also because they're ashamed to be smokers.
So while Britain's smokers believe all this nonsense, they'll carry on restraining themselves, and carry on telling themselves No a couple of hundred times a day. And it really is all nonsense. Passive smoking doesn't kill anybody: even the lousy antismoking studies say so. Nor is it that smoking is an antisocial pastime: it's the antismokers who are the real antisocial killjoys. And would smokers feel any need to give up smoking, if they were to find out that the research into active smoking is so much junk science as well? And why should they admire anyone who has given up smoking, if giving up smoking simply entails saying No to yourself for the rest of your life. And why on earth should they believe that the future is non-smoking, when all the historical evidence is that smoking bans fail whenever they're tried? And why should they be ashamed of being smokers, when so many of their illustrious forebears were smokers? Like Winston Churchill. Pablo Picasso. Albert Einstein. And tens of thousands of others. Millions of them.
Smokers carry around all these illusions about smoking. But they're really the victims of a gigantic confidence trick. One that's been perpetrated by the medical establishment and anti-smoking organisations over many decades using sophisticated propaganda techniques. It's taken a colossal effort to fool smokers into restraining themselves from smoking. And if that effort ever eases up, if the propaganda ever ceases, smokers will rapidly revert to doing what comes naturally - smoking.
Bans fail because the effort needed to maintain the illusion becomes too great. Smokers know perfectly well that their smoke harms no-one. They also know that it doesn't even harm them (they wouldn't smoke if they believed it did). And they know that smoking is a socially inclusive practice, as smokers are bound together in an enveloping mantle of smoke. And smokers don't really admire people who've given up smoking: they don't want to be naysayers forbidding themselves from every pleasure in life. And it takes an enormous barrage of unrelenting propaganda for smokers to be made to forget all these things they know, and to erase their personal knowledge. And that personal knowledge is always eating away at the false, artificial, propaganda-induced 'knowledge' that has usurped their true knowledge, their natural common sense. Switch off the propaganda, and that common sense will gradually come to the fore again, and will prevail over manufactured knowledge.
Most likely the smoking ban will fail when smokers cease to believe the lies they've been told. And they are always ceasing to believe those lies. It takes a constant rain of propaganda lies to keep them from reverting to their natural state. And once smokers cease to believe the lies they've been told, at the same time they cease to have any incentive to restrain themselves from smoking. And when they cease restraining themselves, they'll start to spontaneously light up, just like I lit up in that Indian restaurant last night. And when they see people no longer restraining themselves from smoking, other smokers will cease to restrain themselves as well. Whole pubs will suddenly start smoking overnight. And other nearby pubs will rapidly catch the bug.
At a pub earlier in the evening I got talking about smoking to one of the drinkers. He agreed that the research showed there was little or no threat from passive smoking. He said pubs should be allowed to choose to be smoking or non-smoking. But he said that while he liked smoking, he didn't like being a smoker. It wasn't a good thing to be these days. So here was a smoker who was ashamed of being a smoker. And he also said that things would only get worse. So here was another smoker who could see the future with 20-20 foresight, and the future was non-smoking. He'd broken through one or two illusions, but he remained entangled by the rest of them. If he could have become a proud smoker again, and dispensed with the imaginary smokefree future which held him spellbound, he'd have been at the point of spontaneously lighting up.
I think I'm going to start constructing a new future. It'll be one in which everyone smokes. Children too. And it'll be a future in which the antismokers have had all their lies exposed, and they've all been rounded up and shot. Or maybe not shot. Just hanged. And everyone will wonder why they went along with the madness for so long.
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
Yes, there are still some people who consider both sides of the argument in the smoking debate. Some who still see the deletorious effect of smoker bans on honest businesses and can assign a value to that, instead of just meekly collapsing under the weight of hysterical, pharma-funded rhetoric.
Unfortunately, such a person isn't native to the UK, but hopefully one might crawl out of the woodwork here soon to replicate the brave common sense exhibited by Greg Ballard, Mayor of Indianapolis.
Ballard says he's concerned an expanded smoking ban could hurt some small businesses. He says he doesn't like any of the current proposals.
Predictably, the shrill voice of tobacco control, like the spoilt child in a supermarket, is throwing a tantrum at being ignored.
Democratic councilor Angela Mansfield, one of the sponsors of the plan, said of Ballard, "That's the first time I've heard him say he'd veto anything. That was alarming when we heard this."
"He's never met with us," she said. "We asked him to and he refused."
He's probably well aware of the one-sided anti-business nonsense that you're going to spew, dear. Why bother?
The local government-funded loon was more measured in his tone.
Tim Filler** is with Smoke Free Indy. "We've seen his position can evolve as indicated by the previous change in position so we're hoping he has time to reflect on this," said Filler.
But this report suggests the good cop/bad cop routine is also likely to be resisted.
A spokesperson for the mayor called that very unlikely. He said the mayor was firm in his position opposing any expansion of the current ban.
And I am sure that businesses in Indy will be falling over themselves to offer support to this man whenever they are next asked.
See, UK Tory party? It's that easy to stand up for the rights of everyone, not just a chosen few. You should try it sometime.
** This would be the same Tim Filler who has been caught defaming a grass roots pro-choice advocate. Oh, the usual stuff, paid by big tobacco, that sort of desperate nonsense.
Monday, 23 November 2009
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/blogs/index. ... 1&blogid=4
This makes Simple simon think of the ludicrous 'study' by that ludicrous Dr Jonathon Winikoff whereby he 'shocked' the world with his revelations of 3rd hand smoke! Funnily enough the good DR refused to talk to this writer after a lengthy email ridiculing his limbecilc phone call study as nothing short of cheap assed sensationalism.
Does it not strike you that Apple may have decided that 'toxic particulate' will have embedded itself/themselves within the computer just waiting for an Apple technician to start fiddling before leaping out to strangle the misfortunate creature.
Are Winikoff & Apple now in cahoots for they both act with the same incredible stupidity - 3rd hand smoke/contaminated keyboards, for God's sake! Yet I bet they all drive round in gas guzzlers polluting the very air we all breathe!
I can see law suits emerging here as Apple, probably prompted by Winikoff's wondrous phone research are denying certain customers their rights to repair.
What is for sure is that the depths to which anti smokers are prepared to plummet are getting deeper and more absurd by the week. Any opportunity to worsen the smokers already dismal plight seems fair game for these people - but their day is coming.
It is coming simply because this healthist freakery is bankrupting the world as we know it. The idiot known as Herr Brown has already voiced intention to borrow a mere £173bn to see us through the worst of it next year. Jesus bloody wept, the worst of it next year will be NuLiebour in power until May. How much poorer will we be by the next election?
California, the home of all bans, is now bankrupt, so 'Arnie baby' is contemplating legalising marijuana as it will bring in much taxable revenue. But how is marijuana consumed....errrrrm?
Well sod me folks, we roll it up in a cigarette and SMOKE it! So ban smoking to get in the shit and then sell legalised shit to get out of it again! Marvellous system.
Back to the toxic/Apple situation. It cannot get more ludicrous than this so I am fully expecting a 'board position' to be made for Winikoff - with, of course, a free gas guzzler thrown in!
Friday, 20 November 2009
Above the Old Bailey stands the symbol of Great British Justice, the scales of justice. Scales held by Lady Justice symbolizing the measure of a case's support and opposition. The British Justice system was regarded as the best (fairest) in the world - until July 1st, 2007 that is! That day will be the most memorable for smokers for that was not only the day all smokers were banished from the interior of pubs but also the day that any form of justice for smokers went out of the window.
The scales were now heavily weighted against 13 million people.
When you consider the cast array of crimes that are dealt with by the courts in this country you would think that smoke related misdemeanours would languish near the bottom of the muck-heap.
You would be seriously wrong!
Smokers, apparently, are the new 'cash cows', the new breed of miscreants to fill the judiciary coffers. Licensees are even better prey for the courts as the system vilifies every smoker in every way possible.
Just imagine the young girl standing outside her shop having a welcomed cigarette break. She innocently chucks the cigarette butt down the nearest street drain only to be immediately accosted by some un-uniformed creature brandishing an 'on the spot' penalty ticket. Very dear cigarette-£80! As far as she was concerned she was not littering the streets with her spent cigarette but the law states otherwise!
An elderly gentleman in Kettering sat quietly smoking his cigarette in his car whilst his wife was in a shop. As was his wont he carefully flicked the ash into the ashtray and also condemned the butt to said receptacle. An EHO pounced and issued him with a ticket for littering.
Outraged he took the case to court to prove his innocence - and here is where the bizarre takes over! Despite his protestations and letters of affirmation that he was a person who picked others litter up and put it in bins provided, and despite the fact that he was in direct view of a CCTV camera he was found guilty of littering and also had to pay for the courts time - more than £600 if you please. The bizarrest point is that the court, upon request, refused to allow the CCTV footage to be shown - which would have proved his truthful defence.
As far as the magistrates were concerned the EHO would not be wrong - after all, he/she was performing a vital service and was trained to the hilt!
In the city of Leicester a serial car thief was hauled up in court for yet another car break-in, and was referred to the Crown Court for sentencing. The Judge berated this young hoodlum who's track record consisted of more than 200 vehicle break-ins and told him that this was his last chance before a custodial sentence would be imposed - 200 hrs community service and his picture published so that the public (yes, the public!) could phone 999 if he was spotted anywhere near a car park. Oh yes, fines total:- £00.00.
Now we come to the creme de la creme of this financial war against smokers smoking - or not in this case. Our friend the Liverpool tanker driver ws recently issued with a fixed penalty notice for 'smoking in his cab' during an enforced lunch break. An ever vigilant EHO happened to drive into the parking area and spotted what she considered to be an offence.
From 88ft away she observed him 'flicking ash' form the end of his 'cigarette' before, finally, she states, tossing the cigerette end out of the cab window onto the ground. Being ever vigilant the EHO took photographs of the rear of the lorry, from which the cab was invisible and the front of the lorry which showed a nice big windscreen but no driver inside - not even a driver smoking. The photographic evidence did not extend to a picture of the supposed 'dog-end' hurled from the cab, the photographic evidence did not even show an arm hanging outside the cab with a 'cigarette' in hand.
In fact, the photographic evidence was a waste of time as all it proved was the fact thet the lorry, carrying toxic materials was parked in a certain place at a certain time! Worse still, this EHO went to the drivers place of work 2 days later to issue the fixed penalty notice which promptly ensured his dismissal from employment. The driver argued that he was not smoking but in actual fact "vaping" as he was using an electronic cigarette; ie non ignited, non tobacco substitute for the real thing. His cigarettes were on the shelf at home - after all, just look at what he was transporting!
He refused the FPN and went to court to prove his innocence - big mistake! Bigger mistake - he represented himself in the belief that truth and honesty would prevail. All his protestations were ignored, the magistrates deciding (probably before the case even started) that the driver was a smoker therefore guilty, after all, the EHO was a 'most credible witness'.
In actual fact, the EHO was a useless bag of crap who could not possibly have seen what she said she had seen from the distance reported. I doubt superman could have either! This is all the proof smokers ever needed that the dice, sorry, the scales of justice, are firmly set against them. There is no justice for smokers - because they smoke - and in this nannyist, healthist state we now live in where smokers are the scourge of the earth smokers will never get any justice. The above cases are but a few, there are hundreds of cases where the penalties far outweigh the 'crime' but the powers that be have passed the order down the line to hammer any would be miscreant smoker.
The judiciary has sold its soul to the devil as far as smokers are concerned, they are not interested in truth or justice, they only want whatever money they feel they can get out of each individual.
Justice -What Justice?
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
Freedom2Choose members have been invited to a march on December the 7th by Inez Ward (Justice for Licensees) to take part in this protest, along with other groups, Pub Revolution & Fair Pint amongst them. F2C and JFL are now working together to save the once great British Pubs & Clubs and will be there along with Shisha Bars/Cafe owners to protest about the Smoking Ban Experiment in social engineering that has been a big influence in their demise; over 52 pubs/clubs a week are closing.
Phil Johnson, F2C's Club & Pub Liaison Officer, is delighted to be part of this peaceful protest as this is the start of showing those in power that people power is greater. For too long have the British people sat back and allowed their human rights to be taken away from them one by one. Never should the smoke-ban law been allowed to be in it's present form as the cost to businesses and human misery has been colossal. I urge all people opposed to this form of government control to join the march and join the fight to regain our dignity and our human rights.
From Justice for Licensees:
There will be a peaceful protest march in London on 7th December 2009 to highlight to the government and the rest of the country that action is demanded now. The continuing onerous practices of the pubcos are not acceptable and will no longer be tolerated. It is a completely unfair system which has been to the gain of a few and to the detriment of thousands.The imposition of the SBE was just one nail in the coffin of the pub & club trade and it was not helped by the Pubcos demanding a “level playing field” which ultimately heralded in a full smoking ban without exemptions to pubs or clubs as was intended in the infamous ‘Labour Manifesto’ of 2005, now dubbed The Liars Manifesto. And here is their legacy.
Tenants are suffering, they are losing their homes and livelihoods, children are being affected, tenants do not earn the National Minimum wage in far too many instances, they work in excess of 80 hours a week, they do not have the finances to input back into their business, they are suffering illness and very sadly in some circumstances they are committing suicide. Quite frankly it is just not good enough, there has to be change and there has to be change now! Two government inquiries have demanded it and now the tenants and consumers are demanding it!
Jubilee Gardens (near to the London Eye) SE1 7PB @10am.Justice for Licensees on Facebook
The march is due to start @ midday.
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
And we have also known that those paragons of virtue have been setting their sights, with the crosshairs firmly fixed on the Internet. There is, it seems, not a day that goes by when some
Now it's the turn of the humble blog. One Baroness Buscombe, the new Chair of the Press Complaints Commission, wants to regulate blogs and blogging and bring them into line with the MSM.
There are too many H/Ts as most of the blogosphere has ran with this story but I'll go with the last blog I read, the inimitable Mark Wadsworth.
Monday, 16 November 2009
And what are they spending all this money on? Well, quite a lot of it goes towards stamping down hard on freedom of choice all over Europe.
The smoking ban in Greece is not effective, according to Greek officials, who said that they will launch a review of the law that was passed earlier this year, following complaints from non-smokers at home and pressure from the European Union.
The full article illustrates the dictatorial nature of the EU. The Greek people have delivered an overwhelming rejection of the EU-led anti-tobacco crusade, so the answer from Brussels is not to respect the will of the people ... but to crush it with all means at their disposal.
Remember that you pay for this.
Friday, 13 November 2009
Many of you have probably heard by now through the Freedom2Choose blog that a visit to complain about the Birmingham North and East PCT's graphically violent video which shows a smoker getting beaten to death is to be removed from the web.
I was so outraged when I first saw the video that I complained. The background to why and how it was made, and the wider campiagn that it was part of, was explained but I didn't feel that it justified what I saw as a very irresponsible video which I honestly believe could incite violence against smokers.
Athertonat Freedom2Choose agreed to come with. He is someone very useful to have on side because of the meticulous research he has done on the issue of smoking and health and the talent he has for quoting statistics when it matters.
Also present to add his voice to the complaint was Dudley Councillor Malcolm
Davis(pictured above) . It was very important that the complaint had some kind of political punch and a local aspect to it so the BEN PCT couldn't wriggle out of it by saying it wasn't meant to be seen by a wider audience, which they did.
It is important to add that UKIP was the ONLY party to lend this support. Others chose not to. If I could have mustered representatives from ALL political parties that would have been great but the others were not interested.
Malcolm, a non-smoker, was appalled by the video which he could not access on his council computer because it was blocked as having "unsuitable content" because of the graphic violence. When he managed to see it via a friend's computer, his resposne was "revolting."
The very nice ladies we saw at the PCT from the Communications, complaints, performance and organisational development, and health improvement departments, explained that there was no malice intended by the campaign which was aimed specifically at white males aged between 35 and 55 from their area. They also claim that "hardened" smokers were used as a focus group which approved the video.
I found that hard to believe and I was particulalry astounded when the ladies quoted the figure of 70% of smokers say they want to quit and the PCT has a duty to help them.
I pointed out that I know of many smokers who I chat to outside of public places, and many I interact with on pro-choice forums, who would disagree with the 70% figure. The ladies said I probably talk to the 30% who don't want to quit. It seems no-one has a "duty" to help them and they can be justifiably ignored.
When I pointed out that I believe the NHS is the enemy of the smoker, and even if I was dying from a heart attack I wouldn't go to hosiptal because of the way we are treated, I was told that hospitals would care for smokers in the same dignified way as non-smokers. I asked if they would have a campaign pointing that out to those smokers who don't want to quit and the answer was no. Of course not. I was therefore left with the assumption that 30% of smokers in this country
don't matterto anyone at all, except, it would seem, UKIP.
The ladies disupted that smokers were stigmatised until Dave and I pointed out that being excluded from every public place in Britian was certainly evidence of such stigmatisation.
We also had a general discussion about NRT, and other quit smoking methods that were far more effective than those offered by the NHS. It was pointed out that neither the NHS, and their pharmacuetical sponsors, or the Tobacco companies could claim moral high ground as both compete to provide smokers with nicotine and money - billions of it - was the motivating factor.
I also informed the ladies of violent incidents and deaths by smoking ban that that have occurred since July 2007 between smokers and anti-smokers including those in the Uk of a father who killed his wife because she wouldn't give up smoking and his children so that they could be with her, and the father who beat his 12 year-old son for smoking.
Dave pointed out that those who hate smokers would see the video as justification to attack because they wouldn't see the analogy that was intended.
The video cost about £10,000 to make. Coun Davis said the money would have been better used in direct patient care than to propagate violence against a minority group.
The PCT tried to say it couldn't remove the video. I said if it wasn't removed then my complaint would be taken to the Ombudsman. Dave pointed out that Jane De Ville Almond, the anti-smoking nurse who called for smokers to be left to die if they didn't give up, had a video of her bigoted views removed by claiming copywright and the PCT could do the same.
They said they would remove it in two weeks when the campaign ends. I said that was too long and I would like to see it gone immediately. The PCT said they would review it and put in writing their decision. That hasn't come through yet but as F2C has sent out a press release, and blogged about it, I thought I should too - although I would have rather waited for that confirmation to come through first.
One final point of note is that the PCT said it hadn't received any other complaints. I know that at least one was sent through and several others have been received by F2C.
This is yet another victory for the pro-choice movment and smokers who have had enough and are not prepared to sit back and allow such violent and untrue propaganda against them to continue.
Rankin decided to portray a smoker being 'beaten up from within'. Very clever-I don't think! What it has done is to entice aggressive non smokers to attack smokers willynilly in order to force them to stop.
It truly is amazing just how low some organisations will stoop in order to get the favoured anti smoking message across.
Apparently, NHS Birmingham East and North was hoping the campaign would get through to "hard to reach" smokers – specifically white males aged 35-55 in the C2DE socio-economic category – living in the most deprived parts of the area. Has it ever occurred to these puritanical turds that people in such socio-economic categories don't have a great deal to look forward to anymore so a pint & fag is their only comfort?
Yesterday this villainous video was stopped in its tracks by our very own Dave Atherton, freelance journalist Patsy Nurse & UKIP councillor Malcolm Davis who complained vociferously that the video was nothing short of announcing 'open season' on smokers.
It would seem that Birmingham Primary Care Trust were oblivious to the never ending list of assaults, even shootings, of smokers worldwide. You see they live in their own little cocooned world of self righteousness where only that deemed by 'nanny' to be correct is in fact correct.
It does not occur to these pea brained pillocks that other people may enjoy a different lifestyle.
It does not occur to these pea brained pillocks that the money wasted on anti smoking propaganda would be better spent on cleaner, safer, germ free hospital wards.
It does not occur to these pea brained pillocks that if the whole country gave up smoking, their income tax would rocket and that the NHS would struggle to be funded at all!
But, back to our three intrepid complainants. Having voiced their considerable concerns the Trust has now agreed to 'pull' this 1 minute bilge-video after the catalogue of injurious attacks on smokers was divulged. Apparently it has two more weeks to 'run' on U-Tube and then it is kaput, gonski, binned!
Thank God for small mercies.
Why the Trust ever allowed this to be shown in the first place is beyond me for had this been a scenario of 'AIDS' attacking the body of a homosexual there would have been an uproar-but you see, it's only us smokers so it doesn't matter really in the minds of the pea brained pillocks that try to run our lives.
Isn't it interesting to note that most councils rate "Quit Smoking" as a more serious agenda than domestic violence/assault! What a sad, sad world we now live in-bu hey! our '3 muskateers' have managed to get this bilge off the screen. perhaps, now, other councils will think twice before declaring 'open season' on smokers in such a cavalier fashion. Just think, we could even be brought in as an 'advisory capacity'!
Well done Dave, Patsy & Malcolm, we applaud each and every one of you.
Thursday, 12 November 2009
A plumber whose arm was left twisted grotesquely out of shape in an accident ten months ago has had an operation to correct it 'cancelled four times'.
Nick Carver, the chief executive of the East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, insisted computer records showed the trust had only cancelled two operations and that proceeding with the operations could have put Mr Eeles's life at risk.
'The first time was back in February when his blood pressure was found to be high.
'As his surgery was not an emergency, our surgeons took the right action in referring Mr Eeles to his GP so his blood pressure could be brought under control.
'His second operation in May 2009 was also cancelled, this time because he had failed to act on our surgeon's advice that Mr Eeles that he should give up smoking.
'In cancelling Mr Eeles' two operation dates, our surgeons were acting on clinical grounds only.
'If they are guilty of anything, then it is of having the best clinical interests of their patients at heart.'
This isn't the first time this has happened within our wonderful NHS, either.
A man with a broken ankle is facing a lifetime of pain because a Health Service hospital has refused to treat him unless he gives up smoking.
John Nuttall, 57, needs surgery to set the ankle which he broke in three places two years ago because it did not mend naturally with a plaster cast.
Doctors at the Royal Cornwall Hospital in Truro have refused to operate because they say his heavy smoking would reduce the chance of healing, and there is a risk of complications which could lead to amputation.
Wouldn't it be helpful if we knew how this sort of thing would be handled under the current American healthcare system. Oh, here you go, an anti-smoking US doctor can tell us.
This is disgusting. There are no valid clinical grounds to deny a patient surgery to repair a severely broken bone on the basis of his being a smoker. All this amounts to is the surgeons and health trust punishing this poor man for failing to follow their advice. But you don't punish someone by denying them a necessary surgery. If we punished all patients who fail to heed their doctor's advice in this way, we would perform almost no surgeries.
While I'm not familiar with clinical treatment in Great Britain, I am quite familiar with surgery for broken bones in the United States, and I have never seen a patient refused surgery to repair a severely broken bone because he or she smokes. In fact, to delay the surgery for that reason would likely put the surgeon at risk for a malpractice suit, because the longer you wait to repair the broken bones, the more damage that is done and the more difficult it becomes to do the repair successfully.
In my view, this represents medical malpractice.
But then, once the state takes over healthcare and mixes it with the politics, prejudices, and bigotry of the day, these things will happen.
I've been to the US a couple of times, and they seem to be quite large on the whole. Once Obamacare is all bedded in and fat people begin to be turned away from health centres, there could be some seriously pissed off yanks.
Still, it's their choice I suppose. Who are we to warn them?
Is there no area in our daily lives that this government will not poke it’s nose?
Another survey (remember the Third Hand Smoke survey?) by, and you will never believe this, a fake charity, CASH, sticks the proverbial boot in to Pasta Sauces:
Consensus Action on Salt and Health surveyed 190 types of sauces.So saint Jamie is not such a saint after all, what a way to go for this unofficial food tsar eh.
It said that, on average, leading brands contained 25% more salt than supermarket own-brand options.
Chef Jamie Oliver's Spicy Olive and Garlic sauce contained the most salt, at 3g per 100g. His spokesman said they were working on new lower salt recipes.
Cash nutritionist Katharine Jenner said: "Pasta with sauce is a quick and simple meal for many of us but this survey shows it can be incredibly hard to choose a healthy option.These people really need to get a bloody life, and stay the hell away from mine.
"There are still some sauces on the shelves with really high levels of hidden salt. We urge manufacturers to reduce their salt content and improve their labelling immediately."
Tomato-based sauces and those containing olives and bacon tended to be most salty, (no shit Sherlock) whereas versions with chilli or basil were more likely to be lower.
The survey highlighted Weight Watchers' Roasted Garlic sauce, with 0.1g of salt per 100g, Co-operative Arrabiata Pasta Sauce Fresh (0.25g) and Sainsbury's Spicy Tomato Sauce Fresh (0.28g) as being among those with the lowest content.
Right, I’m off to the movies, I need a laugh.
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
War, I’m sure you do not need telling, is an insult to humanity, the human spirit does not need it, nor does it countenance it.
War is made by politicians, not soldiers, in our name, in the name of faceless people who put a faceless X in a box come election day, depending on how they feel at that time. The war to end all wars was played out in foreign fields for us, the electorate, to feel safer in our warm, comfortable beds, safe in the knowledge that our sons were fighting a just cause, even though they may lose their lives. And yet countless wars have been waged in our name since, and often before, 1916.
I am not often given to poetry but Wilfred Owen speaks to me on the subject of war:
I am in no way religious but words have a habit of rousing me within. Nothing touches me more than this poem by Wilfred Owen, it brings home, to my benefit laden, comfy life, the horrors of conflict made by politicians:
And took the fire with him, and a knife.
And as they sojourned both of them together,
Isaac the first-born spake and said, My Father,
Behold the preparations, fire and iron,
But where the lamb for this burnt-offering?
Then Abram bound the youth with belts and straps,
And builded parapets and trenches there,
And stretch\ed forth the knife to slay his son.
When lo! an angel called him out of heaven,
Saying, Lay not thy hand upon the lad,
Neither do anything to him. Behold,
A ram caught in a thicket by its horns;
Offer the Ram of Pride instead of him.
But the old man would not so, but slew his son. . . .
We'd found an old Boche dug-out, and he knew,As a man I believe in self defence, I believe in defending my country against all threats to our to our liberty and heritage given to me by others, others who have died to defend it, I do not give it away lightly, that includes threats within, and yes, that includes war. I will fight to my imaginary death to remain a free man in the country of my birth but will I lay down my life for it?
And gave us hell, for shell on frantic shell
Hammered on top, but never quite burst through.
Rain, guttering down in waterfalls of slime
Kept slush waist high, that rising hour by hour,
Choked up the steps too thick with clay to climb.
What murk of air remained stank old, and sour
With fumes of whizz-bangs, and the smell of men
Who'd lived there years, and left their curse in the den,
If not their corpses. . . .
There we herded from the blast
Of whizz-bangs, but one found our door at last.
Buffeting eyes and breath, snuffing the candles.
And thud! flump! thud! down the steep steps came thumping
And splashing in the flood, deluging muck --
The sentry's body; then his rifle, handles
Of old Boche bombs, and mud in ruck on ruck.
We dredged him up, for killed, until he whined
"O sir, my eyes -- I'm blind -- I'm blind, I'm blind!"
Coaxing, I held a flame against his lids
And said if he could see the least blurred light
He was not blind; in time he'd get all right.
"I can't," he sobbed. Eyeballs, huge-bulged like squids
Watch my dreams still; but I forgot him there
In posting next for duty, and sending a scout
To beg a stretcher somewhere, and floundering about
To other posts under the shrieking air.
Those other wretches, how they bled and spewed,
And one who would have drowned himself for good, --
I try not to remember these things now.
Let dread hark back for one word only: how
Half-listening to that sentry's moans and jumps,
And the wild chattering of his broken teeth,
Renewed most horribly whenever crumps
Pummelled the roof and slogged the air beneath --
Through the dense din, I say, we heard him shout
"I see your lights!" But ours had long died out.
In Flanders Fields
Between the crosses, row by row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard among the guns below.
We are the dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe;
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If yea break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
I leave you, dear readers, with the bio of Wilfred Owen, a man who could put into words that his fellow combatants could not, he spoke for them, he felt their pain of bloody war and, in the end, he paid the ultimate price that politicians do not dare to ask of [in their political warm bed] us, sound in our safe, warm beds he paid the ultimate price, he paid with his life, the ultimate sacrifise.
Wilfred Edward Salter Owen was born on March 18, 1893 in Shropshire, England. After the death of his grandfather in 1897, the family moved to Birkenhead, where Owen was educated at the Birkenhead Institute. After another move in 1906, he continued his continued his studies at the Technical School in Shrewsbury. Interested in the arts at a young age, Owen began to experiment with poetry at 17.Is life so cheap that we are prepared to waste it in this way? Your sons and daughters are worth more than mere political cannon fodder.
After failing to gain entrance into the University of London, Owen spent a year as a lay assistant to Reverend Herbert Wigan in 1911 and went on to teach in France at the Berlitz School of English. By 1915, he became increasingly interested in World War I and enlisted in the Artists' Rifles group. After training in England, Owen was commissioned as a second lieutenant.
He was wounded in combat in 1917 and evacuated to Craiglockhart War Hospital near Edinburgh after being diagnosed with shell shock. There he met another patient, poet Siegfried Sassoon, who served as a mentor and introduced him to well-known literary figures such as Robert Graves and H. G. Wells.
It was at this time Owen wrote many of his most important poems, including "Anthem for Doomed Youth" and "Dulce et Decorum Est". His poetry often graphically illustrated both the horrors of warfare, the physical landscapes which surrounded him, and the human body in relation to those landscapes. His verses stand in stark contrast to the patriotic poems of war written by earlier poets of Great Britain, such as Rupert Brooke.
Owen rejoined his regiment in Scarborough, June 1918, and in August returned to France. He was awarded the Military Cross for bravery at Amiens. He was killed on November 4 of that year while attempting to lead his men across the Sambre canal at Ors. He was 25 years old. The news reached his parents on November 11, the day of the Armistice. The collected Poems of Wilfred Owen appeared in December 1920, with an introduction by Sassoon, and he has since become one of the most admired poets of World War I.
A review of Owen's poems published on December 29th, 1920, just two years after his death, read "Others have shown the disenchantment of war, have unlegended the roselight and romance of it, but none with such compassion for the disenchanted nor such sternly just and justly stern judgment on the idyllisers."
About Owen's post-war audience, the writer Geoff Dyer said, "To a nation stunned by grief the prophetic lag of posthumous publication made it seem that Owen was speaking from the other side of the grave. Memorials were one sign of the shadow cast by the dead over England in the twenties; another was a surge of interest in spiritualism. Owen was the medium through whom the missing spoke."
You must ask yourself some uncomfortable questions.
Tuesday, 10 November 2009
One hero did come into my life and then he was taken from me. R.I.P Gian, the fight continues in your absence and your name will forever grace my lips when I think of honour, decency and the persuit of justice.
Sunday, 8 November 2009
'Lisbon Treaty should mean single EU seat on IMF board'
Simon Johnson, a former IMF chief economist, said that the passing of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty, should accelerate moves towards a common European position in international economic institutions.
He said: “People say that the EU is not a country and only countries can have IMF seats, but that doesn’t really stand now that you’ve got Lisbon. The treaty makes the EU as much a single federal entity as some other IMF members.”
So soon? The disenfranchisement of the UK government has begun already. A mere three days after Vaclav Klaus signed away the last resistance to a Europe-wide legislature, and before the Lisbon Treaty goes 'live' on December 1st.
Talk of the EU as a single body dealing exclusively with the affairs of member states, without recourse to national parliaments, should be a worrying development for smokers considering the transparent EU stance on tobacco.
Put quite simply, they hate you, and would like you banned from everywhere.
Markos Kyprianou has called for an EU-wide ban on smoking in public places.
“It is time to bring the debate to the EU level”, the EU health commissioner said as he launched a consultation on policy options to tackle passive smoking.
But Dick, I hear you cry, what's the difference? We UK smokers are banned everywhere already. It's not as if there is anyone at Westminster who is willing to listen to us ... they are only interested in filling their pockets, and we haven't got any money to throw at them.
Yes, you'd be correct. On all counts. But, the EU have bigger plans which, until Lisbon, you had a chance to take up with your elected representative.
Brussels chiefs want to outlaw beer garden ciggie areas - and even extend the ban to open air concerts like this weekend's Glastonbury festival.
The European Commission says the current bar on smoking in enclosed public places does not go far enough. It says non-smokers in outdoor areas are still in danger from passive smoking.
It comes after a World Health Organisation report said workers such as waiters and door staff are exposed to dangerous levels of smoke outside pubs and restaurants. And the smoke can waft back inside buildings through open doors, windows and vents.
Note the words in bold above. The European Commission. The unelected European Commission.
Prior to Lisbon, you, business owners, and anyone else concerned about the loss of liberties when there is no valid reason for their being stripped away, could complain like crazy to their MP. They might not listen, but if they didn't, you had the option of voting against them at the next election.
There is no such luxury with the European Commission, as they are appointed, not elected. They are above democracy, rendering you irrelevant.
With the first moves in erasing the idea of a British nation, as a separate entity within Europe, already surfacing at the IMF, it's not going to be long before the steamroller of EU dictatorship fires up its engine and embarks on the flattening of the freedoms they have been planning on crushing for quite a long while.
And, legally, there is not a damn thing you can do about it.
Saturday, 7 November 2009
E-cigarette may look like a cigarette, cigar or pipe so we have banned them.
It must be clear by now, even to the most rabid of anti-smokers, that smoking bans have absolutely nothing to do with health and everything to do with the denormalisation of smokers and their [legal] product of choice.
From what I can gather from my flying smoker friends, using this form of transport is pretty arduous; from the time you arrive at the check in desk to the time you check out at your destination.
It is no surprise then that smokers turn to other means of relaxation in the absence of a pucker tobacco product. Those other means being the smokeless e-cigarette or SNUS. SNUS has been banned in this country, in fact in all member states with the exception of Sweden, by the EU since 1992. The e-cigarette has been banned in some states in the US such as Oregon when anti-smoking guru and ambulance chasing lawyer, and all round lunatic, John Banzhaf, Executive Director of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) took a hissy fit against them.
the Dragon Delta air.
Our friends from C.A.G.E. (Citizens Against Government Encroachment) have encountered Delta air’s ban on their planes and indeed one of their members wrote to them questioning the ban on the e-cigarette and, unbelievably SNUS.
Here is the letter sent to, and reply from, DELTA, reproduced on the C.A.G.E. blog, sent by one of their members. First here is where DELTA states the bleeding obvious:
Thank you for contacting us through delta.com. We are sorry for the delay in responding to your message.
A device known as electronic cigarette or e-cigarette is available to the public.
- It is marketed as a healthier alternative to smoking and used to assist users in their efforts to quit smoking.
- E-cigarette may look like a cigarette, cigar or pipe. [ ED: Is the penny dropping yet?]
- The cigarette makes a mist that resembles normal cigarette smoke. The mist dissipates quickly and is both odorless and colorless.
So where is the problem, you can’t smell anything, it’s a colourless, odourless mist for goodness sake! Where’s the bloody problem?
- Due to continued instances of passengers attempting to smoke real cigarettes on board and the potential concern from passengers, the use of electronic, simulated smoking materials including cigarettes, pipes and cigars, is prohibited on all Delta flights.
Ahh, not content with vilifying smokers on terra firma by associating them with the worst kind of mass murderer they now are the main instigators of air rage! And here was me thinking that air rage was the province of the alcohol drinker? (Drinkers, it will be your turn next.)
- While Delta / Delta Connection do not permit the use of electronic cigarettes on board, they are permitted in the passenger's carry-on luggage.
Well that’s a great help to those that want to give up smoking by alternative methods, isn’t it.
As you can imagine, dear readers, this cut no ice with the member of C.A.G.E. Canada who promptly replied, and I will not add any remarks as the reply speaks eloquently for itself.
Thank you for replying.
I know exactly what an electronic cigarette is, I own one myself. But it's not tobacco, or smokeless tobacco. It is not much different in principle than a pharmaceutical nicotine inhaler. Why would you allow those, or do you? It is only a substitute to smoking and as you say it is colorless and odorless and it contains absolutely no tobacco. Perhaps if the attendants would explain to the ''concerned'' assistance in the plane what this device is all about at the very beginning of the flight, they wouldn't be so ''worried'' about thinking someone is lighting up? This would not only enhance smokers' travelling experience, it would also appease those craving nicotine and you would have less of the incidents of people lighting up as you say. Why not offer complimentary e-cigarettes on board, or even sell them? That would make you stand out, wouldn't it? What good is an e-cigarette in the carry-on luggage?
But this doesn't explain why all smokeless tobacco is banned. What about SNUS? Why would you not tolerate that? Isn't enhancing your customers' flight experience part of good business?
It looks like a cigarette, cigar, pipe that emits an odourless, colourless vapour…but is it? Or could it be a fiendish instrument of torture to the anti-smoking airlines? Are smokers now terrorists?
Flying from the UK? Why not try Delta Air, your sharing, caring airline.
Hat Tip to C.A.G.E. Canada.
|According to Economicshelp.org the definition of quantitative easing involves increasing the money supply by printing money and more money. We are not talking a few fivers here or a few barrow loads of money but billions of pounds.|
As we all know Gordon was known as the Iron Chancellor, certain authorities would question this description, but hey -- you would think Gordon would be prudent and looking for ways to save squillions of pounds.
So why print such vast sums of money? you can save squillions of pounds, make the majority of the population happy, save your local pubs at the same time, ---- here are a few cost saving clues:- -------------------- feel free to add you own.
The payment of NHS staff to force residents of secure hospitals to stop smoking against their will.
Intrusive anti smoking radio adverts:-
Intrusive anti smoking Google style small adverts.
Grants to Youth groups to spread anti smoking bigotry.
Dressing people up as anti smoking penguins and handing out footballs
Dental smoking advisers:-
Get the idea Gordon?? , no need for quantitative easing, you never asked any ones permission to waste such vast sums of taxpayers money. I am sure the public would prefer that the money be spent on equipping our soldiers or an increase in one of the most pitiful pensions in Europe.
One last tip Gordon, can you please ensure that government departments inform the public that anti smoking measures are not free as they are keen to intimate, they are costing the UK taxpayer squillions ££££££££££££££££££££££s.
And Gordon, when the time comes and the money runs out and adverts are not being placed with National and Local Newspapers, the newspapers may decide to print the truth on second hand smoke.
Cue the Sun Newspaper, the Star Newspaper, the Mirror Newspaper, the Waltham Forest Guardian and every newspaper in the land:-----------------