Thursday, 19 April 2012

Beware
The most dangerous man in the country!
( “Glory will be mine!” )

(They’re coming to take me away, ha ha, he he......)

 In my opinion we are looking at the most dangerous man in the country at this present time, the Pol Pot of the health lobby has finally ‘come out’ and declared war on smokers & smoking. Yet, three years ago, this man sat in opposition decrying the anti tobacco measures proposed by Labour - Is this not the height of hypocrisy? Lansley has already proven himself unable to ‘lay straight in bed’ with his ‘turnaround opinions’!
Now let us get one thing straight - before the anti tobacco loons start screaming: I do not smoke cigarettes, pipe, nor any other forms of tobacco for smoking actually makes me sick. Nor have I any ties with or any payment from any form of tobacco company. So there you go, I am simply a normal man on the street, no more, no less.
This war, for that is what it is, on tobacco and tobacco users has reached breaking point and again, in my opinion, this man pictured is heading for extinction; political extinction.
So far the anti smoking lobby have wheedled their way to the ridiculous position of having cigarettes hidden behind shutters, blinds, rolling doors etc just so that children don’t see the colourful packaging, however they allow our kids to gaze at hundreds of brightly coloured sweet packets, which can quickly lead to obesity & major dental problems.
Let us be up front here, ASH et al have forced a law through on the back of lies, fabrications, manipulated statistics & junk science. Yes, OK, the idea behind smoking cessation is logically sound but the practicalities just don’t work out!
I have said from Day 1, that the economics just will not work and that prophesy is now coming true as tobacco control is well and truly out of control.
Brainwashing Labour MPs, non smoking MPs and general ‘do-gooders’ was easy for ASH as they mounted a campaign of ‘anti smoking terror’ quaintly entitled ‘Smoke & Mirrors’, even convincing companies that employees would sue them should they fall ill from any possible smoke related malady. With 75% of the population NOT smoking it was a simple task to whip up a storm of self righteous anti smoking hysteria and when you think about it, it is incredible that this should even occur when smoking rates had declined from approximately 70% (late 1950’s) to just 25% (2005) through natural reduction; ie, people deciding for themselves that they no longer wished to smoke.
The answer is simple: the World Health Organisation, an arm of the United Nations, who have given up all hope of winning the war with illegal drug traffickers. These people have resorted to stamping their authority on a legal product-tobacco! Why? Apparently they need to be seen to be doing something to combat disease & death, but this then raises the question of why they are allowing 4,000 people per day to die in Africa for the want of clean water. So why have the WHO no intentions of laying water pipelines or irrigation for small cultivations etc. instead.
We pay the WHO circa £26m per annum for them to target us re tobacco usage and slowly destroy our own economy. Again I ask, why do they not put that money where it really is needed and lay those water pipelines in Africa
You may raise an eyebrow at the last point but economical destruction is well and truly entrenched as I type for we have wasted nigh on £27bn thus far, on tobacco control, quit smoking projects & NRT products, all of which are funded (in part) by the big pharmaceutical industries who are earning absolute fortunes from this highly profitable crusade. You only have to follow this link to see the amount of money we are talking about here, billions of dollars! Simply look at the Nicotine Replacement Therapy products. They have a 98.4% FAILURE rate yet government keeps spending enormous amounts of our taxes on this rubbish and try to claim fantastic success rates, even though everyone is now fully aware of the truth. The problem for us is that the government only declares a 4 week period for quitting, as a success. This is absolutely farcical as a 12 month period is the accepted norm for complete ‘quit process’. If a mere 5% of those 4 week quitters actually go on to complete cessation then that in itself is a miracle. Of course the only sure-fire quit method for smoking or any other addiction for that matter is good old willpower - end of story.
You have to wonder why, after all the fantastic quit figures issued by various cessation bodies, there are any smokers still smoking in this once free country of ours? The fact that roughly the same amount of people (25%) are smoking now, as were in 2005/6 shows that people who wanted to give up will have given up and those that don’t? ...well, they won’t! Sadly, the anti smoking lobby cannot seem to grasp the plain fact, that many smokers smoke, err, for the simple enjoyment of smoking. Many others smoke as a cigarette calms their nerves, it is a relaxant though of course the anti smoking lobby refute this completely as it does not fit with their ideology at all. They would rather ‘Big Pharma’ issue you with pills & potions! David Hockney explains it all very nicely ,I wonder if Cameron, Clegg or Lansley will even bother to reply?
Before the smoking ban was introduced on that fateful day in 2007, smokers & non smokers managed to enjoy drinking together in our plethora of hostelries - some 65,000 of them. Today we are 10,000+ venues less as smokers have deserted those places which they once supported with no little aplomb. Remember Blair’s ‘spinmeistering’ statement (?) “millions ‘of clean air’ customers are simply waiting to invade the pubs”.
Excuse me but who, apart from the greedy pubco’s , breweries and generally simple could possibly believe that people would be enticed into a pub, via ‘clean air’, to drink alcoholic beverages when they had never bothered with pubs beforehand?
It was incredulous when supposedly learned people rushed to snap up shares in Punch at over £13 per hit. I couldn’t sell mine fast enough, for this wasn’t the signal for the great share price boom, it was the sure fire signal for share price doom! Those of us who bothered to ignore government lies and do their own research would soon realise that Eire had lost approximately 1,000 bars, pubs, clubs etc as the smoking ban hit the industry hard. Consequently the economy nosedived dramatically and the EU had no option but to bail out Eire at a cost of an 85 billion-euro ($113 billion) aid package - and ‘diluting proposals to force bondholders to bear some cost of future bailouts’.
’ Future bailouts? ‘Oh dear oh dear me, not very confident then are they!
Of course it is now well known that the smoking rate in Ireland has risen 2% as more and more people are becoming unemployed, jobs becoming scarcer by the week and therefore they have more time on their hands. However, ever resourceful, Eire is now considered the tobacco smuggling capital of Europe - a title that may well soon transfer itself over here!
You see, neither government nor ASH, wanted the people to know the truth about the damage caused by smoking bans, else why would they produce magnificent reports (all bogus) about “smoking bans having no adverse effect on businesses” a blatant lie, as we have already seen.
Since the implementation of the ban we have had to endure (yawn) the same old boringly regurgitated anti tobacco spiel from Bauld, Ludbroke, Arnott, Duffy, Farren etc etc about how impact on the hospitality sector has NOT been negative. Pardon? Not Negative? Yes, they claim no effect, yet we all now know that Punch Taverns shares have plummeted from £13.68 to hover around the £00.10p mark. Giles Thorley (Punch Taverns) knew exactly when to abandon ship in March, 2010-taking £millions in bonuses with him.
10,000+ pubs, bars, clubs, Bingo halls, snooker halls etc gone bust simply because patronage folded, £millions lost to government in revenue (£254 million in lost taxes, 2010 alone) as punters stayed at home enjoying supermarket beers at a fraction of the cost and £millions added to our welfare payout system as unemployment ‘rocked’ within the industry (comment 2). This is why, thus far, eminent mathematically minded people have now put the cost of the smoking ban at circa £27billion-and rising! There is absolutely no justification for such wastage of tax payer’s money when the easiest solution, then and now, would be to simply allow choice.
Choice for licensees to start with, for who knows how to run a pub best-a licensee or a politician? Under the new law:
Q... were non smokers ever forced to drink with smokers when licensees had choice?
A No! (and vice-versa of course)
Q... were non smoking bar staff (frightened to death by the lies of ASH) forced to
work in smoking pubs?
A No! (and vice-versa of course)
Q... was there ever a problem of returning to the old type ‘SNUG’ room where smokers sat apart from non smoking drinkers?
A No, none whatsoever!
Q... was there ever any need for once profitable businesses to close?
A No!
Q... was there ever any need for previously profitable licensees to file for
bankruptcy?
A No
Q... was there ever any need for licensees to lose their homes due closure?
A No
Q... Did Liam Donaldson threaten to resign if a total ban was not imposed, making the total ban the will of one man?
A Yes!
In fact this game could go on for hours, the truth being that all the misery heaped upon thousands & thousands of innocent people by the extremely poor implementation of the ‘smoking ban’ could have been avoided. The problem is the fact that the entire campaign was one of the best political ‘legerdemains’ of modern times. The previous Chief Medical Officer, Liam Donaldson threw a ‘hissy fit’ and threatened to resign if a total ban was not enforced - so you all know who, ultimately, you have to thank for all this misery. It is rather ironic that the man who caused this state of anti smoking misery is himself, possibly, clinically obese. Off to the ‘fatties club’ with him then, when he has time off from his ’30 pieces of silver’ seat from the WHO that is! He was dangerous, but nothing in comparison to Lansley the destroyer!
Government claimed that a public consultation had taken place with “9 out of 10 respondents demanding a totally smokefree workplace”.
Ah, the only problem with this blatant untruth is that at least 9 out of 10 respondents were from government funded bodies such as SmokeFree NE and others of a similar ilk. The truth was well concealed as media releases (initially) merely trumpeted the overwhelming support for total smokefree zoning.
Similarly the SCOTH Committee report was just shambolic with 14 of the 16 strong panel being either affiliated to or on the payroll of the Labour party, ASH or some other smokefree only organisation. It was this fact which ensured there was only ever one conclusion that was going to be reached. In actual fact, unofficially, they had to stay until they reached a conclusion! In desperation they employed Konrad Jamrozik’s highly flawed study to ‘conclude’ that there was no safe level of SHS (second hand smoke) which, remarkably and amusingly, is exactly what Lansley is stating now! Well, if that be the case then why did the baby boom of the 1950’s create such a ‘welfare problem’ for present day governments? Oh yes, indeed, we are all having the audacity to live longer, how disgraceful when our parents, grandparents enveloped us in smoke!
The myth of the ‘glorious 7th’ has been born by the medical profession, the ‘glorious 7th’ being, of course, the supposed 7th year of longer lifespan of non smokers than smokers. This is simply a figure designed to instil fear into the people that they might die earlier following plan ‘A’ than following plan ‘B’, the plans of course refer to lifestyle choices. Before you go galloping off to determine your own longevity how do you actually know when your time is due? Who holds the key to the ‘great book’ of life & death where all life spans are mapped out and recorded? Why did notorious junks scientist, non smoker and anti tobacco activist Konrad Jamrozik leave this world at only 55 and does that mean that had he smoked he would have died aged 48? Conversely, our very own Bertrand Russell, who led the revolt against idealism in the early 1900’s (think on Lansley) smoked for 72 years and died aged 98. Thus, had he not smoked at all he would surely have lived until being 105! These are the highly flawed and illogical workings of the medically instituted ‘7 year lifespan’ con, created to instil fear into would be smokers!
We have seen the horrendous costs to this country of trying to eradicate smoking. We have clearly seen the hatred of smokers/smoking advocated by government as stigmatisation and denormalisation are engineered at every turn, yet they would not dare to do this against homosexuals, Muslims, Hindu’s or disabled folk-or would they? Lansley is severely endangering the stability of this country with his crusade!
It is a very slippery slope we are treading and the downward spiral shows no signs of coming to an end as Andrew Lansley declares, “We don't work in partnership with the tobacco companies because we are trying to arrive at a point where they have no business in this country."
Pardon me? I will allow you to draw breath at this ludicrous statement.
So now, “LL” (Lunatic Lansley) is the dictator of all matters relating to health and possibly relating to health - and a whole heap more it seems! When we have arrived at a point ‘where they have no business in this country’ it will mean that we have rendered another 80,000 people unemployed, which means another £13m+ per week in jobseekers allowance payments, not to mention all the other benefits people are now entitled to claim. Is it any wonder that the figure of circa £27bn is bandied as the cost on the smoking ban thus far? Thinking about it I have never seen a man smoke 10 cigarettes on a night out and then beat someone up on the way home from the pub! I have never seen anyone staggering all over the place, shouting & swearing at all & sundry because of a few smokes and I have never feared for my life with a smoker behind the wheel of a car either, but all three definitely concern alcohol, yet Lansley deems alcohol OK! Alcohol related treatments cost the NHS far more than smoking related treatments but this doesn’t seem to bother Lansley either as he leads the now personal charge against smokers. He is now severely endangering this country.
That is not the end of the matter though as there are no jobs being created for all these people being made idle through a dictatorial ideology-excepting UKBA of course, for the smugglers are having a field day as previously stated!
Let’s think of the small retailers for a moment, the corner shop people who rely on smokers buying their daily pack who then buy other necessities simply because they sell them in the same shop. The idiotic ‘Gantry law’ (the hiding of cigarettes from view) has proven to be a lot more expensive than ASH declared initially as they were, yet again, trying to deceive MPs & ordinary folk with their anti smoker fanaticism v cost. The Grocer, a most reliable of trade publications openly declared that 15,000 retailers were under threat of closure due to the true costs involved. That relates to another 75,000 becoming unemployed, nearly another £13m per week in Jobseekers Allowance.
How much longer can this go on?
How many more people can this country afford to supplement, for the unemployment caused by themselve’s? How far will this government allow Lansley to take us into financial oblivion?
A Dutch study has already confirmed that healthy, longer living people automatically cost the state more, so why do governments listen to ASH et al when it is blatantly obvious that they cannot afford to? With people living longer these days, governments are struggling with the welfare state costs as it is, yet they happily subsidise a terrorist quango (for that is what ASH are in causing total disruption to this country) to cause them even more financial problems. What are they going to do when losing £10-£11bn per annum in tobacco taxes? Who then funds the NHS? How much does personal income tax have to rise to compensate this? How many people will grow their own tax free tobacco (plenty of advice on the internet!) How much more money will government allow Andrew Lansley to burn on his fruitless crusade? More to the point-how much more can we afford? Answer, quite simply: Nothing!
If Lansley wants to arrive at a point where they have no business in this country’ then is alcohol next for alcohol related treatments cost the NHS far more than smokers do and what about sweet sellers, burger meal sellers, take-away meal outlets, fish ‘n chip shops, cake shops, chocolate factories-oh, the list is endless. In fact the list is so long that more than 50% of the ‘working population’ won’t be working because all of the jobs will have been discontinued due to ideology! Along with all these job losses and mass unemployment the government has managed to lose £16.7bn in tax revenue from tobacco sales! Yet the anti tobacco warriors want more and more until total eradication is achieved-but what will they finally achieve? There is ample room for compromise yet we now find that in a democratic society, supposedly supported by this coalition, that one man’s crusade, possibly for personal fame or infamy, favours dictatorship – at any expense! As I started I will reiterate:
Beware
Andrew Lansley - The most dangerous man in the country!

4 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Pubs sold approx 175 million fewer pints from July 2007 to July 2008 as a direct result of the smoking ban according to market analysts AC Nielsen.

    If the cost of a pint averaged between £2.20 and £2.50 in 2007 that means in just one year, the drinks industry alone lost more than £385 Million as a direct result of the smoking ban.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Anon, it just proves that Bauld et al are highly paid liars; paid to dupe the general public!

      Delete
  3. Did you know you can shorten your urls with Shortest and make money from every visit to your shortened urls.

    ReplyDelete