A true and just court - incredible!

At long last, as sense and sensibility seemed to be going out of the window, the American Courts have ruled against the all powerful health lobby-and all by the law of TRUTH!
For so long the anti tobacco league have 'thrilled us all' (sic) with their array of fantastical claims whereby they manage to indoctrinate a good proportion of the dumb & dumber out there but this time they have come unstuck-BIGTIME!
As our friend Dick Puddlecote has already mentioned:

 "The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington announced it upheld a decision barring the federal government from requiring tobacco companies to put large graphic health warnings on cigarette packages to show that smoking can disfigure and even kill people."

Shall we run that through again? 

Nope, there is no need too for it is fact. The Appeals Court has, gloriously, upheld different courts ruling that all these silly manufactured pictures have no need to be plonked on every single pack of cigarettes sold in the USA.

 

The appeal failed on the most basic of all principles - there was no evidence - there was no evidence - there was no evidence - there was no evidence. There, I think that has got your attention folks. Even anti tobacco warrior Michael Siegel explains the defeat quite succinctly over at his place. Now when a man of the stature of MS starts announcing the FDA does not even provide a "shred of evidence" to support its position there seriously cannot be a single scrap to be found.
So why did the FDA decide to appeal if there is no concrete evidence? The answer my friends is literally "blowin' in the wind" because it is YOUR money they are playing with, it simply does NOT matter to them! All your tobacco taxes being used to further stigmatise you and the product you choose to enjoy. They are so used to getting everything their own way that they 'went to war with no ammo'. Now I am bound to say that if that had been the case in this country, I surely do think that our legal system would have capitulated to the anti tobacco mobs claims and granted everything they asked for. 

Indeed, the legal system in this country has sold itself totally to the whims of our European masters for it is they who asked our nation to enforce the smoking ban through our legal system. It is them that suddenly decided that law is of little importance when it comes to enforcing a European directive at the behest of the WHO. Simply look at these cases if you don't believe me:
Nick Hogan refused to send his elderly & frail customers out into the cold - outcome? PRISON.
Chris Carter refused to bow to this totally illiberal law, fought the courts for 4 years - outcome? PRISON
The courts are punishing people that are innocent of all charges simply because they deem the 'word' of an EHO "more worthy" than anyone accused of any smoke/smoking related offence. People in Liverpool, Leicester, Kettering, London, Portsmouth etc have all been humiliated by our now corrupted legal system simply to suit our EU masters. It has reached such a stage that a simple request for a "non smoke ban corrupted legal mind" was put on facebook for a week yet not one legally qualified person came forward. How sick is that? What does that say about our legal system today? The obvious point to all this is that, if accused, do not even bother trying to obtain expensive legal advice-represent yourself and/or get free legal advice on such matters at admin@nasbouk.co.uk where you will at least get honesty!
The FDA appeal failed because there was no evidence that all these silly pictures have made a ha'peth of difference to smoking rates yet the Aussies have seen fit (in their now crooked courts) to trample all over tobacco manufacturers rights and ordain plain packaging with big pictures - but no good will come of it whatsoever as smugglers will simply rub their collective hands together with delight. Any amount of crap (literally!) goes into some of their cigarettes, purity means nothing, profit is everything. The other problem of course is that once this sort of behaviour is sanctioned by the courts, what is next on the prohibitionists list? McDonalds beefburgers? Kentucky Fried Chicken meals? All alcoholic beverages? All sweets that rot teeth? Where does it end?

A rather startling find was this little gem that rightly claims: 

"Cancer industry total fraud exposed"

The vast majority of so-called scientific studies focused on cancer research are inaccurate and potentially fraudulent, suggests a new review published in the journal Nature. A shocking 88 % of 53 "landmark" studies on cancer that have been published in reputable journals over the years cannot be reproduced, according to the review, which means that their conclusions are patently false.

88%

Now that is some sort of percentage of 'wrongness' to contend with and I, for one, have absolutely no doubt that this 88% is spot on for having admitted that the war on drugs is lost, the WHO have resorted to persecuting the next best thing-tobacco. And we know that many of their studies are conducted to suit the results they want so as to 'face the world' with 'compelling evidence'! Just look how 'compelling' Jamrozik's 'evidence' was-dear oh dear me- but the SCOTH Committee grasped it with both hands as that was all they had! Look at the multiple bogus 'heart attack studies' employed through the media so as to get dumb & dumber on their side. Is it any wonder that 88% can't be repeated when, only a couple of weeks ago, the scientific world declared that the first man to live to be a thousand years old may already have been born! (another favoured phrase of the scientific mob) I think a donkey might be giving birth to a chicken first-don't you?

Of course, despite all this media hype about the evils of smoking (drinking & filling your face) you have to ask the simple question - Do smoking bans really save lives? On the one hand we have Geoffrey Kabat who is a cancer epidemiologist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the author of “Hyping Health Risks: Environmental Hazards in Everyday Life and the Science of Epidemiology.” therefore an expert in his field, whilst on the other we have an expert in engineering by the name of Stanton Glantz who has, somehow, got himself on the anti tobacco gravy train!

I think I know which of the two I would prefer to believe but then the anti tobacco league don't work that way, they only believe what suits them. So we are back to where we started-TRUTH. I can't begin to imagine the anguish caused by this appeal court ruling, the gnashing of teeth will be heard for years to come as 'legal law' has finally shone through and 'junk law' has been pushed to one side. For once the scales have been balanced again, but for how long?