Smoking Bans KILL businesses-FACT!
We knew it would come, we knew it would happen and we knew because the state has spent so much of our money on these quangos, such as the supposed 'charity' ASH, that this result was always inevitable! Governments don't waste £1/2bn per month on a regular basis NOT to have their own way or the way their minds have been corrupted by pseudo science - and a propaganda mission that Goebbels would have bewen proud of. Yesterday proved that what we send to Westminster in the guise of erudite, moralistic, true bloodied British citizens are in actual fact spineless, blinded, sheep (most of them) happy to follow the demands of 'he who pays the piper' - Big Pharma.
As expected, our dunderhead leader switched sides prior to the vote (although not actually voting - he was observing unchartered waters in the Sth West), showing conclusively that he has no mind of his own and exactly why he is the head sheep (barrrr-ram-u) of this intolerant society we are creating. It was the day the state took over!
It was also the day when this writer gave up all hope for this country and welcomes an early release into whatever world awaits us after this one.
That means that there are/were 376 elected MPs who were quite happy for the state to intrude in parental responsibilities. That means that there were 376 elected MPs quite happy to remove personal freedoms & liberties. Worse still, it means that there were 367 MPs quite happy to open the floodgates to what I described six years ago as the "Stepford Syndrome" - our very own version of the feared & hated "SS" of Nazi Germany . Having taken our responsibilities under its wing there will be no stopping the health freaks now as obesity, then alcohol come under the hammer. Thankfully Steve Baker MP has already seen what is occurring here-well, one is a start!The move was approved by 376 to 107, a majority of 269, in a free vote which had divided the Cabinet.
No doubt the portly Eric Pickles will lead the charge on obesity for the Tories. Alcohol will undoubtedly become 'another tobacco' whereby even non alcoholic drinks will be curtailed and in a centuries time (if we haven't been wiped out by disease) everyone will simply sit around drinking purified water with a twist of lemon in it! After all, we have now lost 13,434 businesses thanks to smoke ban laws-where will it end I ask?
The most farcical point about this situation is that the majority of MPs were born in the era of 'smoking muchness' and if they didn't they were produced by parents who did, so how on earth have they survived? So it easy to argue the point that smoking, being a smoker, being around smoking/smokers does NOT have a great effect on one's lifespan. Of course the medical brigade will leap up and down in a frenzy and quote such as:
Dr Penny Woods, chief executive of the British Lung Foundation, expressed her delight at the vote, which came in a Labour amendment to the Children and Families Bill. She said: “The introduction of a law that would help prevent hundreds of thousands of children from being exposed to second-hand smoke in the car is now within reach."
Where is the law that protects babies from this?Of course this silly woman has completely ignored the total hypocrisy of her statement as she mentions not the highly toxic emissions from the very cars being travelled in or the cars travelling in similar fashion. They only speak about that which they want to impress. They say that:
The charity estimates that more than 430,000 children aged 11 to 15 are exposed to second-hand smoke in cars every week in England.
Where is the law that protects babies from this?But they don't say how many children are exposed to highly toxic exhaust fumes each week as they go about their daily business! It doesn't suit them you see, it debases their argument. Also, please note that the word "ESTIMATES" is in there again-they have no true figures but use generally vague lumps of numbers instead. In fact, they tend to ignore the great possibility that babies/infants lungs are damaged within days of being born...... 'because that simply wouldn't do would it'!
Where is the law that protects babies from this?
We couldn't possibly have a law that prohibited such things as exhaust fumes polluting the air we breathe as government couldn't possibly ban transport-the whole nation would grind to a standstill in hours-probably not a bad idea actually! Instead, governments find it far easier to discriminate against 25% of the population to appease the avaricious little gnomes of Big Pharma. As smoking rates were already on the great decline there was absolutely no need for this heavy handed approach to a problem that wasn't really there.
One of the problems quoted by such as ASH was that smoking curtailed peoples lives somewhat. So what! It is each individuals choice as to how they wish to spend their mortal days on this now forlorn planet. Eric Sykes reckoned that he had got through 500,000 cigarettes until he died aged 89-I can't see that his life was curtailed in any way..... can you? And anyway, who determines who should live for what length of time? I wonder how Arnott, Duffy, Sandford, Dockrell etc will explain the fact that they have contracted some form of cancer-especially when they are such anti tobacco advocates? Don't think I am wishing such a disease upon these destroyers of our freedoms, it is simply a statistical certainty that two or even three of the four terrorists will-according to the studies they have produced themselves!
I wasn't born with a date stamp on my forehead, was anyone else? Can your GP tell you when you will die and what of? The only certainty of such predictions occur when terminal disease sets in and an already well established pattern is being performed. In other words, great as the medical profession are at saving people from nasty illnesses etc, they cannot determine your exit from this world by looking at you when you are (say) 16 yrs old. What they can do, and do brilliantly, is to use words and play on peoples fears of death (estimated, could be, attached to, maybe, statistically possible, might well have etc etc)-just look at the results so far!
I visit cancer wards/units on a regular basis and I see the misery there, but it's not the misery that you would expect! I see many people there that have never smoked, never drank (certainly not to excess) yet they still be plagued by this terrible disease. Why? If they have never imbibed nor inhaled why do they have cancer? the answer is simple my friends..... cancer is in all of us, it just needs something to trigger off the cell mutations. I see plenty of cancer patients toddle off outside for a relaxing cigarette (one smokes his pipe in all weathers!) and they do this because they enjoy smoking. Who is to say they should stop smoking and die in misery? Any of the above four pictured will for they cannot envisage the joys gained from inhaling tobacco smoke. I wonder if they have chosen to be cremated? Who knows, the pictures above (exhaust fumes or the four anti tobacco uglies) might well be that trigger - exhaust fumes more likely but you never know! Dr Kitty Little, although quietly hidden by anti smoking organisations, was convinced that cancer rates increased with industrialisation and also whilst smoking rates decreased at a great rate. She was absolutely right.
The other most profound absurdity is the fact that whilst government is telling us that we should all lead 'healthier lives' they are bemoaning the fact that the state welfare bill is rising each year as we all live longer! How ridiculous is that? Add to that little problem the fact that Blair opened the immigration floodgates and it is easy to see where many of our problem lay-IMMIGRATION. For every immigrant that comes into this country we have yet another burden to our welfare state somewhere along the line.
If people were respectful of this countries needs they would all celebrate their 65th birthday and then roll over and die, thus saving the nation paying reteirement monies, care monies, medical costs etc until death do occur!
Add to all the above that the EU now virtually control our everyday lives and you can see why we will soon be bankrupt. The EU only want US for OUR MONEY, nothing else - the problem for the EU is that some 60% of British people DON'T want the EU, their idiotic rules & regulations, their interfering laws, their human rights cobblers that allows terrorists to stay here and most of all their general interfering in our daily lives-as with our bananas!
To save this country??? Is it worth saving after all the damage caused by fruitcakes & loons (and I mean Lib/Lab/Con fruitcakes & loons) ? Well, yes it is for we do have a "Common Sense" party that is severely on the up and hopefully, come May this year, the people of this country will see the sense of voting for us to be OUT of the EU and plump solidly for UKIP.
The EU will certainly destroy this country, for that is what it has set out to do from the days of the silly-arsed Common Market agreements. We need OUT with a capital 'O' and fast. We need to get back on our own feet, trade as we have always traded and as 'Everard' famously said on many occasions... "oooooh, shut that door!" We don't need immigrants here. Officially we have 2.42m people unemployed (4.78m in truth) yet only 181,000 job vacancies - why do we need to import labour from countries poorer than us? We don't. The simple answer is to get the people already here into work not admit more that want to doss about forever and a day. If there is one main message everyone needs to send to Westminster it is the May Message - get us out of here. This might be the day the state took over but if we don't get out of the EU soon the day will come when the superstate takes over - and then we will all be puppets of that shambles headed by Barosso & Co.