Sand(ford)Blasted

 

The anti tobacco lobby mouthpieces fell short in an interview on "Voice of Russia" (London) radio programme hosted by London's Juliet Spare on the so called 'public consultation' by Lansley's layabouts on plain packaging. As my title may suggest to you, defending the rights of everyone but smokers is that queen of vitriol Amanda Sandford, whilst opposing plain packaging is Amul Pandya ("Hands of our Packs" campaign), Chris Snowdon (author, Velevet Glove, Iron Fist) & online guest Mark Littlewood (Director General IEA). Formidable opposition to the terrorist leader of Britain's foremost state funded, internal economic self destruction unit: ASH.

Needless to say the government funded terrorist came out with the par normal garbage that "we think the colourful packaging removal will make a difference..." but what else could she say? It's Lansley's dream that a country of 65million people has no smokers and it's Lansley's government that are funding her terrorist group! Of course there is 'evidence' to back all this bilge up but of course the question, as always, is where has this wondrous evidence landed from this time? Is it Kellners over at YouGov, is it from CRUK or from one of their infamous "Smoke Free regions" who are quite adept at providing results to order-mind you, so are the other two! And again she made reference to the tobacco advertising ban in 2003-something that ASH et al are immensely proud of and mention at every opportunity.
Amul Pandya weighed straight in with the obvious hammer blow response that the only people who would definitely benefit from this ludicrous proposal would be the highly organised criminal gangs, many of whom have switched to tobacco smuggling from their original nefarious activities-and who can blame them! Criminal gangs don't give a hoot who they sell to and they certainly know that with their much cheaper wares they have a ready market in selling to kids. Absolutely bang on the button!
The female terrorist then declared that hiding cigarettes (that children can't buy!) was not enough of a measure as children could see the cigarette packets in all their colourful splendour as smokers pulled them out of a pocket to produce one and light it. Now I can't see how that works when smoking JP Specials or Senior Service. One is black the other almost totally white!
She then goes on to tell us that half of all smokers will die prematurely-how does she know that half of of non smokers won't die prematurely? the question of course is 'who determines any ones lifespan'? Does SHE know on what date she will die so that we can determine whether she has died prematurely or not? 'Prematurely died' is a fantasia created by the medical profession to justify a cause, an ideology-nothing more, nothing less. Clare Squires sadly died within sight of the winning line of the London Marathon two weeks ago; she was 30 years old. She was fit, a perfectly competent runner (she's even climbed Mt Kilimanjaro) yet it was obviously 'her time'. Of course my heart goes out to her family and friends but there is no other answer-it was simply her time. Why can the terrorist C-I-C not take this simple fact onboard and accept that we are all different? Note: Definition for premature death:

Web definitions:

(premature deaths) deaths that occur before they need have done. Avoidable premature deaths are those that might have been prevented by.........

Now this very cleverly worded statement simply covers a 'multitude of sins' for just how many deaths 'could' have been avoided. Clare's death simply proves that: a...fitness is no guarantee of longevity & b...running is a very deadly sport!
The terrorist C-I-C also fails to mention the diabolical AP (Air Pollution) we are subject to on a daily basis. Only last year we were warned about such by a committee of MPs and more recently Camer-Cleggs have been dodging £300m in fines from the EUSSR yet don't bother to inform the general public about such trivial matters as infecting their lungs 24-7.
Chris Snowdon promptly dismissed Sandfords claims as ridiculous and that the evidence is worthless and to be fair I've never known anyone start smoking because of the colour of the packet!

 Chris Snowdon

And, as Chris further states, this government have promised and evidenced based consultation but there is no evidence to consult over so it will be 18 weeks of fantasy island scenario's again!
Mark Littlewood then pointed out that it was indeed a ludicrous notion and that it would not stop anyone nipping into a shop, buying 100 cigarettes and then passing 10/20/50 onto under aged smokers! Hmmm, I wonder what the C-I-C thought of that one? 

Mark Littlewood

Mark then progressed to the setting of the principle of 'nanny' banning that which is bad for you; ie, beer, wines, spirits all going into plain packaging, even sticky sweets full of tooth rotting sugars going to plain packaging-where does it stop?
Then the bomb flight path was laid out by the terrorist queen as she stated that there was "no evidence whatsoever of the 'domino theory'-where's this going to go next?"
Chris went straight in for the kill with, "Well it's a shame that this is radio as I just saw Amanda's nose grow about 3" there for as we sit here there is a Parliamentary Select Committee investigating alcohol and written down in black & white is "plain packaging". Well, upon my soul, she who commands great fees from government funding lies like a pig in mire to back up her own arguments-and blatant lies too! It truly is time for these terrorist quangos to lose their funding, as Stivoro did not so long ago, before they totally bankrupt this country. The Netherlands decided that adults could make informed choices, what is wrong with our governments mentality that it fails to allow us that right? What is wrong with our government that it allows a state funded quango to dictate policy that affects approximately 25% of the people it governs?
So not only have ASH admitted publicly in the last few weeks that the ultimate aim is to remove smoking from the British way of life but now publicly lie to suit their purposes. Only one question really applies now. Why are our government spending our tax money on these self confessed social destroyers? Over to you Dave! 

Poor desperate, pathetic ASH

I nominated, not so long ago, that ASH would soon have no recourse but to name every single organisation that dared speak out against their anti tobacco war as 'in the pay of Big tobacco'. I said then that after all the codswallop they have come out with over the past 5 years (especially) they would have to do this in order to justify their position of state funding fighting those that still dare to oppose their ideological, extremist views. At long last they have had the balls to actually say what they mean:
Via jredheadgirl I was alerted to an article in the Kansas Reporter.
The headline reads Congratulations, you are part of Big Tobacco and it begins:

If you oppose smoking bans for any reason — property rights, individual liberty, you like smokers — you’re now apparently part of Big Tobacco.

 Yes, you read that right, it doesn't matter what your thoughts are on the rights or wrongs of this evil, despicably selective ban, if you oppose such as ASH - you are now apparently part of Big Tobacco!
Now I've gotta say that I'm really impressed with that statement. In fact I'm so impressed that I must relate a tale of my trip to coastal regions this week. driving through Lincolnshire I couldn't help but notice a fair number of empty pubs. Some closed, some up for sale, a couple up for auction and those that were actually open had very few customers in them One of them had "fuck the smoked ban" scrawled across the tatty old circus poster on a boarded up window. Now I can only assume that the owner or even ex owner of this once thriving tavern MUST be part of Big Tobacco as he (we will assume) has objected to his loss of business through those four little, but effective words!
I called in at a caravan park on Wednesday to see an old pal of mine. Luckily he was 'on duty' behind the club house bar, but happiness was not on the menu I'm afraid. 'Pete' has never smoked a cigarette in his 42 years on this earth, nope, never even tried one behind the proverbial bikeshed during his teens yet he is totally and utterly pissed off with our wonderful puritanical extremists; aka ASH.
'Pete' told me that custom in the clubhouse has slowly dwindled over the past 5 years-even though 'at least 84% praise the smoking ban'. I was amazed to learn that the caravan park was 'smoke-free', ie each caravan was a no smoking caravan! Now I find this incredible as a caravan is simply another form of a hotel room, which means that the 'park owners' have/had decided that they were to be completely smoke free-a decision I find incredible. He told me that if I wandered round the park I would soon spot many of his 'static' & 'annual' drinkers sitting outside their caravans happily smoking and drinking cans from the local supermarket.
He was absolutely right! The fingers of both hands were soon counted.
This was something, regarding the smoking ban, that I had not previously considered. I couldn't resist it, I had a walk round and asked a few 'smoking cans' and got a very much expected response from them. Quote, "used to spend a fortune in that club, fuck 'em now", another said "plain stooooopid, look at the park this year-nearly empty". I had to agree with them.
When I got back to the clubhouse 'Pete' had busied himself wiping an already wiped bar down and immediately leapt to the John Smith's smooth-flow pump so as to present me with a pint.
Now this clubhouse had two completely separate rooms and when I mentioned the obvious to 'Pete' he threw his arms up in despair, his eyes rolled and he sighed  from deep within. He told me that 5 years ago the clubhouse would be full-at least six nights a week, 5/6 staff working non stop, sometimes until midnight yet here we were at 7.45pm on a Thursday night, just the two of us in the smaller room and the larger 'Variety Room' closed and in darkness.
When I mentioned ASH, 'Pete' went into verbal overdrive, stating that they were like a runaway train with nothing to stop them. He couldn't see this government doing anything except licking their boots and chucking more and more money at them and he certainly couldn't see a point where they would realise how much this was all costing until it was too late.
Now you must remember that 'Pete' doesn't smoke, has never smoked and has no inclination to smoke-but he is well clued up with what is going on in this beleaguered country. It would seem that 'Pete' must be in the pay of Big Tobacco, after all, who would have such strong views if they weren't in such pay? But it would seem that the caravaners were of similar mind as the smoking ban had secured their absence from the site clubhouse. You see the amazing fact is that since the implementation of the smoking ban the smokers refused to 'entertain' the facilities of the site clubhouse-and so did the non smokers. Like the street pubs, the non smokers had the site clubs all to themselves yet totally failed to make them viable.
As previously stated, ASH are now becoming desperate and have now resorted to playground name calling for over at Taking Liberties we find that ASH have released a lengthy list of 'tobacco criminals'; ie, people and organisation's that have the audacity to object to the onward march of dictatorship. Many of those on this 'hit' list are simply protest groups safeguarding the interest of retailers, consumer groups & tobacco users. They are not in any way, shape or form, funded by Big Tobacco. Entitled Tobacco front groups and third party lobbying tactics,  it starts with the following statement:

This document has been prepared by ASH for the All Party Parliamentary Group on Smoking and Health and sets out a summary of information in the public domain at the current time about front groups and third party advocates with links to the tobacco industry and their role in the recent UK legislative process.

 What ASH are really saying is that any of these named already stand convicted of crimes against ideology-that is the puritanical ideology of such as ASH, CRUK, RCP et al. Mr Patel could shout from the rooftops that this action is hurting his business, he could be forced to close his corner shop because of this war on tobacco but dare'st he object he will be tarred with the deadly brush-he must be in the pay of Big Tobacco. What utter bilge and how better to influence the All Party Parliamentary Group on Smoking and Health (who are already confirmed anti tobacco zealots) to disregard
any reports from any of the named 'factions'. Basically it means that ASH have closed the door to any open discussions on the effects of tobacco-either in health or wealth!
We know they are getting desperate as we now have adverts stating that 80% of cigarette smoke is invisible-what utter gibberish. I don't smoke but I watched with interest tonight as my daughter lit a cigarette. Immediately she lit the end and 'drew', a thin trail of smoke went skyward, the rest went down into her obviously satisfied lungs. With there being no smoke without fire, I would love to know where this mysterious 80% is, was, may be, could be, because she lit a cigarette, she would have to have lit a bonfire to create that amount of 'invisible smoke'. And anyway, if this mysterious 80% is invisible, just how did 'scientists' see it to measure it in the first place? And the final piece in the latest "Junk Jigsaw", look at the figure quoted again. Another ASH special-straight in with 80%! BANG! Straight for the throat, no messing, the usual big number from the Ministry of Dreams (Lies), just like the 84% that 'praise the ban'.
Not only are they now getting desperate, ASH are becoming pathetic!

Meglomaniacs heaven

We now know, indisputably, that Andrew Lansley has renounced all his previous witterings about fairness, equality, human rights & choice  as this so called 'public consultation' (that has none of the general public actually being consulted!) stumbles on until it is decided that there is 'undeniable evidence' that shows plain packaging will be the final 'cure all' of smokers-every one will give up smoking and not one single child will even look at a plain packet of cigarettes-we'll all be too bored by them! The fact that plain packaging, subject to massive court cases in Australia, is now totally irrelevant seems lost on Lansley and the health loonies as they march ever onward with their crazy lifestyle plans where we all live to be at least a centenarian. Plain packaging became irrelevant the moment the tobacco display ban was enshrined in law, but they seem not to have noticed such.
Lansley is fast becoming the king of megalomaniacs as he sees all conquering power before him and sees himself as ruler of all those beneath him thanks to the unwavering support of the anti tobacco legions who instigated this atrocity within our country. It seems we are no longer allowed choice in what we do or how we live our lives as we need to be told when to eat, when to sleep, what to eat, how to eat it, what to drink, when to drink it and how much of whatever we are enjoying......to enjoy!
The health loonies seem to think that we all want to live to be at least 100 years old and I can't figure out why? Who on earth would want to live to that age when one certainly wouldn't be fit enough to go out and do what one could do 50 years earlier. What would you be able to afford with your pension the way the cost of living is rising year after year? You would be consigned to watching TV all day long-the healthy lifestyle channel!
But back to Lansley. One has to ask the question, "what is he getting out of all this?" I blogged, somewhat tongue in cheek a couple of weeks ago, that Lansley was the most dangerous man in the country-now I am convinced that I was right! He is. There is no proof that cigarettes sold from behind closed doors reduce smoking and absolutely NONE that plain packaging will make a ha'porth of difference but our new health Fuhrer is undeterred in his quest for supreme power. A very interesting interview with Andrew Turner of API Laminates lays it all out for us, the damage liable to be caused, the unemployment liable to be caused and the ramifications of plain packaging in the future!

But as I said in a previous blog Lansley cares not a jot about what any of this might do to the economy, in fact the economy must be the furthest thing from his mind as he strives to kill this country off once and for all-and believe you me folks, that is exactly what this ludicrous health drive will do. Let's see what we can get rid of shall we? Well fags are out as they may contribute to cancer, and so might milk, coffee, tea, beef, pork, lamb, red wine & chocolate.....I mean, just how long a list is this going to be? Note here that when I pointed two of these cancer risks out to my then MP, Sir Peter Soulsby [uggh] (a complete anti tobacco warrior) a couple of years ago and asked why weren't at war with bacon & red wine etc, he flippantly replied that "we'll start the campaign tomorrow shall we, after I've finished my bacon sandwich and glass of wine!" (So much for your MP being of any use!) We obviously need to get rid of all the take-away joints for they are guilty of 'making' us 'slob out' in front of the telly and become obese, so that's Chinese, Cantonese, Indian, Mexican, Portuguese, Thai, Turkish and even some Spanish take-away food shops gone. Then there are all the Kebab shops that sell Doner, Kiofte, Lamb, Chicken, Spicy Chicken, Herbed Chicken, Burgers etc and of course we must not forget the good old mainstay-the fish 'n' chip shop. Add to the list MacDonalds, Burger king, KFC and an enormous array of pizza places, all of these will be part and parcel of our failure to meet the BMI figure as laid down by the health gestapo of this once great country. How many of such shops in London alone? A quick check over at Yell.com lists 8 such places in Islington alone - and they don't list every business! You see we have to remember that Lansley's NHS reforms are highly dubious, in fact so dubious that many Tory Mps and ex Tory MEPs doubt his proposals working at all! So a possible 60,000 businesses could be set to close simply to assuage the thirst of our health omnipotence. Think of THAT in cost terms to the country!
The government and the health lobby are well on the way to eradicating our pubs with their smoking ban and consistent taxing of alcohol and we know that the cost so far is circa £27bn-yes BILLION.....and they haven't even started on food (above) yet! It is no longer a war on tobacco, it is a war on free thinking spirits. It is an exercise in state control-but it is failing, as it was always doomed to do. In the latest report a mere 12% of Wigan smokers managed to quit completely-and that's only after a 4 week state controlled period. God forbid they should actually give us a figure after a proper 12 month period !

When you actually look at the reform proposals I think you would agree that Lansley hasn't really got a grip on reality which immediately makes me think that this new found love for hatred of all matters tobacco is simply a giant smokescreen to hide his inabilities of creating a simple but effective NHS reform.
The problem with this scenario of course is that in seeing a way of 'covering his very dubious NHS tracks, Lansley has turned himself into a Lord God of all matter health, he is in megalomaniacs heaven-and still very, very dangerous indeed.

It's a rotten law, a rotten country!

Announced today that we are in a 'double dip', a recession that is, apparently approaching the disastrous proportions of the 1930's. Well, we can certainly thank the Blair/Brown years for our sad financial demise and even applaud them for our complete lack of 'gold reserves' - that we sold at probably the worst possible time and, of course, the worst possible price. But it is another piece of the jigsaw of legislation that Labour pushed through that will see the end of this country as any sort of financial power in the economic world - the Smoking Ban, the worst law implemented since the Clockmakers Tax of the 1790's which promptly saw clock production cease.
Of course the anti tobacco army have marched gloriously onward in their attempt to eradicate smoking in this country simply because 75% of the population don't smoke;ie, they had a natural 'weight advantage' to start with.
We have an indoor ban which has crucified the pubs & clubs with more than 10,000 gone since mid 2007-at God only knows what cost to a government so far up the health lobbyists backsides I'm surprised that they are still easily distinguishable from the Patel's in the corner shop!
We have the lunatic fringe now wanting plain packaging, though of course there is absolutely no point enforcing such as cigarettes now have to be hidden behind 'closed doors'-for the sake of the 'chiiildren'. The fact that kids espy thousands of gaily coloured sweet packets which lead to major dental problems  and obesity seems to have escaped such as Lansley who is on a one man mission to save the sinners smokers from themselves.
We also now have another section of the lunatic fringe wanting to ban smoking in cars, err, private property but they seem to want to ignore that fact just as they want to ignore the fact that the children are already travelling in the most toxic of all our problems. I have friends who have died from the effects of exhaust fumes but not one of my many aquaintances has succumbed to cigarette smoke!
We have yet another, more extreme set of lunatics wanting to ban smoking in parks & other open air areas-now just how are they going to manage/police that I wonder? A park is a public area, paid for (out of our taxes) by the public, for the public-so do they now want to take on the discrimination laws?
It really must be a case of getting all priorities wrong when it comes to this smoking ban and the financial state of this country for we are now in a 'double dip' recession, yet we happily start on the next £27bn in the un-winnable war against smokers.  The latest 'public figure' to come out against the ban is non other than ex Sex pistol John Lydon who simply says "Give people the choice." Now I don't see much wrong with that idea-do you?

Just think about it for a minute.
Thought about it?
Think of how many people would return to the pubs to drink, especially when non smokers had their own pubs, likewise smokers.
Think of how many jobs it would create as pubs started to become busy again.
Think of how much revenue this cash strapped government would once again start raking in-I don't seem to remember there being any form of recession pre smoke ban-do you?
Think of how much money Government would save on funding these terrorist quangos like ASH who have no regard for 25% of the population! Terrorism:- Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians). Isn't it strange how ASH fit the description so nicely-it's a fair cop guv! Even stranger is the fact that government have no qualms about financially supporting this terrorism against its own people and as Dick Puddlecote says here, "It's quite a staggering sum, too. Total budget in financial year 2011/12: £468,462.06" - and that's only the Smoke Free South West mob!
Amending the smoking ban to encompass that which should always have been encompassed (CHOICE) would see this government starting to claw back £millions that have been needlessly wasted over the past 5 years. They only denied themselves £254m in 2010.....and all in the name of an ideology nurtured over the decades by a group of extremists hell bent on the destruction of this country, yet, if everyman & woman was absolutely potless smokers would still find a way to smoke-for you either smoke or you don't. All this idiotic ideology needs to stop for the sake of sanity and the sake of our rapidly failing economy for make no mistake folks the smoking ban, in all its horror, will bankrupt this country. The Labour party made one horrendous mistake by backing one of their own (Donaldson), the Coalition have made a bigger one by not amending Labour's atrocity in law-making!

PM10's & No10

Isn't it truly magnificent when the media actually start releasing, in all innocence of course, the truth about our wanton pollution problems? doesn't make you feel that you have a government and a system that you can trust!

I speak of course of the marvellous revelations that pollution from cars, lorries, buses etc; even power plants kill 13,000 people per annum. With another 6,000 tacked on from EU pollutants we are getting rid of 19,000 people per year-and no one has lit a cigarette or pipe yet!
The article explains how soot particles in the air (PM10s) invade our fragile respiratory systems and slowly poisons us: Quote- "The MIT study estimated air pollution was costing at least £6 billion a year and possibly as much as £60bn. Most of the cost is generated by the cardiac and respiratory diseases caused by inhaling the minute, sooty particles from car exhausts." 
Now this takes some comprehending for we are used to having smoking related costs of £2.7bn thrown at us from every vantage point possible but air pollution figures simply drown any such numerical arguments! 'at least £6 billion a year', more than double smoking costs to the NHS! But the other end of the scale is monumental for we hear that the figure is as much as 'as much as £60bn.' Wowee! Now we are talking 22 times as much as smoking related treatments yet smoking, apparently, still remains 'one of the most preventable causes of premature deaths'. Set that against 'emissions from cars and lorries, which occur closer to where people live and work, pose a more serious risk to human health.' and one has to wonder about the enormity of the lies emanating from our 'No 10' about PM10s?  
We already know that Britain has fended off £300m in fines from the EU/SSR concerning air pollution levels yet, as usual, No 10 says nothing about such matters to the people that put them in office yet they continue to condemn those 25% of the population, including the smokers that were daft enough to vote blue!
Beginning to see the hogwash spouted by anti tobacco groups yet?
As anti tobacco war costs keep mounting (approximately £27bn so far) with results equating to nil pointes, you have to debate the sanity of those leading the charge against a legal product. Yes, I am talking about tobacco!  
After much correspondence to, and very few replies from, Irish Health Minister James Reilly wants to extend the ban to everywhere that children could be, might be, even should be but now accepts that 8 years of colossal effort and 8 years of colossal expenditure have resulted, again, in nil pointes!  infact, Irish smoking rates have increased by 2%-now that is Irish!
One has to wonder when this idiotic crusade will end for the costs, on both sides of the Atlantic are astronomical and now we have the news that Bloomberg (N York maggot mayor) & Bill Gates (worm Microsoft) are to donate $500m "to fight tobacco use in developing countries", well good luck with that then for most developing countries have totally corrupt regimes (mind you, we are getting that way ourselves!) therefore much of the £500m will simply disappear into officials pockets-or Swiss bank accounts. Apparently these people (Bloomberg/Gates) are known as philanthropists but in reality they are simply control freaks who want to attack smokers in poor countries where, quite often, the only pleasure the inhabitants have is smoking. They simply use their colossal wealth, no doubt, in part, gained from those who smoke to pursue an ideology that will never come to fruition. Why should people who enjoy a legal past-time be hounded and bullied into submission by a few anti smoking terrorists simply because they (the anti smoking terrorists) abhor the smell of smoke? 
Before the turn of the century a certain Dr Kitty Little began correlating the rise in cancer cases with the rise in industrialisation but she was largely ignored because the anti tobacco squadrons were already being put in place; ie, her research did not suit that which was already on its way for the unsuspecting smokers. But, the good doctors work was hushed up for more than just the smoking/cancer/diesel studies for she exposed the breeding grounds for all these horrible little people that seem to think they have a divine right to run ruin others lives & lifestyles. She wrote about the Illuminati and the book The Truth Shall Set You Free tells you all you need to know about what is going on, way above our heads, in this totally corrupted, power crazed world. Why do you all think that CP students (Common Purpose) have infiltrated our legal system to such an extent that any person accused of a smoking or smoking related crime has very little chance of justice being served for they are now deemed guilty as charged-even if they don't smoke.
The EU directed that smoke ban laws were to be enforced to the maximum to deter would be activist/objectors and we certainly don't need to look very far for proof of that situation! Corruption in our courts is now commonplace as witnesses are not allowed to be called, CCTV footage is deemed ignorable by Kettering magistrates & state employed 'witnesses' are deemed more credible than any 'honest Joe' off the streets! The mere fact that we know a government agent is lying through her crooked teeth seems to have no basis or make no difference in our courts of supposed law! The  smoking ban has been seen as a supreme cash cow to our financially jaundiced judicial system. but, yet again the question arises, why is this discriminatory law still in place in its original form when it is blatantly obvious that it is costing this country £billions in trade and therefore revenue? The answer is simple my friends. The anti smoking lobby have created a monster, a monster that governments have found to be highly lucrative as the legal system has been adapted to reap the benefits. A monster that can produce a never ending series of studies and reports to support its weird & wonderful claims, a monster that happily discriminates against 25% of the population without fear of contradiction simply because the brainwashing has already been done on the majority!
It is only when scientific studies such as this finally seep out that people even begin to question the validity of the spurious claims from such as ASH, CRUK etc. As an aside, did you notice that as soon as a consultation on plain packaging was announced, YouGov produced a survey stating that 62% of the population wanted plain packaging? Now how did Peter Kellner (confirmed anti tobacco loon) know that a survey was needed, who did he survey and when did the survey take place?
The whole plot stinks and nothing stinks more than the latest report on our pollution status, which is where we started out today as government ignore the possible  "£60bn of which most  of the cost  is generated by the cardiac and respiratory diseases caused by inhaling the minute, sooty particles from car exhausts." Again they use the 'premature death syndrome' as a benchmark for fear, but there is no such thing as nobody holds a dated book of lifespans and non of us know when our time is up! In fact, when you investigate the 'science of anti smoking' and listen to such as Arnott, Sandford et al spouting on about 'overwhelming evidence', the majority of it is merely a smokescreen for no one has ever yet produced that death certificate with SHS as causation of death!

Perhaps, in the light of this scientific revelation, government will refuse to produce a death certificate stating C.O.D: Air Pollution!

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 7^th’ has been born by the medical profession, the ‘glorious 7^th’ being, of course, the supposed 7^th 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!

The Good, The Bad & the idiots!

I find it absolutely incredible that the powers that be still beat the drum against the legal pursuit of smoking-especially when we are faced with severe 'austerity measures' thanks to 13 unlucky years of Labour misrule. That number, thirteen, is unlucky for we now sit in a vortex of financial misery thanks to allowing idiots like Blair, Brown & Darling to run riot with our finances to such an extent that it is almost impossible for us to ever 'get outaa dat shit'! We've even got the one eyed lunatic (Brown) to thank for selling off our gold reserves at a wonderfully low price!

Within those 13 years of misery there have been a number of deaths, most of whom will no doubt have been glad to leave this world of discrimination & hatred, a discrimination & hatred that has blossomed obscenely over the past 5 years. I talk of course, of the 'Health Lobby' who have been seen to move into such a position of power that Governments are scared shitless of them!

The Health Lobby contrived, through pressures of one type or another, to concoct an almost bulletproof facade concerning the death rates from smoking, passive smoking, being near a smoker, living in the same street as a smoker-even the same planet! It made non smokers out to be pious, wondrous creatures who could do no wrong as they trod the path of the righteous. ASH were lauded for 'their' work in revealing this multi-headed monster, yet they were only ever doing their masters bidding from day 1.

Let us consider a couple of points here folks. It is claimed that smokers die younger than non smokers (up to 7 years apparently!) so was Bertrand Russell supposed to die aged 105 instead of the paltry 98 years he did achieve? Henry Allingham died aged 113. Was he mapped out to live to be 120 then-had he not smoked? Do ASH have an ageograph of every single persons life expectancy-including those murdered, killed by acciodental means, during wars, plagues etc etc?

Age is bollocks, pure and simple! It is all mapped out in your genes pre birth so if 'BR' was destined to live to be 105 he bloody well would have done, even though he was a self confessed pipe smoker of some 70 years!

Let's look at the other side of the coin now. labour set up a 'crooked' committee, known as the SCOTH committee, which was to sit in session until they had found a case for there being no safe level of SHS. It's impossible to do but they managed it by ignoring the top 27 studies in the world on the subject and concentrating on the 28th-a study by a little known Austrian anti smoker known as Konrad Jamrozic.

Konrad Jamrozic 1955-2010 (cyclist and rowing keep fit fanatic who died of cancer aged 55yrs.)

Jamrozic somehow came up with a fantastical numerical decision that SHS killed all but the good Lord himself. But! the 'study' was so statistically flawed as to incur ridicule from his peers thus it (the study) was basically discarded-until SCOTH came along desperate for ANYTHING to support their needs. Jamrozics hitherto ignored statistical crap suddenly became all important and junk science just as suddenly became all important as 'the cause'was relentlessly pursued. Amazingly, this wonderfully incompetent junk scientist died in 2010 aged 55. The obvious question therefore is, did he die 7 years before his time or was that his lot on mortal earth? he was an ardent non smoker so he didn't shorten his life which leaves one to conclude that had he been a smoker he would have died aged approximately 48! Also, interestingly enough, Jamrozic died from cancer-yes, a non smoker dying from that which the non smoker tried to convince the world smokers died from! Jamrozic's cancer was a 'sarcoma', which in simple terms is a bone cancer for which there is NO KNOWN CAUSE!

Now let's forward to this year where we find Irelands Finance Minister, also an anti tobacco campaigner, trying to promote yet another smoking cessation aid which simply enriches the pharmaceutical giants at every selling point. "Nico-Bloc" is a very good product he says and we shouls all subscribe to such as it will help us give up smoking. Note that no-one has even asked us if WE even WANT to GIVE UP smoking! Yet again, it is decided that we ARE giving up smoking as it is for our own good. Pardon? Who, in any government, world-wide, has the right to decide what is good or bad for us? Bungee jumping is an exceedingly unhealthy sport-especially when the elastic band snaps! Ski-ing, likewise, as innumerable limbs are broken (including the spine), digging the garden even as many have had heart attacks pruning the flora!



We have another doyen of the anti smoking brigade spouting on about the 'dangers' of that which he himself didn't do, yet he also died from cancer-pancreatic cancer actually. Mr Lenihan left this planet aged 52, so does that mean that had he been a smoker he would have only lasted until he was 45? No, it's all bollocks as both men died when their allotted time time on this planet was up.

It seems very strange, when you actually think about it, that two great men who used their lives for the good of their fellow man (Russell & Allingham) both well exceeded their three score years and ten. They simply did their best for their fellow beings, creating a land where they could be free, a land free from petty dictatorships, a land that was free from personal interference & restrictions of rights, a land where civil liberties were respected.

Now skip to our other examples; dead at 55 & 52 yet they were interefering with all the above! They did not want their fellow human beings enjoying a legal substance (tobacco), they did not want a land where all would feel free, they wanted petty dictatorships to rule, they wanted to disrupt people human rights, they wanted civil liberties ignored when it suited them!

It seems that the good Lord saw fit to remove the evil from society sooner rather than later. man was born to co-exist not war within the confines of his own domain. How many non smokers die from cancer? How many smokers die from cancer? Forget all this crap about 'half of all smokers will die from smoking related diseases'-all of non smokers and smokers will die from heart problems! Once the heart stops beating it doesn't matter whether you smoke or not- YOU ARE SEVERELY DEAD!

What people need to understand is that smokers enjoy what they are doing, they enjoy a cigarette, it calms them, it pleases them, it puts them at one with the world! Non smokers cannot and do not want to undestand these simple facts of life. A smoker doesn't give a shit whether he/she dies aged 68 or 75, 82 or 89 for they are happy people who enjoy that warm, invading feeling as the smoke is drawn down into the lungs. Non smokers haven't got as clue how nice a feeling that is! They don't understand the peace it brings.

This law is so stupid that even the very obvious truth that it is unsubstantiated through true science is being ignored as the health lobby have now assumed an 'all-powerful' coat. But coats can easily be burned, especially if the cloth is costing the country a small fortune everyday there is complete lack of choice. Amazingly, there is absolutely no proof of a single life being saved-and nor will there ever be! However, what is abundantly clear now is that smoking bans kill businesses, kill the will to work, kill the will to live! How many people, good honest folk, have sunk their life savings into something called a pub only to see a government steal their money away from them without any form of recompense? I can think of 4 off the top of my head-£200,000, £90,000, £75,000 & £70,000. Without a doubt the smoking ban and the health lobby will kill the spirit of this country and I, for one, will laugh all the way to the newly built 'WorkHouses'!