A good life spoiled

     We are now all aware of the sad demise of that much loved actor Richard Briers, aged 79. Smoking 'killed him' without doubt, in fact, had he died 10, 20,30,50,60 years ago it would still have been smoking that killed him - because that is the simplistic mentality of the anti smoking brigade. The "let them die" moralistic brigade, who really couldn't give two hoots about smokers (or drinkers or fatties) will be rejoicing in the passing of our much loved star of "The Good Life" (video clip) for 

 

even though he filled our screens with charm & charisma ploughing a lone furrow with his one man dream of self sustainability, he was a smoker, an enemy of this new self righteous state! Indeed, in an article only last week he stated that smoking was never a problem and that in actual fact he "loved smoking" - and fair play to him for that. But, later in the day, as the anti smoking activists got to work, complaining about the Daily |Telegraph glamourising smoking/smokers, those two little words were removed from the article. How sad a person is it that stoops to such a low level? It really is a step back 80 years, to about the same time Richard was born!
     More amazing is the fact that as Hitler started his 'Holocaust', Richard Briers was learning his words, the British way of politeness, of fairness to others, tolerance to others and of equality whilst, 577 miles away in Berlin, a lunatic was doing exactly the opposite. Hitler is dead but unfortunately we have our own set of lunatics in this country and, eventually, they will be as much despised as Hitler, the persecutor, was and still is! The amazing find is that DNA testing shows that dear old Adolf was a descendant of Jewish stock in the first place-now I wonder if Arnott, Bauld, Hastings, Glantz, Chapman, Dockrell, Reilly et al have all descended from smokers (already)?
     Over in good old America, no longer the 'land of the free' has been smashed with "Obamacare" where firms with 50 or more workers pays God only knows how much into the medical health pot, which is having an immediate effect on the employment situation as firms cut down to 49 employees maximum, and insurance companies have seen fit to discriminate against smokers with a fury hitherto unseen! 

 The law, which prevents health insurers from rejecting people with pre-existing conditions, still allows insurers to charge higher premiums based on risk factors such as age, location and family composition and tobacco use.

Tobacco use carries the heaviest penalties, allowing insurers to charge premium rates as much as 50 percent higher for smokers than non-smokers under the law.

So, yet again, those that enjoy tobacco pay the highest price for their pleasure! In America it is obvious now that you are far better off, if a smoker, to be unemployed, living on state handouts and generalluy 'bumming around'. One man sorted this situation out good and proper by simply threatening to shoot President Obarmy Obama. Stephen Espalin,desperately in need of medical care in the great, self confessed "land of the free", found that such medical care was far, far out of his reach and so decided that to shoot 'barmyObama' was the way forward-and fair play to him, I totally admire the man. The typically OTT Senior U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp decided that Mr Espalin was obviously a serious threat to 'barmyObama' and sentenced him to 4 years & 3 months for threatening to kill man nearly a thousand miles away. Need to be a good shot for that to happen methinks! Mr Espalin has already received excellent medical attention from the state prison system pre-trial and is looking forward to completing  his rigorous medical needs during the next couple of years .

 

(Nearly time for my radiotheray again!)

     Meanwhile, as Mr Espalin languishesd in his secure, rent free accomodation for a while, the creator of 'barmyObamcare' has left the White House top take up a lobbyist position. Elizabeth Fowler now works for Johnson & Johnson - now there's a surprise, yet another health freak profiteering from health creation! Just shows that the healthcare profession is corrupt throughout, doesn't matter where you live! Mind you, her new employers will have to profit from some more untested drugs as they have just been buried, to the tune of $109,000,000 by a Massachusetts judge for 'de-skinning' a poor defencelesss child!
     Not all Americans are nutters it seems as Autumn Cook, a freelance writer, states the case against Utah legislators banning smoking in cars. Cars are private property and therefore should not be subject to invasion by the state, no matter how noble or ridiculous the cause (smoking falls into both categories). As she rightly says, just how many other categories would this allow the state to intrude into? Would we have to have a 'drinkometer' strapped to us(?), a 'foodometer(?), a 'walkometer'(?), a 'sitdownometer'(?), a 'sportsometer'(?) - the list is endless as the state/governments decided on new ways of keeping health care bills down.
     Here's agood idea folks, simply let people do as they have always done and then, if they are right, smokers will die earlier than none smokers and save the welfare budget a bloody fortune! How simple is that? You read all this cobblers about welfare costs rocketing yet in the next breath we are being exhorted to live as long as we possibly can for our own good! Where's the good in ending up as a 'knock-kneed-knackered old nose bag' who's only capability is to flop lifelessly in a chair all day (oh yes indeedy, I've seen plenty of them thank you!)? Option 2 is when you can enjoy yourself, enjoy your life and it ends when your body has had enough. Watching the way this country is going I can tell you here and now that I certainly don't want to be a victim of l-o-n-g-v-i-t-y just to suit some health freak like Arnott or Reilly. And just take a look at them!One is a scrawny looking reptile, enjoying a lavish lifestyle & junketting around at our expense and the other thing is a 'Compo' (remember the Last of the Summer Wine?) looking tubby  lump buried away somewhere in Ireland that is incapable of producing a truthful report on anything to do with smoking in cars!  When the 'fat police' really get going he'll be one of the first on my list to persecute! And what right is it of theirs to try and dictate life & death in the first place. How do they think they can control someone's lifespan, whether it be 100 seconds, 100 days, weeks, months or years? By supposedly extending every smokers lifespan, these idiots are actually costing our government more in the long run! How bizarre is that?

     The Australians are suffering from a severe setback as this wonderful  curtailment of plain packaging seems to have had absolutely no effect on sales of tobacco products-and why should it! Nobody, apart from highly over paid anti tobacco zealots, thinks that the silly pictures are effective in the slightest. The only thing of any note that I have witnessed is a couple of friends (one a non smoker) collect all the pictures and carefully mount them on decorative card, in a large picture frame and name it "The Tobacco Twat Years". I suppose, when all this lunacy has run its course, these 'collectors items' will be worth a few quid to some people-probably the enlightened offspring of the neanderthal Arnotts & Reilly's of this world!
     But the Australian example, which was to flood into New Zealand, has halted somewhat as the threat of giant legal action has created a fear amongst the NZ government. Now there's a thing folks! The 'public consultation' is not going well over there, just as it didn't here (more on that in a minute) and we have the absolutely bizarre situation where Maori legislator Tariana Turia openly blasts Big Tobacco yet disagrees with banning smoking in prisons! (Are there plenty of Maori's languishing in Austarlian/NZ gaols I ask?) I think the fact that a judge over ruled a prison smoking ban might have a lot to do with it! However, an article appeared praising the fact that the NZ government SHOULD regulate everything that be dangerous-that'll be motorised transport banned then!
     Just to keep a sense of reality whilst discussing the far reaching effects of smoking bans, how about this little reminder that exhaust fumes are infinitely more dangerous than a wisp of smoke..... boy tries to keep warm in car, dad digs car out of snow, boy dies while dad digs! 

Now there's a truthful demonstartion Arnott-he wouldn't have died if he was smoking a nice refreshing, relaxing cigarette would he! And, even more poignantly,  14 yr old Joe Humphries, who was 6ft 3in and fit and healthy dropped dead whilst out jogging-apparently, having outgrown 'SIDS' he died of 'SADS' (sudden adult death syndrome) yet how could this possibly be when, at 14 yrs of age, he was still a child? See how the medical world twist things to suit themselves-oh, and the lad didn't smoke either!

 

     Talking of twisting things, the truth is now coming out of extra-ordinary crooked dealings between the Department of Health, ASH & the APPG headed by Stephen Williams MP. The 'plain packaging' farce, which should have been dead & buried by now, seems to simply be a rats nest of corruptness & duplicity as friend 'Puddlecote' has been discovering. In fact he has discovered that there is no end to the underhand tactics employed by the above named, notwithstanding donating vast sums of OUR money to erect enormous billboards all over the south west of England proclaiming plain packaging; ie lobbying on behalf of the government for a government proposal! Had our legal system not been so corrupted already I would surely ask just how that scenario 'stood legally' but there is no point even going down that route whatsoever. It also transpires that information on our 'public consultation' has been freely shared with  loonytoons Chapman down under, though what the hell he has to do with anything in this country is beyond me-apart from the fact that they all piss in the same foul pot of corruption that is. Chris Snowdon has summed it all up brilliantly and better still everything is linked.
    So poor old Richard Briers has left this planet to go to a far better place than this, for this is now a planet where bullying & discrimination basically account for any act of any sort against a minority faction-sanctioned by a government scared shitless of those "charities" it now openly pays to lobby itself. Richard, diagnosed with emphysema five years ago said “I was diagnosed five years ago and didn’t think it would go quite as badly as it has. It’s a b*****, but there it is. I used to love smoking.” 
     At 79yrs, don't you think he had a fair old innings? I do, but if he had died at 109yrs the health faggots fanatics would still have claimed that smoking killed him; rest in peace Richard, it was a good life but spoiled by 'them'. Born in times of persecution, he departed in times of persecution!
     I have taken the liberty of adding my own comment to the posts on this article, just to highlight the intolerance and abject stupidity of some that walk amongst us.

 





 

Is it equally gay to smoke?

                    ,

     So we now have the absolute sanctity of marriage intruded upon by the state as the Commons voted overwhelmingly to agree/condone gay marriage. Why? Marriage is an act carried out between a male and a female with the intention of procreating so as to continue this increasingly weird human race of ours.  

     No insult is intended to any particular person or group of people here but it strikes me that the numbers game played by lobbyists & Mps is totally at odds here-read on and you will see. Now if man marries another man and starts all this 'begetting business' it doesn't matter how many times he bangs his male partner neither of them are going to produce any offspring! It is chemically, medically & physically impossible for the 'wifey' part of this ridiculous marriage to concieve and give birth. What it does do, and I'm not in the slightest religious, is to totally demean the teachings of the Christian faith and our church system that has educated for centuries-although decreasingly I must admit. Have a little gander here and see how your MP voted, there's some eye openers I can tell you! Note that David Camoron voted "for" but then with him having gained a first class honours degree at Oxford there is no surprise there. He may have been a twenty percenter!

 

     Apparently, this gay marrige malarkey is all about equal rights for a minority faction/group and fair play to the gay community for they have fought long & hard (no pun intended of course) for equal rights. After all, they are human beings, just the same as us 'straights'. They do the same daily things we do, except slightly differently in the home etc so MPs, in their infinite wisdom, have now voted that they they should be afforded equal rights along with all the straight, heterosexual people roaming the streets. But what about the AIDS epidemic? -  you know, that dastardly 'virus' that rampaged through the gay community taking such as Freddie Mercury, Sylvester, Rock Hudson, Anthony Perkins (Hitchcock), Rudolph Nureyev, the showman extra-ordinaire Liberace and our very own Denholme Elliot  but to mention a few. Marvellous list of 'celebrity AIDS deaths' here!

 
         


                                                                                                       
(Seems the Pope endorses it too!)
     Don't get me wrong here folks, if two men want to poke the old chocolate box twenty times a day that is entirely up to them, but that does not give them the equal rights of a male & female who want to join in holy matrimony-yet apparently our MPs think it does!
    So, the question is quite simple: if  homosexuals have been granted 'EQUAL RIGHTS' to marry and fornicate with same sex partners and also spread the worlds deadliest disease, because they have been a minority faction, discriminiated against for years, then why is it that smokers (another minority being totally discriminated against) don't have their own smoking rooms in our pubs and clubs yet? 
     At the end of 2010 it was 'estimated' that a mere 34 million (yep, 34,000,000) people were living with HIV/AIDS and that HIV/AIDS deaths accounted for 1,800,000 people. On the smoking front it seems that there are 39,000 new cases of lung cancer per annum in Britain and as we now know that 80% of lung cancers are not attributable to smoking that means a mere 7,800 ARE. When you compare that figure to the horrendous AIDS figures it makes you start asking questions re the sanity of MPs! We find that "around 96,000 people were living with HIV in the UK at the end of 2011, of whom a quarter were unaware of their infection." And cop for this folks! - .As of mid 2012, there have been 27,814 diagnoses of AIDS in the UK, and 20,674 people living with HIV have died. ( 40,000+  v  7,800 Hmmmmmmm! Some health danger a wisp of smoke!) And this country's economy & business revenue sector has been slaughtered because of the fear of a wisp of smoke? Where is the sense in all this lunacy of political invasion into people's lives?
     There were 493,242 deaths registered in England and Wales in 2010, only 29,977 were attributed to lung cancer - 25% LESS than attributed to 'stomach & digestive organs'. WOW! There are some serious 'porkies' being banded about by lobbyists then methinks! Why is it that people with AIDS are allowed to stand next to/near to other non AIDS people when this deadly virus can be spread so easily. Just imagine in a pub, someone indvertantly drinks from your pint and imparts a trace of his/her deadly AIDS contaminated saliva, which, when the mistake is realised & rectified, then goes into your mouth as you drink from your own pint glass. (Well, according to some fools, even a wisp of SHS is a death sentence!) Arthur Ashe (Wimbledon champion) only banged a tennis ball about but he was infected thanks to a blood transfusion if you please!
     It would seem that AIDS be a far more serious problem than a wisp of smoke, wouldn't you agree? 
   OK, I have absolutely no desire to drink in 'gay bars' - or straight bars anymore for that matter, but that doesn't stop gay people (HIV positive or not) marching into straight bars to drink and leaving a death sentence behind. So the equality angle is basically bollox folks! It is more of a desperate attempt to 'vote catch' as the next election in 2015 is already under mention. 

 

     The dangers of AIDS are all too apparent as the third world and parts of europe are ridden with the disease yet we are still, thanks to Camorons apathy, fighting a losing battle with immigration.In 2010, 591,000 came here and planted themselves - 510,000, no wonder we are becoming economically unhinged! As previously stated, there will be a major influx of Bulgarians & Romanians next January unless Camoron does something amazing and tells the EU to "Leckt mich am Arsch" and we withdraw altogether. I have a friend who visits Bulgaria several times a year who tells me that many Bulgars are already planning their journey here - oh joy! 
     You see the problem looming large don't you? More immigrants into a country with a rapidly diminishing jobs market and what do you get? Misery & poverty. Remember Mr Micawber's financial wisdom to young Copperfield? We are nearing that point already and the door isn't even open to those 29,000,000 yet! A major factor that government seems to overlook with this immigration is the simple fact that when these people migrate here they expect a certain amount of lassitude to carry on in their social way-with our welfare package backing them. Romanian (31%) & Bulgarian smoker rates (38.4% M -  16.7% W) far outweigh ours yet they come to a country notorious for its hardline stance on smoking-despite all the eastern european  AIDS bumpf above. 
     Bulgarians & Romanians also utilise Shisha bars/pipes, which are places where people of all ethnic groups gather to relax and enjoy smoking a shisha pipe (Hookah or Narghile), enjoy coffee and chat; a social meeting place. A shisha bar, in short, is the eastern equivalent of our public houses. Now this ridiculously implemented smoking ban includes shisha bars and in an attempt to further their cause ASH have declared that one single shisha pipe to be the equivalent (or worse than) of up to 200 cigarettes-whatever next I ask?  Every claim get more preposterous.  

 

(Businesses close with regular monotony since July 1st, 2007!)

Shisha bars are bars/premises/businesses set up solely for the purpose of allowing smokers to relax & socialise through the use of a 'water-pipe' through which smoke is drawn. Sometimes tobacco is not even used! These places are often lavishly decorated with many 'cubicled' areas for small groups to enjoy privacy and basically anyone that does not enjoy smoking shisha simply does not enter! No one forces a non smoker to enter and over the past few years many British adults have taken to enjoying shisha bars.

 
(Europeans happily embrace the shisha culture)

     However, the time has come where local councils have decided that it is time to exert their authority on such places with many being fined for allowing people to do what people go there to do-enjoy themselves & smoke! Watch this video and then tell me what harm these people are doing with their form of socialising?

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySIAU_U0cNA

     Now it has been said, after an article appeared in the "Commentator" that a shisha bar 'ooop north' is exempt from the smoking ban as no members of the public actually enter the premises - only shareholders. As a founding member of nasbouk.co.uk I had many shisha bar owners contacting me asking the very question-can we also....? so I set about investigating this seemingly 'exempted phenomena'. I contacted four local councils (NW, NE, SW & Midlands) to find out if, as the owner of a business premises, "I could allow my shareholders to smoke whilst holding our shareholders meeting as the premises would not be open to the public and therefore only shareholders (not members of the public) would be inside, attending the meeting. No staff will be working as we employ a coffee machine". Now you would think that was a straight forward question but only one respondent actually answered the question directly. The Midlands EHO dept replied with:

              Dear Mr Smith

Please find below my response in relation to your enquiry regarding stakeholders smoking inside your business premises. Section 2 of the Health Act 2006 states that premises must be smokefree at all times if they are a place of work by more than one person (even if they don't work at the same times) or they are a place of work and members of the public may visit to receive goods/services from the person(s) at work. So for example a cafe owner cannot close the doors to members of the public at night and allow the staff to smoke inside. If your business premises falls into either of these two description then you would be breaking the law by permitting people to smoke inside.
If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

     I don't see as there can be any argument with that statement, as it comes from the top dog of that particular councils EHO pecking order. It categorically states that as a place of business, it cannot shut its doors and be declared a 'non business' or domestic property (business rates still apply therefore still a business) so the shareholders status is simply a load of cobblers and we now know that there is only one way to walk around this ridiculous law - it has been studied by two barristers, one legal expert and ratified, but it is not going to be printed here! Interestingly the other three local councils contacted were more interested in knowing the property in question..... "so that I can guage your question more specifically" [and similar wordage]. What they meant was 'so that they could send an army of EHO's around to investigate and hopefully prosecute'. I did inform one buffoon that it mattered no a jot whether the 'property' be a tent, a disused shop or a factory unit-the question remained the same. He/she didn't see it that way and persisted. When I told him/her that 'we could create 60, probably 70 jobs in his impoverished area' he/she was more bothered about the fact that we might smoke in a building than creating employment in the area! Weird mindset these brainwashed anti tobacco zombies-but I'll bet they all enjoy Bonfire Night!
     It also transpired during conversations with these people that they considered all prosecutions to be right & proper and that nothing untoward could possibly have occurred-now there's a thing folks! I sent them a very brief run down of 3 cases that were totally corrupted when presented before the local magistrates (of the relevant areas) and in each case I was informed,  "Thank you for raising some interesting points, which I believe belong totally in another forum....." In other words 'Oh my God, we dare not answer any such questions.....goodbye'. So that can only confirm my own suspicions (from their responses) that they don't really care how they get a prosecution just so long as they get a prosecution-which sounds about right the way the judicial system now works in this country. Innocence before being proven guilty has been totally reversed in the past decade.

     So we come back to the question of why gay marriage has now been ratified, as gays are now apparently entitled to "equal rights" yet another minority can be totally discriminated against and seemingly can't be allowed their own smoking rooms in pubs & clubs? I was always taught that law was the equaliser of all men/women and that no one person was more lawfully entitled than another-it would seem that the law is indeed an ass!