I began to reply to comments left by JJ and TBY on the "Goodbye" post below but it was so long, I thought I'd post it here. It might also make the comments section less cumbersome
TBY - I know what you mean. I only left a comment today on the F2C post about antis because Baz named me specifically, again, and suggested I was "pro-smoking." I am not. I don't encourage people to smoke when they have chosen to quit, and neither do I try and get non-smokers to start. But, I do defend the rights of those who choose not to quit, or who choose to start, or who choose to start again after quitting.
I also defend those who want to sink three pints of beer quickly and then follow it immediately with a fat cream cake if that is what they choose to do.
Baz does know about hurtful comments urging violence against smokers are but he dismisses them. See comments under the "Powerful Posts" piece on my blog further down.
Yes, you're right about tit for tat JJ but sometimes it's hard to ignore because like TBY says, it is often directed personally at me.
If you google Pat Nurse, the first thing that comes up is an accusation from Baz that I am a conspiracy theorist. I am not, actually. I believe men walked on the moon, I'm sure there was more to the JFK shooting but I don't doubt Lee Harvey Oswald was involved somehow. I don't think Princess Diana was murdered by the Royal Family either.
Yes, Baz has a talent for poetry and I would ask him to submit some on my fiction blog but that might prevent me from posting my own which falls short of talent in comparison :)
I don't know how old Baz is but my guess would be about 30 which means that I've smoked for 12 years longer than he has been breathing.
No one ever complained about my smoking back then. My mother never knew that I'd started. This recognised or unrecognised "anti-smoking/er zealotry" is a modern phenomenon brought about by having the right amount of money to throw at the right sort of junk studies to show the right sort of result that's paid for by a self interest group. Big Tobacco did it in the 70s, 80s and 90s and Big Pharma has been at it for a good 30 years. It is only because BP funds to Tobacco Control either directly or indirectly that we now have laws and regulations that prevent tobacco companies from standing up for themselves or their product.
Between BT's and BP's fight for the market control of nicotine is me - a lifelong smoker from childhood (aged 8 in 1968 and not unlike the girl's image above) who now has to decide the best way forward with my health and based on what? Certainly not truth from either side. But then I don't matter anyway because I am a smoker. All of this health and Govt backed exclusion is for those that don't smoke.
Not one tax paid for agency or political party (except for UKIP) gives a damn about those smokers who choose not to quit either because they enjoy it or because they fear the health consequences of quitting which I am sure there are based on studies that have seen and my own life experiences.
Because smokers have never fought previous restrictions, and have sat back and not bothered to fight the abuse that has now built up to a very serious point, we have left ourselves too far behind in the battle and we can only bat off that abuse as it comes in - and boy - does it come in daily along with a press release about some new paid for study that shows we are monsters. I believe that money and PR in this modern age is the only difference between what is "true" and what is "false".
And finally, now that I have mentioned Baz personally on this blog, I should give him the right of reply on this blog and there we have the problem.