THE HATE CONTINUES

Simon Clark over at Taking Liberties thinks the Department of Health's latest attack on smokers is a good thing because it may allow the issue of the fraudulent con of SHS to be brought back out for debate.

I wish I had his faith and I accept he is far more of an optimist than I am. But I don't see it that way. I see it as a corrupt dept led by unelected people with a mental phobia who have been given far too much power and now intend to push that further by wasting millions of our cash on state hate campaigns to finally finish us off.

Make no mistake this campaign, due to be launched in March, is the final step before the final solution which will be criminalisation. I base this assumption on what has gone before from a Govt that feels justified in attacking us, marginalisaing us and stigmatising us and allowing us to have absolutely no say in our own future - nor are we allowed to bring up our children as we want and give them the guidance they need on very important human issues such as tolerance.

Neither do these bigots even consider how a smoker lives - what considerations they give to family members who don't like smoke, where they smoke in their homes or cars or when and whether they smoke around the precious children who are now the property of the state and ASH Uk.

I guess I'll be in prison within five years just for being me when I know for a fact that I have never harmed a single person in my entire life.

CALLS TO CRIMINALISE ADULT SMOKERS

As the fascist social engineers in Aryan Australia take the final step before criminalisation of a legal product and it's law abiding consumers, I see the UK smoke and mirrors jiggery pokery fakery to promote smokers as undesirables has started here too.

Of course stealing tobacco companies' historic trade marks, to be replaced by Big Pharma supported Tobacco Control's own logo graphic images in the land of Oz, is the last in the step-by-step approach towards tobacco eradication and making smokers criminals.

The Aussie plain packaging scandal is not meant to stop young people smoking. It's aim is to target and further humiliate adult smokers into quitting and the next necessary step towards making the product illegal. It seems pretty obvious to me that they must know this ill-thought-out knee jerk reactionary legislation will increase smuggling so they must want it to further stock up anti-smoker support towards the smoker's eventual criminalisation.

Once this legislation comes into effect, fake tobacco will hit the streets, poor estates, and children's parks. Man with a cheap bag will wait outside school gates. Smugglers will get richer and more violent and smokers will be blamed for it all. The stupid Govt that fights fire with fire, will make all tobacco possession illegal. It won't be able to weed out the criminal from the law abiding smoker and so will throw us all into the same pot. Bingo - what greater quit motivation than give up or go to prison. Job done.

Criminalisation of smokers will only make the vile Smokerphobics happy and give them a huge amount of perverse pleasure to know that smokers are suffering. No one else will benefit at all except Big Pharma's NRT business that will get richer.

Should this happen, the mental syndrome these people suffer from will just find a new focus. Fizzy drinks, perhaps, or burgers; perhaps beer will be the next target of their hypochondria-related phobia once they claim victory in having "dirty, filthy, selfish" smokers removed from their sight and their communities.

Here the Liverpool based anti-tobacco's Third Reich Dmyst is trying to make our Westminster bubble insulated Govt believe that people want law abiding UK smokers criminalised too and the group is already stocking up the armoury.

This minority tax payer funded group was established to promote fear and hatred of people who like smoking using children and young people as human shields to achieve the political and ideological aim of a smoke free world.

Dmyst represents a small number of people who have Smokerphobia - or Anti-Smoker Dysfunctional Syndrome (ASDS) to give it it's proper name - but claims somehow to speak for the general well-balanced majority.

Bearing in mind that Dmyst managed to pull together just 8,000 signatures to ensure smokers are excluded from open air** sports grounds in a city that has a population of 435,500 or more they did a grand job of pulling the wool over the two directors' eyes at Liverpool and Everton.

Not only has the enforcement of this smoke-free-by-force extremist ideology devastated the UK hospitality industry - and I could argue kick-started the general economic decline - but on the whim of an orchestrated minority, regular customers who were once welcomed and poured their hard earned cash into the ground for decades are now given no consideration when or if they attend.

Just imagine what our side could do if we had Dmyst's budget, Govt backing, an organisational structure rather than disorganised pissed off members of the public shouting about how unfair it all is with worn and hoarse voices. Imagine if we were treated fairly and equally and had their huge salaries to motivate us.

Dmyst really wouldn't stand a chance because the majority of British people hate extremism even those who hate smoking. Deep down the British are fair and tolerant and recognise that smokers are considerate or we wouldn't have accepted without any comment all of the restrictions placed upon us year on year over the last four decades.

We complain now because it's all gone too far. Enough is enough. Make room for us somewhere and live with it in your own space and we will stick to ours. Criminalisation is the line we will not allow Govt to cross. The anti-smoker industry can't force through the view that to defend our right to be left alone to enjoy a legal product in free association in the company of like minded friends is extremist - not yet anyway.

This is why Dmyst's poll asking for tobacco to be made illegal and smokers to be treated as smack heads is the next move on the agenda. Dmyst is aiming to get enough orchestrated support before the template of stupid bigoted Govt that knows nothing about smokers' lives follows in some new restrictive form which the antis see as yet another step towards the wet dream of a world without smokers.

See through the illusion and don't let Dmyst get away with yet another anti-smoker confidence trick. Follow the link to the series of anti-smoker polls and make your voice heard.

So far Dmyst's supporters are ahead in calling for criminalisation so in fairness and for a balanced result, share the poll among your own contacts, friends and sympathisers and tell the anti-smoker industry that it has had all it is going to get. No more!

** Not one study has ever been produced, and not once ounce of "evidence" exists, to show that smoking in the open air harms anyone at all including children who, in fact, appear to gain some sort of protection from indoor SHS which they have now been denied because of fraudulent political science to promote the 1970s delusion of a smoke free world by 2000.

WHOOPI DO FOR COMMON SENSE

I dislike the tag "Smoker's Champion" because it is so banal but that is often what actress Whoopi Goldberg is described as and here in this ABC news report, she defends the rights of US soldiers thrown into the hell of war to be able to smoke.

As she points out :

"If they're so concerned about health, then why send them out to war in the first place?"

Most people on that panel agree that forcing soldiers to quit at one of the most stressful times of their lives is morally wrong except for one woman.

I note how she throws money in at the very first opportunity to bolster her argument. I find these pulled from the air figures, like £800 million as the cost of healthcare, unrealistic. I might believe them if the source was ever quoted and backed up but it never is - and we all know about science by manipulation of data by paid for academics rather than science by biological fact.

She also quotes the number of people killed by pulmonary disease as being caused solely by smoking when we know that isn't always true. A never smoking relative of mine has hereditary pulmonary disease and it is a crying shame that this is never mentioned when citing so called figures of smoking "related" illnesses.

In truth, genetics plays just as much of a role in our illnesses as those products they claim are "bad" for us in a whole myriad of ways - some made up some true but we don't know to what extent because the people who give us this information can't be trusted.

I'm also as mad as a box of frogs about this derogatory fraud that smokers are somehow mentally challenged which I find odd given that three previous generation of smokers built the society we have today including two generations of smokers who won two world wars.

Those on the smokerphobic's side of the debate include historical figures who were more mentally challenged than any smoker most normal people have met in their lifetime. Because we question or challenge their propaganda we are called holocaust deniers or flat earth believers.

And yet their supporters, like Hitler, designed the holocaust and the rooting tooting evangelical nutter W.G Voliva - one of the first rabid anti-smokers who decided non-smokers were "clean" and smokers were not - did indeed believe in the flat earth theory and paid a lot of money to anyone who could disprove his wild and weird theories

Despite the fact that history shows the unhinged to be on the side of the anti-smoker campaign, they still make dodgy claims that they expect us to believe from smoking causes cancer to smoking makes your skin fall off to smoking gives you dandruff. They even claim it will give you TB which real scientists know is scientifically impossible.

The anti-smoker industry's ridiculous suggestions are aimed at one thing to my mind - hatred, distrust, and loathing of smokers by suggesting that they are somehow not the same kind of people as those who chose not to smoke. And that is bigotry. If directed at ethnic people it would be racism.

UPDATE :
How they lie is demonstrated and worked out by The Moose. Most of the smoking and health garbage really is just an illusion based on phobic manipulations rather than true and actual fact.

BULLY COUNCIL FURTHER EXCLUDES SMOKERS

A council in Blackpool has shown it's Smokerphobic colours by publically stating that it's discriminatory and unnecessary outdoor smoking ban is not imposed on grounds of health but hatred of a minority lifestyle group and a desire to force smokers to quit.

The sign in which they poke fun at smokers is offensive and smacks of group bully action. It isn't even legal and has no weight in law as a recent move to sneak through an amendment to the Health Act 2006 shows

The dickheads in Blackpool who put up such a huge and intimidating sign admit they can do no more than hope smokers will not smoke. They can't make outdoor bans legally but they know that the weak and vulnerable are easy to push around so they do it because they can. They are even forcing private property owners to give over more outdoor space at cafes, restaurants and pubs to those who hate smokers.

Note how the prick from the council says it's not about health but forcing smokers not to be smokers anymore without giving any consideration to whether the one in five smokers in the town want it or not. Nor does the council ask its libertarian non and never smoking population whether this is a civil liberty taking step too far.

"The Solaris Centre is an environmental centre and the grounds are very closely connected to the buildings. Staff are unable to smoke in the area and we *ask* visitors to the building and park to do the same.

“The signs are there to encourage people to think about their behaviour and help to create a smoke free environment.”

I would urge the council to think very seriously about it's own behaviour and how destructive their bigotry is to the sound and fair principles of choice, democracy, tolerance and social cohesion. If anyone fancies a day out in Blackpool to hammer home the message to the council that smokers will not be bullied, singled out and punished in this way, then please let me know.

Meanwhile, I'll be contacting Hamish Howitt, the one reasonable voice in Blackpool's sea of bigots, to see how and when this can be done. We must show these people that they can no longer push us around. Some of us are here to stay no matter what they do and they must make space for us.

They cannot tell us after centuries of smoking, after a lifetime, and generations of family smoking, that we are suddenly - within just five short years - "socially unacceptable". By what right do these truly awful fresh-air fascists think they can decide this? There are no proven grounds at all - ever - that smoking outdoors harms anyone.

This policy is simply based on hate and prejudice. Blackpool has revealed itself to be the most intolerant, regresive, fascist council in England. Perhaps Coun Paul Bartlett who was humilated in Stony Stratford should move there. His own voters thought his idea of an outdoor ban was the most outrageous ever and it led to a no confidence vote in him.

UPDATE Anon in the comments brought my attention to one of my lost blog images by a nutter called WG Voliva who believed the earth was flat, that he would live to be over 100 due to his diet of nuts and water but he died of cancer in his 70s.

Yes, such bans have always been based on hate and not health and imposed by bigots and nutters.

UPDATE 17th October 2011.

Smokers who make a stand can make a difference. The council has now decided it will not enforce this ban which is against the law.

I like the idea in the comments below to stick swastikas on these offensive signs until officials everywhere get the point that "No Smoking" is sufficient - except in areas, such as outside, where putting them up breaks the law.

GOOD DRUGS BAD DRUGS

Image from HERE

When are "bad" drugs "good"? When Big Pharma pushes them rather than illegal cartel drug barons or the legal tobacco industry.

We know that the Pharmaceutical industry is corrupt and doesn't give a flying fig about health. It's primary and only concern is profit and if children in the Third World are too poor to pay for life saving drugs then Big P simply won't provide them.

That's why every single anti-smoker organisation in the UK that is snuggled up in bed with Big P - including ASH - and several UK universities are not in it for health reasons but for cash and jobs.


Early medical "researchers"

Even the hallowed and saintly Stirling University admits it is dependent on Big P because most of its students now have careers in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and agricultural industries.

I don't see how they are much better than those who work in the tobacco industry myself and certainly their morals at taking this dirty money are questionable.

Of course tobacco is a natural medicinal herb but Big P and its academic lackeys malign it as a drug to slander tobacco consumers as addicts and push custom towards Big P. They cover the lie with Frankenstein science because they cannot openly admit after years of untruths that tobacco does indeed contain therapeutic qualities.

I know that I'd rather rely on nature than an unnatural manipulation of nature but each to his or her own - if only we were allowed to make our lifestyle choices without fear or favour.

It does suit Big P and its servants scientists to create a nation of hypochondriacs and phobics to keep the huge profits rolling in but I honestly and sincerely doubt that their motives are altruistic or based on any real concern about health - just as they were not in the days when snake oil salesmen pushed their useles wares.

I'd like to think that Govt is finally waking up to the con bearing in mind that Nanny Milton is trying hard to distance herself from ASH but I simply don't believe her.

ASH is not a grass roots organisation and never has been. It was set up by Govt and is a Govt quango in reality that masquerades as a "charity" so we are really not that easily fooled Ms Milton.

The only way that you can prove to us that you are not smokerphobic or biased in running the DoH is to stop all funding to the anti-smoker industry and lay off the Tobacco Industry, its law abiding consumers, and all the associated businesses with it - including the small vending machine salesmen, paid less than researchers at Stirling, now out of work and on the dole thanks to your Govt's stupidity in following the damaging economic policies of your predecessors in Labour.

Tobacco should be regulated and is. Over regulation in favour of its direct competitors at Big Pharma is obscene and would be unlawful if such methods of putting legal industry out of business was directed at any other lawful product.

UPDATE : I just saw this and wonder how on earth the author expects us to believe it and how he can state, with a straight face, that :

R.W. undertakes research and consultancy for, and has received travel funds and hospitality from, companies that develop and manufacture smoking cessation medications. He has a share in a patent for a novel nicotine delivery device.

Sorry, but here is direct evidence of an alleged "scientist" who depends on his own personal fortune by harassing smokers and propagating untruths.

If this man really "cared" about smokers damaging their health then he would be active in his cause for free like just about every single pro-choice warrior. He's obviously in it for the money. Don't believe a word.

TERRIFIED BIG P FRONT GROUPS STRIKE BACK

Big Tobacco salesman with his new customers



Well, well, well. It looks like the Big Pharma front groups are trying to cover their arses by using their pet journalist at a second rate paper to sprinkle false accusations because the Tobacco Industry wants to see documents from its secret meetings with the DoH to see just how much it has lied to Govt over the last few years - particularly with a view to stealing the industry's trade mark so that it can boost sales for it's pharmacuetical paymasters.



When under pressure the smoker hating fake charities and Big Pharma funded political lobbyists just lie to any old gullible smokerphobic hack already prejudiced in their view. And The Independent calls itself impartial? Heh heh heh. The secret's out about this propaganda rag that employs a reporter in the pocket of the anti-smoker industry.



The thoroughly researched article free advertisement for the liars at ASH desperate to hide their jiggery pokery manipulations, junk science, and down right Public Relation frauds inspired to create hatred of a minority group, shows that The Independent is working really hard at losing itself even more sales.



Alex Deane from from Big Brother Watch appears to be the main focus of the libellous article. I hope he sues.



By implication, the ASH press release that also mentions vaguely "other lobbyists" implies that socially excluded, outcast, and slandered people like myself who waste far too much trying be heard on blogs such as this by people who rarely listen, are also in the pay of this mythical invention of ASH "The multi-billion pound, evil tobacco industry that captures children in cages like the freak in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang."



What a shame ASH's pet hack didn't bother to seek both sides of this. If he had, then he'd know that just about all of us are ordinary people, mainly skint, trying to turn back this flood of fradulent information because of what is at stake - the freedom to be left alone in peace without harassment, the right of property owners not to have what is rightfully theirs stolen by Govt, for the country to once again employ and promote those critical aspects of a decent society - tolerance and choice - and to call for truly impartial and independent research on smoking and health, particularly in relation to lifelong smokers who began in childhood and continue into old age because they are skeptical of ASH's model of "one size fits all."



This new "expose" *snigger* fed to The Independent by ASH reveals just how desperate they are. I can't wait for the details of their secret meetings with the DoH to come into the public domain. It is time for everyone to see just how deep their prejudices run, how flawed their "science" is and just how much MORE money they have at their disposal than what has become "Little" Tobacco fighting for the right of its consumers attacked and denormalised by a direct competitor who uses ASH to promote its unhealthy products including the killer drug Champix.



Frank Davis probably explains this better than me about how this mythical Big T organsied resistance is nothing more than Anti-smoker hysteria and panic. We are not organised. We are simply indivuduals hacked off at the lies at our expense and we want the balance of fairness and truth redressed.

IS THIS HOW IT'S DONE ?

I can't honestly say that I noticed much division between smokers and non-smokers before July 2007. There were a few people who really hated smoke but there wasn't the contempt, bitterness, and fear that is now shown towards people who smoke that appears to be hyped up year on year.

And to be honest, if this bloke really is a non-smoker who has been fined more than £300 because of the council's obsession to get smokers, I can understand that he might now hate smokers in a way he probably didn't before.

He might not see that it is an unjust law, a corrupt public health policy, and a bigoted council that has inadvertently caught him in the trap they set for smokers. He might just see that the "selfish" actions of a smoker has brought him trouble. It's a shame I missed that court case. I'd have liked to spoken to him.

In other news today, I note how a smoker of 50 years who began when he was 11 has quit using e-cigs. Good for him. I said ages ago that they were a great quitting aid but I am rather disturbed by his view that he is now "so pleased" to be a non-smoker.

We know that too many former smokers suddenly become wholly righteous when they quit and seem to think they have a licence to become far more abusive towards smokers than the average smoke hater. I sincerely hope that this is not the case with this chap and I hope he never sees the day when the e-cig is banned in the UK.

But it is easy to see how the war on smokers, and public disgust at them, is created by the state, it's propaganda and it's draconian and oppressive laws.

FASCIST OZ STEALS SMOKER MUM'S CHILD

Dads smoke too

At face value it looks like fascist Australia is the first to to discriminate against smoker parents.

In this case the country's bigoted judges are taking children from loving mums and giving them to bigoted dads who complain their ex partners are unfit to be parents because they enjoy smoking.

It is terrifying to think that the country is breeding a new generation of Nazis who are being taught to hate one particular lifestyle group and see them as inadequate human beings.

British smoker mums wake up. Your children could be next especially as our corrupt Govt is in the pocket of the anti-smoker industry and to ensure it keeps getting Big Pharma pay-offs, it will move towards this kind of discrimination against loving parents.

First the state favours a non-smoker parent and next it will favour the state over two-smoker parent families.

Is this really what you want? If so just keep voting Conservative. No doubt Big Bully Lansley will see taking kids from smoker parents as a great wheeze to force us down to 18.5% is five years time when the next step towards criminalisation of smokers is taken.

UPDATE
And this latest move comes from a state whose institutions have abused kids for the last 80 years

Sickening isn't it - unless you're fascist that doesn't care about kids other than how you can use them to achieve your own ends of a final solution for those humans you despise.

TORIES SET THE BULLIES LOOSE

NuConservatism may be responsible for the new brand of bullying that the Govt is proposing for smokers but none of it is based on fact rather misinformation, propaganda and prejudice by a Govt that chooses to hate.

We know that the passive smoking fraud is fake and hyped up to achieve the ideological aim of a smoke free world and that third hand smoke is currently being invented to push further that fascist cause that has no basis in science but hatred of people who do something that others dislike or disapprove of.

Even alleged "respectable" and "caring" (ahem) "professional" organisations like Action on Smoking and Health have jumped aboard the third hand smoke bandwaggon in a bid to terrify ordinary people into thinking their neighbour's house is more harmful than the fall out from a nuclear explosion

And our Govt is happily taking these ideologically inspired frauds onboard with its plan to further isolate, denormalise and socially exclude smokers without bothering to listen to what we have to say about it in response or how it will affect our lives.

The report says :

"The evidence is clear that smokefree legislation has had beneficial effects on health. We also know that levels of compliance and public support for the law are high. The government believes that the aims of the legislation continue to be effectively achieved."

But what it omits is that the miracle drop post ban heart attack study was manipulated to order and has since been found to be false and dismissed as junk science by proper epidemiologists who are fed up at their work being misrepresented and manipulated by those who know nothing about correlation and causation.

Coun Carl Mimms is a humanist but no scientist and if he can get it, I fail to see how the Govt can't.

Carl, quoting his former science teacher, said :

"I can correlate the number of storks flying over Sweden to the number of births. That does not mean they caused the births."

So with no basis in science to further persecute life long smokers who choose not to quit, while boasting about a smoke free law that everyone loves and complies with, the Govt fails to mention it has only been achieved by threat, force, bankupting and jailing those "unbelievers" who questioned their democratic right to choose to exercise their own personal property rights.

Since the Govt effectively nationalised our pubs, cafes, bars, restuarants, it is no wonder that it now feels confident enough to go further and dictate to all of us what we can and can't do in our own homes:

"We will encourage local areas to create networks of local smokefree ambassadors at a community level to encourage people to make their homes and family cars smokefree. We will support local efforts to raise awareness and use behavioural change insights, for example around building positive social norms and through positively recognising people who protect their families and other people from secondhand smoke in their homes and family cars.

To support local efforts, we will work with national media to raise awareness of the risks in exposing children to secondhand smoke. The department of Health’s new marketing strategy for tobacco control will set out further details of how we will support efforts by local areas to encourage smokefree homes and family cars."

We all know what the word "support" means in this context. It means measures will be introduced to "enforce" this ideological aim by using an army of busybodies only too willing to door knock and harras smokers at home - especially if they get paid to do it.

Enforcement will not be immediate. They've started on the propaganda already. In five years time when Lansley forces us down to 18.5% of the population, it will be done by a drip feed effect of making ordinary people equate sexually abusing or beating a child with smoking within a mile of their presence which means neighbours will consider it their public duty to report smoking neighbours as smokers become more dehumanised and separated from the rest of society.

Hitler said something about how no woman would take the risk of her child’s life for freedom for someone else, and it makes me depressed that today's younger people, far removed from those times, are falling into the same kind of ideological propaganda trap which is using their children to get them on side.

One wonders how they'll feel when the Govt starts taxing chocolate and putting it in a plain pack covered with gross images of diseased, obese hearts, or the wine 'o clocks who will panic at every knock on the door when the time comes to equate parents who like an alcoholic drink to Joseph Fritzl.

Both of the above are a domino fall away now that the first on smoking and free choice has been pushed well and truly over.

QUITTING CAN KILL TOO

While Pfizer encourages relatives, friends, and colleagues of smokers to bully them into quitting for their own good it doesn't shout so loudly about how its product Champix can kill those they care about

Despite this danger, and world wide awareness of it, the Australian government paid for 368,924 prescriptions in January and maybe doesn't mind how many people of that number it has sentenced to death in the long term aim to rid the country of smoking and smokers by any means.

This is the same Govt which intends to criminalise smokers in their own homes and is going all out to make their lives miserable as it hurtles towards the final solution.

Hounding them out of society, marginalising them, making people fear and hate them, is all for their own good and that of others, based on the Govt's pompous, naive, misled and ill-informed desire to believe what it has been force fed by self interest charities in coalition with their funders in Big Pharma companies.

The latest authoritative study confirms all previous studies that show PASSIVE SMOKE KILLS NO ONE and is no more than an irritant to overly sensitive people and certainly not to neighbours in apartment blocks who are frankly lying if they say it is.

The scientists say :

“Among never smokers in our population, we observed no association between either exposure to ETS at home or at the workplace and lung cancer risk (Table 2). In general, the effect estimates for ETS exposure were similar between the total population and only among never smokers.”

The only truth about smoking is that The Lie hurts smokers and those around them when the health truth is not that clear cut. Govts should not be taking sides on the issue because it is backing prejudice and tyranny with unreasonable and unnecessary smoking bans and restrictions tailored to punish a minority who don't want to quit enjoying a legal product.

Some smokers die young but most live to old age and some even to ripe old age as centenarians. Big Pharma and self interest anti-smoker charities say smokers are weaklings who can barely breathe never mind run and yet the real life anecdotal evidence always seem to prove something different.

Luckily the smoker runner linked above hasn't had any bad side effects from Champix but I know - as someone who likes to run but not in a competitive sense - that I'd much prefer to smoke a natural product moderately than take a man-made chemical alternative which has a shady reputation.

Quitting is better done without any Pharma quit aid. It will make smokers, their relatives, friends and colleagues believe that smokers are addicts and that products are the cure because Big P wants money and lots of profit. If it was true that tobacco is addictive, and passive smoking is harmful, then everyone would be smokers today and not less than in any other age.

All smokers need is to want to stop smoking and the rest is easy An age-old truth that still stands up to scrutiny.

AUS BACKS TYRANNY

I really feel for our Australian smoking cousins as the country proudly boasts about how tyrannical it has become.

When people are prevented from living peacefully and contentedly in their own homes then it matters not how it's dressed up or spun, it is oppression of the very worst kind and when lawyers become involved, then it is simply the weight of wealth and industry against the weakest members of society.

There is no scientific evidence at all to support this kind of Australian bigotry which has occurred because of a phobic fear encouraged by the billion pound anti-smoker industry which pushes hatred, prejudice and discrimination. If this home ban is "making history" then it indicates a future that we should all fear whether smoker or non-smoker.

If we are not free to live our lives how we wish in our own homes when IT DOES NOT HARM ANYONE ELSE, then I, for one, would have no wish to live at all. As a lifelong smoker, if I lived in Australia with no means of emigrating from that county, then I would kill myself. I will not live in the land of oppression. I will not. If it happens here, I would rather go to prison where people are far more free than those smokers who live law abiding lives.

At least, finally, smokers are getting some support and not before time. It's just a shame that tobacco companies who got them into this mess have taken so long to stand up for them.

Such is the bigotry of the Australian establishment that only fellow tyrants like Hitler, Stalin or Mussolini would think it an outrage that someone was standing up for the oppressed.

Australia should hang it's head in shame for advocating the slavery of a nation and backing tyranny of the worst kind. It used to be a country I admired. I have family there. Now it's about as welcoming to smokers as Nazi Germany was to Jews and others it deemed undesirable and a danger to others based on nothing more than prejudicial hatred.

THERE IS NO SAFE LEVEL OF GOVT STUPIDITY

Alan Johnson, the creep who made smokerphobia compulsory during his time in Govt, was on BBC Question Time the other night and the very sight of him almost caused me to burst a blood vessel. He is so bad for health, they should ban him from all public places.

I could feel my fingernails gripping tighter into the arms of the settee as he opened his mouth and started talking. Those dodgy, used car salesman, slitty eyes narrowed further as he spewed forth his congratulations to the NuConservatives for implementing his policy on further denormalisation of tobacco consumers.

Yes, they'd have us stigmatised for the crime of buying a legal product we've enjoyed for decades by making it damn near impossible for us to buy it in the UK. First the tobacco display ban, next plain packaging after the charade of the fake consultation.

Meanwhile these monumental acts of stupidity, born from an ideologically obsessive healthist stance, have made smoking infinitely more dangerous, especially for the poor and the young, and deprived the UK treasury of some £4B in lost tax as this Panorama investigation shows.

Wittingly or unwittingly, these puritans are falling into the trap laid for them by smoker haters such as Action on Smoking and Health the charity founded to help smokers but has now become a greedy, far right wing lobby group that gobbles public money for its twisted cause to force smokers out of society by any means.

How much ASH costs the UK treasury from smokers who legally go abroad to avoid the fuss and tax must be equal to that of the cost of the black market.

What a great achievement but public opinion could not be twisted without the morality of Govt behind it - hence the smoking ban had to come first. Previous Govts have sensibly stayed out of the argument and let market forces decide.

It was only when Bigot Johnson's NuLabour weirdos swallowed hook, line and sinker every lie pushed down our throats during the first 10 years of their power. Arnott even took the piss out of her new paymasters. She explained how the con was pulled on a public that frankly didn't give a damn about smoking one way or the other :

It is essential that campaigners create the impression of inevitable success. Campaigning of this kind is literally a confidence trick: the appearance of confidence both creates confidence and demoralises the opposition. The week before the free vote we made sure the government got the message that we "knew" we were going to win and it would be better for them to be on the winning side.
(Deborah Arnott and Ian Willmore; July 2006)

No wonder both smoking and non smoking voters who fight against smokerphobia are flocking to the only party that speaks common sense on this issue. Even the NuGovt has to admit UKIP is best for the UK after swiping UKIP policy which it is claiming as its own.

Smokers who care about this cause have a duty to vote UKIP. The hate won't end unless Govt ends it and it seems that the NuTories are tainted with the same level of stupidity as NuLabour. You can expect years more pain under them.

SMOKER DISCRIMINATION AT WORK

SAD Ireland thinks smoker job discrimination is a huge social step backwards and so do most right thinking people except those blinded by anti-smoker hatred.

I heard about the legal discrimination of smokers at work reported in the New York Times but the Stand FAST blog has taken a deeper look into the problem of discrimination in the workplace against smokers.

It seems that many "healthcare" (I use that word loosely because although these zealots may work in health, they certainly don't care) employers have moved from attacking smoking to smokers themselves. It's all part of the wider "Denormalisation" plan that promotes "Smokers as employer liabilities".

Not only have they refused to hire smokers - who may only smoke in their own time - but they are also threatening to sack any smoker who doesn't quit and force them to take urine tests to detect traces of a legal product:

...the “No Smokers Need Apply” policies are not restricted to new hires. In some instances, employers are demanding that smokers quit their habit or face the prospect of unemployment. In some cases, employers are demanding urine tests, intended to detect traces of nicotine, a perfectly legal substance, from those seeking employment and, in some cases, from those who may already be employed who want to keep their job.

These employers, which include the American Lung Association, the American Cancer Society and a growing number of hospital and health care facilities, believe they have a right to dictate what activities employees may indulge in their free time.

The anti-smoker zealots justify these gross intrusions into the personal lives of potential employees (and existing employees) by pointing out the need to “increase worker productivity, reduce health care costs and encourage healthier living.”

The (New York) Times article insinuates that the shift from smoke-free workplaces to smoker free workplaces is a new phenomena. “The policies reflect a frustration that softer efforts — like banning smoking on company grounds, offering cessation programs and increasing health care premiums for smokers — have not been powerful-enough incentives to quit.”

But, in fact, the uncompromising vindictiveness of the zealots has been characteristic of the euphemistically named “tobacco control” movement from the very beginning. They have carefully crafted a propaganda campaign which portrays smokers as social misfits - addicts, aggressively spreading their contagion to a non-smoking population and jeopardizing the lives of children.

Offering jobs to non-smokers only is increasing in the UK as well and the Govt is doing nothing to protect smokers from such blatant discrimination. I'd like to know if they really think we are incapable of doing our jobs because we are smokers. After all, who the hell won two world wars, built the first tank, and engineered just about every great thing this country has ever been known for? Smokers of course because back in our glory days most people did it.

In The UK, things have moved further towards "quit or jail". The first piece of the plan is likely to be put in place in a couple of days when a bigoted council in Suffolk decides whether to impose a "fine or quit" policy on those it harasses in the street or at work.

None of this is ultimately about health - it's about hate. For me and many other smokers, it's not about smoking - it's about the right to be left alone to live in peace without fear or prejudice.

Is there no Govt that will give us that at least?

UPDATE - StandFAST reports that non-smoking employee spouses of smokers are also contagious. I think the aim is to break up marriages by such covert means so that smokers will be isolated further. Divorce or quit is also a strong quit motivator to some.

LIARS DAMAGE PUBLIC TRUST

There's been an almost daily assault lately of anti-smoker propaganda and the absurd Third Hand Smoke(THS) is one of the most obnoxious because it's aim is to create smokerphobia and exclusion of a minority group.

Those who want to eradicate tobacco by any means might think smokers are fair game to attack. But it would be nice to think, at least, that it's because they really do believe the health threats and are genuinely terrified of us.

So why do they admit to lying through their teeth to get funding - and why would funders and Govt continue to support these bigoted groups when they admit to being less than honest?

Rich White from Smokescreens points out that junk science is thrust purposefully on an unsuspecting public with the aim of causing prejudice and fear and ultimately exclusion of a social group.

What this really means is that individuals with a prejudice agenda are able to openly admit it and receive lavish amounts of money in return. It's a shame that America has just celebrated Martin Luther King day, a man who is revered for helping to erode social segregation, but simultaneously it is working hard to segregate another group of society - even fabricating evidence to do so.

America is embracing new prejudices while crowing about how far forward it has moved as an alleged "tolerant" and "equal" society. The UK blindly follows this trash because our leaders are quite simply thick, cowardly or naïve.

I fight for freedom of choice and I believe in individuality although I always thought of myself as more socialist than capitalist because I've always been poor. It was a surprise therefore to find this blog listed as "Right Wing" by Total Politics.

Perhaps I've changed and if so it is the smoking ban that has done it. Perhaps politics has and it isn't about "left" or "right" anymore.

I believe the battle is now between those who want to be left alone and those who want to control every move they make. Libertarianism V Authoritarianism as Josie Appleton writing in Spiked observes when examining the recent imposition of the smoking ban in Spain:

In this battle it is crystal clear what is at stake in smoking bans, and what the different sides represent. This is not a conflict between smokers and non-smokers, but between those who are for the bureaucratic regulation of social life and those who are for tolerance and liberty.

A WEEK OF INSULTS

It's been such a busy week that I've hardly had time to do anything other than read a couple of blogs and post a few links on Facebook.

THIS ONE from Simon Clark is important because it presents the truth about SHS - or passive smoking - and how and why it came to be the stick that hysterical bigots beat smokers with.

A smokerphobe called Simon Crompton - who loosely describes himself as a "journalist" when he's obviously more of a propagandist - hasn't got a clue about the true science - but he knows for sure the hate he wants to spread about those he fears and dislikes.

By coincidence his bile came up just after I finished reading THIS from Terry Simpson MD who says:

The Surgeon General also stated that 49,000 deaths per year were caused by second hand smoke. As a surgeon, I was stunned, because I had never seen an autopsy report listing second hand smoke as the cause of death. Nor had I seen this as a secondary cause of death. So I asked six pathologists if they had ever listed second hand smoke as a cause of death – not one had. In my years of clinical practice, I have seen patients die from many devastating diseases, and yet I have never seen anyone who has been disabled by, or has died as a result of, second hand smoke. This was my first clue that perhaps there was more hyperbole than science involved in the reports issuing from the Surgeon General’s Office. To give a contrast: 33,000 people die per year of pancreatic cancer – all of the pathologists have listed pancreatic cancer as a cause of death.

If second hand smoke exposure is a significant risk factor for developing lung cancer, then we should expect to see increased numbers of cancer cases in non-smokers who are exposed to regular doses of second hand smoke. Has there been an increase in the incidence of lung cancer among nonsmokers over the last 40 years? The answer is quite simply… No.


I've also been reading Frank Davis's Blog and the fascinating debate on the link between active smoking and lung cancer with three posts from contributors that I admire, Chris Snowdon, Rich White and Dave Atherton.

I like Frank's latest post about Junican's game with Tobacco Control who were asking their employees to come up with new ways to shame, humiliate, abuse and insult smokers which was also featured over at Dick Puddlecote's place.

Tobacco control lunatics have to believe that people like Junican are tobacco industry lobbyists. They can't bear the thought that the little people are so pissed off at the anti-smoking industry's manipulation of their lives, and control of their Govt, that they have moved into a position of self defence and preservation.

Junican - who says he is just a 71 year old who looks after a 69 year old who can't enjoy the pub anymore - is like the rest of us who post on forums and other sites. We're just ordinary ignored people who don't get paid, are branded in some of the most inhumane and derogatory ways, and are fighting simply for the right to be left alone.

We don't promote tobacco and don't care if people smoke or not as long as we can be left in peace. We've heard the propaganda, we've scrutinised it and we've discarded it. We don't deserve to be punished and abused just because we won't do as tobacco control says.

We do promote choice - a concept that tobacco control can't grasp. The other thing we fight to prevent is not people quitting smoking if they choose - but criminalisation of those who choose not to.

The anti-smoking industry is pushing things that way through propaganda untruths which get picked up and promoted as truth by useful idiots like Crompton to incite further hatred and keep the funding ball rolling.

None of us fought or cared a damn about tobacco control methods until they conned a stupid Govt into excluding us from every public place four years ago. (The link shows the NuGovt is just as bigoted, blind and incapable of intellectual and independent thinking on this subject as the last.)

Since the ban, which was the first step before the rest could follow, tobacco control, part of the anti-smoking industry, have moved on to label us as child abusers, parents of criminals, and not worthy of more than being left to die if we need operations. Despite the fact that we cost the state less than healthy people

That rent-a-quote celebrity quack Dr Hillary Jones should be struck off in my opinion. Any doctor that takes this stance must be breaking the Hippocratic Oath. I think he should, perhaps, remind himself of this bit:

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.


If he really is a GP, and I don't know as I've only ever seen him on GMTV and in trashy papers, he should be reported to the General Medical Council for his lack of sympathy to patients and his promotion of inequality of care.

The other thing I saw this week was the story about how two smokers were sacked for smoking in the open air. What a rotten thing for Morriosn's to do just before Christmas. Scrooge would be proud. I'm boycotting that store's branch here. I hope others do the same.

This all comes as a result of years of Denormalisation a public health tool promoted by the bigots at ASH which has only recently come out into the open because it is so unethical they tried to hide they were using it.

The other thing that has kept me from blogging apart from real life work this week has been the dentist. I finally got one after years of being without a decent NHS dentist. This one, a Greek Cypriot, seems OK but I hate sitting in health related waiting rooms and having to look at lying posters exaggerating the propaganda myths of smoking and smokers.

One poster promoted that it was better to give up and get fat. "Weight can be lost - lungs cannot" it screamed. I wondered who among the denormalised smokers would quit and fear then getting denormalised and excluded further because they become "obese." It seems you can't win either way.

My dentist had a suggestion box. I wrote on a piece of paper that nice pictures on the wall would be far more relaxing that all the smoking signs. I won't hold my breath that my next visit will see any change.

There has literally been loads of suppressed rants this week but they'll have to wait. I didn't intend to blog this evening and my admin has taken a back seat as a result so I don't know if I'll be blogging again before Christmas. My last working day is tomorrow and I've still got all that shopping to do before Saturday.

It's not a pleasant thing to do anymore. It's no fun trudging through town and shops and not even being able to stop for a cup of tea in the warm with a smoke - something that used to be the highlight of the whole experience.

GIMME A BREAK PULEEEAASE...

Here we go again. Smoker persecution stepped up one notch based on a fallacy that smokers are lazy while promoting the idea of "Smokers as employer liabilities."

It's all in the plan to denormalise people who don't do as they are told by healthists.

I don't go out to smoke during working hours because I don't feel like it. I feel guilty just taking a lunch break. I'm sure I'm entitled to a 10 minute break in the morning and afternoon but I don't take it.

My current colleague is also a smoker. He does nip out once in the morning for a fag and once in the afternoon. He also nips out to get a sandwich, and then nips straight back to the office to work as he eats it.

He's on an average wage and the extra hours he puts in each week are phenomenal. Sometimes he starts work at 7.30am but he is not home again until 11.30pm. I don't begrudge him a smoke during work and I think it's rather mean that anyone else should.

The Norfolk based council smokers are being publically humiliated to further the cause of making smokers unemployable. Not so long ago they were treated as equal and allowed the right to smoke in designated areas. Now they are being hounded out of legal activity on a whim and personal dislike.

I'm amazed their union is not standing up for their rights. But then what's the point of unions today? They have no power. No one likes them. They have their own pet causes and nothing else matters in the alleged just cause of "fairness".

KERRY McCARTHY MP CAUTIONED

Well, it looks as if Miss Goodytwoshoes Kerry McCarthy MP has been cautioned by police . How the hell she knew the results of the postal vote in advance amazes me but then of course we live in a fascist society where elections are all but rigged.

I used to like her. I recall a couple of years ago - after she posted a patronising piece following a Forest do that low income smokers were too stupid to know what was best for them - that I debated the smoking issue on her blog.

I felt it was good to engage with an MP - and that the MP might actually listen. I was naive back then and didn't realise it was about money and hate and not health.

I poured my heart out on her blog and felt encouraged when she said that she would think about what I'd told her when the smoking issue came up in the House again.

Then she immediately voted for a tobacco display ban without thought for the little consumer like me or the little business person who runs the local corner shop. As far as I know, she has voted for every spiteful piece of anti-smoker legislation that was forced upon us while NuLabour was in power.

That's why I'm not sorry that her arrogance has finally landed her in trouble.

The only reason she gave for her hatred of smokers was that her granny died of cancer. Yes. This really is the quality of intellect and bigot that our House of Commons attracts.

As for rigged elections, it looks like a bit of gerrymandering is afoot in my County. I'm told the NuCons are aiming to change the boundaries again so that they can reduce the chances of any other party ever getting elected here.

Beware of AV - it won't be in the little person's interest but it will benefit whatever dictatorial party is in power at the time and can only ever bring just a govt we can't stand. We need a change - the Coagulation is not it.

ASH FUNDS HATE AND PREJUDICE

Why am I not surprised that Welsh ASH has funded research to show that smokers really are despicable people.

It was never going to show the truth because that does not fit with the smoker haters' agenda. Imagine presenting ASH with a paid for study that said smokers were actually mentally well balanced people and our evidence shows that you smoke phobic and health freaks are the real nutters.

This bit in the Spiked article linked above gets me the most. The patronising enforced caring really makes me want to vomit when the truth is that anti-smoking cowards hide behind "the poor" because they generally don't speak up for themselves so they can lie in their name. Well - NOT IN MINE!

Indeed, there are all sorts of reasons why people might be less concerned about their health than health guardians feel they ought to be. One of these is poverty: if your life is a bit of a grind with limited opportunity, then having another beer or smoking another fag might be a more appealing prospect than an extra few weeks, months or years of old age. As the Marmot Review on health inequalities noted earlier this year: ‘People with a higher socioeconomic position in society have a greater array of life chances and more opportunities to lead a flourishing life. They also have better health. The two are linked: the more favoured people are, socially and economically, the better their health.'

Don't tell me for a start that those with highly paid jobs don't find their lives a bit of a grind. All those long hours at work, day after day. Money has nothing to do with it. Who the fuck are these arse sniffers to dismiss "the poor's" lives in this way. When was this Marmot last in the heart of the sink estate? Cnut!

And the view that those who have more money are somehow immune to bad health makes me want to pee myself if it wasn't so crass. Try telling actor Christopher Reed that all his wealth saved him when he took a risk and rode that horse that broke his neck and killed him slowly over 10 years. Try telling that to actress Grace Kelly, Princess of Monaco, when the fast car her daughter liked killed her after plunging off a cliff!

I assume you get the point that lots of money won't save you and being poor doesn't mean your life is shit. But it is good ammo in ASH's lie box to fund continuous prejudice and hatred and blind the soft and stupid.

These organic fart sniffing MPs in Parliament - all 141 of them who voted against David Nuttall MP's amendment - should hang their heads in shame. His 10 minute rule was was defeated and it seemed the knob NuLab MP Kevin Barron took note of crazed anti-smoking plants or stooges from ASH.

I have to say I am over the moon that my MP Karl Mccartney supported David Nuttall. I think I'll ask my technical expert to set up a gallery of the 86 heroes who dared to support us to go with my blog mascot Philip Davies. I salute them.

WHO SAYS SMOKER BABIES ARE SMALL?

Anna Racoon has written a very amusing piece about puritan health freak Jamie Oliver's new baby.

Anna rightly pokes fun at the celebrity couple giving this poor child a stupid name as idiotic as his sisters. Yes, I'm sure they'll love their parents for that one day.

The birth didn't pass my notice but I was only interested for one reason. For all Oliver's sanctimonious lecturing to others on how to be "good" parents when it comes to feeding them the kind of shite they don't want, I'm sure his health paranoia must also make him anti-smoking.

Well you know what, Oliver, for all your puritanical, health zealotry, my second baby when born was bigger than yours who came in at a mere 6lbs 9oz.

I had the most stressful time of my life during my second pregnancy and my smoking reflected that. I was on 80 cigarettes A DAY and you know what, she came in at 7lbs 12oz. My biggest baby. Who says smokers have smaller babies? oh yes, that's right, the lying anti-smoker bigots who will do and say anything their Big Pharma paymasters tell them to say to encourage hatred, fear and prejudice against smokers.

As this example shows, this kind of health hype just isn't true - unless of course Jools has secretly been puffing on 100 cigs a day without us knowing. Somehow I think if that had been the case, then it might have given podgy Oliver a heart attack!

He really should watch his step. Nanny Obese will coming for him before too long.

HISTORY REPEATING

Perhaps daytime TV viewers can enlighten me further on a story I heard today from the brain dead numb skulls that put my gender to shame - Loose Women.

I'm told that this morning, one of the presenters was trying to incite hatred against lifestyle groups after the finger wagging antis came up with yet another stupid idea to get people to stop smoking and eat healthily. Pay 'em with taxpayers' money.

One of these women reportedly said that "smokers should be lined up against the wall and shot because they are killing themselves anyway." Whoever it was should be reported to the Broadcasters Standard Agency. It's disgusting that main stream TV companies can incite such violence against a minority group!

It looks like those bigots on the programme have outed one of their members and then shamed her into quitting. I feel sorry for her. They have just forced her into a 60% greater chance of getting lung cancer

If it is true that the presenter of that awful show did say this, then she deserves to go into Dick Puddlecote's Bigot Bin . Sorry I can't find a direct link to it. I know DP is currently compiling a list of all those anti-smoker comments urging death and murder to their fellow human beings.

To my friends, family and colleagues I say, if it truly came to lining up smokers and shooting them, would you stop them? Would you still stay silent because you despise the smell of smoke and believe the worst of what is told to you about smoking?

I know we are not Jews. I know smokers are thought of as lesser people and we have no right to claim to be a group. I know that what happened in Nazi Germany was one of the worst ever human atrocities - but it still happened to people whatever their tag because inhumane and bigoted people didn't like them - the look of them, the smell of them, their habits religious or otherwise, their lifestyles.

Somewhere at the beginning of that tragedy, which is such a relatively short time ago, was a Loose Women type person saying that Jews could choose not to be Jews and killing them was probably doing them a favour anyway.

Have we learned nothing? Why is the state encouraging this bigotry? I truly despair.

And this is worth a look. H/T Timbone