This piece of made up research is the latest pre-home and car ban assault on smokers using the Hitler propaganda tool of children as human shields.
And I assume the Guardian is in the anti-smoker industry's and the ConDem Govt's pockets bearing in mind how the Govt bragged:
"We will work with national media to raise awareness of the risks in exposing children to secondhand smoke."
Or in other words we will tell gullible and overworked journalists what we want them to print knowing that they won't look behind what our paid-for junk scientists say to achieve our ideological aim of purging society of smoking and smokers.
They know they don't need "truth" "fact" or "science" to back this up after the £3,000 per day Pharmaceutical Taxi For Hire former minister Patricia Hewitt lied and manipulated evidence to gain the blanket smoking ban on behalf of her clients.
It is on the back of this astounding piece of legal discrimination, and nationalisation of privately owned property, that smoker prejudice and hatred has grown to the level that even real evidence isn't required any more in the quest for further restrictions.
I suppose I'm more angry about the Guardian because I expected better as a former socialist but then the paper began to disappoint me back in 2008 when the sanctimonious columnist Libby Brooks told the world how I, as part of a delegation that went to parlt to be heard on the invitation of Philip Davies MP, was some sort of Hooray Henry.
She said class was an issue in people smoking but it isn't other than she has helped to make it unaffordable to low income families who will be forced to a dangerous black market while the rich and privileged will be able to afford to smoke safely.
Brooks said back then on what was the first anniversary of this ban that :
"...smoking speaks of disadvantage." without informing her reader that it is her own special brand of snobbery that is disadvantaging the vulnerable.
She piles up the bigotry further by quoting figures fed to her by the anti-smoker industry :
"And yet the fact is that 70% of smokers say they want to quit" and uses as an example of this the fact that she smokes (or did at the time of the article) but is too weak and stupid to be able to choose for herself whether to quit or not without the Govt's advice and hectoring.
At least the poor are capable of making that decision for themselves.
She ended her grossly misleading article by pontificating :
"It is neither patronising nor paternalistic to acknowledge the distinction between David Hockney and a Dundee single mum. Choice is not always free. But a recognition of that is only meaningful if it looks to the carcinogenic effects of inequality, too."
Sorry, darling, but it is.
I wonder if she gives much thought to that as she drives her car poisoning the under classes and their "poor deprived" children that she persecutes to ease her own privileged conscience.
I can't embed it, but the video of that event I attended in 2008 can be seen here and the only person out of place would have been the posh Ms Brooks with her no doubt pinched, upturned nose.
I'm definitely no snob. We 'ave dinner at 1pm and tea about 7pm. The on'y time you'd fin' me talkin' to people who soun' like they got a plum in their gob, an' them talkin' to people who live on council estates who drop consonants, like me, is at an event where you'll find other smokers.
A Forest video of an earlier do that I didn't attend can be seen here.
Simon Clark gives more background on that HERE.
It seems a life away from the days when we thought we could secure a reversal of the ban. Nigel Farage tried to help us even then. The best we can hope for now, and the fight we must NEVER abandon, is for fairness and acceptance as a minority through an amendment to a corrupt, paid-for and spiteful law that legalised intolerance and discrimination in this country against one group of people in a way it hadn't done since the equally evil laws that criminalised homosexuality and suicide. And yes, at one time in our history people could be hung for attempting "self murder."!
Our fight now is to prevent the smoke police from knocking at our doors to arrest us for being worse than child sex killers which is where the Guardian and its bigoted friends in ASH are taking this with the drip feed effect of misrepresented stories and manipulated studies and new words of abuse to describe lifelong smokers such as hardcore. A ploy by careful use of language to equate smokers with porn, sex, and perversion so that smokers as child abusers is implanted covertly into the wider public's belief.
Many of us were child smokers in a different age, from a different generation, who chose to continue smoking in adulthood when smoking was perceived differently and accepted everywhere.
True scientific, unsullied, non-corrupted, evidence shows that while we may irritate a tiny minority, we harm no one and we are more likely to harm ourselves than if we quit after almost an entire lifetime of smoking.
We are not child killers or abusers. Our mothers, fathers, grandparents were not child killers or abusers either. This hate and lies to achieve an ideological aim must stop.
I'd say write to current health persecutor Andrew Lansley and his boss Camoron to tell them that if they really want to stay in power, they are backing the wrong horse. As they haven't listened to one single word we have said, and they back laws to silence us, then I say again, PLEASE, vote UKIP because Farage is listening and UKIP in local or national Govt will be our only voice.
As for the Guardian, it appears to have forgogtten that its journalists are supposed to research facts and not just repeat and cherry pick bits of propaganda that suit the Govt of the day's purpose. That way fascism lies and if we get a revisiting of Nazi camps for undesirables whether smokers or muslims, then it will be the Guardian that's helped to facilitate them.
This is Chris Snowdon's take on it which is well worth a read. Seems the Independent also has lazy spoon fed journalists too.
And THIS from Smoking out the Truth.