THE CLUB’S AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

06/09/2011

THE CLUB IS A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO DETEST THE SMOKING BAN. WE DO NOT AGREE THAT SECOND HAND TOBACCO SMOKE IS DANGEROUS.

WE WANT THE LAW TO BE AMENDED SO THAT PUBLICANS AND OTHERS CAN PROVIDE FACILITIES FOR THEIR SMOKING CUSTOMERS. WE WANT AN END TO THE PERSECUTION OF PEOPLE WHO ENJOY TOBACCO.

WHY NOT GROW YOUR OWN CIGARETTE TOBACCO? IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL. SEE SIDEBAR FOR EASY-TO-FOLLOW GUIDE! OR GO DIRECTLY TO THE SITE:

https://growingandcuringtobacco.wordpress.com/

TOBACCO GROWING DIARY 2012 (SEE SIDEBAR).

TOBACCO GROWING DIARY 2013 (SEE SIDEBAR).

THE McTEAR v IMPERIAL TOBACCO (2005) CASE – SEE SIDEBAR.

DOLL AND HILL ‘HOSPITAL STUDY’ (SMOKING AND LUNG CANCER) (1950) – SEE SIDEBAR.

DOLL AND HILL ‘DOCTORS STUDY’ (1951 – 2001) – SEE SIDEBAR.

Tobacco CONTROL tactics. (tctactics.org) HOW TOBACCO CONTROL DECEIVES. (See sidebar).

“SMOKERS BLACK LUNG” IS A FRAUD. See this post by Frank Davis:

http://cfrankdavis.wordpress.com/2012/08/06/the-black-lung-lie/

NB. BECAUSE OF SPAM, COMMENT ON POSTS WILL CLOSE AFTER SEVEN DAYS. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COMMENT ON OLDER POSTS ON MY LATEST POST (simply reference to the title and date of the older post).

 

 

Advertisements

My Bladder Operation

16/12/2018

I told the tale about the lead up to this operation a little while ago.

Briefly, I accepted a ‘circular’ invitation the have a blood test which seems to be sent out to everyone over 70 or so who is not yet dead. The test did not include prostatism from which I suffer – an enlarged prostate gland which stop urine, or at least reduces the flow, from making its way down the othera and to the outdoors. It is not an uncommon complain in older men. I went to the practice and had the prostate added. The practice nurse told me that my prostate ‘count’ (antigens in the blood stream) was ‘a bit high’ and said that I needed to see a doctor and an appointment was made for two days later. The nurse’s deduction was wrong, as I later found out when I went to see a urologist, who said that my count was not unusual for someone of my age (79) with prostatism.

But, by then, the damage had been done. Had the nurse not referred me to a doctor about the ‘high count’ and just congratulated me on being pretty health, despite my smoking and drinking, I would have gone on my way. I had no problems with peeing or pooing, other than those caused by the prostatism, which was handled fine with ‘wee pills’. I had no pain or flow problems, although I was careful to ensure that I peed before leaving home or boarding a plane, and stuff like that. Just common sense.

Had I not been advised to see a doctor as a result of the bad calculation of my prostate ‘count’, he would not have found minute traces of blood in my urine. All the poking about in my rectum would never have happened. A small amount of blood on his finger when he withdrew the digit would never have appeared. A whole shipload of ‘investigations’ would never have ensued.

Of course, some time later, the ‘bladder problem’ might have arisen, but it was obvious from the cystoscopy that the ‘growth’ had been there for years. By ‘growth’, I mean straggly bits of white stuff anchored to the side of my bladder.

It was only after the poking about in my rectum that I started having aches and pains.

So, on Thursday, I went into hospital to have my bladder ‘re-sectioned’. That meant that the sides of my bladder would be’scraped’ to remove the white stuff and see what the growth was and do a biopsy. I still have to have a CT scan for that purpose, or whatever.

I was not looking forward to it. The cystoscopy which I had had, left me with difficulty and pain peeing, despite my wee pills.

The operation itself was conducted with a spinal injection of anaesthetic. That was a strange experience. The injection did not hurt significantly. Gradually, my lower half went completely numb and my legs were paralysed. The anaesthetist told me that I would feel tugging and pushing, but no pain. That happened. An instrument was passed up my willie into my bladder to ‘scrape away’. Unfortunately, a catheter had then to be inserted to suck out the detritus and some blood, and it was not a little thin thing. No problem until the anaesthetic wore off, then continuous low-level pain. I had to ask twice for some sort of painkiller. That worked well enough for me to doze off for a while. A ‘boss’ came round and told me that I could go home. The catheter was removed (which hurt) along with all the monitors and I got dressed to go home. I said cheerio to the others and set off for the main entrance/exit.

Then a nurse came chasing after me. I could not go yet. They had to be sure that I could urinate. So back I went. Try as I might, I could not do so. And it hurt trying. There was plenty water in my bladder. The nurse told me that, if I could not urinate, then a catheter would have to be inserted and I would have to stay another night.

And then it struck me like a bolt of lightening – from where, I do not know.

I had not taken my wee pills – painkillers but no wee pills (which slacken the prostate gland off so that urine can pass). I took them and stood reading rather than sitting down. After about half an hour, I felt an urge to pee, but only a trickle emerged. Not enough! So I waited another half hour standing up. This time, a decent flow occurred which was enough.

And I was picked up and taken home.

It will take some time before my bladder and associated organs settle down. I know that from the cystoscopy and prodding experience. But I know that the worst is over and that everything will get better in due course.

Please do not be put off having such problems investigated. The above are only my personal experiences and musings. I vaguely believe that all the double and double and double checking of your identity and all your past history are unnecessary and caused by multi-million pound judgements from mistakes. What tends to be forgotten in the morass of detail is the simple fact that, in my case, I needed my wee pills before I could urinate. It wasn’t the operation which was causing the problem – it was just the enlarged prostate.

But, going back, there are certain ‘ifs’. I have had circulars before about having ‘age-related’ blood tests and ignored them. Why look for ‘public health’ problems? Had the nurse not diagnosed a ‘higher prostate count’, wrongly as it turned out, then the minute traces of blood in my urine would not have been discovered. How many other old people have such minor bleeds which cause no problems?

One cannot swear to it, of course, but the probability is that, had not ‘public health’ insisted that GPs circulate their elderly patients with recommendations for blood tests, which scare them into submission, lots of my suffering and NHS costs would not have occurred. The cost of my ‘procedures’ must be horrendous. What will have been achieved?

What ‘public health’ describe as ‘Prevention’ is nothing of the sort. How can it be since it cannot differentiate between individuals? It is a blunt instrument. I cannot say often enough that, before the blood tests, I had no problems at all with urinating. No pain, no problems with the flow, only sensible precautions because I am ‘getting on’ and have prostatism. ‘Prevention’ has probably caused more worry and pain, both mental and physical, than any ‘epidemic’ in the past.

It is weird how the only medical doctors who stand for Parliament seem to be Zealots of one sort or another. Perhaps that goes for all MPs. To wish to be an MP requires zealotry – or perhaps flattery. How did PM May ever decide that she wanted to be an MP? What motivated her? I would regard being an MP as a massive, massive responsibility. Even more massively if I was asked to stand for PM. If I could not go before the People and justify my policy decisions other than by claiming ‘this is the right thing to do’, I would be mortified. That is at least one of the reasons that Cameron failed. His attempt to ‘renegotiate’ with the EU hit a brick wall, and it showed. Why was he not incensed by the refusal to negotiate? There is only one reasonable reason, which was that he did not care and/or was powerless.

Thrutch about as she may, PM May has also turned out to be powerless. The EU ‘Commission’ regards itself as the Emperor of Europe. Membership depends only upon nepotism.

There are loads of fake Charities and NGOs which are nepotistic and would not exist if it were not for taxpayer funding. And they would not get the funding if it were not for nepotistic Government control of funding.

Cleaning the swamp is a massive undertaking. But it must be done. The swamp has deepened and spread over the years. We need a political party which has, as its main promise in its manifesto, the firm intention to clear out the swamp, and little else.

I would vote for such a party.

 

Gaining ‘Ownership’ Via Regulation

12/12/2018

I read an article on Velvet Glove Iron Fist today about the Government response to the Science and Technology Committee on e-cigs:

https://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2018/12/science-and-technology-committee-on-e.html

It seems that the Gov is looking kindly on those products, including HnB and snus, but only as smoking cessation products. The Gov (aka Tobacco Control in the UK in this instance) does not regard those products as having a right to exist in themselves. They are like crutches, handed out to deserving people who have difficulty walking. You can get crutches free from the NHS, provided that you are an approved person. Or you can buy them yourself. If you do, then you have to pay whatever price the seller demands, which could be quite a high price.

If the Gov decrees that ‘Smoking Cessation Services’ can hand out ecigs free, then you can bet a pound to a penny that the price on the open market will rise substantially. Further, you could bet a pound to a penny that flavours would be minimal, since ‘free’ means ‘take it or leave it’. The Gov would bulk buy, with everyone in TobCON taking a cut along the way. Say goodbye to your high street vape shop. How can you compete with ‘free’?

That is what has, more or less, happened with tobacco products. Government profits from cigs etc are massive. Further, the Gov controls ingredients, distribution and availability, taking a cut at every step via VAT. The only thing that stops Gov from poisoning cigs is the profits.

But it is not really ‘The Government’ in the sense of politicians. Politicians have become lackeys of TobCON.

And that was the fatal flaw which caused Blair to introduce the Smoking Ban in 2007. I used to quite like Blair when he was PM. He didn’t just spout propaganda, like May does. When he appeared on TV, at least he made sensible arguments, even if he was lying.

For me, the smoking ban was a complete shock. I really, really thought that publicans would have ignored it. The shock was doubled in intensity when the staff of pubs, 17 year old boys and girls, wholeheartedly enforced the ban as though they were policemen. I suddenly realised that those people that I regarded as ‘friends’ were nothing of the sort. The ‘friendliness’ was merely convenience. Since then, I have no ‘friends’ behind the bar. I have only acquaintances. “I’ll have a pint of Fosters please”. “Thanks”. Even a couple of ‘friends’ on the customer side of the bar turned on me when I dared to light a cig indoors. One guy actually snatched the cig out of my mouth.

But I know quite a few regulars who have replaced the dead and absent old regulars. There are not as many. I am friendly with them and chat with them from time to time. But my objective of going to the pub has changed. I no longer expect to have some fun. I don’t mind sitting quietly in my favourite spot watching football, golf, darts, or whatever, on the TV. My objective is to relax with a nice, tasty pint of beer. I take the walk of shame to the outdoors for a fag when I wish to do so. It still rankles just as much as it did ten years ago.

So vapers should not be overjoyed that the Gov seems to have taken on-board the approval of ecigs. What is happening is that ecig manufacturers will become suppliers to TobCON, who will control price, tastes, strength, appearance, advertising and profits.

A revealing clue was that the document which VGIF referred to stated quite clearly that, after Brexit, TobCON would look at the EU regs about the size of tanks and the size of vials of liquid with the implied suggestion that those regs would be relaxed. Who would do the relaxing? It would have to be TobCON via its control of Gov.

But successive Ministers have not dared to question the FCTC. No MP has dared to question the supremacy of the UN, WHO, IPCC, IMF, etc. It might have been better to defund the UN before defunding the EU. Do you know, dear reader, that the funding of the FCTC comes almost entirely from the UK?

I seem to remember that the Gov set up a dept under Lord Sugar to investigate the drain of money by ‘projects’ which had outlived their usefulness. He was stymied at every turn. That dept faded away.

And yet, just as you would look at every cost you endure to ensure that you are as lean as possible, Gov seems not to have that attitude. It concentrates only upon BIG MONEY – billions.

The Brexit fiasco is a perfect opportunity for Gov to cut out the myriad of costs which mount up to massive sums.

PM May Calls Off Brexit Vote

11/12/2018

What an utter and complete shambles.

What is it about that woman? At least Cameron immediately saw the writing on the wall after the Brexit vote. I cannot say that he covered himself with glory when he promptly resigned after promising to do what The People decided. He ran, but you cannot really blame him. He more or less could not deliver on his promise. Why is PM May hanging around? She nailed her colours to the mast, sailed into the affray and got her mast shot off and her ship badly holed. Is he going to limp back to port, patch up the hole, erect a new mast, and then nail different colours to her mast? Whose colours?

I read a commentary today which said that a second referendum could not contain a question, “Do you wish to remain in the EU?” That decision was made in 2016 in the negative. It cannot be changed. The only thing that could happen would be a referendum some time in the future to rejoin the EU. All the stuff about the referendum being only ‘advisory’ is crap.

A General Election is a referendum. The People are divided into constituencies and given the right to vote for any candidate that they wish, or not, as the case may be. Other than in the case of proof of outright fraud, the candidate with the most votes is elected. The election results are stated publicly and, at the end, appears the statement, “And I declare X to be the duly elected member of parliament for this constituency”. There is no clause which says, “….. unless her majesty the Queen objects”, even if there were a theoretical possibility that that could happen.

But is there a ‘right’ for the Government or Parliament to delay and delay and delay? That is a constitutional matter which I do not know the answer to. I would imagine that if push came to shove, the Supreme Court would say that the decision of The People was effective immediately, and that Article 50 of the EU has nothing to do with it; that all ‘negotiations’ must be directed to the process of withdrawal and not trade etc, such as terminating the tenure of MEPs. It would have been perfectly legitimate to continue with current trade arrangements since The People voted to leave THE POLITICAL ENTITY known as the EU, for the time being.

I do not understand how the negotiators could have got themselves bogged down in trade arrangements when it is obvious that you cannot undo forty years or more of trade agreements overnight. It cannot be done, and no one voted for it.

Free movement? It has existed for centuries, but in recent times (the last several decades) a passport has been required. All the passport does is certify the country of origin of the holder and his identity. When I go to Mallorca, I have to show my passport to the hotel and they take a photocopy. But that does not mean that I could not disappear into the general population if I have ‘friends’ there.

What is different is not ‘free movement’ but THE RIGHT to work and such things. That is entirely different. Note the capitals of the word ‘right’. Brits have been taking up employment in Europe for centuries, but they did not have a RIGHT. If the King decided to expel all Brits, then expelled they were. End of.

FROM THE BEGINNING of the negotiations, it was obvious that trade should continue as it is. Far to complex to mess with. Start with the obvious consequences of the vote – withdrawal from Court of Justice, end of MEPs, continuation of joint projects like Euratom and interpol. Do it all amicably. Continue with current air travel arrangements and shipping. Don’t expect the EU apparatchiks to help. Tell them what you intend to do. For example, tell them that we will not erect a hard border with the Irish Republic. It is up to the Irish Republic and the EU to do so if they wish to, and they must pay for it. Stop arguing with your neighbour about who pays for a new garden fence when you do not give a shit whether there is a new garden fence or not.

The rules of golf built up over time to take account of a variety of different ‘issues’. Today, the rules are about as permanent and unchanging as is possible to achieve. And yet, still, tiny alterations are needed. What we have today politically is somewhat similar. That is why it is so hard to decide who to vote for in a GE. For a time, UKIP promised a new vision, but it turned out to be hopelessly incompetent. The comical thing is that Tory and Labour are also hopelessly incompetent. Think about it. Your house has a serious problem due to weather erosion of roof tiles. They need to be taken off and reset. Instead, you spend your available funds on paying for a gardener to replant your garden so that the garden is pretty.

That is what has been happening with Brexit. Never mind Article 50, the first thing, after the Brexit vote which should have happened is a 650 to 0 decision in parliament to implement Brexit with all haste. It should have been a formality. There was certainly no need for a General Election when Cameron ran away.

Expect further octopus-like twisting of tentacles, but such twistings will fail eventually. The odd thing is that the Gov did not chop off the tentacles right at the start.

Watching a Jordan Peterson Interview

09/12/2018

There are many, and I have seen a few, but I had not seen the one I watched this evening. It was an hour and a half, but, for a change, I had time on my side so I watched the whole thing:

Some people have sneered at him and I must admit that, watching this particular video, I did find his habit of making a statement then waiting for the presenter to start to speak before saying something else, and using the same ‘trick’ again and again, somewhat disconcerting. But what I especially like about him is that he has no truck with ‘political correctness’. Either something is ‘true’, or ‘untrue’ or ‘unknown’.

It is not always easy to get your mind around what he says. For example, he abhors inexact definitions. For example, we all used to know what ‘a man’ was, and what a ‘woman’ was, but those definitions have been under attack. But he refuses to accept that attack until those who are causing the confusion come up with a precise definition of what is a woman/man or a man/woman. He said that homosexuality/paedophilia  have  been around since ancient times, which is true. There are ancient frescoes which show such activities. That is not the issue. The issue is ………….

And there is the problem. No one knows even what the issue is, never mind what the answer is, because of imprecise definitions. Again and again, in the interview, Peterson asks the presenter ‘what do you mean by x’? She speaks in generalised, feminist language with nothing precise.

Again and again, in the interview, Peterson asks the presenter to define words like ‘transgender’.

The final part was about free speech. I was getting a bit mentally tired by then and distractions abounded. I need to watch that part again.

My overall impression was that the interview was the wrong way round. Peterson should have been interviewing the feminist. But that would never do. It would have been like a lion ripping a rabbit to pieces.

And is that not true of smoking bans and such? I cannot use the lion and the rabbit in this case. The similitude is a dam, especially about Brexit. It is at the point of bursting.

The political possibility was UKIP, but it has fallen apart. I am not surprised since it disavowed smokers, which was an utterly stupid thing to do. It should have supported smokers, vapers, drinkers, and the rest of the dregs of society, as seen by the Elite.

Where is the party which will stop the persecution?

A Crazy Tale of the NHS

07/12/2018

Despite what I am about to write, I am a great admirer of the NHS. There is no doubt in my mind that, had it not been for the NHS, my wife, who suffers from Multiple Sclerosis, would have died on at lest two occasions in the last few years. The first occasion was when she went into a coma because of a bad urinary track infection. She was in a coma for three days and was in hospital for seven weeks. The second occasion was more recent. She had some sort of stroke, but not a bleed. From what I can gather, it was caused by a shortage of blood to the brain. She was awake, but groggy, if I may put it that way. It might have been much worse had I not had a ‘feeling’ that there was something odd about her snoring. It didn’t sound right. When I tried to wake her up, she could not focus her eyes on my face. She seemed to be weak and said nothing. I called an ambulance, but the problem passed very quickly and she was back home after about three days. There has been no recurrence.

My crazy tale has nothing to do with live and death emergencies. It is about a series of incidents.

In June, I received a circular from my GP’s practice suggesting that I have blood tests because of my age (79). I vaguely knew that it was a circular because the tests (which I looked up on the net) did not mention my prostatism problem. I had in mind to ignore it on the grounds that I would go to my GP when I felt ill. I put the letter on one side because I was going on holiday in the near future, as yet not specifically decided as to dates. During that holiday, which is easy to remember what happened because of the restricted dates, I had no problems urinating whatsoever. No pains, no cramps, nothing. But I tended to make sure that my bladder was fully empty by having ‘sit-down’ wees.

When I got back mid-August, I made a terrible error. I decide to have the blood tests, and even went down to the surgery and asked them to add ‘prostate’ onto the list. I had the tests.

A week later, I rang the surgery and they asked me to call in to have a chat with the practice nurse. I made an appointment. She told me that all was reasonably well, except that my ‘prostate count’ was somewhat high. (The ‘prostate count’ is the number of specific antigens in your blood relating to prostate activity). An appointment was made for me to see a doctor two days later, which I did. He checked my urine and found non-visible traces of blood. He then did what’s called a DRE (Digital Rectum Examination). He said that the prostate felt OK although enlarged. But when he took his ‘digit’ out, he found blood on the tip of the finger. He then reinserted the finger and prodded about quite vigorously, so much so that I emitted either urine or seminal fluid from my willie.

I got dressed and sat down waiting for judgement. The doc pursed his lips, thought, pursed his lips again, and then said that he would discuss matters with the boss and ring me later. He did. They decided that, not only would I need urology to be involved but also colorectal.

The urology came first at a local hospital. The urologist said that my ‘prostate count’ was normal for my age, but that they would take a look inside my bladder just in case. The procedure is called ‘cystoscopy’. A very thin ‘telescope’ with a light is threaded through your willie.

Meanwhile, I had started to experience rather horrible feelings from my bum. I felt that I desperately needed a poo, but, when I rushed to the loo, nothing much but wind escaped. That lasted about a week before returning to normal.

I had to go to a town which is not far away but which I have not visited for decades. I decide to drive to the railway station and take a train, and then I had to find the clinic. I started from home two hours before my appointment. After waiting for about half an hour, I was told that the appointment had to be cancelled because the ‘clinician’ had just not turned up. Nobody knew why. I turned down the offer of travel expenses. Sod them.

At that point, I decided to transfer my ‘care’ to my local hospital which is ten minutes drive away. Even that, although perfectly legitimate, was a struggle. It was not just about the clinician not turning up – it was also about the logistics of looking after herself. Why take two hours when you can take ten minutes?

Fairly quickly, I got to see a urologist at my chosen hospital. She was young (and quite attractive) and she knew her stuff. No doubt such a comment would throw the feminists into fits, if it was made in a newspaper. There was some info, contained in a letter from my previous urologist, which had not been scanned into the computer. I supplied her with a copy. Thereafter, things stated to move a bit more rapidly. But I was suffering from the aftereffects of the digital proddings – lots of aches and pains in the bladder area. At least, I think that the proddings caused the aches and pains. I have been taking paracetamol and ibuprofen to keep those aches and pains under control. Continuous aching is worse that sporadic jabs of pain. Anyone who has suffered from sciatica will support that.

It is at this point where the story becomes surreal. I was asked to attend an appointment for a pre-op assessment, which I did. My blood pressure was taken and found to be OK for my age on the second attempt. A cardiogram was taken. I was asked to blow into a spirometer (?), which I did, pretty forcefully. As far as I know, none of those tests revealed anything abnormal.

So then I was asked to have a chat with a different, older woman. She asked me loads and loads of questions about stuff like allergies. I had none of the afflictions which she mentioned. And here is the comical bit. She asked me to recall EVERY occasion during my whole life, on which I have been ‘put to sleep’ for an operation. I could remember only two (or was it three?). And then she reminded me about having my tonsils out, which occurred when I was around eight years old, or whatever. I actually remember feeling very lonely in that hospital bed. The picture of everything being in darkness and a nurse sitting at a table in the middle of the ward, with a single light over the desk, is indelibly printed upon my mind.

And then she asked me about smoking. I could have lied blatantly and said that I had stopped years ago and gone to tobacco ecigs. I could have. But I decided that, come what may, it was in my best interests to be honest about it. So I told her – 40 per day.

And then she asked me about drinking alcohol. I said about a litre of red wine per day. Hysterics! The ‘recommended level’ is 14 units per week! I was indulging in 100 units per week! I said, “I suppose that the Chief Medical Officer would be displeased”. But the sarcasm was water off a duck’s back. I would have to have an appointment with the anaesthetist because of the consequences. She seemed to be quite excited by the prospect and arranged an appointment for the next day.

Rather disruptive, but not intolerable.

The anaesthetist was a jolly nice chap. I had a very amiable conversation with him. I wish that I had thought about it at the time, but the conversation was really utterly pointless.

Why?

Because all that drinking of red wine in the past was irrelevant. The only real thing that mattered was whether or not damage to my liver had occurred. But we had a chat and he explained to me that drinking alcohol over a long period of time stresses the liver, and the anaesthetics add more stress. Some drinkers become delusional after the op. But, if the anaesthetist knows about the drinking, then there are drugs which can be administered either before or after, which help.

I wonder how enjoyable delusions are? It would be nice to feel the effects of intercourse with Theresa May, do you not think?

One last delusion. The anaesthetist then recommended that I commit to some sort of ‘alcohol committee’, which would produce ‘the plan’, should I become delusional after the operation. Since I had decided beforehand to ‘hold my tongue’, I readily agreed. I would talk the talk.

And then came the killer which illustrates the uselessness of all that had gone before.

Later in the afternoon, I got a phone call from the hospital.

“Can I speak to Mr James W…?”

“Speaking”, I replied.

“This is the hospital. I understand that you had your pre-op assessment yesterday and today. Is that right”.

“Yes”, I replied.

“We have in mind to do the procedure next Thursday, 13th Dec”, she said.

“Do you mean the actual operation?”, I asked.

“Yes”, she said.

“But I have an appointment for 21st Dec for a CT scan”, I said.

“Oh”, she stuttered, “That should have already  …… ” and stopped speaking. The obvious missing words are “been done”. She said that she would get back to me but did not.

Think about the above. Think about the lack of info and the surplus of info. Think about the dozens of questions I was asked, and ask yourself if the information produced matters when the op is on your bladder. The fact that my drinking and smoking is in the past reveals that only the effects of my actions matter. What have been the effects? Are my lungs OK? Is my heart OK? Is my liver OK? Do not the blood tests, the cardiogram, the sprirometer, reveal such things?

It is incredible that people like ‘The Chief Medical Officer’ can fly in the face of common sense and define every individual as a cripple.

 

Responding to an Invitation to Comment on the Proposed EU ‘Deal’

04/12/2018

‘Velvet Glove Iron Fist’ proposed that the Brexit negotiations started from the wrong place. He suggested that the ‘wrong place’ was an obsession with immigration. He said that PM May was distracted by the issue of immigration:

https://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2018/12/deal-or-no-deal.html

It may be true that some surveys placed immigration at the top of the list of objections to the EU, but ‘free movement of people within the EU States’ does not mean ‘immigration’. What ‘immigration’ means to most of us is what is happening in Italy – boat-loads of impoverished young men, women and children landing on your shores shouting ‘National Assistance’. People have travelled and cooperated with others throughout Europe since ancient times. No doubt a modicum of ‘others’, whatever their skin colour, have also moved around the world from distant lands.

There is a difference between ‘free movement’, which has always taken place, and ‘invasion’.

But what is important is that every single person who voted for Brexit had his own reason/s for doing so. ‘Surveys’ of perhaps 1000 people can only show what those people said that their motivations were. Such surveys are useless.

Some commenters at VGIF are respected and clever, and have read the short form of the Brexit Agreement, but, as I gather, very few have read the whole thing. Who can blame them? 600 hundred pages of legalese blather are not for interested people to read. They are for people who are being paid to do so to read.

I have made my contribution. This is what I wrote:

I am a bit late to this discussion, but it is heartening that few insults have been thrown about!
My ‘take’ on this debate depends upon the original question posed in the referendum:

“Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”

Apart from the words ‘remain’ and ‘leave’, the only important words are ‘the European Union’. I suppose that all voters had their own ideas of what those words meant, and what was important to them.
I am 79 years old, but not yet quite senile. I am too young to remember anything about the foundation of the ‘Iron and Steel Community’, which I understand was one of the founding principles of cooperation rather than conflict.
When I became old enough to know better, I was fully in favour of the ‘European Community’, even to the extent of supporting the Euro! What could be better than to be able to buy a loaf of bread anywhere in the ‘community’ using the same currency, even if the prices were different?

My attitude changed very gradually. I gradually became aware that ‘integration’ was proceeding far too quickly; that an Empire was being created without the specific consent of The People. I also became aware that the ‘Elite’ who ‘governed’ were very much linked to the UN, WHO, IPCC, etc. I also became aware that there were very few top politicians anywhere in Europe who gave a toss about those links, and their effect upon EU ‘Elite’ proposals, such as Climate Change.
I further became aware of the massive corruption, the back-scratching, the horse-trading, the profligacy, the ‘grants’ which depend upon reciprocal favours.

So when I voted ‘Leave’, it was not to create mayhem in trade arrangements which have built up over 40 years. It was to end the UK involvement in wholesale corruption, funding the same, and enabling not only EU aristocrats but also UN aristocrats. My vote was most certainly not intended to enable bureaucrats to bugger up trade between European countries.
In fact, my vote was not about trade at all. It was about the imposition of ‘rules’ which limit our freedom, both as individuals and as shareholders in companies. Controlling individuals is hard, but controlling companies and industries is easy.
It ought not to be so. Shareholders should be more belligerent.

There is a war being waged. Who controls commerce and wealth and the spread of ‘utility’? Does that control need an Empire, or can it be achieved by cooperation?

My decision to leave the EU was based upon the EU’s lack of authority. The EU Parliament is a joke. Its approval of this or that is irrelevant. Only servile compliance with directives, and the gold-plating of such directives by our politicians, sustains the Empire and its works.
Has any State ever said, “NO!! WE WILL NOT COMPLY!!” Perhaps they have, but the refusal to comply is ‘negotiated’ into an ‘opt out’.

As the author said, “I would not start from here”. I believe that our political negotiators were misled into believing that Trade was what Brexit was about, or they were stupid. It has always been about POLITICS and not trade.
Put as simply as possible, we do not want Ministers in Parliament saying, “There is nothing that we can do. It is an EU directive”.

I am looking forward to the Dec 11th debate in Parliament. I shall make it my business to access the Parliament channel and listen verbatim. It should be fun.

Is a Dog Conscious?

03/12/2018

Our daughter has a lovely little shiatsu dog named Bella. She is ever so funny. We had care of her for the weekend because daughter was visiting elsewhere. She spent most of her time upstairs in our other daughter’s ‘apartment’ because she was too scared to risk coming down the stairs, although she was happy to climb up them. I went outside to put some rubbish in the bin, and she heard me. The timing was such that it was about the time that she would normally expect to go ‘walkies’.

She came tumbling downstairs as fast as she could. I don’t mean that she fell downstairs – just that she showed no fear. She then bounced about waiting for her lead to be put on and taken for her ‘walkies’.

I had no intention of doing so, but what can you do? So I took her around the block. She had four wees and a poo. She hung back to sniff whatever pongs appealed to her and then shot past me to the next source of tempting pongs. When we got back home, she was happy.

I have often wondered what animals like Bella are conscious of. Certainly, she has memory and emotions. But does she have intelligence? Or is there such a thing as ’emotional intelligence’? I do not see why not, if you see ‘intelligence’ as ‘knowing’. ‘Knowing’ at an emotional level is normal. For example, a lion ‘knows’ that the way to get food is to chase, capture, kill, and then eat a wildebeest, or whatever. It ‘knows’. You may call it ‘instinct’, if you like, but the fact is that the lion ‘knows’. 

But are such animal ‘conscious’?

I think that the are, but only in a superficial way. They know when the time has come to give up and die. That is a concept which we humans find hard to accept.

The big difference is that human consciousness is entirely different. It is not directly based upon internal emotions. It looks outwards. Sure, we have ’emotional intelligence’ but we have a ‘higher level’; a MUCH higher level. We are able to think about ourselves. We able to think about whether it is more important to be content but poor or discontented but rich. We can aim to be content or rich, although it is possible to be both.

But are we humans FULLY conscious, or is there an even higher level? Is there a state of ‘being’ which is not trapped in a body and mind? That is what religion is about. Don’t knock it. It is about a ‘higher state of being’ which is not bound by bodies, brains and minds.

All you need, dear reader, is to realise that you are trapped in your body. You must make the best of it for the time being. The best way to do that is to be kind to other people. The whole idea of ‘turn the other cheek’ is not to be upset if your kindness is taken advantage of.

We live in a world of cheating and distortion, as is the case of dear, sad, Theresa May. Only honesty and kindness will provide the benefits of Brexit for the UK. Propaganda will not.

Honesty and kindness are the key.

A Dreadful Fire in California

02/12/2018

I was reading one of my favourite blogs today – Orphans of Liberty. They have a report on a really awful brush-fire in California:

https://4liberty.org.uk/2018/12/01/why-did-those-houses-burn-but-not-the-surrounding-trees/

No one know how the fire started, but because of the dry conditions and a strong wind, the fire spread like mad. Thousands of houses and other buildings were destroyed. People have been wondering why the houses burn down but surrounding trees were hardly affected. It seems that the strong wind blew embers through the trees which set light to any dry stuff which lay in the wind’s path. Many houses were wooden and themselves very dry.

Hundreds of square miles were affected, especially the town called Paradise. A strange name for a town, I think – a bit presumptive. It seems that there were many mobile home sites, home to many elderly people. Those sites were particularly badly affected because of the close proximity of the mobile homes to each other. With the tremendous heat and the strong wind, fire spread from one to another with ease. I think that the narrator said that a couple of hundred people were killed and many more missing. Many houses were built of wood.

If you watch the video, you will see why an awful lot of people would have thought of that area as being a wonderful place to live. It is almost bucolic, in the sense of ‘communing with nature’. In effect, it is as though people simply made a clearing in the pine forest and built a house. But it wasn’t the trees which surrounded those houses which caused the problem directly. It was the detritus which had built up in the form of piles of dry tinder – leaves and twigs and such.

Right at the end of the video, the narrator says the the fire is out and people can get back to burning their rubbish and gathered leaves as they normally do. It wasn’t said sarcastically, but you can get the drift. Who in their right mind would be burning piles of detritus like leaves at the end of summer in very windy conditions?

I would not normally be writing about such events happening thousand of miles away. It is because it happened in California. No wonder the town was called Paradise since Californians  seem to think that they have achieved perfection. What place on Earth has been more infantilised? Sea, sun, surfing, smoking bans, health clubs, gyms – all the paltry trappings that you can think of. Is it any wonder that the interior parts would like to seceded from the coastal strip? They are two different worlds. The interior parts are where people have real jobs, operating farms and herding cattle. They are not holiday makers or callow youths or retired people or illegal immigrants.

Infantilisation of the population of the world seems to be an objective of the UN, WHO, etc. Although those organisations and their dependent organisations pay lip service to the idea of young people getting fat as a result of spending too much time playing video games etc, they are happy with the fat situation because it enables them to attack multi-national corporations, like food companies. The infantilisation of people makes it easier for ‘The Elite’ to build their world-wide empire.

It would not surprise me one bit if people like Cameron (a Common Purpose graduate) and May had this idea in their collective minds, that National Governments, like the UK, were simply too weak to take on global companies. I feel pretty certain that when people like Richard Doll approached Tobcoms with the results of their studies about tobacco danger, they were much offended when Tobcoms laughed in their faces. It is hard to believe that Doll et al did not try to influence Tobcoms with their research findings. Only when they were rebuffed did they decide to play the long game. They were important and expert academics, not used to being laughed at.

Tobacco WAS a special case. I believe that Tobcoms were totally wrong not to take on board the evidence which Doll et al displayed to them. Despite the obvious epidemiological faults, the studies were very strong. It would have behoved Tobcoms to move into ‘harm reduction’ rapidly once they knew what was happening. Filter tips were introduced. I remember when the filters turned very brown, but now-a-days, they hardly turn brown at all. That is because the tobacco plants grown these days do not produce as much tar as they use to. There is far less tar in tobacco smoke these days than there use to be. And they should have commissioned studies showing just how little tar was still in cigs. In Canada, tobcoms and gov cooperated to find a variety of tobacco plant which produced little tar. Tobcoms made the terrible error of calling those cigs ‘lights’. I suppose that word was supposed to convey that the cigs were ‘light’ on tar, but the reality was that that word enable TobCON to castigate Tobcoms for pretending that ‘lights’ were not only less dangerous but not dangerous at all. It also, ultimately, enabled the Canadian Gov to avoid any blame for their involvement in producing the ‘light tar’ plants. It was, of course, a legal swizz.

There seems to be a point where politicians lose touch with reality. Kings used to have court jesters to remind them that they were not Gods. It seems that Jeremy Corbin is supposed to be PM May’s court jester, but he is not very effective. That is not surprising, since the court jester should be going on about the EU Empire, and not fictitious ‘austerity’.

I think that ‘The Elite’, such as Blair, see only political Empire as the answer to global industrial and commercial interests. That might have been fine, had it not been for the manifest persecution of ordinary people due to bans and taxes inflicted upon them in the multinational war.

To make things worse, ‘The Elite’ have decided to do everything that they can to stop people from taking their own decisions to diminish the power of multinational companies, especially Tobcoms. Rather than decrying ecigs, they should have given small ecig companies tax-breaks.  Even Juul is better than combustibles, and should have been given tax-breaks. After all, the tobacco in Juul ‘heats’ is still heavily taxed. Perhaps they are afraid of being accused of taxing ‘harmless’ products.

There is a political ‘fire’ burning fiercely in the UK at the moment. London is like the coastal strip of California. It should be surrounded by barbed wire and watch towers, armed with machine guns. Armed guards should be posted around the perimeter to check passes in and out.

The people voted ‘TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION’. That is a political decision and not a trade decision. I doubt that the vast majority of people who voted for Brexit were bothered about trade. But nobody has asked them in a poll. Is that not weird? Or nobody has taken any notice, and the results of such a poll have not been given prominence on the BBC. Thus, such a poll could treated as ‘fake news’, even though it was not.

Why did the majority of the people vote ‘TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION’? It can only be that they were sick to death of ‘directives’. Each individual voter might have a particular ‘directive’ which he/she abhors, but what is important is that the collective will was to cut the crap.

Yes, some time must be allowed to elapse before foreign fishing boats are excluded from our fisheries. That is reasonable. The only decision required is the period of time. Each decision exists on its own merits.

But ‘leaving the EU’ has little to do with those decisions. Brexit is about dis-empowering the unelected ‘Elite’ from telling us what to do. As a simple example, ecig liquids should not be limited to 10 cc bottles and snus should not be banned.

Is not the answer extremely simple? Just make it known that such regulations no longer apply. There is nothing complicated about it. There really is no reason for a Parliamentary debate. Just ‘make it known’. Vape shops can sell liquid in as big a container as they like, and tobacconists everywhere can sell snus. They can also all sell Juul.

At a stroke, TobCON would lose any purpose.

Not long ago, maybe fifteen years ago, my golf club had low alcohol beer on draught. It was not popular, even though it tasted quite nice (I tried it). Why was it not popular, in view of the stringent ‘driving under the influence’ laws and penalties? I think that most members though that drinking low alcohol was ‘cissy’. They would rather drink less ‘proper’ beer than drink ‘cissy’ beer.

Perhaps TobCON relies upon smokers NOT opting for ‘cissy’ ecigs and such. If I got the same pleasure from Juul, I might go for it, but I am damned it would do so if the ‘heats’ were taxed at the same rate as cigs. The words ‘tobacco products’ are too general to differentiate between good and bad. You might as well lump together cabbage and chocolate cake as equally fattening.

It is weird how important Gov departments, like the FDA (Federal Drugs Admin) in the USA, can manipulate data like Juul use amongst schoolkids, to deprive ALL the people of of the benefits of Juul (if those benefits are are real, in the sense that the tobacco cigs are really as bad as painted.

I vaguely suspect that the dangers of today’s tobacco cigs are grossly overstated.

A Defence of the EU

01/12/2018

I read an interesting post this evening in defence of the EU. It is here:

http://bracken.uk.com/2018/11/brexit-what-next.html

I do not mind bloggers defending the EU and saying that it is a mistake to leave the EU. That is legitimate debate, regardless of the result of the Referendum. It is a reasonable attitude to say that the decision was a mistake.

I have given that post some prominence because it is reasonable. But it deviates from the REAL problems of being a member of the EU. I have always held that I voted for Brexit to rid taxpayers of the cost of the corruption. I do not understand how Macron, Merkel and May et al can countenance the corruption. I do not understand how they can stand the corruption of the EU being hand in glove with the WHO and the UN. I do not understand how our Government in the UK can be so subservient as to accept the EU Directive that ecig liquid can only be sold in 10 ml bottles.

That is just one example of stupidity. Another example is the ban on snus. That also is stupid.

But there is a reasonable argument that the stupidity is because the wrong people are in charge. I would go along with that idea if there was some way to change who is in charge. But there is no such way. Such decisions are secret.

The point of Brexit is to remove ourselves from that corruption. It has little to do with trade. No one in their right minds would want to disrupt trade. That is not what the Brexit vote was about. It was about everything else apart from trade. By trade, I also mean overflying territories. None of those arrangements, including student exchanges, are affected, unless someone wants to be awkward.

Brexit was about removing ourselves from a form of dictatorship, disconnected from trade.

Why do people like PM May not see that?

At What Point Did the Government of Great Britain Lose All Sense of Proportion?

30/11/2018

One must admit that the end of the Empire reduced GB to a small group of islands off the coast of Europe. But, there again, so did loss of Empire affect France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, etc. It is understandable that the Elite of those countries yearned for a new Empire. What could be better than a new Empire comprising of the sovereign countries of Europe?

I have often said that I can find no definitive answer to the question as to what caused WW1, other than that the ‘Aristocracy’ of Europe fell out. After the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, the Austro-Hungarian ‘Empire’ demanded that Serbia comply with impossible demands. The invasion of Serbia then brought into effect a myriad of inter-related treaties, some of which were secret. I have no doubt, in my mind, that some of them were the result of Napoleon’s adventures. But all of them were the creations of the ‘Aristocracy’. Between the wars, ‘socialism’ gained the ascendancy, but did the ‘Aristocracy’ disappear? I think not. It changed. It changed from being based upon the ownership of land to ownership of industry. Also, it hid itself behind innumerable companies, the shareholders of which were based abroad, many of the shareholders being themselves companies.

There are certain people who get all the blame and attention, such as Soros, but they are not necessarily the main actors. There may be an element of ‘fake news’ about their involvement in bending Governments to their will. The real culprits are the ‘Aristocrats’ who took over the Civil Service and Industry, and then moved on to create the UN and all its works.

But why did the USA fall for the trick? Perhaps it too had its ‘Aristocracy’, although of a different kind.

Perhaps the degradation of UK politicians into puppets of the EU and UN, unable to take serious decisions but are constrained to passing laws about same gender marriages, etc, and raising taxes to pay for more and more costly ‘initiatives’, reflects upon the characters of individual MPs. Essentially, it comes down to having no idea what to do. In many cases, such as Brexit, the whole issue is too complex for them. They would rather stay with the ‘status quo’. They are frightened. Shall I repair the hole in the roof or replace the whole roof? Is the hole just a one off, or does it indicate that the whole roof is in a mess? Advice is required. But do they go to roofers for advice? NO! They go to architectural ‘professors’, ‘doctors’ and other academics, or they go to massive building groups which do not deal with holes in roofs. Thus they get advice to RIP EVERY SLATE ROOF OF EVERY BUILDING THAT THEY OWN AND REPLACE THE SLATE WITH TERRACOTTA. That is what happened with asbestos. Not all asbestos was dangerous. Vaguely, I recall that ‘white asbestos’ was OK; it was ‘blue asbestos’ which was dangerous.

What we are witnessing, at this time, is a complete loss of proportion. Every year, in the UK, some 500,000 people die. I have long held that the cause of death is failure of a major organ, whether it be heart, brain, liver, etc. The part that ‘lifestyle’ plays in the failure of a major organ depends upon the circumstances. Amy Winehouse was a great songstress but she succumbed to an excess of drugs and alcohol. She is not the first. Billy Holiday died young from the same problems, and so have any other ‘artistes’. Amy and Billy CHOSE their lifestyle. One can only presume that they wanted to live an exciting life, come what may. In a sense, it is like a person becoming a ‘soldier for hire’. I met a guy on a golf competition  some years ago. A part of his neck was missing. He had been a British marine and transferred to the USA marines. He was hit by a bullet in the neck, but not fatally, as is obvious. But it could have been fatal. He was extremely lucky. It would have been great to listen to his reminiscences, had the opportunity occurred, but it did not. After the game, we all went our separate ways. But I remember him very clearly. He was a very calm golfer.

I think that our politicians really, really want the EU to make decisions for them. In a way, I understand that attitude. Who will deliberate with the International Money fund and the myriad of other supranational NGOs if not the EU? What is missing is that the EU is in league with those NGOs.

The only sensible option is a complete break. Get in contact with Trump and drain the swamp. The swamp enables the continuing failure of Africa to take advantage of its vast mineral wealth. Forget the UN – it is corrupt. Abolish it and replace it. But such things are hard to achieve, even though everyone knows that they are no longer relevant.

People PM May are lost in a world of detail. They do not see the ‘big picture’, or rather, the ‘big picture’ that they see is subservience to ‘Aristocrats’ in the EU.

I want to see the free trade area in Europe to survive. I do not mind ‘free movement’ of Europeans with passports.

The ‘sense of proportion’ suggests that care and attention must predominate and not EU Directives.