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

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





The Artificial


I read Simon Clark’s blog ‘Taking Liberties’ today. He was talking about – well, I’m not quite certain what he was talking about. You read it:

The Cambridge dictionary defines ‘hubris’ thus:

A way of talking or behaving that is too proud:

EG. “He was punished for his hubris”

I’m not sure that Philip Morris are speaking or acting proudly, although I would concur that PMI seems to be throwing its smoker customers under a bus.

But what I am personally annoyed about is why on earth anyone should want to quote Arnott’s opinion of whether or not PMI’s Iquos are legal adverts in shops which wish to sell that product. Here is Simon’s quote:

Arnott said:

“The legislation is very clear that advertising which has the effect of promoting tobacco products is illegal. That includes iQOS, just as it includes pipes used for smoking tobacco. It’s a barefaced cheek for Philip Morris to argue otherwise.”

Why was she quoted at all? She has no legal expertise at all. You only need to read her CV. All she is, and all she has ever been, is a ‘word mincer’. Read the quote:

The legislation is very clear….” Is it? Is a poster which says, “IQOS available here” ‘promoting tobacco products’? Does the word ‘Tobacconist” promote tobacco products? Just a word mincer.

“….just as it includes pipes….”. Eh? Has she never seen Antiques Roadshow?

Just a word mincer.

And what is the scientific or legal derivation of the colloquial phrase ‘have a cheek’?

Just a word mincer. She minces up words like a sausage machine minces up pork, but not so expertly.

I can understand the MSM quoting here since she can be relied upon to insult people in their millions. Perfect click-bait. But there is no way that she should be quoted in respectable journals such as Taking Liberties of the BSC.

No… Much better to say ‘The Royal College of Physicians’ mouthpiece minced up the English language thus:

“The legislation is very clear that advertising which has the effect of promoting tobacco products is illegal. That includes iQOS, just as it includes pipes used for smoking tobacco. It’s a barefaced cheek for Philip Morris to argue otherwise.”

The (very junior) health minister, Steve Brine, was no better. Simon quoted him as saying:

It’s completely unacceptable for organisations to be promoting tobacco products – smoking kills, and that’s why we have clear, strict rules in place protecting people from its harmful effects.”

Another piece of word mincing. Maybe Arnott told him what to say. Iqos is not smoking. QED. There is no combustion therefore no smoke. QED.

As I recall, the Health Act was very clear about what constitutes the subject of the smoking ban. It was cigs, cigars, pipes, etc, ‘OR ANYTHING ELSE WHICH CAN BE SMOKED’. [Words to that effect]. That is, the words ‘tobacco products’ have to be in smokable form to come within the definition of ‘tobacco products’.

I do not know if the TPD from the EUSSR has a similar definition, or even if there is any definition at all.

What I would like to see is some tiny organisation take on the word mincers and let them take it to court. Ignore the bullying warnings and let it happen. Let the word mincers tear each other to pieces, as they try to square their ‘harm reduction’ failures with their persecution of vaper (tobacco products) and Iqos users (tobacco products) and, of course, the blatant and unforgivable persecution of smokers.

I particularly love Brine’s quote:

It’s completely unacceptable for organisations to be promoting tobacco products – smoking kills, and that’s why we have clear, strict rules in place protecting people from its harmful effects.”

Ha! Ha! Ha! He sees no cognitive dissonance between condemning evil and reaping tax moneys from it.

Another thing. I do not see PMI’s announcements as being in the slightest bit threatening to us smokers. Simon compared PMI with Lucozade, but there is a huge difference. PMI has not changed its ‘recipe’ for its tobacco products. I think that PMI is playing a very clever chess-like game with TC. “If you can’t beat them, join them”. Even better, “If you can’t beat them, take over from them”. What is the point of taxpayers paying for ASH ET AL if Tobcoms have declared an intention to outdo them? Has ASH declared an intention to have smoking outlawed by, say, 2030? It has not. What PMI has done is upstage them. It has declared its hope/intention to be able to stop producing cigs by 2030, or whenever. It expects to do so by replacing cigs with Iqos. No wonder ASH (and its political puppet, Brine) are screaming. (Remember the ‘scream test’?) PMI is outflanking them, and they know it, and they are afraid that the gravy train is grinding to a halt.

But the consequences range wider. The likes of Glantz are also about to be retired, and all the other spongers on the other side of the Atlantic. PMI is big and affects the USA as much, if not more, than the UK.

So I go along with PMI’s chess-like game plan as a stroke of genius in the sense that, as in chess, you bide your time before battering your opponent with an unexpected ‘pawn avalanche’. What that means in chess is that your opponent might not realise that he has lost several pawns, which do not matter much normally, but has therefore left himself open to a gradual but determined, slow advance of several pawns to trap his King.

Thus, PMI seem to have calculated that now is the time to ‘advance its pawn avalanche’ in the form of the massively less dangerous Iqos. Let ASH ET AL wind up the danger of smoking and SHS to astronomical proportions, and then undercut them. ASH ET AL cannot deny the actual science, which shows that the ‘toxins’ are almost nonexistent in Iqos. But what of the SHS danger of Iqos fumes? Surely PMI must have calculated that the fumes are 90% less dangerous than SHS fumes? So why should Iqos be banned in clubs and pubs?

I think that is a lovely idea because it brings attention back to the harmlessness of SHS. No wonder Arnott and her puppet, Brine, are foaming at the mouth. But Arnott and Brine are not ‘the deep state’. The RSP is one of the tentacles.

It really is weird. Blair invented ‘New Labour’, which abandoned its supporters, the working class (whatever that may mean), and brought in the smoking ban for no good reason whatsoever. Unless Blair was a Globalist. Perhaps some thoughts about Globalists are worth exploring. The thoughts would have to be conjectures, since all is hidden. But I would vouch to say that Globalists are linked strongly to the IPCC, possibly even more so than TobCON. But there is also the spectre of global population. What is the opposite of ‘Go forth and multiply’? Could it be ‘Come back and shrink’? ‘Come back and divide’ does not seem right.

This post was intended to be short. It swelled as it went along. But at least it more or less stayed with its title: “The Artificial”.

Can we be totally confident that the Royal Birth actually occurred? LOL! Of course we can …….. De Duke is still alive and kicking, or is he? There could be a look-alike. And there are plenty look-alikes for the Queen.

Of course I jest……………

Who know what is true these days? Blair, Brown, Cameron, etc, should have thought long and hard before capitulating to the Globalists.

There is no reason, after Brexit, that the UK should not control the EU. It is quite simple. We have the power. And be in no doubt that power is the main thing. “Inflict tariffs upon our goods and services, and we will inflict similar tariffs on yours”. Customs union? No need. Just carry on with present arrangements.

No. Brexit is about politics. The corrupt EU Parliament no longer figures. They can bugger themselves to oblivion, but not at our expense. And, No.. We will not give the EU billions without the purpose of the money being spelt out in minute detail. Why is the MSM not publicising such things? The EU must present an estimate in the first place, and then firm the estimate up to become a quotation. “X cost for Y benefit”.

We must wait and see how these games pan out.


Hayek’s Principle


There is an excellent site devoted to the economic principles of Friedrich Hayek. It is:

Essentially, Hayek’s proposal was that The State cannot possibly know each individual’s choice of what to buy in his/her best interests in the market. (By ‘market’ in this case, we mean any sort of shop, supermarket, on-line store, insurance, holidays, whatever). Prices in the market will rise and fall depending upon availability and demand. ‘Availability’ equals ‘supply’, but is not quite the same. There is a sense in which demand is immediate, but availability is not always immediate. For example, a millionaire might demand an immediate flight to wherever. His office would enquire and find someone who had a private jet who would do the job – for £10,000 or whatever.

Hayek’s argument was that the State cannot possibly control the economy because it does not know what people want, nor can it know, since people’s choices are changing all the time. The best computers in the world cannot cope with unknowns.

One of the many, many unknowns is how smokers will deal with massively increased taxes on baccy. It is clear beyond doubt that there is a massive black market. Unfortunately, I am not privy to the working of that market, or how to become involved. I guess that the fact that I no longer ‘move’ in circles where visits to disreputable clubs and pubs are the order of the day has something to do with my ignorance.

I wonder sometimes how genuine tobacco product sales info is; how genuine Nat Stat info is. I do not suggest that Nat Stats are corrupt. In fact, I know for a fact that, during the Blair years, Nat Stats fought off demands to fiddle the figures. I wonder sometimes if Nat Stats is being fed junk via the interference of the Deep State. Who monitors the sales stats of Tobacco Product Importers? How are the facts moved from importer to Nat Stats?

Trust in Government does not really revolve around promises. It revolves around continuity. Such things as smoking bans massively destroy continuity. Some citizens are suddenly declared to be ‘personas non gratis’ – outlaws. That would be OK, if those persons had done something terribly wrong. Think of the old Westerns: “Wanted Dead Or Alive. $100 dollars reward”. But smokers have never done anything wrong at all.

That is the reason for the invention of SHS Danger. There needed to be a reason for smokers to be ‘wanted dead or alive’.

The ‘evidence’ was crap, and Blair et al knew perfectly well that that the ‘evidence’ was crap. As I have pointed out again and again and again, if constantly, day after day, inhaling huge ‘packets’ of tobacco smoke into your lungs takes 30 years to have an effect, how can whiffs of tobacco smoke have any effect less than hundreds of years? No harm from SHS has ever been demonstrated.

Back to the Hayek Principle. Communism (and Socialism in general) failed because, no matter how well meaning the ‘managers’ might have been, they could not predict. Thus, their supply side could not cope.

The ‘Market’, however, copes by being inhuman. It is strictly business. However, there need to be rules to avoid cheating and fraud.

In the case of Fredie Mac and Fannie Mac, the State buggered everything up in the USA.

When ‘The State’ gets involved in the economy, it complicates an already complex organism beyond its capacity to absorb stupid laws like smoking bans. And then, when the stupid laws are not enough for the irresponsible blatherers, the State buggers things up even more.

What is the answer? It can only be a new political movement.

Further Examples of Elite Bias


Yesterday, or the day before, the BBC trumpeted that we had just had the hottest April day for some time. Erm…. Not really. London experienced a heat sink, as you would expect with such a mass of concrete and energy use. It is like smog, but with different causes. There are vast numbers of particles of soot etc from vehicle exhausts which are heavier than air. There is no wind to disperse them. They are trapped near ground level. The whole atmosphere, including the particles gets hotter and hotter, at surface level.

But wait! The very BBC which trumpeted the ‘hottest April day’ for – erm – some time, is now forecasting that temperatures will fall back to something like 12C during the day and 6C during the night, here in the North West.

Where is the unbiased BBC research about the lousiest winter that many of us can remember?

It really is weird that we ordinary folk, who would rather be doing something more interesting, have to wind ourselves up to bombard our local MP with education. What makes it worse is that they will remain obdurately unwilling to to even read your letters properly.

Mind you, I must admit that I have never written to my MP. I wrote to my local ward councillor, UKIP, about a problem with the bins, which she helped to sort out. Another election is due shortly, and I (and wife) will vote UKIP again. I (we) will continue to vote UKIP because it is impossible for us to vote Blair and Brown, or Cameron and Osborn.

There is just a very, very remote possibility that one could vote for Corbin, provided that he clearly explained how he would free The People from persecution in all its forms. ALL its forms. Using taxation to force people to conform is anathema and promotes revolution. It has always been so.

But, no doubt, TC apparatchiks will disappear into the woodwork. Someone should create a list of such persecutors for action at a later date. Anyone who demanded a rise in taxes on cigs, for example, is an arch persecutor because the number of people affected is so enormous. Never forget that a small increase in taxes equals a huge overall theft from smokers as a group.

I personally do not know how to create a website which would attract attention. Perhaps a reader could do that. What I have in mind is a list of Tobacco Control spongers, with some info about their previous history. For example, what did Debs Arnott do before getting her cushy job with ASH?

I really feel that we have to hit the actual purveyors of persecution where it hurts. I do not mean threats of any sort whatsoever. I mean how they became experts in smoking danger when they are marketers and not statisticians, or even oncologists.

Enough for tonight. I hope that readers are seeing where my thinking is going. It is that The Elite decided decades ago that The People had to be disciplined. “Do not walk about with your hands in your pockets”. “Do not run in the corridors”.

Last thing for tonight. I was an ‘airman’ in the Air Force. I set off from my billet to somewhere and I was smoking a cig. For some reason or other, it was not allowed to smoke in the open air!! As I rounded a corner, an officer appeared 20 yards in front of me. Shit! I braved it out and saluted and he replied. But he could not resist saying, “Put the cigarette out!”

I suppose that a courageous member of the Labour Party, even in uniform, would have said, “Who the fuck do you think you are, arse-hole? You have no right to control me other than at work”.

It is at the lowest level that the contempt for legal niceties will first erupt. Our job is to ensure that that the persecuted and prosecuted are not the scum of the Earth.

I am beginning to lose track. I must to bed.



It is about time that The People realise that 25% of their number are being persecuted. That 25% is people who enjoy tobacco. But there is another group which is being persecuted, which is people who put a teaspoonful of sugar in their cup of tea. That may add another 70% to the total number of persecuted people. I don’t suppose that it is possible to pass 100% of persecuted people. The answer, of course, is that the persecutions hit the same people over and over again. If you enjoy tobacco, and are stupid enough not to take a cheap trip for a couple of days, paid for via your credit card, to, say, Belgium, to stock up with a year’s supply of roll up stuff or even cigs, then I can do nothing for you. If you cannot see that paying half price saves far, far more money than credit card charges, I cannot help you. Of course, a certain amount of discipline is required to pay off the credit card debt, but the savings are far, far greater than the interest rate.

The ferry from Hull is cheap. You can arrange in advance your purchase. You get a floating hotel and a day out for next to nothing. Your only ‘problem’ is getting to Hull. Forget it if you are too scared to work out how to get to Hull.

But that is beside my point this evening. What is absolutely clear beyond doubt is that the politicians which we elect are perfectly happy to persecute The People. It is easier for them to persecute minorities, because the majorities do not give a shit. The majorities do not see PRINCIPLES.

Citizens of the United Kingdom should be painfully aware that NO politician gives a toss about persecution of any given minority of the moment. That minority might be parents of young children. Witness the eagerness of Scottish MSPs to inflict ‘named persons’ upon parents in Scotland. Who would have authority? The parents or the named persons?

Persecution of minorities, via taxes, was done away with decades ago. But it has reared its ugly head again.

What can we do to blast the likes of Osborn and Cameron? We must find ways to discredit them and persecute them, any which way we can. After all, they set up the persecution of smokes, fatties, drinkers, etc.

A Little Example of the Epidemiological Dilemma.


I am 78 years old. During the last several months, I have been gasping for an opportunity to prepare my plot for the coming growing season. My Nic. Tob. plants are doing very nicely since I germinated in January. They could go outside tomorrow if weather conditions were right, but there is still a chance of frost, which would kill them pronto. Another couple of weeks need to elapse before we can be confident that the chance of frost is over.

Yesterday was a lovely warm, sunny day. So I set to. I had already removed the remains of last year’s plants in January (or was it December?) and dug the plot deeply and extended the plot. It now covers an area of about 20 square metres. Deeply digging such an area is hard work.

So yesterday, I corrected a fault with the plot overall. It was too bumpy. There were high areas and depressed areas. I wanted the plot to be more or less even, but I also wanted it to slope a little so that surface water would tend to drain off. It now slopes a little from back to front and from left to right. That involved a lot of raking. I cannot say that it was hard work, but breaking up lumps with a rake and dragging damp soil about is tedious. In hot sunlight, it is sweaty work.

Today, I continued the job. I spread the contents of my compost heap over the surface of the plot. That was harder than I expected because the compost was very clumpy and sticky. It consisted of half rotted leaf stuff, lawn mowing and the remnants of thousands of teabags. The paper on the teabags rots quickly, leaving a lovely, brown mess of highly fertile ‘manure’. I had to get the wheelbarrow out to transport the sticky stuff to convenient spots on the plot from where they could be spread out more or less evenly over the plot. But the wheel on the wheelbarrow was a bit seized up, so I had to free it with WD40.

Then I found a real problem. When I deeply dug the plot in Jan, I made no attempt to break the lumps of soil up. I expected frost to do it for me. When I tried to dig in the compost (and the bonemeal which I had spread all over the surface), I met significant resistance to the spade blade. The soil deeper down was still badly compacted. So I re-dug the whole plot to a spade depth – about 10 inches.

You can possibly see where this post is going. At my age, how is it possible for me to do such hard work? Why did I not have a heart attack and drop dead? After all, I have been smoking since I was about 17.

Here is the epidemiological problem:

Is it that I can do all that work because I am fit, or is it that I am fit because I do all that work?

Because of my wife’s infirmity, I am constantly doing little things. Not a lot. It does not hurt, it does not take a long time, it is not difficult. But there is masses of it. Can I do those things because I am fit, or am I fit because I do those things? Can I exercise because I am fit enough, or am I fit enough because I exercise?

The question is worth asking because it is relevant to ALL epidemiological studies. And it is VERY important. VERY important.

Thus, in the Doctors Study, it is worth asking if smoking killed some doctors because they were already weak. Those doctors could have been already weak for all sorts of reasons, whether it be alcohol, war-time service, bugs picked up from patients, lack of exercise, and many other factors.

Would those who died from LC not have done so had they not smoked? You might just as well ask it they would not have died had they not had practices in smoggy towns, which brings in the factor of where those doctors who died from LC had their practices.

I have always in the back of my mind Kitty Little’s studies of the presence of LC in windy cities on the coast of South Africa as compared with cities in the interior. There was far more LC in the later than in the former.

Other studies have shown similar results among smokers who smoke the same amount but live in either the country or the city. The city dwellers fare worse than than the country dwellers.

It also seems that people who live in the lower apartments of a block of flats suffer more LC than those who live in higher apartments.

But there is a problem, just like my discovery that the soil was far more compacted deeper down than I expected. It is the Doctors Study claim that heavy smokers were 15 times more likely to die from LC than non-smokers. It could be the other way round – perhaps many doctors were not fit enough to smoke.

I really must check the text again, because I am not sure about that. I really must, but I am too busy right now being fit enough to dig, or digging to stay fit.

Smoke for a longer and more pleasurable life! But if you are fed up with living, then stop smoking. Sit down, watch TV, guzzle tea and scoff biscuits. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES make your heart work. That is bad for your health. You might have a heart attack.

My experience in trying to get my wife out of hospital revealed to me some of the faults in the system. For example, it was quite comical how two social services people deliberately split my wife and I up so that one could talk to her whilst the other distracted me. It was deliberate. But what was worse was that the ‘Occupational Therapists’ were pushing their ideas of what was ‘safe’. They seemed to have no idea that no system was perfectly safe.

I have in mind to create waves, but not yet. My thinking is that the involvement of multiple agencies, as a ‘team’, actually diminishes responsibility. If the doctors in the hospital say that the infections etc have been cured, then there is no reason that the patient should be in hospital at all. How the patient gets out of bed is not their concern. An there is no reason for the patient to stay in hospital just because ‘Occupational Therapy’ thinks that there are risks. Those possibilities rightfully belong at a later stage, after the patient has returned home.

We have not had any follow-up from Occupational Therapy.

Occupational Therapy seems to me to be like TC. It is demanding of perfection. But the youths involved seem to have considerable power. There were  two of them, both around 25, or thereabouts. Both seemed to be more powerful than the 50 year old Consultant Doctor who was responsible for curing patients.

What is ‘Occupational Therapy’? Does anyone know? It is much like ‘Tobacco Control’. No one really knows what it is.

OUR Children


Frank Davis was talking about ‘An impending  Political Krakatoa Event’:

I think that the explosion will about OUR children.

A ploy by TobCON and others has been to describe the Nation’s children as OUR children. Erm, no. The Nation’s children do not belong to TobCON. Those children belong to their parents and no one else.

I do not know how many readers know about Hayek. He is famous for denouncing the possibility of State control of the economy of that State. His premise was that it is not possible for a State to have sufficient knowledge of what is going on in the economy of the State. There are far too many individual choices being made. EG, whether to buy sausages as compared with potatoes. Those choices cannot be anticipated, and so States should allow the ‘free market’ to decide what is most popular at any given time, and allow the market to decide prices.

The same idea applies with children essentially. There is no such thing as OUR children. When TC or others say, “OUR children need to be protected from sugar adverts”, they mean that they have control over YOUR children. So OUR children translates into THEIR children. The experts OWN your children.

Was the ‘named person’ child protector actually rolled out in Scotland? What always happens in such cases is that the scheme is rolled out with much fanfare and then abandoned within months quietly. No one is ever indicted for wasting vast amounts of taxpayers’ money.

I think that the explosion, the eruption, will eventually come from parents. What is missing, at this time, is a seriously involved parental presence in schools. I do not mean a docile group of chosen TobCON operatives. I mean parents who want their children to be taught maths, reading and writing in the first place, and not racism and sex stuff.

So where is the National Parents Defence Group?

The Royal Statistical Society


“The Royal Statistical Society (RSS) is one of the world’s most distinguished and renowned statistical societies. It has three main goals. The RSS is a British learned society for statistics, a professional body for statisticians, and a charity which promotes statistics for the public good.”

A learned society.

A professional body for statisticians.

A charity which promotes statistics for the public good.

So where are they regarding the junk statistics produced by TobCON? I suppose that it is possible for the Society to say that there is nothing wrong with the stats produced by those studies, and that the conclusions claimed are none of their business. They are only concerned with the actual stats. Thus, Glantz can get away with claiming that vaping is a gateway to smoking because he is entitled to interpret the stats any way he likes. To fall foul of the Society, he would have to fiddle the actual figures.

That is a horrific scenario. It is ridiculous. It means that professional statisticians do not give a toss about how their work is used. If I was such a person, I would be extremely incensed if my work was distorted to produce ‘truth decay’. Only corruption could explain such a thing.

Is the Royal Statistical Society corrupt? It would not surprise me. TobCON seems to have infiltrated its agents into every institution on the planet. I wonder if it is worth enquiring by a direct approach to the Society whether or not it has been infiltrated, or is there another way to find out? The silence from that ‘Honorable Society’ is deafening. You would think that Ronald Fisher would be the patron saint of the Society.

Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher FRS (17 February 1890 – 29 July 1962), who published as R. A. Fisher, was a British statistician and geneticist. For his work in statistics, he has been described as “a genius who almost single-handedly created the foundations for modern statistical science” and “the single most important figure in … “

Fisher denounced Doll’s studies. One can only assume that Doll had the backing of people far richer and influential than Fisher. It is that backing which is so troubling. The idea that one billionaire can create mayhem is very troubling indeed. Such billionaires can invent stories about their opponents at the drop of a hat, accusing them of all sorts of illegal practices. The accusations are the weapons. Cliff Richard has taken them on, and I hope that he takes them for millions.

In fact, Doll DID have such backing. He was supported by Rockefeller via the Tropical Hygiene gang.

I wonder what would happen if I, as an individual, asked the Royal Statistical Society to review the latest obesity statistical scare? The trouble is that I am not by any means an ‘expert’. Perhaps someone like Chris Snowdon could make a better fist of such a referral.

The important thing is that ‘Truth Decay’ must be defeated. I do not care what ‘the truth’ of smoking is. I only care that ‘the truth’ should be clearly stated and not distorted by propaganda.

Doll’s Doctors Study showed that lung cancer was rare, even though he purported to show that smokers suffered disproportionately. LC was still rare.

So the Royal Statistical Society has to be brought into play somehow. It has hidden itself away for far too long.



‘Truth Decay’


Yes, you read that correctly – not ‘tooth decay’.

I came across that phrase via Dick P’s twitter feed. It is here:

Do you not think that it is a wonderful phrase? I love it. Zealots of all flavours have been using ‘tooth decay’ as a bludgeon with which to batter parents into abject surrender. The phrase suggests that parents are responsible for harming their children by allowing them the occasional treat of a few sweets. Or rather, by allowing them any sort of sugary treat at all – ice cream, chocolate, cake, etc. In fact, I wonder if parents allow their kids to have any sort of dessert at all, even if they are eating out.

My hotel in Mallorca was very busy this time. There were loads and loads of families. It was particularly noticeable how many grandparents and grandchildren there were. Easter hols, I suppose. It may have been especially busy because so many of the hotels in the town were still closed. I doubt that the the kids were refused their desserts with their meals. The Barbados hotel does a really tempting line in the desserts field – everything from whole fruits like apples and oranges through chocolate soaked sponges and bowls of multi-coloured sweets. What more could a child expect? And their parents and grandparents.

My experiences in Magalluf reinforced my belief that hardly any of the propaganda put out by The Elite is true. There were dozens and dozens of kids but I did not see a single fat one. Not one. But there was also another observation. It was that most young men were not tall and most young women were rather small. You can observe these things leisurely when you have time to do so, such as when you are sitting outside a disco at 2 am playing chess on an electronic chess set. You also get to observe that most of the young men were typical Caucasian physical types – some rather skinny and some somewhat chunky, but mostly around 5′ 7″ or thereabouts. The girls were not the sylph-like figures of TV programmes and adverts. They were mostly around 5’4″ or thereabouts and a bit ‘hippy’ (a bit wide in the hips). But they were all lovely of course.

The trouble with ‘Truth Decay’ is that, once the propagandists have painted the false dichotomy by constant repetition for a sufficient period of time, it is bloody hard to reassert the true ‘Truth’.

But supposing that one determined to seek the true Truth by selecting a few primary schools and attending those schools and standing outside videoing the children leaving the schools at 3.30 pm or so. How else could you collect real, ‘true’ evidence of child obesity? It would not be five minutes before one or more parents approached you belligerently asking what you thought you were doing! Imagine what would happen if you said, “I’m doing research on child obesity”. You would very quickly be told to f off and do your research elsewhere. So what happens is that the propagandists actually get inside the schools and surreptitiously take readings and adjust the readings as they wish. Head Teachers are powerless to stop them. The ‘Faceless Elite’ then tell Head Teachers to send letters to parents.

Where are the teaching Unions!!!!! They should be playing merry hell with the Local Authorities. Those Unions sold their souls when the sided with Tobacco Control.

Only if you go back to the original research can you get a glimmer of the real Truth. I have the Doll reports from the Hospital Study and the Doctors Study in detail. I must re-read them. As I recall, without looking anything up, out of some 30,000 doctors, in the Doctors Study, who were mostly smokers at the beginning of the study, only about 1000 died from LC. Pro rata, the smokers were 15 times more likely to die from LC. Right. But, in view of the fact that the vast majority were smokers, why did so few smokers die from LC? Why did not some 15,000 die from LC? What was wrong with those doctors who did not die from LC? There must have been something wrong with them. They must have been ill, not to die from LC.

There was another titbit of info in the Doctors Study which is often overlooked. Smokers were ‘only’ twice as likely to die from heart attacks than non-smokers. Statistically, twice as likely means nothing since far too many other factors come into the equation. Doll glossed over that difficulty.

And another thing. The study was ended prematurely. When the study was ended, there were still about 6000 doctors alive. There was no reason for the study to end until all the doctors were dead, give or take a few. I suspect that Doll et al did not want everyone to know that all the doctors died eventually because their hearts stopped.

‘Truth Decay’ has been evident throughout the nerve agent poisoning episode. I do not know why May and Johnson have targeted Russia. No doubt they have their reasons. But the ridiculous attempt to assassinate an old fart and his daughter in such a stupid way speaks volumes. No assassin would make such a botch of it, even using a ‘nerve agent’. And what precisely is a ‘nerve agent’? What is wrong with a couple of bullets?

Can smokers use ‘Truth Decay’ themselves?

It is possible. For example, suppose that I said that only 10 doctors out of 30,000 died from LC, as reported by Doll? Would anyone correct my figures?  Suppose that all us smokers shouted that SHS is not dangerous?

But how could we do it?

I tried to create a ‘Constituency Group’ meaning at least one person in every constituency in the UK. My idea was that we could bombard our MPs with the FACTS. I really believe that it is possible to do so. It is especially important in this era of ‘Truth Decay’.

The only problem is, ‘Who decides what to bombard MPs with?’ Perhaps that task is what FOREST should have been doing for the last 20 years.

But we have to start somewhere and somehow. I am too old and have too may responsibilities with my wife suffering from MS and recently out of hospital. I cannot do it. We need a multi-millionaire to side with us. Why do all the rich bastards side with puritans in the healthy, wealthy West, rather than attacking poverty in Africa and such places?

It can be done. Smokers can be defended, if only by making raw tobacco available at a cheap price. That should suit TC, since it would damage Tobcoms.

Only rigid TC Zealots stand in the way of compromise. It is sad that politicians cannot see that rigidity.

FOREST should be the prime mover, but it is chicken. It has no courage. I do not know why FOREST lacks courage. It should have organised the battering of MPs in every constituency years ago. Perhaps it was complacent, or was just going through the motions.

Battering MP is our best option. For too long, they have been insulated against smoker anger.

Time for a change.

Should Smoker Advocates Give Up Bothering With The MSM?


Did anti-communist advocates argue with Stalin in Russia? Did they issue press releases moaning about his pogroms and collectivisation of agriculture? Did they whinge in the newspapers of the time when he had opponent shot in the back of the head?  I doubt it.

We are in much the same position. The only difference is that the official ‘pro-smoking’ advocate, FOREST, is allowed to continue to exist – barely. As Simon Clark pointed out, ASH ET AL claimed that FOREST was supported by funding from the Tobacco Manufacturing Assn. It is not. It receives donations from certain individual companies. But what is wrong with that? Would ASH ET AL provide FOREST with funds?

My problem with FOREST is that it is a sort of anti-communist voice in East Germany which might have been permitted to exist as a silly throwback to rule by the Kaiser, before more enlightened rulers took over. From the MSM point of view, FOREST is a useful idiot.

Obviously, I am not condemning Simon Cook. It is not a personal thing. It is a structural thing. If FOREST, and Simon Cook, depend upon being quoted in the MSM to justify their existence, then they are just like ASH ET AL.

I might well be better if FOREST did not exist. It might well be better if smokers had an underground organisation which did not talk to the MSM at all. Let ASH ET AL dominate. They do not matter. Do not respond to invitations from the MSM to comment on ASH ET AL propaganda. Such comments perpetuate the existence of ASH ET AL.

I note that FOREST has moved away from arguing about ‘smoking’ and has moved towards ‘smokers’. Too late. ‘Smokers’ should have been the emphasis twenty years ago.

Smokers are being persecuted. There is no doubt. And the persecution is obvious. ASH ET AL demand that the persecution should be ratcheted up by another cog or two. It is demanding that images of smokers must be banned on TV. The excuse is ‘for the children’, but anyone with intellect will know that the idea is propaganda – ban images of smoking on TV period.

So, in my opinion, FOREST should stop being a lackey of the MSM. The MSM no longer matters. Refuse to engage with it. Refuse to engage with ASH ET AL. Do surveys of how much smokers enjoy smoking and produce press releases about such things. Lobby MPs. IGNORE THE MSM! Ignore ASH ET AL!

You see, ‘SMOKING’ is an activity. It is easy to condemn. It is far more difficult to condemn ‘SMOKERS’. That is why ‘the children’ are invoked so often.

To fight back, we must emphasis SMOKERS. SMOKING is is not the issue. TOBACCO is not the issue. PLANTATIONS are not the issue.

We must emphasis the persecution of smokers and demand the reversal of that persecution, especially taxation and smoking bans. Blair initiated the blatant persecution of smokers with the smoking ban in enclosed places, aggravated by potentially massive penalties, not on smokers, but on people who were not smokers – publicans and such. Why there were not massive protests astonishes me. Perhaps it was because the whole Health Act was so convoluted.

Do not think that Pubcos are your friends. Far from it. The staff may be friendly, but the organisations detest you. You are a source of income and nothing more. Do not expect any support from them.

So we rely upon ourselves. But we cannot have a central organisation. Tobacco Control is far too powerful for such an organisation to fight it.

The persecution of smokers must be seen and reversed.  It may take some time.




At last, the weather is bucking up a little. This next week,  hereabouts, we can expect temperatures in the high teens or even above 20C on one day. The main thing, as I see it, is that everything is soaking wet and cold, including the fabric of our houses. Everything needs drying out and warming up. I noticed this evening, around 5 pm, that even though it has been a fine day, the lawn grass was still wet.

The Zealots have tried their best to follow the directives from the WHO and get ‘plantations’ of Nicot.. Toba… banned in the UK. I’m surprised that they have not produced a ‘study’ which shows that NT spreads like wildfire, just like Japanese Knot-weed. As usual, they managed to get a law passed via the greedy Chancellor of the Exchequer’s budget, or some such, which does not actually ban the growing of such plants, but purports to regulate dead plants at the end of the season.  Needless to say, the provision is typical of BAD LAW. It was passed, without scrutiny, because nobody actually gives a shit about plants – unless they have to be grown in attics under grow lights. I should imagine that anyone who grew plants in an attic has thoroughly insulated the attic by now. Thus, the Zealots, by engaging in show trials, actually contribute to the proliferation of the ‘offence’.

The upshot is that growing the plants has been legislatively approved. I love it when the Zealots produce laws which have the opposite effect of what was intended.

My dedicated plot needs quite a lot of work to make it as fertile and productive as possible, but we must always remember that it is primarily a hobby. At least it is a bit more productive than writing this blog!

To finish off, here is a pic of my plants:


Aren’t they lovely? But under the biggest plants are lots of small ones. The propagator has 72 cells. Since that pic was taken, I have transplanted the plantlets into separate 2″ pots. They should be going outdoors early May, all being well.

Readers will reasonably expect me to say what the end product will be. All I can say, from past experience, is that the results of my endeavours, including curing the leaves, have been modest. I am talking about quality and not quantity. The taste tends to be tarty.

The curing process involves collecting leaves which are ‘mature’ (big and beginning to droop and become a paler shade of green) and holding them in a sealed chamber for several days (about five) at about 95% humidity and about 35C. IE, warm and damp.

They say that the stuff should be aged for years or ‘kilned’ for a month or so. I am not at all happy with those ideas. But I do not know. For all I know, the recommendations on the net might be the destructive imaginings of TC.

We are all in a sort of dream world. Who knows whether A or B or C actually said what they are reported to have said.

In my opinion, it would be really, really great if the BBC was cleansed of people with agendas, and was reverted to reporting FACTS! It is important to remove opinions from the news altogether. Opinions can be expressed elsewhere.