Some More Thoughts on ‘Casting Doubts’

There has been a lot of stuff today in the blogs about PP. One of the most amusing has been Dick P’s observations here:

Simple Simon Chapman said that he and his mates had scoured the Oz Gov budget figures but could find no data about tobacco duty income expectations or actual receipts. Of course, not being an economist, he would not know where to look. It seems that the figures are available to a sufficient extent. One of the comical things about the silly Nicola Roxon’s expectations that PP would reduce consumption of tobacco is that the OZ Treasury, all along, budgeted for AN INCREASE in tobacco tax income AFTER the introduction of PP!

Simple Simon has serious egg on his face.

All the more reason, therefore, to turn the devious trickery against Tobacco Control. For example, I talked yesterday about using garyk’s calculations which indicate that, while 85% of smokers die from ‘tobacco related diseases’, so do 84% of non-smokers. What that means is that the TC have tried to use the phrase ‘tobacco related’ to suggest ‘tobacco specific’. I think that it is fair to turn the tables on them and to say that these percentages show that these diseases are NOT caused by tobacco. How can they be, since as many non-smokers die from them as do smokers? There is a bit of deviousness involved, because that idea ignores the specific ‘evidence’ about the connection between smoking and lung cancer.

If TC can use such tricks, why should not we? I have in my hand a Spanish fag packet. It says on the front, “Fumar mata” (Smoking kills). That is a bare-faced LIE. Heart attacks kill, strokes kill, bullets cause ‘exsanguination’, and it is the exsanguination’ that kills, cancers kill, malaria kills, etc.

Sometimes I get the impression that people who comment on newspaper sites about smoking and who demand that the Gov should ban smoking, are terribly afraid. I don’t mean that they are terribly afraid of SHS, although that is what they say. I mean that they hope to live for ever, and, somehow, expect that smoking bans, even if they do not smoke, will create a ‘super-healthy’ state of being, which will result in infinite life.

That could be another way to cast doubts. I like it. For example, when a person says that smoking should be banned, reply:

“If you are a non-smoker, you do not need smoking to be banned to live for ever. Unfortunately, no one has yet invented a pill to ensure that you live forever. One day, it may be that such a pill will be invented. In the meantime, nothing is more certain than that you will die, and you will almost certainly die from a ‘tobacco related disease’. The famous ‘Doctors Study’ showed that 85% of smokers die from ‘tobacco related diseases’; it also showed that 84% of non-smokers died from ‘tobacco related diseases’. What does that indicate? These so-called ‘tobacco related diseases’ are no more ‘tobacco related’ than they are ‘living and dying related’. Wake up! Do not allow yourself to be conned by the snake-oil salesmen of Tobacco Control!”

Do you see that there is little in that paragraph which is superfluous?


We are beginning to learn how to fight back. HIT THEM with their own tricks. Make THEM explain THE DETAIL, rather than them disseminating slogans and us having to respond in detail.

Another interesting fact is that half of the signatories to the FCTC are in arrears with their contributions, and the USA, as a non-signatory, has paid NOTHING! It is countries like the UK which are keeping the FCTC organisation afloat. How stupid are our politicians? That organisation is costing billions, when you take into account its social and economic effects. It is no passing joke. It is destructive and useless.

What is becoming more and more obvious is that, when the ‘Youth’ stop enjoying tobacco, they replace it with something else. Years ago, I was in a nightclub, and I remember the situation very clearly. There were two young women sitting at a table looking glum. The reason that I remember it clearly was that it was the night on which the ‘Allies’ invaded Kuwait and expelled the Iraqi army. A guy strolled up to these two young women and handed them ‘something’ small. They immediately trotted off to the loo. When they came back, their attitude was entirely different. They giggled and laughed and danced. I DO NOT KNOW what actually happened. I can only describe what I saw. Also, the probability is that few of us ever visited such places in the way in which I have described, although the ‘flower power’ generation will have had very similar experiences.

Overall, it is clear that Tobacco Control is simply a ‘kill joy’ organisation. Is it any wonder that the ‘science’ is un-scientific?

Thus, we must complain and complain about the ‘sin taxes’ on our pleasures.  There is no justification for them. Some fifty years ago, such taxes were justified under the heading of ‘luxury’ taxes. I suspect that Cam/Clegg/Mil do not know that. Today, fuel is not a luxury, it is a necessity. Therefore there should be no such thing as ‘fuel duty’. All that ‘fuel duty’ does is make our innovative goods more expensive than similar Chinese goods.


Finally (I must to bed), it is ABSOLUTELY OBVIOUS WITHOUT DOUBT that the way to cut national costs is to STOP throwing money into the hands charlatans in the EU, the WHO, the IPCC, and the UN. SOD the treaties – they are simply comical. Re-allocate the charlatan, Andrew Black, to Australia, and put him in charge of bin collections.  He is, after all, very, very clever. At least he was able to correct our wonderfully able Health Minister, Soubry MP, that the EU had not dropped ecigs from the Tobacco Control Directive.


Does anyone beside me see the childishness of Cameron/Clegg/Miliband? They are ‘not fit for purpose.


%d bloggers like this: