Further to Propaganda Stuff from Last Night

One ought not to start drinking red wine at 10 pm and then start a post three hours later at 1 am. But here I am again. However, the difference is that I went to the pub at 10 pm and only had two pints, which do not count.

I have been chatting with JB from Ireland via e-mail. She came across a method of curing leaves using an old-style metal dustbin and a crock pot. In her case, however, she has a redundant chest freezer which she can use. The beauty of that is that it is already insulated internally.  There is some electrical wizardry involved, using thermostats and thermometers, but nothing that is the least bit difficult. She is going to run with it and keep me informed. Perhaps, in a couple of months time, it might be possible to recommend a cheap and efficient method which might make curing simpler.

======

When I wrote last night’s post, I gradually faded away into inebriation.  Sorry about that. But I am in danger of the same thing tonight, so I’d better get on with it.

The whole point of last night’s post was to highlight the ‘publicity stunt’ nature of Tobacco Control methods. These ‘publicity stunts’ have been employed for over a hundred years, ever since an American guy worked out how dim ‘the masses’ were. Interestingly, the ‘Pavlov Dog’ experiments are integral to the idea.

It isn’t that people are not intelligent. It is more that they have neither the time nor inclination to check that what they are being told is correct. Thus, the more that some untruth is repeated, the more it becomes true – in the minds of ‘the masses’. In the minds of Tobacco Control, even those of us who object to being assimilated are still part of ‘the masses’, but we are only a tiny part and can be ignored.

What this means is that Tobacco Control can say anything at all without proof, provided that it is scary. Thus, we have the attack on e-cigs. “We do not know the long-term effects” is scary. But, when a new medicine is introduced to the market with MHRA approval, does anyone know the likely ‘long-term effects?’ Thalidomide comes to mind.

 

But before I forget (again!), I need to point out the blatant use of old-fashioned advertising techniques as illustrated in Dick Puddlecote’s analysis of the mumbo-jumbo about e-cigs here.  When you read it, you will see that the people who oppose e-cigs spend ninety percent of their time demonising tobacco companies. They have little to say, in reality, about e-cigs themselves. Even when they do, they get the facts wrong.

——–

There is a guy in Scotland who intends to ‘sue’ for the devastation of his social life as a result of the smoking ban. Simon Clark at Forest has poo-pood the idea. I do not know why he has done so. If Tobacco Control can bring to the Court such things as claims for damages because Big Tobacco caused a person to get lung cancer, I see no reason that a person should not sue for devastation of his social life. It is a matter of ‘human rights’. What is important is that Smokers are not protected as ‘addicts’, therefore they can be discriminated against. They can be denied jobs and houses. But the other side of the coin is that they therefore have the rights of any ‘un-addicted’ citizen, which means that they have every right to open bars which are owned by smokers, staffed by smokers and open to smokers. The ‘Health Religion’ fails entirely on these grounds – the lack of truth about SHS combined with the right to assemble.

But the guy in Scotland ought not to rely upon voluntary donations from the public. Organisations such as Big Tobacco, Big Alcohol, Big Food should be massively interested in funding the guy’s legal action. This is no small thing because it brings THE CONSUMER into the equation, who has hitherto been ignored as though he does not exist. One might wonder how Politicians see ‘the masses’ when they contemplate the chances of re-election. Smokers themselves are regarded as sub-human, but there are an awful lot of drinkers who have not spoken yet.

Tobacco Companies have been deliberately excluded. Nothing that they say is given any weight. Drinks Companies etc should take notice and combine to fight the Zealots. If they do not, then they will be picked off one by one.

And it is very, very easy. The result of the Doctors Study could have been contested in Court at the very outset. By the time that anyone got round to looking at the facts, the results had become ‘legend’. But the McTear Case exposed these ‘facts’ as the ‘legends’ that they were. Smoking has NOT been proven to be a cause of lung cancer.

—–

But there is a HUGE problem, which is politicians. Politicians admire Tobacco Control because of its superb ‘public relations’ initiative. Their admiration is akin to Nazi use of propaganda in Germany. They do not care one jot about smoking: they only care about the ‘here and now’ probabilities of being re-elected and, therefore, enabling the continuation of their exercise of POWER. Be in no doubt that the exercise of POWER is a powerful aphrodisiac. The aphrodisiac does not have to be sexual – it can be ‘admiration’. We all like to be admired. In fact, I might make it my business to buy a big rock and chisel it out to create a monument to myself. I could put the statue in the middle of my tobacco plant plot. That would be lovely. My statue would be ADMIRED long after I pegged out.

Politics is so, so cheap, is it not? It is a good job that we have the Civil Service to look after us. If it were not for them, the water supply, the transport system, the health system would grind to a halt.

The serious problem with our so-called ‘Democracy’ is that it has become a fascist, totalitarian dictatorship.

What is the answer to the EU, UN and WHO dictatorship? It is very, very simple. DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE that they exist. There is no need to leave the EU – just ignore the ‘Directives’.

=====

I think that I have it about right tonight, but the above is only a smidgeon of the world-wide worming of Tobacco Control. TC is a worm.

 

Advertisements

4 Responses to “Further to Propaganda Stuff from Last Night”

  1. brian moore Says:

    simon clark has proved to be a utter waste of time to me, refusing to answer emails and phone calls after l have supported all of his campaigns etc, he is nothinh but a charlaton living off a charity.

    Brian Moore.

    ps l have told him so and told him NOT to email me again for support.

    • junican Says:

      I’ve said before that I would not like to be in his position. He dare not deny that smoking is bad, otherwise he would be crucified. I don’t think that he can even say that the science about it has been exaggerated. Thus, he always has one hand tied behind his back. It’s like saying that you have a good car when you have already admitted that it keeps breaking down.

      • brian moore Says:

        Dear Junican.
        l asked for his advice when l was told that l could not smoke in a outside patio area at a local pub/resturant, l took this issue up with them and went to the very top management of the particular chain, after a lot of excuses and being referred to various people they finally conceded that they could only ask people not to smoke there. lt is my opinion that the zealots want to commondere prime outside areas when the sun shines and still object to people enjoying themselves!!!

        Yours Brian.

      • junican Says:

        I seem to remember that. I admired your perseverance. Perseverance pays off nearly every time when you challenge the obfuscation.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: