Tying Themselves Up In Knots

This from a Senator in the USA named Charles Schumer (D-NY):

“E-cigarette companies are stepping over the line by marketing these products to kids and getting them hooked on smoking, and they’re hoping that the federal government passes the buck and turns a blind eye to what’s happening.”

It is hard to understand the mentality of a person who makes such a statement.

Michael Siegel argues the case here:


Siegel argues about the facts – vaping is not smoking since there is no smoke, but even being charitable, and allowing that the Senator meant ‘marketing to kids, and thus getting them hooked on nicotine and thus leading them into actually taking up real smoking of tobacco’, there is no evidence that that is happening.

But people like this Senator know very well that what they are saying. The niceties of truth and accuracy are of no interest to them. Their objective is to inflame passions. Take the above statement apart:

stepping over the line…

getting them hooked…

passes the buck…

turns a blind eye…

All are emotive, imprecise, inflammatory, derogatory phrases. If we replace those phrases, what do we get?

“E-cigarette companies are marketing these products to kids in order to get them to start smoking tobacco, and they’re hoping that the Government does nothing about it”

Put that way, it is far clearer that the Senator is either deliberately lying or is deluded. For there is no reason whatsoever for ecig companies to try to entice kids when they have millions of smokers to tempt. Why should ecig companies risk the wrath of the State? If the day arrives when smokers are reduced to a tiny rump, then it could be in their commercial interests to market to kids. Until then, there is no point.

I have little doubt that the Senator’s statement was deliberately couched in those phrases. He know damn well that it makes no commercial sense for an ecig co. to market to kids, but his intention is to inflame the passions of parents by using those phrases. That is all. It is a deliberate ploy, and there is little point in talking about the content of the statement.

How should one respond to such a statement? Tobacco Control itself has taught us – look for the killer put-down. Senators are not in the business of erudite discussion and argument. Remember the Profumo affair? Mandy Rice Davis: “Well, he would say that, wouldn’t he?” (When Profumo denied sexual involvement with her and others) So the put down is obvious:

“What the Senator says is silly, and he knows it. With millions of smokers who would like to stop, why should ecig companies market to kids?”

 The important word in that sentence is ‘silly’, because it emphasises the inflammatory nature of the phrases the Senator used – they are all silly.


Is Tobacco Control in the UK dying a slow death? It rather looks like it. They have picked all the low hanging fruit. In fact, the only really low hanging stuff was the Comprehensive Smoking Ban. You could say that increased tobacco taxes were also low hanging fruit, but that is now producing massive problems for Government. We must remember that all tobacco imported which is not subject to UK duty, whether legit EU imports of personal use, or smuggled ‘chop chop’, is a loss of duty in the over-taxed UK, but it also means a big increase in the cost of import policing. Not only does border force have to try to detect cocaine etc imports, but it now has to try to detect tobacco imports. That is a lot of work for nothing since the seized tobacco is just burnt or buried, or whatever. For every one shipment which is discovered, there will be nine which get through. (That statement is nearly as bad as the Senator’s statement, since I have no idea whether it is true or not) I suppose that I could embellish it:

“For every shipment of this evil substance which border force thankfully intercepts, it is worrying that there may be as many as nine which the marauding criminals, who think nothing of the damage to our children and young people, manage to import by bribery of ships’ crews. We therefore call upon the Government to double the officers of border force”

Oh, by the way, I am not talking about tobacco. I am looking forward 10 years to when the cost of ‘candy’ is 70% tax.

I think, from a practical point of view, this visualisation of ‘the low hanging fruit’ is very important. There is some sort of equation in there. It is difficult to work out. In theory, banning smoking in pubs etc was supposed to bring about a massive improvement in the health prospects of bar workers. Note the word ‘prospects’. As far as I know, since the turnover of staff in bars and pubs is very rapid, there has been no ‘tobacco control’ study which has evaluated the beneficial effects of the smoking ban. Or, to put it another way, because of staff turnover and the need for vast periods of time to elapse between exposure to tobacco smoke and death therefrom, it is not possible for such evidence to exist. It is reasonable to say also that tobacco display bans and plain packaging were also low hanging fruit since all that was required was legislation. At this point, almost all of the low hanging stuff has been picked. From now on, there are no companies to bully and harass, or rather, that there is little return from trying to bully and harass them. There is no money in it.  From now on, the only way is to bully and harass individual smokers, which is the reason for these ‘voluntary’ bans in public places and in hospital grounds. That is where the ‘put-down’ comes into its own.

I think that the key for us smokers, whatever the situation, is TO FEEL NO SHAME!! Absolutely not. For example, if you visit a hospital and step outside to have a fag, and someone wearing a cap says that you cannot smoke in the open air, then you must smile, chat and discuss. The point is that in no way must you be aggressive, because your aggression indicates that you feel SHAME. It would be interesting, in such circumstance, to accuse the oppressor of being ashamed, and that would almost certainly be true as regards a security person trying to stop people smoking in hospital grounds.


I wonder how many people who work in tobacco control are secretly ashamed? Because they are so closely involved in the creation of sound bites and press releases, they must surely know that they are disseminating propaganda. Are ALL the staff of ASH on £100,000 per an? What is the betting that 25% of ASH’s staff smoke on the quiet? Certainly, I think that those people are almost certainly 100% drinkers of alcohol – they would have to be to drown the shame of lying and cheating.


What has Tobacco Control, world-wide actually achieved? Has it eliminated smokers as Hitler eliminated Jews, Gypsies and Queers? I suggest that it has achieved nothing except increasing the costs of Government, hospitals, doctors, dentists and border force among innumerable others (airports, etc).

And the Zealots know it.

This is where the Tobacco Companies come into the equation, and what I find very strange. I do not understand. They have not been silenced by law. There is no law that I know of which denies them free speech. Thus, they could, if they wanted to, defend themselves and their customers. To understand, let us think briefly of a different situation. Let us think of our UK water suppliers.

I have a water supplier. Every few months, I find that my water supply cost has increased without notification. The only notification I get is a general announcement via the TV and newspapers, and on the bill I receive, telling me how wonderful they are and how they are the cheapest supplier. At the same time, they tell me how much more my water supply will cost next year. Now, suppose that the Government slaps a 20% excise tax on water?

I rest to think. ALL water suppliers are afflicted. Thus, there is no way for any individual water supplier to represent its customers and complain.

There lies the problem. The water company should have realised, something like a trade union, that its customers are A HUGE BODY CAPABLE OF AFFECTING POLITICS. But there is a huge problem – these very people will also object to price increases!

Thus we can see why tobacco companies abandoned smokers. They were caught on the horns of a dilemma. They are allowed to speak, but because they are officially devils, everything that they say is dishonest.

It might take some time, but it is becoming clearer and clearer that the same applies to Health Zealots. The only difference is the need to identify the criminals among the Health Zealots. There are very many. For example, Arnott has been filmed DRINKING ALCOHOL ALONG WITH THE FORMER GOVERNMENT MINISTER CALLED MILTON MP!!! Disgraceful!

The Smoking Ban produced serious and lasting effects. But the effects had nothing to do with smoking prevalence or the health of bar staff. The Ban closed pubs. That is perfectly obvious and is as proven as can possibly be.

But I would say that the Zealots must win a few more ineffectual battles before the great rebellion begins. For example, I think that the Zealots must be allowed to ban ecigs. Only then can the prohibition be reversed. Further, SHS will be found to be harmless – because it is.

You see, the Zealots try to persuade people that 20% of the population who smoke are A MINORITY. Well, no they are not. They are 100% payers of tobacco taxes. They are vastly the majority of payers of tobacco duties.

Plus, we should acknowledge that tobacco duty has nothing whatsoever to do with the NHS. We have to be brave and stop that nonsense. There is no equation between ‘tobacco related diseases’ and ‘tobacco taxes receipts’. Smoker or non-smoker, you will suffer the problems of old age and die.

Tobacco taxes were originally intended hurt the colonialists in the USA after Independence.

—Oh Dear… I must to bed.



2 Responses to “Tying Themselves Up In Knots”

  1. smofunking Says:

    Interesting that you should make the comment about ASH staff being drinkers.

    The other morning I could hear a group of revellers having an after-drink singalong in the street, which got me wondering as to whether ANTZ might occasionally let their hair down with a half a pint of bitter shandy. Then, as they stagger out of the pub, I could imagine them bursting into a chorus of;

    “Oh, we hate smokers,
    We hate smokers,
    We hate smokers,
    We hate smokers,
    We hate smokers,
    We hate smokers,
    We are smoker haters”

    One can just vision them going on a finger wagging rampage through the streets, fuelled by alcohol and self-righteousness and chastising anyone doing anything that resembles smoking, whilst chanting, “Think of the chiiiiiiildren”.

    • junican Says:

      You could almost put that verse to a conga rhythm!
      “We just all hate smokers;
      we just all hate smokers;
      lala, laa, laa;
      lala laa laa.”

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: