Noise About an EU Exit Referendum

I was thinking a couple of hours ago about what to write about tonight. It isn’t much fun not being able to think of something to write about when you have become addicted to blogging.

I got to thinking that we rely rather a lot on the Zealots coming up with some new hair-brained scheme so that we can write scathing criticisms about the latest TC wet dream of further persecution and punishment for smokers. They are still popping up, like the ‘voluntary ban’ in hospital grounds in Scotland. I think that we are so used to the rape of the English language, such as the Scottish hospital authorities describing their hospital grounds enforcers as ‘advisers’, that there really isn’t much point in talking about it. I think that we shall have to accept that the Zealots will continue to ‘try it on’ here and there. They may be successful, here and there, in getting by-laws passed. Does anyone remember Wigan council banning ecig use in its vehicles? I wonder how they are getting on with enforcing that?  I should imagine that it has all been forgotten.

So what is there to talk about which does not rely upon the Zealots acting first?

Frank Davis, and others, DO talk about the extensive adverse consequences of smoking bans. Frank even conducted a survey of his own which showed that people who go to pubs had been adversely affected by the ban. Bloggers like Chris Snowden use graphs to show that pubs and clubs have been seriously affected by smoking bans. I saw a report a couple of days ago which said that Enterprise Inns intended to sell off about 1000 pubs and ‘reorganise’ another 1000 (whatever that means). Clearly, those plans are intended to raise capital, perhaps with the intention of repaying debt, but the reality is that they are shrinking their business, and thus shrinking the group’s earnings and potential earnings. Frankly, I am surprised that there has not been a bankruptcy of a major pub group – as yet.

Because of the election. there has been a hiatus. I have no doubt that TC is brewing up more scares with which to bamboozle the new Government Ministers. I read somewhere that Cameron’s plan for saving the NHS from bankruptcy is going to be based upon ‘prevention’, so we smokers can expect even more harsh persecution and punishment, since all ailments are now defined as ‘smoking related’. Break a leg as a result of a fall? Smokers’ leg bones break more easily because of smoking. Non-smokers who fall from a great height bounce and walk away uninjured.

‘Prevention’ equals more and more and more nannying and bullying. Forget the niceties of the actual words. No point in bothering with them. Assume that ‘an advisor’ is ‘an enforcer’. Thus, we can expect Cameron to advance anti-alcohol, anti-sugar, anti-salt, anti-everything. The problem for him is that it will not work in the short term at all, and probably not in the medium term as well. Remember how Denmark had to repeal its ‘fat tax’? It was a disaster, since those Danes who lived close to the border with other States popped across the border and bought their butter, etc, there. It seems that the Danes have become past masters of of tax evasion (legitimate – Yes, I know about the difference between ‘avoidance’ and ‘evasion’). One can imagine a person driving over the border and buying a ton of butter. Further, the Danes abandoned plans to tax sugar and stuff. Note that the WHO has ignored this failure in Denmark and has advocated tax increases on such stuff in the EU. Do you see? The intention is to make sure that ALL EU States obey, so that the reason that such taxes do not work (the ability to hop over the border) no longer apply. So the WHO aristocrats pressure the EU aristocrats, using the World Bank, which the UN controls, as a Big Stick, to do as instructed. On the face of it, Cameron intends to go along with this BIG PLAN. The BIG PLAN idea is that no one will get ill or die provided that illnesses and death are PREVENTED.

Can we see the problem? Even if it is successful, the problem is that there will be more and more and more old people. Surely, that is not a good thing? AH! But the UN has the long-term answer. As part of the Millennium Goals, ‘Sustainability’ is the key. Regardless of the pap blather about Climate Control, the real objective is population control. They do not say so, but that is at the root of everything.

Personally, I do not disagree that it is possible for the human population of the world to become too large. It is certainly possible. But is it not true that advances in medical science and the postponement of death thereby, compounds the problem? If it is true that smoking kills people prematurely, would prohibition of smoking cause a worsening of the world population problem?

Of course it would, if it was true that smoking causes severe curtailment of life expectancy.

So how would the Mega-rich Elite in the world (people like Bloomberg and Gates) like to see ‘progress’ be efficient?

1. The ecosystem of the World must, at all costs, be protected.

2. The world population must be controlled – eventually.

3. The population must be as healthy and productive as possible.

There is no need for further points. All further points are subsections of the above three principles. Frankly, if those aims were properly discussed and considered, in public, I would not personally disagree much with the ideas. What matters is not the ideas, but the implementation of FORCEFUL CONTROLS, especially if these controls are secretly agreed by aristocrats.

—–

I read somewhere that Labour has now changed its mind and supports a referendum on leaving the EU. Since the Labour Party has not yet elected a new leader, that may just be a rumour. It would not surprise me, however, if they have not changed their stance. The reason is that Labour and Tory have common ground to ensure that we stay in the EU. Both Elites want aristocratic control.

We, The People, want friendly relations with our neighbours. We want free trade and easy travel. We want a common, easily converted currency. Thus, a foreigner from France might easily spend his Euros in British shops, and a Brit might spend his pounds in a Spanish hotel.

As I have said before, the fundamental problem with the Euro was that it tried to emulate the USA dollar. That is OK, except that the USA dollar national equivalence took decades to settle down. The Euro, however, was imposed, and, rather than allowing market forces to do the business, World/EU Central Banks interfered. All those gangs of thugs are no better than pirates.

I like that idea. The whole UN operation is, basically, a huge gang of PIRATES.

 

 

Advertisements

4 Responses to “Noise About an EU Exit Referendum”

  1. Ed Says:

    As you mentioned in one of your previous posts, the fight for world domination began around 400 years ago. This same group has pushed the overpopulation propaganda for over 400 years. This group also pushed out eugenics, which contrary to peoples beliefs, started here in England in 1904. Then came the Galton Laboratory for National Eugenics in 1907 and the British Eugenics Educational Society. It was three years later that the sister organisation of the Eugenic Record Office was founded in the United States, Both institutes used the research results of the Galton Laboratory of National Eugenics to propose practical applications.

    Interestingly enough, Thomas Jefferson referred to the same group of people as “Hostis humanis generis” or the enemy of the human race.

    Taken from the McCloughry blog;

    “Thomas Jefferson correctly pegged the British Slavemasters and their global domination schemes, and he suggested that what is needed to handle this psychotic tendency is to limit the British to their own island.

    “They would still have a fertile island, a sound and effective population to labor it, and would hold that station among political powers, to which their natural resources and faculties entitle them. They would no longer indeed be the lords of the ocean, and paymasters of all the princes of the earth. They would no longer enjoy the luxuries of pyrating and plundering everything by sea, and of bribing and corrupting every thing by land; but they might enjoy the more safe and lasting luxury of living on terms of equality, justice, and good neighborhood with all nations.

    …While it is much our interest to see this power reduced from it’s towering and borrowed height, to within the limits of it’s natural resources, it is by no means our interest that she should be brought below that, or lose her competent place among the nations of Europe.”
    – Jefferson Cyclopedia
    Thomas Jefferson to John Adams Polar Forest November 25 – 1816

    How do they go about this?

    …[their government] insinuates the same poison into the bowels of every other, corrupts it’s councils, nourishes factions, stirs up revolutions, and places it’s own happiness in fomenting commotions and civil wars among others ….
    – Jefferson Cyclopedia
    Thomas Jefferson to John Adams Polar Forest November 25 – 1816,

    Direct descendents of this group, along with the Cecils and Cavendish’s, fomented WW1;

    http://tarpley.net/online-books/against-oligarchy/king-edward-vii-of-great-britain-evil-demiurge-of-the-triple-entente-and-world-war-1/

    Other good reads on the “British way” from Tarpley’s site can be found here, just scroll down to the British section;

    http://tarpley.net/online-books/against-oligarchy/

    This group also manured the ground for WW2, see here. Again a very lengthy read, but eye-opening;

    https://mikemcclaughry.wordpress.com/the-reading-library/world-government/british-security-coordination-compendium-the-book-and-the-lords/

    https://mikemcclaughry.wordpress.com/the-reading-library/world-government/british-security-coordination-compendium-ii/

    https://mikemcclaughry.wordpress.com/the-reading-library/world-government/british-security-coordination-compendium-iii/

    https://mikemcclaughry.wordpress.com/the-reading-library/world-government/british-security-coordination-compendium-iv/

    https://mikemcclaughry.wordpress.com/the-reading-library/world-government/british-security-coordination-compendium-v/

    On both occasions they offered us a solution in the form of a world union. A true, problem, reaction, solution straight from the Hegelian dialectic.

    http://www.infowars.com/the-hegelian-dialectic-and-its-use-in-controlling-modern-society/

    This solution was firstly in the formation of the league of nations and then the UN, after giving us those world wars to end all wars. No doubt they’ll want a WW3 or at the least an implosion of the world economy to bring in a cashless control grid and a totalitarian society.

    The League of Nations was the brainchild of the late 1800’s, early 1900’s generation of British “Slavemasters” and this group have passed the torch since the time of queen Elizabeth.

    It was senator William Edgar Borah, who pretty much killed the League of Nations single-handed, although his name is rarely mentioned amongst American patriots today, however, I would put him right up there with the likes of Jefferson as a true red blooded patriot. Here is an excellent account of his actions;

    https://mikemcclaughry.wordpress.com/2014/06/06/the-man-who-killed-the-league-of-nations-senator-borah/

    Borah shows us by example that these people can be defeated and the expansionist UN and WHO are powerful but not invincible. Once humanity stands up it will crush these bastards who insist on subjugation and control, or exile, isolation and even death for those who won’t conform to their agenda. However, it sure helps knowing who they actually are, and their history, to help us “little people” when aiming our blows to knock them back on their collective arses and into prison, or at the end of a rope where they truly belong.

    • junican Says:

      I read your final link through earlier on. The author of the article is extremely anti-British, isn’t he/she?
      I think that it is true that, after the defeat of the French and Spanish navies at Trafalgar, the British navy reigned supreme over the seas around Europe, and that the powers-that-be at the time made sure that it stayed that way by continuing to build up the navy. But did the British navy become pirates? I suppose that it could have demanded some sort of ‘duty’ from cargo ships and such, but I doubt that it had any interest in outright theft and murder. If fact, real pirates would have been preying on British shipping as much as any other.
      But all that stuff is so long ago that no one will ever know the facts.
      What I think is very true is that the British control of the seas facilitated the spread of the British Empire far and wide.
      In effect, Senator Borah said that America should stick by its ‘Munroe’ doctrine, and keep out of European treaty-making, while looking after its own defence. He took exception to the idea that each British dominion (Australia, New Zealand, etc) would have individual votes in the League of Nations, while America would have only one vote. Interesting, is it not, that the USA signed, but did not ratify, the FCTC? It decided that it would NOT be subjected to decisions foisted upon it by some sort of vote of the dis-United Nations.
      Why did the UK not also refuse such a commitment?
      What is going on? There is something really, really wrong.

  2. Ed Says:

    I don’t think its anti-British, it’s anti-new world order, which isn’t anything new, it’s about 400 year old, it just so happens that England (London) was and still is the central hub for all this nefarious activity.

    I personally think the overall aim was to get the anti-tobacco framework in place. Although it hasn’t been ratified, many of the provisions of the treaty are already in effect in the USA and they’ve led the way in the war on tobacco for over 40 years. Don’t forget it was the American Cancer Society who played an important role in the development of the framework agreement, so everything is full steam ahead despite not having ratification.

    Apparently, ratification requires that the President send the treaty to the US Senate and that the Senate then vote in favour of it by a two to three majority. Although the US often leads in treaty creation it is quite often poor at ratifying them and there exists quite a lot of theories out there as to why this is so. I found an interesting pdf of one of these theories and in it the FCTC gets a mention;

    https://fds.duke.edu/db/attachment/2151

    • junican Says:

      I haven’t read the whole of that link, but enough to get the idea. It is a catch 22 situation, I think. If the President is struggling to get approval for his agenda, then he can ill afford to spend precious time getting approval for treaties. If he has plenty of backing from Senators, he is better off using that time to push his proposals as far and as quickly as he can.
      I can see how the USA would regard ratification as not really necessary, provided that it acts in accordance with the terms of the treaty. But not ratifying, especially with a treaty like the FCTC, allows the States of the USA to have more freedom to decide for themselves how far along the road they go with the implementation of the terms.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: