I hope that the link takes the reader to the specific post by Simon Clark. Essentially it is about a broadcaster who said those words.
According to a report on STV last night Macpherson was diagnosed with kidney cancer in 2013 “as a direct result of breathing in other people’s smoke”.
That is from a guy, Archie Macpherson, who is supposed to be intelligent and who was a good football commentator in his time. It appears (from Wikipedia) that was born in 1937, which makes him at least 78 years old. His diagnosis was arrived at in 2013 when he would have been around 75 years old. Why would he think that he is immune from cancer other than as a result of tobacco smoke?
Again, I say, this guy is supposed to be intelligent, and yet he displays ignorance of the highest order.
How sad then that younger generations will only know him for what he calls a “visceral hatred of anybody who smokes”, says Simon Clark.
How ‘the younger generations’ will view him is of no importance whatsoever. What matters is the poison which the tobacco control industry has injected into the minds of even the most sophisticated of people.
Let us recall that Cameron said that he was not minded to force tobacco companies to sell their products in packets which all look the same apart from different medical porn pictures which are fraudulent and have nothing to do with smoking. And then he did exactly that. Further, he said that he was not minded to introduce a sugar tax, and then did exactly that. It is clear that the denials were intended to get the law passed BEFORE objections and not after them. The sugar industry should object via the Supreme Court of England, and they probably will, but they will come up against the Supremacy of Parliament. They can only object on the grounds of a higher authority, which is the EU.
Who on Earth could possibly understand how the UK handed over our sovereignty to countries like Estonia? For be in no doubt that ‘Qualified Majority Voting’ handed over such powers to a group of minor countries.
But we disgusting, filthy, stinking smokers do not care! Sod the lot of them. I have a ‘visceral hatred’ of intolerant anti-smokers. I hate them because of their stupidity. What can be more stupid than to go into a place where there is lots of tobacco smoke and then complain that your clothes smell and you need to take a shower? How stupid is that? Only a really stupid, stupid person would go into such a place. I mean, how could such a person even enter a place which stank? It is like deciding to coat yourself shit and piss and then complaining that shit and piss stink. Prior to the smoking ban, there were always multiple places with not a whiff of tobacco smoke, or any other whiffs. They could only marginally be described as pubs. They called themselves ‘hotels’, but only had a couple of rooms for people wishing to stay overnight. What characterised them mostly was that they had high ceilings so that tobacco smoke rose up, dissipated and was extruded via open windows. But that was before the hysteria.
Is it reasonable to say that the UN’s agenda over the last fifty years or so has totally distorted the meaning of ‘human rights’? In my opinion, there is no such thing. There is only the ‘rights’ of individual humans. Human rights are not a collective to be described by the UN, EU, or Parliament. They are individual. I have THE RIGHT, as a human being, to enjoy cocaine if I wish to. That right cannot be denied to me. That is a ‘first principle’ and cannot be denied.
It clearly follows that The State should not impose limitations upon my decisions, other than real, factual, proven harms to others. Stinking cloths are needs for showers are not harms.
But nothing will change until we elect the RIGHT people to control the REAL government, being the Civil Service as a generalisation. Donald Trump, despite his obvious failings, might just be the sort of tonic that Democracy needs.