Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Is There Any Difference Between ‘Kids’ and Adults?

14/09/2018

It has become more and more difficult to know when childhood ends. Before he became a politician, Scott Gottlieb was a physician. He is now head of the USA Food and Drug Administration (FDA). If I was POTUS, the last person that I would choose to head the FDA would be a former physician. Why? Because he comes loaded with biases. He can’t help it. It is built into his psyche. He will have found, during his years as a doctor, that drug addicts are pathetic people. He will have come across loads and loads of ‘food addicts’ who are enormously fat and suffering from diabetes, knee joint problems, ankle joint problems etc. Try as he might, he cannot help holding such people in contempt. They sit in his office, blubber squeezing through the sides of the chair, and complain about their aches and pains. And when they peg out, he is glad to sign the death certificate.

So it is natural for such people to blame ‘Society’ for their own feelings of guilt about how they reacted to drug addicts and food addicts.

And so we get people like Scott G, convinced that their ‘physician’ experiences, which they despise, are typical of the whole population, blaming society for the failings of a few people and projecting those failings onto everyone. Thus, ‘kids’, ‘adolescents’, ‘youths’, ‘teenagers’, ‘young people’, ‘under 21s’, ‘children’, become lumped together.

Would any ‘child’, walking into a vape shop, be sold a vape pen and vape liquid? Erm… What is your definition of ‘a child’? That is where Scott G’s diatribe against vape shops and manufacturers collapses. Define ‘KID’.

Thus, the argument does not revolve around flavours at all. It revolves around the age and maturity of individuals who might loosely be described as ‘youths’. Are they capable of making a judgement of what is best for themselves? There is no answer in the case of any specific individual – some are and some are not.

Scott G demands that vape shops and manufacturers address what he describes as ‘an epidemic’ of ‘youth/kids’ vaping. How could manufacturers be involved? What could they possibly do? Vape shops do not sell to ‘kids’. What more can they do?

It strikes me that the whole furore is designed to further the medicalisation of ecigs. Whether Scott G know that is uncertain. But there are certainly wheels within wheels.

I watched a utube video this evening of a Congressman in the USA declaring that, for too long, Congress has been off-loading decision-making to various ‘expert’ bodies. The result has been that citizens are rendered powerless since they cannot vote those ‘experts’ out of office, and they do not know which congressmen were responsible without spending loads of time trying to find out who voted for what. The video is here:

 

Briefly, what Senator Sasse was saying was that the Judge who was being appointed to the Supreme Court was an honourable man who would administer justice according with the US Constitution. He deplored the idea that the Supreme Court Judges had to adjudicate laws which the Senate had messed up. That made the Supreme Court Judges political. It was for the Senate to take the risk of being voted out of office by The People, and not hide behind the Supreme Court. It was because the Senate had avoided its responsibilities that the Supreme Court had been labelled as ‘political’.

The same applies in the UK. More and more freedoms have been circumscribed with uncertainties, such as ‘hate speech’. Thus, all citizens of the UK are reduced to children who need a slap to remind them who is boss. In some cases, the slap has to be a thorough beating, publicised via the dead-tree media ‘pour encourage les autres’.

And who is in the vanguard of the ‘reductio ad infantilo*’? Well, blow me down. It is the WHO, IPCC, UN, EU and all their unelected bosses and their servants.

I have heard it said, in Parliament, by a Minister, that some ‘rule’ or other had to be imposed ‘because of a Treaty’. That response was not queried. What does that mean? It means the abdication of responsibility. And such abdication of responsibility means that thousands of citizens of the UK are made to suffer.

We smokers are not asking the right questions. It is reasonable to start with, “Why are you persecuting us with massive taxes? Who gave you permission to persecute us? Who can give you permission to persecute us?” You might also add, “You are evil. You would throw smokers to the lions if you could”.

Stop arguing on their terms. It is not about lung cancer. It is about freedom from persecution.

Advertisements

Loss of Confidence in Politicians

13/09/2018

There is a tide in the affairs of men, which taken at the flood leads on to fortune…”

The ‘tide in the affairs of men….’ can also work in the opposite direction, and lead on to destitution and misery. In the case of a politician, it is not about fortune, but about credibility.

Does any voter actually respect and admire PM Theresa May? I might have done so had she gone on TV and explained, in detail, how her ‘Chequers Plan’ for a new Treaty with the EU, post Brexit, would have worked. But not a word has been said; not one ‘spokesperson’ has explained to the people (the majority) how her ‘Plan’ would satisfy the requirement to leave the EU.

Brexiteers are not helping. The ‘top people’ in Brexit seem to think that voters are stupid, and that all they want is to exclude pakis from immigration. But there is far more to it, obviously.

The critical thing to understand is that it is not about trade. Not at all. It is not about over-flights etc. It is about ‘FUCKING DIRECTIVES!!!!’ Sorry to swear, which I do not normally do.

It is about ‘one size fit all’; it is about climate blather, and tobacco blather, and countless similar UN projects which the EU is subservient to.

Above all, it is about Politicians, as they pass through Parliament for a few years, and I include Prime Ministers, being subservient to the EU. The UK has become like some small ‘province’ of the Roman Empire. We can arrange Cup Finals and footie matches and any number of similar ‘National’ events. We can even have an England football team, and cricket team, etc. Wales, Ireland, Scotland can also vie with each other, and with England.

Bread and Circuses.

But not Tobacco or Alcohol, and not gas or oil or coal.

It comes down to the simple idea of ‘FREEDOM’. A crazy idea that I came across this evening was that, in the USA, Scott Greilber (?), head of the Federal Drugs Admin, wants ecig companies to tell him how they are going to stop ‘youths’ enjoying ecigs, and if they do not, then their products will be banned.

Scott G (?) is a politician, appointed by Trump. He knows fuck all. Another arsehole who needs to be removed forthwith.

But that not a consequence of the stupidity of the person involved. It is a consequence of PRESSURE. It is not about stupidity; it is about cowardice and fear. The fear is that the politician will be denounced as ‘a lackey’ of Tobcoms. That accusation must be avoided at all costs.

But ordinary, sensible people, despite their ignorance, see past the exaggerations and propaganda. The ‘silent majority’ never speaks on Twitter. Nor do I.

It is the ‘silent majority’ which will eventually win the day.

As regards smoking, almost nobody cares whether a person smokes or not. Most people are not so shallow.

It would behove politicians not to be so naive.

Hubris in Lifestyle Control

12/09/2018

The dictionary describes ‘hubris’ as an excess of pride. I like this example:

Pride only became hubris when it went to extremes, like any other vice”
In other words, it is perfectly OK to be proud of some accomplishment, but another thing altogether to insist that your accomplishment is better than everyone else’s.
Hubris is not at all uncommon. It proliferates throughout academia. Academics are forever pulling each other’s work to bits, snarling and scoffing.
So it is quite amusing to read that one, ‘Professor SIR Ian Gilmore’, has beaten his breast and torn his academic robes into little pieces because he is displeased:
https://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2018/09/toys-out-of-pram.html
What is he displeased about?
As ‘The Chair of the Alcohol Health Alliance’, he reckons that his decisions about who the Gov should deal with about alcoholic beverages override any other person’s decisions. That, presumably, is because he is a ‘Professor SIR …’.
He has put his belongings into a black bin-bag, thrown it over his shoulder and departed whilst shouting, “Up yours!!” And what exactly has he resigned from?
…..we feel our respective roles as co-chairmen of the Alcohol Leadership and Tobacco Control Implementation Boards of PHE ….”
Eh? Do such ‘Boards’ actually exist, or are they fabrications? By ‘fabrications’ I mean ‘constructs’ which only exist on paper. It is easy to construct such entities without anyone having the faintest idea whether they have more than two self-appointed members. But they do sound very important, do they not?
The other member of those ‘Boards’ is “Professor John Britton, director, UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, University of Nottingham”. 
Why has he not resigned also? It seems like a put-up job to me.
So the Gov has decided to discuss matters relating to ‘harmful drinking’ with the charity ‘Drinkaware’, which is funded by the Industry, but not controlled by it. the ‘Professor SIR’ and the other guy are not happy because they want complete control of advice given to Gov.
Frankly, I do not think that the furore has anything to do with the head of PHE, Duncan Selbie. He has shown himself to be just an apparatchik. He is on a par with Andrew Black, the Ozzie, who advised Soubry in her infamous appearance before a Parliamentary Committee about the Tobacco Products Directive, which included ecigs, which are not tobacco.
People like Black and Selbie are survivors. They go with the flow and cleverly make astronomically expensive plans which are always politically acceptable.
But why should that be so? Why should PHE be deciding upon the level of taxation? It should not be. It is about ‘HEALTH’.
It may well be true that smoking causes lots of ill-health, but it is not for doctors to decide taxation. That is especially true of ‘Professors’ of alcohol and tobacco teaching establishments.
What sort of student wants to study ‘alcohol and tobacco’? I cannot help but feel that THERE ARE NO SUCH UNIVERSITY COURSES, or, if there are, that there are no students. Or, if there are students, they are employees of PHE who are sent on those courses.
That is not unlikely. The Bank I worked for had a College, and it was not unusual for us staff to be sent on courses there. I mean ‘sent’. You were informed that you had been chosen to attend a course as an employee, all expenses paid, and you damn well had to attend. I dare say that people refused, but, like TobCON, no one knew about such refusals.
The likes of ‘Professor SIR Ian Gilmore’ live in a bubble of approval, which is where their hubris comes from.
We need a PM with courage. I mean COURAGE, as per Trump. Someone who has FREEDOM at the top of his/her agenda. The EU has been getting away with destroying freedom by attacking businesses, unless they are multinational businesses, which are easy to negotiate with to their mutual advantage.
PHE is mirroring the worst of monopoly control by its support of nicotine patches and such, which are such an abject failure, and have been for years and year.
PHE is a dead duck, and should be abolished completely. It was always a terrible mistake.
Why?
Because it had no affinity with people who were ill. It was always trying to make healthy people mentally ill by promoting fear. Reform of PHE? Maybe, but that would require reform of the whole Dept of Health. I doubt that there are any ‘Professor SIRS’ capable of making recommendations to do so.
The simple fact is that it would be better to channel funding into ‘curing’, if possible. The idea of ‘Prevention’ is hopelessly optimistic. There are far too many things to ‘prevent’. It cannot be done.
So, in very big terms, abolish the FCTC and IPCC and concentrate on releasing the Wealth of Africa and other Nations. Raise standards of living for those people. Sort out ‘Global Warming’ when it becomes important, if it ever does. Defund all the UN except the political.

 

Does Public Health England Promote Mental Health Problems?

11/09/2018

Hour after hour, during certain parts of the day, cancer societies, heart societies, lung societies, etc, place adverts on TV which emphasis the horrors of cancer etc. They mercilessly pluck the heartstrings, seeking legacies from people’s wills and donations. One ad which has been repeated again and again and again recently talks about a child which had cancer but was ‘cured’ and how wonderful that was. The fact is that the number of children who contract cancer is utterly minuscule, but it happens from time to time and some die. Perhaps most die. It is hard to see how CRUK could play a part in curing such childhood tumours. They are almost certainly genetic.

But there are loads and loads of adverts which rely upon ‘health’ problems, such as toothpaste to ‘cure’ gum problems, and pain suppressants to ‘cure’ the causes of pain, and laxatives to ‘cure’ bowel problems, and stuff to ‘cure’ upset stomachs.

All of them promote fear.

Public Health England is worse of all. At least you can see that most TV ads are simply selling products and can be discounted. But when a huge government department distorts facts, persecutes citizens, and creates fear, then is it any wonder that more and more people are becoming nervous wrecks? Hardly a day goes by without some health scare hitting the headlines.

I have been having problems with my prostate. I have been putting off the inevitable by telling myself, “Well, it isn’t all that bad”. But I had to grasp the nettle and so I have had blood tests done. I do not have the results yet, but I have been able to convince myself, hard though it might be, TO WAIT FOR THE FACTS! I think that we all have problems with our imaginations at these times. Every time I think about the problem, I shout at myself, “WAIT FOR THE FACTS!” Not be long now before THE FACTS are revealed.

But it is easy to imagine, due to the proliferation of ‘fake news’ via adverts and PHE pronouncements, that one is riddled with ‘non-communicable’ diseases. Are you plump? Then you must be riddled with ‘sugar related diseases’. Do you enjoy getting a bit inebriated? Then you must be riddled with ‘alcohol related diseases’. I puff on cigs, but, for some reason or other, I do not fully inhale. I draw the smoke into my mouth and throat and then blow it out. I have always done so, I think. Even so, according to ‘health experts’, I am riddled with ‘tobacco related diseases’.

But PHE never talks about ‘poverty related diseases’ or ‘fear related mental health diseases’. Nor would it EVER acknowledge that PHE itself promotes ‘mental health diseases’.

Think about ‘project fear’ in relation to Brexit. How many people have actually taken on board the fears about economic collapse with all its repercussions? 100? 1,000? 10,000? 100,000? 1,000,000? 10,000,000? It is clear, since most of ‘project fear’ occurred before the vote, that most of us do not give a shit about those fears. We want our country back.

But why did people like the PM May ever want to stay in the EU? Why did they not see the nonsense of only the Commission being able to make decisions?

I have a ‘feeling’ that people like May, Cameron, etc, believed that the ‘axis’ of Germany, France and the UK would always be sensible. But we have seen that it is not so. We saw it especially when Soubry, representing the UK, thought that ecigs had been dropped from the Tobacco Directive. She had to be rescued by that snake, what’s-his-name, who is now big in the WHO. The Australian smart-arse. The reality seems to be that neither Germany, France or the UK know what the EU is actually doing.

The latest abomination from the EU is the ‘internet censorship’ directive:

https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2018/we-need-real-copyright-reform

The EU directive seeks to force ALL platforms, such as Google, to censor everything that is written or said. The idea would be that Google would create ‘algorithms’ which pick up and block ‘speech’ which offends the algorithm.

I am not quite sure what the word ‘algorithm’ means. The Cambridge dictionary is not quite clear:

a set of mathematical instructions or rules that, especially if given to a computer, will help to calculate an answer to a problem”

What I take from that is that some words and phrases will be ‘noted’ and if repeated sufficiently often, the entry will be erased. No account will be taken of the context or the legitimate use of repetition in literature to make a point.

I do it all the time. It is a ‘trick’ which I learnt from an author named Erskine Caldwell:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erskine_Caldwell

He was a brilliant novelist.

The sort of thing I mean is something like this:

“His name was Jake. His name was Jake and his Dad was called Mike. His Dad was called Mike because ‘Michael’ was a ‘family’ name, going back generations. His name was Jake, short for Jacob. That name too was a ‘family’ name”.

What I liked about Erskine Caldwell’s stories was the slow build up of pressure, as illustrated by the repetition in his prose.

The ‘algorithms’ will be soulless, but what is worse is that they will be unanswerable. There will be no redress, except possibly by bombarding Google et al with emails, which will be answered by ‘algorithmic’ computer responses. It would not surprise me if big organisations were not already using ‘algorithms’ to answer customer complaints.

Freedom of speech is far, far more important than the EU. But freedom of speech comes from a far more important principle. It is the principle that the ‘individual is sovereign’. Nothing is more important.

It is that principle which was ignored in smoking bans. If a bar wishes to allow smoking and the staff do not object, then the State has no right whatsoever to interfere. Only if the danger was manifest and provable would State interference be justified. Vague ‘population epidemiology’ which suggested that a tiny number of bar staff and customers, perhaps one person per 10,000 pubs, would not suffice.

PHE has spread more and more fear, thus stoking mental ill-health.

It is time that a COURAGEOUS Minister of State for Health called a halt.

Costing Tobacco Control

10/09/2018

This little post does not assess the cost of TobCON! Such a venture is way beyond my ability, time or information to assess. But something that I came across earlier led me to think. There is a huge health problem in Venezuela, caused by the catastrophic breakdown of supplies to hospitals, amongst other things. Where is the WHO? It has gone missing – again. It went missing in the Ebola crisis. That lead me to think about how much money is being poured into WHO which is being spent on propaganda and little else.

For how long have resources been spent on planning for the new Prohibition?

We could talk about ‘The Doctors Study’. As I understand it, Richard Doll spent some time in Germany before WW2. Doll was a communist in his youth, but, at the time, National Socialism in Germany was not a million miles away from Communist Socialism in Russia. At the time, German Socialism was dead set against tobacco, arguing that it ‘weakened’ German youth. That was in the 1930s.

I believe that Doll served in the Navy during WW2, but, at the same time, plans were being laid for the prohibitionist stance on tobacco. Plans for the Hospital Study MUST have been made during the war. Doll himself said that the Hospital Study ‘was planned in 1947’, but there must have been ‘pre-planning’ long before that. In my own mind, I suspect that the ‘pre-planning’ evolved from Prohibition era failure of tobacco bans in the USA. After all, Prohibition in the USA only died in 1933.

Not for a moment do I believe that Doll was acting alone or at his own expense. He was a student supported by the Rockefeller Institute, and I have no doubt that he had close contacts with that Institute. I have no doubt that Rockefeller money was ‘laundered’ through other ‘institutes’, but it must have been an objective to replace Rockefeller funding with Government funding asap. The anticipated costs, as per TobCON’s plans, would have been enormous. The ‘long march’ through the institutions would be massively expensive, and for a long period of time.

And so we see today the outcome of those plans. People employed ostensibly in ‘Public Health’ actually spend lots of their time in promoting ‘Tobacco Prohibition’.

The problem is that this massive expenditure has become so woven into the fabric of, say, NHS costs that it can no longer be isolated. The same applies to Local Authorities. ‘Public Health’ in Local Authorities has become synonymous with TobCON. TobCON costs cannot be calculated.

But that very fact indicates just how massive the TobCON Empire is.

It also indicates just how important it is to kill off the virus by any means possible.

“Land of Hope and Glory, Mother of the Free…..”

09/09/2018

I caught the last half hour of the ‘Last Night of the Proms” on BBC1 tonight. It is always uplifting. I dare say that many decades ago, when the Empire still existed, phrases like ‘wider still and wider, should thy boundaries be set’, referred to territorial spread, but in recent years, that phrase meant ‘spread of liberty, freedom, equality before the law’ etc.

What went wrong?

What happened to ‘Mother of the free”? Where did the freedom go? In many respects, it is now a criminal offence to be ‘free’.

Think about that. It is now a criminal offence to be free.

We all know that SHS danger was exaggerated beyond measure in order to ban smoking in ‘indoor public places’. The excuse was that ‘there is no safe level’. It still amazes me that anyone with any intelligence, such as the ex-PM, Tony Blair, could equate ‘no safe level’ with ‘always a dangerous level’. The two things are entirely different. The first is theoretical, based upon epidemiological mumbo-jumbo; the second is a matter of fact, which would require actual physical proof. Where is the proof of actual physical harm from SHS? Major studies, such as Enstrom and Kabat and the WHO’s own study, Boffetta, showed that SHS did little or no harm, certainly not enough to require legal interference.

That is the truth. It is as though everyone has been told that 2 + 2 = 4 and a bit. No one defines what the ‘bit’ is, but almost everyone believes it. Further, the ‘bit’ becomes overwhelming important. Why is it so difficult for people to understand that even the most ‘trustworthy’ of studies, such as Doll’s ‘Doctors Study’, emphasise heavy, direct inhaling of tobacco smoke over a long period of time before a few smokers will die from lung cancer when they are old? How is it possible for inhaling tiny bits of SHS to endanger people during a normal lifetime? The unspoken trick is not to say that the human lungs can cope perfectly well with small amount of crap in the atmosphere and absorb those ‘toxins’ and expel them. It must always have been so, otherwise the human race would not have survived.

What chance is there of Brexit reviving ‘the Bulldog Spirit’?

It is not easy to define. The ‘Bulldog Spirit’ is defensive but strong. But the British Bulldog has been weakened by infusions of dope, mostly by politicians. But that is mostly because the politicians themselves have been doped.

How did that happen? I do not understand. You have to wear a seatbelt in a car at all times, but you only have to wear a seatbelt on an aircraft during take off and landing, and I am not sure that there is law which requires the wearing of seatbelts. Is there a law which requires aircrew (not cabin staff) to wear seatbelts at all times?

How do MPs become doped up so that they pass legislation produced by doped up Ministers?

But the doping is far more widespread. The Chief of ‘Public Health England’ has recently said smoking will be eradicated by 2030. Who gave him the authority to make that decision? It must be TobCON.

There have been suggestions that a major political upheaval is likely. I can certainly see a huge change in the nature of the Tory Party, but not in Labour. Labour has already committed itself to hard-left.

But no change in the Tory Party will matter unless it revitalises ‘personal sovereignty’ and maximises it. It isn’t just about de-regulation; it is also about getting rid of laws which make ‘freedom’ a criminal offence.

The Childishness of Goverment

07/09/2018

I haven’t much time tonight. Tomorrow, I must go to be exsanguinated, or, if you like, suffer a tad of blood-letting. My doctor sent me a circular telling me that I needed a blood test because I am ancient. I think that the requirement to send out these circulars to ancient people comes from ‘Prevention’ in  the Health Dept, or PHE. I would normally ignore it, but my prostate problem has been playing up for a few months, and needs to be attended to.

I must admit to being a terrible coward. I have known for months that the problem was getting worse, but I persuaded myself that it was not that bad, and, indeed, it is not that bad, provided that you ignore a poor flow of urine and burning sensations and feeling in need of a pee all the time. It is not that bad. But it is hard to make yourself make the phone call and book an appointment, but, most of all, it is hard to place yourself into the hands of someone who is almost certain to be a cruel and vicious anti-smoker who lies and lies about smoking, and calls for murderous taxation and exclusion of smokers and isolation of smokers. It is not difficult to imagine your GP with a whip in his hand. I wonder how an obese smoker with piles would get on?

Not that I imagine my GP in that way. I am sure that he is a kind and sympathetic person.

And is that not what doctors are supposed to be – kind and sympathetic? How can you practice medicine and be other than kind and sympathetic? That reminds me of Frank Davis’s ‘Dr W’, who became ‘big’ in the BMA (?). According to Frank, Dr W could not smile. When he discovered that one of his sons had become a smoker, he became hysterical, calling his son, “Disgusting, stinking, filthy”. But was Dr W affable and caring in his surgery, or wherever he practised? Who knows?

It would not surprise me if Arnott was not a perfectly pleasant person to chat with at a bit-of-a-do, glass of champers in hand. For all we know, she might be great fun, chatting about how she wrapped the Health Sec around her little finger; how he/she stuttered and stammered when she told him that the evidence showed that he was useless. What a giggle!

It is a well-known fact the cruel despots can be wonderful husbands and parents; that people can have different personalities in different situations. The situation tips over into insanity and mental health in general when the personalities clash. How many people are quietly insane?

I think that there are many, many people who are quietly insane. I think that my Auntie Delia was quietly insane. She was single, having devoted herself to looking after her parents. She worked in a factory for a while, but left because the male supervisors said nasty, sexy things. She could not stand it. She told me all that when I used to visit her home on my way home from school when I was about ten years old. She lived in poverty, but was not unhappy with her lot. But she was a bit crazy. But she was still a lovely person, despite all that.

My aunties and uncles all seemed to be a bit crazy. I especially remember Auntie Alice saying to my Mum, “It must be true because it said so in the paper”. Even at the age of ten or so, I knew enough to be able to say to myself, “Why should it be true because it said so in the paper?” Of course, I dared not voice that.

Why should I take anything as ‘true’ because somebody said it? Perhaps, in my ten year old brain, I had already experienced event which were said to be true, but which I had personal, visual evidence which denied that supposed truth; such as being blamed for some event which I knew that I was not responsible for. Even as a child, you learn that there are occasions when you will be blamed for something, but know that your denials will fall on deaf ears. Such occasions have to be accepted and just ‘rolled over’. There is nothing that you can do.

Even as adults, we are subject to such accusations all the time, and not just re smoking. Try to get ‘air-side’ in an airport, and you must pass thorough examinations. But all those problems were caused by the unrestricted import of violent thugs and violent ideologists in the first place.

Can that situation be reversed? Only Brexit will do so. It is very, very important that the Muslim invasion of Europe must stop at our shores.

But Brexit will not stop the pathetic capitulation of our politicians to TobCON.

We must wait and see.

Why Did Hitler Try To Exterminate Jews?

06/09/2018

I dare say that that question has been asked and answered thousands of times. But I have never read anything which is other than superficial – disgusting, filthy, sticking.

Did he want to confiscate their wealth? But, according to the photos and records which we have seen, most of the Jews transported to Death Camps were ordinary people trying to make a living. Ordinary people.

So why the Jews? There were not that many of them in Germany. There were some in France, and, despite the difficulties of arranging transport etc, may Jews were sent to Death Camps from France to Germany. Why? The same applied to Anne Frank in Holland. Why seek out Jews to kill in Holland? Why? What was the point?

Almost all the stuff that I have read, or which has been ‘propagandised’, has emphasised the cruelty, efficiency and generality about the holocaust, but I have not seen anything which examines the depravity.

The reason that this idea came into my mind was that I was watching a video by Jordan Peterson this evening. He was talking about the proliferation of victimhood. In short, everyone seems to want the Gov to solve their self-created problems. There is an infinite number of such problems (probably an exaggeration, but never mind). Are you gay? Are you gay and black? Are you gay, black and unemployed? Are you gay, black, unemployed and female? The list goes on and on and on.

I used the word ‘depravity’ at the end of the previous paragraph. I am not sure if that is the best word. I use it to suggest amorality and rape. It is easy to understand how a young, male Muslim might have been taught, by implication, that nubile young Western girls who were ‘unbelievers’, wearing short skirts, were fair game for rape and pillage. That is not the ‘depravity’ of which I speak.

The depravity of which I speak is the lack of consciousness of pain and suffering inflicted. Imagine an old chap who has walked to his local with his faithful dog for years, and is suddenly told that ‘dogs are no longer allowed’. There is even a sign on the door with a depiction of a dog with a thick red line through it. Dogs do not voluntarily good into pubs, so the sign should really portray a ‘Man and a Dog’. That is, the actual thing forbidden is ‘The Man’. The same applies to ‘No Smoking’ signs. They do not forbid smoking – they forbid smokers.

Our laws have gradually become more depraved, and, as in Nazi Germany, the ultimate result will be extermination of offenders – for no specific reason, other than being a smoker.

The Barnsley situation is a good example. Perhaps the 55 Labour Councillors just do not see how they place smokers in much the same situation as Jews in Nazi Germany. They are to be exterminated.

When the shit eventually hits the fan, and those councillors are eventually asked to explain themselves, they will inevitably say, “It was not my idea”. As though it did not matter how they voted.

And has that not been a serious problem for years and years in Parliament? How did it come to pass that a Tory PM, Cameron, was so weak that he fell for TobCON’s hysterical demands for PP?

We must expect more such ‘extermination’ ventures from TobCON before it implodes.

In the meantime, I ask again, “Why did Hitler et al choose to exterminate Jews specifically?” I would love to know.

Was Barnsley Targetted?

05/09/2018

The answer must seem obvious – “Yes, of course”. But it is not as simple as that. How did TobCON know that Barnsley was ‘ripe for picking’? How did TobCON know that there would be no problem is getting councillors to vote in favour of their blatantly hairbrained scheme to ban smoking around school gates, even though the council had no authority to do so? Why vote for something that you know is unenforceable? Or could that be THE reason? Did waivers say to themselves, “What does it matter? It is only a signal”.

But I think that there was a lot more to it. TobCON must have known that they had a majority in favour beforehand. Perhaps, when you look at all the local authorities in England, some stand out as good candidates. Perhaps TobCON already knew that there was a strong anti-smoking element on the council which would see nothing wrong with using children as a smokescreen for their devious plans to cause trouble amongst parents waiting for their kids to come out of school. A certain element of willingness to bully people must have been present already.

The problem is: ‘How can the tables be turned?’ How can the bullies be seen off, just like school bullies have to be faced down?

I have just checked the make-up of Barnsley council. There are 62 members. Of those, 4 are Tory, 1 is Libdem and 2 are independent. The other 55 are Labour. It is easy to see how ‘follow my leader’ will prevail, no matter how pathetic the idea is. The reasons for the virtue signalling are of no importance, nor are the stated reasons for the non-ban.

But the beauty of these non-bans and virtue signals is that they alert the people to weakness of their representatives. They are bullies. If they are bullying smokers, who else are they bullying? How much taxpayers’ money are they splurging on the costs of other pointless, worthless, virtue signalling?

I suppose that costs will cause the eventual collapse of TobCON. In Oz, another 12.5% of duty has just been piled upon the price of cigs. Cigs will cost around £20 for 20. Smuggling is an enormous problem. How many border officers have to be paid to intercept those consignments? And to make matters worse, the contraband which is discovered has to be destroyed. Journalists there are fond of stating how much duty would have been lost, had those consignments got through. There is an implication that smokers would be forced to pay official prices because of the interception. Is that likely to be true? I doubt it. Smokers with any sense would stock up for such ’emergencies’. But there is another interesting aspect. Chris Snowdon gives a breakdown of recent custom’s seizures here:

https://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2018/09/australias-new-tobacco-industry.html

Quite a lot of the seizures involve ‘loose’ tobacco. Clearly, there is a thriving industry in the making of cigs from ‘loose’ tobacco. ‘Loose’ tobacco is extremely cheap. The vast majority of costs come from making cigs. Think about it. A farmer somewhere in China or Indonesia is growing vast acres of plants and curing them. It takes a few days from harvesting the plants to having the finished product. He sells the produce by the kilo at, say, AU$2 per kilo. A kilo will produce 1000 cigs or more. He sells thousands of kilos and, in Chinese terms, gets rich.

Does it matter to smugglers if a few consignments are intercepted? It does not matter a toss what the calculated loss of revenue to the OZ Gov is. Only the cost of the raw material and transport matters. You can bet a pound to a penny that the people arrested know absolutely nothing about the ‘masterminds’. Further, I suspect that the small fry do not give a toss about suffering some jail-time. Jail-time cost the Oz Gov a massive amount of money, along with the cost of customs officers.

No wonder Oz has banned nicotine ecigs. The Oz Gov desperately wants smokers to pay the full price for cigs. It would be too easy for a smoker, deprived of cigs, to use an ecig for the time being, if he ran out of stock.

I would love to see tobacco revenue in Oz collapse. Smoking bans are irrelevant when it comes down to the nail. If I cannot smoke in a pub, I shall go outside. If I cannot smoke outside the pub, I shall not go to the pub at all. I’ll drink at home. I like my home. And if I find a source of cheap cigs, I’ll take advantage of it. I do not give a shit about political shysters and the like.

In those terms, organisations like the FCTC become irrelevant. They just cease to exist. They have no power over me at all.

I suppose that the supply of ‘illicit’ cigs is a top-down operation. Friends will help friends, who will also help their friends, so that, gradually, a very wide circle of ‘customers’ evolves. But I suppose that the circles are very closed. You would have to find a way to ‘break into’ a circle, which would be far from easy. That does not apply to me because I know no such people and have no wish to do so. But that does not mean that I do not LOVE such rogues. They are far more honest than the deviant globalists who inhabit Westminster.

It has been bandied about that massive realignment of politicians is in the offing. I hope so. Tory and Labour have become essentially the same thing. Both parties have set about persecuting citizens for being smokers, drinkers, fatties, etc. It has gradually got worse and worse as time has passed. It would not surprise me if the main parties break up and that a new party evolves which promotes the freedom of the individual, within the law. A good start would be to repeal the seat belt law, which was the start, in recent times, of coercion by the State with no redress.

Freedom of the individual is crucial and is the foundation of civilisation in post-Christian Europe. I say ‘post-christian’, but the general principle of ‘love thy neighbour’ still applies. Things go massively wrong when ‘love thy neighbour’ translates into ‘force thy neighbour’.

So, going back to Barnsley, we see force being applied, even if it is not legal force. It is still force, even if it is intended to pit one citizen against another. In fact, it is reasonable to say that that form of force is the most cruel of all.

The Birds: Barnsley Council ‘Jump The Shark’

04/09/2018

I bit of a change from my usual subject – at least to start with.

Birds bathing

I don’t know where that bowl came from. I thought that daughter 3 left it here with other ornaments when she moved homes years ago (most of them are still here). She says not. It could have come from daughter 1 when she was doing here uni art course, and she was particularly interested in sculpture. Anyway, it has been in our back garden for years, though not lying flat on the paving.

Our cat, Marcus, who is around 17 years old, lost most of his sight due to a detached retina. I remember how that happened. He was trying very hard to be sick; I mean really, really retching. I was nearby at the time, and I noticed that, immediately afterwards, he seemed not to know where he was going. The problem cleared up until the silly bugger climbed onto our garage and thence to the roof of next door’s extension. It was getting dark and he could not get down again. We had to rescue him by putting up a ladder. Again, his sight went bad and has stayed so. At first, we thought that we would have to keep him permanently indoors (many cats live that way, especially in flats), but we devised a system which allowed him to mouch around in the foliage in the back garden but not get to the fences. We used a dog lead pegged into the centre of the lawn. The length of the lead is sufficient for him to explore a wide area and snooze in his favourite spots.

Somehow, the bowl found its way flat onto the paving, and I noticed that he often drank rainwater from it. I noticed also that the water soon became really dirty. I could not understand why that was so – until, one day, I saw the birds bathing in it. Filthy little buggers!

Normally, they seem to bath in the early morning, but sometimes they appear during the day. I suspect that they do so when there is little or no water in the bowl and I clean it and fill it up for Marcus to drink from.

On this occasion, for some reason or another, the birds decided to revel in the clean water. I was able to grab my mobile and activate it while the birds were still there. (They usually only hang about for a couple of minutes) I managed to get a pic through the kitchen window, which you see above.

There is something magical about seeing them splashing about and shaking their wings in the water. I don’t know a better word than ‘magical’ to describe the delight one experiences in such simple things.

We usually associate ‘magic’ with good. I know that we have the phrase ‘bad magic’ but I am not sure if we have a single word which means ‘bad magic’.

But I do know that there is an awful lot of ‘bad magic’ around. It is almost always crudely disguised as ‘good’. Take, for example, the actions of Barnsley Council, fully described by Dick Puddlecote here:

http://dickpuddlecote.blogspot.com/2018/09/is-barnsley-doziest-council-in-country.html

The ‘bad magic’ is disguised as ‘good’ by the ‘evil’ use of children to spout anti-smoking propaganda. The idea of persecuting smokers by shaming them is disguised as ‘protecting’ children.

The trouble is that many, many parents actually believe the propaganda. They are quite likely to turn on any parent or grandparent having a cig whilst waiting for the children to come out. Note that fact. The parent smokes only whilst waiting for the children to come out. As soon as they come out, he/she finishes his cig and collects the child. It would be interesting if a propagandised parent turned on a smoker and said that he should not be smoking at the school gates. I should imagine that the reply, “There are no children here yet”, ought to suffice to shut the propagandised parent up. Just repeat that mantra: “THERE ARE NO CHILDREN HERE YET!!!!”

The phrase ‘jump the shark’ is pretty good. It invites one to imagine a celeb ‘jumping over a shark’ for publicity reasons. Much the same applies to the Barnsley Council posturing.

A spokesperson told us: “It’s not an outright ban, more of a request, but yes, vaping is included.

That is posturing since the Barnsley Council has no power to ban smoking outdoors anywhere. It is intended to incite the populace and cause fights and trouble. And any fight will be labelled, “SMOKER ATTACKS PREGNANT SINGLE MOTHER OF FIVE”.

I think that we should welcome such idiocy. Because, sooner or later, FACTS will demolish the propaganda. The worse the propaganda, the better.

I need to revisit the Doll ‘Doctors Study’. I need some simple FACTS. For example, out of some 30,000 smoking doctors at the start, only 1,000 eventually succumbed to LC as the cause of death. I need to refine those figures. Something like that. But there are immense complications in that many smokers stopped. The critical thing, however, is the LC figure, and not the heart problems. After 50 years, Doll et al stopped circulating doctors with the questionnaires. Why did they not go on for a further 10 years or so until ALL but a few doctors were dead? I suspect that ALL the doctors would have died from ‘smoking related diseases’. The only difference would have been how long they lived and NOT what the died from.

Barnsley Council is typical of Councils which have lost control and are trying to find excuses or trying to create ‘fake news’ to distract attention from their failings. ‘They plead ‘Government Austerity’, when the reality is that they have splurged money on ‘public health departments’, which produce nothing at all of public good.

Local Authorities must reorganise themselves. Councillors cannot do it because they are not ‘professionals’. The Councils must appoint CEOs who will have the courage to close down whole departments, or at least reduce them to skeletons, if Westminster insists upon their existence. Again, we see the incompetence of PM Cameron. Why did he not know that Local Councils would be riddled by special interest groups? Their purpose should be to mend roads and control pests, and little else. How did London get saddled with a Mayor who has just announced that sex change operations are a priority when London is awash with violent crime? Fake news.

Would it not be wonderful (I almost said ‘magical’) if Parliament abandoned its obsession with trivia, such as smoking prevalence, and concentrated upon matters which seriously affect the Nation?

Drastically cutting funding to the UN, WHO, IPCC etc would be a start. They are all leaches.