The uglification of England
Wednesday, May 16, 2007 
The "uglification of England" that David Hockney refers to and Barry Goodman describes in practise (below) is reflected by some of the emails that are flying into our inbox. Today, we received the following (this is the edited version!):
"Hello Mr Simon Clark of FOREST, I am 'THE ANTI SMOKER'. On 1st July 2007 Smoking WILL be totally banned in ALL PUBLIC PLACES. This will be permanent and there is NOTHING you will be able to do about it! Then your Pro-Smoking Club will be declared illegal and people will give up smoking in their droves like in Southern Ireland which is now a 'Non-Smokers Paradise'. Yes, Mr Clark, come and have a nice chat with me. I'd eat you alive (verbally I mean). You don't want me inside your head, you'd have a nervous breakdown. Goodbye Mr Clark."
OK, he's barking mad. But there's plenty more where that came from. Other emails include:
"Smoking in public is obnoxious and always has been. Next you will be suggesting that the slave trade was perfectly acceptable, or maybe that paedophile's [sic] are robbed of their human rights."
"No more medical treatment for smokers. Let them die slowly and in agony. They all scum [sic] especially FOREST members."
"Smokers are ignorant, abhorrant and arrogant little twats who couldn't give a shit about anyone but
themselves. They are fucking idiots and I hate them.""You people are SCUM. Hope you all get cancer and die a slow death you evil bastards."
"Smokers are a dying breed of smelly individuals with little willpower, even less self esteem and probably no common sense. Have fun and die happy in an oxygen tent :-)"
You might think these people are all nutters (or, as we now say, not fit for purpose) but you'd be wrong. Two years ago a local councillor returned a letter Forest had sent to thousands of councillors throughout Britain. Across the top he had scrawled, "I hope you get cancer and die." When we mentioned this to the local paper, the news editor laughed and said, "Oh, he's quite a character!", and ignored it.
The smoking debate has long been characterised by extremism on both sides. But the level of abuse from anti-smokers is definitely getting worse and, interestingly, it has got worse since MPs voted to ban smoking in enclosed public places. Encouraged by our elected representatives, and the government's increasingly radical anti-smoking campaigns, some people clearly feel they have been given the green light to say (and do) whatever they like if it involves smokers. How far this will go remains to be seen. I'll keep you posted - if I haven't been eaten alive.
Reader Comments (55)
Does anybody know any paedophile that is smoker? As far as I know every known paedophile is non-smoker.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
And if I am right than I think, it should be done research about the cause between not smoking and sick mind.
That first email looks SUSPICIOUSLY like the FREQUENTS the comments section.
Apologies for the uppercase. Not shouting, I promise.
Ha! that made no sense (I suppose that's why there's a preview button).
"That first email looks SUSPICIOUSLY like Rob Simpson who FREQUENTS the comments section.
Apologies for the uppercase. Not shouting, I promise."
I see this uglification as a good thing. The uglier that side becomes the more people will want to distance themselves from it and the stronger the smoker's case for discrimination becomes.
Some people on this blog don't like the tone of my comments but the examples Simon has posted are good examples of comments that have levelled at me over the past few months (I'm active elsewhere in the war on smoking). And so if I come off as, ah, determined in my posts try and remember what I've been dealing with.
I mean, seriously, the hate, filth and bile being levelled at smokers these days is truly beyond belief and we wouldn't tolerate it if it was aimed at any other segment of the population.
Doesn't surprise me in the slightest, I'm sorry to say. I remember reading years ago about smokers being physically assaulted and even killed by shooting in the U.S.A. as soon as the zealots felt their views had the support of the government.
This is what happens when governments support extreme positions. They're supporting extremists. (Why the couldn't work that out for themselves will always bewilder me).
And why would I send hate mail to Simon?
I have to agree that smokers are scum, im one so I should know, however, lets not forget the thousands of people out of work in Ireland due to one pub a day shutting, or the EXTRA, yes, EXTRA ten people a day now dying because of increased smoking in the home, as reported to the EEC comission.
As for letting them die, fine, but lets also let obese people die as they dont pay as much in tax as smokers do, and drug users, let them all die painfull deaths as they drain the system, again, without adding to the system.
And what about drink drivers?, lets save even more by leaving them by the road to die as it was their own fault.
I would wellcome a full ban in Britian, but then who would pay the 10 billion pounds into the NHS that smokers do? bear in mind that smokers cost around 4 billion, will these anti smokers be happy to pay extra tax on everything to make up the loss?.
So lets, ban smokers, obese, drug users and drink drivers from the NHS, but also stop taking their money in tax.
I would add to my previous... the whole thrust of evolving societies over time has been one of 'inclusion' - of affording a sense of equality and fairness to different groups (apart from extremists - who have tended to be regarded with suspicion). By this means, impressionable individuals have received the message that this is the socially acceptable path - tolerance, fairness, decency, respect, inclusion.
This ban takes hundreds of years of societal evolution and turns it on its head. It is divisive and grants free licence to all those who've kept their vitriol in check during more reasonable times to spew it over their object of hatred - and they will. The recent (poorly considered) choices made by anti-smoking 'authorities' simply add fuel to the fire.
Oops. That should have read: "The recent (poorly considered) advertising choices made by anti-smoking 'authorities' simply add fuel to the fire."
I've been around smokers for many years although curiously only been a smoker myself for just over a year. Part of the reason for starting was my refusal to be told what to do by do-gooders who try to run this country.
How many people have 10 pints and go home and beat their partner up - or the A & E staff when they are taken paralytic to hospital? How many people have 10 fags and do the same?
Aha!!
Pubs are now open longer, there's more binge drinking than ever, and do the government try to ban it in public places? Do they fk!!
Too many backhanders and donations from the breweries!
Smokers aren't daft, they're rational, which is more than can be said for alcoholics.
And I do enjoy a drink, in case you wonder whether i'm anti-alcohol, but there is some much pro drinking legislation and so much anti-smoking legisation it's time for us all to do smoke-ins after july 1 and civil disobediance. Good luck!
Have you ever noticed how many anti-smokers appear to be unable to spell, use punctuation or follow a logical train of thought in support of their arguments? Should we perhaps be looking at serious research into the effects of nicotine deficiency?
Wishing ill health on fellow human beings is unforgiveable and trading personal insults or using foul language is completely unnecessary. I do hope that the authors of the emails sent to Simon are in a tiny mnority indeed.
This is the fault of the media, they have helped to stir this kind of hatred. The BBC who weare forced to pay a license too.
Do they have any idea to the damage they have done.
Anti depressant are at an all time high, great for Big Pharma, not for the users.
I bet they are rubbing their hands at the prospect of a lot more come July 1st.
If the hook had been through the cheek of a rabbit all hell would have been let loose!
I read that churches have to conform to DoH signage and wonder if there will be demands for further intrusive signs of new world compassion:-
- Love thy neighbour as yourself unless they smoke.
- On seeing a packet of cigaretes the good samaritan crossed to the other side.
etc. etc
I have been smoking for 45 years because I enjoy it the upcoming smoking ban does annoy me as I think the bill was badly drafted.
exceptions should have been made for certain areas in pubs and clubs where no food was being served.
However we are stuck with it.
My local pub was recently refurbished and ahead of the smoking ban made the whole inside area non smoking however they have created a small covered terrace which complies with regs compleat with heaters and very good it is to.
So we can still have a pint and a fag.
I work for a company that introduced a total no smoking ban on all company premises some years back but with the july ban looming has sent memos advising us that anyone smoking on company premises will be subject to deciplinary
action inc company vehicles.
How far can we allow this to go as the non smoking people will never be satisfied untill
they have stopped us at home.
I found those emails very interesting Simon. I've had a few myself after some articles written in other places. I've not had much experience of abuse being leveled at me in person though - just the odd dirty look of disapproval.
Consider it was the stated purpose of ASH to help smokers give up so as to protect their health. I think the messages you got are from ASH types that now feel confident enough in their position to come out and be a little more honest about what they want for smokers. Kind of like the coward who comes to your office and just as he is walking out the door mutters something rude where when he was within your reach at the other side of the desk he was as polite as could be.
Reading all the comments are pretty scary, do I as a smoker have to wear a sign on my clothes to show my hobby - ? Will I be put into a camp, due to the fact that I smoke, and it might or might not kill my dog?Come on - We have been there 65 years ago - My family experienced that. - The world has already judged them - normally history teaches us a lesson and makes us grow up. The respect for the personal freedom of choose is more important, than all the prohibitions all the various governments can introduce. Are we on the road to regimes like: The Soviet Union, the 3rd Reich?
As I am not God I have no right to judge others, by their hobbies, interest, colour, religion, sexual orientations, beliefs, perfume …. Even if it is bothering me, I do not give them the right to judge me either. No matter who you are, what you are, what are your choose in life we are all different, but we all have to respect this and respect others as human beings. To bring your own misery onto others, will not make yourself any better or happier....
This is for all those antis who can't spell and write
appalling twaddle. You know the type: "it's inevitable," it's unthinkable it could be different" and all those statements of wishful thinking. Well, never count your chickens before they're hatched.
Now, read on:(www.smokersclubmedia.com/pr/pr051707.html). Cut and paste if necessary.
I have just read the post by blad,and I have to agree that this ban is an infringment on property rights,I am a commitee member of a landlocked ex servicemens private members club, which is owned by the members including the freehold,there is no entry to the general public unless by invitation,ie for private functions etc,over 90% of the members are smokers including the staff,we have been racking our brains looking for a way around this,but I am afraid that once the ban comes in people will stay away and the place will have to close, resulting in six job losses, and nowhere for the vetrans to have their pint and ciggie,any suggestions including possibility of legal action most welcome!!
JUST REMEMBER FELLOW SMOKERS.........WE STILL CAN USE OUR VOTES WISELY.
I AM TIRED OF THIS UNDEMOCRATIC SOCIETY WHICH IS BEING RULED BY DICTATORSHIPS WHO INVADE OTHER COUNTRIES TO RID THOSE COUNTRIES OF (GUESS WHAT) DICTATORS.
I CAN'T WAIT UNTIL THE ANTI-SMOKERS ARE TAXED TO THE HILT AS A SMOKER I AM USED TO PAYING EXORBITANT TAXES.
This country makes me sick! Personally i blame journalists for everything!
Also, am i right in saying that the only place to be exempt from the smoking ban will be House of Commons bars? If so... I think that sums everthing up! They already get away without having to pay license fees to the BBC. I better stop before my rant drifts off to other subjects!
Carl; If logic and justice played any part then of course there would be a way for you to keep the club open and allow smoking. The government had no right to even contemplate making a law that would ban anything on private property.
Just to clarify what some deliberately misconstrue. Private property is property that is not owned by the state and has nothing whatever to do with how the property is used or who uses it. Public property is state owned property. Therefore a public house is private property.
One of several property rights is the right to determine what property is used for and who by. The person who has the property rights is the
owner of the property - no one else.
One of the only remotely legitimate reasons for having a government at all is to defend private property rights. But we live in a democracy and unfortunately democracy is enemy of individual rights, especially property rights.
Bernie,
Thanks for your comments,Surely when implementing this legislation they took property rights into consideration?,sadly it would appear not, it would be interesting to know what the legal aspect is though, wether they can be held responsible for loss of earnings/livelehoods, any ideas??
Carl how courageous are you? :-)
It could make a great story and I think would even be taken up by the media. I had not noticed that you said your club was for ex servicemen. It is possible some of those ex servicemen fought the Nazis (fascism). The Nazis were very anti smoking. Did those servicemen put their lives on the line to defend us against the Nazis only to have their own government betray them? You could make a very logical case for this.
There's something TERRIBLY frightening about all this anti-smoking hysteria, and it rather reminds me (at the risk of seeming over-dramatic) of all that officially-sanctioned Jew-baiting that took place in Germany in the Thirties. Hitler, of course, was in many senses a Modern Man: a teetotal, vegetarian animal-rightist with a loathing of tobacco.
All we need now is for a Smoker to set fire to the Diana Memorial, and there'll be blood-letting in the streets. And it'll all be OUR fault !
How can all this be happening in England - the country I love - and whose Sons and Daughters gave so much in the last war in the cause of Freedom ?
Whatever happened to Fair Play and Common Sense - two national traits upon which we once rightly prided ourselves ? Fanaticism was for Foreigners.................(and Californians).
Such a shame, I feel, that tobacco doesn't play a prominent role in the Islamic Faith: we'd see government-funded Smoking Clubs springing up like mushrooms !
Well, if I'd ever seriously considered giving up La Diva Nicotina, I've certainly abandoned it now: I'd sooner be stoned to death than give that purse-lipped little colonial at the Department of Health the satisfaction, frankly. Perverse ? Yep, that's me all right: like all good Heretics, I prefer to make my own mind up about things, thank you ! You see, I left Primary School a long time ago.................
Bernie,
I like the idea,but would need to speak to a few people first
Just to put you in the picture though,we are one of only two royal naval old comrades clubs in the country and our constitution is based on service values and traditions ,did you know that as far as I am aware (could be wrong!!) that the royal navy still issues duty free cigs to personel on board HM ships.
Over the past couple of years we have had the local Royal Engineers club close down,and,most of their members are with us now.(Shame it closed as it was on M.O.D property and would be exempt!!).and yes we still have a few veterans who fought in ww2,though sadly their numbers are diminishing.I am very interested in your suggestion, please let me know what you have in mind.
Carl.
Carl; You could do something illegal that would be sure to get media attention or you could keep it legal and still have a strong moral case for media attention.
The illegal thing to do would be to have a "smoke in" on the 1st of July or some time after that. Call your local media to come and see and take pictures and get interviews. Also alert the local council about what you are doing so that you can get pictures of an officious type from the council arresting someone or handing over a notice of fine.
The legal thing to do is pretty much the same thing only you stage it outside the premises and have some placards. I'm sure you could get local support from members of the public who would be ashamed at having such men forced to stand outside their own club for the sake of a law they literally risked their lives to prevent happening in this country by fighting the Nazis.
Either way I wouldn't expect to get any concessions but that isn't the point. This is like the OAPs refusing to pay their council tax. The councils have no option but to have them arrested and jailed for to do otherwise would open the floodgates but it makes them look bad which is the point.
And it is an important point to make the law look the fool that it is. Tony Blair and his ilk can whine as much as they like about "respect" but they have to be taught that for the law to be respected it has to be a respectable law. A law that puts ex servicemen who fought an enemy so as not to have such laws in their own country is beneath contempt. The government has no respect for whatsoever for the people who fought. But do not get the idea that the general public has no respect for ex servicemen for that would be completely wrong. Especially when it comes to the war against the Nazis.
The more laws that can be pointed to as being ridiculous the more dangerous that is for the authority and credibility of government.
I suspect that the smoking ban law requires fixed penalty notices like parking tickets which they want to dish out and not want to give the option of giving a court hearing. What I think would be good would be for clubs such as yours to be given such a notice and then to refuse to pay it. At some point they will have to give you a day in court. If it were then possible to have a jury (notice how recent laws are likely to make that harder to get) I suspect you would have a very good chance of having the thing thrown out. The last thing the government wants is to have a jury trial for such a case as they would be almost certain to lose it. So it would be fun to push for such a thing.
To be completely honest and not paint a glorious picture that may be entirely wrong I have to also say that you cannot count on the local press to give you positive coverage. They get a lot of their advertising revenue from advertising local council jobs.
Bernie,
It would seem that great minds think alike, my basic idea was along the same lines as yours,to force it to go to court,I am in the position at the momennt where I would have to seek the approval of the membership, which I cannot see a problem with. but, although I can spread the word our next meeting is not until the middle of June.It would be nice if when we have this "peaceful protest" maybe someone from Forest would like to attend to ensure fair play.Simon perhaps??????????I will keep you informed.
Once again very many thanks for the advice.and rest assured I intend fighting this to the bitter end.
Hey Carl thanks for the "great minds" compliment.
I'm not a FOREST official but I'd like to come along to support you and I'm sure there are others here who would too. Where in the country are you?
Hi again Carl, Bernie and all of you,
I am sorry for my spelling and even my poor English; I am French living in London and during few visited in Aberdeen since 2005 I saw the change of this place who look like Pigalle in Paris……
I, with other Friends, French Lawyer, decide to hire a Scottish law firm and try to find the way around this laws who go against all the Human right of choose and freedom, Right of Privet Propriety ….
The good new is that there is away around and now we are processing with preparing the Memorandum for QC.
The bad new is that as none Scottish and none from Aberdeen, We need to get in contact with people that have with same interest as us. We do believe that if we can move the Smoking Ban in Aberdeen, a small town where the law is so hard we can make it move every where. Then are next will be Scotland, England…..and why not in France where the law will be on Next year and will leave us more freedom that in UK but will be still an acceptable under “The declaration of the human Right”
“Considering that it is essential that the human rights are protected by de jure system so that the man is not constrained, in supreme recourse, with the revolt against tyranny and oppression. »
“Considering that in the Charter the people of the United Nations again proclaimed their faith in the basic human rights, the dignity and the value of the human person, in the equal rights of the men and the women, and that they were declared solved has to support the social progress and to found better living conditions in a larger freedom. »
“Article 7.
All are equal in front of the law and have law without distinction to an equal protection of the law. All are entitled to an equal protection against any discrimination which would violate the present Declaration and counters any provocation with such a discrimination.
Article 8.
Any person is entitled to an effective recourse in front of the competent national courts against the acts violating the basic rights which are recognized to him by the constitution or the law. «
Please do get in contact with me if you are interest>
Thank you
Frederique
PS: You have to know, for this project I thought to move to Aberdeen but will be quite impossible because I am a smoker and as I see on internet and as I be tall :” Sorry no dog and not smoker…”
Hi Bernie,
We are in sunny Eastbourne on the south coast,and you would be made very
welcome.I will post developments here as they happen so watch this space!!!
Frederique,
Welcome, there is a group who are raising funds for this purpose go to www.freedomtochoose.co.uk
Viking saying : Against idiocy even the gods battle in vain. Can't those bloodyminded fanatics see that they're driving people into WORSE "habits" (addictions) than "un-cool" cigarettes - and what this is doing to "national health", physical and mental, not to mention NHS-, crime-, etc. budgets ... I see officialdom's way of focussing attention to "the evil smokers" (!) as an equivalent to a thief throwing a juicy bone to the guard dog, to distract it while he does his thing ... How much are the Anti-Smoke Hounds missing in their enthusiasm to hunt us ... ? These are dangerous times !
Aase Skriver
These are, indeed, dangerous times. Jew-baiting - smoker-baiting. And who or what will be next? My advice to those of you, above, who are wishing to stage a peaceful protest - be very careful. I believe that those people who protested against the Hunting Ban in 2004 outside Parliament wanted a peaceful protest and the Police beat them into submission horrifically. I remember watching this on TV and feeling appalled. I don't think, now, they will treat smokers any differently. Actually smokers are quite a large minority group (25% of the adult population) - yet, much smaller minority groups are treated with deference.
I have to say I totally agree with what Martin said about Islamic smoking clubs popping up like mushrooms. I think I am right in saying that the government Religious Hatred Bill has gone through parliament. How about us smokers making up a new religion incorporating smokers? Then it would be illegal for them to discriminate against us!
I am totally outraged by the smoking ban. Life for the smoker is difficult enough and this legislation was not needed as most offices and workplaces had already banned it! I can only take a flight lasting two and a half hours as after that I start getting stroppy! Air rage was unheard of before the airlines banned smoking.
One thing I would urge though just to get back at them (especially doctors) is visit your GP and take up their free anti smoking patches and then use them selectively when you know you are going to be in a situation where you can't smoke i.e. long haul flights etc. When you want more free patches just say you gave up for a time but will probably patches for the rest of your life. They won't like it bcause of the drain on the health service but they have committed themselves to help people give up and they say "Don't give up giving up!"
“Air rage was unheard of before the airlines banned smoking.”
Silvia, you are right
According to this link “restrictions such as banned smoking are the leading causes” of air rage.
http://www.flighthealth.org/air-rage.htm
Excellent couple of suggestions, Sylvia !
Actually - in a perverse sort of way - I'm almost beginning to ENJOY all this...........
Let us hope that The Fight (worth the capitals, I think) has only just begun.
May I also be so bold as to suggest that EVERYONE who has contributed thus far to this site a) download and print off a copy of Joe Jackon's excellent essay, and b) POST it to his/her local MP. The response should be interesting, at least..............
Joe's well-reasoned arguments are unassailable - and ONLY a BIGOT could dismiss them out of hand ! Let us not forget - as I believe we tend to from time to time - that THEY are OUR servants, and NOT the paid stooges of the Drug Cartels,the BMA
(they had 'Doctors' in Ausschwitz, too), or Neurotics Anonymous.
And yes - we ARE one of the biggest 'Minorities' in the Country.
Frankly, I think we've ALL been a little too 'tolerant' of the Antis and their fellow-travellers for too long: now it's time for US to start making BLOODY NUISANCES of ourselves, and putting THEM on the defensive.
At least we can go down fighting......
À l'outrance, Mes Amis................!!
Hi Guys,
Just found a new take on this,I have in front of me a copy of "statutory instrument 2007 no 765 of the smoke free (exemption and vehicles regulations 2007).
Regulation 11 states (and I qoute)provides for most enclosed vehicles which are used by the public or used for work purposes to be smoke free but,AIRCRAFT AND MOST SHIPS AND HOVERCRAFT ARE EXCLUDED.
So it would appear that the airlines have only themselves to blame for air rage.
I have to agree with Martin (18 May) as it echoes my own feelings on this matter. All we need do is look through history at every single aggressive dictatorship to see how minority groups within those societies are targeted (scapegoated) as a way of distracting the focus away from 'bad management'. Inevitably, such attacks are preluded by intensive propaganda designed to whip the population into a frenzy of self-righteous indignation.
All we need do is look at events, past and present. The Witch Hunts of Medieval Europe - primarily innocent young women targeted by sexually repressive church states intent on solidifying their hold on an ignorant and fearful populus. The persecution of Jews by Hitler's Nationalist Socialist Party requiring a scapegoat for all German society ills at that time. The hysteria of the McCarthy years in the USA that saw innocent citizens tried and executed as traitors...the list could go on and on.
The main thing to remember is that we are all just another target in a long history of targets - a perceived sub culture whose persecution can assist the powerful in further consolidating their hold; not just on us but on everyone.
I see from one of the links on this site (to BBC News) that "Latest US research, published in Pediatrics, estimates films delivered 13.9 billion smoking images to American adolescents aged 10-14".
Well, I've just done a bit of a calculation. Assuming that the average American 14-year-old has watched TEN films a week, every week of the year, for every year of his life since birth, that would mean that he's seen 7280 films (quite a lot - even by American standards, but never mind).
This in turn would mean that EACH film would - on average - have shown just over 1.9 MILLION 'smoking images'.
Gosh and golly - now, that IS a lot, I have to admit ! Clearly, I've somehow misinterpreted these findings.
Well, I have two simple questions regarding this latest piece of fatuous propaganda - fed to (and solemnly digested by) gullible newshounds at the Beeb:
How on earth was such a piece of 'research' conducted - and over what period ? A shade under 14 THOUSAND MILLION 'smoking images' sounds rather a lot to me:
"Hi, Eugene. Say, just as a kind of guesstimate, how many smoking images do you imagine you and all the other Young People in America been subjected to over the years ?"
"Gee, Sir - that's a tough call, and I'm still only 14. Let me see now (pauses to reflect). Yeah, I think I got it. Just under fourteen billion, I guess'
"Thanks for helping us with our research, Eugene: it'll sure save a lotta lives"
"No - thank YOU, Sir, for empowering me to Make A Difference to the Young People of the Planet"
My second - equally obvious question is this: why are 'smoking images' considered SO much more deletarious than shooting/stabbing/punching/driving-cars-badly images ?
I only ask because I want to know...............
Naturally, I WOULD have put this to the Dynamic Duo, Hewitt and Flint (which sounds rather like one of those daft TV series from the Seventies), but THEY tend to be 'unavailable for comment' these days.
Ideas, anyone...........?
Going back to forming a new religion based on smoking, think back to the UK 2001 Census, which was the most probing one we have ever had. They asked the question (optional) about your religious beliefs. In contempt of this question a lot of people put Jeddi and because so many put this the government had to accept it as an official religion! So why not smoking - after all the American Indians smoke a peace pipe. How about a peace pipe smoke-in (venue to be decided but must be a public building) to "pray" for peace in Iraq?
I think we should not fight for new religion but fight for freedom, decency of human’s life and common sense.
The big enemy of the freedom and common sense is fear.
Fear from smoking is induced by scientific fraud.
Scientific fraud is the main weapons of “antismoking cult”
Luke, I do so agree with you (though I DO like the sound of Sylvia's Cunning Plan). But may I add one other value to Decency, Common Sense, and Freedom - that of Truth ?
All four are gravely at risk in this Brave New World that seems to be dawning.
I can't help feeling that Something Is Terribly Wrong somewhere, and all this bloody UNNECESSARY nonsense to do with smoking is but one symptom of the disease.
At least they don't BURN heretics any more (too worried about carbon emissions, I imagine).
Martin thanks for your comment. I strongly agree with every point that you make.
I also have great respect for Sylvia. I like every post that she posts on this forum. My intention was to give constructive comment on her post and not to criticize, but I think I could have done on more polite way. I think it is because of my pore writing ability. I hope she won’t take offence.
Smokers and non smokers that care for freedom, decency of humans’ life, truth and common sense need to be united in reclaiming and defending this basic value of humanity.
We need to do something before we are completely outlawed.
Today is outlawed smoking in the pubs, tomorrow will be outlawed smoking in the cars, day after tomorrow will be outlawed smoking in the home and after that it will be Forest outlawed.
We need to do something about that, before is too late.
My suggestion is that we first need to organise an active political organisation with strategy to reclaim and defend basic value of civilisation.
Luke -
First, many thanks for your kind response.
Second - at the risk of being presumptuous - I'm sure that Sylvia took no offence at your remarks: she strikes me as FAR too intelligent (she's on OUR side, remember !) for that.
Yes, I was wondering whether someone would broaden the debate out beyond the theme of THIS particular blog - to embrace the notion of Liberty, and the possible need for a political re-alignment (not just in this country, but in the West as a whole).
Clearly, the outmoded division between Left and Right is no longer serving us well. I speak as someone from the conservative Right (the English 'Right', that is, not the Continental variety), but I am certainly NOT in any sense tribal in my allegiances. As such, I am deeply sceptical of the need for (or the ability of) the State to solve ALL our problems, and that scepticism extends equally to the large corporations (and in this regard, I have much in common with the Libertarian Left - if such a thing still exists).
It seems to me that today the TRUE distinction -in politics, at any rate - lies between the Freedom-Givers and the Freedom-Takers. But, is the Modern Electorate, I wonder, any longer grown-up enough to shoulder the Responsibility that comes with Freedom ? In the War, Young People gave their lives in MILLIONS for an abstraction called 'Freedom': how many would nowadays be willing to sacrifice even their mobile phones, I wonder, in our comfortable, rights-obsessed, consumerist West ?
Obviously, this is not the place to embark upon a Major Debate. But MY view - in a nutshell - is that both governments AND corporations (and I include the European Union - Jean Monet's Fourth Reich IMHO) are FAR too strong for our collective and individual good, and that the seemingly inexorable process of INCREASING power to both that has been going on since the War needs to be reversed.
Government, in particular, 'does' TOO much, and most of it BADLY. (I suspect that BERNIE may sympathise with this outrageous notion, at least).
The first question, however is: how ?
And the second question is: how many care, anyway ?
God - now I'm starting to sound like a Lefty !
OK - just put me down as a bolshie conservative
(no capital letters, note)............
Anyone out there prepared to run with THIS one ?
I have read all the comments left regarding this posting and notice one major omission. I had a difference of opinion with a doctor the other day. According to him, smokers should give up the habit to increase their standards of health. This created another point. That being, if everyone gave up smoking as the medical professional tell us then, we would not need half the doctors, medical staff or even hospitals.
Tobacco was introduced into this country during the reign of Elizabeth I. Why is it that it has taken until the 1960's for it to now be claimed responsible for cancer etc. There are other forms of burning carbon which has increased since the War. Petrol, diesel, and other carbon based fuels for heating can also cause these problems. We are then told that companies should allow time off for employees to attend anti-smoking classes to reduce absenteeism from smoking related illnesses. What are these? Doctors will tell you these are respiratory illnesses. Well! Surprise, surprise, these have existed since before tobacco was first introduced in Britain. If we are to have health warnings on tobacco products, why not on fuel pumps? Also why is it that any improvements on such green issues are being put off until after 2020?
Why if this Government cannot afford to pay state pensions and therefore intend raising the retirement age to 68, are they now wanting to push healthcare, Surely, the longer you live, the worse the economy is going to get. They know what is causing these deaths and they have no intention of doing anything about it. This makes more sense.
Finally, has anyone considered no terrorist bombs have gone off in open spaces.
I have always believed that the evil and vile things said by the anti smokers are only said cos they were once smokers themselves and have given up, and obviously still want a cig. Otherwise why is there suck hate in them. Another thing i dont understand is why do non smokers want to come onto a smoking website. I have absolutely no interest in going onto the ASH website
It is absolutely appalling now, the way in which smokers are being treated and spoken to. It is reminiscent of the German public's views towards the Jews in thirties Nazi Germany. At first it was just a small section of Nazi thugs that acted in such an inhumane way towards people which were once classed as their fellow citizens, but gradually, as the anti Jewish propaganda increased, and took hold, it became more and more acceptable for the majority to start acting in the same manner, and as we all know, the rest is history.
We cannot just sit back and let ordinary law abiding citizens be bullied and cajoled like this, where will it end?
We have heard of other countries, such as Ireland, where smokers have been physically attacked on the streets. We have all heard the verbal abuse which many smokers are now undergoing. There will come a day when the anti smoking brigade goes that one step too far, they are already wishing cancer and death on smokers, how long will it be before a smoker is actually murdered by one of these thugs?
Even a long standing friend of mine has now started. He has been going to smoke filled pubs all his life without ever complaining, he has worked alongside smokers. He has had dinner at my house on many occasions, where I have always smoked, and he has been out to restaurants with my wife and myself on equally many occasions. Now however, if I have the "audacity" to light a cigarette anywhere near him, he waves his hand about in front of my face in a very rude manner. The last time this happened, we ended the evening by having an argument which became really heated. I tried to make it into a reasonable discussion instead of a heated argument, but like the people we are now hearing about, he was not willing to discuss anything, he was right and I was wrong, full stop. In fact his final comments on the matter, was that I was talking a lot of b+++++ks.
By the end of the last war there were hardly any Jews left in Europe. Are we really going to sit back and let the same thing happen to smokers?
I have just read the ASH Scotland article on the McTear versus Imperial Tobacco 31/05/2005. How can any self-respecting organisation in the western world you such an article to gain 'Brownie Points' from someone's death. I bet rabble will be the first to wear the Red Poppy on Remembrance Sunday. What ipocracy!!!
ASH might be better explained as 'Actively Seeking Hitler.'