Wozza leads the resistance
Wednesday, June 27, 2007 
Antony Worrall Thompson was an absolute star all evening. Wozza - Forest's patron since 2001 - isn't just a name on a letterhead. For years he has taken the time and the trouble, often at short notice, to do numerous interviews on our behalf.
Monday night at The Savoy was no different. He arrived early and was immediately at a centre of a media scrum. Before dinner he must have given at least a dozen interviews to journalists and broadcasters including programmes such as Newsnight, Tonight With Trevor McDonald and You and Yours. (The latter was broadcast yesterday. Go HERE and under 'Listen Again' click on Tuesday edition. Antony is featured 37 minutes into the hour-long programme.)
He also featured in yesterday's (London) Evening Standard which reported that:
If New Labour has found the resistance to its hunting ban formidable there was an indication last night that it can expect more of the same from its ban on smoking in public places. Chef Antony Worrall Thompson led the resistance.
"This is about control. The control freakery of this fucking government. Do you ever go into a town centre and cause trouble because of the effects of a cigarette? How long before they ban alcohol in pubs? What about obesity? How long before they ban food in restaurants? I'm not going to put up the No Smoking signs in my restaurants."
The Spy column in today's Daily Telegraph repeats Wozza's "control freakery" comment. It also quotes him saying: "There are loads of 85 and 90-year-olds who have smoked all their life who didn't get cancer - and I think it'll be proved in due course that it's all genetic." The fightback starts here!
Reader Comments (25)
Good for Antony Worrall Thompson, he is a true star, and real friend of freedom.
Of course Antony Worrall Thompson is right when he says that it will probably be proved in due course that cancer is all genetic.
How else could anyone explain the fact that an aunt of mine who died of lung cancer had never smoked in her life, none of her family smoked and neither did the people she worked with?
I think that Antony Worrall Thompson is great man and I have great respect for what he doing.
Quote;
( "There are loads of 85 and 90-year-olds who have smoked all their life who didn't get cancer – )
This is fact of life. It is serious question will this people be alive today if they didn,t smoke or if they quit smoke earlier.
Quote;
(and I think it'll be proved in due course that it's all genetic.")
Wide acsepted theory about genetical predisposicion to any ilnessess has never been established and every day loosing ground only it not getting wide preess coverage. Geneticaly predisposition to ilnessess was speculation/asumption that was quickly acsepted as scientific fact
The genetic is meaningles world in atempt to understand ilnessess and desease.
Cause of lung cancer are not understud. In realyty we know less today than 100 years ago about cause of lung cancer.
No one is geneticaly “chosen” to be prone to lung cancer.
Most part of genetic science is nothindg also than introducing religious thought on beck door of humans resoaning.
It is just InteleGENE design theory. Intelegent design theory that creacionist traying to sold as science is advance stage of IneleGENE design theory.
Genetics should be part of science of heredithy. In reality we don’t have science of heredity because of gene hype/mania
Quote;
(The fightback starts here!)
I hope that the fightback will start and I wish and I hope that Antony Worrall Thompson will lead the fight but before I think that we need to agree about effective and efficient strategy.
Well it looks like it was a very nice bash for the media luvvies. Ooooh - and we got featured in the Telgraph!
When are you going to get serious about this?
The only thing that will have any impact on these meddling, facists, is massive civil insurrection. The people of this country are fed up to the back teeth with having their lives scrutinised, and their freedoms gradually eroded. The smoking ban is the latest example of this administration playing fast-and-loose with established principles, The emasculation of the House of Lords being the most serious. Tobacco has been part of English culture for Four Hundred and Twenty years. The ban has nothing at all to do with health and everything to do with compensation culture, big business, and insurance.The Lords suggested that the ban represented "...a disproportionate response to a relatively minor health concern.". I say that the ban is just another nail in the coffin of freedom.
Nice dinners, and talking heads are all very well, but unless we smokers are prepared to get out onto the streets with placards and banners and block the centre of London for a week or so, nothing will change, and the anodyne idealists will, after savoring their latest victory, begin their next crusade.
You are most definitely right Matt, we do need to get out there and show this government that we mean business.
I wonder what would happen if the government suddenly decided to ban all private motor vehicles from our roads and streets after dusk, or say between the hours of 6pm to 6am the following morning?
If this government is seriously worried about our health, and us inhaling other people's poisonous fumes, then this could seriously happen couldn't it?
How would all the self righteous, anti smoking, do gooders react to that one I wonder?
The media as a whole will take no notice of comfy dinners, especially before the ban.It would have to be Wembly stadium for them to take a blind bit of bloody notice. Revolts have to be after the ban,when they're not expecting any. You have to realize that the goverment is not prepared for dissent on this issue,because most people have caved in to the law everywhere else.
They think this is easy.
That's their weakness.
They don't want a fight. They don't expect one.
But hopefully in England they're going to get a huge suprise, that they can't handle.
Good luck to the pubs who are defying the ban. It has to start somewhere.
If the clubs and pubs who were against this ban
took a stand together,and just said no, they wouldn't be able to do a thing about it. As I said, they don't want a fight, it would be far too expensive, so let's give them one.
Actually, Zitori, strategy may be good because if the weather turns really nasty (as predicted this weekend) and there were lots of smoke-ins etc. the services would be too busy sorting out other problems - even if there were enforcement officers patrolling, this should give a few people experience of learning how to deal with them!
Simon; When you have the time please respond to my blog post.
www.icanhelpit.co.uk/blog
Peter
No sign of Robert since your last comment, is he sulking
Anthony Worral Thompson is a fine man in terms of his willingness to speak out against smoking bans. However, to refer to him as leader of the 'resistance' is a bit rich and, frankly, debases the term. Off the top of my head I can't think of a single example in history where resistance to oppression in the form of words alone achieved anything much of significance. From Gandhi and the suffragettes through to the resistance against the Nazi's, direct action has always spoken louder than words. Fine dinners and fine words are just that - please don't confuse them with actually doing anything.
Scorpy,
It needs to bear in mind that pro smoking movement or movement to defend our way of life does not exist.
Many years the FOREST is only that trying to defend right and dignity of smokers.
Without people like Anthony Worral Thompson we would not have FOREST.
Next point is that from 14 milions of smokers just small percentage (about 0,1%) ever heard about exsistence of Forest.
Important point is that majority of people that posting comment on this blog exspecting that somebady fight for their right without intention to be personaly direct involved.
Before we criticise people that are in forefront of fight for smokers right we should to discus a litle bit about ourselfs and find way to mobilase significant number of smoker to be active.
Luke, sorry, that was a bit sharp for a first post - I just meant to point out (the obvious) that there is a fight to be had beyond words. I'm trying to do my bit in getting active and getting others involved, I wouldn't just sit back and criticise others for not doing it for me.
Many good points have been posted on this site but unfortunately, some points seem to have been missed. We are always told that smokers take up 25% of the population. Where the hell does this figure come from. There is no such question asked in any Censors form that I recall filling out or any where else for that matter. If 25% of about 60 million smoke, then this makes 12.5 million of us. Remember, it was our Parliaments who decided the smoking ban was to be in a blanket form. ASH and its cronies did not have a vote as they are members of Parliament. Therefore, it was the smallest minority of this country that had their say. Combining both Houses does not amount to 1000 voters. So why are we the smokers designated as a minority. Simple mathematics – I believe.
In Wales, 39 members voted for this Farce as against 700,000 smokers, if this 25% figure is to be believed. Again, ASH has no legal vote. When you consider all members of the various parliaments that voted for this ban, this accounts for less than 1% of the population. This has no place in any democracy.
If the NHS had used the money we give to its revenue, why has so much been wasted on anti-smoking adverts. If this money had been used for the purpose it was given, we would a health service to be proud of, instead of one which patients die from MRSA etc.
The doctors we now have in the community ask 2 specific questions where you visit them.
1 Do you smoke? And 2. Do you go to any place where people smoke? These questions are used to diagnose various ailments from a boil to flatulence or even pregnancy – I suppose.
In Wales we have this idiotic system whereby if you are unable to visit their surgery you then have to phone for an agency doctor to decide if a visit is necessary. Even if that doctor calls on you he or she has little history of you to perform a good diagnosis. I have seen this happen at first hand and remember many needless deaths caused by this incompetence caused by money being misdirected to unnecessary places. These mostly being to management bank accounts and this anti-smoking gimmick.
Scorpy. For the fight to go beyond words it needs backing. It needs people to know that there's an army of people ready to back them up if needed. THAT is where we need words, that's where media coverage and grassroots campaigns are of supreme value.
Our first job is to rally support. It's important to capitalise on the ban and the bitter taste it'll leave in people's mouths and to let them know they're not alone, that's there's millions of people who feel the same way and are willing to fight back.
Rob, I couldn't agree more about the need to rally support, and now is the time to be doing it. But people are more likely to rally when there is something they can actively join in *with*, All the time 'resistance' exists only as polite talk and objection, what is there to rally *to*?? Where is the back up army for those who want to fight back? What is the battle plan?
I see the nightclub owner (cherie blair client) has said he will not stop anyone smoking. He has also said he will pay all his customers fines until hell freezes over. Good on you boy, let's hope others follow.
Maybe that is where the next smoke in will be. At last an excuse to go in one of those clubs:-)
I am a registered nurse and work in cancer care and yes i smoke. I am sick and tired of the lies and deciet of this present goverment about passive smoking and it`s effects. I have a degree in oncology nursing and there is not one peice of credible evidence that states passive smoking causes illnesses in non smokers. I have done a lot of research on this issue and get so angry when i hear this lying goverment spouting on about it will save 1000`s of lives, what bull shit. If passive smoking is so toxic then why the hell is the house of commons bar exempt, thought 2nd hand smoke killed!!! The more people who defy this ban the better, we cannot let an idiotic minority dictate to a so called free society any longer. We really must stand up and fight this discrimitory horrendous law once and for all. Enough of their bull shit!
Robert woods, well said! The fraud is huge and MUST be exposed to the general public as soon as possible. That is the golden key. The media is extremely fickle, and if a few more journalists can be persuaded to 'out' this scam, then the ball 'might' just start rolling. You know what? This is a massive con, so it has to have the potential of a massive scoop,if they have the balls publish in a big way. The effect would be dramatic, and their house of cards would come tumbling down.
Unfortunate name Robert (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation being a mighty contributor to the antis cause). However you make good sense. Would you care to write a piece for my blog?
www.icanhelpit.co.uk/blog
Have you read the article on www.forces.org? It states that the World Health Organisation have withheld from publication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could have even a protective effect!
Always thought it was a lot of old Bo**ocks!!
Hi again if anybody on here has any good ideas about how we can form some sort of group to fight this unlawful blanket ban, then let me know, as i have emailed MP`s and also written to Tony Blair. I`v also stopped paying my monthly subscription to my professional union the RCN (Royal College of Nursing) on principal because they were in full support of a blanket ban on smoking. I wrote to them and detailed my disgust and why i no longer wanted to be part of their union. I also refuse to adhere to my hospital policy of not smoking on my coffee breaks etc, i put a coat on over my uniform and smoke, i dare them to discipline me for this breach of policy, so far its been all threats! However fighting alone is a lonely pastime and one person can only make a very small impact, hence any ideas anyone , as strengh in numbers.
Rob
Robert, try www.freedom2choose.co.uk and be sure to check the links at the bottom of the web page as well as the top. You can also sign up for the discussion forum.
(Sorry Simon, but it was a direct request and it didn't seem fair to leave him hanging in the air like that. If you object to the link, just delete this post).
Poppy; I don't see any reason for Simon to object. He wants people to behind anything that will try and turn the tide doesn't he?
Robert; Go to f2c but also go to my blog (link below) and join in the discussion about what we should/could do about it.
www.icanhelpit.co.uk/blog
Well that's how I would look at it too, Bernie, but Simon did say previously (I'm paraphrasing here) that he found it discourteous for people to link to 'campaigns' via this blog - and, whilst I find it hard to comprehend why passing on information in the interest of liberty should be frowned upon in any way by a libertarian, I do appreciate that it is his blog, and that he has ultimate editorial control over it (just as I feel that pubs and clubs should have control over whether smoking is allowed on their premises).
Phew! I've finished straddling that one now! ;)