Wednesday, 24 February 2010

A smoke a day keeps the paedos away.

That's what this advert seems to say (thanks to Snakey in the comments two posts back for the tip).

Children, take up smoking now. If you are ever forced to your knees by an apprentice Gary Glitter and he unzips, aim the hot end of your Silk Cut right into his jap's eye and cauterise it shut. He won't trouble you again. He won't even trouble a urinal for the foreseeable future.

If you're not smoking when one of these perverts grabs you, well, the result might be nastier than a bit of a cough.

Therefore it is essential that all children are provided with cigarettes at once, on the National Health, in order to destroy the country's paedophile rings by searing the ends of their trouser snakes with hot ash and nicotine. Don't worry if you don't get the target first time, kids. If you accidentally extinguish your cigarette on the perv's bag of lumps, simply light another while he's rolling around and screaming.

Seriously though, that's not what the advert was intended to say. As has already been pointed out by the Velvet Glove and Taking Liberties, the advert's purpose is to equate smoking with the rape of children.

Which is patently ridiculous. Everybody knows smokers eat children, not rape them. Make your minds up. If you're going to make up lunatic assertions and draw idiotic conclusions from self-evidently ridiculous and transparently faked research, at least try and apply a touch of consistency.

ASH and all their antismoking buddies have always had this unhealthy obsession with children. This advert, I think, shows their own subliminal desires coming to the fore.

The reason they don't want children involved with smoking is that they prefer their victims fresh.

Deny it if you like, ASH, but the advert is a dead giveaway, isn't it?

We know what you're up to. Pervs.

Kids, take up smoking. The paedos don't like it. It's the only way to be safe from them.


Pierrepoint said...

Here we are again, and yet another smoking post!
When you blog on any other subject other than smoking you always make me sit back and think.
You clearly are a smart guy, and I always thoroughly enjoy reading your blog.
Now for my own tuppence, if you will?
Five years ago I decided I didn't want to smoke anymore. This was before any stupid bans were in place and I was under no pressure to quit, not even from my wife!
I decided one day that the cigs were smoking me, and not the other way round.
"Fags, keys, money" was the checklist if ever I left the house for any reason.I could make do with forgetting the latter two, but not the first. I remember jogging back to my house some 500 yards to collect my "baccy tin" because the fishing trip out in the boat would have been a complete nightmare without it!
No one defended smoking quite like me. Absolutely no one!
To not do it anymore, and more appropriately, to not want to do it anymore is simply wonderful.
My post won't change your opinion, and nor is it meant to, but I just thought that some lesser determined types might benefit from my ramblings.
To not smoke, and moreover to not have the slightest inclination to do so, after being the world's biggest nicotine junkie, feels just a bit good.

Leg-iron said...


Not smoking feels good... to you.

Smoking is no longer enjoyable... for you.

You conclude, therefore, that intelligent people don't smoke.

I have a perfectly clean driving licence. Never had a single point or endorsement. I don't drive now.


Driving is not enjoyable... to me.

Not driving feels very good... to me.

Should I therefore conclude that all drivers are less intelligent than me?

Or should I conclude that other people might like different things? Just because I no longer want to drive, does that mean I should discount any driver as an irrelevance?

Should I put around stories saying that all drivers deliberately aim at children, deliberately angle their exhausts at pushchair height, or that all drivers are paedophiles? Should I make up research on second hand, third hand, fourth hand driving?

That is what is happening to smokers. You stopped, and that's fine. Smoking is a choice. Nobody should be forced into it.

But - nobody is! Any smoker who wants to stop can stop. Just like that. I have, in the past, pointed out why it is not an addiction and why the addiction idea is propagated.

Yet the antismokers have now tried to label me 'paedophile' because I smoke. Should I sit back and accept that or should I give as good as I'm getting?

The gloves are off. No prisoners. If they want made-up associations then that is what they will get. If they want 'evil' then that is what they will get. If they want to pretend that I am promoting smoking among children then that is what I will do. Really. Quite deliberately and with no concern for the outcome.

Fair? Reasonable? Compassionate? No it is not. It is evil. Should I be worried? Why? I'm already branded evil. Might as well perform to the best of my ability.

None of those words - fairness, reason, compassion - have been aimed my way in the past. I have been called filth, evil, scum, child-poisoner, cancer-spreader and now paedophile.

You antismokers want fairness, all of a sudden? Too late. The time for negotiation has passed. It's war now.

Just remember, I didn't start this.

Mark Wadsworth said...

"Fags, keys, money"??

With me it's: keys first (so I can go back in if I've forgotten something), then cards (travelcard, bank card), cash, mobile phone, papers, lighter, tobacco, iPod, roughly in that order.

But I live a few hundred yards from the shop, so if the worst comes to the worst I buy myself some more smokes on the way.

Mark Wadsworth said...

On cars, I did without a car for fifteen years but then bought one again on the spur of the moment and I really like driving short to medium journeys, I find it quite good fun.

Pierrepoint said...

You conclude, therefore, that intelligent people don't smoke.

Sorry sunshine, but that's an outragious assumption.
You are full of sense most of the time, but to give me the whole nine yards for telling you of my personal "get to grips" didn't deserve that put down, I'm absolutely certain.

Leg-iron said...

Pierrepoint - have a look at the linked advert and imagine how you'd feel if you were still smoking. I am not thinking in reasonable terms at the moment.

I had the impression that you had linked intelligence to non-smoking, as is standard among the antismokers these days. If I blew up at you unfairly then I apologise. I am in a state of rage.

Everything else stands for the antismokers out there. No more reasonable compromise. No more fair play.

Okay, I often talk about smoking. It's something I enjoy and it's under attack from all sides for no reasonable reason at all. Every day there's some arse who thinks it's clever to pretend to cough. Sometimes I'll blog about drink because that interests me too, and is also under attack.

I don't blog about cars because cars don't interest me. Others who are interested will have much more to say on the demonisation of drivers.

If there wasn't this permanent attack on smoking, based on absolute lies, I'd say nothing about it at all.

RantinRab said...

How I long for the old days, when all we had were smokers and non smokers.

Mrs Rigby said...

You've pinpointed something a Junior R said recently. To paraphrase - people, "Accuse others of planning to do things they yourself might do, not what they think is too terrible to do."

It doesn't work with, "Mum'll kill me if ...!" because she won't, but she might get cross.

If the general rule does work, then linking smoking cigarettes with sexual abuse and/or paedophilia indicates some very sick minds.

Anonymous said...

The ad goes beyond poor taste. It's pornographic and an offense to human decency - not only on the level of it being sexually perverse and being shown to underage children, a form of child abuse and pedophilia in itself, by whoever paid for the ad - be it government or government by way of fake-charity/quango - and it's doubly offensive because it is an immoral comparison to suggest smokers are equivalent to pedophiles.

This is how Hitler got the whole shabang up and going. Now it's up and running again.

Truth about the SHS Fraud - let's see the media run stories and articles on that - instead of garbage pornography depicing simulated oral sex using underage children.

The immorality is in all the things the anti-smokers have been doing and it's getting worse, closer to the final solution of stoning and crucifying smokers soon, concentration camps and ghettoes.

Those remaining silent but knowing this is the truth - and it is - the TRUTH - are as guilty as those actively engaged in the anti-smoking and SHS Fraud deceptions.

Mr A said...

I used to think that the "Think of the cheeeeldren" line was just an easy way for the Righteous to disguise any flaws in their argument with unnecessary emotiveness. However, I'm starting to think there's more to it than that. In the same way as the most violently homphobic are often closet homosexuals I'm starting to wonder if these people's obsession with children is indicative of something more. There does seem to be an unhealthy fascination with their uncorrupted flesh and the whole idea of being sex-objects rather than mini-people who should be cared for and looked after.

john miller said...

The short, simple answer to all this is illustrated by the correct response to the question: "Where is the only place in countries that have implemented smoking bans that you can legally smoke?"

Answer: "In the buildings where the legislators sat to pass these laws."

Oh, and obviously you have no access to these buildings as an ordinary citizen in these new democracies. In much the same way that Louis XVI wouldn't let you into Versaiiles, you try and get into any EU building now that we're all equal...

Leg-iron said...

What's most shocking is that the antismokers think that such an advert is okay. They'll be cheering and applauding it, just as they would have cheered and applauded the drop of the guillotine, and the rickety cart that brought heretics to the stake.

It's the same mentality. Those 'witches' never turned anyone into a frog and never flew on brooms and deep down, everyone knew that but it didn't matter to the mob. They were someone to pick on, someone to blame for everything, someone to sneer at.

Second hand smoke is a lie. It's the modern equivalent of 'She turned me into a newt'.

Doesn't matter to the mindless mob. They have someone to burn.

It's all they really want.

Anonymous said...

Am I the only one who sees this advert as a real “last throw of the dice” for the anti-smoking movement - a truly desperate measure to try and re-ignite the glory days of anti-smoking hysteria by equating smoking with probably the one remaining “sin” which the antis know is viewed even less favourably than smoking by the chattering classes, i.e. paedophilia?

Since the ban came in, we’ve had countless new “revelations” from many different quarters of the anti-smoking camp, each one more fantastic, convoluted and essentially unbelievable than the next. We’ve had “third hand smoke,” lethal bacteria in cigarettes, nicotine in the water system, and new diseases by the dozen suddenly attributed to smoking - all of which, after a short flurry of a few newspaper stories, have vanished without trace; and none of which have succeeding in catching the public’s imagination sufficiently to flog this particular dead horse back to life.

So this, I think, is their final and their biggest trump card and they’re playing it now, simply because they’ve got no other cards left to play. I know I’ve said it before, but I think that hard reality has, in the wake of the smoking ban, come thundering home to all those anti-smoking organisations and campaign groups who fondly thought that they could go on forever, campaigning, pushing, bullying and blackmailing people towards their goal of a Utopian tobacco-free world. All of a sudden they’ve realised – too late, it seems – that from the Government’s point of view they’ve served their usefulness by “fronting” the campaign for the ban and now, with impending cuts on the way, there really isn’t any need for funding to continue to be directed their way any more. Whether they state it publicly or not, the anti-smoking movement know this. Hence the desperation. And hence this ad.

Anonymous said...


Re your statement: “ ..... and more appropriately, to not want to do it anymore ....”

And there’s the rub. I realise that you quit some years before the ban was implemented, but the problem for smokers now is that no matter how much a quitter might tell himself that he “doesn’t want to smoke” any more or that “he’s giving up for himself, not for any other reason” or that “he doesn’t want to be addicted any more” there must always - now - deep down inside, remain that little, itsy, bitsy, teeny, weeny suspicion that no matter what he says to himself or to others, it was actually pure social pressure from so many fronts – cheesy Government adverts, the spiteful and unpleasant smoking ban, children parroting guilt-inducing anti-smoking propaganda, subtly bullying spouses or friends or colleagues or strangers, no-smoking signs on virtually every flat surface available – which eventually caused them to give up any form of resistance and join the great Club of the Conformists.

There is, in fact, an acid test for this which usually proves extremely accurate in my experience – and that is to ask them if, having given up, they now loathe and can’t stand the smell of cigarette smoke; or if, even though they’ve given up, they aren’t bothered about other people smoking around them. Not bothered? Then they really did give up purely because they didn’t want to do it any more. Morphed into a smoke-hater? Deceiving themselves. Then, a bit of digging around after that confirms surprisingly often that the initial diagnosis was accurate.

Just out of interest - which type are you?

Mr A said...

I agree with the earlier poster who said that the antis are often their own worst enemy. Remember, the mentality of these people is deeply pathetic. Bullying control freaks without an ounce of grace or dignity, many are quite simply sociopaths. Adverts like the above are one example. The now infamous "Twin Towers" ads are another (imagine - they must have seen the poster of a plane flying into two cigarettes modelled to look like The World Trade Centre and gone, "Wow! Excellent work! That's brillinat! Go to the presses with it immediately" whereas any normal person would have seen it and simply been dumbstruck by the psychopathic crassness of it all. Remember, these people are actually amazed when these type of campaigns cause a furore! They are not normal. In their twisted minds mass muder, pedophilia, mutilation (remember the fish hook ad?).... these things make perfect sense in order to combat the universal "atrocity" of smoking.

That said, while they are their own worst enemy the window of opportunity for them to trip themselves up is rapidly diminishing. More and more people are now unblinkingly accepting any Media lie that is spoon-fed into their slack-jawed gobs and soon we may even be like the States where lunatics (I use the word carefully and I mean it in its truest form - I mean people who are genuinely suffering from a mental condition) like John Banzhaf and Stanton Glantz, can appear on TV and say that smokers are actually amphibious spawn of the Elder demon gods (whilst foaming at the mouth and occasionally exclaiming, "Ping pow woooooo wip wibble!") and no-one bats an eyelid at them. In fact many believe them.

We can only hope our own batch of Nazis implode before we get to that state.....

opinions powered by