Wednesday, 1 September 2010

No Smoke Without Fuhrer.

Antismokers love to wave their hands and gleefully cry 'Godwin's Law' whenever any discussion on smoking points out Hitler's antismoking agenda. They think that will hide the roots of their ideology by scaring the opposition into silence, just as these same people shout 'Racist' to shut down dissent on immigration discussions.

Well, it won't work here. The facts are that Hitler's Nazis came up with smoking bans, passive smoking and all the rest of the rubbish that is spouted at us now. If he hadn't shot himself before I was born, I'd have grown up in a world that had reached the imaginary science of fiftieth hand smoke at least and in which even typing 'tobacco' on a blog would result in the deaths of thousands.

ASH are following Nazi doctrine. So are the BMA. Deny it if you like, or look it up and live with it. Look up his stance on green initiatives too. Hitler may be dead but his great plan for world domination is very much alive. Islam? Don't make me laugh. They are a distraction and they will be disposed of when they have served their purpose.

There is no foundation to the antismoking movement. No real science behind any of it. It is a sham, an illusion, a bogeyman to frighten children at bedtime. Consider - when most of the population smoked, how many died of passive smoking? How many had even thought about it? Yet now, with smoking down to 20% of the population, you antismokers are scared to death of us.

The Pro-choice smoking doctor wrote:

Terrorists have more protection under the human rights act than smokers.

I'd go further. We are more powerful than any terrorist, anywhere. ASH and the BMA made it so. We can terrify with no weapons other than a little bit of leaf wrapped in paper. We have the power to destroy a club, pub or restaurant without damaging a single brick of the edifice. All we need to do is light a cigarette in there and they are gone. We can kill your antismoking drones with a puff of smoke and a few well-chosen words. You can't stop us. There is no organisation, no hierarchy, nothing to attack. There is no 'Smoking bin Laden' to seek out. There are no cells or training grounds. We are invisible and everywhere and there is no way to stop us getting hold of tobacco. The EU won't let you stop us, and you can't leave the EU because you are under its control. The only way this country will ever leave the EU is under a government that would not support the antismokers. We cannot lose. We might take a long time to win, but we cannot lose.

Frank Davis points out the feeble structure holding up the antismokers' case. They thought they would win easily. They believed it because we didn't object at all to a few non-smoking areas. We didn't even fight against the smoking ban, we just stopped going to pubs. Then they sought to extend their control to outside areas, to private cars and homes.

Hospitals are riddled with diseases that don't exist outside but they won't let anyone smoke in there. Since smoke kills bacteria, you might want to ponder why they are so keen to remove the smoke but not much interested in removing the bacteria. Doctors now see it as just and fair to shrug off that Hippocratic oath when confronted by a smoker. Soon they will shrug it off for all non-Aryans. Doctors might as well change their names to Mengele when they display as much medical ethics as he did.

There are many out there who believe that smoking causes all diseases and that if you have a disease, you are either a smoker or are friends with one. The surge in lung cancer cases, that coincided with a decline in smoking, is due to smoking. There couldn't be anything else responsible, in the small minds that soak up the foetid drivel of the Dreadful Arnott and her ilk. Those other things cannot and must not be investigated, lest they detract from The Message.

This is your life we're talking about here. Sneer and spit at smokers and ignore the far bigger causes of your death if you wish. It's your choice. Isn't it? I mean, it's not as if you're being used to further an agenda. It's not as if you are considered an expendable unit whose death would enable the Dreadful Arnott and her cohorts to delight in parading your corpse as a testament to their personal dictatorial views. Is it? Oh, no, you have come by these debating methods entirely on your own and the minor detail that they are exactly the same as everyone else's is entirely coincidental. They could not possibly have been indoctrinated into you. You'd know. Wouldn't you?

Your life. Your choice. You think?

Hitler and his Nazis managed to persuade the youth, and most of the population, that particular groups of people were fair game for attack and eventually, fair game for his Final Solution. He used the same methods that are being used on you now. Look them up.

So here's the challenge, antismokers. Without invoking your godlet Godwin, tell me why it was terrible for the Nazis to do this but it is now perfectly fine for you to do it?

While you're at it, tell me why black people should vote BNP and why turkeys should not only vote for Christmas, but also contribute to the cost of it.

The last two should be easier.


Anonymous said...

Actually, I'm just waiting for organised crime to develop a new stand-over tactic: "Now, listen 'ere, matey - if you don't start payin' up, you might just find that all sorts of people starts ta light up fags in this luverly establishment of yours. There might even be some peoples I know from tha council in 'ere ta see it."

Mark Wadsworth said...

Genius post title.

HenryJ said...

The BMA mafia and their mates seem to think they have won the smoking war and are now going after the drinkers using the same tactics,time to cull these toerags but before that find out who is backing them and why,I personally think it's the EUSSR as Greece has just banned smoking in public places.

JJ said...

Just make it up...who will question it?

Leg Iron – All propagandists work on the same principle “Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying and eventually they will believe it”. Can’t find the date of this quote.

It works beautifully and every time too. This is how Hitler rose to power. This principle and gullibility are a wonderful combination.

But here’s Hitlers’ best quote by far.

“I am convinced that if I had been a smoker, I never would have been able
to bear the cares and anxieties which have been a burden to me for so long.
Perhaps the German people owe their salvation to that fact.” Circa 1942

Unless and until we breakthrough to the main stream media then we will never get our message through. This would mean a high profile court case. Yes I know it’s expensive, but this would be the one way to engender recognition that we so desperately need.

I thought Dave West of the Hey Jo club when hiring Cherie Blair would have gone through with the judicial review. But it somehow fell through. He has of course been plagued by Westminster Council who have prosecuted him on occasions. Since he relies on smokers for his custom I'm surprised he gave up…especially with his money.

Going off topic slightly. I wrote recently requesting a FOI on any DOH information that they might have about post-mortem evidence concerning deaths by ‘passive smoking’, rather testily they replied that they have given all the necessary information that they are going to give. They also refused an internal inquiry…and we think we live in a democracy – eh?
I shall of course write to the Commissioner’s office, but this takes a very long time because of the backlog involved.

I also wrote to WAG TV about a possible smoking debate, which would have been in the format of a courtroom, with a judge and jury making their decision about the validity of the smoking ban when all the evidence was heard.

Unfortunately the producer responsible was on holiday, so his assistant said she would pass it on to him when he returned…I am sure he’s a busy man…but a simple reply by now would have been nice…that was over a month ago. Maybe the topic is too politically incorrect.

You see…you can only do so much…but when you don’t have access to the right people – then nothing happens.

Sad really isn’t it…it’s like being in a maze with no way out…you just go around, and around, and around and…

Anonymous said...

Re the raise in hospital infections since the drop in smoking; could this also be the reason for the sudden boom in bed bug infestations (which I noticed reports of started in NY) ..... haha what irony?

Anonymous said...

I have long held the view that the Health acts are 21st century equivelent to the Nuremberg Decrees, one would have to be blind not to see the comparisons and the methodology in use against smokers, more lately drinkers and the obese are being taken down the same road.

As for Gowins Law it is merely a sheild for Nazis to hide behind, who else would need a law that says that you if you make comparisons to the Third Reich you have lost the argument?

John Watson.

Anonymous said...

I would have thought that the best way to make a monolith irrelevant is simply to go around it, not face it head on.

Their science is from the Dark Ages.
They even believed that nicotine was unique to tobacco until recently.
I've known that since I was child reading Mum's gardening books.

They are still carrying on about carbon monoxide when in low doses its an anti-inflammatory gas made by the body itself,nitric oxide is now hailed as the miracle of the decade.
Both have been discovered to be neurotransmitters.

The deadly tar turns out to be coenzyme Q10 or solanesol its precursor, which is common to all the nightshade vegetables.

If it wasn't so serious it would be laughable.

I've been experimenting with dried herbal teas for the beneficial gases and the rest of the important ingredients are available in natural form at your local health food shop.

And I don't like the sound of these -

Health 'benefits' of smoking?
"Important note: smoking may offer a limited degree of protection in some individuals against the development of a small number of diseases, outlined below.
However, this information is of no relevance to public health, given that the amount of disease that tobacco may be said to prevent is insignificant in comparison to the far greater incidence of disease caused by smoking."

"In the first three years after giving up, new quitters were 91 per cent more likely to develop diabetes"

And especially not this -

"The report goes into detail. "Each had been addicted to the habit no less than 25 years, smoking in excess of 20 sticks a day. The striking direct statistical correlation between cessation of smoking to the development of lung malignancies, more than 60% plus, is too glaring to be dismissed as coincidental."

Gardener - not scientist.


Leg-iron said...

Anon - organised crime will soon, if they aren't already, profit both from the sale of black market tobacco and its use as a weapon of extortion.

Criminals love bans. It's how they make their money.

Leg-iron said...

JJ - even when the figures are randomly increased, the zealots instantly forget ther old figure and latch on to the new one.

They forget that there even was a previous figure. Not once does it occur to them that they might be being lied to.

According to Velvet Glove, Iron Fist, this week smoking costs the NHS one billion. At that rate of increase we'll soon cost more than the entire NHS budget so you can forget about getting your bunions fixed. We're using it all.

The more bizarre the story, the more likely it is to be believed.

Which, when you meed one of these drones, can be fun to play with.

Leg-iron said...

Rose - a study in India also showed that smokers who quit were far more likely to develop lung problems than those who didn't. Frank Davis had details, a long time back.

There are possible mechanisms to explain this but they'll never be investigated unless the hysteria is brought under control.

For example - while constantly irritating your lungs with smoke can't be seen as a Good Thing, if it increases the flow of mucus and thereby increases the removal of other, far worse, pollutants, then it could have an overall protective effect in polluted environments.

Or, the constant annoyance of the immune system with smoke might keep it active and thereby increase its ability to destroy precancerous cells. Stop smoking and the immune system backs off. All the way.

These will be derided by antismokers without a second thought. They simply don't want to know.

Anonymous said...

“I am convinced that if I had been a smoker, I never would have been able
to bear the cares and anxieties which have been a burden to me for so long.
Perhaps the German people owe their salvation to that fact.” Circa 1942

What an unintended admission that is! No doubt it was said when he was still absolutely convinced that Germany would win the war and all his shenanigans would go undetected. Clearly the world would be a much happier place if he'd kept on smoking. Anti-smokers should take careful note!

opinions powered by