Friday 19 November 2010


I have, in Email, interesting information from South Africa where apartheid was banned unless you smoke but it'll take time to build that one. Thanks, CT. I want to look closely at the full paper before rolling up a response.

In the meantime, there is another pub forced into destitution by fifth columnists among their regulars. Once again, now they are homeless and penniless, the State decides to hammer them with fines they cannot possibly pay and will then put them in prison cells while letting muggers, rapists and thieves walk free. All because they supported freedom of choice and refused to act as unpaid enforcers for the NASHI* party.

There is a place to donate to help pay their fines. Actually, looking at it, it looks exactly like the sort of thing Pat Nurse once proposed. A co-operative based on voluntary donations that could brush away the dusty judges and the council Stasi within moments.

I bet this idea gets far more voluntary donation, and much faster, than the dweeb walking across Canada with no support at all in order to raise funds for 'the popular antismoker inquisition'. Even ASH and the Pharmers have ignored him. They don't need you, dweeb. Work it out. Think. Sorry, I have overstepped your humanoid limitations.

Anna Raccoon and Old Holborn raised the funds to free Nick Hogan in a matter of days from the limited reach of the bloglands. It put to shame the national voluntary donations the Dreadful Arnott and her Gestasho managed to raise in a year. There is no popular support for smoking bans. Most non-smokers just don't care. Only antismokers get all worked up about it and only because they are control-freaks and hideous self-important scum. There aren't anywhere near as many of them as they imagine. One of them is, unfortunately, Deputy Prime Monster and he actually believes his opinion matters. Which is quite sad, really. Cue EU Joker laugh.

No, smokers don't like the ban. Surprise! Nonsmokers don't want their pubs closed either. Only antismokers put their delicate sensibilities above their social lives, and way above those of anyone else. They will fold their arms and smile that smug Righteous smile while the pub shuts down. Then they will move to the next one and wait for something to moan about. At no point will they consider moving to a non-smoking pub. What could they bleat about in there?

Over at Dick Puddlecote's I see the NASHI party have been busy generating new propaganda. Well, let them. It is the best smoking-promoting idea they've had yet. No wonder the tobacco companies don't complain about the advertising ban. There's no need, and it's saving them a fortune. You think I'm paid by Big Baccy? Look harder. ASH and their friends are the ones promoting it, not me.

Pension costs will be saved by leaving smoking pensioners to freeze to death while staff costs will be cut by sacking those who even look as if they might be smoking. In Australia, they even have a draft threatening letter (via Pat) which borders on the insane -

As a person who smokes, you may feel that you have the right to use a legally available product, but this does not apply where your smoking affects others.

Does it not apply to your car or your heating system? No? Why not? Arseholes. Oh, wait, it's down under. Mouths. If it is legally available, where did your authority to deny it come from? These people are scared shitless of harmless second hand smoke and I for one will continue to play that for all it is worth. One day, one of these mindless drones will die of a heart attack before my eyes, just from a few words, and I cannot help in case I put third hand smoke on them. I can't even call an ambulance because it would be tainted by smoky fingers pressing buttons. I will try, I will really really try not to laugh, but no promises.

Callous? Look hard at what you propose for me, antismokers, and then quantify 'callous'. I'm not proposing to kill you. I have no violent intentions. All I can fight with are words. If you die from words, that is because of your own beliefs, not mine. You choose the psychosomatic heart attack. All I do is explain how to achieve it. Why would I do that to you?

Well, why would you do this to an ordinary family?

Gloves are off, antismokers. Time to reap what you have sown. You want a compromise?

No. We tried that, remember? Repeatedly. We will not try again.

The time for compromise has passed.

*(NASHI - Nasty Anti Smoking Hypocrites, Innit?)


manwiddicombe said...

Only antismokers get all worked up about it and only because they are control-freaks and hideous self-important scum. There aren't anywhere near as many of them as they imagine. One of them is, unfortunately, Deputy Prime Monster and he actually believes his opinion matters.

I thought Cleggy was a smoker (however much self-loathing that induces in him)? There was a round of celebrity smoker 'outings' a few weeks ago after Cleggy said on Desert Island Discs he'd take a few packets of fags as his luxury item. It makes his stance on the smoking ban even more ridiculous than if he were a non-smoker.

Anonymous said...

A few years ago I heard a woman whimper, she sounded sad but I ignored her and closed my ears and heart. Over the years the whimper became a sob and eventually the sound became so pitiful and distraught I could no longer in good conscience ignore a woman in distress so I sought her out and followed the mournful wailing. After a search of epic proportions I found her, sitting alone and crying. Being aware of the perversity and misrepresentation in today’s society I considered carefully wether to approach her or walk away, at that precise point, during my deliberations, she emitted such a soul-wrenching wail that I had no option but to try and comfort her. “Hello” I said, “my name is John, what has caused you such pain”. “I have been attacked and abused for more years than I care to remember” she said, “I have been misused and mistreated, my words, my ethos have been perverted by man and I can no longer suffer in silence but suffer I will for all eternity, for that is my destiny”. I was profoundly touched by her candor, her bravery and her resolve. Quietly, tentatively I sat beside her and took her hand, “may I embrace you” I whispered. She looked up at me with her tear stained face and smiled, “of course you may” she said, “my name is Liberty”

sixtypoundsaweekcleaner said...

Liberty? She ran off with a Scotsman, while Mandelwotsit was on watch.

I'm done with all this expostulating. I'm numb from the navel up. Now what were you saying?

Oh yes. I've run out of jokes.

Junican said...

LEG Iron.

I have just done my bit and donated £20.

But I must admit that I was very reluctant. I was reluctant because Ray and Jill McHale made a terrible, terrible error. Yes...they did everything correctly as regards the requirements of the law as regards 'not allowing smoking', but they made a fatal mistake. They themselves 'lit up'. They may have claimed that the pub was 'their home', but the law does not allow that. The pub was 'a public place', and smoking is not allowed in such a place. Thus, they broke the law by lighting up themselves. ANY OF US ON THE NET COULD HAVE TOLD THEM THAT. They should have known that there would be 'spies' about, with mobile phone cameras. They should have been ultra-careful not to transgress themselves.

Nick Hogan made a similar mistake. I know because I live in Bolton and went to his pub. He had a notice which said that smoking was prohibited and that anyone who smoked did so at their own risk. Clearly, he did not realise that by saying, "You smoke at your own risk" that he was, in effect, 'allowing' people to smoke.

We bailed Nick out, but we really ought to be aware that what we paid for was his stupidity. Sorry, but that is the truth. I hate to say it.

The law can be circumvented (by which I mean 'obeyed by publicans precisely but not so as to force their clientèle to obey'), with a little imagination. Candles can be lit (smelly smoke) and candlesticks can be ashtrays. But it would be foolish for one publican to do it on his own. In a small town, several publicans could get their act together, if they wished to.

The trouble with these publicans who make terrible errors is that they are bring us, ALL OF US DISSENTERS, into disrepute. They make us look stupid.

handymanphil said...

Junican my friend you are absolutely spot on with what you have said, but who among us have not made errors along the way. This whole stinking law was built to skin the licensees, not the actual smokers in the pubs. We are appealing for help simply because we can see another Nick Hogan scenario 9exhorbitant, unpayable costs) bringing about the same result as Nick's. We want to pre-empt that if we can.
That is why we need blogospheres help on this occasion-before imprisonment beckons!

Leg-iron said...

manwiddicombe - Cleggy's smoking just makes his refusal to consider any amendment to the ban worse.If there's one thing worse than a pompous controlling ass, it's a hypocritical pompous controlling ass.

Anon - Liberty will need more than a cuddle. She'll need the defibrillator paddles and adrenalin by now.

Junican - valid points. However, all I really want is to be able to sit in the pub again with a drink and a smoke. Any landlord supporting that gets my support. No matter how they do it.

Yes, they are breaking the law, but it's a law that says they have to throw the elderly and infirm out into the cold.

The fact that the government and councils fully support this law says much about them.

It says much about Nick Clegg too. He might not want to bring back hanging, but death by cold is just fine with him.

Anonymous said...


What I am saying, essentially, is that it is not 'martyrs' which is required. What is required is a way for PUBLICANS to legally circumvent the law. Ray almost succeeded. It would take ONLY ONE publican to find the way for many others to follow, if they had the courage. What should really be happening is that publicans should be bailing out Ray, and not us.

I am thinking of the possibility that many people, like me, would risk a £50 fine if only we could go to our favourite pub and smoke. It would, of course, only be feasible is there were many thousands of us, UNLESS a trial case in the the courts had previously found a publican innocent of 'allowing' smoking.

Clearly, there would never be such a trial. The powers-that-be would do anything to avoid it - it would upset their propaganda.

What amazed me at the time was that, during the interval between the passing of the law and the implementation, the publican's organisation (Licenced Vic Assn?) did not take legal advice to find out precisely what was expected of publicans. To be precise, to find out what the word 'allow' means. It really is absolutely amazing that the mere fact that the Labour Government changed the Bill at the last moment did not flash warning signs to the publicans.

Or did they expect their pubs to be inundated with non-smokers, as ASH promised? and so, why do they not sue ASH for millions? Americans would.

Paul said...

Sent a donation for £35.

opinions powered by