Give me another cigarette!

FFS…

“When you think of someone who smokes Benson and Hedges or Marlboro, there are very different images – the sophisticate versus the cowboy. Take that away and you don’t have people expressing identity through cigarette brands.”

Patronising cocksores.

More Stephen Pound stretching…

Media whore Pound

I’ve just found this.

Yes, Stephen Pound MP again.

But once you’ve got a cunt hooked, best not to let him go, eh?

He was against the smoking ban:

I’ll admit that there was a bit of the Jeremy Clarkson in my protest as the anti-smokers were, in the main, a po-faced bunch who seemed bent on banning tobacco smoking as the first step on a prohibitive road.

Oops…almost a bit of Libertarianism creeping out there…

Having said that, the Freedom for Fagsmokers crews were well staffed by moon-howlers who seemed to want to do away with speed limits and any drugs control.

False alarm!

Smoking is so antisocial that it should be banned – and this time I will trust the better instincts of the people and vote for health over libertarianism.

Healthy but firmly under state control – that’s the ticket, Stephen.

I do hope he’s in a marginal seat…

A very marginal one.

Alcohol: more doctors say more stuff

Here we go again

This is very worrying.

There should be a ban on all alcohol advertising, including sports and music sponsorship, doctors say.

and

The report points out that while the money spent on alcohol advertising – nearly £200m a year – remained significant, there had been a growth in more subtle types of marketing.

The alcohol industry had, in particular, become a major sponsor of sports events – second only to the finance sector in terms of overall funding.

Do they really think that if I watch a Carling Cup fixture then when I hear the name of that well-known brand of watery piss fit only for washing shit off a tramp’s arse lager or see the advertising boards then I’m going to want to drink the stuff?

Give me a fucking break.

No-one’s that cunting gullible or easily influenced and, if they are, then maybe we should run adverts telling them to jump in front of an Intercity express and so rid society of one more moron.

Next step…warnings about alcohol consumption on TV programs and films.

Then…an eventual ban on seeing it portrayed on screen.

They’ve already banned all tobacco advertising and sponsorship and the entertainment industry seems to be working alongside the various authorities to get rid of smoking on screen.

So, why not apply all this to alcohol?

And the saddest thing is, collectively we’ll just bend over and let them buttfuck one more freedom into oblivion.

Top tip: Get the drinks in while you can.

Mine’s a glass of Rioja – ta.

“How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic”

There was a time when you’d have to do something pretty fucking serious to bring social opprobium upon yourself.

I mean serious shit; like beating your wife, mugging an old lady for her pension or your kids getting into trouble.

Nowadays, however, it’s all changed and as far as I can see, you now have three new transgressions that are likely to get you shunned in most social circles:

1) Stating that even though someone, for sake of argument, might have a hook for a hand, be transsexual, come from a different ethnic group to your own or is in any way different to you, they can still be a cunt.

Not because they’re different, but because a cunt is a cunt is a cunt – as Gertrude Stein once wrote.

Being a cunt just slices across ethnic, social, cultural, political, physical and religious boundaries.

Anyone can be a cunt – and, be warned, there’s thousands of the fuckers around and many of them are protected by law.

2) You smoke.

This really is the new ‘addiction’ monster paraded to scare people. It’s replaced drinking alcohol and jacking up heroin as being the single worst thing a person can do to their body and not only do you harm yourself, you kill others around you with second hand smoke – a fact not proven by anyone of any scientific reputability so far – and you also produce third hand smoke.

Yes, third hand smoke.

Read it and weep – and then cry because so-called serious scientists who help to form government policies which become bad laws can also be cunts…(see #1) above)

This brings me on nicely to:

3) You’re a climate change sceptic.

Now, this really is serious shit, because you’re not just insulting someone (however much they deserve it) or even jeopardising their health, you’re destroying the whole fucking planet.

Yes, you, you selfish and utter cunt – unwittingly you are now in category #1.

But without any legal redress whatsoever.

Because you are an unbeliever.

This is the new religion for the 21st century – the new dogma – the basis of a new Inquisition; snooping in your rubbish bin, curbing your freedom of movement, impinging on your lifestyle and when you have sinned you can buy your way to redemption through the indulgence of the holy carbon offset or by recycling your empty alcopops bottles.

Start to object, criticise, question, even, and you’re going straight to climate change sceptic HELL.

(Oh, are you going to fucking burn, you bastard.)

So tainted are we heretics that the apostles of Gore have devised many answers to the naive and petty questions we ask.

Here, in a handy list, are all the questions we will want to ask and all the answers we can ever want to hear under the heading of  “How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic ” by one Coby Beck (file under #1 above).

That, my fellow sinners, is one fuck of a long list.

It’s worthy of the Jesuits or the Scientologers or the Moonies.

It has headings such as ‘Stages of Denial’ – ‘Types of Argument’ – ‘Levels of Sophistication’…

Then there are the questions and concerns Mr Beck thinks someone who walks round in shoes made of muesli should be addressing and asking us as we luxuriate in our dirty sins and which are supposed to convert us to the right path one by one.

Here’s a sample – a very small sample:

Water vapor accounts for almost all of the greenhouse effect
There is no proof that CO2 is causing global warming
CO2 doesn’t lead, it lags
CO2 in the air comes mostly from volcanoes
What about mid-century cooling?
Geological history does not support CO2’s importance

It really does look like the ‘how to convert’ pages from some religious cult manual.

But nowhere does it ask two rather pertinent questions – to me, at least.

1) Aren’t many people making a shitload of money on the back of climate change concern?

2) Can anyone think of a better way to enforce social control?

Think about it…there’s a whole new technology coming out of this with all manner of opportunities for people to trouser fucking tons of cash and there’s all sorts of ways in which people can be monitored, observed and regulated even more than they are already.

It’s possibly the biggest hoax ever perpetrated by mankind and it’s going to affect all of us for years and years to come. It’s going to halt economic recovery, it’s going to place restrictions on us that are going to have a profound effect on our everyday lives and it’s going to cost every one of us who pays tax more – a lot more.

It’s not even as if there aren’t scientists who offer the alternative point of view – that climate change isn’t man made and that it’s as natural as the sun rising and setting and the tides ebbing and flowing.

But no, all oppositional debate is drowned out by cries of ‘vested interests’, ‘denial’ and ‘crackpot theories’.

Anyway, come what may, I shall still continue to call a cunt a cunt, smoke – if only to annoy prissy bastards who inhale more shit than I produce from their own fucking car – and refuse to get suckered in by the climate change clergy.

Fuck them and their carbon offset scams.

I’m already seeing my personal freedoms and liberties taken away on an almost daily basis.

Enough is enough.

So, how should you talk to a climate change sceptic?

Pretty fucking carefully if you don’t want a solar panel rammed up your arse…

There’s no smoke without self-righteousness

Normally I’d be writing this with a cigarette on but we’ve banned smoking in the house.

Yes – Shark Towers is now a no-smoking establishment and those wishing to avail themselves of the noxious weed must now go outdoors or into the shed.

It’s not a health decision but an attempt to keep the house smoke-free and clean in order to sell it later this year.

There are fringe benefits, of course – I’m smoking far less and saving money – but I’m not going to quit the habit.

I enjoy it far too much and besides if I can annoy a few self-righteous anti-smoking bastards it’s my Libertarian duty to carry on smoking and irritate the fuck out of them if I possibly can.

However, when it comes to punitive measures against smokers, the Usanians beat us into a cocked hat.

I heard on the radio last night that Richmond in California is going to ban smoking in multi-occupancy dwellings.

Now, that’s nothing new in the ‘Land of the Free’ but Richmond is, apparently, the murder capital of California, which makes you wonder what the fuck its civic leaders are doing for brains.

Richmond is also the largest US city to introduce this type of legislation, along with virtually every sort of anti-smoking law it’s possible to impose on its citizens.

Richmond now has on the books the strictest batch of secondhand smoking laws in the region, said Serena Chen, a regional director at the American Lung Association in California. Other cities have some of the same laws, but not all of them.

The aptly-named Richmond councilman Tom Butt says:

“We’re on the right side of history. This idea that somehow you could bifurcate buildings and make portions of it smoking, portions of it nonsmoking, it just doesn’t work.

Well, call me a staid and stick-in-the-mud Luddite, but I’d rather take my chance with the carcinogens from a bit of tobacco smoke than some gun-wielding arsehole on PCP, which is the sort of anti-social character for which Richmond is famous, or so it would appear from some of my research.

You stand a fair chance of someone popping a cap in yo’ ass there, with a murder rate 5 times the national average.

However, as with many urban shit holes, I’m sure that the majority of Richmond’s citizens are ordinary law-abiding people.

I’m equally sure that less targeting of smokers and more policing with regard to reducing the murder rate would do far more to make the city a better place to inhabit as well as being a more productive use of Richmond taxpayers’ money.

As always, however, it’s the easy targets that get selected.

Doing something that would actually make a real difference to people’s lives is just too fucking difficult…

Of course, I suppose we should be thanking these guardians of public health.

I mean…all that nasty tobacco smoke with its carcinogens.

Who wants to suffer from all these things?

  • Coughs and phlegm
  • Lightheadedness, nausea
  • Increased susceptibility to allergens like dust or pollen
  • Irritation of eyes, nose, throat and lungs
  • Inflammation of lungs, and increased asthma attacks
  • Respiratory diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
  • Lowered resistance to respiratory infection
  • Macrophages overwhelmed by particles result in immune reactions that cause inflammation and ‘sticky’ blood, increasing risk of clots and both heart and lung disease
  • Mutations in chromosomes and damage to DNA
  • For people exposed chronically to 1µg/m3 a rate of lung cancer in the range of 34 to 650 people per million
  • Possible cause of multiple chemical sensitisation, leading to changes in red and white blood cells, bleeding, liver damage, and degeneration of the nervous system.

Oops…sorry, that’s what diesel exhaust fumes do to you.

But that’s OK, at least it’s not tobacco smoke…

ASH, the BBC and more smoker-bashing

Excellent stuff.

Fuck ’em all.

(2) It’s at times like these…

…that I feel ashamed to be British.

Regardless of whether I smoke – and I do – the current proposals to remove displays of tobacco products by 2011 just smack of a draconian lack of joined up thinking.

Yes, tobacco kills, but so does alcohol.

Unlike alcohol, however, excessive consumption of tobacco doesn’t make people violent and abusive.

Give me a smoker over an alcoholic anyday.

There’s an excellently reasoned blog post about the proposed display ban here.