Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing

I wrote last night that the antismoking zealots seem to regard themselves as good, but that I see them as evil. I’d like to kick that thought around a bit more.

The reason I think that they’re evil is because they’re destroying communities and friendships with their smoking bans. I’ve got personal experience of it, and I’ve seen it happening to other smokers, and I’ve had people commenting on my blog saying as much. I think the smoking ban is tearing at the whole fabric of society, right down at its foundations. It’s pulling it apart. The pub closures that have followed in the wake of the smoking ban are just the tip of the iceberg.

The social damage is almost completely hidden because it happens at an individual and personal level. It isn’t ‘news’. But it ought to be, because it’s happening to millions and millions of people, and adding it all up the damage is colossal. But the politicians and the pundits and the news media can’t see it. So they don’t think anything untoward is happening. But I think something terrible is happening to hundreds of millions of smokers all over the world, with hardly anybody noticing.

That’s my perception of events, anyway. And I don’t see that there’s any upside to smoking bans. There’s no genuine health threat from secondhand smoke, and in fact some of the antismokers admit that the threat is a bit nebulous. But for them the real point of the ban isn’t to save any non-smokers’ lives, but to make smokers quit smoking. It’s a social engineering project. And it’s one that doesn’t seem to be going too well, if reports that more people are smoking since the smoking ban are true. And I can well imagine they are, now that smoking tobacco is now an act of rebellion much like smoking cannabis was 40 or 50 years ago.

So what’s the upside? The only upside I can see is that a bunch of professional antismokers are making a very good living, thanks to all the government taxes and Big Pharma money they get. Tobacco Control is a multi-million dollar industry. For thousands of people, it’s become a career.

So there’s this Tobacco Control industry, which destroys communities, and which bankrupts businesses, and which does nothing of any positive value at all. What do we usually call that sort of outfit?

We call them crime syndicates. Like the Mafia or Cosa Nostra.

Criminal enterprises of that sort work by extorting protection money from people. They don’t contribute anything of value to the community. They just parasitically live off society. They take, and they give nothing back.

In fact, a lot of criminal enterprises not only take, but they also give back. It’s just that they give back things which are illegal. Like drugs. Or prostitution. They’re often simply conducting businesses which happen to sell things which are illegal. If they were made legal, they’d become legitimate businesses overnight.

But the Tobacco Control crime syndicate doesn’t give anything back at all, unless you want to count the Nicotine Replacement patches which Big Pharma are pushing as the only legal alternative to smoking tobacco or vaping e-cigs or sucking snus.

Because Tobacco Control doesn’t work quite like most crime syndicates do. It works by conjuring up an imaginary threat (from firsthand smoking, secondhand smoking, thirdhand smoking, etc, etc ) to public health, and demanding political action and, of course, public funding. And unlike the Mafia or Cosa Nostra, it hides behind the pretence that it’s doing something good. Al Capone never pretended to be doing good. Neither did “Baby Face” Nelson. Or “Legs” Diamond.

The Tobacco Control crime syndicate works by presenting itself as whiter than white, and as Doing Good, and furthermore as Doing Good that urgently needs to be done if Lives Are To Be Saved. The trick is to find a threat of some sort, pump it up to the max, and laugh all the way to the bank with the research grants and publicity funding that you extract from big stupid government.

It’s a racket.

And because it’s a very successful racket, it has spawned similar rackets. The Global Warming crime syndicate is a spin-off from the Tobacco Control crime syndicate. It uses the same basic template: trace amounts of gas in the atmosphere poses a dire threat to the survival of the human race. And it’s even bigger than than the tobacco control racket. And, just like with Tobacco Control, there are no benefits. You’re just paying to be “protected” from the climate.

What better racket can there be, than one which has the full support of governments all over the world, and whose leading lights appear as paragons of virtue? Al Capone would have paid good money to have had that sort of credibility. He would have appeared on TV (not that they had TV in 1930) giving good advice to unmarried mothers or something. There might even have been an Al Capone Foundation, a bit like the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation. There could even have been a statue of him somewhere in Chicago.

But the trouble with parasitical crime of this sort (or any sort) is that it bleeds human society dry, and this makes it impossible to go on with it indefinitely. It’s unsustainable.

It’s a good word that: Unsustainable. I must use it more often. Who knows, it might catch on.

About the archivist

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing

  1. tug says:

    Frank you have it Spot-on, the Pubcos have found to their cost that the Smoking ban has had a impact on their Businesses and since 2007 their profits have been unsustainable ( is a good word ) in fact they are just about all Broke, still, they did want a level playing field and got one, so they can all go Broke together. It is a shame that not one of them had a business mind to know that a business that offers CHOICE to ALL is a success. Time for a Reform.

  2. C777 says:

    The pub ban is the cornerstone of the antismoking lobby, (crime syndicate).
    If that falls or is seriously ammended their in trouble ,and the fraudsters know that, the game would be up for them.

  3. Rose says:

    Pub closures at 25 a week, sales declining

    Comment
    2nd Aug 2011

    “the reason why many within the pub sector haven’t made “enough noise” is that they are actually quite content with a smoking ban and now being able to work in a smoke free environment safe in the knowledge that they won’t have a law suit against them for harming their staff at a later date.”
    http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/forum.ma/view-thread/9481?PagingData=Po_10~Ps_10~Psp_Id~Psd_Asc

    “they won’t have a law suit against them for harming their staff at a later date”

    ASH News Release: Embargo: 00.01hrs Monday 12th January 2004

    ASH and Thompsons’ Tell Employers:
    Don’t Say You Weren’t Warned Over Secondhand Smoke

    “The hospitality trade faces a rising threat of legal action from employees whose health is damaged by secondhand smoke, after a new tie-up between health campaigning charity Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) and the UK’s largest personal injury and trade union law firm Thompsons was announced today.

    ASH has sent a registered letter to all the UK’s leading hospitality trade employers, warning them that the “date of guilty knowledge” under the Health and Safety at Work Act is now past, and that employers should therefore know of the risks of exposing their staff to secondhand smoke. Employers who continue to permit smoking in the workplace are therefore likely to be held liable by the courts for any health damage caused. ASH and Thompsons intend to use the letters in any future court cases as evidence that employers have been fully informed of the issue.

    ASH and Thompsons are also planning further steps to encourage employees who believe their health has been harmed by smoking in the workplace to seek legal advice on making a claim for compensation. These will be announced shortly.”
    http://www.ash.org.uk/media-room/press-releases/ash-and-thompsons-tell-employers-dont-say-you-werent-warned-over-secondhand-smoke

    I had wondered why there seemed to be so much resistance to even the mention of repeal on the Morning Advertiser.

    Looks like ASH really did make them an offer they couldn’t refuse.

    • Frank J says:

      If ever I’ve seen fright then those comments are it. They must be petrified of a possible amendment knowing the whole stack of cards would tumble. Of course there was nothing to stop them going no smoking prior to the ban. Wonder why they didn’t?

      You’ve got to credit Dave A. It’s very frustrating to quote facts and figures and receive nothing but insults for so doing. He’s a tremendous character doing sterling work.

  4. Junican says:

    Your version of ‘criminality’ is a version which smokers would uphold, but non-smokers (and, especially, anti-smokers) would not. That is why criminality requires statute law. But statute law has been expanded to allow Local Authorities to enact a version of statute law, which is not dissimilar to the situation as regards the States of the USA. This is very bad news since it allows jumped-up fanatics like Councillor Bartlett from SS to gain serious power over others.

    The odd thing is that certain things which should be ‘criminal’ by statute are not. It is not criminal for the Panorama programme to ‘publish’ blatant propaganda and bent statistics. “Thousands of lives could be saved” by interventions. Well, no. An examination of statistics of liver disease deaths in 2009 reveals that ‘alcohol related liver disease’ deaths number a few hundreds. Only 5 deaths can be so related in those under 25 years of age. Such blatant lies are not criminal.

    (By the way, I wonder if the BBC was paid for producing that Panorama programme? What was paid? And by whom?)

    • Frank Davis says:

      I think that you commit a crime when you harm someone. I think that expelling smokers from society does them great harm, and so it’s a crime, and the people who are doing it to them are criminals. That it’s not something that’s being done to non-smokers or antismokers or ex-smokers makes no difference. Just like if a thief steals my wallet, but not somebody else’s, it’s still a crime.

  5. marbee says:

    This is a very dangerous road the public is taking in regard to enacting smoking bans with false science as the basis! Tobacco Control organizations like the American Cancer Society, ASH, Tobacco Free Kids, etc., have become nothing but Perception Management firms. They are paid to CREATE “truth”. Created truth is controllable. PM uses select information involving falsehood and deception. Really smoke and mirrors to get people to believe what they want the “truth” to be. Wars can be created using Perception Management! Everyone, really, has seen PM in practice, and small business owners are experiencing this with legislation against their Constitutional rights. It requires absolutely no courage to support a popular position, even if completely wrong or illegal.
    Smoking bans are DESIGNED to close pubs, kills two birds with one stone. And it drives the need for the sheeple to purchase big pharma’s products. Big pharma is all about behavior control, not finding cures. They aren’t shy about it, it’s right on their tax exempt foundation’s website. In fact,you can buy their book on Amazon for $80.00: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Series on Health Policy, Tobacco Control Policy. http://www.amazon.com/Tobacco-Control-Johnson-
    Foundation-Anthology/dp/078798745X

    • Frank Davis says:

      Perception Management

      Is that an academic discipline of some sort? Can you get a Degree in Perception Management?

      Whether or not, this is exactly what they’re doing.

  6. Pam Parker says:

    Frank – you’d be real interested in the requests for investigations 21 of us from 9 states sent to Congress, filed under the Whistleblower Act. A small portion is outlined in this article I wrote.
    http://www.ukcolumn.org/articles/one-world-governance-new-corporate-american-business-model

    Too many people are now informed about the greedy non-profits, charities and big pHARMa’s involvement to keep this quiet much longer. Congress is already in deep doo-doo with the American People. They’d better bring all this out into the sunlight and DO something about it because the People are very angry.

  7. ASH said, “The hospitality trade faces a rising threat of legal action from employees whose health is damaged by secondhand smoke”

    <>

    “ASH and Thompsons intend to use the letters in any future court cases as evidence that employers have been fully informed of the issue. ”

    <>

    Nice, eh?

    – MJM

    • OK… I guess using signs for my commentary doesn’t work real well here… LOL!

      ASH said, “The hospitality trade faces a rising threat of legal action from employees whose health is damaged by secondhand smoke”

      {Absolute nonsense. Even if the advocates’ claims of things like a 20% rise in the base rate of lung cancers were true, they equate to about 1 extra lung cancer for every 40,000 worker-years of exposure. I don’t think the average pub on the corner needs to get their panties in a twist worrying about this.}

      “ASH and Thompsons intend to use the letters in any future court cases as evidence that employers have been fully informed of the issue. ”

      {OK boys, go down ‘n bust a few kneecaps. Tell ’em if they don’t fall in line we’ll whip up a mob to go down ‘n burn ’em out fer good.}

      Nice, eh?

      – MJM

  8. And I’ve now also learned that using “Less Than” and “Greater Than” signs next to each other simply makes them invisible altogether!

No need to log in

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.