The Iron Fist of Tobacco Control

I’ve often wondered how Tobacco Control exerts influence. It occurred to me this morning that, in the aftermath of the UK government ditching plain packaging, we’re being shown how it’s done.

As ever with Tobacco Control, it’s the dark forces of Big Tobacco that are being fingered. And the ‘connection’ is that Crosby Textor, the consultancy that the Conservative party has begun using to shape its 2015 election strategy, also has a contract with Philip Morris. That’s been enough to associate Lynton Crosby, one of the founders of Crosby Textor, with Big Tobacco, and make him into a minion within their Evil Empire.

If you ran a pizza parlour, and you delivered a dozen Quatro Formaggio pizzas to someone who worked for Philip Morris, that would be enough to associate you and your pizza parlour with Big Tobacco, and prove your membership of the Evil Empire. Yes, it would.

Anyway, that’s the key, always-present, hallmark Big Tobacco link. After that it’s a matter of setting the media on the trail of Lynton Crosby, using your connections with the Guardian, the Telegraph, and the BBC (where Andrew Marr has been asking questions on his show), and your connections in parliament to get questions asked in the house (by the leader of the Labour opposition), and even pulling in re-enforcements from abroad.

Australia’s Health Minister has accused the UK Government of dropping plans to introduce blank cigarette packaging due to pressure from tobacco companies and one of their former lobbyists now working for the Conservatives.

Tanya Plibersek picked out Lynton Crosby – an Australian election adviser who has links to Philip Morris, one of the Big Four tobacco firms – as one of the main factors in the UK’s decision not to emulate her country in restricting cigarette packaging to single-coloured boxes emblazoned with graphic images of smoking-related diseases. “I think this does show the continued effort of big tobacco to prevent plain packaging,” Ms Plibersek said. “It’s very clear Lynton Crosby has been a key adviser in this move to dump plain packaging in the UK.”

Simultaneously you deploy ASH’s Deborah Arnott in the Mirror.

Deborah Arnott, of Action on Smoking and Health, said: “We need to know if Lynton Crosby has been briefing the media on Mr Cameron’s refusal to back a new law to stop the tobacco industry from using its pack designs to market its killer products to children.

“And we need to know why the Prime Minister and the Health Secretary don’t seem to think that the 200,000 kids a year who start to smoke deserve their protection.”

She added: “Mr Crosby’s background creates a serious conflict of interest. If he plays any part in the Government’s decision on whether to proceed with standard packs it would break the UK’s treaty promise not to let the tobacco industry interfere with health policy.”

 And you get about 40 doctors to sign a letter of protest.

In short, you kick up a right little media shitstorm, conjured out of nothing (because plain packaging was always a lousy idea). And it’s all done using connections in the media and the government and the ‘charities’ to create a wholly spurious media event.

Maybe you even activate antismoking assets in the Conservative party, and get John Redwood, MP, to write a piece suggesting that smoking be made illegal, while deleting most of the resulting protest comments.

It may not actually work, but it’ll give the government enough of a bloody nose to ensure that they agree quickly the next time that Tobacco Control demands some new antismoking measure.

And at the same time, you use your connections to make sure that the ministerial misbehaviour of Tobacco Control shills like Anna Soubry doesn’t get any media airplay at all.

And in this manner you create a false media superculture whose beliefs and values are quite different (and even opposed to) Britain’s underlying real culture, which ceases to be represented or reflected or reported.

But it may not be just Tobacco Control that have Lynton Crosby in their sights. He used to work for Boris Johnson, and was the architect of  his two mayoral campaign victories. And now that he’s working for the Conservative party, the Labour party will want to settle an old score. And the Conservative party is shifting its tactics, it seems.

David Cameron must have known his hiring of the man often described as an “evil genius” would draw him into the ambit of bare-knuckle politics. It’s what Crosby brings to election campaigns. Four election victories for the rightwinger John Howard, making him the second longest-serving Australian prime minister. Two victories in the London mayoral election for Boris Johnson, confounding the notion that his charge is a buffoon and London a Labour fiefdom.

The attraction is obvious, but that doesn’t diminish the significance of Crosby’s appointment. In the desperate quest for a majority, the Cameroonian project to detoxify the Tory party has been paused, perhaps abandoned. Had Steve Hilton, symbol of that makeover, expired rather than just moved on from his job as director of strategy, he would be spinning in his grave.

Crosby, bluff as a barrack room sergeant with a vocabulary to match, would shed few tears about that. “He really hates Steve Hilton,” said a source who observed him. “He thinks all that repositioning stuff and the Big Society doesn’t work. He likes things to be simple. Pick very simple themes and go for your core vote. Anything else he sees as a waste of time.”

And Crosby may well think that smokers are (or were)(or should be) Conservative core voters:

There has been speculation that the rise of Ukip, which promotes the rights of smokers, and concerns that plain packaging would lead to a rise in tobacco smuggling were two reasons why Cameron decided to abandon the plan after Crosby reputedly encouraged him to prioritise the Tories’ goals ahead of the 2015 general election.

Because the problem for the Conservative party (and also the other main parties) is that UKIP has been stealing their votes. And quite a few of those votes will be those of smokers who have been abandoned by the main parties.

Perhaps the arrival of Lynton Crosby as a Conservative party strategist signals the end of attempts to re-brand the Conservative party as a touchy-feely, environmentalist party, and signal a return to its core values and its core vote. In which case it would be a very good thing.

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to The Iron Fist of Tobacco Control

  1. harleyrider1978 says:

    TC itself is a political movement and a part of an even bigger political movement as we have seen all across the globe all linked together using the power of the UN via treaty laws to erase our own constitutions and national laws where it can. Ive seen the courts in America basically told what to say and how to write its decisions after reading quite a few handed down over the last few years. The wording maybe diferent but the effect and subject matter is the same!

    The nazis actually judge shop the same as any political party does to ensure they get the right outcome. Even the USSC has been threatened in the past by FDR to start changing their verdicts against his agenda or else he would increase the number of justices on the bench and put in his own judges to counter balance the opposing side and get his way!

    This is what happens with life appointments………..In fact its lead most to just figure out there is no justice in any court anywhere in the world when politics can be used to pressure decisions regardless of the facts and the laws!

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      They have made and invented their facts and the courts simply comply with the political powers to be in charge pushing the agenda. I nfact most courts always uphold the laws instituted in their home state regardless of proving them wrong………Its just how it is.

  2. woodsy42 says:

    It’s the media/PR version of a kid having a tantrrum in the supermarket aisle – and displays an approximately similar degree of self control.

  3. waltc says:

    Terrific Anatomy of a Smear you just wrote. As you know, it’s an old story. Start with our “friend” Siegel’s thesis in a 1999 post on ANR’s website in which he said, “Do not get into arguments with the industry about scientific evidence…Instead, the best approach is to expose the tobacco industry ties of the so-called scientists making the arguments.” Whereupon, he set out to smear both Robert Levy and his co-author of a published paper deconstructing the alleged 400,000 smoking deaths a year. Full story at Snowdon’s place. Scroll to the headline “Political credibility…”

    http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2009_11_01_archive.html

    Then there’s the story about Judge Osteen, the guy who said the EPA report on secondhand smoke was a corrupt crock. I quote here from a paper at CLASH (sorry, no handy url):

    “The anti-tobacco forces (and they’re Forces To Be Reckoned With) approached this decision by the usual means. They immediately set out to discredit the judge and to skew and misrepresent his findings.

    Judge Osteen, they said, was a lackey of Big Tobacco. Prima facia evidence was the obvious point that the judge resided in…North Carolina! And if that weren’t bad enough, 30 years before, while in private practice, he’d lobbied Earl Butz, then Agriculture Secretary, over something to do with tobacco quotas on behalf of a private client, a farmer.

    Meanwhile, they had rather conveniently forgotten that only one year before, he had handed down a sweeping defeat to Big Tobacco, the worse it had ever suffered, when he decided that the sale, manufacture and distribution of cigarettes could indeed be managed and controlled by the FDA. Back then, they were absolutely goofy in their praise. What a fair-minded judge! What an upright decision! But one year later, he’s a lackey of Big Tobacco whose decision can’t be trusted.”

    We also know what happened to James Enstrom.

    • Frank Davis says:

      There’s perhaps a slight difference in the present case, however, because the guy that’s being smeared – Lynton Crosby – is himself a consummate professional smear artist (or negative campaigner, if you prefer). I doubt that either Enstrom or Osteen were.

  4. beobrigitte says:

    Simultaneously you deploy ASH’s Deborah Arnott in the Mirror.

    Deborah Arnott, of Action on Smoking and Health, said: “We need to know if Lynton Crosby has been briefing the media on Mr Cameron’s refusal to back a new law to stop the tobacco industry from using its pack designs to market its killer products to children.

    “And we need to know why the Prime Minister and the Health Secretary don’t seem to think that the 200,000 kids a year who start to smoke deserve their protection.”

    Wasn’t the smoking ban supposed to be a “success”? How come every year ‘200,000 kids’ start smoking?

    She [Deborah Arnott] added: “Mr Crosby’s background creates a serious conflict of interest. If he plays any part in the Government’s decision on whether to proceed with standard packs it would break the UK’s treaty promise not to let the tobacco industry interfere with health policy.”

    Lets go back a few years…………..

    Lets level the playing field and apply the very same restrictions imposed on the tobacco industry also to tobacco control.

    Tobacco control’s interference with health policy has not exactly been beneficial, has it?

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Its funny how TC has gome out of its way to GAG big tobacco in the MSA deal and then to gag everybody even individuals from going to the government to fight back against TC and its claims. That part is in the FCTC treaty basically saying the only ones allowed to speak to the government about tobacco are its enemies!

  5. prog says:

    The gnashing of teeth and hand wringing could be perceived as comical. After all, as far as most people are concerned this is a storm in a teacup. TC suffers one seemingly small defeat and the shit hits the fan. Could you imagine the reaction if the government had the temerity to even suggest that the ban should be amended? Clearly, this will simply not happen under the current administration or any combination of the three biggest parties. No openly sympathetic MP would have a cat in hell’s chance of getting a senior job. Basically, we’re going to need a major change in the political system. We know they’re terrified of UKIP, which is the ONLY party that would dare to challenge the fascists. Let’s hope Nigel can extend the LA success into Westminster, but it seems things will get worse before they could exert any influence. Even then, it’d be an up hill struggle.

    • Frank J says:

      If there’s votes in it, bye bye TC. I feel that if UKIP grow bigger, then an ‘amendment’ would be on the cards. Bottom line, Cameron and Clegg’s jobs are more important to themselves than any TC stooge. TC can wail and gnash as many teeth as they like. ‘Public Health’ is now in the process of being transferred from NHS to Councils and I know for a fact (don’t ask how, jobs would be in jeopardy) that they have been told by some Councillors that their votes come first and they’re not keen at all. All we’ve had to date is a knee jerk from a few ‘donkey’ Councils. Election time is very sobering for Councillors.

      I also believe that both Cameron and Clegg are fully aware that TC comes out with BS.

      • Frank Davis says:

        Bottom line, Cameron and Clegg’s jobs are more important to themselves than any TC stooge.

        I think that is indeed the bottom line. And I think that Cameron and Clegg are beginning to understand that unswerving allegiance to TC has been costing them votes. Votes that are going to UKIP. I don’t get the impression, however, that Miliband (with his ‘Benson and Hedge Fund’ jibe) has even begun to understand that this affects the Labour party too.

        But if, let us imagine, all the main parties eventually realise that the War on Smokers has been costing them dearly in votes, could they do anything about it? After all, if Labour announced an about-face on smoking, would any smoker believe them? This one certainly wouldn’t. Same with the Lib-Dems. Both these parties drank the kool-aid, and they provided the bulk of the 2006 parliamentary vote that brought in the ban.

        The only party that has any chance at all of recovering its credibility, in my view, is the Conservative party, principally because about two thirds of Tory MPs voted against the ban. But to do so, I think they’d have to ditch Cameron. Either that, or Cameron would have to do a Nigel Farage, and be photographed drinking a beer and smoking a cigarette outside a pub. Even then, I don’t think I’d believe it.

        All three parties have serious problems in rowing back on smoking bans, should they wish to do so. And it may be too difficult for any of them to seriously contemplate.

        • Frank J says:

          Cameron has a survival instinct like anybody else. So do all MP’s. If the UKIP threat grows larger, it’ll kick in. What happened to ‘Blue Labour’? a couple of years ago they were talking about amendments. It’s obvious that the parties, in partic. Labour, still feel they are following public opinion about smoking and the ban but if hard facts (increasing UKIP vote) prove otherwise, they’ll ditch it like a hot potato. They’re hardly people of integrity!

          The problem they have is that over the years, the activists have ingrained themselves in health, locked the doors and operate in isolation. But if they want to keep their jobs, they’ll have to wake up and solve it. Start by appointing a Minister who’s impervious to the Mount Olympus effect and can. actually, run his Dept. Is there anybody of that calibre? still, I repeat, if they wish to keep their jobs, it’ll have to be tackled

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          After all, if Labour announced an about-face on smoking, would any smoker believe them? This one certainly wouldn’t. Same with the Lib-Dems. Both these parties drank the kool-aid, and they provided the bulk of the 2006 parliamentary vote that brought in the ban.

          How true Frank and the same in everyplace else the bans came down.
          Like the last time we had bans in America it became so hot a political issue both parties voted to repeal and just get rid of it altogether. Lets keep up the heat here and around the globe everyday! We are making an impact and the loss of support for these prohibitionist parties is fast comming to a point they have to take notice.

          We need an incident and its always something small that brings to a head the political strife of any movement……………..Thats where we win!

          In Utah In 1922 it was when a overly zealous newly elected sheriff decided to start arresting people for smoking indoors………….He arrested a politician and his 2 friends!
          2 weeks later in the midnite hour the state legislature repealed the utah statewide smoking ban!

        • nisakiman says:

          I’m sure it can’t have escaped the notice of all the political parties the recent poll in the ‘Mirror’, which saw 80% of respondents unhappy with the ban. All politicians read all the papers (or get their aides to) assiduously so they know which soundbite they next need to utter. I’m equally sure they must be aware of the results of the ‘public consultation’ on plain packs, where 64% were against. They may finally be getting the message that bans may please the squealers in Public Health, but not so much the voters. And it’s the voters that they need.

      • prog says:

        Yes, UKIP has increasing influence locally. They could be in a position to rein in LA excesses but they’ll have no powers to amend a law imposed by central gov.

        • roobeedoo2 says:

          I have written to my MP today, bringing Anna Soubry’s performance to his attention (there’s a shortened version on Youtube, via Dick Puddlecote). He lost his government position in the last reshuffle (he was a whip). I have told him that I can’t possibly vote conservative again after her undemocratic actions, which are seemingly being condoned (she’s likely to gain further promotion in a future reshuffle, as per the Daily Mail article yesterday). My vote will be going to UKIP.

          I also told him that I would be speaking to every smoker I encounter about this and that if he wanted to he could find us, outside, ostacised from society. I reminded him that there are circa 20% of population who freely admit they smoke (the implication that the number is much higher for those that smoke but don’t consider themselves smokers, mostly because they bum fags of others).

          What else can I do? Edmund Burke had it right when he said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

        • Frank J says:

          They’re not doing too bad, nationally, either. That’s what counts to Cameron and Clegg. If it continues to bite and their positions look bad, you can bet your life anything is on the cards.

          I wasn’t talking about UKIP councillors above. I don’t know any. I’m referring to existing Councillors who don’t want this poisoned chalice of public health foisted on them. They fear reaction from the voting public and, to be honest, they’re nearer to the ground than modern MP’s. They see it as Govt. trying to get rid of a problem by giving it to them.

        • Frank Davis says:

          I seem to have missed this transfer of Public Health to local councils. Anyone got a link?

        • Frank J says:

          It’s already happening, all part of localisation. Started in April. Workforce working for public health under NHS transferred to Councils. Caused a mess with payments I might add. In one case involved moving buildings but this was done about 6 months ago. In this case ‘smoking cessation services’ were moved out completely, sent to a different area.

          I can’t give anything further – no names, no pack drill. But I am aware first and second hand, that it’s not wanted. This Govt. is washing its hands of it. For them it’s a smart move.

        • Tony says:

          A couple of links on localism:
          http://www.f2c.org.uk/blog/?p=280
          http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/New-figures-reveal-scale-city-s-heart-problems/story-18755392-detail/story.html#axzz2RJE8LknF
          Talking to the BBC, Broxtowe MP and Health Minister Anna Soubry said: “Moving public health down to the local authorities is the right thing because they know what’s best in their area. We have given more money to local authorities. We are putting over £2.7 billion into local authorities to do this work.

  6. Mr A says:

    I’m actually hoping their tantrums will work against them.

    The likes of Cameron and the majority of MPs aren’t friends of liberty or scientific integrity. But I think there’s been a trend in the past for them to follow Tobacco Control measures as it makes them look (in their eyes, as it’s not an issue they give much thought to), “progressive” and “caring of the children.” Plus these measures’ failures doesn’t reflect back on them (in the same way that a failed war or an economic policy can). So they follow it, it makes them look cuddly and caring (or so they think) and their failures don’t reflect back on them.

    But now the TC demands are not only getting outlandish but are also very possibly illegal, they are having to think about their implementation a bit more. So they announced their TC measures like they normally do before someone pointed out, “Hang on, this is probably illegal.”

    Now that they have been on the receiving end of these politically embarrassing tantrums and concerted political campaigning, I am hoping that a lot of the bovine MPs who just went along with this shit before are now thinking, “Hang on. Rather than being “experts” and “doctors” these people are clearly lying. Also, they are obviously not just “anti-smoking health professionals,”, they are clearly part of a massive political lobbying machine. They have embarrassed the Hell out of us – why are we actually paying them to do this to us?

    So I’m actually hoping this will work against TC in that the next time a tobacco proposal comes up, instead of just being blase and automatically greenlighting it for the cheeldren as they have been doing, they will instead think, “Tobacco is a minefield and these idiots will burn us like Hell if it goes the wrong way. Best to just ignore the issue. That way it can’t backfire on us like it did before.”

  7. Rose says:

    Ever wonder why they seem so desperate to stop people smoking that even a temporary setback will send them into fits of rage?

    Time is running out to rely on general ignorance.

    I missed this one in 2011

    “Wonder oil’ to hit the market”

    “The Central Tobacco Research Institute (CTRI) is all set to release tobacco edible oils in the market by 2012.

    “The institute is opening gates to sign an MoU with entrepreneurs, industrialists for transferring ‘Solanesol’ drug technology which was patented by it. It has anti-cancer, anti-diabetic, anti-ageing properties and is in great demand in Western countries. Solanesol is a phytochemical, starting material for synthesis of co-enzyme Q10 — physiologically active substance with high pharmaceutical activity.

    Efforts are on to exploit tobacco for its multiple beneficial uses such has Solanesol derivatives, value added products from nicotine, leaf extracts in pest management, fraction-1 protein as a dietary supplement for dialysis, and for treatment of burns. Its products are useful for surgical trauma patients. Tobacco molecular farming can be utilised for production of enzymes and flavour compounds.

    The CTRI extracted Solanesol from tobacco waste and supplied it to a few companies at the rate of Rs. 200 per gram for research purpose. However, it is estimated that cost of production (raw material) on industrial scale is expected to be around Rs. 6,000 a kg in the international market, and the price of Solanesol (purity more than 95 per cent) is around $500.

    According to CTRI Director V. Krishna Murthy and senior principal scientist C.V. Narasimha Rao, they have completed edible oil trials. Evaluation of the nutritional and health aspects (pre-clinical toxicologyl) of seed oil, including analysis of micronutrients, vitamins and proximate constituents will be carried out with the help of the Hyderabad-based National Institute of Nutrition, to promote the use of refined tobacco seed oil as edible oil or vegetable oil blends. “The CTRI then will release the products in the market,” said Dr. Krishna Murthy.”

    Tobacco edible oils having anti-cancer, anti-diabetic and anti-ageing properties to be released by CTRI”
    http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/wonder-oil-to-hit-the-market/article2610247.ece

    The more I find out about the plant and it’s properties, the more I suspect that even with those outrageous tobacco taxes on the raw product, it might just be worth the money.

    Processed, packaged up individually and sold over the counter the prices for some of the individual components of tobacco are extortionate in their own right and I’d still have to set fire to something to keep taking the supplementary carbon monoxide and nitric oxide I’ve been inhaling all these years, now that their benefits in low doses are known.

    I’m also very pleased that non-smokers can now share the benefits of these discoveries, but I do expect that people like John Redwood should show the courage of their convictions and give up nicotine in all it’s forms completely.

    “While most people know that nicotine can be found in tobacco, low levels of the compound can be found in peppers, tomatoes and other members of the Solanaceae flowering plant family.”
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-57583731/eating-nicotine-containing-produce-like-peppers-tomatoes-may-lower-parkinsons-risk/

    It’s also been found in non-solanaceous plants like cauliflower and tea, all of which I suspect John Redwood has indulged in repeatedly.

  8. Supergran says:

    Frank, is there any research that could show how many billions of pounds are invested in tobacco for pensions and for shareholders?? (I imagine most MPs have a huge portfolio of money-making share schemes)?? I would so dearly LOVE you to name and shame every last one of them. It would be hysterical to find out about all the pension funds, government investments and individual investors (zealots, anti’s, smokerphobes) etc who are actually making money this way. Now Frank, THAT would not only make my day, it would make my year!!

  9. magnetic01 says:

    Excellent summary, Frank.

    “As ever with Tobacco Control, it’s the dark forces of Big Tobacco that are being fingered.”

    It’s how the “healthist” crusade has been framed from the outset. Antismoking has been obscenely funded by the taxpayer and Pharma interests for the last few decades. The great “skill” of activists is in propaganda – how to make headlines, how to maintain a high media profile. There has essentially been no questioning of their conduct. They are used to getting their way. The more fanatics are accommodated, the more hysterical and inflammatory become their claims, and the more deranged, draconian, and inhumane become their demands. On the rare occasion that fanatics don’t get their way, they resort to “Plan B” which is occurring now in the UK concerning “plain packaging” – it’s all a tobacco industry “conspiracy” – “there’s that “evil” tobacco industry thwarting our wonderful work”, screech the fanatics.
    This entire “Us vs them” framework was also contrived by the fanatics decades ago. This mythological good vs evil drama was suggested by the Australian antismoking activist, Chapman, at the 1983 [antismoking] World Conference on Smoking & Health. It was in the presentation of his paper, a manual on how to do propaganda, “The Lung Goodbye”:
    “Such a list could be added to considerably, but most entries would be characterized by being somehow cast in a mythological good versus evil battle in an arena observed by mass numbers of people. The good (health/clean air/children) versus evil (cancer/uncaring, callous industry) dimension is the ineluctable bottom line in the whole issue and a rich reservoir for spawning a great deal of useful social drama, metaphor, and symbolic politics that is the stuff of ‘news value’ and which is almost always to the detriment of the industry.” p.11 (see Godber Blueprint)

    It’s all for manipulative, theatrical effect – although there are those within the movement that believe they are “god-like” – and has been quite successfully used for the last three decades on an essentially superficial/gullible political class, media, and public. The zealots and their financial partners must have regular belly laughs at how all too easy the brainwashing has been.

    And there’s nothing new here. That’s how prescriptive, moralizing zealotry works – we know everything and we know how everyone should be conducting themselves, i.e., “god complex”: We are “good” and anyone who disagrees with us is “evil”.

    “Anyway, that’s the key, always-present, hallmark Big Tobacco link.”

    Standard operating procedure. Through the “Us vs them” framework, the tobacco industry has been demonized. When wanting to remove any criticism/protest, the zealots typically go for the “tobacco industry connection” smear, however tenuous the connection might be. If the zealots can’t find a connection, they’ll make one up. Just the insinuation is sufficient for smearing purposes. This is one of the reasons that Siegel distanced himself from Americans for Non-Smokers Rights.

    “It may not actually work, but it’ll give the government enough of a bloody nose to ensure that they agree quickly the next time that Tobacco Control demands some new antismoking measure.”

    Intimidation and bullying has been routine from the early days of this crusade (see also Walt’s comment). Siegel has indicated that on occasions his superiors have been contacted by the zealots strongly suggesting that they not renew his academic contract.

    From NYCLASH
    In Mr. Glantz’s vocabulary, opposition to smoking bans, no matter what the reason = “pushing the tobacco industry’s agenda.” Here’s how he suggests that his troops deal with any such heretical legislators:
    “In each state one or two politicians seem to be taking the lead in pushing the industry’s position (at least publicly). As soon as these politicians start floating trial balloons, they should be attacked publicly. If they can be bloodied, it could well scare the others off. Fear is a great motivator for politicians.”
    http://www.nycclash.com/CaseAgainstBans/Appendix.html#GlantzPrinciples

    We now have a corrupt, self-serving, self-installed elite that forms a closed propaganda network from government health bureaucracies to a myriad of medically-aligned NGO’s, all connected to the WHO. These miscreants have made their cosy network a law unto itself.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Clicks have a way of undoing themselves……….especially those clicks that create Hundreds of millions of enemies!

  10. harleyrider1978 says:

    Augusta Commissioner not likely to reintroduce smoking ban soon

    Id say in parts of America especially the South the bansterbators are finding its all but over.

    Those pushing for smoke-free bars and other public places in Augusta will get a boost from entertainers next week, but the introduction of a proposed ordinance is likely weeks away.

    Augusta Mayor Pro Tem Corey Johnson, who helped shepherd a tougher smoking ordinance last year before the Augusta Commission before it was voted down, said he has no immediate plans to bring it back up.

    “We’ve still got a few things we need to deal with,” he said. “I just haven’t had much time to talk with colleagues and see where they were on this thing.”

    It could be late September or October before Johnson brings it back up. Augusta is covered by a state law that bans smoking in restaurants but allows it in bars and places that do not admit anyone younger than 18.

    The group pushing for what it calls smoke-free workplaces is concentrating on public education. Jennifer Anderson, the chairwoman of BreathEasy Augusta, said the group goes to public events such as First Friday to talk with people about secondhand smoke.

    “A lot of people really don’t realize how hazardous secondhand smoke is,” she said. “That’s the big thing that we’re seeing when we go out to the public.”

    The group passes out information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about how exposure from as little as 20 minutes of secondhand smoke exposure can affect nonsmokers and longer exposure appears to have larger consequences.

    A study of 2,889 “never smokers” published in February in the journal Hypertension, for instance, found that the higher the levels of nicotine byproduct in their blood, the greater the level of hypertension regardless of other risk factors such as body mass index and cholesterol levels.

    The previous attempt to ban smoking in bars rankled some owners and is likely to raise opposition again.

    Mike Scheetz, a co-owner of The Pub and Grub on Mike Padgett Highway, said he would be opposed to a smoke-free ordinance. He estimated about 25 to 30 percent of his customers smoke.

    “I imagine they would probably not want to come here or what they would want to do is get a drink and go outside” to smoke, Scheetz said. That would mean adding an outdoor area, he said.

    From the comments

    Let it die

    The “anti-second-hand-smoke-in-bars” crowd needs to slink back into the world of “please forgive us.”

    I have never smoked, and cigarette smoke bothers me, but I tolerate it because it is important to people I love and respect.

    Let the business owners run their businesses as they see fit. If prospective employees can’t abide the smoke, then find employment elsewhere. There are eighty-times more non-smoking establishments than there are smoking establishments. Let us co-exist!

    …………………….
    Instead of 100’s, I hate what someone is doing laws.

    Let’s ban Liberals and save the jail space and administrative overhead to enact, announce, publish, instruct LEO’s on the new law, ticket, add more to an already overcrowded legal system, put them on trial, fine or house them. Not to go into the likely legal appeals and lawsuits and those costs.

    If Augusta is big enough to have a Gay Pride Day and everybody is expected accept one another actions and lifestyles why not allow smokers to smoke in those places that allow it?

    …………………………..

    Lamb said it best

    Live & let live….even legit drugs are dangerous…do you them banned to.

    http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/government/2013-07-22/augusta-commissioner-not-likely-reintroduce-smoking-ban-soon?v=1374528758

  11. magnetic01 says:

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would inflict the Chapman Trick – the attempt to manipulate nonsmokers in particular into the belief that in SHS they are breathing vaporized ant poison, embalming fluid, toilet cleaner, road tar, etc – on the population under the masquerade of medical “authority” to shove the antismoking agenda down everyone’s throat? Who but the mentally unstable would set out to convince the public that even a whiff of ambient tobacco smoke is “toxic and dangerous”, that there is “no safe level” of tobacco smoke? Who but the mentally unstable would actively promote such irrational belief, fear and hatred to advance their agenda?

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy, having shoved the Chapman Trick on the population, also “educated” the public that exposure to SHS represents nonsmokers being “forced to smoke” against their will, i.e., passive smoking, secondhand smoking? Smoking involves the inhalation (drawback) of a concentrated “packet” of smoke: Simply breathing air that has some remnants of smoke does not remotely resemble smoking. Passive or secondhand smoking are just some amongst many inflammatory myths.

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would contrive tobacco-use into the same sentence with narcotics such as cocaine and heroin?

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would push for taxes on tobacco to be raised to compounded extortionate levels on a fraudulent basis (and for their own financial profit), knowing full well that that is also the best way to promote a contraband market and further oppresses those of low income? Who but the mentally disturbed, having actively promoted a contraband market, then deny any responsibility?

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would jeopardize the immediate health (e.g., physical assault) of smokers – for no other than bigoted, social-engineering reasons – by having them walk to dark, isolated, and sometimes distant, areas if they want a cigarette? Who but the mentally unstable would insist that no accommodation be given to the habit of smoking whatsoever?

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy cannot reason through the detrimental consequences of their social-engineering and, when these potential/actual consequences are pointed out, they couldn’t care less anyway? Who but the mentally unstable would disavow any responsibility for any detrimental consequences of their making? All that matters to the mentally unstable is their acute fixation – their deranged smokefree “utopia” – at any cost, and where the cost is typically borne by those other than the fanatics that are producing the cost.

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would jeopardize the economic viability of businesses through baseless, draconian smoking bans/policy and then contend that no such detrimental consequence ever occurs? Who but the mentally disturbed, where denial of such consequences is impossible, then deny that it has anything to do with them?

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would make it mandatory to increase the chemical load of cigarettes (FSC) and never bother to have such a product change health tested? Who but the mentally unstable, when alerted to the failure, then demonstrate that they couldn’t care less?

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy, having already promoted a contraband market, would then actively promote a counterfeit market where the contents of cigarettes are entirely unknown?

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would set out – intentionally – to “denormalize” a sizeable group of the population (smokers) through fraudulent means – a constant lying under the pretense of “science and scholarship”, to make this “target” group appear as not fit for normal society, a “threat” to all, to be relegated to the margins, to be sneered at, looked down upon?

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would assume guardianship of “the children” – as the tyrannical typically do? Children present a “blank slate” where the fanatics can shape the children’s thinking in the fanatics’ deranged perspective, brainwashing them in antismoking propaganda from an early age a là Temperance/Eugenics Groups of early 20th century America or the Hitler Youth. Who but the mentally unstable would “teach” children that their 30-something (or any age for that matter) smoking parents are liable to drop dead at any moment from smoking and that the children are being “killed” by ambient tobacco smoke?
    http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2012/12/23/Most-kids-of-smokers-what-parents-to-quit/UPI-38571356298634/

    In one school, the very word “cigarette” is verboten:
    http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/12/children_do_not_need_us_to_artificially_sanitize_the_world.html

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would “teach” children that having “nicotine addict” parents is shameful? It is the constant [fake] moralizers that are the abusers of children. And what the rabid zealots consider as “the children” is constantly morphing into greater perversity. Consider this sanctimony from the self-absorbed zealot par excellence, Stan Glantz, concerning university-wide smoking bans directed at adults:

    If young people can stop smoking, or never start smoking, before they reach their late 20s, they will be unlikely to ever develop the habit as older adults, said Dr. Stanton
    Glantz, director of UCSF’s Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.
    “Virtually nobody starts smoking after age 24 or 25,” Glantz said. “If you can get people through the college ages and a little bit past, and they’ve either not started or they’ve stopped, then they’re pretty well taken care of.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/01/13/BAGJ1MOO9L.DTL

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would protect their Pharma funders by calling for bans on all the competition for potential smoking “substitutes” (chewing tobacco, snus, e-cigarettes) giving Pharma a monopoly for its [useless] smoking cessation wares?

    Who but the mentally unstable, corrupt, dishonest, and greedy would put antismokers – haters of smoke/smoking/smokers – in charge of tobacco and not expect catastrophe….. or even recognize the pathway to catastrophe as it’s occurring?

    At every turn in this twisted antismoking saga, there has been constant self-serving deception. There is no accountability on the part of the “society-fixer” fanatics: They have made themselves a law unto themselves. In their own contorted, cultic fantasy-world are the fanatics/zealots/extremists always right, never wrong. Only more troubling than the antismoker fanatics is the medically-dominated Public Health framework that has legitimized them. It’s here that the seriously mentally disturbed – a là eugenics – reside: They have all sorts of divisive control plans, far beyond antismoking, for the public. Public Health has once again been hijacked by the medically-aligned, peddling their deranged physicalist world view and perverse definition of health. Public Health is once again being used for deranged ideology, financial profit and oppression. Public Health, from the WHO through to national health bureaucracies, has destabilized countries around the world, bringing them progressively under sick, central control. It is robber bureaucrats, robber politicians, robber “advisers”, robber hangers-on. And it’s more than money that they’re robbing.

  12. magnetic01 says:

    Frank, a call from the dungeon.

  13. garyk30 says:

    “Crosby Textor, the consultancy that the Conservative party has begun using to shape its 2015 election strategy, also has a contract with Philip Morris. That’s been enough to associate Lynton Crosby, one of the founders of Crosby Textor, with Big Tobacco, and make him into a minion within their Evil Empire.”

    Well then; since Einstein worked for the Swiss govt at the time, I guess that makes his theory of relativity nothing more than Swiss govt propaganda..

    Any research funded in part by govt money must be nothing more than govt propaganda.

  14. Rose says:

    Does smoking make you a bad parent? Survey finds smokers feed their children less, buy them smaller birthday presents and raid their money box to fund their habit

    “The research was carried out by pharmaceutical company Pfizer as part of their Don’t Go Cold Turkey Campaign ..”
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2375079/Does-smoking-make-bad-parent-Survey-finds-smokers-feed-children-buy-smaller-birthday-presents-raid-money-box-fund-habit.html

    You know, I am so glad that my children are grown up and beyond the reach of these tormentors, it was bad enough frightening little children by implying that their young parents were likely to drop dead at any moment.

    Anti-smoking ad could frighten children, says watchdog

    Department of Health commercial featuring girl who fears her mother will die should not be aired before 7.30pm, rules ASA
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/apr/01/anti-smoking-ad-frighten-children

    Now they want to make the children of smokers believe that they are unloved and neglected.

    There are no excuses, the ends do not justify the means, these are truly evil people and I am proud to oppose them.

    • beobrigitte says:

      The proof of anti-smoker being the lowest of the lowest.
      “The research was carried out by pharmaceutical company Pfizer as part of their Don’t Go Cold Turkey Campaign ..”
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2375079/Does-smoking-make-bad-parent-Survey-finds-smokers-feed-children-buy-smaller-birthday-presents-raid-money-box-fund-habit.html

      A survey has discovered that nicotine addict mothers and fathers cut back on Christmas presents for their children, buy them less clothing and even feed them less to fund their daily cigarette habit.

      The poll, which examined the lifestyle behaviour of smokers, also discovered that some people stole from friends, applied for credit cards and even asked strangers on the street for money when desperate for their fix.

      I wonder what would happen if a group of smokers got together and sued the paper for slander/defamation of character.
      Smokers apply for credit cards to fund their cigarettes but not to buy food and e.g. Christmas presents for the children, or to fund school trips? REALLY?????????

      What a disgusting bunch of people these anti-smokers are!! It is high time to kick them out!!! They are not content having destroyed the livelihood of many people, they now celebrate kicking and insulting the very families they put on the dole.

      I cannot do and say enough to distance myself from that anti-smoking scum!

    • roobeedoo2 says:

      When one of my sons came home from school one day and said “cigarettes are bad for you. I wish they would ban them”, I looked at him kindly and asked him what he likes doing. “playing video games”, he replied. “Well,” says I “some people think video games are bad for children. Should we ban them too?”. Never had another peep out of either of them about smoking.

      Parents can do a lot by teaching their kids about the thin end of the wedge. The smoking ban was the very thinnest part of the wedge that is being used to prise us from the rest of our freedoms.

      • beobrigitte says:

        When one of my sons came home from school one day and said “cigarettes are bad for you. I wish they would ban them”, I looked at him kindly and asked him what he likes doing. “playing video games”, he replied. “Well,” says I “some people think video games are bad for children. Should we ban them too?”.

        Yep!!! Last year my daughter visited me with her partner who is an ex-smoker and likes his beer.
        I supplied quite a number of different beers and had my ashtray -as usual – on the table. He announced that we smokers can’t even smoke outside everywhere; in some places we are being herded to a small smoking area.
        I took another drag of my cigarette and said:” And you go happily along with that. By the way, the campaign to stop youngsters drinking is already underway. They want minimum alcohol pricing.”

        *silence*

        I asked him if he would like to try a “super” stout. After all, he is on holiday but I trust he’d apply common sense and not just pour this £17/bottle down his throat.

        He had a sip, looked at me, then eventually said: “This stout is out of this world!!!”
        My reply: ” it will be when beer is the next cigarette.”

        His reply: “Next time I visit, I’ll not begrudge bringing you tobacco”.

    • Marie says:

      As a smoking granny, I am suspected of giving too expensive presents to my grandchild. ;)

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        And leaving good tips at smoking locations you can eat at!

      • “If you ran a pizza parlour, and you delivered a dozen Quatro Formaggio pizzas to someone who worked for Philip Morris, that would be enough to associate you and your pizza parlour with Big Tobacco, and prove your membership of the Evil Empire.”

        And you’re not exaggerating. Three examples:

        1) Gian Turci (one of the founders of FORCES.org ) went to a conference one afternoon about 15 years ago and ate half a complimentary ham sandwich. Since the conference was hosted by British American Tobacco, the Antis waved it as proof that FORCES closely collaborated its plans with and was fed and supported by Big Tobacco.

        2) I signed a petition and filled out a comment form on the RJR or PM site about 20 years ago where I asked if they ever shared their email lists or research materials with Free Choice activists. That served as the basis for a claim that communicate directly with Big Tobacco and have asked them for support.

        3) A little over ten years ago, David W. Kuneman and I published a study that ripped apart the “Great Helena Heart Miracle” and similar nonsense studies claiming massive drops in heart attacks after smoking bans. Our research was not only completely open-source-based and verifiable (unlike Helena’s “trust us” secret data), but it was also covered a period over ten times as long and a population base over a thousand times as large!
        The “TobaccoScam” board dismissed our work as worthless because 25 years previously Dave had worked as a soda flavoring chemist at a soft-drink company called “7-Up” At one point during his employment there the company was one of dozens bought and then sold a few years later by Philip Morris as it transformed into Altria. The TobaccoScam “Fact Checker” said our work was worthless because it had been done by “a tobacco industry researcher.”
        Under THAT sort of standard, any antismoking research involving a researcher who had worked one teenage summer as a cashier at a drug-store chain could have their research dismissed as the product of a “Big Pharma Employee.”

        – MJM

  15. DP says:

    Dear Mr Davis

    “Perhaps the arrival of Lynton Crosby as a Conservative party strategist signals the end of attempts to re-brand the Conservative party as a touchy-feely, environmentalist party, and signal a return to its core values and its core vote. In which case it would be a very good thing.”

    Don’t hold your breath. More likely the Conservative Party are shape shifting into election friendly form, and will shape shift back again after the election, whether or not they form the government.

    Westminster is a life-limited institution, scheduled for demolition by the EU. The next election may be the last.

    For as long as the EU allows Westminster to continue to pretend to govern the UK, the EU will still have final say on any matters which take their fancy. So many eurocrats, so much time: got to keep busy.

    DP

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Perhaps then the Queen will manup and take back control! Likely with full support of her Subjects!

  16. Silver Price says:

    The Tory party election strategist Lynton Crosby has put out a comprehensive denial that he had ever discussed or lobbied David Cameron or the health secretary over tobacco packaging.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

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