Antismoking Terrorist Bastards

I’ve been working on some ideas for cartoons of prod-nosed, pursed-lipped antismokers. Someone else has been too:

antismoking_puritan
The anti-smoking puritan.

Nose: Permanently crinkled as a pre-emptive defence against the foul odour of tobacco smoke

Voice: Tighter than piano wire

Overall expression: A sort of sanctimonious disgust

Overweening passion: Hatred for smoking that regularly skirts the psychopathic…

But how’s this for psychopathic hatred?

The father of a terminally ill man yesterday called on health bosses to let his son have a fag at the hospital where he is being cared for.

Forty-two-year-old Sean Major suffers from degenerative illness Huntington’s Disease, and until recently he was able to enjoy a cigarette in the grounds of Paisley’s Dykebar Hospital.

But his father Joe, 77, said patients have now been banned from smoking in the hospital grounds, and this means Sean is being deprived of his last pleasure in life.

Mr Major explained: “It used to be Sean could smoke outside. It wasn’t inside the hospital, it was outside and in an area away from everyone else.“

But the hospital has banned smoking outside in the grounds now and that means Sean can’t smoke at all.

“And he can’t leave the hospital for a smoke.

“Huntington’s is a degenerative illness and smoking is all that Sean has got left.

“They can surely let him have a cigarette somewhere.”

I couldn’t put it better than Nisakiman:

“Bastards. Complete and utter bastards.”

Junican is comparing antismoking zealots with terrorists. I think he has a point.

daesh_antismoking_ad

Beirut: Daesh has started an anti-smoking campaign through billboards of its de facto capital Al Raqqa and in its online propaganda — testimony that the terrorist organisation is alive and well despite non-stop air strikes from Syrian, American and Russian airplanes.

Billboards sprung up on the streets of Al Raqqa saying: “Smoking has killed millions.” Next to the crimson text is the graphic photo of a blood-dripping cigarette perched on the corner of an ashtray. Unlike the case in 2010, when a smoking ban was briefly implemented by the Syrian government and then broken by society, restaurateurs, and coffee-shop owners, these billboards were not signed off by the Ministry of Health but by Daesh.

The anti-smoking ad is trendy and far from amateurish, appearing to be cleverly crafted by graphic designers, much like Daesh’s online magazine Dabiq. The objective, of course, is religious puritanism and not health awareness.

Is it any different in the so-called ‘civilised’ western world? Antismoking is just as much religious puritanism here as it is there. We even get exactly the same kind of sick, twisted antismoking ads. And we have Daesh-equivalent bastards running Paisley’s Dykebar Hospital.

What’s the point of bombing Daesh in Syria when the same psychopaths are everywhere in our own so-called ‘Public Health’?

On the bright side, you can now use Google Street View to walk around the British Museum. You can even smoke while you wander around it.

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

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

73 Responses to Antismoking Terrorist Bastards

  1. harleyrider1978 says:

    Well t terrorists in Calif took out 14 and wounded several other health facists………..
    But then when your support and push the terrorists like ISIS to push your anti-smoking laws and rules even if it includes beheading and hands lobbed off for for breaking their jihad law how can we feel bad if the same terrorists kill off some of the allies here in America. I know I wont shed a tear over it. All the Obama administration was interested in was how he could use it to further his other pet peave besides anti-smoking his anti-gun agenda……..

    Personally if terrorists want to kill off public health Nazis all the power to them.

  2. Cecily Collingridge says:

    I am rather disturbed by the cartoon at the top. All it needs is a mole on the chin and it could be me! Perhaps I should cultivate my “overweening passion” to become ‘a hatred for the ANTI-smoking LOBBY that regularly skirts the psychopathic…’. I like the sound of that.

  3. Lepercolonist says:

    It broke my heart reading about Sean Major. These health officials are really sick in the head.

    • Ripper says:

      One must remember – hospitals, and their grounds are public places, paid for and owned by us, the tax payer. The hospital authorities can bring in all the policies they like, but that will not change the fact that it is NOT AGAINST THE LAW to smoke in hospital grounds. I myself have always done it and never been challenged, but if I was I would give short shrift. Neither will I pay for parking, their ‘PCN’s are meaningless and get filed away in the bin.

  4. magnetic01 says:

    While it despises all else about the West, the bloodthirsty murderers of ISIS have adopted the West’s antismoking, something more with which to bludgeon their captives, instituting a complete (everywhere) ban on smoking with brutal fervor ….. for the “good” (at gunpoint) of their captives, of course…. for a “healthy” society.

    Antismoking is “anti”; it’s an extreme, prohibitionist view. It’s always a symptom of a dictatorial mindset. The only issue then is the magnitude of coercive measures to conformity. With ISIS, a brutal, savage bunch, people are ordered not to smoke under threat of having fingers and ears lopped off, if not worse. In the less brutal West, for example, the punitive measures are more “civilized”, consisting of inflammatory propaganda concerning the “risks” of smoking and secondary smoke to nonsmokers, pitting a majority against a minority, ostracizing/de-normalizing smoking/smokers from normal, mainstream society, smoking bans galore – indoors and out, the depiction of smokers as a “leper” class that contaminate the “clean”, and fleecing smokers through baseless, ever-increasing extortionate taxes. Maybe the West’s Public Health wants us to be thankful that it hasn’t [yet] ordered smokers be shot on sight.

    Just some scrutiny of prohibitionism reveals contradictions galore. But in the case of ISIS the absurdities are eye watering. The antismoking meme used by ISIS is that smoking is “slow suicide”. Engage in the “slow suicide” (involving old age) and ISIS will mutilate young adults in the here and now. This is coming from butchers of men that are themselves suicidal in an accurate sense of the term through their abominable “world conquest” conduct. They could get blown up at any time in their physical prime by opposing military forces. Then there’s a subset of these nut cases, in their physical prime, that do actual suicide by blowing themselves up with bomb vests and belts, taking as many with them as possible. Maybe that’s what ISIS finds repugnant with smoking….. that the so-called “suicide” is far, far too slow.

  5. Wow. This is cool. Instead of “Antismokers are Nazis”, which seems slightly outdated nowadays, there’s a new one: “Antismokers are terrorists”. Hey guys, what’s next? Come on, there’s something even more stupid that can be released from your posts. Be creative! Give more bullshit to the world! We’re wating.

    • waltc says:

      Ok, Peter. What would you call the bureaucrats who’d deny a deeply suffering dying man the right to smoke a cigarette–outdoors, yet? Humanitarians? Go on. Be creative. Speak your heart. . The world awaits.

      • I would call such a person “consequent”. A hospital is a non-smoking area. Any questions?

        By the way: This way of trying to achieve compassion for the “rightless smoker” is really disgusting. Persons who suffer from serious illnesses have the right to get an adequate medication to ease their pain. And there are much more effective medics for treatment of Chorea Huntington than cigarettes. So, shut up tryin’ to make readers believe that nicotine is effective agints neurodegenerative brain diseases!

        By the way 2: A terrorist is a person who kills people for political or religious reasons by means of exzessive violence to spread anxiety and fear among the population and not a person who prohibits smoking. Only if you haven’t known that.

        • Joe L. says:

          The original, basic definition of a terrorist is, “a person who terrorizes or frightens others.” I hate to break it to you, Mr. Rachow, but Nazis actually were terrorists. Now take a look at the grotesque, graphic images that antismokers have forcibly installed on cigarette packages as well as in television advertisements. What’s the end goal? Fear. What about the secondhand/thirdhand smoke myths? Again, the goal is fear. The list goes on and on. Radical Muslims, Nazis and antismokers are all forms of terrorists. Extremist ideologies breed terrorism.

          Also, the only person here claiming “nicotine is effective agints (sic) neurodegenerative brain diseases” is you, Mr. Rachow. If you had actually read the article before running your virtual mouth, you would have read, “But his father Joe, 77, said patients have now been banned from smoking in the hospital grounds, and this means Sean is being deprived of his last pleasure in life.” Please go away … preferably forever.

        • Hey Joe, you’re a really tolerant smoker. Admittedly “Go away!” is a little bit nicer then the eternal “You sucker!”, “You moron!” or “You wankstain”. Thanks a lot for your politeness.

          And I just wonder where you got your defintions from. Maybe out of a book of fairy tales. And Nazis definetely were no terrorists. They were ruthless insane people who committed mass-murder. Or to say in in other words: They were killers for an ideology.

          And now it’s up to you to show were people who oppose smoking (you call them “antismokers”) tend to kill other people. The only killer in this game is, by the way, the tobacco industry. Killin’ millions every year. Not with bombs, suicide-belts or kalashnikovs. Just by selling a deadly product and making their victims inhale the smoke. And making them pay a lot of money for their suffering and death. Ever thought about it?

        • Roobeedoo2 says:

          ‘They were ruthless insane people who committed mass-murder. Or to say in in other words: They were killers for an ideology.’

          Have you seen our Wailing Wall?

          Visited the Graveyard?

          https://thesmokersgraveyard.wordpress.com/

          Nah! You’re too busy admiring your reflection, you good-looking son of pun…

        • Roobeedoo2 says:

          You only have compassion for those that don’t smoke, so having a lecture from the likes of you about ‘compassion’ is somewhat…

        • Joe L. says:

          Actually, Mr. Rachow, my definition of ‘terrorist’ can be found (word-for-word, in fact) here. You could have discovered that with a quick Google search.

          And Nazis definetely were no terrorists.

          I’d pay to watch you say this to the face of a Holocaust survivor. Thanks for posting such an ignorant comment so all the world can see it in perpetuity.

        • beobrigitte says:

          The hospital authorities can bring in all the policies they like, but that will not change the fact that it is NOT AGAINST THE LAW to smoke in hospital grounds.

          Any questions?

        • beobrigitte says:

          And there are much more effective medics for treatment of Chorea Huntington than cigarettes. So, shut up tryin’ to make readers believe that nicotine is effective agints neurodegenerative brain diseases!

          Perhaps politeness is an area you have not discovered as yet. Perhaps you also know little about Huntingtons.
          It kills whom I now call “youngsters”.
          Nicotine sure cannot cure Huntingtons, neither can it extend the affected person’s life. However, Huntingtons affected individuals, however, may enjoy a cigarette. This is something they could do right to the – to them well documented – end if it wasn’t for all the tobacco control financed(and lobbied) nonsense.

          Write a 500 word essay on that.

    • Roobeedoo2 says:

      Oh, Antismokers are Nazis. And they’re never outdated *sigh*

      • smokingscot says:

        Very appropriate Roobeedoo, especially the one in the mirror one!

        I’ve checked on what “consequent” means in relation to the Scottish ban on smoking in hospital GROUNDS.

        “following as a result or effect”

        Or as the military might say “collateral damage”.

        But what the hey, our Germanic Troll’s got time on his hands and he does help beef up the visitor numbers, so the whole thrust of Frank’s post, namely that anti’s are indeed no different to Daesh with respect to their attitudes to smoking – and to the people who smoke – helps push this post up the search engine rankings.

        Yup, even shite’s got it’s use.

    • Supergran says:

      You still hanging around here then Peter? Obviously got nowt better to do – being as you are an anti. Feck off !!

    • slugbop007 says:

      https://peterrachow.wordpress.com/
      I just found your German language weblink where you called Frank Davis a paranoid something or other. Look who’s talking about phobias, Peter.

  6. waltc says:

    I think we should bombard the bastards at that hospital with emails . A quick google gave me what may or may not be the right address (nothing was listed for Administration) so I was left with: : complaints@ggc.scot.nhs.uk. Maybe someone else here can find a better address so I’ll hold my fire till then. Also since the article seems to have no room for comments, how bout a gangfest of letters to the editor esp from you guys over there? This can’t be allowed to go w/o comment

    • Great idea. If I were the recipent of this mail I would send you back a list of mental institutions in your area and then subsequently press the “DEL”-key.

      • Joe L. says:

        Except you would never be the recipient of the email because last I checked, “internet troll” is not a paid position at a hospital.

      • nisakiman says:

        Of course you would, Mr Rachow. I wouldn’t expect anything else of you. I’m quite sure that any other indoctrinated, hate-filled misanthropist would do the same. Fortunately you’re only a megalomaniac scribbler with no influence anywhere except inside your own twisted mind, so your splenetic utterances here merely evoke a degree of pity from the rest of us.

        I’m going to paste a recent comment from elsewhere (actually on the subject of the latest bout of insanity, this time from the sugar Nazis, but pertinent nevertheless) from a chap called Mac. I’m sure he won’t mind me copying it here.

        Read it, Mr Rachow, and ponder on what is written and how it applies to you:

        Sugar? Seems like only yesterday it was salt.
        Some people will choose to smoke. Some will die youngish, some will die very old. Some folk will choose to eat and drink a lot of what they like, some will die youngish, some will die very old. This could go on for ever with everything, right?
        Then there are those who will live what the state decrees to be a safe, protected and healthy lifestyle. Surprisingly, some will die youngish and some will die very old.
        However, it’s a 100% certainty we’re all going to die and as the last lap gets underway, some will be wondering what they missed and why, while others will be wishing they’d done just that little bit more.
        So to all those, ‘it’s bad for you – I don’t like it so you can’t do it – it’s not healthy – we have to stop it now!’ fellows, let me assure you that while you’re possibly just passed ‘start’ on life’s highway and it looks like a long, almost never ending road ahead with time aplenty to foist your pettiness upon others, trust me, when you get to my end of the road, which, by the way, is cluttered to hell an’ back with tin cans, and look over your shoulder, back down the road of life, you’ll be amazed to see just how short a journey it actually was. Then you’ll realise, too late, what a complete and total waste of your brief time it was being so miserable, trying to foist your misery on others and hating the enjoyment of those who had a little zest for life and were attempting, against all the odds, to enjoy their brief moment in the sun.

        Wednesday, December 2, 2015 at 8:41 | Unregistered CommenterMac

        • “Enjoyment” – OK, then enjoy your lung cancer! Have fun!

        • nisakiman says:

          Hmmm. After 55 years of smoking, my lungs are in fine fettle. I suppose it’s always possible I may be cut down in my prime at the age of 95 with some ‘smoking related’ disease, but as things stand, it doesn’t look likely to happen in the foreseeable future.

        • Just wait. Some thing may happen fast.

        • garyk30 says:

          Peter says we should enjoy our lung cancer.

          He is trying to scare/terrorize us with the fear of lung cancer which is a scary/terror inducing disease.

          The main reason for terrorists killing people is to cause submission in the rest of the population.

          By their talk about diseases, antis are trying to compel smokers to submit to their way of thinking.

          By bringing up lung cancer, Peter is using the same method of compulsion as the terrorist the shoots people.

          Peter has proven our point. :)

        • beobrigitte says:

          Of course you would, Mr Rachow. I wouldn’t expect anything else of you. I’m quite sure that any other indoctrinated, hate-filled misanthropist would do the same. Fortunately you’re only a megalomaniac scribbler with no influence anywhere except inside your own twisted mind, so your splenetic utterances here merely evoke a degree of pity from the rest of us.

          +1

      • beobrigitte says:

        Great idea. If I were the recipent of this mail I would send you back a list of mental institutions in your area and then subsequently press the “DEL”-key.

        You would ACTUALLY reply EVERY email? *WOW*

        The “mental-institution-scare” might work for you – it does not work for everyone else, sorry.

        I also have to be the bearer of bad news for you.
        “Enjoyment” – OK, then enjoy your lung cancer! Have fun!
        Just in case you do not read everything.. (skim reading only works to get a gist)
        For ANY cancer to manifest itself a multitude of things have to happen at the same time. In short: There is NEVER a single cause of cancer.
        (BTW, as it stands, you are paying my pension right now. Make sure you stay healthy so I can enjoy the next 20 years. *Thank you*)

    • Frank Davis says:

      I think we should bombard the bastards at that hospital with emails .

      I agree. Perhaps we could find a wide range of email addresses, and adopt a carpet bombing approach. So that even if we can’t reach the hospital administrators, we might reach their MPs, their co-workers, their wives and children, their next door neighbours, and even the corner shop at the end of their street,

      As for Peter Rachow, while he’s perfectly entitled to his deranged antismoking views, and he’s not particularly abusive, I can’t see that he has yet made a single substantive point, and so his comments amount to a form of noise or repetition. So I’ll place him under moderation. Who knows, he might yet have something worth saying?

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        First e-cigarettes to be prescribed on the NHS in the New Year

        Doctors will soon be able to hand out the device to smokers who want to quit, a move that will reportedly cost the NHS in the region of £20 per kit and £10 a week…

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3348012/First-e-cigarettes-prescribed-NHS-New-Year.html

        • Roobeedoo2 says:

          Cool. I might get one just in case I need to take a plane trip. You can vape on planes, can’t you?

          As for completely replacing smoking with vaping…?

      • smokingscot says:

        With regards to the Troll, I saw in the comments following its previous visit that it refused to accept a comment left on its site by one of your regulars.

        Clearly there cannot be one rule for it – nor indeed the entire anti brigade – and yourself.

        What has transpired today can – in my opinion – be described as “pitting people against each other”. Now that’s something a Dutch MP who goes by the name of Erik Ziengs pointed out when he called for an end to public funding and tax-free status of all organisations that encourage that sort of behaviour.

        http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2015/10/vvd-mp-says-anti-smoking-group-should-lose-tax-free-status/

        (It also happens to be the subject of my latest post, where I try to put it all into context).

        • beobrigitte says:

          With regards to the Troll, I saw in the comments following its previous visit that it refused to accept a comment left on its site by one of your regulars.
          Perhaps it is not bright enough to answer back?

          What has transpired today can – in my opinion – be described as “pitting people against each other”.
          I agree. And this works for IS really well, too. A fragmented community hardly can be called serious resistance.

      • slugbop007 says:

        Do not, under any circumstances, ban Peter Rachow from this blog. His simpleminded, factless attacks make for great copy and could be used one day in a court of law to get these stupid smoking bans repealed.

  7. Igrowmyown says:

    Hi Peter I knew that they were reprinting “Mein Kampf” in Germany but I hadn’t realised that they had cloned Mr Hitler again to publicize the reprint, any chance of a signed copy?

    • Oh man, offending other as “Hitler” is out. Please call me “terrorist”! Just keep up to date!

      • Stevel says:

        Calm down Peter, now I guess by your first comment that you are an anti-smoker and that you have taken offence at being called a “NAZI” or “TERRORIST”. But in your last comment you now want to called a “TERRORIST”. Can you not make up your mind, that is if you actually have one? Please don’t tell me it was an attempt at sarcasm!

      • Cecily Collingridge says:

        Peter, in order for you to call Sean Major a ‘consequent’ implies you believe his disease is a result of smoking. Huntingdon’s Disease is inherited, caused by a faulty gene. There’s no cure for it and its progress can’t be reversed or slowed down. During the condition’s later stages, he will be totally dependent and need full nursing care. The article clearly states he is ‘terminally ill’. In case you do not understand English sufficiently, it means he is now dying. Your lack of compassion is breathtaking but maybe it’s because you are young or your life experience so far has been so fortunate you have never experienced, or witnessed first hand, total dependency and suffering.

        The increase in prejudice behind this new hospital smoking ban extending to anywhere on the grounds should concern you, because one day you or a loved one will land up in such a place. To illustrate, as you brought up lung cancer (“OK, then enjoy your lung cancer!”) you could conceivably get lung cancer yourself as there are a number of causes. The problem is that it has become a stigmatised disease as a result of public health campaigns. To quote from a study (S. Mahoney, 2015, ‘Lung cancer? – he must be a smoker’): “For lung cancer sufferers, the elements of stigma communication found in adverts… provokes feelings of shame and guilt… enhanced by the group stigma patients face as a result of labelling. Public health campaigns combined with public legislation since the banning of public smoking in 2007, identify, exclude and stigmatise lung cancer patients and as a result are seen more as ‘smokers’ than ‘victims of lung cancer’” “Once these individuals have been labelled as smokers, modified labelling theory describes how they are subject to uniformed treatment by others… Labelling in these campaigns provokes societal responses which restrain an individual to that label, causing them to accept the role and incorporate it into their identity…” “Victims of cancers who usually experience a growth of social support following diagnosis, such as breast cancer, have much lower rates of depressive symptomatology three months after diagnosis (8%) than lung cancer victims (44%). This further negatively affects the patient’s mental ability to escape from the cycle of oppression.”

        “This damage to self-perception is not restricted to lung cancer patients who have smoked. Patients in Chapple et al.’s (2004) study who had never smoked reported being labelled as smokers regardless. One patient commented that medical professionals marked him on hospital reports as a smoker, no matter how many times he protested and in the end, he accepted the role as resisting it seemed futile…

        So, Peter, this could be YOU. I hope you are taking this on board. There are many other stigmatised diseases, also known as discredited conditions, which you could get. Reflect on that.

        “Purtle (2012) argues that stigma is the enemy of public health as it ‘discourages people from seeking care, negatively impacts the quality of health care provided and can cause psychological distress that adversely affects disease trajectories.’”

        • garyk30 says:

          Strange thing about lung cancer is that, altho smokers are more apt to get the disease, smokers and never-smokers have the same probability of NOT getting the disease.

          This is due to it being a relatively rare disease.

        • Some French bloke says:

          On the subject of stigma and “discredited conditions”, a doctor posted this interesting testimony at junkscience.com some months ago:
          “During my clinical training in medical school and through my years of postgraduate training we were told by our professors and clinical instructors that all cirrhosis of the liver was due to alcoholism. Since our patient population consisted largely of county hospital patients, we certainly did see our share of skid row alcoholics. But a number of patients suffering from cirrhosis vehemently denied being heavy drinkers. They were often treated with disdain and accused of being liars. Our instructors almost without exception told us not to believe their denials as they were all “closet alcoholics”. Years later we learned that a significant number of cases of cirrhosis were caused by Hepatitis C and had nothing to do with alcohol whatsoever.”

          Though the article and its comments seem to have been deleted, the link was:
          http://junkscience.com/2015/05/29/risk-factors-an-idea-whose-time-has-come-and-gone/comment-page-1/#comment-364954

        • slugbop007 says:

          Speaking of breast cancer, I read this morning that Hitler’s mother died of breast cancer. Her doctor was Jewish. So, breast cancer has been around a lot longer than was first thought and a cure has not been found yet. The funds keep rolling in, though.

  8. richard says:

    Sean should smoke away regardless. He doesn’t need to ask, just nip out of sight. Since he’s very ill anyway, what’s he got to lose?

    • Ripper says:

      Spot on Richard – he does not need to ask. Policies are not laws.

    • margo says:

      I was going to say that, too, only you got there first. I hope, if he needs help to break the rule, someone’s around for him. If I lived in his neck of the woods I’d volunteer.

  9. John Watson says:

    Job 14
    1 Man that is born of a woman is of few days and full of trouble.

    2 He cometh forth like a flower, and is cut down: he fleeth also as a shadow, and continueth not.

    3 And doth thou open thine eyes upon such an one, and bringest me into judgment with thee?

    4 Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one.

    5 Seeing his days are determined, the number of his months are with thee, thou hast appointed his bounds that he cannot pass;

    6 Turn from him, that he may rest, till he shall accomplish, as an hireling, his day.

    Mister Rachnow, the above words are words you will never hear spoken for you, you will have died and be in the process of burial. While I personally am not one for religion or the bible these words are a truth, they are undeniable. As verse 1 states life is indeed short and full of risks trouble and sorrow, From our very first breath we begin the process of dying, Some may count over a century of years (most of whom are smokers incidentally) some, like my own daughter mere months verse 5 illustrates this perfectly. No man can foretell the time and place of his demise (unless they so choose) so there is no such thing as a shortened life, we live as long as our bodies permit us to do and not as long as Doctors tell us we will. Would you not agree Mr Rachnow that life is to be enjoyed by the individual for what it is, however long it may be, that you living in your glasshouse should be wary of throwing stones lest you bring your own house down?

    • slugbop007 says:

      The best adaption of those lines can be found in Henry Purcell’s Music for the Funeral of Queen Mary. Glorious music, strong words. My mourning music of choice.

  10. Igrowmyown says:

    Hi again Peter sorry for the slow response to your reply to my comment but I have just been manuring my allotment beds ready for next year’s tobacco crop. You say that offending as ” Hitler” is so out but I do not wish to follow the latest trends in social offending,merely to point out that when you follow a path of isolating a group of people in society as worth less than the whole then you are inevitably walking down the same path that Adolf Hitler chose.

    • slugbop007 says:

      Hitler was not the only guilty one. There were plenty others to go around: Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Franco, Obama … The list is endless.

  11. Frank Davis says:

    A few contacts I dug up for Paisley’s Dykebar Hospital..

    complaints@ggc.scot.nhs.uk (via Walt)
    press.office@ggc.scot.nhs.uk

    Paisley and Renfrewshire South Westminster MP Mhairi Black (SNP)
    mhairi.black.mp@parliament.uk
    @mhairiblack

    Ward 05 Paisley South councillors
    Councillor Eddie Devine cllr.eddie.devine@renfrewshire.gov.uk
    Councillor Roy Glen cllr.roy.glen@renfrewshire.gov.uk
    Councillor Paul Mack cllr.paul.mack@renfrewshire.gov.uk
    Councillor Marie McGurk cllr.marie.mcgurk@renfrewshire.gov.uk

    Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board
    NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde Corporate HQ
    J B Russell House
    Gartnavel Royal Hospital Campus
    1055 Great Western Road
    GLASGOW
    G12 0XH
    Telephone: 0141 201 4444
    Twitter: @nhsggc

    https://www.facebook.com/nhsinform
    http://www.nhsinform.co.uk/further-information/feedback/
    https://www.facebook.com/NHS24/
    NHS 24
    Caledonia House
    Fifty Pitches Road
    Cardonald Park
    Glasgow
    G51 4EB

    smokeline@nhs24.scot.nhs.uk (Why not?)

    P.S. I have written to his MP and all his local councillors, and posted comments on NHS Facebook pages (from which they’ll probably be deleted). I even wrote to Smokeline!

    P.P.S. One of the councillors replied, saying the right MSP to write to was George.Adam.msp@scottish.parliament.uk

    • waltc says:

      Done. Tho Aside from “complaints” and “press,” only cc’d the one msp you said was the right one. Can you carry this over to another post so others act too?

      “Gentlemen

      I call to your attention the case of Sean Major at Dykesbar Hospital in Paisley as described in The Daily Record on 5 December.

      The dying man is in the final stages of Huntington’s Disease, now unable to speak though still ambulatory, and is being pointlessly forced by blind irrational bureaucratic diktat to forego what his father describes as the only pleasure and relief left in his life– the chance to smoke a few cigarettes a day, outdoors in a remote spot on hospital grounds.

      This cruelty towards a dying suffering human being cannot be justified by any rationale. Tobacco neither caused nor can worsen his condition. Outdoors, he is not affecting anybody else, though the case could be made that, outdoors, no smoker affects anybody else.

      That an NHS spokesman nonetheless defends the policy of banning outdoor smoking on all hospital grounds, even as it tortures this unfortunate man, is a perfect example of the retrograde mentality of “I was just following orders.”

      I urge his msp’s to come to his aid, and the aid of others made to suffer so pointlessly, and urge the hospital to consider the autonomy and wholistic well-being of the patients it claims to serve.

      Sincerely

  12. margo says:

    Peter Rachow’s spelling is appalling!

    • Smudger says:

      And his humanity non-existent. It’s a chilling thought that another human could actually feel and believe all that boilerplate psychotic anti-smoker crap. Equally chilling that, despite wishing death on complete strangers for no reason, said human cannot see that he IS a Nazi, or more accurately an unthinking drone carrying out orders.

    • beobrigitte says:

      Peter Rachow’s spelling is appalling!
      Spell check problem?

      And his humanity non-existent. It’s a chilling thought that another human could actually feel and believe all that boilerplate psychotic anti-smoker crap. Equally chilling that, despite wishing death on complete strangers for no reason, said human cannot see that he IS a Nazi, or more accurately an unthinking drone carrying out orders.

      Drones have neither, humanity, nor the capability, to ask questions. Nothing other than carrying out orders can be expected from them.

  13. harleyrider1978 says:

    Cook: ‘Our way of life’ is harmful

    Remember the uproar when lawmakers first considered the curtailing of smoking in public places? Even modest proposals of smoking bans in hospitals, schools, and museums roused the ire of smokers, who insisted that their “basic human rights” were being targeted.

    So-called grassroots movements sprang up, artificial as Astroturf — they were financed and abetted by an industry disinclined to limit its flow of ill-gotten gains. Seven CEOs earnestly testified before the U.S. Congress that no ill would come of smoking, when the industry’s own studies had long proven the link between smoking and certain types of cancer.

    Along similar lines rests Steve Degenfelder’s contention that BLM and the state of Wyoming must continue with energy leases. “Keep it in the Ground” and like movements jeopardize “our way of life,” he states. The big picture is more complex than that.

    Most countries, in preparation for the climate talks in Paris, have pledged to battle climate change. A new analysis shows, however: even in best-case scenarios of making good on the pledges, it’s almost inevitable that the world will heat up by six degrees Fahrenheit. Scientists say six degrees Fahrenheit is a level that’ll produce catastrophes ranging from food shortages to widespread extinctions of plant and animal life. Extinction of human life, too. Like it or not, our accustomed lifestyles are coming to an end.

    As with the tobacco lies, entire societies are discovering that we have been systematically and cynically deceived by industry-funded dissimulations. The deception orchestrated by the fossil-fuel industry produced decades of false climate-science “evidence.” Lately however, corporate bullies acting for the sake of continued profit have been exposed. Not individual preference but access to pertinent information is at the heart of today’s changes.

    With 2015 wrapping up as hottest year in world history, advocacy groups recently delivered 360,000 petition signatures to the U.S. Department of Justice, calling for a probe into petro giant ExxonMobil’s history of funding climate-change denial. In spite of what the company knew about climate science, it orchestrated a massive assault on accurate information.

    “Decades before climate change became a . . . political issue, the biggest oil company in the world was doing cutting-edge research into just what was causing it and how dangerous it might be,” reads the petition regarding the research the company did on climate change in the 1970s and 1980s.

    Exxon chose to protect its profits over protecting the planet: The company covered up its findings for nearly 40 years, continues the petition. “They hid the work of their own scientists, while financing an elaborate network of climate-denial think tanks, organizations, and politicians.”

    Another recent development: On Nov. 23, a study in the highly authoritative Proceedings of the National Academies of Science caught the eye of the public. It’s an analysis of 20 years of data by Yale University researcher Dr. Justin Farrell. The study shows beyond a doubt: ExxonMobil and the Kochs are the key funders of think tanks that concoct climate disinformation. The funding ensures the spread of misinformation throughout our mainstream media.

    Farrell analyzed more than 39 million words of text, produced between 1993 and 2013 by no less than 164 organizations involved in the climate-change counter-movement. In interviews Farrell spoke of these groups as “creating ideological polarization through politicized tactics.”

    “The contrarian efforts have been so effective . . . they have made it difficult for ordinary Americans to even know who to trust,” Farrell told the Washington Post, which first covered the study’s release. “The counter-movement . . . messages (are) aimed at refuting current scientific consensus with scientific findings of their own.”

    It is to be hoped that the newsrooms and boardrooms of the traditional media will undo some of the damage done by their complicity in spreading fossil-fuel-industry funded misinformation. By aligning disinformation campaigns with pro-climate-action campaigns, news reports lend legitimacy to the former while watering down the observations and warnings of the latter.

    “Will false balance — quoting a distinguished climate scientist and then speed-dialing Pat Michaels at the Cato Institute for an opposing quote — finally stop?” So asks Jim Hoggan, well-known Canadian founder of DeSmog Blog and chair of the David Suzuki Foundation.

    Degenfelder’s resistance to change is understandable. Most times we humans prefer no change whatsoever, though we arrange predictable changes: the obligatory if uninspiring holiday gatherings; the calendared celebrations of births, graduations, anniversaries; the tried-and-true vacation destinations. Mea culpa.

    History rolls on, oblivious to individual desire. The one thing that’s certain is that everything changes. While “our way of life” is brief as the blink of an eye, the damage it has done, and continues to do to our planet and its climate, will last for centuries on end. Fossil-fuel leases exacerbate the problem.

    http://trib.com/opinion/columns/cook-our-way-of-life-is-harmful/article_c0c5d095-89a7-59a6-9469-2e84654f5fa8.html

  14. beobrigitte says:

    Forty-two-year-old Sean Major suffers from degenerative illness Huntington’s Disease, and until recently he was able to enjoy a cigarette in the grounds of Paisley’s Dykebar Hospital.

    But his father Joe, 77, said patients have now been banned from smoking in the hospital grounds, and this means Sean is being deprived of his last pleasure in life.

    A fanatics’ lobbied law in fear of old peoples’ diseases cause nothing but grief. Huntington’s kills people prematurely. Definitely.
    The anti-smokers are disgusting people who aid suffering for their own ideology. Just like IS does…..

    Sure, rabid anti-smokers (obviously incapable of questioning what is presented on a plate to them) still blurt this lung cancer nonsense. We have to be patient with them as they obviously failed to understand the concept of genesis of cancer. MULTIPLE things have to happen at the same time for a cancer to manifest itself. Of course this does happen – and it does not differentiate between smoker and non-smoker.

    Actually, anti-smokers just don’t care about people like 42 year old Sean Major. Anti-smokers HATE the tobacco industry – and people enjoying tobacco.
    It amazes me when they SERIOUSLY try to impress people with TOBACCO CONTROL FINANCED research non-sense. Tobacco Control can hardly be termed impartial, can it? So, their research is as valuable as that financed from the tobacco industry…. Oh!!! wait!!!! The tobacco industry was banned in the 1990s in Britain from funding University research; it was said that the BIG Pharmaceutical industry (incidentally having found a market for cheaply produced smoking cessation nonsense meds) was going to cover the financial loss…..
    Just like IS finances itself largely (though not completely!) through selling oil.

    I can see no difference between IS and Tobacco Control. And they both want to kill smokers.

  15. Joe L. says:

    Very much on topic, I just realized our friend Peter Rachow seems to perpetually have the stereotypical face of an anti-smoking puritan. A Google Image search pulls up about 20 different pictures, however there’s little to no variance in his facial expression in any of them. Looks like you’ve got your next caricature candidate, Frank.

  16. slugbop007 says:

    To Frank Davis:
    This is a link to Peter Rachow’s power page. All the articles are in German. Any translators here?
    The second article calls you, Frank Davis, a paranoid something or other. Sweet. Let the mudslinging begin!
    https://peterrachow.wordpress.com/

  17. slugbop007 says:

    It appears that J.S. Bach was a pipe smoker. My, my my.
    http://murderofravens.org/2008/08/08/a-poem-about-pipe-smoking/

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s