View Full Version : Smoking - a NWO change?
Leon
15th December 2010, 11:47
Does smoking fall under the NWO changes?
There have been so many attempts to stop people smoking, increases in tax, increasing campaigns to try and stop people from smoking. Why?
I do agree with this: people who smoke discriminate against those who do not! Eg. In the workplace a smoker on average goes and has a smoke once every hour for at least 5 to 10 minutes. Here also bosses discriminate against those who do not smoke. Eg. When you stop work and talk to someone you are told to get back to work, when you go away from your post the boss says you should go back to your post and work….
Does this mean we are all better off smoking in the workplace?
This equates to about an extra hour non smokers work, or a shorter workday for those who smoke at the expense of those who do not smoke?
In a restaurant, before smoking bans, did smokers consider those who do not smoke? No
So in this instance a ban is good, but then it discriminates against smokers!
But then why do we really have a ban at all? Or should there have been changes in the law so both would be satisfied as smoking is an addiction is it not? A bit like alcohol!
If we did live in a democratic society smoking should be allowed and not banned, as with anything a solution should be found.
But we are told it is for our own health??? Should we not have a free choice? Now we are being dictated against, even though non smokers may agree with the ban it is not democratic! This is socialism or NWO is it not?
Everybody’s body behaves differently and if smoking causes you cancer perhaps smoking is your cancers trigger. Just like for some the sun is, or alcohol. Or the wrong food?
Where does this dictating stop?
When will people understand that we in our lives are dictated to, to such a point!
Should we not find a better solution?
Governments love this ban as they know you cannot just stop smoking and the tax dollars from this are unbelievable… wake up people…
Btw, I am a non smoker, and have never smoked… nor do I drink unless on a social basis…
bluestflame
15th December 2010, 11:53
interesting how hardening of the arteries and calcification blamed on smoking and colesterol can unofficially be traced to what they put in the water ...
Taurean
15th December 2010, 14:12
According to Laura Knight-Jadczyk smoking contains a drug that helps you " think ".
Apparently during WWII 85% of the population smoked, so people never really bothered too much about it until airlines started bringing attention to it, c.1985, and started banning smoking on short haul flights to begin with, and from that point there's been a steady demonising of the habit ever since.
TPTB really don't like people socialising in groups as their free speach cannot be controlled so easily, so the smoking ban in Pubs, cheap supermarket booze available 24 hrs. ( no pub I know opens 24 hrs. ) just encourages Joe public to stay at home and watch telly.
The One
15th December 2010, 14:40
There’s a lot that fall under NWO changes
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2003/aug/07/shopping.health
Baron
15th December 2010, 15:43
I don't know where you got the 85% of the population smoked during WW11. That has never ever been the case.The amount of women who smoked was negligible and since they make up over 50% of the population. So if 100% of men smoked then that would still only be about 50% of the populace. If the 35% of women had smoked on top of all the men smoking the population would be totally mentally retarded and with a massive proportion of children being deformed and chronically ill. Though having said that the amount of children exposed to smoke in the womb and via second-hand smoke who are deformed or have other underlying health problems such as chronic Asthma and learning disabilities,and if they survive being born the 10.000's of cot deaths having to breathe the smoke and house fires that kill innocent children, is no small matter even today and that's because more young women smoke now than ever before, for some crazy reason! Though men smoking is responsible for most cot deaths!
As for smoking if they want to smoke and suck in 4000 toxic chemicals that's fine as long as they don't expose anybody else to its toxic poison and filth. They should be responsible for the pollution and ciggies garbage they throw out aka ciggi stumps and ash, not escaping;the poisoning of others.
One fact that came out last year in one of the major scientific journals was that 99.9% of all violent crimes were committed by smokers, with or without the use of other drugs!
Smoking is an addiction like any drug taking that makes people do crazy things to justify it that's why smokers always crave to be with other smokers or encourage others to smoke. The makers of cigarettes have modified them since the late 40's that the tobacco is 40x stronger than the natural plant making them even more addictive.
Smoking has been a culling tool by the powers that be for decades that's why they never banned it. Only today have measures been taken because they cannot really keep getting away with allowing it to kill the innocent.But since we have toxic food to replece this old culling tool those with no disapline will die early anyway.
Baron
15th December 2010, 16:09
"interesting how hardening of the arteries and calcification blamed on smoking and cholesterol can unofficially be traced to what they put in the water ... "
Some truth to what's put in the water, however they can be blamed on smoking too.What's interesting here is that fluoride and chlorine they put in water, are also put into the cigarettes.
The cigarettes also have toxic aspartame in them an artificial sweetener that's basically toxic rat poison that once oxidised turns into formaldehyde! Very good if you want to be mumified!
Cholesterol is NOT the killer we think it is! Cholesterol is like the repair gel of the body when your arteries get damaged the cholesterol races there and like a filler or spackel fills in the damaged artery so it does not break and you bleed to death! If you cut your yourself cholesterol races to the area to heal you. High cholesterol just means you have damaged arteries and the biggest culprit outside of smoking or in none smokers, is vegetable oils like Canola, rape, saff flower etc.Though NOT Olive oil. Vegetable oils, and like MSG and Aspartmate, which is a neuro toxin is in nearly all processed foods!
Baron
15th December 2010, 16:23
"According to Laura Knight-Jadczyk smoking contains a drug that helps you " think ".
If she thinks that then she must be a smoker and she must also be off her head! I have heard only one other person say the same, and that's somebody who is a fraud and a liar. I really did not want to mention his name, but I will have to on this occasion. Bill "con-man" Deagle who lives on fantasy island. He actually said the reason he is so intelligent (I say a mad liar) is because his mother chain smoked throughout her pregnancy! For me that's no intelligence and takes the biscuit of pure stupidity from both mother and son.
Carmody
15th December 2010, 17:18
It would be more correct to say that the current well known scientific evidence on smoking during pregnancy supports the idea that smoking during pregnancy has an overwhelming chance to be related negatively to some malformation of the given fetus's growth into a healthy child and then a healthy adult.
Thus, it is not realistic to say that Bill Deagle is automatically a deformed and deranged person. The reality is that unless we've done the actual work ourselves or have been directly involved in said situations... our statements are merely a report of something we heard.
You can make any conclusion you want, just don't come here and force things on me. Use reasonably presented arguments, thank you very much. This is not a rant forum, based on negative emotional casting. That's GLP and ATS, etc.
Leon
15th December 2010, 17:34
Just on a note: Why is the NWO so concerned about our health? yet building Fema camps? is this so we can die healthy??? or is it so they have more body parts to put in storage? just asking.
Baron
15th December 2010, 18:02
¨"Just on a note: Why is the NWO so concerned about our health? yet building Fema camps? is this so we can die healthy??? or is it so they have more body parts to put in storage? just asking."
I can only take a guess why?? But their modes operandi seems to be to keep one well enough to be a slave consumer for an approximate time, and for one to get ill enough as early as possible to then engage the medical industry to grab as much of your wealth off you, and then you can die.
Baron
15th December 2010, 18:22
Mod edit, please treat others on this forum with respect, this kind of post is a violation of the forum guidelines that you agreed to
........................................................
"It would be more correct to say that the current well known scientific evidence on smoking during pregnancy supports the idea that smoking during pregnancy has an overwhelming chance to be related negatively to some malformation of the given fetus's growth into a healthy child and then a healthy adult."
Who the hell are you to tell me what's the more correct way to say something? Get lost Deagle or Deagle shil.
"Thus, it is not realistic to say that Bill Deagle is automatically a deformed and deranged person. The reality is that unless we've done the actual work ourselves or have been directly involved in said situations... our statements are merely a report of something we heard."
Don't imply or put words into my past posts that are not there! Typical disinformation artist YOU are!
"You can make any conclusion you want, just don't come here and force things on me. Use reasonably presented arguments, thank you very much. This is not a rant forum, based on negative emotional casting. That's GLP and ATS, etc. "
Yes I can make any conclusions I want, and in my case I have done my homework! I have been a member of both forums longer than you sony Jim! You don't know who I am do you? I was not presenting an argument I was putting my point of view based on good information. Oh and the only person who was ranting was YOU! Instead of ranting, and you who want's to prove a point over another; instead of implying use some facts in future! If you don't have any, well you know where to stick your face. Your a typical ill informed jerk.
wynderer
15th December 2010, 19:21
my understanding is that Reptilians can't stand the smell or taste of tobacco -- this may be one reason why the big push against its use
morguana
15th December 2010, 19:30
Please remember to treat others on this forum with respect, calling another member a jerk etc is a violation of the guidelines,
I'm sure we are all adult enough to talk calmly with each other when engaging in emotive debates.
It is better to step away and take some deep breaths or a walk if you have got to the point where one becomes disrespectful to another.
m
Fredkc
15th December 2010, 19:30
Baron;
Re. post #11;
Could you turn down the volume a tad?
You're anti-rant sounds very much like a rant.
Fred
Carmody
15th December 2010, 19:33
"It would be more correct to say that the current well known scientific evidence on smoking during pregnancy supports the idea that smoking during pregnancy has an overwhelming chance to be related negatively to some malformation of the given fetus's growth into a healthy child and then a healthy adult."
Who the hell are you to tell me what's the more correct way to say something? Get lost Deagle or Deagle shil.
"Thus, it is not realistic to say that Bill Deagle is automatically a deformed and deranged person. The reality is that unless we've done the actual work ourselves or have been directly involved in said situations... our statements are merely a report of something we heard."
Don't imply or put words into my past posts that are not there! Typical disinformation artist YOU are!
"You can make any conclusion you want, just don't come here and force things on me. Use reasonably presented arguments, thank you very much. This is not a rant forum, based on negative emotional casting. That's GLP and ATS, etc. "
Yes I can make any conclusions I want, and in my case I have done my homework! I have been a member of both forums longer than you sony Jim! You don't know who I am do you? I was not presenting an argument I was putting my point of view based on good information. Oh and the only person who was ranting was YOU! Instead of ranting, and you who want's to prove a point over another; instead of implying use some facts in future! If you don't have any, well you know where to stick your face. Your a typical ill informed jerk.
I'm thinking you don't need any help in hanging yourself.
Good day to you.
Leon
15th December 2010, 19:53
Why the bad rant in this post?
Best to stick to the subject...
morguana
15th December 2010, 19:54
Smoking is bad for health, that is a fact, anyone who has seen the insides of a dead person who moderatly smoked would know this, it does cause problems for babies in the womb...fact....anyone who has medical knowledge and has seen the effects on smoking in pregnancy knows that the placenta is not healthy. A lot of thought is given to the ptb and how they are all evil, however these people like all in this reality can not be put into little boxes, some are good and some a bad, with all the shades of grey in-between, not every one in positions of authority are out to get us, not all scientists who study issues such as the effect of smoking are corrupt. I for one am pleased that smoking is banned from public indoor places, the rights of those who don't wish to fill their lungs with someone elses habits should be protected, breathing in clean air is a basic human right and need.
Just my pence worth
m
Alaois
15th December 2010, 20:03
strange thing is the closer unnatural alchemists are to the smell of tobacco the better they hide their unnatural smell -- that's where you find the worst tobacco smokers
edit to post -- to clarify that's where you find tobacco smokers with the worst mannerisms, nothing to do with with tobacco. Intention is always essential to understand.
I personally am a chain smoker and have suffered much in my life. No sense in getting riled up over a little wacky tobacky now is there? :~
Banshee
15th December 2010, 20:20
.............................
heyokah
15th December 2010, 20:25
Ah, the good old days when anti-smoking sentiment wasn't shoved down our throats ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI
Ross
15th December 2010, 20:27
Can we please keep this on topic...
Thank you
Ross
BrianEn
15th December 2010, 20:32
I smoke. It's expensive, it's a slow death sentence, yet I still do it. Not to mention it's a filthy habit. It make my house and clothes stink, but I still do it. It's actually a madness. Most people I know who have smoked for as long as I do have expressed simular misgivings about smoking, and like me continue to keep up the practice. Nicotine is a strong drug. The ritual of smoking is another hump to get over. When I tried the patch(for one day) all I wanted to do was put my fingers up to my mouth and inhale. I tried that but there was no cigarette there. My dad once equated quitting smoking to a baby getting getting off the bottle. For the parents on the board you know what's that like.
I guess smoking can be a real toy for the government. Let's raise taxes and see what happens. They have all the data. They just don't like to share the data that will decrease their power, but the info will go out if it suits their purpose. It's like when the Ontario government had finished their impact report on the casino that they forced on our city. They wouldn't release it to the city council in our city. It contained info on how senior citizens addicted to gambling were selling their perscriptions to continue gambling. Suicides dramatically increased when people became so addicted to gambling and lost their money, homes and families. That's a hard place for anyone to come back from.
Dragonfly
15th December 2010, 20:39
IMO the whole smoking topic goes clearly in the divide et impera direction. It's about to create (one more) concept of the enemy. In Switzerland, where I live, smokers have been a main target in the media. Maybe the next targets are the obese people, then the handicapped are in focus, foreigner could also be interesting to bash (already the case) and in the end.......? Who is next?
Ross
15th December 2010, 20:44
Some may be interested in this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_smoking
After the European exploration and subsequent colonization of the Americas in the 16th century, the smoking, cultivation and trading of tobacco quickly spread to all corners of the globe. By the mid-17th century every major civilization had been introduced to tobacco smoking and in many cases had already assimilated it into the native culture, despite the attempts of many rulers to stamp the practice out with harsh penalties or fines.
Ross
Decibellistics
15th December 2010, 20:54
I smoke cause it feels good. I'm not too worried about my physical body.......doesn't mean I don't care for it......but i don't worry about it.
It's a scapegoat I think, its one of the few legal things that blew up because, it ****in kills people. So it's a way to side track people from the more subtle things like, fraud, corruption, and institutional violence in general. Other than that I think it is a way mess with people's heads.
i.e. what's the number one reason people probably smoke------stress
how do you stress out someone even more who takes something for stress-----tell them what their taking is going to kill them
watch as stress levels and negative self hate arises from feeling that you are killing yourself because of a substance you use
stress levels continue to rise and so on until the person decides to say **** it, or they quit smoking completely..
it's another way to energetically rape people I think.
**** with their minds eye.......and suck out their power....and refill it with negativity.
Oldest trick in the Book.
Bill Ryan
15th December 2010, 20:55
I don't know where you got the 85% of the population smoked during WW11. That has never ever been the case.The amount of women who smoked was negligible and since they make up over 50% of the population. So if 100% of men smoked then that would still only be about 50% of the populace. If the 35% of women had smoked on top of all the men smoking the population would be totally mentally retarded and with a massive proportion of children being deformed and chronically ill.
The actual figures seem to be here:
(In 1948, 82% of men - and 41% of women. Looking at the trend (and the social circumstances), the % of men smoking during the war would very probably have been 85-90%.)
Source: http://www.laia.ac.uk/factsheets/982.pdf
http://projectavalon.net/smoking_in_GB_1948-94.gif
Baron
15th December 2010, 20:57
How hilarious you are and you got less than what you fired at me with your rant! Amazing I get hung for the word "Jerk"! My first expletive, if you can call it that? But my facts stand to the end. Even if the shepple cannot see it.
Bill Ryan
15th December 2010, 21:00
But my facts stand to the end.
See graph above....
Decibellistics
15th December 2010, 21:02
LOL HAHAHAHAHAHA awwwww Bill you crack me up
Baron.... :)
I try to use my curses as adjectives and or situational descriptive verbs. not nouns. I looooove yooouu :)
I can tone it down to if ya'll would rather I not use my hey I'm that crazy 21 year old kid that has goofy comments on the forum if ya'll would like. I mean no harm though. Trying to open eyes and show perspectives
Peace to all
MargueriteBee
15th December 2010, 21:03
yeah, I smoke. If I need a ciggie I can't think, just like if I have to pee I can't think. My boss told me she didn't care if I got up for a smoke every hour because I got more work done than the non smokers for some reason. I could correct 7000 errors a day compared to the two or three that my coworkers did. It's not the smoke, it's the person. When I retired they hired two people to replace me.
norman
15th December 2010, 21:43
yeah, I smoke......
...... When I retired they hired two people to replace me.......:painkiller::painkiller:
That made me chuckle
:offtopic:
I had a very good theory worked out about the smoking ban that made a lot of sense until I realised that a lot of countries were doing it around about the same time.
As others have said here, considering that the ptb want as many of us dead as young as possible, it's seems very unlikely to the usual stuff they dump on us from very high up above the government or even the E.U.
My theory was that the landslide victory that put Tony Blair into No 10 Downing Street had created a large number of wimpish back benchers who were rediculously over-the-top PC. When the Iraq invasion came up in Parliament they all chuffed and balked about such horrid behaviour and threatened to vote against it. Hilary Armstrong, the chief whip, probably had a word with them and offered them an 'incentive'. Being so PC they said something like " I only got into politics to boss people like smokers around, this war stuff isn't my sort of thing at all". OK, says the PM, we'll put an anti smoking bill through parliament for you, now will you support the Iraq campaign?"
Well, that was my theory and I was proud of it, errr... until I realised it was happening EVERYWHERE!
So!.... I really don't get it at all.
Baron
15th December 2010, 21:55
Bill,
This graph was done by the now defunct "Tobacco Advisory Council" (TAC) and going from memory the reason they got this figure of 82% in WW11 for smokers was that they used the Armed forces as their baseline for their statistics! This was not for the general populace even though they said or implied that. The reason they did so was probably their obvious anti-smoking agenda,governments often try the same scare tactics and this was for a valid reason, they wanted to show how it was becoming more and more unfashionable to smoke when this data was compiled around the mid 1980's. unfortunately the government went on the opposite tack!
Though their misleading statistics put back government anti-smoking measure a generation, once it was discovered by the cigarette manufactures there was fraudulent data! This caused the government to close or abandon the (TAC) it's now a non entity though there is a new one in its place.
However my facts do stand to the end. Smoking causes neurological damage, deformities and many major health conditions from asthma to learning disabilities and violence,to the victims of thoughtless parents who caused their children's deaths from burning to death in-house fires,and cot deaths from smoke entering baby's sleeping area. Which were my main points of facts and issues with the earlier post.I just happened to have read the backfire of that graph in the 1980's and new the real figure was lower but still its handicapped generations of children and adults.
A side note, none of the women in my family near and far right back to my grandparents to siblings have never smoked half of the men did or do.
My own father a chain smoker gave up after seeing a shocking film many years ago, and is still going strong. His younger brother my uncle died just a few months ago from stomach cancer, who never gave up, which was caused by smoking the same as one of my grandfathers who died some years ago from the exact same condition. He always thought drink was the worst so he was tea total all his life.Though he had a good excuse, for smoking he was quite traumatized during WWII he was a desert rat, and the film "Ice cold in Alex" and the character played by the late Sir John Mills was based on him.Sir John Mills was uncannily just like him.
Whatever the graphs, smoking is no good for anybody and smokers don't just kill themselves they kill the innocent around them.
norman
15th December 2010, 22:02
.....Whatever the graphs, smoking is no good for anybody and smokers don't just kill themselves they kill the innocent around them.
Which puts us right back on the OP topic. WHY!?..... would the "NWO" ( his term, not mine ) want us to stop killing ourselves?
I still don't get it.
Baron
15th December 2010, 22:12
"Mod edit, please treat others on this forum with respect, this kind of post is a violation of the forum guidelines that you agreed to"
I think you have made an error! The words in red italic are the words fired at me not by me! I responded in kind with a much less vicious response than the rant I received and I did not feel violated. And if the word a mild expletive of Jerk was what you refer and is prohibited then I 'm shocked, because though I don't use swear words myself I did not think I was in kindergarten either and would never have agreed to such guidelines of utter nonsense. If these are the rules that Jerk is forbidden then I will go back into hibernation and not stress anybody again here with such shocking words.
lightblue
15th December 2010, 22:20
.
So!.... I really don't get it at all.
i think one big mafia clan crossed another, bigger mafia clan....i suspect money is the issue....i don't quite get it how either..
i read some place years ago, so i don't remember where, that prior to introducing a non smoking policy, the airliners were legally obliged to have air extractors/vetilation system on board - which was expensive ...since the non smoking was introduced, obviously, that regulation was ditched and we now enjoy the same stale breathing space alongside various bacteria etc., due to fellow passengers coughing, sneezing....so you may think it's healthier to fly these days...i think not....
i often light up two cigarettes at once on leaving airport buildings... :yu: l
.
Banshee
15th December 2010, 23:03
"Mod edit, please treat others on this forum with respect, this kind of post is a violation of the forum guidelines that you agreed to"
I think you have made an error! The words in red italic are the words fired at me not by me! I responded in kind with a much less vicious response than the rant I received and I did not feel violated. And if the word a mild expletive of Jerk was what you refer and is prohibited then I 'm shocked, because though I don't use swear words myself I did not think I was in kindergarten either and would never have agreed to such guidelines of utter nonsense. If these are the rules that Jerk is forbidden then I will go back into hibernation and not stress anybody again here with such shocking words.
Hey, if it makes you feel any better, I came really close to calling someone an a hole a few days ago, but then thought better of it. Its not really the person who is a jerk, because you really don't know that person. it was jerk like behavior, right? Far be it from me to jump on the PC bandwagon as I look at fear of language of any type as being the sign of an arrested intellect. As an example - fornication under carnal knowledge was a victorian crime. The police making the charge, used an acronym and voila! We have the world's favorite expletive! That said, we should all refrain from attacking people personally. Certainly, you have access to an on line thesaurus- find more interesting language next time and leave them confounded. It does make one wonder though, on a site that abhors censorship, why we need to fear words. Malintent, yes, but words....that's infantile and yes... calling someone a jerk is malintent.
Baron
15th December 2010, 23:13
"wow. looks like Baron might be having a nicotine fit - lol. That whole thread made me cringe from beginning to end."
Banshee:It's odd how this clearly disrespectful this post of yours is allowed while I'm now affectively banned because I have just received my official warning.
Carmody: You also must be pleased with yourself I'm sanctioned or basically banned now, one infraction and they will finally have me out of here because I don't by (BS) or inacurucies , I'm not sure is (BS) insulting or a swear word? All for using the word "Jerk" and you for some reason can post a diatribe of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and get away with it. One law for some and another for others. I suppose it's just a knee Jerk reaction when I post! I never would have taken offence no matter how many jerks you would have fired at me I left kindergarten years ago.I was only back a day and tried to only add substance and my knowledge! I suppose if I was brown-nosing and writing lies and agreeing with all the liars and frauds I would be heralded! I've just not ever been any good at being an obsequious sucker up! Darn it! It was the same when I was a kid I would sooner take a beating than suck up to filthy bullies!
What a pity, "I suppose it had to come to this. Such
is life." as Ned Kelly said meeting the hangman.
Baron
15th December 2010, 23:25
Agreed and I normally do confound them with words! But I'm human and sometimes a malintent is appropriate.Now all can be glad I'm now out of here... I always knew one infraction from me and I would be on the chopping block here.
I'm gone now you can all rest in peace. I don't like public dressing downs and I got both,somebody who thought all my earlier posts were marvelous,but once mod power sets in! And for such minor infraction. My years and past time consuming efforts here and worked on posts of substance including trolling my large databrain sharing my knowledge deserve better than to be insulted for nothing.
Ross
15th December 2010, 23:40
Hi Baron,
I will clarify for you:
You were given a warning.
The reason for this was for using the term 'jerk', which was directed towards another member/s.
No infraction points were issued and you are not banned.
I will guide you here, these guidelines in particular:
RESPECT
1. Disagreeing with various points or topics is natural, however we do require that our members be treated with respect. If a member’s conduct is seen to hurt the community spirit of the group and persist even after warnings to desist, they will be unsubscribed. Generally individual posts will be moderated first, and thus not appear on the forum, before the member is unsubscribed.
POSITIVITY
1. All members are expected to contribute to the positive energy and attitude of the forum. While healthy debate is a traditional and integral part of all critical inquiry, members are expected to be open-minded, committed to learning, and responsive to well-intentioned feedback.
2. Anyone who does not appear to be in alignment with the purpose and energy of the forum may be asked to leave.
I ask you all to refrain from any kind of dis-harmony towards members. This can lead to reactive communication, as is apparent in this thread by some posters.
Its not that difficult....so, lets move on...to the topic at hand.
Regards
Ross
Hiram
15th December 2010, 23:52
It sounds to me like a few posters here maybe need a cigarette break.
I'm sorry, I had to say it. Too tempting:)
Hiram
16th December 2010, 00:22
Okay...on a serious note.
The answer is very simple. The NWO is getting you accustomed to the concepts of controlling others. The concept that others are relatively free to do as they please..even in their own homes must be abolished.
And what better foil for such an argument then those nasty smokers?? Their second hand smoke is killing babies after all. All the science says so. Besides, quitting smoking is for your own good. You should frown on anyone who smokes right?
While we are at it, we should outlaw fried and unhealthy food. People are too ignorant to think for themselves, so we should take away their access to such a thing. Besides they harm all of us when they become a dredge on the healthcare system.
People also should not be allowed to own pets. That is a luxury that is bad for the environment. Their waste pollutes the land and water supply, and they produce too much carbon dioxide. A good environmentalist should frown on their neighbors for having pets. At some point it should be illegal.
And don't get me started on alcohol! What suffering has the substance caused. This should be outlawed....why you ask? Because it harms others, and society would be better off without it....
So perhaps you see where this logic goes. It can be twisted and manipulated to conclude almost anything. The logic justifies control of others in order to make you feel comfortable.
I am not a smoker and never have been. I do not begrudge others the right to smoke however. I am not keen on attempts to control what other people do with their bodies. I do believe smoking can be harmful to others, but not as harmful as car exhaust--which causes Leukemia (see Benzene exposure) or poor eating habits which cause more death.
Control always starts at the fringes of society..and seems to make sense at first...but once its instituted it quickly spreads like a virus.
"I know of no safe repository of the ultimate power of society but the people themselves. And if we think them not enlightened enough, the remedy is not to take the power from them, but to inform them by education." ~Thomas Jefferson
daledo
16th December 2010, 00:35
The nicotine in cigarettes causes the release of a neurotransmitter, acetylcholine, in an area of the brain that causes increased vigilance and alertness. It thus helps the smoker to concentrate. Nicotine also releases dopamine in the so-called 'pleasure' area of the brain, giving rise to a sense of well-being.
Read more: http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/7587,news-comment,news-politics,smoking-was-good-for-you#ixzz18EBDogcD
Heishman and his colleagues studied all the literature they could find on nicotine and performance published between 1994 and 2008. In all, they reviewed and coded 41 studies and looked at how nicotine affected everything from fine motor skills to short term memory. Their results were published online in the journal Psychopharmacology.
What they found surprised them. Not only does the drug help with fine motor skills and alertness, it improves short term memory for tasks like remembering a list of items.
"We knew that the effect on attention was well known, but I was somewhat surprised about the effects on memory," Heishman said. "Smokers say that one of the reasons that they smoke is to help them concentrate, focus on tasks and do their work, and obviously a lot of our daily work involves memory. So on the other hand, I guess it shouldn't be too surprising."
http://news.discovery.com/human/smoking-is-good-for-you.html
It has been found out that cigarette smoking enhances the information processing mechanism in humans. This property is being attributed to nicotine and the effects are directly proportional to the nicotine content of the cigarettes. Cigarette smoking has also been related to an improved loco motor performance in humans as per the Institute of Psychiatry, London University. Another smoking benefit is the loss of weight. In a research funded by the American Health Association, it was found out that smokers tend to be thinner than non-smokers. Smoking benefits have also been found in the oral health realm. A non-smoker is at a higher risk of contracting various oral diseases like gingival inflammation, tooth mobility and plaque as compared to a smoker. Non-smokers are also at an increased rate of contracting deep vein thrombosis after a major operation as compared to smokers. Postpartum hemorrhage and hypertension are relatively lower in smokers as compared to non-smokers. A large number of studies also indicate that cigarette smoking helps in protecting the smoking from Parkinson's diseases. A study titled "Cigarette smoking and neuroleptic-induced parkinsonism", published in 1990 elaborates on this point.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2223421/health_benefits_of_smoking.html?cat=5
"Scientists have also found evidence that smoking might, in some circumstances, help prevent the onset of various dementias. Many dementias go hand-in-hand with a loss of chemical receptors in the brain that just happen to be stimulated by nicotine. Smoking seems to bolster these receptors, and smokers have more of them. The theory is that smokers may then have more to lose before they start losing their minds. "It does seem that nicotine has a preventative effect, but the problem is that the other stuff in the cigarette tends to rot everything else," says Roger Bullock, a specialist in dementia and director of the Kingshill Research Centre in Swindon. So if your time is nearly up anyway, and you have somehow managed to steer a course past the Scylla and Charybdis of heart attacks and tumours, smoking might just help you retain your marbles."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2003/aug/07/shopping.health
The problem isn't that smoking is bad for you, it is what you are smoking. They have made it illegal to grow your own tobacco so you are forced to smoke cigs that are laced with all of these dangerous chemicals. The corporations were responsible for this by paying off gov't officials to bring about these laws. Lobbyists should be banned. The way I look at it... there has to be benefits to smoking or they wouldn't be trying so hard to stop it.
TPTB promote fighting between the masses. Black against white, gay vs. straight, Christian vs. Muslim, smoker vs. non-smoker. United we can defeat them but they keep us busy fighting between ourselves so we are distracted from the TRUE evil of this world. When can we be free to make choices for ourselves without someone else telling us what to do? This is just a control game for them. We have free energy but we are forced to continue to use oil. More people die around the world from this pollution vs. smoking but no one talks about that in any studies.
Daledo
norman
16th December 2010, 00:38
CLANGGGGGG!.....
You just rang my bell, Hiram. Of course, it's 'boot lick class'. I was too offended, as a smoker, to see it in a detatched way. I was trying to finger a culprit.
bluestflame
16th December 2010, 00:44
originally tobbacco was organic , and popular , once the controllers saw this that people were actually benefiting from it that's when the chemicals went in ...the chemicals are the problem with smoking
but you can't grow our own organic tobacco at home , that's illegal
Ross
16th December 2010, 00:45
Lets also consider the massive income from smoking aids....and the terrible pills on the market, Champix, Zyban...BOTH OF THESE cause several problems and alter brain function...not nice at all.
bluestflame
16th December 2010, 00:46
and yes they can't just ban smoking outright , ever been round a smoker that's ran out of smokes , they'd walk miles in rain snow sleet etc. just to get a pack of smokes
Hiram
16th December 2010, 00:50
Yes, if you read extensively of Arctic explorers who were stranded for years in the far North or South (see Endurance) it was not food, or any other substance that they craved. It was tobacco.
(Furthermore, my brother was in Prison for a time, and he describes fogetting about cigarettes actually after about 3 weeks. What he could not stop thinking about was a cup of coffee. He would wake up at night craving that cup of coffee! That really speaks to the addictive power of caffeine. But thats off topic!)
Harley
16th December 2010, 00:54
Oh My! This thread has been "interesting" (I won't use a more descriptive word here)! LOL!
Do I smoke? Yes.
When I retired from Boeing three years ago they literally had to shut-down the swing-shift for a considerable period of time because there was no-one else cleared for access to the Labs and Vaults, nor anyone qualified to handle or operate some of the equipment, in the AWACS Test Program.
Did I smoke more back then? You better believe it!
Now what they have is a bunch of snotty, know-it-all, disrespectful youngsters who all are smokin' dope in the Black Holes and Break-Dancin' on the Flight Line and a bunch of uneducated youngster-managers who believe that if they never see you, you are doing a great job!
Do I smoke less now that I've retired? I'm almost done!
On Topic though, one of the reasons is MONEY! They hooked you on tobacco over a hundred or two years ago so they know you're never going to be able to quit. What a great way to make more money! They aren't ever going to ban it! 'We'll just keep "Putting the Screws" to them. They'll always pay because they can't quit!'.
And it's the same thing with many aspects of our society. Gasoline is another terrific example.
:)
bluestflame
16th December 2010, 01:08
wasn't there an incident a while ago where the tobacco companies were caught genetically modifying tobacco plants to have an elevated cmount of nicotene some say at least twice the natural occuring nicotine levels
they said it was to mix in with the other tobacco to help regulate the levels of low nicotine varieties
bluestflame
16th December 2010, 01:14
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/03/cigarette-maker/
March 20, 2008
"Two days ago, Philip Morris backed NC-State scientists announced they’d genetically engineered tobacco plants to have reduced levels of some carcinogens. Further investigation by Wired.com revealed that the tobacco giant has applied for 34 field test permits for genetically modified tobacco since May of 2005, according to the USDA field trials database. 33 of the permits were issued."
we are still being asked to believe that the carcinigens are in the tobaco itself , rather than the chemicals they are putting in to "protect us"
"Over the last three years, the USDA received 117 total applications to test GM tobacco strains, including 19 by North Carolina State University, which received $17.5 million from Philip Morris in December 2002 to map the tobacco genome.
Little can be determined about the types of studies that Philip Morris has run because they’ve labeled the details of their field permit applications, "Confidential Business Information," sealing them from public scrutiny."
the spin doctors hard at work
"Many groups that fight genetically modified organisms focus on genetically modified food or "pharming," or the practice of synthesizing pharmaceuticals in plants. Tobacco, however, is a natural drug crop and falls between the cracks of most watchdog groups. For example, Vector has been marketing cigarettes with genetically modified tobacco under the Quest 1-2-3 brand since 2003, according to an interview the company’s CEO gave to Business Week. Almost no public outcry has resulted."
norman
16th December 2010, 01:42
I've been having a weird experience for years whenever i tried to tell people that back in 1978 the tobacco companies all ( together) launched a type of ciggy that was based on a substance they called NSM. They openly admitted that it was made from 'tree bark' and contained NO nicotine at all. I remember it very well because it was the summer I hitch hiked down to Epsom Art School for an interview. I tried a couple of packets of them from 2 brands and got frustrated with them because of the lack of a "hit".
I've found that no one I currently know can remember those NSM fags ( sorry, an english word for ciggies, not what you yanks etc mean by that word ). It's SO weird that no one remembers them but me!
I noticed that during the years that followed that time, a lot of new versions of the main brands came out onto the market that were very low TAR! and sold as less harmful. The straight NSM ciggies lasted only a few months before they withdrew them completely as a marketing failiure. I assumed that they'd mixed the NSM into the newer types of ciggies.
These days I only smoke hand rolling tobacco but even that seems to have changed slightly in recent years. Whenever I'm cought out without any 'bacci' and someone offers me a 'straight', if I take a draw on one, I feel little or no nicotine 'hit' and a strong chemical burning sensation in the back of my mouth. If I smoke more than one or two I get a lingering cough that last for days. What the hell are they putting in those things?
Agape
16th December 2010, 01:52
I remember that as a kid and youngster I could not stand the smell , many adults in family smoked that time , usually not in front of me to protect me from inhalling it still it just smelled bad to me.
Same as alcohol did and I could not quite understand what's so enjoyable in all those smelly things .
Mum quit smoking when I was in 6th grade , she was not a heavy smoker but used it as a way to vent her stress out of window . I knew when she went to for ciggie she was upset .
Paradoxically, when she quit smoking her health went down, this can be just chance but when I thought about it deeper,
it was more like if she's lost the rest of her controls .
And she's turned to strict anti-smoke agent for years, like most of the former smokers . I don't think she should start again :lol:
I never felt tempted to it by others , had friends who smoked , I didn't, except they lulled me to good couple of joints with various good and wise folks in India and that part of it was on spiritual note and I'm not going to regret it .
In later years, in monastery , I've avoided being in smoking company totally and it proved to be much better for health , without doubt.
Paradoxically again, I tried calming myself with ocassional smokes when I was totally alone here, at the end of 2006 or so,
I was in contact with one US researcher and things went weird on their side , car accident and strange events , much stress. I sat and thought..
please don't laugh at me... all these great folks go for ciggie when they're overstressed.
I have no help, I take no pills, no natural resources here, I need to try that too.
So I virtually, secretly , taught myself the worst possible habbit I always condemned , I'm not habbitual in that, not with other things either , I don't 'need it' .
When I am out, with good people, I am non smoker .
When I am alone and stressed I go to have 'a peace pipe' . Does it help ? Is it good ? Probably not. I promised myself to stop it totally when all this stress is over .
I'd say..like every other thing in life, it's a matter of culture . Things can be performed with culture and dignity or become devastating habbit ,
like food, smoking, alcohol, whatever you can name and is easy to get.
It's a misuse of nature and more importantly, a misuse of our own nature to lose controls over ourselves, one way or another and not being able to exist without the thing.
I've seen friends who could not keep sitting two or three hours in lecture without being able to get out for a puff. Shivering somewhere in dirty corner for smokers.
People who can't stop eating all day or simply feel like dying if they can't have lunch or dinner ..
It's an individual question but if you feel you can't do without it, logically, that's not right .
The spirit has evaporated and poisoning remained ..
Till you spirit is healthy , things can be taken with ease. Even illness can be accepted, as a transformatory experience .
If spirit is not healthy..you're creating damage to yourself even with the healthiest goodies ..you still look like fanatic and freak and not someone who is in control of his own self.
:alien: :love:
Hughe
16th December 2010, 02:07
Smoke industry is booming in 2nd, 3rd world countries like Korea.
The government runs a cigarette company for manufacturing and distributing various products for the public. It sells hundreds millions of packs per year. In my guess, 80 to 90% of male adults are smokers here.
It gives free cigarette to workers in military from the bootcamp to professional soldiers.
You can buy cigarettes in banding machines on the street, convenient stores, anywhere.
Kids start smoking at age 10 but nobody cares about them cause most of them are belongs to poor class.
The addictive substances' policy is a complete joke. A joint of marijuana means automatic jail time.
Any substances from natural herbs/plants have been banned except alcohol. Why? for the interests of small groups.
People really don't know about it. Smokers becomes non-smoker when they get serious illness: cancer, complicated health problems.
You don't have money for curing smoke related illness. Sorry. it's your problem. The government, society completely trash people.
12 years of public education does not teach basic knowledge how to maintain health lifestyle and to eat properly.
2010 Animal Farm, the society only expects good consumers not citizens.
Hughe
16th December 2010, 02:22
On Topic though, one of the reasons is MONEY! They hooked you on tobacco over a hundred or two years ago so they know you're never going to be able to quit. What a great way to make more money! They aren't ever going to ban it! 'We'll just keep "Putting the Screws" to them. They'll always pay because they can't quit!'.
And it's the same thing with many aspects of our society. Gasoline is another terrific example.
:)
Yeap. It's all about the money, and destroying individual's free will and soul in return.
How many elders nowadays can talk beautiful fairy tales or great visions for their grand children?
Taurean
16th December 2010, 03:07
Did the Native Indians have to go outside for a smoke.
Seems to me those Native's have got alot to answer for,
MargueriteBee
16th December 2010, 03:19
Which puts us right back on the OP topic. WHY!?..... would the "NWO" ( his term, not mine ) want us to stop killing ourselves?
I still don't get it.
perhaps as a distraction, or so they can seem to be caring while they stab us in back?
Taurean
16th December 2010, 03:22
I remember NSM ( New smoking material ) - classic all time flop, same as these electronic cigs.
norman
16th December 2010, 03:30
I remember NSM ( New smoking material ) - classic all time flop, same as these electronic cigs.
YYYYEEESSSSSSS!.... finally someone who knows what I'm talking about.
I think it's probably about 95% of what people generally believe to be 'regular' tailor made cigs. They've never been forced to print any details about the 'ingredients' of cigs and just let the idea flow that a cig is simply tobacco when it's certainly far from that.
It well known that there is Salt-Peter in them ( to keep them burning ) but there's a hell of a lot more in them than that.
StephenW11UK
16th December 2010, 03:32
Since the ban on smoking in bars, restaurants and the work-place many smokers have surely become more considerate of the feelings of others. If we ourselves now show more consideration to others w.r.t. smoking or else have noticed how smokers are now more considerate to us, does that motivate us to start developing this character trait further, whether at work, when shopping, on public transport or even, if not especially, at home?
Carmody
16th December 2010, 03:41
If you smoke, you should be hunting down the native American Tobacco. Pure tobacco, organically grown, no crap added in.
Carmody
16th December 2010, 03:48
Lobbyists should be banned.
If you wanted to find ONE cause to do the most damage to the PTB system in the USA, that would be the battle to fight. to make any instance of lobbying grounds for criminal prosecution for treason, on both parties. Ie, death penalty. For the politician and the person lobbying them. No fines, no jail time, no plea bargaining, but the truth of the situation. Treason. Death penalty. Ie, a small group going against the will of the people to corrupt a high office. Otherwise known as treason. Of course..I've simplified it. But it cannot be tangled up in massive reams of paper defining boundaries and complexities. Make it simple. You take anything, from anyone... to swing a federal vote in any way, shape, or form, it's treason, in the case of both parties.
bluestflame
16th December 2010, 04:09
one thing I did notice with the banning of smoking inside pubs , non smokers would come out and sit with the smokers cos they missed thier presence
course not all non smokers
Beth
16th December 2010, 04:15
What I've noticed, living in a smaller town, is the banning of smoking in bars (you call em pubs, Brits), is that their business is way down and and some are closing down.
bluestflame
16th December 2010, 04:24
no doubt there are plans in the pipeline to further penalise smokers in the future with an introduction of a carbon tax placed upon smokers , of course they'll place the tax at the pump" so to speak" cos practically unenforcable at the smoker
yet another increase in the price of a known addictive substance ,
cash flow
Isthatso
16th December 2010, 04:26
I went to a wise old native amercian healer who smoked for ceremonial purposes but also for his health (that's what he told me) and he did smell lovely. He mentioned it wasn't the same cigarettes you buy in the shops.
I do know several people who worked in bars and cafes that were so relieved when smoking was banned inside the bar. The air quality changed dramatically.
I agree with MargueriteBee - an appearance of caring...at least on the surface!
Ross
16th December 2010, 04:40
I performed in all kinds of venues from Pubs, Clubs, Casinos, for years, and I can tell you when they introduced non-smoking it was a blessing for all, including smokers.
All venues then introduced a smokers area, via an 'open area' (some outside access) away from non-smokers. This works well.
Also, smokers who went to their designated area's soon found themselves in a 'not before' realized postion which gave birth to the term 'Smurfing', smokers who flirt with other smokers. This offers singles a place where they are closely herded together and find themselves in a more accepted place to say "hi, how you doing" without feeling like they were 'hitting' on anyone...which of course lead to more conversation...and in several cases I witnessed, they started dating....hence the term 'Smurfing'
Leon
16th December 2010, 08:56
there is one thing you can eat, ride and smoke its a camel...
I know the effects of smoking and what it does to the body.
what I am trying to understand is what gives people and the government the right to tell those who smoke to stop? we don't do this with alcohol either!
Should it not be a choice?
why penelise those who are addicted with super high taxes?
look at Australia! and the UK!
Why does it always seem that once the people or government has a subject that is easy to keep on their back about this...
please read my first post....
Humble Janitor
16th December 2010, 09:04
I am so sick and tired of smokers that whine and whine about their "rights" when they have the right to go outside every 5 minutes and take a puff. Never mind that the place I work at is supposed to be a smoke-free zone. That doesn't stop these crybabies from getting their puff on.
What's even more disgusting is the patients who feel they MUST go outside to smoke and when they come back in, the elevator reeks of smoke. I had to use my inhaler immediately because the stench was so strong. And yet, these fools are too stupid to probably even THINK that smoking is egging on some of their health problems.
I can't understand why these fools deserve any rights at all when their behavior harms other people?
Don't even start on the NWO conspiracy blather. You can't possibly use that as an angle for EVERYTHING. That's a cop out.
What you should be worried about is how smokers get away with dozens of mini-breaks per day while their work is left for others to pick up on. I worked at a place with a woman who spent more time outside smoking than doing her work. The burden fell on me to clean up after her. I grew up in a household for 20 years with a mother who insisted on smoking in the house. The day she finally listened to my father and went outside, he had to repaint the ceiling, which was covered with probably 20-25 years worth of cigarette smoke. My brother took up smoking by stealing cigarettes from my mother when he was 13. I lost an uncle to lung cancer and you know what? He kept on smoking right up until the day he died. I developed asthma several years ago thanks to a combination of growing up around a smoker and poor air quality where I live (perhaps the tossers fouled it up with their marlboros and virginia slims?).
The cycle goes on and on. If you want to argue about NWO conspiracies, then you should look at how they hook people onto cigarettes and lead them to an early death. They put all kinds of nasty chemicals into the cigarettes. THAT is the conspiracy here, not the taxes and other restrictions.
After all, smoking is a GREAT form of population control because of the fact that it harms even non-smokers!
I just had to rant. Don't even get me started on smokers' rights until you hear it from someone who's had to deal with it for years and years. My mother still won't quit.
It's a selfish, nasty, disgusting, repulsive habit! To me, there is NO defending it!
I mean absolutely no offense to anyone on here. I am ranting in general.
Humble Janitor
16th December 2010, 09:10
Did the Native Indians have to go outside for a smoke.
Seems to me those Native's have got alot to answer for,
Is this some kind of joke in poor taste?
Might as well make a joke about natives that drink as well.
¤=[Post Update]=¤
one thing I did notice with the banning of smoking inside pubs , non smokers would come out and sit with the smokers cos they missed thier presence
course not all non smokers
I don't feel bad for smokers at all. I have a right to go to a bar and not have to smell their nasty stenches.
The One
16th December 2010, 09:11
...........
bluestflame
16th December 2010, 10:34
next coffee drinkers and thier toilet breaks ....
The One
16th December 2010, 10:43
Not forgetting equality and diversity
John Parslow
16th December 2010, 11:29
Funny how all the top dogs are still allowed to smoke big Cuban cigars in their exclusive clubs though ... JP:cool:
Humble Janitor
16th December 2010, 12:26
next coffee drinkers and thier toilet breaks ....
You can't possibly be serious here.
Smoking isn't a normal bodily function.
Taurean
16th December 2010, 12:52
Caffeine, Nicotine, Inhale, Exhale, Consume, Excrete - just different combinations of chemicals and matter.
TPTB are masters of providing all manner of chemical cocktails for us to consume, directly or indirectly.
I guess it's just fashionable to demonise smokers at this particular moment in time. - Soft target really.
Have you noticed how hypocrites use the term " I & me " more prolifically in their sanctimonious rants.
morguana
16th December 2010, 13:16
I am just quickly posting my apologies to baron, I should have taken the time to pm him and ask him to edit his post instead of publicaly engageing him, I am sorry.
m
Fredkc
16th December 2010, 14:42
First off;
If you smoke, quit. If you don't, don't start. That said...
Thank you for NOT breathing while I smoke!
LyYLrVNKE68
Banshee
16th December 2010, 15:47
How did you do it Fred? (quit) Was there any bloodshed? LOL. Maybe people here could use a little advice?
¤=[Post Update]=¤
I am just quickly posting my apologies to baron, I should have taken the time to pm him and ask him to edit his post instead of publicaly engageing him, I am sorry.
m
Hi Morguana!
Just a quick question about that - what is protocol when the Mods or others think something should be censored or edited? Do sentences sometimes disappear from posts or do posts get deleted?
Thanks! :)
HORIZONS
16th December 2010, 15:58
The reason??? The reason for control at ALL levels is so that a simultaneous incarnational world will be changed into a sequential one. The freedom of our individual expression of being is the root of all evil to the PTB, which supports the sequential incarnational agenda, and this is one thing that they desperately want to destroy. To the PTB it does not matter if it is good for you or bad for you - this is not the issue - control of your individual expression of being is the issue - sameness is what is desired. :spy:
Banshee
16th December 2010, 16:04
originally tobbacco was organic , and popular , once the controllers saw this that people were actually benefiting from it that's when the chemicals went in ...the chemicals are the problem with smoking
but you can't grow our own organic tobacco at home , that's illegal
You can buy tobacco seeds, but tobacco takes a massive amount of land. Its not illegal here to use is as a natural insecticide, but again, waaay too much hassle. Have you ever cut the stuff and dried it? Hugely labor intensive.
I am ashamed to admit that I am a smoker as well. Have been for longer than I care to admit. I recently purchased some electronic cigarettes and they are a pretty good replacement when you are ready to put down the smokes for good. You cannot do both, it renders the "vape" (vapor cigs) as they are called, somewhat palid by comparison. The vape provides nicotine ( for the chemical benefits and yes, I agree, I am much more capable of concentration and thought as a smoker), but doesn't deliver the toxins ( or at least as many of them). And I will concur on the weight thing. It keeps me thin- when I tried to quit in the past, I gorged myself with carbs. I guess we could have a whole other thread on the evils of oral fixation - lol.
I am setting a start vaping only date of January 10th. Please let me know if my rambling posts go from bad to worse.
ExHaLaTiON
16th December 2010, 16:06
ahhhhh.. to smoke or not to smoke that is the question. I think its all about balance and control of one self and smoking because you enjoy the cigarette not because your addicted to it.
Now how many people do you know can smoke when they want and stop for months on end if they wanted? Not many because we let the addiction take us over.
We have let the system, take us over.
a NWO change? Maybe
Banshee
16th December 2010, 16:11
Lobbyists should be banned.
If you wanted to find ONE cause to do the most damage to the PTB system in the USA, that would be the battle to fight. to make any instance of lobbying grounds for criminal prosecution for treason, on both parties. Ie, death penalty. For the politician and the person lobbying them. No fines, no jail time, no plea bargaining, but the truth of the situation. Treason. Death penalty. Ie, a small group going against the will of the people to corrupt a high office. Otherwise known as treason. Of course..I've simplified it. But it cannot be tangled up in massive reams of paper defining boundaries and complexities. Make it simple. You take anything, from anyone... to swing a federal vote in any way, shape, or form, it's treason, in the case of both parties.
And didn't Obama ( One Big @ss Mistake America) campaign on a promise to rid Washington of lobbyists and insiders? So we still have lobbyists and needless to stay, he stocked his entire cabinet with corrupt insiders. Its funny, he never really did specify exactly what change was coming did he? Semantics. That's his game.
Scott
16th December 2010, 16:18
Stimulating conversation, please continue :)
*Takes a drag, and blows smoke rings*
Fredkc
16th December 2010, 16:25
Banshee;
How did you do it Fred? (quit) Was there any bloodshed?I am unable to type without a cigarette in my left hand. it screws up my finger spacing.
Bloodshed? try reaching for my pack. :)
______________________________________
Re. mod edits:
If you look at my post #77 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?9387-Smoking-a-NWO-change&p=81547&viewfull=1#post81547) you will see:
Last edited by Fredkc; Today at 06:44.
You will see that anytime you a: leave a thread, then b: return and edit your own post.
You will also see it any time a mod edits a post. This means that a mod can't "sneak in" and edit anyone else's posts without leaving a tell-tale. :)
Also, the words "Last edited by Fredkc;" in that line is a link. That link will take you to a page where you can see that post before and after the change, with the change highlighted.
So who edited, and what was changed is always present on the forum.
If I edit someone's post, even if it's only to fix a YouTube link, I will also give a reason why.
Hope I explained that well enough,
Fred
Beth
16th December 2010, 17:02
Just wanted to quickly add that the taxes levied on tabacco and alcohol in Michigan are called "sin taxes." IMO, that is definitely a way to demonize people.
Carmody
16th December 2010, 17:05
that appears to be a mod level link only, with reagrd to the software. So you can check on people's behavior and what they do but us peons cannot. :p
As for Sin Tax, I'm suspecting someone outside of the Gov coined the term pretty early in the game, and the new emotionally catchy name was co-opted by all. But I suspect it is nowhere in the legal paperwork, and in reality has some other definition with no emotional connotations.
ok NOW I see the history link appear, but it does not appear for your earlier post in this thread.
HORIZONS
16th December 2010, 17:06
Just wanted to quickly add that the taxes levied on tabacco and alcohol in Michigan are called "sin taxes." IMO, that is definitely a way to demonize people.
I wonder what the tax would be in a Brothel? LOL! :)
Carmody
16th December 2010, 17:10
I wonder what the tax would be in a Brothel? LOL! :)
Communications tax. Shout-out tax. All kinds of names.. it could have. Reversed, I speak today. Apparently.
Fredkc
16th December 2010, 17:16
Communications tax. Shout-out tax. All kinds of names.. it could have. Reversed, I speak today. Apparently.
"To your planet, welcome!"
"Sin Tax"
How apropos...
Sin: (adj.) To be without.
So a sin Tax is a tax on being without something... but not until you get it.
Beth
16th December 2010, 17:16
I wonder what the tax would be in a Brothel? LOL! :)
Those are the only taxes politicians pay ;)
Banshee
16th December 2010, 19:01
...................................
Taurean
16th December 2010, 19:04
I wonder what the tax would be in a Brothel? LOL! :)
That's not a tax it's a perk.
John Parslow
16th December 2010, 20:18
Ha ha ha Taurean
Like your humour! JP
kalimistik
16th December 2010, 20:34
I live in Spain and a year ago they were charging 2.50 euros for a pack of 50g of rolling tobacco and last May that raised to 4.40 euros and of course with a 1.90 rob , it amazed me almost double the price but today I went to buy some tobacco and they have put it up again to 6.30 another raise of 1.90 and all in a space of 8 months, well again I was left gobsmacked. They have almost tripled the price within the year.......... EFFIN ROBBER BARONS!
Ross
16th December 2010, 21:14
I live in Spain and a year ago they were charging 2.50 euros for a pack of 50g of rolling tobacco and last May that raised to 4.40 euros and of course with a 1.90 rob , it amazed me almost double the price but today I went to buy some tobacco and they have put it up again to 6.30 another raise of 1.90 and all in a space of 8 months, well again I was left gobsmacked. They have almost tripled the price within the year.......... EFFIN ROBBER BARONS!
Here in OZ, for a 50 gram pack of tobacco, you are paying the equivalent of 23.68 euros...seems to me you are getting a cheap deal.
5x50 gram packs at duty free (airport) costs $50.00...at the local shop $150.00....
Side note: As far back as we can go, Human beings have thoroughly enjoyed stimulants of many kinds, in this 'epoc' smoking dates back 5000 years...seems to be part of our human-ness to want to alter our chemistry, from various forms of stimulants/sedatives.
Ross
Humble Janitor
16th December 2010, 23:34
I live in Spain and a year ago they were charging 2.50 euros for a pack of 50g of rolling tobacco and last May that raised to 4.40 euros and of course with a 1.90 rob , it amazed me almost double the price but today I went to buy some tobacco and they have put it up again to 6.30 another raise of 1.90 and all in a space of 8 months, well again I was left gobsmacked. They have almost tripled the price within the year.......... EFFIN ROBBER BARONS!
Why do you even want to do it in the first place?
That's my big question. What motivates people to take up such a habit in the first place?
Meditation is free and it's a stress-reliever as well. So, why don't more people meditate instead of smoking?
As I said, the real conspiracy is how tobacco is used to hook, pacify and eventually kill off those who smoke (as well as their loved ones).
Beth
16th December 2010, 23:54
Let's try to keep this thread on topic, which is if there is an agenda/conspiracy. No need to make this a non-smoker vs. smoker thread. It's also quite judgmental to condemn others because of their personal choices. With that said..........
:focus:
meeradas
17th December 2010, 09:19
if there's an agenda, it's
- bringing in more control in various ways [e.g. in Germany you need a banking card with a chip, or a EU drivers license, or an ID card - because of "age verification" - to get a pack of cigs from a vending machine]
- creating more enmity between people
- more money to the so-called "health care" systems by (plans are on the way for sure) creating special risk groups (who, once indentified [see the age verification above], shall pay more for even less health care rendered to them)
- depriving the (occasional meditative self-rolling additive-free tobacco using non-socialising) smoker of a way to relax (i hear "thou shalt be tense all the time!" thru a bullhorn)
- planting (more) negativity into smokers by putting these nice "sayings" and disease- pics on the packs and pouches (I'm not saying that these don't do their good job in maybe keeping a youngster from trying in the first place - i'm saying that all of this won't work at all in persons [I]who don't love themselves...).
- it's another perfect money power reallocation tool (direction up = more of it to the top), some reasons found above; forgot the heavy taxation (there are places in the EU where tobacco tax raises were justified as being necessary because of their direct use against "terrorism"... and in comes the enn doubleyou oh!).
Could go on, but want to stop here.
One thing for our 'radicals' here:
When i smoke, i'm a smoker. When i don't, i'm a non-smoker. Thus, most of the time, i'm not. I'm free - no offense!
I really enjoy it - when it's just me and the cigarette, and silence. Noone else around. This relaxes, deeply at times (even had a couple of the profoundest spiritual experiences of my life 'on a cigarette') - there's no denying this; who doesn' believe this doesn't have to try it: You're free!.
What i do not like at all: Passive smoking (been working in bars, hotels.. i know all about suffering from being exposed to guests who smoke their sticks all the time - even getting sick from this); there's only one thing worse: Being a bikerider and having to inhale diesel...
Cheers to all, and peace! Amen.
Banshee
17th December 2010, 16:37
...............................
Humble Janitor
20th December 2010, 07:16
For those claiming that ciggies help them "relax", there's a plant that's even more natural. It's green and it's risky but it works better than tobacco in my opinion.
meeradas
20th December 2010, 07:47
you are so right, HJ. Nevertheless, over here it's unfortunately still illegal to even just carry one of 'em plants around...
shadowstalker
20th December 2010, 08:54
Packs of smokes in Texas range from $4.30 to $7.50 depending on the brand.
$50 to $100 for 1 pound loose tobacco depending on brand.
My dad is 74 smoked since 16 still has pink lungs.;)
My grandma smoked till her death at 82 since 18, pink lungs still.;)
My aunt by marriage smoked two packs menthol's a day and 3 pots of coffee thru all four of her pregnancies, all the boys where where born in good health and at least 5 pound over norm and 4 inches over norm.;)
I myself was practically born with a cloud over my head, started smoking at 18, got cancer at 27 Hodgkin stage 2, got radiation treatments for a few months, 6 months later was told I had C.O.P.D. I asked the oncologist if it was from my smoking he said "NO IT WAS FROM THE TREATMENTS". He warned me of all the diseases I would get from the treatments and yup that was one of them..
So for me IMHO I really do believe that if anyone gets sick from anything that it has to do with how one deals with things from there inner being.(to a certain degree)
There are to many factors to state one way or the other on the smoking issues when you combine:
Cars
Trucks
Planes
Factories
Airborne Chems
Free Radicals
GM Products
Chem Treated Water
Vaccines
Chem Trails
Pesticides(Airborne)
Lord knows how much more out there.
I have yet to find a real doctor to pin point that smoking alone causes lung Cancer or lung disease.
I have yet to find a doctor that has stood on his/her own research to prove one way or the other.
I also believe IMHO that it has a lot to do with ones own soul contract and what kind of body we choose, whether it to be week or strong, I chose a week body to learn from others frailties.
I was born with Hypothyroidism, but it was not life threatening till I had the treatments.
I was also born with scoliosis
I now have a bad heart and bad lungs from the treatments as well.
John Parslow
20th December 2010, 09:13
Hello Meeradas
One thing for our 'radicals' here:
When i smoke, i'm a smoker. When i don't, i'm a non-smoker. Thus, most of the time, i'm not. I'm free - no offense!
I really enjoy it - when it's just me and the cigarette, and silence. Noone else around. This relaxes, deeply at times (even had a couple of the profoundest spiritual experiences of my life 'on a cigarette') - there's no denying this; who doesn' believe this doesn't have to try it: You're free!
Well said. JP :cool:
Leon
20th December 2010, 13:31
Hello shadowstalker,
I agree with you there...
shame about yourself, take care..
shadowstalker
20th December 2010, 22:17
Hello shadowstalker,
I agree with you there...
shame about yourself, take care..
Thank you
But other then what the treatments had given me in return of my life I am perfectly healthy, despite all else.
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.1.1 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.