Comments

Joyce (Wed Apr 9, 08:39 AM)

All the luck in the world, Joe!

How lovely it would be to organise a weekend in Vienna among people on this and the “Taking Liberties” blog where we smokers could eat, drink and enjoy each other’s interesting and tolerant company in comfort without being stared at as if we’re animals in a zoo.

Peter James (Wed Apr 9, 08:56 AM)

Excellent Joe! Keep it up, I think you raise some spirits on here.
Yes Joyce. You can count on me for a trip to Vienna.

Margot Johnson (Wed Apr 9, 10:31 AM)

Thanks Joe. Very good luck with the rest of your tour and the extra effort you make to send the truth back to us.

In the combined effort that our politicians are making to completely destroy the infrastructure of our country, so paving the way for Europe to take over and gobble up all our assets, they are also ruining our tourist industry. What incentive is there for a tourist to come here now into this litter strewn, inhospitable benighted country?

I have a day-dream scenario. A good fairy has appeared and waved her magic wand. We are suddenly back in the old days as a free independent country able to make our own laws. Our government looks at the rest of the world and realises that tobacco smokers have been targeted, exploited and demonised. It also realises that there are still millions of them seeking a nice place for their holidays.

It sees a niche in the market. It reduces excise duty on ordinary tobacco products by half, and modifies our own ban so that owners of businesses can choose whether they want to be smoking, non smoking, or part smoking. It also insists that all places used by the public must be as well ventilated as they are in Switzerland.

Result? Day tripper traffic to the continent would be reversed and happy shoppers would pour into England. Our hospitality industry would boom and proprietors would be able to afford superb welcoming accommodation. Unemployment statistics would dramatically reduce.

Ah well – back to grey reality!

timbone (Thu Apr 10, 12:07 AM)

“Why should this be so? If anyone has any answers beyond a general ‘this country’s going to the dogs’ malaise, I’d be interested to hear them”.

Mr Jackson, what you said provoked me to think on this. Maybe the severity and the hysteria being whipped up in the UK is not fundamentally about smoking, it is something else. A few years ago, before the SBE had become what it has turned out to be, my son said to me that our Country was not a happy place. He was referring to a disintegrating political climate, and the many organisations telling us how our Country was loosing it’s power as a nation, and all the problems we had. Possibly, if anything could be presented to us as being one of the many major causes of our demise, then politicians would become obsessed with it, people would respond, and it would become a channel, something to vent their anger on, something to blame, some temporary relief to their unhappiness and frustration, (which was not actually being caused by what they were attacking). Let me close with a comment from the main instigators of this cruel anti smoking propaganda, ASH. In a document about their activities, I believe it was Deborah Arnott who referred to their efforts to deal with the smoking problem. Those two words, smoking problem, made me feel very uncomfortable. We all know that historically another organisation used a similar phrase.

Col Dee (Thu Apr 10, 03:39 AM)

It’s an interesting question. I don’t pretend to have any one theory which I believe, but here are some ideas…

_____________________________

1. In a time of political apathy, when the political elite seem totally untrustworthy, people will ally themselves with anything.

Groups like ASH promise a better, brighter future if Britain “goes smokefree”. People, desperate to believe that progress is possible and that THEY CAN PERSONALLY HELP to bring it about, jump on the bandwagon.

The three main parties don’t listen to the public so the public feel politically disenfranchised. Things like the smoking ban are an opportunity for Joe Bloggs to get political. And it’s totally safe because anyone who disagrees with “your politics” is a tobacco stooge.

_____________________________

2. We are living longer and therefore diseases are coming to the fore which have hitherto been avoided because you died quicker.

The cumulative emotional effect of this is that people are aware, perhaps more than they have ever been, of how corruptible the human body is. That, combined with our modern belief that one can expect things to be getting constantly better (because of the technological march), leads people to question how we can avoid the illnesses besetting our old relatives. They see “health” in the same way as they see Windows or Super Mario: there MUST be ways to improve it.

There really is no way to do that. If you live longer, your “window of vulnerability” to diseases of the old is going to lengthen, too. Many of us WILL get dementia and cancer simply by virtue of living long enough to develop them.

But we need an answer. So we believe anything. Organic foods? Smokefree? Daily exercise hour? No alcohol?

People will agree to any sacrifices because, deep down, they know it will all be pointless and they WILL endure a lengthy purgatory in a care home before they die.

_____________________________

3. In spite of the stereotype Brit’s love of independence and distrust of authority, we have long been a nation of book-keepers and filers.

That’s why Orwell’s Ministry of Truth “rings true” in the British mind – that idea of a building full of busybodies filing every little detail and changing things etc. Think also of the massive administrative task it would have been to run the British Empire. In all those outposts, embassies and offices, there would have been busybodies cataloguing everything. And today, we have armies of HR managers and diversity trainers doing essentially the same thing: serving an ideological cause by way of interfering with the minutae of the daily lives of everyone they are able to influence.

So something like a national smoking ban is an opportunity to provide these busybodies with many more things to do – more boxes to tick, more phonecalls to make, more clauses to reinforce, more fines to issue, etc.

Listen to Dawn Primarolo or Tessa Jowell and tell me she couldn’t fit right into any office in Britain, as the woman who makes sure every staple is bent at the right angles and every paperclip is in the little cardboard box, and nobody is exceeding their alotted daily maximum. People like this enjoy mundane rules because it makes them feel important – when everyone else is writing them off as “that busybody who desperately needs a shag”.

_____________________________

4. As the ties between Westminster and Brussels get stronger and the EU’s involvement in British affairs intensifies, we increasingly see laws that are not forged by British politicians but by EU bureaucrats and EU “visionaries”.

For many people in Brussels, Britain may represent a triumph because Britain has resisted Europe for centuries. So, getting it roped into things like the smoking ban represents a “defeating” of England, and the English spirit of independence etc.

If you’re that way inclined then pushing for the smokefree mentality to be implemented more fiercely in Britain than in Europe could be tempting.

Of course it seems ridiculous at first glance to think that EU bureaucrats will be bothered by stuff that went on in Britain centuries ago. But then again, as the scope of a politician’s mandate broadens, so, it seems, does the scope of his interest in the political situation surrounding his remit – both spatially and temporally. Also, as his mandate broadens so does his interest in abstract ideas like empire, democracy, global economics, power-sharing etc. We never hear local councillors talking about “historic” changes and “1000 year reichs” etc. That stuff comes from politicians whose scope is huge – and the scope of EU bureaucrats is certainly huge.

So, in a way, it makes perfect sense that a centuries-old conflict between Britain and Europe would be in the minds of EU bureaucrats when they’re drafting UK legislation, or influencing those who do. Their remit is huge, so the political/historical environment they are aware of will be correspondingly broad. After all, these are people making historic changes to European politics – things like Britain’s age-old independence WILL piss them off.

_____________________________

5. The worst possible scenario is that, as an extension of 4), Britain is being used as a sort of dress rehearsal for the politics of New Europe. Sure PC is everywhere but is it anywhere more rife than in Britain?

More practically, the EU are pushing for a Europe-wide smoking ban. Does anyone seriously believe that such a ban would be based on, say, the Spanish smoking ban instead of the British one? Of course not. These fascists are looking for CHANGE, definitive and certain. The Spanish smoking ban is flaccid; the British one is total. What we’ve seen in Britain in the last two years is CHANGE in capitals, and no mistake.

I suspect that the Europe ban, if and when it comes, will be as draconian as the British one. Perhaps identical.

As the nation who have proudly resisted state intervention and Europe for centuries, the British are perfect candidates to use as an example of how the State is, today, in charge. That’s why our ban had to be the worst.

Margot Johnson (Thu Apr 10, 07:00 AM)

Superb article, Col Dee. Thank you.

Joyce (Thu Apr 10, 08:31 AM)

Col Dee, I think you’re absolutely right that an EU imposed ban on the Continent would mirror the UK ban in terms of its comprehensiveness. For the ban to work in the UK, however, it had to be complied with by smokers. The resources weren’t there to enforce widespread non-compliance. I can’t imagine our continental cousins being so obedient. In the UK I think it has to do with an ingrained attitude to authority.

Mrs A E Harrison. (Thu Apr 10, 12:23 PM)

Good Artical. But this is the worst country a real nanny state.Whats greece like? I would like to know. The nanny state has gone to the dogs a long time ago. They get annoyed with us smokers but do they stop this awful binge drinking? No of course they dont .

Simon Richards (Thu Apr 10, 01:00 PM)

This excellent piece suggests that, as with the enforcement of the myriad of burdensome European Union regulations, other European countries treat legal restrictions on freedom with much more common sense than we do in the UK. Ours must be amongst the most aggressively over-zealous state apparatchiks outside the Communist world. From the vicious way in which the Metropolitan Police treated peaceful Tibetan human rights demonstrators, to the pettiness of Little Hitlers in our local councils, we have become the most oppressed people in the democratic world.

timbone (Thu Apr 10, 01:14 PM)

I have heard that Greece are to gradually introduce smoking restrictions by 2010. We must remember that the European Health Minister until recently was Greek, with what I call an anti smoking OCD – Obsessive, Compulsive, and wanting to create social Disorder. It will be interesting to see how they manage to police such a ban, considering how many islands there are!

Ian E. Allen (Thu Apr 10, 01:47 PM)

Bottom line.

I smoke and will continue to smoke as and when i wish.

If i am fined for smoking in a restricted area i will not pay the fine.

If i am taken to court for not paying the fine and given community service i will not do the community service.

If i am taken to jail for refusing to comply will i mind ? no, why not ? because i will be allowed to smoke in jail to ensure harmony.

What a load of codswallop

Margot Johnson (Thu Apr 10, 02:32 PM)

Food for thought in both your posts, Timbone. I too think that conquest of the U.K. will become the template for all EU countries. I was in Northern Italy when the smoking ban was introduced there. It was rigidly adhered to at the beginning,. I was pleased to learn from Joe that it has seemed to relax a bit.

My view, also, is that EU control has been heavily centred on the U.K. For the moment, it is to their advantage to allow the other countries to feel that there is not much wrong with belonging to the EU. Unlike us, they are already within the land mass of that continent so it would seem a natural thing to do.

The greatest aid towards final EU regionalised control was the adoption of the Euro as standard currency. That was a huge step forward towards loss of national identity. There seemed many advantages to having just one currency also. However, I was also in Italy when this happened. I will never forget the sadness of the people themselves at losing their historic traditional currency. It is the oldest in Europe and our own sterling currency was based on it. We copied the currency first issued by the merchant banks of Genoa. We even adopted the same names. Remember, [those old enough], our currency before we went metric was L.S.D. for pounds, shillings and pence? This stood for Lira, Soldi and Dinari. [Sorry – I digress.]

As you say, timbone, once the EU becomes the law in all European countries, after final takeover, EU Law will become rigidly enforced everywhere. Europol, the EU police force, will have greater power than any national [sorry, regional], police force. They will have right of entry into any home and right of arrest without giving reason. Prisoners will not need to be told why they have been arrested until the day they appear in court. They will be tried by one man, a sort of magistrate. There will be no jury and no right of Habeus Corpus.

Everyone, no matter what their political leanings are, such request a copy of the booklet “The European Union Project” which outlines the masterplan for EU domination. You can request it by contacting UKIP or emailing info@theeuroprobe.org.

The varied and colourful countries of Europe are going through a honeymoon period at the moment. As, indeed, we are. we “aint seen nuthin” yet.

Very interesting observation in a Comment to a previous blog which touched on the approaching euro parity with sterling at present being manipulated. Just imagine how strong sterling would be if we were still an independent country – 80% of European imports are from right here in the U.K.

Margot Johnson (Thu Apr 10, 02:34 PM)

Sorry, I phrased my last bit badly. I meant to say that 80% of our exports are to Europe.

Margot Johnson (Thu Apr 10, 02:38 PM)

Sorry, also meant to say that the booklet can be obtained free from UKIP but costs £3.50 including postage from the publishers.

Nigel Hall (Thu Apr 10, 02:57 PM)

Simon – at least no communist government banned smoking in public places ( which in communist states would have included even pubs, clubs and restaurants – er….some mistake, surely?)

Also, despite “Brits” kidding themselves they are tough and independently minded, I suspect they are the most placid and easily bossed-about people in the world. Except when they’re pissed out of their brains, of course!

George E. (Thu Apr 10, 02:58 PM)

Thanks Joe. Your report set me up for the afternoon.
By the way, I think I have an answer for you.
It has been decreed that pigs have to be 95 per cent enclosed because the authorities believe that, otherwise, the little oinkers would get out and fly off.
And having a mindset where they believe that pigs can fly, the authorities are inclined to believe too that the economy is safe in their hands and that one whiff of passive smoke is deadly etc. etc.
Our current problems will be solved only when those currently responsible for smoking policies are confined to structures that are 100 per cent enclosed.

Carlos (Thu Apr 10, 05:21 PM)

about Austria Im forwarding this: well: in Austria so many things happened..

but the result is: we shall get something like the spanish solution.

anyway, a little summary:

We have in Austria a so called “big coalition” (2 parties which are nearly as strong as the other: the red (SPÖ) and the black (ÖVP)

The 2 actors were
Kdolsky the health minister of the christian-conservative party (liberal for smokers)

and Oberhauser, the Health responsible of the socialist party. (Prohibitionnist)

As 3 constitutionnal judments fell in germany in favour of the bars owners (because of the discrimination of the ones who could not have a separate room),

the socialist Oberhauser realized that she would not be able to go on demanding the total ban for everyone who could not have a separate room. (Because of the discrimination)

So she suddenly demanded the TOTAL prohibition. so everyone would be discrimanited equally.. the bitch.

And the whole country revolted:

– The chamber of commerce – the voters (they received mail bombings during half a week)

and even her party which has been loosing already the 2 last regional elections (they lost 6%!).

And you know what? They kicked her out of all negociations 3 days later. Smile

Instead of this they put the social Minister Buchinger (SPÖ) to negociate with Minister Kdolsky), and they decided, there would be
the obligation of separated rooms for everyone, except for the ones who cannot:

– if they are too small – or they cannot have 2 emergency exits – or if the fire rules cannot be respected

or if they are a historical monument (there are many of them in Austria of course).

It should be decided in May, so we have to hurry.

They might be now the obligation of a rear room for the smokers. Ban at the bar. and so on.

But maybe we will get more jugments form germany .. and also in austria there are always more challenges.

If we mange to get rid of the ASH and to make their lies known: we could maybe avoid that.

Moreover it seems that the EU ist not able to force us.

It seems like it depends indirectly on the treaty, in the form, that the states could leave different compentences to thje (WHO)EU.

But maybe we could still avoid that.

In the actual situation: they cannot force us.

So you could google some of these names (all this happened from the 31st of march. The negociation was planned for the 1st of april.

So it was a bit long.

ACTUNG: The ASH has a meeting in Vienna in May, and they are planning something “new” against us.

Beverly Martin (Thu Apr 10, 06:18 PM)

Brilliant Joe, thank you. I knew you were going to say ‘UK’. That’s just about how it feels – we are packed onto trains and buses in conditions that would be outlawed for our two- and four-legged friends, with similar treatment as adult smokers. I’m not at all surprised that piggy-wiggies do a whole lot better than we do under EU “law”. We should also remember and say loudly that all those wonderful veterans on last November’s parade at the Cenotaph – who risked their lives for our freedoms – could not have sat in their local pub with a pint and a fag 60 years on. I asked David Cameron what he thought their comrades died for. So sorry to say: no answer received.

Adrian Brown (Thu Apr 10, 07:05 PM)

Anyone seen this piece of drivel on an NHS-funded [i.e. tax-funded] health-website?

http://www.malehealth.co.uk/userpage1.cfm?item_id=1263

An attack on Joe Jackson, accusing him of “misrepresenting the science”. Quite aside from misrepresenting Joe Jackson’s position on choice, the author displays a breathtaking level of scientific-ignorance, before advising us to use our “common sense” to decide for ourselves that the unquantifiable risk from ETS really is as bad as “good science” keeps telling us it is. No evidence is offered to support this view, as it would, apparently, be too complex for us poor dears to understand. We are invited just to take Jim Pollard’s word on the matter, whilst being reassured by his charitable-status and the presence of that NHS logo.

There’s a comment-box, but rest assured they won’t publish any.

GALLEY SLAVE#41 (Thu Apr 10, 07:16 PM)

To the best of my knowledge we have not heard a single word from the tobacco industry in defence of their product!!!
Have they been told to keep quiet by the wassocks of Westminster

Julie (Thu Apr 10, 07:43 PM)

Joe Great atricle!!

Carlos well done to Austria, it makes me ashamed to be British, we just dont have the strength to stand up to those who rule us!!

I live and work in England my company has just withdrawn smoking breaks, there are many smokers, but no one, including myself is willing to stand up and have their say. THANKS FOR SHOWING US THAT IT CAN BE DONE.

Mark Harrison (Thu Apr 10, 07:56 PM)

I have read with interest the many comments about the EU. I left Britain some while ago and have lived in many countries since then. I currently reside in Germany.

It is apparent that the EU has moved, perhaps, too quickly in removing the individual freedoms of the member states and that some curbing of their power is in order, but is a return to the age of competing nation states really the answer? That was what lead us down the road to two world wars. The EU was formed in order that the peace of Europe would be preserved, indefinately. Britain is a part of Europe and for it to be excluded would be tragic.

The anti-smoking lobby are global, not just European. The draconian implementation of the ban in Britain has come, not from Brussels but Westminster.

The answer is for the UK to remain within the EU and for Brits to use their rights as EU citizens to live and work in any of the member states, where there is so much more tolerance and freedom. Britain is the problem. Turn your backs and find a place where you can live life.

Not all on mainland Europe is perfect by any means but it beats the hell out of stalag Britain.

Besides, if Britain leaves the EU, how will it find jobs and houses for the hundreds of thousands of natives that are forced to return because they have lost their status as EU citizens?

Julie (Thu Apr 10, 08:11 PM)

GALLEY
not only that I hear they are funding, not at will from the antis

What can i say there is a media block out, I bought the Guardian yesterday, nothing in the main line press, but plenty in the financial pages. I do believe there is a media block out. What about the Sun the one we hate but rely on for consumer feedback. NOTHING!!!! Unless any one can tell me any difference as I don t buy it.

Enkidu P (Thu Apr 10, 08:16 PM)

To judge from many preceding comments, there seems to be a popular belief that the anti-smoking hysteria was imported into Britain from Europe when, in fact, it came from the fount of all things silly and anti-social on the other side of the Atlantic.

Significantly, the conclusion of the late Dr. John Gofman that medical x-rays are the prime cause of cancers and ischaemic heart disease (summarised at http://www.burtongoldberg.com/health-articles/medical-x-rays-a-cause-of-cancer-and-heart-disease.htm) receives no publicity.

Neither does the extraordinary longevity of smokers including (among many others) Jeanne Calment, who smoked until she was 117 and went on to die aged 122+ (http://www.lastingtribute.co.uk/tribute/calment/2603938), Henry Allingham still going at 111 (http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http://archive.theargus.co.uk/2006/4/22/210069.html&date=2007-12-01) and Buster Martin about to compete in the London Marathon at 101 (http://abcnews.go.com/International/Story?id=4385601&page=1).

Given the paranoia of the medical profession, most members of which have little more knowledge of technology than did their witch-doctor predecessors, concerning the possibility of class action suits for malpractice, it can fairly safely be assumed that the anti-smoking movement is nothing more than an orchestrated diversion by the so-called World Health Organisation on behalf of the American Medical Association.

Keep up the resistance at all costs.

Thomas Laprade (Thu Apr 10, 09:19 PM)

The untold Truth

http://cagecanada.blogspot.com/2008/04/he-who-controls-media-part-2.html

Dear Editor, April 10/08

http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Columnists/Diotte_Kerry/2008/04/08/5223491.html

If you ask most people, they’d tell you they’re not big fans of hypocrisy and political correctness.
So how is it that journalists, of all people, can fall prey to those two nasty traits?
For the last couple of weeks, board members of a national journalism association have engaged in some heated discussion over an advertisement a lobby group wanted to place in Media magazine.
That’s the publication for the Canadian Association of Journalists (CAJ). I’m one of 13 people on the CAJ’s national board.
Normally, we see eye-to-eye on motherhood issues, including freedom of speech, fairness from bias, truth, accuracy …
But when a pro-smoking group called Tobacco Smokers of Canada wanted to advertise in our national magazine, all bets were off. I’ve learned one lesson: Where there’s smoke, there’s ire.
In a display of hypocrisy and political correctness, our magazine publisher turned the group down flat, claiming the ad violates Canada’s Tobacco Act. Most all board members agreed with the decision.
No lawyer was called for a legal opinion, I’m told.
In my view and the view of an Ottawa consultant intimately familiar with the Tobacco Act, the ad is perfectly legal, especially since the magazine is targeted only at people over the age of 18.
Political correctness and hypocrisy were behind the decision, not rule of law.
Judge the ad for yourself:
“Dear News Industry: The opposing side of the tobacco smoke issue is not being reported. Many researchers, scientists, even doctors and politicians, as well as millions of news reading, taxpaying voters, do not believe the anti-smoking claims about second-hand tobacco smoke.
“We tobacco smokers appeal to you all. Please, also report our side of the tobacco smoking issue in accordance with the principles and ethics of journalism and the news industry’s fiduciary duty to the public.”
The group then rubbed a little salt in the wound by quoting, in the ad, the CAJ’s principles and ethics guidelines that include the defence of free speech and the belief in allowing “disparate and conflicting views.”
Clearly, the ad is not advertising tobacco and the smoking group had a right to its opinion.
That seemed lost on most CAJ board members.
Some said we’d have to investigate the group’s claims and delve into the studies disputing the extent of harm caused by second-hand smoke.
Others figured the group spokesman should write a column, not buy an ad.
When I asked one board member if they would grill every potential advertiser on the facts of every ad submitted, I received this response: “Yes, every time someone wants to place an ad dealing with any product proven to kill people I would definitely ask these kinds of questions.”
lt’s obvious from that some people just have blinders on when it comes to the topic of tobacco, which is, last I checked, a legal product in Canada.
A major study published in the British Medical Journal backs up the group’s view that second-hand smoke is not as deadly as most anti-smoking activists claim.
In that study, more than 118,000 adults were monitored for almost four decades. Essentially, it found that people exposed to a life of second-hand smoke were about as healthy as those who weren’t.
It concluded: “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco-related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect.”
It’s tragic when political correctness trumps freedom of speech.

Thomas Laprade

timbone (Thu Apr 10, 10:31 PM)

Picking up on a couple of points raised in previous comments. On the subject of SHS/ETS which we are told continually is more deadly than any other toxic substance and kills thousands upon thousands of innocent bi-standers every year, all the statistics include active smokers! This is why if you ever ask any authority like ASH, DoH, NHS etc if this is the case, they either refuse to answer, or send you down some other blind alleyway. As far as virtual silence on the part of the Tobacco Industry is concerned, two things. Firstly, they are well aware by now that if they make any protest against the big health barons, they could cause even more trouble than already exists. Point two, where do the pharmaceutical companies get their nicotine for their NRT products?

chris (Fri Apr 11, 05:15 AM)

Hey, Enkidu, greetings for the fount of all things silly and antisocial on the other side of the Atlantic. Wish I could say you were wrong. We used to look to you guys for sanity and relief from grim american puritanism, but it seems now you’ve surpassed us.
That being said, a visitt to the US might not be so terrible, depending on where you go. Many states, especially in the South, are still smoker-friendly. Even in Lord Bloomberg’s dreary fiefdom of New York City there are still some places to enjoy a drink and a smoke.
Joe Jackson’s guide is a great resource for those of us who’d despaired of visiting some of our favorite countries again. Hey, Joe, if the music thing ever doesn’t work out, consider writing a line of tour books.

Margot Johnson (Fri Apr 11, 11:36 AM)

Joe Jackson’s superb writing, and the man himself, has now attracted informed comment from all over the world. This is becoming a unique blog with sufficient evidence being built up to take ASH et al to court for fraud.

Special thanks and a great welcome to Carlos from Austria. We’re privileged to receive such detailed insight into this compact well organised “foreign” country. It must have taken enormous effort and time in a language which is not his own. And, yes, our merry friend Enkidu P, from across the pond, is correct in saying that the insidious campaign against smoking was concentrated upon the U.S. of A. It was the obvious choice by Big Pharma and the super rich global control despots. It is the most visible continent in the world with its big-hearted open window successful democratic society. The present unification of Europe is just part of the global strategy to create another easily controlled “region”. I have always believed that Europe was the most unique continent in the world precisely because of our diverse racial structure. It was from this rich and colourful continent that all our present Western civilisation was created. From the Egyptians, Greeks and Romans onwards until we reach this sad point in time, where national identity will be crushed and no doubt the one common language of English be enforced.

You think it won’t happen? It will. Who could have enviseaged the enormity of the natural function of smoking being banned world wide?

So let’s take Big Pharma, ASH & Co. to court. But which court, where? We are now under global control and there isn’t one. We who still believe in fighting for freedom would seem to be on a hiding to nowhere. However, this present world war – and it is a world war – has use of a new weapon which came onto the scene in recent years. This is the weapon of instant communication. No other civilisation in history has had this weapon.

To attempt a small summing up of where we are to date, I believe that a sleeping giant has been awoken through this attempt, successful so far, of a world ban on smoking. Smoking has been a normal human function since primitive jungle times. It is as normal a function as eating and drinking. There have always been people who choose not to smoke and I have known some who have tried to smoke, but their bodiles are so constituted that tobacco is rejected. Similarly there are many vegetarians whose bodies reject meat eating.

There are many benefits to smoking and it would not have become as popular as it has were there not benefits. Few people have questioned what these are, apart from a feeling of “well being”. Until now they have never needed to.

Sufficient evidence is now available to show that passive smoking is not harmful. The mistake we are all continuing to make is a tacit acceptance that smoking may be harmful to the user. It is something that has brainwashed us all to the point of believing that some of this theory might be true. The only real truth is that excessive consumption of anything at all could have harmful effects.

Smoking has always been the natural enemy of the pharmaceutical industry. The beneficial properties of nicotine are well known to them and side by side from the very start of their “research” into the dangers of smoking, has been their anxious research into attempting to mirror the benefits of smoking nicotine into a pharmaceutical drug form. This research still goes on and the happy stumbling upon the present by-product of nicotine patches, is just another little bonus for them.

A quick list of some of the many benefits of nicotine; its natural internal healing properties, and so on, are given at the top left hand corner of the front page of “www.thesmokermagazine.co.uk.

To mention just one simple function we all know about but interpret incorrectly, I quote from a lovely old book I found as a child in my grandfather’s attic. It is called “Home Management and Entertaining”. I guess it was published in the early 1900’s, before ISBNs and publishing dates were used. In the section on the etiquette of giving dinner parties, it says, “a gentleman should smoke after meals as it makes him cough and get rid of the germs of the day.”

From the longevity mentioned above to my own life, which has been long, healthy, smoke filled and doctor free, we must change our mind set regarding the danger to smokers themselves. Scientifically, smoking just cannot be singled out and seperated from the many pollutants we breathe in. As for statistics – WHO etc., just pluck them out of thin air at will. No real proof is ever asked of them, nor could they provide it if it were.

Margot Johnson (Fri Apr 11, 12:49 PM)

Oops, sorry! I didn’t mean to say that Egypt was part of Europe. Just tried to compress the scientific, mathematical and cultural influences which formed our western civilisation into as few words as possible.

Didn’t succeed, of course!..

Joyce (Fri Apr 11, 06:24 PM)

Posters on this thread might be interested to know that UKIP has put a piece on its website about the recent hacking of F2C’s and Forces’ sites.

How refreshing – a UK party that is helping rather than bashing smokers and their defenders!

(With thanks to Norman on the “A Message to Smokers from Boris Johnson” thread on “Taking Liberties”)

Jo (Sat Apr 12, 06:15 PM)

Sorry Mark Harrison I disagree with your point to stay in the EU I feel this would only lead us eventually into civil war. I have always stayed clear of politics as it only causes arguments but, since the smoking ban my eyes are ever more being opened. Some-one said in episode 1 the great Joe Jackson vote UKIP and look into their info pack. Well I did and glad for it so thankyou for whoever you are. I think it true in previous comments that the EU policing will become more oppressive and we are endangered of no return if the EU take over. Dont forget that Tony Blair was in power when the ban was being put together and his wife well what was her job say no more. Blair has always been obsessed with his power and sure he is going to be the president of the EU. I personally believe that when Blair stepped down so should have the party as after all who voted Gordon Browne. We have become a bastardised country where people dont know or understand their identity or creed. Our youngsters cant get jobs because they have no experience so they work for agencys at very low wages if not they sign on and become the norm of teenage bums in the parks getting drunk cos it’s easier.

It’s not about being racist its about our country being England and English laws,spoken and freedom of speech for all. We have to make a stand some where it does not affect those who already live here (of whom some I’m friends and work with) Only limitations of new imigrants and our borders protected. The fact is our soldiers of 1st and 2nd world war was to fight for our freedom and our countries,laws and beliefs so why should our war dead have died invain only for the EU to take control of everthing. Not only that some people have family who are elderly,poorly or not able to work abroad like yourself. After all it’s OUR COUNTRY,OUR HERITAGE, and OUR FUTURE. If you were worried about voting a different party such as UKIP as I was then free phone 0800 5876587 Im glad I took time over this and read their intentions I’m fully supportive. Good luck To all and kep it going Joe Jackson

Margaret (Sun Apr 13, 09:14 PM)

Joe, I love your post. keep up the good work

Mark Harrison (Mon Apr 14, 10:25 PM)

Jo, your reply to my post was interesting. There is one thing that we appear to agree on, and that is the freedom to express our personal views. May I just say that I respect the principles in which you believe. I do, however, disagree with much of what you have to say.

Your idea of ‘civil war’ is, I believe, totally unfounded. There is no underground structure within British society that would lend itself to such a radical solution. People cannot stir themselves to protest or strike in any numbers today let alone armed insurrection.

As for Blair instigating the ban to further his own political ends, I do not doubt that he has that character trait, but you must remember that whoever the PM would have been (and whatever colour) the result would have been the same.

As for young people being unable to find jobs I find it difficult to place the blame for that at the door of the EU. In fact EU employment law allows all UK citizens the right to live and work in any of the 27 member states. All it takes is a little effort. Something that, sadly, many of today’s youths lack.

Finally, I would offer a word of caution about UKIP. They are a radical party and they look at extreme solutions to problems often without thinking out the results of those actions. I am a smoker and I hate bans of any sort, but I would view with caution any non-mainstream party who offered me a golden chalice. Oft times that chalice turns quickly into a poisoned one. 1933 springs readily to mind.

Jim Pollard (Tue Apr 15, 08:39 AM)

I just want to respond to Adrian Brown’s comment about an article of mine on the website I edit http://www.malehealth.co.uk. I don’t question anyone’s right to disagree with me about anything (although I’d prefer they read what I say first) but please don’t question the site’s integrity.

Adrian (Thu Apr 10, 07:05 PM) says “There’s a comment-box (on the website), but rest assured they won’t publish any.” Not so. I’ve had several emails on the topic in the last 48 hours – quite a coincidence – and I’ve invited a couple of the writers to write longer articles which I’ll publish if I can. The reason comments don’t appear immediately below the article as on this site is because the web technology we use is very old. Funding is the problem. You’re very lucky to have enough money to have such a high-tech site. I’d love to meet your sponsors.

On passive smoking, I really think the debate moved on long ago. Talk to people today about the smoking ban and they will tell you they like it because they no longer cough, no longer have streaming eyes and no longer have to spend the day in stinky clothes with smelly hair as the price for going down the pub. They won’t mention passive smoking.

Don’t a lot of smokers see the ban as an opportunity to cut down a little given that we know most smokers want to quit?

By the way Joe, just in case you read all this stuff, ‘Chrome’ is just beautiful.

Joyce (Tue Apr 15, 09:51 AM)

Jim, I think that you’re mistaken if you think that the debate on passive smoking is over. Indeed, there was never any proper debate in the first place, one reason for the anger felt by many smokers.

The ban was brought in, not because it was believed that non smokers ought to be protected from an irritant, but because passive smoking was hazardous to their health. Many people believe that the risk was grossly overstated and did not merit such a draconian measure. These people include informed smokers and non smokers. In fact the more courageous members of the scientific community also speak out about the ETS studies which they consider to be of such poor quality that they are undermining the discipline of epidemiology as a whole. On the basis of shoddy “science”, presented by a fanatical lobby which is riddled with vested interest, 25% of the population is denied use of a legal product in comfort. Even if the risk was as great as the tobacco control lobby would have us believe, other solutions were available but these, of course, were dismissed by a lobby which is not so much interested in the health of non smokers as “denormalising” smoking.

I would suggest that the people to whom you’ve spoken who like the ban are ill-informed or incredibly selfish individuals to consider that it’s acceptable to deny millions comfort on the grounds that they suffer irritation. As for smokers welcoming the chance to cut down through the ban, smokers are adults who, in a sensible society, would be expected to take responsibility for themselves without authoritarian State intervention that punishes and bullies rather than educates and encourages. .

Try talking to different people.

carol capeling (Tue Apr 15, 02:32 PM)

hi joe, Your smokers guide to Europe is great. I now go abroad 4 or 5 times a year to buy my cigarettes and red wine. It is much cheaper than in England and I have a great time not feeling like a lepor when I enjoy a cigarette.

chris (Tue Apr 15, 08:27 PM)

Jim, if there were so many people who wanted smoke-free pubs, such places would exist without government mandate.

timbone (Wed Apr 16, 11:42 PM)

Jim Pollard. I read your article, and wanted to respond from a different perspective, but didn’t, as I felt that it was a waste of time. I read your response on here to Adrian Brown, and had a change of heart, obviously, you respected another point of view. So where is my comment then?

dave (Fri Apr 18, 03:56 AM)

hi all
ive just come across this site,
and while its nice to see so many posts with more or less the same mind set as my own on the smoking ban and the spiteful way this goverment
impose’s its will / i have to wonder if there is an appox 12 millon smokers why have not at least 7 millon of them melted down the goverments website with mails of protest or better still marched on the parliment with howls of no no no

and a question if anyone can help’
why were the tobacco firms so quiet,
with there money they could have kept this in court for years,
one would have to presume some kind of backhand deal was done with them,
anyway i enjoyed reading the posts and have signed meself up ,

dave (smoker,drinker,and motorist,could i be anymore hated)

Joyce (Fri Apr 18, 08:06 AM)

Hi Dave,

Many smokers don’t realise that there is opposition to the ban because of little and highly selective reporting in the MSM. Many will believe the lies on which the ban is based being uninformed about the history, motives, vested interests and ruthlessness of the tobacco control lobby. There are many articles that expose them. Look around the FOREST site, Forces and freedom2choose.info. Michael McFadden, Joe Jackson, Prof Michael Siegel, Prof John Brignell (or is it Brignall) all have writing worth reading.

As for the tobacco companies – partly they’ve been weakened and why should they care, anyway? Smoking bans don’t stop people taking up the habit nor do they have a major impact on people quitting. Anyway for years they’ve been busy making inroads into the developing world, a large, untapped market where stopping smoking is the least of people’s worries.

Marge (Fri Apr 18, 03:39 PM)

It’s great to hear from you Joe, please keep it up. Just to know there are other smokers out there who have had enough. You add a touch of humor as well which can only help in these dark days. I prefer to leave the fanatics alone, you never know it could be catching

dave (Sat Apr 19, 02:41 AM)

hi joyce
i think the big problem in this counrty is the lack of will, if you remember the petrol tax debarcle,
you see They no one is going to seriously make a stand what did they do a couple of days of disruption and back to work ,

the french stayed for about 2 weeks who backed down the goverment did, and they dont back down because there weaker than are goverment they backed down because they knew there people were prepard to stick it out,

of course you have the other problem here of being aressted on some new do not complain law
ang given a crimanal record.
dave.

sorry for my appalling spelling not one of my strong points keep up the good work .

Ross (Sat Apr 19, 03:05 PM)

Just discovered this wonderful article, and the informed responses.

It has concerned me for some years now just what a nanny state we live in.

The smoking ban was shocking enough, but now alcohol, food and driving are all under attack like never before.

They are now proposing to hide tobacco displays under the counter, and segregate the alcohol section in supermarkets.

What madness….....even just ten years ago these ideas would have been dismissed as fantasy.

The important thing to remember is that when people had freedom of choice, they choose to smoke. In pubs. Non smokers choose to join them.The passive smoke hysteria was simply ignored.

Then the Government gave in to antitobacco, disregarding public opinion.

This set a disturbing trend. Now, public policy is dictated by single issue hate groups and the media. Public opinion no longer matters.

John B (Sat Apr 19, 05:22 PM)

Great site, and great articles – thanks Joe.

I’ve just returned from the Netherlands, where I could smoke in pubs, and in my company’s smoking room ! :O)

Jim Pollard, you really are a well-meaning twit you know. 75%-80% of the public wanted separate provision – only the big pub chains wanted a blanket ban. Fuck the people, eh, we know best ?!

If you’ve any research on chemical-free tobacco being responsible for illnesses, please share it. Otherwise have the grace and common decency to admit you’ve been part of a political/sociological experiment. Don’t worry though, it’s never too late to apologise, and reject the dark side.

Valerie (Sat Apr 19, 11:13 PM)

Mark Harrison. I found your caution about UKIP amusing, since Gordon Brown reminds me very much of a spiteful pig-headed autocrat, the epitome of a dictator in fact. He rules his way and without consultation, and thinks his intellect makes him superior. And his use of legislation to get us to toe the line is too primitive for words. Lets beat them into submission is his approach. He considers the majority incapable of thinking, or having any common sense. He is playing God. We so easily confuse intellect, by which I mean acquired knowledge and the ability to regurgitate facts, with wisdom and intelligence. This government’s approach is simple and crude; scare dissenters into submission. UKIP can’t do worse, and most of all, I doubt they are as petty minded and as spiteful as this government. I also think Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling were idiots to nationalise Northern Rock for they have taken on the investment banks. Yes the banks were being greedy but to take them on and try to compete with them is going to cost us taxpayers shedloads in my view, but the additional costs will be hard to spot, a few basis points here and there on the UK’s borrowings. GB is an arrogant bully, and I just hope he gets his comeuppance soon, before we are so stitched up by legislation we’re scared to get out of bed. You can always tell a bully by their fear, and GB was scared s***less to let the nation decide whether they wanted him as PM. Say no more. At least we may (lets not count our chickens!) have a chance to vote for UKIP.

Valerie (Sat Apr 19, 11:23 PM)

Joe,
I love this site, and thank you enormously for the lead you are taking in giving those of us, who Politicians would like to silence, a voice. I went on a coach shopper trip to belgium recently, cost £23, and got my two carrier bags of 3200 cigs, saving myself north of £300. I hadn’t been on one of these day trips before, but it was, bar the weather, extremely pleasant and I found a delightful coffee shop where I could have a fag in the warm. Your guide to europe is a great help, and will influence my choice should I get a chance to go away.

Margot Johnson (Sun Apr 20, 10:22 AM)

Good comments, Valerie, and welcome to the site Dave & Ross. Let’s hear more from you and, Dave, never mind the spelling – you made a good point about us being scared of breaking some new law and getting a criminal record. This is why we smokers did not have mass protest marches. We are not stupid.

As for Mark Harrison. What a load of cobblers! Calling UKIP an extreme radical party offering a golden chalice! No, Mark, no golden chalice being offered. Just sound commonsense. You should be broad minded enough to actually look at their website and in particular at the video featured there. It is called “Remote Control” and goes inside the EU Parliament to show the corrupt voting system going on right now. Just a hasty show of hands, no counting, and within seconds yet another petty infringement of our liberties becomes law.

And, yes, Valerie, it is still nice to be able to go to places like Belgium and enjoy a cig and a drink in comfort. Not for long, though. As has been said elsewhere, once the Lisbon Treaty has been accepted throughout Europe, the severe repressive laws now in the U.K. will apply all over Europe.

Gordon Brown has sold us out by signing the Lisbon Treaty without giving us the chance to say whether we want complete European control. No Referendum allowed – as promised in their election manifesto. Leaders of all three main parties seem already to be in the pay of the EU. There is nothing to choose between them.

On 22nd April, this coming Tuesday, Brown and Milliband have been summoned to appear in the High Court regarding this broken promise. And, yes, they are being taken there by one brave man from UKIP with no big money behind him. Let’s hope the present corruption has not reached our High Courts.

Mark’s advice, that if we don’t like it in the U.K., we can work in Europe, is about the most facile thing I have read for ages. Why should we be forced to leave our family and friends and our homeland – just to survive? Also, it’s doubtful that anywhere in Europe will be better than U.K. once the Lisbon Treaty is ratified throughout.

The present gloom and chaos which is being spread throughout our country is just a means to an end. Demoralise the people and divide and conquer. This way we take our eyes off the ball to concentrate on smaller fears.

That is how Nazi Germany gained control and also Communist Russia.

Valerie (Sun Apr 20, 02:35 PM)

Margot, thank you, and entirely agree that we should not be forced from our homes and families, but I know I am unconsciously on the look out for a freer country to move to; where smokers are not alienated. As has been said, outdoor heaters, and covered areas, demonstrate respect for both the law and people.
I shall look and listen out re the court hearing. If corruption has reached the courts, it would suggest Brown and Mugabe have more in common than may at first appear. I laughed my sox off reading about John Prescott’s confession that he suffered bulimia. He’s apparently been labelled extremely brave in outing himself. Pleeze. He stuffs his face, and has a food addiction. It’s not just smokers who are addicted. And he blames his bulimia on stress. There’s a surprise. He’s not even williing to take responsibility for his choices. He’s making me want to puke too! I just hope the health service has enough money to pay for all the anti depressants people are going to need as they struggle to survive life here in the UK, for when people are forced, bullied, ignored, and oppressed, there are consequences. Not that this government has a clue as to what makes people tick. They are screwing with peoples brains.

Margot Johnson (Sun Apr 20, 03:57 PM)

Yes, Valerie, but as usual Big Pharma are the winners.

Does anyone think that Big Pharma and the EU are seperate organisations? See Simon Clark’s latest article today on “Taking Liberties”. For anyone just joining us, read his leads within that article to his own attendance at an EU meeting regarding the latest moves towards strengthening the smoking ban. Now THAT knocked the sox off the rest of us!

Valerie (Sun Apr 20, 05:07 PM)

Thanks, Margot. I will read that article.

Valerie (Mon Apr 21, 12:55 PM)

I just want to qualify my comments about John Prescott. The guy is milking his suffering to promote his autobiography, which I find very distasteful. No mention while he was in office. Yet another self rather than civil servant. On a more general note, the trend to label anti-social behaviours, for want of a better description, boxes people in for life. They get identified for once having suffered whatever it is they suffered and are in prison in that respect for life.

Joyce (Mon Apr 21, 02:13 PM)

Further to Valerie’s comments about labelling, there was an article yesterday in one of the papers highlighting “Foetal Alcohol Syndrome” (am I the only person who hasn’t heard of this before?) which the reporter described as “an incurable disorder…”

FAS is caused by women drinking during pregnancy and is a subsect of Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, an umbrella term for a “range of outcomes”. Children with full blown FAS can be identified by distinct facial characteristics: “narrower eye openings, a thin upper lip and a flat, elongated philtrum”. The emotional and behavioural manifestations of FASD were specified although “Often, it’s said about such children that they “just don’t get it””. This quote from a Dr |Mather, consultant paediatrician who also advises that women who are planning to get pregnant should not drink at all.

Am I the only person to be cynical about this? Is my cynicism misplaced? A photograph of someone who purportedly exhibited the facial characteristics of FAS looked perfectly normal to me; the “problems” of children suffering from FASD could be applied to children by virtue of being, simply, children and the report stated that FASD is an “invisible disorder [which ] can be very hard to spot” (yes, really). Is it really the case that women’s drinking patterns have changed so much that only now is such a syndrome identifiable? Or is this just another tactic in the new war on drinking?

Valerie (Mon Apr 21, 03:08 PM)

Joyce, I share your cynicism. These back door efforts to scare the wits out of people is shameful. There are two types of shame. We can lovingly shame someone into themselves by pointing out their excesses with kindness, or we can shame them out of themselves by making them feel like lepers. The latter is the preferred route for this government and so many others such as this Dr Mather. It is the wrong approach, and very dangerous for it can so easily incite people to violence against themselves and others. I’ve never witnessed such mass hysteria from so many mindless people, all quite potty in their own way, and all wanting to play God. This Dr Mather has done no one any good whatsoever.

Mark Harrison (Mon Apr 21, 05:58 PM)

Margot Johnson.

In reply, I am broadminded, unlike UKIP whose ‘grand solution’ is to close the doors on unity and put up the shutters on the island.

Also, I have read the UKIP web sight (all of it) so don’t presume to know what I have or have not done, without asking. In their own words, on their own website, they even use the word radical in relation to themselves.

I agree that Brown and his monkeys are a nightmare but the UKIP alternative would be a disaster. Ever heard of out of the frying pan into the fire?

Now, as a broadminded person, I am always willing to listen to the other side, so can you please answer the following, in the context of the UK being out of the EU.

1. With whom will the UK trade profitably, considering that the 80% trade with the EU will be lost?

2. How will European tourists be encouraged to visit Britain with restricted borders? They are already put off by the island’s stubborness in refusing the Euro.

3. Where will you house all the Brits that are forced to return from Europe after losing their EU status?

4. Where would you get your ‘unlimited for personal use’ tobacco and drinks?

5. How would you replace those highly qualified professionals, i.e. doctors, who come from the EU to work in Britain because it does not have the talent itself?

The EU does need reform, that I will not deny, but to return to the days of petty nation states and xenophobia is ludicrous. Although not perfect the EU has done much good for the peoples of Europe. Long may unification continue.

Margot Johnson (Tue Apr 22, 11:54 AM)

Dear Mark Harrison,

Thank you for your reply. My short answers are:-

1] We can continue a friendly trade agreement with Europe without being totally controlled by them. They need our goods as much as we need to sell them. We would also be free to trade with any other part of the world.

2] Tourists can enter the U.K. by showing their passports as at present. Should they attempt to take residence here they would get no state benefits or assistance in finding homes and jobs. Tourists would be encouraged to visit this “foreign country” due to the traditional heritage we already have, and to be received by a much more welcoming hospitality industry and a cleaner happier environment. I’m sure they won’t object to exchanging their euros for the local currency as they do in all places abroad.

3] British citizens could return to live and work in Britain if they chose to do so. One million planned new homes have already been earmarked to house future immigrants. If necessary, they could use those while searching for, and perhaps buying, homes of their choice in the regions of their choice.

4] A sensible UK government would reduce the excise duty on tobacco products and bring it in line with Europe, or reduce it even further than that. This would also encourage the tourist trade. We can’t afford to? We can, if we stop paying untold billions to the EU each year and receiving just 4 billion in return. UKIP intend reviewing all quangos and reducing the tons of unnecessary paperwork they thrive on. Just think of the savings that dissolution of ASH would engender if people had freedom of choice as to how they wish to live their lives returned to them.

5] Doesn’t it? Reform of the strangled NHS is long overdue, including much less paperwork and better working conditions for the medical profession.

No one disputes the benefits of friendly trading agreements between all European countries. I refuse to call them “states” yet. This originally was a very good thing and welcomed by all. The Benelux countries, [Belgium, Holland and Luxembourgh], have had this for a very long time and it was within that triangle that the concept of free trading throughout Europe was born. That it has escalated into total control by the EU, and reduction to becoming member states with loss of national identity, was never envisaged at the start. Do not be lulled into thinking that all European countries are happy about this or have yet accepted it as a “fait accompli”. They have not! Don’t presume that the rest of Europe will accept total EU control and that you will be forced to leave Germany. The end of the story is not yet.

These are my very short answers. All could be nit picked. You say you have studied the UKIP website – presumably also watched the video “Remote Control” featured on it. The present UKIP information pack contains much more up to date material. Their present Manifesto was written in 2005 and will be updated nearer to the next general election. Meanwhile, I urge you to read the speech made in the House of Lords by the UKIP peer Lord Pearson during the debate on the second reading of the Lisbon Treaty.

This speech answers all the questions you have put far more adequately than I can do here. It deals, in particular, with the economic viability of an independent U.K.

Incidentally, I don’t remember Europe consisting of petty nation states and xenophobia. To me it has always been a rich vibrant Continent made all the better by its different cultures, languages and customs.

Jo (Wed Apr 23, 01:35 PM)

Thanks Margot Johnson
Well put across and I shall still be voting UKIP and sorry that you feel that way Mark.As for our youngsters I work day in day out with quite alot some have very good qualifications the reason that they cant get jobs is that, EU directives on health and safety at work, if you have no experience you cannot do the work this even goes as far as to loading a bin on a back of a dustcart. The only way round at the moment (watch this space) is that they work through agencies and if that is not showing effort on their behalf well then I dont know.

Welcome to the site Dave and Ross.

dpp00 (Mon Apr 28, 02:57 AM)

hi all
you know i’d like to see a list of all the good things the E.U has done right along side a list for all the bad,
and maybe a profile of HITLER & HITLER i’m sorry i mean HITLER & BROWN (now theres a great name for a packet of ciggies)

i was stopped the police the other day they said their computer said there was no insurance on my car i said your computer is wrong,i went off to rumage in my car to look for proof while i mumbled fairly loudly ,it must be like livin in F##king russia
the policeman said if i swore again he would arrest me bless me theyv gone very senseitive,

anyway upshot was they seized my car /so next evening i went to perivale police car pound with all my documents about 8pm by 8.30 there was 30 other unhappy members of the public all with much the same story / the fine for this was £130 per person so £3900 for the few hours it took to “DO” everybody was a nice bit of revenue collecting,

now im not complaing i was hoping someone might know how to get in on the action.

dave

joyce (Mon Apr 28, 01:13 PM)

Dave, why was there a fine when you were wrongly accused? And why are you not complaining??

dpp00 (Mon Apr 28, 11:59 PM)

hi joyce

its not a fine as such its the charge for towing your car away plus storage /i had it happen several times to me not with the police but with different parking companys all there small print is the same,

you must pay the towing/storage/fine to have your car released ,it makes no difference if the car was removed by mistake,illeagaly,your parking ticket had fallin off the dashboard,you didn’t see the sign’s,all completely irelevent you must pay the release fee’

then by all means you can challange the fine through the normal channels /or mostly the small claims court but as with most things who has the time or can be botherd to go through all the red tape,

joyce (Tue Apr 29, 06:40 AM)

That’s absolutely outrageous, Dave!! What a scam. The thing is, if people don’t challenge it of course they’ll continue to get away with it.

Rather like the story mentioned on another thread of the guy in Cumbria being fined for having his wheelie bin lid open and all the other things that are happening in this dreadful country these days.

dpp00 (Tue Apr 29, 10:43 AM)

hi
well yes its a complete scam that if you or i tried
to do no doubt we’d be faceing a judge,

what really annoy’s me about these tactics that all councils/police/and private clamp firm’s use,
is that threre is no leyway at all if you don’t have the money you don’t get your car,

its also worth mentioning that there is law in place to make it damm hard or make you afraid of trying ,

example 1.
you get a parking ticket the fine is £80
you are offerd that if you pay the fine within 7 days
the fine will be reduced by 50% so £40
however if you decided to challange the ticket and went to court and lost,

you would then have to pay the full 100% fine £80 plus of course your costs,
it is a punishment for daring to try and stand up for your rights,
also if you look on the back of any ticket you will find that just about anything you could think of as good grounds for appeal is already marked down as not accepteble .

what ever way you look at it it is a system for gathering revenue /fineing people for living
dave

Pat Seward (Tue Apr 29, 04:23 PM)

I have recently had a week in barcelona and can recommend it. A beautiful civilised city where you can have a glass of wine, some tapas and a cigarette

joyce (Wed Apr 30, 08:38 AM)

There’s a story on the newsfeed on the FOREST site from the ‘Publican’ that says that the ban in Germany is not going down at all well. It also says that the Germans are being told that in the UK the ban ’s been welcomed by all and sundry. Something to bear in mind when WE hear reports of other countries ‘embracing’ (they always seem to use such silly language) their newly imposed ban.