Monday 1 June 2015

UK's Most Obscene Parasites Reveal Their Latest Plans

Guido has got hold of ASH's latest plans for making sure they continue to sponge off of our taxes for the next few years.
The leaked memo includes plans to investigate “legislative and non-legislative options to make outdoor environments smokefree” and “all enclosed cars and motor vehicles.”
Yes. In the past Deborah Arnott was ecstatic that smokers had been "exiled to the outdoors" but now her and her office of revolting state-funded cocksockets want the outdoors too.

It doesn't matter that even Simon Chapman - a geripratric who hates smoking so much that he earned his place in the institutionally anti-social tobacco control industry by vandalising bus shelter adverts - says that outdoor smoking bans are "ethically unjustifiable" and is contemptuous of their benefits to health and society in general.
In contrast "fleeting encounters with cigarette plumes" in wide open spaces pose "a near homeopathic level of risk to others", he says. 
He suggests the relative lack of research looking specifically at the impact of lighting up cigarettes in parks and on beaches is down to scientists appreciating that such exposures "would be so small, dissipated and transitory as to be of no concern". 
Prof Chapman says policies based on mere sightings of smokers are "redolent of totalitarian regimes in their penchants for repressing various liberties."
But ASH wouldn't care if Britain did, indeed, become a totalitarian regime as long as the tax tap keeps shovelling our money in their direction. They don't give a shit about health, just their bank balances.

They know that smoking outdoors presents no problem or threat to anyone at all, but always choose to pretend otherwise, as they did here.
Amanda Sandford, from the anti-smoking charity Action on Smoking and Health (Ash), said: 
"Although more research needs to be done to verify the findings of this initial study, it shows that further restrictions on smoking outdoors, such as smoke-free cordons around doorways, may be necessary to protect employees who are required to work in places where people are smoking."
Well no, actually, it didn't say that at all. What that study on smoking outdoors really said was revealed by Time magazine.
Levels rose by 162% among students hanging out at the bar, 102% among those at a restaurant, and 16% in the control setting. Yet, in spite of the shocking statistics, overall levels of exposure for all three areas remained relatively low, and would be classified as "background" level, according to measures established by the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
So, nothing to see here, just another example of ASH misleading the public which - funnily enough - is precisely what they were created to do by an anti-smoking, anti-drinking, anti-sex fascist in the 1970s.

As for banning smoking in all cars, I'm afraid this one was telegraphed a long time ago. It's funny that I'm often accused of making up scare stories and pointing to a non-existent slippery slope, but I predicted this 2015 ASH policy goal in 2009.
Deborah Arnott, of fake charity ASH, during a BBC piece talking about banning smoking in cars containing children, let slip that this was just a first step towards dictating what you do in your own car whoever is in it.
Deborah Arnott, chief executive of Action on Smoking and Health (Ash), said the charity was in favour of a ban on smoking in cars.

The risks were not just to children but to adults suffering from conditions like heart disease, she said
It's the way they work, you see. Use the chiiildren to denormalise an activity, then once the precedent is set and another tiny part of your freedom has been extinguished, push for the larger part.
Nope, it's never been about the children either.

Guido's leak shows that ASH are also looking to ban smoking on stage which has harmed no-one in the world, ever, as well as recommending "national surveillance" for, amongst others, "people with mental health problems". So more rancid torturing of incredibly vulnerable adults incarcerated against their will, then.

Meanwhile, they continue to sit back and say nothing as the sickest fucks in British society beat up on smokers and - despite pretending they are a friend to vapers - have done diddley squat to stem the tide of e-cig bans up and down the country.

There is no more dangerous and obscene collection of hideous parasites in this country at the moment. It's high time the state funding of this disingenuous bunch of bastards was stopped and they were told to fuck right off and get a real job.


Vlad said... an institution, organization, or fund established to help the needy.
2.terrorist group: a political movement that uses terror as a weapon to achieve its goals
3. pressure group: an interest group that endeavors to influence public policy and especially governmental legislation, regarding its particular concerns and priorities.

Which one describes best the activity of ASH ?

Dick_Puddlecote said...

None of them, they tend to work like this instead.

moonrakin said...

I think is sadly undersupported and has gotten a bit frayed at the edges.

I've been 'stonished at my local "Wildlife Trust" which is stuffed with ex-council environment nonjobbers and sucks millions direct from public funds (they are funded from Landfill Tax!) with only vestigial accountability and lobbies the council to boot . I've put links to their annual reports into comments in local rag which routinely get deleted - which speaks for itself....

If you can communicate with The Devil - crowdfunding the site to be a bit more polished and current with a news feed maybe - will get right up their noses.

Bonfire of the Quangos? = not the half of it ......

Ian B said...

It's insane, isn't it? The whole thing. Everyone's gone stark staring mad. Here's a woman in a major national newspaper- a supposedly right wing one, at that- seriously claiming that "a man groped her with his legs".

I give up.

What the.... said...

Which one best describes the activity of ASH ?

Me. Me. [hand raised] Me.

I say all three.

ASH is a pressure group. It’s raison d’être is to influence public policy and especially governmental legislation, regarding its particular (antismoking) concerns and priorities, i.e., at least prohibition of smoking from public view – indoors and out – if not also the prohibition of the sale/use of tobacco.

ASH is also a terrorist organization. It is “a political movement that uses terror as a weapon to achieve its goals”. The manufacture of tobacco smoke into something on a par with a bio-weapon like, say, sarin gas,
if not worse, is terrorizing the populace into conformity. The sight of adults
with cupped hand over mouth to avoid even a wisp of smoke while passing someone smoking…. outdoors… is testimony that they have been well terrorized.

And, finally, ASH must also be considered a charitable organization. It is an organization helping the needy. Through its influence on government, ASH does much to find very-well-paid employment for needy, incompetent,
megalomaniacal, hysterical types within Tobacco Control and Public Health to further the prohibitionist agenda. If that ain’t charitable, what is?

Lisabelle said...

Wish we all saw this train coming back in the 70's, 80's. They have gained too much ground, then you have the issue of a-culturalization going on globally, where western culture may well be gone at the rate it is going. They can't figure out how to make money in any honest way so they are now cannibals!

jmshigham said...

There is no more dangerous and obscene collection of hideous parasites in this country at the moment.

Defra? Ofsted?

Mike Loftus said...

From the description, the man may well have 'groped her with his legs'. The puzzle is why she didn't say anything to him, or, if she was afraid, why not just get up and move away?

Mike Loftus said...

If you had warned me in the 70s that this train was on its way, I would have written you off as a paranoid nutcase. Had you warned me in the 80s, I would have thought you morbidly pessimistic. I know better now.

truckerlyn said...

I would say both 2 and 3 - both descriptions fit them pretty well!

gray cooper said...

The political class who funds from taxpayers these fake charities is criminal and very foolish.