Misanthropes speak

Yesterday I mentioned that there seemed to be disappointment in some areas - oh, alright, it was The Guardian - that 2011 has not seen record temperatures and warble gloaming is not baking us all to death in our revolting, right wing, miserable selfishness. It's no great surprise that they're not alone, being in the company of none other than Phil Jones. Yes, him again.

>From: Phil Jones [mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk]
Sent: 05 January 2009 16:18
To: Johns, Tim; Folland, Chris
Cc: Smith, Doug; Johns, Tim
Subject: Re: FW: Temperatures in 2009

Tim, Chris,
I hope you're not right about the lack of warming lasting
till about 2020. I'd rather hoped to see the earlier Met Office
press release with Doug's paper that said something like -
half the years to 2014 would exceed the warmest year currently on
record, 1998!
[...]

When you profess a belief that warming will be catastrophic and kill millions that's a really lovely thing to hope for, Phil, you great humanitarian, you. And did you even consider how unlikely this actually is to happen? At the time you wrote that, January 2009, you must already have been aware that in your own HADCRUT3 record the nine years 1999-2007 inclusive all failed to exceed your desired record, and since there are only sixteen years from 1998 to 2014 that was mathematically impossible even if 2009-14 all broke it. It should already have been crystal clear when you wrote that email that what you were hoping for simply would not, could not, happen. Expressing the hope that it would might suggest getting some primary school level maths wrong, or it might suggest that jigging the figures to make some of the years that weren't quite warm enough just a little warmer was being considered. Wouldn't be as good as real warming, which if I understand the warmist ideology is not good but bad yet is also good if it's bad for people, but it might be good enough if it persuades people to support policies which are bad for them. Or something.

I'm not going to speculate which of those is more likely, but I will say this. A bloody good dose of global warming might be just the thing needed to help Phil Jones thaw out his fucking heart.


H/T Watts Up With That.

Some people really are weapons grade cunts

Despite liberally sprinkling my posts with Anglo-Saxon on many occasions I try not to put swearwords in post titles too often if I can help it. However, it's hard to avoid it when I read something like this.

Click pic for link - also at The Telegraph

The needle on my personal misanthropy meter went so sharply to the right of the dial that it broke the stop off, smashed through the side of the case and is now stuck a half inch deep in the wall. What kind of colossal übercunt does that? What kind of fucking parasite sinks that low? Actually using the word 'parasite' is a little unfair and I should probably apologise now, just in case I've offended any cases of amoebic dysentery that resent the comparison with cunts who take off their own kind in time of natural disaster. They might live in shit and spend much of their time making their victims feeling wretched and miserable, but at least parasitic amoebas don't sink to doing it to their own kind.

Of course the unspeakable fucking mutations that were responsible almost certainly didn't know they were looting the home of someone who'd died, that they were stealing the possessions of her grieving family. But they surely would have known that some people had died or at least that it was a strong possibility. The fact that there had been a fucking earthquake can't have escaped their attention, for Christ's sake. It's not a huge mental leap to imagine that when looting damaged and unattended homes you might possibly be only one remove from fucking grave robbing.

Obviously I hope that they're caught, that the New Zealand police and prosecutors nail them with a completely watertight case, and that the court chooses to impose the most severe sentences that it can to reflect the utter depths of bastardry and cuntishness that is using the damage caused by a fucking earthquake as an opportunity to steal. That's certainly what ought to happen in a civilised society, but failing that some poetic justice would be appropriate... is it wrong of me to hope that a fucking building falls on them too?

Cunts.

A pathetic bellend with an uninspiring career who deserves to disappear up his own arse with alacrity...

... meets David Hasselhoff.

Easy choice.

The Snowolf has been looking at women in their fifties. One, Nigella Lawson, TV domestic goddess and Queen of Food Porn is 51 and looking fabulous. The other is Gillian McKeith, slightly older, and known for describing herself as a doctor until it became clear that poking through people bowel movements and telling them that the nutritional value of food depends on what colour it is does not, in actual fact, count. Even allowing for the slight age gap NotDoctor McKeith looks less fabulous than the Domestic Goddess Food Porn Queen. In fact she looks like she not only sucks lemons to get that face but could also, if she decided it was bad for people, suck every photon of every ray of sunshine right off the fucking crop.

I'm betting she eats alone, in silence, probably indulging in a spot of scouring at the same time.

Wouldn't surprise me, Snowolf, wouldn't surprise me. Nor would it surprise me if he's right in his guess that Nigella, queen of full fat desserts, good cuts of meat and food that's not mere fuel but a joy to eat, tends to eat with friends and family and with laughter and light. And he finishes with an absolute killer of a point.

These two pictures demonstrate what the Righteous, the people that would have you smoke-free, drink-free, fat-free, friend-free, choice-free, freedom-free actually look like, and what they want you to look like. It also shows how those who want everyone to spend the time we have on this Earth actually living and loving, rather than surviving and cowering in fear, look.

Which would you rather be?

An easy sell as far as I'm concerned. Food porn and fun over Righteousness and shit sniffing every day.

Denormalisation and the march of hatred.

Over at Leg-iron's there's a post on discrimination in which he says:

"You cannot, so far, tell who we are unless we're actually smoking but that's going to change. We will be made identifiable. Third hand smoke will be the excuse."

Which prompted me to write in the comments,

Perhaps some sort of yellow star motif? It'll make aiming easier when the time comes...

I don't say that lightly since I have Jewish neighbours that I like and respect, and obviously what's going on has yet to reach Shoah proportions (and we should all very much hope that it never does) but all the same the parallels are disturbing. While some may be prepared to live and let live those who believe they are in the right - the Righteous, to use Leg-iron's expression - make no room, sometimes literally no room, for those who disagree.

Not "Smoking is not allowed". It's actual smokers who are not allowed

What are they teaching kids these days?

By the approving sounds of some lecturers, rioting, trespass and property damage. I dunno, once upon a time it was apples on the desk. In my school days it the occasional bag of sweets or, for one particular teacher, Monster Munch. Now it seems like if you want to be teacher's pet you have to smash a few windows in and drop fire extinguishers on coppers from a high roof.

The coming catastrophist mantra.

Warble gloaming could, according to James Delingpole, be circling the drain, and we should get ready for what he calls the next Big Lie: biodiversity. Personally this seems like something I can get right behind for a change. I'm all for more diversity so let's get cracking. I suggest we start by genetically modifying absolutely anything that moves and then anything that doesn't until it begins to move, and we keep going until the bio is so amazingly diverse that people are having to shoot down their breakfast cereal in the mornings after it's smashed its way out of the packet and is flying round the room chasing the cat.

They're grrrrrrrrrrreat.

Do you think Greenpeace will have me?

Nuclear missive.

As it's been more than ably covered by WUWT and James Delingpole I'm a bit late to this, I know, but there is one aspect to Hal Lewis's superb resignation letter to the American Physical Society I want to draw attention to, and that is its timing. The very same weekend the 10:10 mob had intended to launch their little promo movie in which anyone displaying scepticism or apathy to The Cause is summarily executed by being exploded, a respected physicist writes such things as:

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

And:

... the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

And:

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.

And:

I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

And:

The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch...

The whole thing is worth a thorough read and tends to support what I've suspected for a long time, namely that there is now so much money involved that the whole field of climate research has become an industry in itself. And like any industry Big Eco moves to promote it's interests, though as the 10:10 film showed it's just as capable of publicity own goals. It's only natural that it will also want to protect them, and we shouldn't forget for a second that 10:10 showed us how that might work as well.

10:10 regret to announce that Professor Lewis
is no longer available for comment.

P.S. - I hope the fact that next month's talks on warble gloaming are (a) being talked down and may not get the same level of government attendees as in the past, and (b) is yet again being held in a beautiful and luxurious tourist resort - and, incidentally, to which nearly all the attendees will presumably fly by magical no carbon emitting aircraft as the citizens of the majority of their respective countries hope for a warmer winter than the last one - isn't being overlooked what with all these resigning professors and exploding children. If you're all very good Chris Huhne might spend some of your money on a postcard.

Bastards!

The oxygen of publicity.

No time for much of a blog today so I'll let this stand alone. Via The Filthy Engineer I see that EU Referendum is starting a campaign to heap all the shit on O₂ that it deserves for its continued support of the 10:10 campaign, producers of the eco-murder video. Admittedly this might seem like I'm going against my libertarian principles but I'm not saying that O₂ can't support whoever they like and for whatever reasons, just that the eco-fascists they're sponsoring are people who are more worried (though it seemed not actually that worried) about offending people than the fact that their wet dream of being able to blow up anyone deemed insufficiently enthusiastic would be nothing less than murder. And that, I feel, is an excellent reason to find another mobile phone service provider if you're with O₂.

I feel another video might be in order if I have the time over the weekend.

Someone somewhere is really pissed off at 10:10.

Yeah, I know Downfall mashups are so last year, but I just couldn't resist it.

An alternative 10:10 video.

I realise I've not just broken Godwin's Law with that vid but thrown it from the top of a cliff and set its house on fire, but as I said before this is how the most extreme Gaiaists and alarmists, and increasingly the ones who might think of themselves as moderate, see other human beings. This is the value they put on the lives of people who not just disagree but don't joyously embrace the cause and the rituals that come with it. A shrug of the shoulders instead of enthusiasm for the hair shirts is all it takes to reduce the value of your life to zero.

The new Untermenschen - UPDATED

They're everywhere, the new Untermenschen. You probably know several yourself. A smoker or two, obviously, that goes without saying. And drinkers too, of course, and people who put extra salt on their chips, and in fact people who like chips in the first place unless they're pretty stringent about hitting the gym and working them back off again. Yes, we all know that in the Ninth Circle of Hell Judas Iscariot will be smoking, drinking and tucking into over salted so-called junk food without taking any exercise, but the criteria for being among the new Untermenschen doesn't end with simple personal lifestyle choices that don't fit in with the Strength Through Joy-ism of the state and it's nannies. Oh no. If you don't commit to the new state religion as well, even if you do actually believe in it, then you too are an Untermensch.

And so you should be killed, preferably as graphically as possible pour encourager les autres.

+++UPDATE+++

At this point I had embedded the original movie from YouTube but thanks to microdave in the comments I see this morning that the backlash has grown during the night and the vid has now been taken down. However, they've just been reminded that once anything hits the interwebs it's probably there for good, and so it has proved. There are dozens on YouTube and they're probably going up faster than they can be taken down, and even if that dies down it still won't have gone since microdave snagged a copy to stick on EyeTube and which I'm using to replace the defunct YouTube one.

Great work, Dave. They'll have a hard time getting this genie back in the bottle.

Your choice. You don't have to join in. No pressure... BLAM

No pressure - because not joining in makes your continued existence unnecessary. You are, you see, entirely disposable. Even that bird who used to be in the X-Files can be disposed of, her contribution deemed insufficient to allow her life to continue. She believed enough to do the voiceover but didn't plan to join in the rituals, and that won't do because it's not just your belief the Gaists demand. It's your unswerving obedience. Failure deserves death, instant and very, very bloody death. They're not actually killing anyone yet, but it's getting pretty obvious how they feel about anyone not singing from their hymn book.

And of course it's not just them because the anti-smoke, anti-drink, anti-meat, anti-fat, anti-personal choice mobs think no more of you than do the Gaiasts. Very soon we will all be Untermenschen in the eyes of somebody, if we're not already. We can choose to stand up now and say, 'Enough.' Or we can wait for one of them to give us our final order:

"Stand by the wall, you fucking scum!"


H/T WUWT.

Green is the colour of evil, dictatorship and death.

As disgraceful as what's being done to the Thompsons is (see last post) we should remember that for some greenies this is only the beginning, and that what they really want is to kill off most - about 90% - of the world's population either directly or by encouraging disease and starvation in the third world, to sterilise many of the rest by force, to licence having children (actually a child), to set up re-education gulags for those who aren't on message but for whatever reason aren't killed (yet, I presume), and to have the few remaining people completely under the control of their ruling elite and living the kind of life that hasn't existed in Western nations for several centuries. There are people out there who absolutely and sincerely believe that Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and others in the Window Licking Happy Massacres Club were doing the world, as distinct from humanity, a favour but didn't go far enough. And this man, Pentti Linkola, is one of them.

Philosopher Pentti Linkola has built an enthusiastic following of self-described “eco-fascists” receptive to his message that the state should enact draconian measures of “discipline, prohibition, enforcement and oppression” in order to make people comply with environmental dictates.

Jesus Christ Almighty, you can almost hear the marching jacksandals, can't you? Form an orderly queue at your nearest gun shop if you're not keen on the idea of going quietly when this fucker's greenshirt stomrtroopers kick your door in. You really shouldn't judge by pictures but there's something about that photo of him that to me makes him look like he's evaluating the person behind the camera. It's a look I've always imagined was on the face of Josef Mengele and fellow Nazis as they experimented on prisoners. It's a look of someone who doesn't just not value human life but values the extinguishing of it. Or maybe that's just the impression I have because he says things like this.

[World War Three would be] a happy occasion for the planet.... If there were a button I could press, I would sacrifice myself without hesitating, if it meant millions of people would die.

I like the idea of him sacrificing himself without hesitating but I'm not so keen on all the other stuff. Admittedly I feel pretty misanthropic myself, ooooh, about four or five times a week, but I don't want everyone else dead or even necessarily converted to my way of thinking - I just wish their apparently congenital need to suck the state's tit from the cradle to the grave while they tweep out in front of the idiot's lantern wasn't stopping me from living my way. Smiler up there wants to go so much further, further even than the likes of Porridge, Lovelocke and Moonbat, and if there was a button I could press to interrupt the X-Factor with a short message to the effect that this greenie at the least, and almost certainly many others, would very much like everyone watching the show to die please, I'd happily sacrifice a few minutes of other people's on-air freak wrangling* if it meant millions of people finally learned how genuinely dangerous these eco-tools, or rather eco-facists as some of them are beginning to admit, can be.

Gentlemen... 'Eco Prevails!'

Islam? Osama bin Liner? Don't make me fucking laugh. He might harbour dreams of a caliphate and the conversion of western nations to his particular fantasy, but relatively speaking that's chickenshit. What Linkola and his fellow believers want is basically the end of the world.


* TM Daily Mash.

Destroy the unbeliever! Kill the heretic!

Modern Greenism is a funny thing. In some ways it's like many other industries - it has products to sell and needs to create a market for them, it's ruthlessly protective, chock full of vested interests and it lobbies both governments and media all over the world to ensure that it gets lots of promotion and regulatory, ah, environments that suit it, which is why I often refer to it as Big Eco. Yet it's also like religion in that they've got people performing the prescribed rituals even when there's a self evident and needless risk of setting the cat on fire, they've persuaded courts that religious discrimination laws apply to them, and that they really, really, really hate infidels er... heretics er... unbelievers er... sceptics. Seriously, you only have to look at the reaction to Lomborg's 'return' to the fold and the whole more-joy-in-heaven-over-one-sinner-who-repenteth-y tone to it, even though the guy really wasn't saying anything very different from what he'd said before, and how the warmist zealots treated him when they thought he was an AGW apostate.



Nor do you even have to write a book saying it might not be as bad as all that and that anyway it'd be cheaper simply to adapt to any warming to attract the green wrath. Oh, no. Just saying you're not a believer can get your life ruined, as explained by Anthony Watts (update here).

I need your help, because they need your help. Please read this whole story and consider if you can help. WUWT readers may recall this story: Death of a Feedlot Operator …in which the anal-retentive government of West Australia has “licensed” a family farm out of operation due to some shonky science and arbitrary application of the “sniff test”. Yes that’s right, cattle farms smell, so do pig farms, as does any farm.

Even windfarms once you take into account the niff from the chunks of dead birds dropping from the sky. But this shouldn't be a problem in a country in which agriculture is still such a huge part of life and the economy that Aussie farmers are supplying beef to McDonalds not just domestically but even in the US. Just considering livestock alone and ignoring crops and wines the agriculture industry earns nearly a billion dollars from exports, about two thirds from beef. So it seems a little odd that the WA government would, as Anthony Watts claims, regulate out of business a cattle farming family - Rotarians, incidentally - who've invested in environmental standards by planting trees, using a worm farm to break down waste and have invested in odour reduction system precisely to address the concerns that people living nearby would have (though for my money living in rural Oz and complaining about farms is like moving to the end of the Heathrow runway and whinging about the noise). What could possibly be...

...now it’s reason to shut one out due to baseless complaints from the local greens. And, it all started when Matt Thompson started doubting global warming and talking about it publicly.

Ah, yes. That'd do it.

Click to embiggerse

It goes without saying that my position on telling people what they can do with their own land, land that they occupy legally, is the typical libertarian one of non-interference unless you can actually show that someone else is losing out, and as I mentioned above not living with a farm-y smell in an area that is so heavily agricultural should not come anywhere near qualifying. However, Australia's track record on this is not something it should be proud of, especially since it so often seems to be in the name of that which is Holy and Green. The Thompsons are joining reluctant company such as Peter Spencer, a farmer driven to go on hunger strike to protest a ban preventing him from clearing his property of vegetation so that the land can count towards Australia's carbon sinks, incidentally rendering him effectively unable to farm on his own farm and making his land virtually worthless. A billion dollars of exports and they're simply not important enough for the the government to care about, and indeed, judging from Jo Nova via WUWT, the Thompsons weren't even on the radar at one point (my emphasis).

The Thompsons waited a full year to get Works Approval for a 15,000 head feedlot. After they had already committed the capital, the rules kept shifting. They discovered they’d need ongoing licenses as well. After several years of ramping up the capacity on these licenses, things changed. Matt spoke out as a skeptic. About that time, the renewals were delayed, then the numbers were cut in half, and new conditions were added that were impossible to meet. To feed and supply water for thousands of cattle the Thompsons had to sign agreements in advance to pay for hundreds of thousands of dollars of goods they could not use, but had no way of knowing that at the time. When they appealed, it took 18 months to get “vindicated” but by then there was only six months left on the “two year” license. Not enough to set up all the contracts and run a business. The new sub-clauses meant that even licenses for a qualified “10,000″ head had vague untestable conditions: the license you have when you don’t have a license.

The usual bureaucratic goalpost shifting up to a point and then suddenly, no doubt completely by coincidence, delays and restrictions and more delays that basically destroyed the farm as a business despite the Thompsons 'winning'.

It's a fucking strange kind of win that can really only be celebrated by the other side, and that's the situation now because the business is screwed and the Thompson family have just days to get out before the NAB bank, who had once promised not to act till the end of the year, repossess the property. This, by the way, is the same NAB bank who are currently running this advert about how wonderful they are towards small business. As such an appeal is running to help the Thompsons, and if you can spare a few quid I'd highly recommend you pop along either to WUWT or Jo Nova, read the whole thing and click on the Paypal Donate button on your way out. If not then please at least repost it, Twatterise it or do whatever you can do with Facebook about it. If you're in Australia you could write to the WA Premier and relevant minsters as suggested on WUWT (see 'Update 3' down the page), and if you bank with NAB you might think about moving banks and writing a letter to explain why.

And if you ever decide to visit West Australia, which is a beautiful part of the country, do remember to take a clothes peg with you on the off chance you might be in the area where the Thompson' farm is and hopefully still will be. It probably won't smell much even if by some miracle they're still farming there, but on the off chance that you find a greenie whining about the cow farts hurting the sky you can do everyone a favour and use it to peg his lips together.

H/T Obo. I was very late to this having been a little too busy to catch up on who on the blogroll has written what lately, and only a shirt while ago happened to notice Obo's appeal to Oz based folks to spread the word about it.


* 'Predictions' have mostly been long since downgraded to 'projections' and then 'scenarios'. I was under the impression that theories with a real claim to be scientific are normally not shy of making predictions. It's what they're fucking for. As with so many things this does not apply to warble gloaming theories, partly because it's half religion and half Big Eco business and partly because they seem to prefer any actual predictions they make to be untestable by anyone not prepared to wait around for a hundred years or so.

A Righteous frenzy.

Following on from last night's piece about anti-tobacco zealots comparing smoking with the September 11th attacks (see post before last), this afternoon I read an interesting article in The Age in which a public figure is slammed for not being on message when it comes to ruling over other people's bodies. The frenzy of the Righteous getting in there to tear off a piece of the poor sod is depressingly predictable.

LORD Mayor Robert Doyle has caused a storm by suggesting there is no evidence passive smoking causes lung cancer.

Cr Doyle, who is also chairman of Melbourne Health, told 774 ABC Radio: "I don't know of a case of cancer that has been caused by passive smoking."

So not just a public figure but also one who chairs a local health service, and worldwide that industry is just stuffed with people addicted to lecturing other people about what they do with their own bodies. Melbourne Health is no exception, as we shall see.

When told there has been, he said: "Have there? Really? I don't know of one. I am happy to be corrected."

Good for him, though he could have gone further and more overtly called their bluff simply by asking for one example of a death certificate, just one and from anywhere at all, that listed passive smoking as cause of death. Yes, I know they're only talking about incidences of cancer but the implication is clear. And so, when you read on, is the bullshit (my emphasis).

The chairman of lung service at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Associate Professor David Ball, said no one knows the point at which tobacco smoke becomes safe.

From which we can infer that no one knows the point at which tobacco smoke becomes dangerous either, though naturally Professor Bell assumes, despite the tacit admission that he doesn't actually know, that it's anything greater than zero (again, my emphasis).

Professor Ball, who has worked at Peter MacCallum for more than 30 years, said: "The most sensible advice I would give to people is to avoid tobacco smoke altogether.

"We know that about 10 per cent of people who are lung cancer sufferers have never smoked, so the cause of their cancer is unclear...

From which we can infer that the cause of cancer in the remaining 90% who have smoked or do smoke is considered clear.

...and it would not be unreasonable to conclude that some of those people may have caught it from the cancer-producing substance in tobacco smoke that they may have been exposed to, either through their contact with relatives or close family members."

Which translates as "we don't know why they got cancer, but we're assuming that a smoking related cause must be present for some of them". From this we can infer that there is no identifiable cause at all for the others who may not have been exposed to blahblahblah.

However, the important point is that there is no practical difference between cases where there may have been smoke exposure and cases where there may not because in all cases, to use the professor's words, the cause is unclear because they have never smoked. From this we can infer, as Leg-iron frequently points out, that medics tend not to look for any other cause once it has been determined that the patient has ever smoked. Breathing radon, if we choose to take the good professor's claims at face value, is apparently harmless after all. At least he doesn't consider it worth a mention despite being, according to Wikipedia (with all that implies),

... responsible for the majority of the mean public exposure to ionizing radiation.

And...

Radon emanates naturally from the ground and from some building materials all over the world, wherever traces of uranium or thorium can be found, and particularly in regions with soils containing granite or shale, which have a higher concentration of uranium.

Presumably this is because both uranium and thorium are radioactive and radon isotopes are in both thier respective decay chains. And does Australia have much in the way of uranium and thorium? Oooh yes. Lots of both, and by extension presumably a fair bit of radon along with it. Granite? Sure, we've got tourist landmarks made of the bloody stuff? Shale? Not so sure about that but I think some of the domestic gas production comes from shale rock.

Anyway, all that's irrelevant because tobacco is determined to be the cause for 90% of lung cancer as well as an unspecified, though implicitly significant, proportion of the remaining 10%. This might change in future if anyone works out how to sue a rock or ban certain types of geology.

Professor Ball supported banning smoking in outdoor dining areas.

Who'd a thunk it?

And of course he wasn't the only one getting cross with Cllr Doyle over his failure to toe the line on smoking. Aaaaaaaand... cue rent seekers!

Mike Daube, professor of health policy at Curtin University and president of the Australian Council on Smoking and Health, said: "There is very clear evidence on passive smoking and lung cancer. .."

But not in the form of death certificates, obviously.

"The lord mayor should be ashamed of himself for making a comment like that. It sounds to me very ill-informed and irresponsible."

It sounds impartial and perfectly responsible to me. If he is ill-informed perhaps that's because nobody can inform him of the name of a single person who has cancer or who has died and where all factors, e.g. possible presence of radon, were considered but eventually passive smoking was positively identified - as distinct from 'assumed to be in the absence of any other ideas' - as the cause. Go on, name one. Cllr Doyle has said he's happy to be corrected, and I think most pro-choice people are the same. We're all just waiting on the name.

Quit Victoria executive director Fiona Sharkie said: "Exposure to second-hand smoke is a cause of cancer."

She said the evidence was "incredibly well documented".

Providing you're not expecting to see it on an actual death certificate, in which case it's not documented at all. Again, name one, just one, case in which all possible causes were considered but exposure to second hand smoke was positively identified as the cause. Just one case.

The thing is you can't can you? And neither can the guy from Council on Smoking and Health (CoSH? - it feels appropriate somehow). Not if Professor Ball, himself a zilion miles from being pro-choice, is to be believed.

"Given that Robert Doyle is the chair of Melbourne Health, which includes the Royal Melbourne Hospital, he has probably got many doctors there he could check it with," she said.

Why? He already knows what they'll say. We all do. But can any of them point at a single death that has been positively and indisputably caused by passive smoking? Or is it the usual assertions of vast numbers simply on the grounds that, well, what else could it be (forgetting that nobody's actually looking for any other cause, natch).

Since it's all laced throughout with caveats and the usual weasel words 'may', 'could', 'potentially', 'some' and so on, whoring themselves on behalf of people who believe their assumptions are correct but can't bring themselves to say openly how much is still assumed, I wouldn't be surprised if the first certain passive smoking related death is actually some poor bastard getting murdered for lighting up by an outraged non-smoker who's simply retaliating in unjustified fear - whipped up by the antis - for their own life. They'd probably get off too. The way things are going murdering untermenschen like smokers will be seen by some as a public service. Ordering the poor sods around is already fine, and, as Cllr Doyle has found, failing to support more and more oppression of smokers makes you nearly as bad as them in the eyes of the Righteous.

There's no such thing as too low for the Righteous.

I was looking through YouTube for something else that I thought might interest Dick Puddlecote and JuliaM, something about ads here in Oz by tobacco firms and retailers campaigning against moves such as hiding the fags out of sight and forcing manufacturers to use plain packaging. What I stumbled across by accident has temporarily driven the thought from my mind and left me near speechless with rage. What I stumbled across shows how low the Righteous are prepared to stoop, and perhaps a hint at how some of them are starting to view smokers.

What I stumbled across was this:



I'm not remotely a religious man but free speech is practically holy in my book, and since I can't bear hearing anything along the lines of 'Oh, I'm all for free speech, but...' coming from anyone else it's difficult for me to say that he shouldn't be allowed to do that or YouTube should take it down. But in the same vein I can say that I think the creator of that is the lowest kind of hectoring, nannying whiney little authoritarian there is and that this comparison isn't merely scraping the barrel but smashing through the bottom and digging a hole.* Is he seriously comparing a voluntary activity which carries health risks to those who choose to partake with an act of nearly unprecedented mass murder by 19 wild eyed religious fanatics for some twisted idea of glorifying their god?

If you work for a tobacco company or have shares in one that's how they've been thinking of you. Because of all this crap about nth hand smoke, if you are a smoker that's how they're now starting to think of you. And if you're not a smoker and you fail to condemn those who do, how they will soon begin to think of us? If tobacco companies and smokers are being compared with hijackers, terrorists and mass murderers will those of us who say 'let them smoke, I don't mind, they're not hurting me' be seen as apologists? I think we will, I really do.

9/11 for fuck's sake. There's no comparison at all. A small number of Islamist headcases might like to take my life, but a vastly larger number of self-righteous übercunts in our own society think as the creator of this video thinks. Oh yes, I know who I should really fear and who I should really fight. It's the man on the other side of the street twitching and waving theatrically if anyone with a cigarette comes within ten metres of him, and even more, the bastards who pull his strings and manipulate his thoughts and twist his face into expressions of hate and disgust toward people whom he can no longer even think of as people. They are our most dangerous enemies, and they don't want to settle for our lives - they want our thoughts and our souls.

Well, they can have one of my thoughts gratis:

Never! Now fuck off.



* And thinking along those lines I suggest anyone who feels so inclined pop along to YouTube and exercise your freedom of speech in the comments for that video. However, I would suggest not complaining to YouTube in case they pull it and stop more people seeing the minds of the anti-tobacco zealots. And maybe grab a copy of it just in case someone decides to dispose of the evidence.

Comment moderation.

Due to one or more complete cock slots wasting my time with comment spam I'm moderating all comments for the time being. Hopefully the fuckers will get the message and go play on a freeway somewhere. In the unlikely event they read this my message to them is simple and from the heart:

... and have a nice day

Success...

Prick.

What libertarians are up against.

The normally irrepressible Dick Puddlecote has been linking to Longrider and getting a bit fed up with where both their thoughts are leading.

And there, unfortunately, is the problem. The enemies of liberty are not just the politicians, the bureaucrats and senior police officers. It’s not just the petty jobsworths and town hall officials wearing the jackboot that stamps on the faces of the oppressed. It’s the man on the Clapham omnibus. And that is a depressing thought indeed.

Talk of a lasting rebellion is incredibly premature. We're still nibbling at the edges of a nasty disease. That of spineless 'oh well'-itis. The regurgitating of idiot ideology by those whose life skills have been replaced by blind adherence to poorly thought-out authoritarianism. So much so that their only understanding of responsibility is to replicate the fuckwittery of those they see wielding power, without any thought to the obvious consequences of their actions.

Depressing? Yes. Is there an answer? Fucked if I know ... but I can't see one yet in the new morons we have governing us.

Me neither, though I think Dick Puddlecote is mistaken in even looking to government for the answer (I'd be surprised if he really is). I feel the answer needs to come from outside the government, and indeed outside the government apparatus and the statist bastards who compete to run it. I'd agree more with Longrider, whose blog I've read too little of, that the man on the street is as big a part of the problem as any government. Too many are conditioned to do as they're told and too lazy to do anything but accept the thoughts they're told to think. Too many are to prone to a sharp intake of breath and the stock illiberal phrase, 'Ooooh, there ought to be a law against it', inevitably giving some bastard the excuse to fucking make one. Too many are willing to say 'bloody government' at the drop of a hat, but too few are prepared to demand less government, if such an idea has even occurred to them. And too few, far too few, realise that the individual liberty that they'd very much like for themselves hinges wholly on individual liberty for everybody.



That kind of thinking is what we're up against, folks. Frankly I have no real desire to change it more than necessary for my own freedom. If someone wants to enslave themselves that way it's their business, and if they can't be talked out of it then that's that. I don't want to drag people kicking and screaming to libertarianism - it wouldn't be terribly libertarian for one thing - but that's where I want to go. So they can go be right or left if they like. They can go be statist conservatives who have traditional ideas about marriage and child rearing and what recreational drugs should be allowed, they can go be statist socialists if that's what flicks your switch. But if we have the decency not to want them forced to be libertarian, who the fuck are they to demand that we comply with them?

'Yes, we are all individuals!'

'I'm not.'

'Shhhhhhhhhh.'

Art imitating life, there. And it's not just that we should be fed up with the mob regurgitating their force fed thoughts over us and telling us what we are and shushing anyone who says 'I'm not'. It's also because of what the mob can easily become.



Sorry, that's not it. I meant this.*



It doesn't matter whether what drives this hatred is whipped up religious intolerance based on misunderstandings, half truths, coincidences and bullshit or whipped up anti-smoking zealotry based on misunderstandings, half truths, coincidences and bullshit. There's no justification for persecution.

To quote Brian, fuck off.

* Yes, I know they did it before they turned up outside Brian's in the morning. Doesn't change the point.