Trump is coming home

And Shuiab Khan of the Lancashire Telegraph does not like it

The bulk of his article is about the football. The usual about how the lads did us proud and all that stuff. And also, football isn't coming home this time but it is next time. You know the script

It would have been the perfect, off the shelf "Well done England", football article, if it wasn't for the dig at Donald Trump in the final paragraph

And then our bad luck returned with a vengeance. England go out of the World Cup and the next day we have Donald Trump these shores telling us that a lot of Brits agree with this stance on immigrants.
You couldn’t make this up.
What an extremely and utterly depressing end to the week. 

What a weird thing to say. Many Brits do agree with his stance on immigrants. His stance being, that if you are going to come to America, do it legally and follow the proper channels. What's not to agree with?

Many Brits live in areas that have been severely badly affected by uncontrolled immigration, so they would more than likely go further than Trumps message of 'do it legally' and say that if you don't have anything to offer and only want to come here for the welfare payments, stay the hell away

Shuiab Khan is one of those people who dislikes Trump, not because of anything he has done or is doing, but because it fits the lefty narrative to do so. He's also one of those people who think we all agree with his opinions and if anyone doesn't, they must be 'Far Right'.

I felt it was necessary to add a scathing comment to this article

I wonder why? It's mostly just the usual guff about 'The Lads', apart from the bit about Trump at the end. Maybe he was expecting a drubbibg from the 'Far Right'?

What Makes People Sink so Low?

Ninewells worker ‘caught puffing’ next to hospital’s ‘no smoking’ sign

'Caught puffing' completely legally in the open air. So some busybody decided to photograph this person and complain about them to the newspapers? What makes somebody do such a thing? How can you hate smokers so much that you photograph them without permission, having a legal smoke and pass the picture on to the papers?

And how can the papers think this is a story that is worthy of or even needs to be published? They have actually taken down the article now, so I can't link to it, but I did save it in my Pocket list
A hospital worker appears to have been caught having a sneaky smoke at Ninewells – right beside a “no smoking” sign.
The worker seems to be wearing a lanyard around his neck and has a large key attached to his belt.
So what!?
A cigarette can clearly be seen in his hand, just a few feet away from a large sign that reads: “Please respect our No Smoking policy on this site.”
Well he clearly does not respect the no smoking policy, probably because it's complete bollocks and he's not doing any harm having a smoke in the open air
The cheeky smoker was snapped by a Dundee resident visiting a relative in the hospital.
So who is this resident?
The man, who didn’t want to be named [...]
Seriously!? The guy who took this picture did not want to be named, yet the paper publishes this:

This all seems a bit...

...hang on...

He said: “I’d just dropped off relatives at the hospital and saw this man smoking.
“I’ve been coming and going a lot recently and I’ve seen him telling people outside there’s no smoking allowed. It’s the pot calling the kettle black.
“I recognised him right away, just out having his fag, right beside the front door.
“He would always go around telling people off for smoking – and I thought it was quite amusing, quite funny.”
My piss was really starting to boil while reading the first half of that article. I even Tweeted about it before finishing. But this is a little different. The man having a smoke in front of the no smoking sign, the man who I was just about to vehemently defend on my blog, is the man who enforces the no smoking rule and tells everyone else to put their fags out*

Fuck it then, he should be shamed. Harassing smokers and then flouting the rules himself. What makes people sink so low?

The no smoking policies adopted by a lot of hospitals these days is very wrong, making patients, visitors and staff go off site to smoke, when they could easily accommodate them on site, but if you take on the role of non-smoking enforcer, you should be subject to the same rules you are enforcing
NHS Tayside operates a blanket ban on smoking in hospital grounds, with exceptions made for e-cigarettes outdoors. The service took the radical step of closing off its “fresh air” garden at Ninewells due to complaints about people sparking up. The space is immediately outside the front door.

Later this year, a new law will make it illegal to smoke within 15 metres of a hospital in Scotland, with offenders liable for on-the-spot fines if caught.
Complete lunacy. Just give people a spot where they can have a fag in peace

*Assuming the story is correct

Three for Three

Or - "We're all smokers now"

Somebody has really been pulling out the stops this week, to promote the Nanny State in our local newspaper

On Monday the target was smokers:
Smoking rates in East Lancashire among highest in the country
SMOKING rates in East Lancashire are still some of the highest in the country.
New data released by the Office for National Statistics and Public Health England have revealed the top 10 local authorities in England where men and women smoke the most and least.
Two East Lancashire authorities have been named in the top 10 local authorities with the highest smoking rates for men and women.
Oh well, somebody has to be above the national average, may as well be us. But as Chris Snowdon tells us, the yearly decline in smoking has finally levelled out, possibly to do with the introduction of plain packaging. Maybe we've reached a point where the remaining smokers no longer do what they're told and the emerging smokers have been desensitised to all the hype?

If that's the case, why not spend more taxpayers money on more of the same?
Since last year Lancashire County Council has been working with Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust and commissioned the creation of a Quit Squad to discourage people from smoking.
Quit Squad encourages people to stop smoking and support for pregnant women to quit. A smokefree initiative has also been set up to help protect people from the effects of second-hand smoke.
Not just to provide assistance to smokers who want to quit, but to discourage smokers from smoking, if they want discouraging or not
And what the hell is a 'Quit Squad'? Why must everything be presented as though it's aimed at children in the playground, these days?
The data was analysed by bosses at E-cigarette retailer
Is anyone else getting pissed off with vape peddlers joining the anti-tobacco bandwagon?
“This suggests it isn’t necessarily triggered by any one factor, such as employment or education, but choice.
So no problem then? Nothing to see here? Of course not
Perhaps more needs to be done in these areas
Perhaps you've done enough?

So that was Monday. Tuesday the target was fat people:
REVEALED: Three East Lancs boroughs named among worst in the country for takeaways
BLACKBURN with Darwen has lost its unwanted crown of ‘takeaway capital of England’ but it is still among the worst in England for its number of fast food outlets.
The borough, along with Burnley and Hyndburn, features high up the list published by Public Health England.
Public Health England again. But looking to Chris Snowdon again for the facts, living near a take-away does not make you fat. But we don't need reams of evidence and statistics to figure that one out, do we? Businesses only open if there is demand. An increase in take-aways, must therefore follow an increase in demand, not the other way around. Also, no fast food joint I've ever known, has ever forced people to go in there and buy food
Around two thirds of adults in the borough are classified as either overweight or obese.
Strangely enough, 'Classed as', does not mean 'Is'. All you have to do is go outside and open your eyes, to see that nowhere near two thirds of the local residents are obese. If I was to bet money on it, I would say the true figure is closer to 6% than 60
Cllr Brian Taylor, executive member for health and adult social care at Blackburn with Darwen Council, said: “The increased availability of high sugar and high fat products is a growing national challenge and in 2016 we adopted a planning policy which restricts the number fast food outlets within 400 metres of nurseries, schools, madrassas and colleges.
Brian Taylor is one of our local Nannies. The concept of personal responsibility is beyond him, so now my access to local businesses is restricted because a small minority of people do not know how to take care of themselves

Which brings us to todays story press release. Alkies:
'Horrifying' numbers treated for alcohol-related liver disease at Blackburn A and E
Horrifying! Truly terrible! Do you want to know what the horrifying number is? Let's take a look through the crazy window
DOCTORS treated 59 patients for alcohol-related liver disease last year, according to NHS figures.
That's a rate of 46 for every 100,000 people registered in the area, 51% up from five years ago.
46 people out of every 100k. Up from 23 in the last five years. Anyone who can describe those figures as anything other than a complete non-event, must work for Public Health England
The rate for the whole of England is 26 for every 100,000 people.
26 people. Absolutely nothing to see here, right? Wrong
Professor Roger Williams, director of the Institute of Hepatology, said the statistics for England were "horrifying" and proposed setting a minimum price per unit of alcohol to curb drinking.
Make millions of people across the country pay more for their booze in order to have a negligable health effect on 26 of them. You really would have to be stark raving bonkers, but this is the Public Health Industry and that's what they've become
More people drink at home
Do you wonder why?

You know what annoys me most about all this? It's not that Public Health England come out with all this tripe with regular monotony. That's how they shovel up taxpayers money, so it's only to be expected. Their nose would be soon out of the trough if they told us there was nothing to worry about.

It's not even the Government who listen to these tax sponging imbeciles and implement their proposals. They're a bunch of elitist sponging control freaks, so it's only to be expected too. They would also have a bit of a problem if there was nothing to worry about and we had no need of a Government to protect us

What annoys me the most, is how easily the general public swallow this up and demand something be done. The population is so gullible it's unbelievable.

Take a look in the comments:


Lionheart134 2nd July 8:30 am
So, maybe they can put some cash aside to pay for their high dependency on health & social care in later life to compensate. Don't trot out that old chestnut about smokers' taxes propping up the NHS, it's just not true.

Really Easy 2nd July 12:18 pm
cigarettes are fine if you don't mind having 4,000 chemicals, including 43 known cancer-causing (carcinogenic) compounds and 400 other toxins. These cigarette ingredients include nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide, as well as formaldehyde, ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, arsenic, and DDT. Nicotine is highly addictive.

boynesider 2nd July 12:30 pm
Tell that to the Roy Castle Foundation

thornintheside0 2nd July 5:48 pm
Are you employed by the tobacco companies? you must be to come out with barely believable fairytales that you have conjured up to convince yourself that smoking's fine. All properly investigated surveys i.e. not ones sponsored by tobacco companies prove that smoking cigarettes is harmful to your health. Whether its passive (remember the bad old days when after night out you stunk of stale fags?) or you actively smoke. You choose to ignore all that and will be telling us next that the world is flat and its only the liberal lefties making the earth is round nonsense to charge you more for your travel (if you can afford it what with the present price of ciggies). Oh and you are allowed an unwise decision just like your mother did when she said 'yes' to your dad.


Pendle Bill 3rd July 7:40 am
With respect, it IS the Government's business to do what it can to ensure that the public stays alive, safe and healthy!

Excluded again 3rd July 7:51 am
The NHS is under huge cost pressures. Many of the diseases it has to treat are due to unhealthy lifestyle choices. The NHS would save a lot of money if most people adopted a healthier lifestyle - which very much makes this the government's business.

Aidan Abett 3rd July 8:57 am
By your logic, the government shouldn't have introduced the breathalyser or the seat belt law.
Of course the government had to introduce that legislation because too many people are too stupid to know what's good for them or bad for them (millions of them voted to voluntarily impoverish the nation just two years ago as an example of this).

The vitriol against fatties wasn't as bad as it was against the smokers. Many of the commenters needed to leave room for a sustained attack on the brown people who run most of the fast food outlets in the area

And today

eddyo 2 hrs ago
With your attitude the NHS is on borrowed time. It is fine to abuse your own body, who cares unless you are dolally? But why should others pay for your free-loading attitude and likely health issues brought on by your lifestyle? Fat, boozing smokers with heart, lung and dreaded c conditions that 8 times out of 10 will arise. Oh, you've 'paid in' ****. Yeah, all 50,000 worth, which is how much healthcare costs you should be 'entitled to' before you start paying. And if you don't have the top- up money? You do with out - as we all should do.

thirdeyevision 2 hrs ago
ban alcohol

Only a couple for today yet, but it was only published this morning. Give it time

If this is the level of support Public Health England has for it's denormalisation process of Smokers, fat folk and drinkers, everyone is pretty much fucked, because as us smokers have been saying for a log time now, "One day, they're coming for you"

The Cost of Stuff We Like

Do you like doing stuff? Any hobbies or interests? Do you like food? Beer? Television?

What about tobacco? Yeah, me too. I like cigars. What do you smoke?

Anyhoo, things we like cost money. We all know that. That's why we do the things we don't like, such as going to work from nine to five. It's to make money to pay for the things we do like. Houses, cars, electricity, food, drink and of course, tobacco

Well it seems that some backwater tobacco control group in Australia or New Zealand or some such, has just discovered that the things we like, actually cost us money. I shit you not

Toki Rau Stop Smoking Services Northland want to raise awareness of just how much money Northlanders who smoke are spending on tobacco in one year.
Why? I'm sure smokers are well aware how much money it costs them, they spend the bloody money.

Northland District Health Board was able to work out the figure based on the 19.1 per cent of Northlanders who smoke, Northland Census data which showed the average number of cigarettes smoked on per day (14.8), and the cost of a packet 20 cigarettes ($27).
Fucking genius! Tobacco Control does nursery school maths

A conservative estimate is around $147 million.

Money well spent in my opinion

That is an average of around $7391 per smoker. Imagine what you could buy for yourself

I can imagine. About 244 Packets of fags. By their calculations

To illustrate the amount of money that is going 'Up in Smoke' Toki Rau Stop Smoking Services Northland burnt a cheque at Te Matau ā Pohe Bridge in the carpark on Wednesday.
Fuck, there go my eyebrows

That gurning harridan looks likes she's never enjoyed anything in her life. What is the point of burning a fake cheque in a carpark to show how much money people spend on tobacco? I spend lots of money on lots of things I like. How about burning a cheque to show how much people spend on curries?

Northland District Health Smokefree Advisor Board Bridget Rowse says it's astounding how much money is going up in smoke.
Or in the case of curries, being shat out your ring. It's not 'going up in smoke', being pebbledashed down the bog or pissed up the wall though, is it? It's being spent on something that people choose to spend it on, because they enjoy it. It's called choice

But tobacco is a bit different to curries and television and cars and all the other things we like. Sure, we pay taxes on all lifes little pleasures, but the sheer volume of tax added to tobacco is what sets it apart from everything else

Maybe if they didn't tax us so fucking much, the amount of our hard earned money 'going up in smoke' would be a hell of a lot less

Jeez, these people are as thick as mince

Voluntary Smoking bans

Last week at Franks Place, we were discussing the smoking ban and how it has become normal for many people, particularly the young who have started to frequent pubs only since the ban was put in place and have known nothing different

It's not uncommon for children to be used as a good excuse to have smoking banned in certain places. It's also not uncommon for The Tobacco Control Industry to press gang children into their campaigns and have them stood protesting outside a school or playground with placards in their hands

'For the children' is the rallying cry of the Tobacco Control Whack-A-Moles when they keep popping up to demand the next restriction or ban, but ten years since they first showed us that private property is no longer private and not immune to Government interference, smoking bans and the idea of further legislation has become so much accepted by the general public, legislation is now not always necessary. Tobacco Control can simply ask people to ban themselves from smoking and the brainwashed masses will jump through hoops to see that it happens

Smokefree Sidelines
Kids copy adult behaviour – so please don’t smoke on the sidelines.

That’s the message in a campaign launched by Healthy Norwich and the Norfolk County Football Association.
Tobacco Control must have regular get togethers and try to come up with new places where children go and adults are still allowed to have a smoke

Local youth football clubs are being invited to join the campaign and become smoke free spaces. This means members and visitors are asked to refrain from smoking indoors and outdoors, anywhere on site, including all playing fields and especially the pitch side lines.

'Invited'. Makes it sound like a privilege, doesn't it?

If mums and dads are seen smoking as they watch their children play a game, it sets a bad example. So the good thing to do is either walk away or better still, quit altogether

If mums and dads smoke, their kids are going to see them smoking a lot more often than while they are playing a game of football. Banning smoking on the sidelines will make no difference what-so-ever to children seeing adults smoking. But of course, it's never about the actual health message they say it is, it's only about making it as difficult for adults to smoke anywhere

The most effective way to prevent young people from becoming smokers is to encourage adult smokers to quit and to remove young people’s exposure to smoking.”

That's a disgusting stance to take. Adults must be forced to quit in order to prevent children starting. It's already against the law for children to smoke, cigarette taxes have made tobacco prohibitively expensive for kids (and many adults) and the new plain packaging laws were supposed to be so effective at preventing kids from smoking, they were referred to as a 'vaccine against lung cancer'. Yet the simple act of seeing an adult smoke will make a child take up the habit?

Norfolk FA Chairman, Michael Banham said: “We’re delighted to be able to provide support to such a worthwhile initiative that can have a real positive impact on the lives of Norfolk’s youth footballers.


James Wade, from Smokefree Norfolk, added: “Around 35% of children who smoke start around the age of 12 years with 90% of those children starting smoking because a family member does or because they feel peer pressure from their friends.

So nowt to do with 'glitzy' packaging then?

Secondhand smoke has been proven to be 85% more toxic than smoking

Good Lord! Passive smoking is more harmful than actual smoking? Passive smoking was originally invented as a good excuse to ban smoking in pubs. As long as smokers were only harming themselves, there wasn't a good reason for such a draconian ban, but as soon as it could be shown with bad science, that smokers were killing everyone around them, the ban became justifiable

Now it's come to this. Smokers are actually doing more harm to people around them than they are to themselves. These are the people who are breathing a wisp of massively diluted ciggy smoke in the ambient air.

The batshit just keeps on coming

Being a smoke free sports club is not about unfairly targeting smokers

All tobacco legislation is about unfairly targeting smokers. It's all about making it as difficult as possible for smokers to enjoy a cigarette anywhere, in the hope that they will eventually do as they're told and quit for good. Or become 'smokefree' in TC Newspeak

Rather, it is about promoting your sports club as a healthy and inclusive place

But just not inclusive for smokers.

Last year, Healthy Norwich worked together to designate 85 children’s play parks as Smokefree.
Smokefree Sidelines is an important next step for the Healthy Norwich campaign

Voluntary smoking bans. I hope their are enough smokers left with the balls to tell them where to shove their smokefree spaces

Politicising Celebdom

Taylor Swift. One time emerging country music star, youngest ever artist signed by Sony/ATV and now somewhat teeny bopperish chart singer. I'm not much of a fan of her music, as it isn't really in my comfort zone, but what i do like about her, is her politics

What politics?

That's just it, I don't know. And that's what I like. I really can't stand the modern need for celebrities of music and television, stage and screen, to constantly tell us what we should be thinking about this and that politico-economic issue, of which they have very little actual knowledge

It's got to a point where you can't hear the music or see the performance, through the ever increasing fog of virtue signalling, that every one of the insufferable buggers seems to engage in on a daily basis

Trent Reznor calls out Taylor Swift for not speaking out about Trump

Ok, first off, who the dickens is Trent Reznor?

The Nine Inch Nails frontman...

Oh. So who the dickens are Nine Inch Nails. *Googles them*

Ahh. A has been, probably never was, 'rock' band. Oh well

Trent Reznor has called out Taylor Swift and stars like her for not speaking out about Donald Trump.

Swift is famously silent on most political issues. She shared a photo of herself in line to vote ahead of the 2016 US election but has never revealed who she voted for or spoken out against a politician

And my respect for Taylor Swift has just gone up a notch. Even if she is secretly a Trump hater, at least she keeps her politics separate from her music career and her fanbase

Speaking to the New York Times, the Nine Inch Nails frontman explained why he feels it is necessary for stars to speak out on political issues. “I was doing press with somebody in the mid-90s and they made an argument that stayed with me: that I have influence, and that it’s my job to call out whatever needs to be called out, because there are people who feel the same way, but need someone to articulate it.”

You couldn't be more wrong fellah. Yes, you do have influence, but it certainly is not your job to 'call out' people you don't like. Your opinions are just that, opinions. And they are worth no more than any other peoples opinions

The only influence you have comes from the fact that some impressionable people tend to emulate the famous, but you do not have a responsibility to use your influence to affect peoples political points of view, any more than you have a responsibility not to smoke in front of young fans in case they copy you

Of course you are free to spout your political views to anyone who will listen, however that does not mean that everyone should do it and it certainly doesn't make Taylor Swift wrong for not doing it

So what if Ms Swift were to heed your words and start to speak out about Trump as you think she should? What if she 'spoke out' to her fans about Trump and said that she thinks he's a wonderful President, the best thing since sliced bread? Would that be ok with you?

Would it bollocks, because Mr Reznor does not just want people like Taylor Swift to speak out, he wants them to speak the accepted narrative among the lefty world of showbiz, that Trump is a very bad man

Continuing to explain he thought it was a lot easier to “keep your mouth shut and let it go” in the past, Reznor added: “You don’t hear a lot from the Taylor Swifts of the world, and top-tier, needle-moving cultural youth because they are concerned about their brand, their demographic and their success and career and whatnot.”

Which is exactly why she entered showbiz in the first place. You don't move to Nashville Tennessee at 14 to start a music career, with the eventual goal of being able to rubbish some President that it's trendy not to like. You do that to become famous and sell your music to as wide an audience as possible, along with obtaining all the trappings that success comes with

Being a successful artist involves a lot of 'concern about your demographic, success, career and whatnot' and very little about your political affiliations. He is calling Taylor Swift for concentrating on her music and wanting to sell albums, which is what he and his band should be concentrating more on rather than complaining that the current President isn't a socialist

Reznor also gave his views on Trump’s actions in office, saying what he is doing is “concerning and infuriating.” “It’s not the conservative agenda, it’s not a question of religious preference, it’s not a question of should government be big or small,” he said.
“I don’t have any problem with those topics. But the disregard for decency and truth and civility is what’s really disheartening. It feels like a country that celebrates stupidity is really taking it up a notch.”

These celebrity Trump haters are very good at sweeping generalisations, but never ever seem to quote examples of the times when Trump has acted in the way they accuse him of acting. Could it be there are none?

So why now. Why has the frontman of a hasbeen band decided it's time to have a little pop at Taylor Swift for not joining the anti-Trump train?

Nine Inch Nails are set to release a new six-song album [...] later this week

And there it is. Free publicity for an album launch. How shallow

I suggest that when Taylor Swift is ready to launch her next album, she go to the New York Times and tell Trent Reznor to kiss her arse. With bells on