Tobacco Control is, in it's entirety, a forced medical treatment.
As such a human rights abuse hosted by a United Nations Agency.
The cartel named "Tobacco Control", employs all of the dark abuses of social engineering, as it's primary plank. Making torture part and parcel of what they have been engaged in for more than a decade. It is an organization formulated in a jail in the 1920s by another anti smoker advocate, one of the most vicious pieces of human trash to ever have walked this planet.
They should all be aware time is on our side and eventually they will gain a reputation earned in the phrase "you are known by the company you keep".
The indictments of the tobacco industry, will be far less interesting to the viewing public and the twitter-sphere. Than dragging so call professionals into courts and watching them suffer, through all of the humiliations they so richly deserve. having done everything the Tobacco industry did and far more, because their advertising and promotions were negative ads, aimed to do harm to other people, with malicious intent. Without that harm their campaigns would have no value, and no chance of success, so it is not a harm by many tortures they can make any valid excuses for, to aid in their defense.
We have a right to be protected against harms imposed by others not risks or phobias which would not qualify, but harms. These harms have victims with names, while none of the statistical numbers, of imaginary harms by risks or risk management, can make that same claim.
Doctors have one obligation; to do no harm. They have failed as individuals and as an industry, or more correctly a criminal cartel.
As such a human rights abuse hosted by a United Nations Agency.
The cartel named "Tobacco Control", employs all of the dark abuses of social engineering, as it's primary plank. Making torture part and parcel of what they have been engaged in for more than a decade. It is an organization formulated in a jail in the 1920s by another anti smoker advocate, one of the most vicious pieces of human trash to ever have walked this planet.
They should all be aware time is on our side and eventually they will gain a reputation earned in the phrase "you are known by the company you keep".
The indictments of the tobacco industry, will be far less interesting to the viewing public and the twitter-sphere. Than dragging so call professionals into courts and watching them suffer, through all of the humiliations they so richly deserve. having done everything the Tobacco industry did and far more, because their advertising and promotions were negative ads, aimed to do harm to other people, with malicious intent. Without that harm their campaigns would have no value, and no chance of success, so it is not a harm by many tortures they can make any valid excuses for, to aid in their defense.
We have a right to be protected against harms imposed by others not risks or phobias which would not qualify, but harms. These harms have victims with names, while none of the statistical numbers, of imaginary harms by risks or risk management, can make that same claim.
Doctors have one obligation; to do no harm. They have failed as individuals and as an industry, or more correctly a criminal cartel.
No one believes the lies of second hand smoke. If you walk into a conference of Tobacco Control activists and light up a cigarette, you make a lot of people mad, but no one would be running for the door fearing for their lives. They know as we know, such a move would only stand to make them look foolish and for good reason. A reason they refuse to face up to, on their own. We heard for years of this brave soul Tornado Repace who voluntarily took measurements of smoke in the air any place he could find it, including any place he believed he had found it. Yet the promotions he made and the testaments he made; that there was "no safe level of tobacco smoke" conflicted absolutely with his own activities with no breathing apparatus employed in all of his years in the field.
Tobacco Control "the movement" are plying for an imaginary right, to be "protected against tobacco smoke". Imaginary because no such right exists. It is entitlement, by taking an emotional assessment "risk" and pretending it is a "danger".
Governments can interfere, if someone is doing harm to another. They can not "protect" someone from the fears that exist only in their minds. We have psychological councilors at the wait, to secure that objective. Politicians sign on to the danger, as their entitlement to interfere. If no danger has been demonstrated, only fear supports their otherwise illegal activities, when they impose these laws and encroach on otherwise still valid rights and freedoms.
All they claim that is necessary; is to pretend a danger exists and it entitles government activity that would not survive in the courts, had they not resorted to pretending to fear the smoke, in spite of it's relatively benign nature in the real world.
If you look at the research, only smokers are not harmed by tobacco smoke. The research has been consistent If it could be demonstrated that smokers were harmed by the smoke, said to be harming others, there would be some basis for these laws. Since nothing can be demonstrated it would appear that smoking is the only real protection against second hand tobacco smoke risks. If it sounds insane that is because it is drawn from the same logic pool, where you would find tobacco smoke as a health risk. No real danger just a lot of bad acting and far too many willing to sign on to corruption in their own field of expertise. Diluting the importance of their own scholastic achievements, training as Scientists or Doctors and immediately declaring themselves nothing more than prostitutes and double speak clowns. Having learned nothing of importance.
The jump from association to causation was a deliberate lie, upheld universally throughout the sciences, because if they did not make that jump, moving risk to danger, they would have nothing to present in their promotions, that is more than a scary story to frighten the children. Scary stories will not survive legal challenges and we have already seen that in the courts where any judge weighed the evidence, in place of imposing the common good of mote and beam. They need to prove that smoking killed anyone, just as they will need to prove the same could be shown with tobacco smoke, that is where their logic and legitimacy ends.
Full disclosure is central to law making and binding contracts. If emotional promotions, by incomplete or inaccurate information pools, was the basis for those laws, those laws should not stand and the perpetrators of lies of omission, should be made to account for their crimes and incompetence.
>>>You do not<<< have a right to be "protected" against tobacco smoke, any more than you have a right to be protected against the goblins under your bed. Anyone who tells you that anyone is being harmed by tobacco smoke exposures, is guilty of telling you lies.
No comments:
Post a Comment