Feel the tobacco control stupid – words fail me

As at time of blogging – click for linky

Oh, for fu… Yeah, okay, baccy control idiots. Whatever you say. Sure, his name really is shared with a medieval merchant and jewel thief, and I also happen to know that curiously enough Dick Puddlecote has also been executed and buried in five graves, which I believe makes blogging something of a challenge for him. And in case I ever get added to the list, though maybe there’ll be a separate list of heretical non-smokers who support smokers, my family name really is Exile and in the early 70s Mr and Mrs Exile Snr took their wailing infant son along to the local sky pilots in order to have the little nipper christened ‘Angry’. Honest.

Because nobody on the blogosphere ever chooses to adopt a nom de blog.


Tip of the akubra to Chris Snowdon on Twitter.

Posted on June 2, 2012, in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 17 Comments.

  1. Fank davis has been making death threats on his blog, Action will be taken against him.

    i will warn you and other trolling pro smokers, that onilne bullying and threats wil be dealt with.

    • And it’s this, exactly this, that makes me embarrassed to be a non-smoker, because it is from among my fellow non-smokers that the hatred springs forth. Not all of them, to be sure. I’m certain I’m not the only one who isn’t convinced by the pharma- and tax-sponsored lobby groups and doesn’t care if other people smoke as long as it’s easy – and it is easy, trivially easy, to avoid the smoke if you want to – but it is not the smokers who refuse to live and let live. The prohibitionists appear utterly incapable of realising that one reaps what one sows, and the smokers are merely responding in kind to the ever increasing litany of people saying they wish smokers would die (Dick Puddlecote happens to have a fine collection of linked examples of anti-smokers spewing venom and often threatening violence against smokers – do go and have a look). In fact often it’s not even that, just a sarcastic repeat of abuse directed and them with the words altered so that smokers reads anti-smokers or similar to illustrate the hypocrisy of anti-smokers being free to threaten and bully and wish violence. And it must be said that you (collective ‘you’) have dug the trap and jumped in of your own volition. All this talk of putting snipers on rooftops with carte blanche to stick a round through the head of anyone who lights up a smoke goes without so much of a whisper of complaint from the anti-smoker lobby, yet when smokers say the same thing what happens?

      “i will warn you and other trolling pro smokers, that onilne bullying and threats wil be dealt with.”

      Motes and beams, chum, motes and beams. And that kind of veiled threat is particularly inappropriate since in this case it’s aimed at someone who has never, ever, once made any kind of threat to anti-smokers – feel free to trawl ≈2,500 posts and find one if you can, but since I despise anti-smokers for their constant and increasing harassment, threats, bullying and dehumanising of people who I can deal with perfectly well simply by moving a metre out of the smoke, I have been careful not to make one. I have certainly called them names but since smokers get called names, and also since you’ve called me names for daring to support smokers (oh, the humanity) I don’t see a problem with that. Freedom of speech is an absolute and goes in all directions. You are free to call me a trolling pro-smoker when I am neither (I’m pro-freedom and property rights, and as such I equally support smokers, drinkers, users of any illegal drugs, people who eat unauthentic pizza, prostitutes, soccer fans, gays and lesbians, cyclists who don’t wear helmets, women who have abortions, people who put sugar in their tea and just about anything else you can imagine that can be done without bothering me or forcing me to take part – I talk about smokers, drinkers a lot because it’s clear that when the nannies have finished with them they’ll come for the rest of us, and that’ll include you as well one day). In turn I’m free to call you names, though I haven’t decided what, if anything, is appropriate.

      As for Frank Davis (you may dislike him but is it too much to ask to tone down the hate just enough to do the man the courtesy of spelling his name correctly?), if he has indeed made a death threat I’ll take him off my blogroll. I very much doubt he really has so link and a screenshot please, because all you’re doing at the moment is accusing without providing a shred of evidence.

      PS – nearly forgot to thank you for leaving a comment that failed to address anything in the actual post.

    • ‘Action will be taken’?? Ooo, fweats. I bet dat is soooo scawy.

      You’re ‘avin a larf encha?

  2. God knows what they would have written about me?

    “Mr. John Galt does not seem to have any physical manifestation outside of a 1950’s novel. How he continually contributes as part of Angry Exile’s commentariat is a mystery that would confound Einstein himself”.

    By the way chrish36, you’re a dick.

  3. Good lord! My gast is flabbered! All this time I’ve been thinking what a nice name “Exile” is. (Although I did wonder about the wisdom of your parents’ choice of “Angry”).

    I was one of those poor unfortunates who was not afforded the luxury of two names. Oh well, I suppose we all have our cross to bear…

    • Although I did wonder about the wisdom of your parents’ choice of “Angry”

      Making good use of the happy coincidence of the surname I was named for a book by a Russian defector. At least that’s what I’d hope to see if I ever get an entry on tobacco control’s wiki. Not likely as I’m pretty generalist when it comes to matters of personal liberty and probably don’t blog about it enough for them. Christ, if Leg-iron couldn’t get on…

  4. Yes, reading that was a laugh out particularly loud moment. I don’t know what was funnier – the fact that they actually searched Companies House for ‘Puddlecote’, or the idea that they thought it might tempt me into revealing my company name. I blog anonymously precisely because these people are evil and would act to harm my business, without a doubt.

    The past couple of days just proves that.

    • Pretty much what I thought. We haven’t reached Kristallnacht type action toward people who smoke and businesses owned or run by known smokers, but I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if tomorrow I woke to news that a tobacconists had been firebombed by tobacco control supporters. The ‘slap a smoker’ thing and that vid of smokers (even if they were stunt smokers rather than actual ones) being assaulted as if that’s just fine because they’re only smokers are worrying signposts. And of course what’s always concerned me is what happens when they run out of smokers? We know the drinkers and salad dodgers are next, and tactics lifted straight from tobacco control 101 are already being used against both groups. Sunbathers look like coming in for a bit of it too but if you’ll excuse the pun my money would be on gamblers being the next major group in the sights. Again, more things that I personally don’t do, but we’re fast running out of people standing between me and the bansturbators and nannies.

  5. smokingoutflatearthers

    A smart move dick and shared with most bloggers who peddle smoking denial,

    your credibilty would be shot to pieces if you had to explain your blog to real people, customers, employees…for christ sake if they ever knew the truth..

    chatting amongst nutters who swallow any old shite so they can still have a fag is another matter.

    • If this is a reply to Dick Puddlecote please use the reply button on his comment. If you’re just calling me a dick for wanting another fag I’d say it takes one to know one and I don’t smoke anyway. Nor do I drink, and since it’s statistically likely that you do I’m cheered by the thought that your likely vice is already coming under the same kind of attacks. But try to enjoy your Pinot Gris when the label’s got health warnings and photos of cirrhotic livers on and the media are bombarding you with bullshit about the social cost and the problems of second hand drinking – which incidentally is something that’s already begun. Many smokers are likely to tell you it’s just desserts but I’ll support your right to drink then just as I do their right to smoke now, and I’ll tell them the same as I’ll tell you: when it comes to our individual liberties we hang together or hang separately. I don’t like the smell of fag smoke and I don’t like dealing with pissheads, but if I don’t support smokers and drinkers it’s a given that something I do enjoy will be taken away from me.

    • Flat-earther,

      The mistake you make is not to realise that what DP writes is not actually controversial amongst ordinary people. It is puritanical, goat-bothering control-freaks like you who have something to hide from the general public.

      Secondly, what on earth is ‘smoking denial’? I can vouch for DP, who I have met in person, he never denied me a smoke!

  1. Pingback: The Guardian Angle | Head Rambles

  2. Pingback: Longrider » The Evil That Men Do

  3. Pingback: Why Are We Paying For This Ineptitude? |

%d bloggers like this: