Tobacco – Smokin’ the propaganda peddlers
Tobacco – Smokin’ the propaganda peddlers
By Savage Plane
[411 Note: This is a spot-on post about the so-called “evil” of tobacco. You should check out the book – Velvet Glove, Iron Fist – to see how screwed up the whole anti-tobacco “plight” has been over the past many decades… it’s sickening, and more about money (via taxation and “grants” for studies) and political power, ego, and control. It is that simple to summarize. Read on to become more aware.]
So, it came to a point in time when I decided, as a researcher & a smoker, to find out about the horrors of tobacco. I figured I would scare the crap out of myself with the cold, hard facts about my awful vice, and have no other reason but to give up & live happily ever after.
I secretly hoped there was a conspiracy at play, and that the true amount of damage the evil weed was inflicting was, some how, not as bad as I’d been told my whole life. What I ended up finding was a rabbit hole of hidden studies, skewed statistics and out right fraud, leaving me with the resolute determination not to give up any time soon.
Let me clarify this from the beginning, I’m not talking about your branded packet cigarette here, I am talking about rolling tobacco, as pure as you can obtain & preferably home grown. So, from my research, it turns out there could be a very plausible reason why the Establishment does not want us to have access to mind altering substances such as nicotine and cannabinoids ….
“Increasingly, studies are beginning to show that complex information processing, and perhaps consciousness itself, may result from coordinated activity among many parts of the brain connected by bundles of long axons. Cognitive problems may occur when these areas don’t communicate properly with each other. […]
Using nicotine, they stimulated the axon to determine how it would affect a signal the brain cell sent to the cortex. Without applying nicotine, about 35 percent of the messages sent by the brain cell reached the cortex. But when nicotine was applied to the axon, the success rate nearly doubled to about 70 percent” 
“Nicotine DOUBLES the efficiency of our thinking. Hmmm… I think that makes it pretty clear why the PTB (Powers That Be) wish to stamp out smoking. After all, as one comment to the article mentioned, “if our immunity to emotional manipulation and psychopathic propaganda is directly proportional to the cortical control we can exert over the knee-jerk emotional reactions programmed into the amygdala. If smoking can DOUBLE the effective communication between the cortex and other parts of the brain, then what does that say about efforts to do away with smoking in the general population? Can’t have any of the hysterical sheeple accidentally waking up and thinking rationally about their actions.” 
As another ‘motive’ we could look at comparative costs, a tobacco product in 1994 was £2.40, it’s now nearly £10. That’s a nice little earner for the Establishment and cancer nazis. In 2012-13 the UK Government Mafia trousered £12 Billion from tobacco revenue (That’s nearly a fifth of the NHS budget. They plan on raising this cost by another 50% by 2020, but that’s beyond the remit of this blog post.
The proposals, put forward in a document by the Independent Cancer Taskforce, are part of the latest attempt to drastically cut down cancer deaths.
Currently, a packet of 20 cigarettes costs about £9.60, and tobacco is seen as being the main cause of cancer, followed by obesity.
The report suggests the 50 per cent price hike could be put into place by 2020.
(as reported in some controlled rag) 
So smoking is “seen” as being the main cause of cancer eh?
Well lets have a closer look at whether there is any evidence to back up such claims which inevitably domino on to what can only been described as ‘robbing us blind’ taxes. Have you seen the cost differences just across Europe? It’s the same product so why the enormous difference in price?
For as long as I’ve been buying beer from the supermarkets it’s been possible to get a can of weak pish for 50p (using promotions and the football events etc). The price of a single can would be way over £2 by now if the Government had taxed it in line with tobacco, but I can still get nearly a pint for 50p today. Of course, the price of a pint in a local boozer has sky-rocketed along with tobacco, as they can’t have us socialising and communicating with each other, now can they. The last time I bought a pint in Britain it was £4.50 and that was a while ago. Tell me, would you pay £4.50 for a pint in the non-smoking pub, or would you pay 50p for nearly a pint in the comforts of your ‘own rulz’ realm at home?
Now this should tell you an awful lot about the motivations behind the ‘apparent’ vices our government pushes us towards and steers us away from – it’s called social engineering
Of course, the Establishment would like nothing better than to ban tobacco outright, but they’ve learnt from past attempts that the only way is by pricing most people out of the vice. This is a not so veiled display of taxing the poor and financial discrimination, but there is nothing new under this Sun.
We have all seen the ‘nocebo’ inducing anti-smoking propaganda, shoved down our throat from day 1, so below is a collection of ‘alternative’ articles, studies & history you may not have been made aware of. The mental prisoners of peer review will be screaming at this point, but in reality there are dozens of studies & papers available for those that actually go looking.
As always, you decide…
The Smoking Gun:
Even blind faith needs a system of positive reinforcement, which in this case became the advertising agencies and the media. Suddenly the television screens were flooded with images of terribly blackened “smoker’s lungs”, …with the accompanying mantra that you will die in horrible agony if you don’t quit now. It was all pathetic rubbish of course. On the mortuary slab the lungs of a smoker and non-smoker look an identical pink, and the only way a forensic pathologist can tell you might have been a smoker, is if he finds heavy stains of nicotine on your fingers, a packet of Camels or Marlboro in your coat pocket, or if one of your relatives unwisely admits on the record that you once smoked the demon weed.”
In 1950, the first substantial post war antismoking statistics were published. They marked the starting point of a great stampede against smoking. Until now that stampede has lasted 60 years. Although it is showing signs of decay, it has not yet run out of steam.
The pretext for the antismoking stampede was, that by ‘eliminating’ smoking, lung cancer would be ‘eliminated’. While smoking has certainly lost some of its former popularity in the ‘western’ world, lung cancer remains on the rise. In the United States, cigarette sales topped in 1981, with 636 billion cigarettes. While cigarette consumption has almost dropped to half of this figure, the same cannot be said of lung cancer. Lung cancer does not seem to mind whether people smoke or not.
Once a year the American Cancer Association publishes estimates of cancer figures. The 2010 estimates were released recently. Lets have a look at them here: Cancer Facts and Figures 2010.
“Greece has the highest prevalence of male smoking, but doesn’t have the highest incidence of male lung cancer. That honour goes to Hungary, where there are slightly fewer smokers than in neighbouring Austria.
Russia wins the prize for having the highest prevalence of male smoking, but it doesn’t have the highest incidence of lung cancer.
China is another hard-smoking country, not too far behind Russia, but it has male lung cancer incidence less than the USA, where less than half as many men smoke.
There is a higher prevalence of male smokers in India than in the USA, but only a fifth as much lung cancer.
There is a higher prevalence of smokers in the Yemen than in the USA, but the USA has 14 times as much lung cancer.”
“Sterling and his coauthors report that not only is the death rate considerably lower for the CPS sample than for the entire U.S. but, astonishingly, even smokers in the CPS sample have a lower death rate than the national average for both smokers and nonsmokers. As a result, if OTA were to have used the CPS death rate for smokers, applied that rate to the total population, then subtracted the actual number of deaths for all Americans, it would have found that smoking saves 277,621 lives each year. The authors caution, of course, that their calculation is sheer nonsense, not a medical miracle. Those “lives would be saved only if the U.S. population would die with the death rate of smokers in the affluent CPS sample.” Unhappily, the death rate for Americans is considerably higher than that for the CPS sample.“
Nicotine – The Zombie Antidote by Gabriela Segura, M.D.
Yes, tobacco has its pollutants, but they are found in the water we drink, the air we breathe, in baby food, you name it, in even higher concentrations. A conservative estimate is that over 80,000 new chemicals have been introduced into society since the 1800s, only a few hundred of which have been tested for safety; this doesn’t even take into consideration nanotechnology and GMOs, which are already pervasive in the food chain. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, about 2.5 billion pounds of toxic chemicals are released annually by large industrial facilities. And the authorities are worried about a plant that produces the learning and memory-enhancing, natural chemical nicotine? It really is laughable. You see what mainstream education indoctrination does to your brain? You breathe thousands of chemicals every time you inhale air, whether you like it or not, and whether or not you are sitting next to a smoker.
“Yes, you’re reading this right; as a doctor, I don’t discourage patients from smoking in this increasingly stressful world. I do encourage them to choose organic tobacco and papers, or to go back to the old traditional ways of smoking pipes or cigars. The smartest people on Earth smoke and it is a veritable sign of the times that smoking is so highly discouraged in this modern, zombie culture.”
“For personal disinfections nothing enjoyed such favour as tobacco; the belief in it was widespread, and even children were made to light up a reaf in pipes. Thomas Hearnes remembers one Tom Rogers telling him that when he was a scholar at Eton in the year that the great plague raged, all the boys smoked in school by order, and that he was never whipped so much in his life as he was one morning for not smoking. It was long afterwards a tradition that none who kept a tobacconist shop in London had the plague.” – A J Bell writing in about 1700.
“When we connect the dots through medicine, science, history, psychology and sociology, the truth emerges plain as day: the all-out global propaganda campaign against tobacco is part of the same push for ‘full-spectrum dominance’ over humanity in all other spheres. The targets and victims of the fake ‘War on Terror’ are the same targets of the war against tobacco. We are expected to believe that our wonderful ‘leaders’ encourage us to eat poisonous GMO food yet are oh, so concerned about the alleged health effects from smoking? Give us a break!”
Dr Michael Greger doctor talking about smoking being good for you (tobacco – 20minutes in )
Above, is a mainstream article on the medicinal uses of tobacco that manages to stay within the confines of Establishment acceptability with it’s continual assurance that tobacco is not good for you these days, it was just a fad… nothing to see here
The Smoking Scare Debunked by Dr W T Witby