Nappy-Headed Ho's

[Guest]

I love this thread

 

it's just wandering all over the countryside.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFF

[LordTheNightKnight]

I love this thread

 

it's just wandering all over the countryside.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFF

 

You need to see more message boards. This is straight up on topic compared to some I've seen.

[Guest]

yes I find myself in agreement with Lord again. I bet that Korean kid chalked up some weird stuff on forum boards.

 

Whoops! Maybe the thought police will start checking more throughly, and then ban forums for encouragng weirdos.

 

I don't have a clue what those shootings tell us Lord. Nothing IMHO.

 

Socio and psycho -paths exist period and that has nothing to do with guns or race.

 

As for my comments on your politics and perception of wealth I apologise if I got the wrong end of the stick; you have just seemed a bit chippy on times....like when you mentioned your low income as though the rest of us are loaded or something. It is all relative; your lifestyle will be incredibly more comfortable than the majority of people in the UK for example, and us far better than a soweto township.

 

I agree what you have said about animal cruelty; howver for example I and 600 vets who gave evidence to the Burns report are clear in our message about foxhunting. It is NOT a matter of opinion; the Hunt is not cruel....that is the concensus of veterinary opinion. Similarly, Canadian veterinary experts have pointed out the incredible swisftness of the harpik as a killing device. Yet there ARE people here who disgaree with those views yet have NO experience or knowledge of these things to go on. They have swallowed PETA's lies but xpress surprise when others swallow lies about fur.

 

Also I must add that as far as "animal police" go, there isn't a VET I know that trust any of them within a mile of an animal; in the UK at least. They are TOTALLY without qualification in welfare or husbandry yet have incredible powers. If there is animal abuse, it should be in the hands of regular Police and veterinarians, NOT these animal police brownshirts. You have no idea of the conflict they thrive on, and the lack of interest they express in animal welfare unless they smell a prosecution. A fox lying in the road with a broken hip? Forget it there is no chance of them coming out. Pay for the vet as countryside people do daily for the wildlife that urban folk and animal police don't give a flying f*** about. And NEVER let one near your horse, as any horseman in the UK will tell you.

 

As for the comdey thing; are you sugesting that racial jokes are responsible for this korean kids madness?

[LordTheNightKnight]

yes I find myself in agreement with Lord again. I bet that Korean kid chalked up some weird stuff on forum boards.

 

Whoops! Maybe the thought police will start checking more throughly, and then ban forums for encouragng weirdos.

 

I don't have a clue what those shootings tell us Lord. Nothing IMHO.

 

Socio and psycho -paths exist period and that has nothing to do with guns or race.

 

As for my comments on your politics and perception of wealth I apologise if I got the wrong end of the stick; you have just seemed a bit chippy on times....like when you mentioned your low income as though the rest of us are loaded or something. It is all relative; your lifestyle will be incredibly more comfortable than the majority of people in the UK for example, and us far better than a soweto township.

 

Having a low income=/=being against wealth. It just means I don't have that much.

 

I agree what you have said about animal cruelty; howver for example I and 600 vets who gave evidence to the Burns report are clear in our message about foxhunting. It is NOT a matter of opinion; the Hunt is not cruel....that is the concensus of veterinary opinion. Similarly, Canadian veterinary experts have pointed out the incredible swisftness of the harpik as a killing device. Yet there ARE people here who disgaree with those views yet have NO experience or knowledge of these things to go on. They have swallowed PETA's lies but xpress surprise when others swallow lies about fur.

 

Also I must add that as far as "animal police" go, there isn't a VET I know that trust any of them within a mile of an animal; in the UK at least. They are TOTALLY without qualification in welfare or husbandry yet have incredible powers. If there is animal abuse, it should be in the hands of regular Police and veterinarians, NOT these animal police brownshirts. You have no idea of the conflict they thrive on, and the lack of interest they express in animal welfare unless they smell a prosecution. A fox lying in the road with a broken hip? Forget it there is no chance of them coming out. Pay for the vet as countryside people do daily for the wildlife that urban folk and animal police don't give a flying f*** about. And NEVER let one near your horse, as any horseman in the UK will tell you.

 

Okay, implying that they are fascist in some way does not prove they are wrong. If you want to prove they are wrong, try actual facts and figures. What you are posting here is just ranting about what they supposedly do and not do. Trust me, that argument doesn't really convince anyone. Of course facts and figures won't convince everyone, but it is more effective.

 

As for the comdey thing; are you sugesting that racial jokes are responsible for this korean kids madness?

 

WTF? I didn't say ANYTHING about his motives. I'm referring to our FOCUS about the events.

[Guest]

Firstly Lord facts and figures are the problem.

Statistics etc prsnted as fact have been known for 100 years or more to be completely unreliable; yet we live in an age where after all that they are believed. It suits everyone to talk in those terms because without being trained in interpreting statistics you have no idea of contra against the crap.

 

For example; what does this tell us:

 

25% of adults die of smoking related diseases.

 

That may shock some. However, to me it says that 75% of people die of non smoking related diseases, and that as 25% of people smoke, what we need to find out is how many of the 25% are smokers. Answer if you dig: exactly half. That means that half the people who die of smoking related diseases do not and have never smoked. Hence, eager to pursue the case, they look for scapegoats quickly or their evidence is shot to pieces. Hence passive smoking. Blame the non smokers deaths on the smokers. Except that now latest research shows that air in smokey bars and clubs ect is two and a half thousand times safer than it need be for any chemicals present to cuase nay damage whatsoever. YET the smoking bans continue.

 

The same "facts and figures" are used to back the arguments for global warming, but again anyone who can analyse the statistcis, and point out the obvious climate changes in recent history being linked to the sun, are ignored.

 

Facts and figures Lord, are the new religion.

They ask for blind faith on interpretation. And you can interpret such things in many ways. Rising ice cream sales near summer were once proved to cause summer through stats logic, since other causes and effects (like seasonal change caused by earth tilt and sun etc)and other are absent from the data.

 

So I prefer this evidence. 580 vets gave evidence to the Burns report that in their qualified opinion foxhunting was the most humane form of fox control , and gave their reasons why in depth. Naturally they are familiar with the horrors of all other methods of control, including guns and poison, and gave the actual process of death and injury in their evidence.

I have posted direct links to that evidence in all my discussions on foxhunting, but just like the British government, several people here refuse to acknowledge that. I CANNOT post it in the thread because its dozens of pages long; but he links are clearly marked and without looking at THAT evidence nobody has any weight in their opinions. I also gave established scientific facts about the powerful painkiller in adrenalin, which any "chased" animal has. I also pointed ut that the method of hound kill is a bite to the neck severing the nervous system and death within 3 seconds. It is therefore utter nonsense to suggest the fox is ripped apart alive yet people HERE continue to say it. They ARE facts not my opinion.

 

ARGUMENT through logic and multi disciplinary approaches (and the Burns report was a fantastic example of that despite the fact its conclusions were moderated and even they were completely ignored. It was the WMD thing again) present a much more detailed truth, than "facts and figures" . Remember that facts and figures from the worlds greatest scientists in the 1930s proved the superiority of the Aryan race above other races.

 

My method of argument is to summarise the evidence and point you to the links for evidence. Not quote statistics masquerading as facts. Problem is people don't like reading or pressing links they do not agree with. However when their responses show they have failed to consult my links then their argument is immediately negated in front of anyone who has. EVERY time I argue with a PETAphile and he posts links I do him the coutesy of analysing them; then criticsing anything that doesn't stand up. NOBODY has done that on the foxhunting debate here; nobody looked at the veterinary evidence to which I pointed.

 

...........................................................................................................

 

Secondly you miss my point about wealth. I said wealth is relative.

You say you don't have much. For an American to say he doesn't have much is a gross insult to the millions of people in the world ...and even in the USA ... that have abspolutely nothing to eat. That is what I meant. So maybe you should reonsider and be grateful of your position.

 

Do you know why few aboriginal peoples ever post on net forums? Because they may travel 100 miles or more to their community centres, then find that the computers there are outdated. Five years ago I spoke to many aboriginal peoples. Now they have no access because technology has moved out of their reach. It takes MY computer for example up to half an hour to download some myspace sites; it just hasn't got the memory to cope. All my Inuit friends for example find this a problem too.

 

You on the other hand have access to mass communcation with up to date technology, and have things at your disposal that many people in the world cannot even begin to dream about. They have wind up radio in parts of rural Africa for example; and that is only within the last few years. An anti biotic course can be the equivalent of two months wages; and our multi nationals have played havoc with their cutures and incomes often through moral imperialism of our governments masking forced economic change(such as dimaond mines-bushmen of the kalahari-big game hunting; or Inuit-marine mammals; and the cree are still waiting for their compensation fro flooding their hunting grounds so Canadians in cities often whining the PETA cause can have cheap hydro electric power and be all "green")

 

So that is what I meant by income being relative. Also priorities are relative too. I live in a tiny old virtually derelict Victorian terraced house with no central heating BUT my girlfriend has several nice furs. I ain't whinging, and it drives me up the wall when people assume that we are rich because we have a racehorse, support foxhunting, and vote Tory. We have prioritised, and look on nobody with envy.

 

...........................................................................................................

 

As for the last point it can be summarised like this note we have pinned on the tack room door:

"Big people talk about ideas

Average people talk about things

small people talk about other people"

 

Now regarding the tragic victims of the tragic Korean, what can we say about it? Nothing. There is no converstaion about this that can possibly have any meaning apart from psychological profiling. There simply is no other discusion so it is POINTLESS for any of us to focus on it UNLESS it comes out that he was brainwashed by some cause, cult, ideology or religion which will again present a problem. It looks very much at present that he acted alone because he was nuts. End of focus until the experts tell us otherwise. Just let the families grieve is my view.

 

Racism however , IS an issue that IS worth focussing on; AS IS freedom of speech and its limit if any , in comedy...which brings it nicely back to one of the original points about Imus. Which I am not even sure was in this thread anyway I think its in the blonde one lol!

[Guest]

F*** me Lord 600 people have tuned into this pedantic and sputnik wandering argument lol!

[ReFur]

TOS,

 

I think it is each of the two of you clicking in several hundred times!

 

Linda

[LordTheNightKnight]

TOS,

 

I think it is each of the two of you clicking in several hundred times!

 

Linda

 

Not me. I just click when there is a new response.

 

And tos, just because you like smoking does not mean there isn't a risk with it. Yet it's largely due to the way cigarettes are made, when ones not loaded with nicotine and chemicals are safer. So argue for safer cigarettes, rather than deny a problem.

[Guest]

Argue for pure tobbaco cigarettes.

 

OFF

[Guest]

The argument for "natural tobacco" being less harmful is largely based on the statistics which show a very very low rate of lungcancer in native Americans. Not this is typical of our misconceptions. Most native Amicans have not only been smoking Marlboro for decades they have ben selling them tax free for ages now too!

They don't smoke natural tobacco any more. a huge percentage of them smoke modern cigarettes yet the incidence of the disease remains low.

 

So. About these "chemicals". They are in such tiny amounts that thy are harmless. Worker's argument that tiny amounts of toxins build up and eventually have a hrmful effect. Howver this idea is NOR consistent with other scenarios where this happens.: inded, small amounts of exposure to toxins appears to build immunity...and signifciantly especially genetic immunity. Which is probably the real reason for the lack of lung cancer in the people who have used tobacco the longest. Already it has become clear that thrid gneration smokers are less likely to succumb to smoking relatd diseases, whereas medical scinece assumed the opposite was true. That has incredible implications: smoking may over generations act as a "toughener" of humans in resistance to disease.

 

Now these chemicals. In the most recent study it has been found that the smokiest environments are between 2500 and 25000 times safer than legally required. A SINGLE chargrilled stak is FAR higher and more dangerous to passively inhale as it sizzles in a restaurant; and in fact can easily set off smoke detectors whereas smoking doesn't unless the thing is set to.

 

What does all this mean? You may not like smoking, but on health grounds, it is increasingly emerging that billions of pounds of taxpayers money has been used to fund a huge swindle that diverts attention from the real causes of disease, such as viruses and bacteria (which look like they are actually responsible for 69% of lung cancers).

 

Now. As a matter of taste. Do you know why they put chemicals in marlboro lights (like sugars lets be honest they don't put agent orange in them...they keep that for your food lol)?

It is because they make them taste good and also produce an aphrodisiac effect in women the same as chocolate. All these years spent looking for female aphrodisiacs and now we spurn them!

The four tried and tested aphrodisiacs, like it or not, on women are (in this order):

1.Cocaine

2.Nicotine

3. Chocolate

4. Champagne

 

The latter sends the chemicals in the others to the brain quickly.

 

Now its up to you what you do with that information, but I also know that fur is pretty decent too and will use all I can legally get my hands on lol!

 

Now the other thing remains...which again is not being reconised because of it political incorrectness....is the positive effects of nicotine. It should be being hailed as a wonder drug .

Again...prevents Alzheimers, Parkinsons prostrate cancer. You will still find that many medical sites still claim a link between prostrate cancer and smoking, but this is totally untrue. The more men give up, the more they get prostrate cancer. I hard that someone is finding som intersting rsults regarding this in men who despite giving up or never smoking. have wives that smoke. They appear to have a degree of immunity too. Weird huh?

Now the other unpallatible truth. Nicotine is a powerful...one of the most powerful brain stimulants. Again the implications of research that is beiang buried willsurprise you when it finally gets out. Don't forget, thee are numerous scinetists doctors and researcher posting in SF forums about this stuff, and giving such ingo to FORCEs and FOREST; so its readily availabe....look.

It actually appears that research trying to prevent SIDS suggests tiny amounts of nicotine may actually prevent it. Hardly surprising when you think about it. SIDS is a brain malfuncton not any other organ.

Then there was the rsarch that tried to prove a correlation between "lost manhours" and smokers taking breaks. Again they found the opposite. The mental stimulation could keep smokers working at a project far more productively for longer than a non smoker, whose attention would wander after 20 minutes.

 

There are loads more things like this btw; this is tip of the iceberg. rember the movie "sleeper" where wood allen wakes up in the future and everyone smokes because they found out smoking is good for you? There may actually be an element of truth in that. Imagine if it is finally proven...and we are not far off...that grandchildren of smokers who smoke become more resistant to smoking realted disease. Where does that leave the near 50% of non smokers who are dying of smoking related diseases?

Can you imagien fifty years down the line what will be the situation? Yes; ironically it will be the smokers who are resistant to smoking related diseases, and the non smokers overtaking them by far falling to the diseases.

 

Face it. Something ELSE is causing lung cancer and while this witchunt goes on we are not finding out what it really is.

 

I bet its nappy headed hoes.

Edited April 22, 2007 by Guest

[Guest]

Nine yards of Bull###t doesn't quite get you a first down.

 

 

OFF

[Guest]

Now before you disregard what I have said as piffle, I want you to read these links. THEN try to see th bigger picture.

You all well know that I think what we have seen with PETA and so on for the last thrity years (and the Nazis started it for similar reasons) is a RANGE war between traditional animal resources, and synthetic subsitutes; the exploitation of which needs land to exploit the non renewables but guess what? There are reindeer herders seal killers landed aristocrats and sheep farmers all over it.

See it like the range wars between cattle and sheep, or buffalo and railroad, etc. Some may call it progress; but that is a mistake. Its just a war over resouces.

 

NOW. See this. Nicotine is smerging as one of the most beneficial drugs ever known to man. And geuss who has control of it? Tobacco companies, not pahramacuticals. Getting the picture? Then read on:

 

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-3.1/benowitz.html

 

http://www.jcrows.com/nicotine.html

 

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/biology/b103/f02/web2/sfrayne.html

 

http://ibdcrohns.about.com/cs/ibdfaqs/a/smokingguts.htm

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9551775&dopt=Abstract

 

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/516104_4

 

You will notice in that one taht criticism of smoking because it is bad for the immune sytems where thy mention animal testing, has a faily simple counter balance. The same animals eating large protions of carrot swdede and added vitamin c...their immune sytms continued to function well. So smokers CAN compensate for what damage smoking does do .

 

http://www.springerlink.com/content/fk15138x56334r63/

 

An anti smoking site is forced to admit:

http://www.aptmq.qc.ca/positiveeffectsofsmoking.php

 

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/mksg/exd/2004/00000013/00000011/art00001

 

That last on is about skin. Yes they say, it appears nicotine does have bad effects on ageing and wound healing. BUT their research has also come upwith some fascinating benefits which require new research. Translation?

They aren't being paid to investigate those.

 

I could go on and on like this; there are thousands.

So what is going on? Why the witch hunt? Why is nearly all the latest rsearch being surpresed. Why are the drug comapnies keeping it quiet?

Because they HAVE to find a way of delivering the drug as effectively as smoking; otherwise, they will not rea the finacial benefits. In the meantime they continue to trn the screw on government to ban smoking and force tobacco comapnies into ruin. In twenty years time they will then have control of the amazing drug.

 

Don't think goverenment would co operate with that? Do you know what they will do for money? Today the police file on cash for knighthoods was presnted to the Crown Prosecution service. This goverenment may be found guilty of the worst criminal corruption ever in british history. And remeber their million pound backhander from the AR movement? Well they still pursue their AR agenda, BUT ABSOLUETLY not up for negotiation is animal experimentation. That is The LEAST likely thing I will ever defend; it is easy to see the antis point on that as being unethical because the animals ARE put through prolonged agony in some cases on purpose.

Yes there are benefits; but it does in some cases contravene animal welfare ethics nevertheless.

Anyway, the government have tightened their defnce of major paharmacutical operations. Why? because there are Labour fingers in pharmacutical pies.

IF they will go against their ethics on that, believe me thy will do everything theyy can for paharmacuticals to eventually control the most incredible natural drug ever used by man: the only one that actually IMPROVES his brain power.

 

And one other thing just bringing it back to the Korean. Smoking has enormous benefits for psychological health, mood and various psychoses, depression etc. What is the betting the Korean was a non smoker? Many Psychologists now are ENCOURAGING their patients to smoke.

The Native Americans didn't use "the pipe of peace" for nothing.

 

Let me know if you want more evidence; there is tons.

[Guest]

you may want to chew on those links with a skoal bandit to help you concentrate Off

 

Not ONE single death can be put down to smoking; except by the American legal system; and that is the problem. And we all know how dodgy that is.

Scientifically, no cause of death has ever been attributed to smoking...YES evidence that smoking MAY have contributed; particularly heavy smoking...but with a combination of genetic disposition, diet, social class, exposure to coal dust, asbestos and other pollutants etc.

The experiment can simply NOT be repeated therefore it is scientifically erroneous to suggest smoking DOES cause cancer, heart disease etc.

 

Now helicobactor pylori and human papilloma virus and coal dust and asbestos...they ARE provable as causes. Scientifically repeatable....in animals. (Also in animals it can be proven that nicotine does have detrimental effects on immune system BUT they can be compensated for by daily vitamin supplement). As are car exhaust fumes in enclosed spaces. But smoking...no.

 

HOWEVER...all these diseases nicotine actually PREVENTS...are indeed scientifically varifiable.

 

And remember as I said before, there was a huge correlation between areas with practising witchcraft and plague etc. The fact is the people returnd to the "old" ways when science and religion failed them That was the reality of the link, but thousands of people were killed because science misread the link. The same with smoking and cervical cancer...high correlation...no link...apart from that women who smoke are likely to be more adventurous=more sexual partners= more likely to contract human papilloma.

 

What we are witnessing is a new witch hunt; equally without actual established foundation.

[Guest]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cImlm3TlDiY

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZu4FbJAx7c&mode=related&search=

 

Talk is cheap!! Yee Hah!!

[LordTheNightKnight]

Touch, you are such a baby. Is that what other smoking fetishists do? Lie that no one has been killed by smoking?

 

This is a fur fetish site. We don't lie there is no harsh side to our fetish; we just admit it's there but we like it ANYWAY. If you were really secure about your smoking fetish, you would admit the dangers (since part of the definition of smoking involves minor degrees of smoke inhalation), but point out that you also like it anyway. We wouldn't mind, since we know the world isn't perfect.

 

I'm not against smoking. I'm against how it's done the wrong way. It should just be done for enjoyment, not for satisfying addiction. Without all that nicotine (which may have benefits, but that should be applied with proper medication, not just pumped into tobacco leaves more than is already there), people could smoke, look sexy doing it for people like you, but then stop if they start to feel problems.

[Guest]

Lord.

You present me ONE piece of proof that smoking is directly responsible for lung cancer. After all those billions of dollars they have jack shit. NOW I am NOT suggesting that it is NOT bad for you at all...when did I say that? Merely that the health claims about it have been massively over exageratted for various reasons. Preventative medicine is cheaper than cure mainly. And there is more profit in alleviating sypmtoms than finding cures too.

 

Likewise, you completely miss the point on fur. YES it is possible that cruelty to animals does exist on some fur farms. Such farms will not be in business long and the dodgy stuff that comes from China ends up on hoodies because its so poor. You simply cannot be cruel to an animal and it produce good fur period. Likewsie a badly treated racehorse will not perform. That doesn't stop abuse, BUT it is a tiny tiny minority who are involved; and they aren't in the game long because the regulating authorities (as on fur farming) have very high standards that have to be adhered to.

 

I am NOT a fur fetishist. I can dig it, but I am into women not fur. Same witb smoking. I just like traditional glamour and imagery assciated with that but I certainly would NOT defend anything that was cruel to animals because of a fetish! That is pathetic. I was quite happy with quality faux

until I realised that I was being lied to about fur. I had always supported native use and sales of it, so was never really anti, but I didn't go really pro fur till I found out what has been going on. What...you think I come here to jack off? I thought it was clear that I don't because I feel the politcs of fur are more important than anything else. Next you will be suggesting I am pro hunting and racing cos I jack off to horses and hounds lol!

Likewise atrue capnolagniac THRIVES on the ill effects of smoking...the coughing, the fact that it may cause disease etc. Some of em go nuts when some of us that just OBJECTIVELY appreciate smoking and its glamour point this fraud out. What...you think that all these hollywood movie makers, models photographer have depicted smoking (and fur) as glamorous because they are ftishists who will continue no matter what? That is rubbish. They are objectively beautiful and part of ou humn culture for thousands of years; but would NOT be beautiful if the model suddenly keeled over of a heart attack or the mink really was ill treated and skinned alive.

Animals are my first priority. But I HATE being lied to and told what to do. I can't believe why you think PETA tell lies and yet the pharmacuticals and anti tobacco lobby and legal profession don't. Its the same bullshit; it is propaganda; nothing more. And the governments of the west have to pander to multi nationals and lobby groups, and newspapers and tv take their huge advertisng revenue. There is NO freedom of the press if you can't pay for it. I SAW an incident once which resulted in the death of a horse at the hands of let us say a respected animal welfare group. There were hundreds of witnesses. Not ONE newspaper would touch the story.

 

I have as you asked presented you with a great deal of evidence that nicotine is being seen secretly by scientists as a wonder drug, and you ignore it.

 

I can't see youtube furelli as I have a primitive computer; sorry. What's it about?

 

As I have often said, you have to weigh up the pros and cons of an argument and come to a conclusion. I know PETA inside out. None of their arguments stand up; with the possible exception of some vivisection.

 

Likewise, I have YET to see any real scientific evidence that smoking causes disease in isolation of other variables. That does not mean it isn't bad for you...but the pros certainly outweigh the cons from my point of view. Why the hell do you think so many people smoke if it isn't so? Beacuse it is enjoyble and stimulating and the majrity do NOT experience ill health at least for the first thirty yers or so. Yes it has bad health risks , but it isn't like car exahust fumes as is being claimed. The presence of chemicals is 2500 times safer than need be and that is now proven beyond doubt yet the bullshit still flies. EXACTLY the same as it does with foxhunting and fur farming despite massive evidence to the contrary.

The same as the Iraq war proceded though the Blair governemnt MISLED the world over evidence for WMDs.

 

I asked WHERE is the evidence of WMDs to my MP and none was produced.

I asked WHERE is the evidence that cruelty is normal on western fur farms or among native peoples and their husbandry and NONE has been produced. I have presented much evidence here to the contrary.

I asked WHERE is the evidence that foxhunting is cruel and presnted volumes of evidence to the contrary here and none was produced in the prosecution.

Now I ask WHERE is REAL vidence (not stats manipulation without consideration of variables) that smoking causes the dgeree o diease is claimed. Apart from the ONE piece preneted by worker which I was able to point out th flaws with, and the vidence I have produced for your viewpoisnt myslf, NOTHING has been forthcoming.

I was told by your good self that I was a LIAR for claiming the Nazis instigated smoking bans and I still await your evidence yet I have produced a great deal in support of my claims; it is FACT Lord; I will get an acknowldgement of that from you at least; likewise if you produce an idea or evidence that prove me wrong then I will of course back down.

I was asked to show WHY I think that UK governmnt controls on indivudal liberty have frighteneing parallels with Nazi germany and I produce Britains top historian to back up my claims.

 

You are the ones that blindly believe what you are told without researching it; and you are the one that fails to produce evidence, as do a few others here.

 

I even attempted a thread to see if any of you could disprove a worn out conspiracy theory which does hold some shocking truth (the USA DID nuke Antarctica in the fifties) , and only worker engaged. But I know all the real reasosn th conspiracy doesn't hold up.

 

Now maths computer and engines...I know jack shit about them so don't have a valid opinon.

 

 

 

Carry on believing propaganda if you like but keep an open mind huh?

Ask yourself always "is this likely to be true; what motive is behind the research or stats, what is the ideology of the political party and who are their backers, who are the biggest newspaper and tv advertisers" etc.

 

try READING my links for once. I know its hard for you non smokers to concentrate for more than 20 minutes but hey!

 

I can't believe you would tolerate animal cruelty for fur btw. I certainly wouldn't.

But then I went to fur farms to see for myself.

 

Before I polluted my body with smoking I wanted to know exactly what I was letting myself in for too. Half a million fags later and I am still fit and healthy. Even if I get something like lung cancer it doesn't mean it is from smoking...my job entails breathing far far more dangerous chemicals on a daily basis KNOWN to cause lung cancer and other lung diseases.

[LordTheNightKnight]

Can you really think you are right if you can't be CONCISE in your responses? It's not as though you are addressing things that require responses more than three paragraphs long. And half of it is only slightly relevant, and even those points are longer than they need to be.

 

It seems you just post long responses because then it's harder to prove you wrong, so if we do address every single point, you can just make a long response to every response.

 

In other words, you're just trying the written equivalent of shouting so long and loud, no one can get a word it. If you REALLY thought you were right, you would actually make points that GET TO THE POINT.

[Guest]

Lord

"which may have benefits, but that should be applied with proper medication,"

 

That is just proof you haven't read the links.

 

"Is that what other smoking fetishists do? Lie that no one has been killed by smoking? "

 

No the true SF ist gets off on precisely that...they like to imagine it's fatal connetations. I am not a smoking fetishist I am a glamour fetishist if anything. A plain woman smoking in a t shirt and jeans does sod all for me and neither do ebay women in furs very often.

I also do boots corsetry haute couture tweed seams stilletoes gloves nice hair long nails want me to go on? I am here more than those sites because a crime is being committed in accusing the fur trade and you believe the acussation. I have experience of animal care and animal care on fur farms and aboriginal animal use. Your quote below is a scandal; and you had better produce evidence of that too:

 

"We don't lie there is no harsh side to our fetish; we just admit it's there but we like it ANYWAY"

 

You are a fool if you truly believe that and know nothing of the welfare on fur farms, or the ethics of aboriginal use of animals.

 

"Lie that no one has been killed by smoking?"

 

If you are going to make a habit of calling me a liar you had better produce some evidence. I wouldn't invite it if I wasn't familair with it so beware.....it can all be shot to pieces just like PETA's. "Know thine enemy as thy friend"

[Guest]

btw any mods looking in...there are about 15 items in this thread where a proper moderated discussion forum would have asked the posters to put up or shut up; and none are mine.

 

EVIDENCE

[Guest]

Your criticism of my long posts is unwrranted.

 

I have given your points detailed consideration and argued back asking you for evidence. I have continually stated I an armed with tons of it , and have reasoned how pharmacuticals and other intersted parties are in on the swindle. I could write you a book on it if you like telling you how many senior politicians have stciky fingers in pharmacuticals that truly torture animals while they pretend to be for them. I have masses of VALID information about this hypocrisy. I repeatedly bring up helicobactor and papilloma because millions have died unecessarily because of the emphasis on lifestyle cause of disease and the medical establishment knows it. I still await a credible response from you arguing against that.

 

Okay let us make this a short one. We will start with the beginning:

 

AGAIN WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE THAT THE NAZIS BANNED SMOKING IS A LIE?

[Guest]

Off

my nine yards of bullshit can be fully supported by Medical Bodies own evidence. Their case is falling apart and they are desperate. Some doctors are quickly removing themselves from the whole thing. Prosecutons will shortly follow the other way.

Expect cervical cancer in the first law suits. That is why the AMA has hastily withdrawn it from smoking related disease list along with many others they will shortly have to. You want the evidence for all that and my other stuff? Because if you do you had better read it cos Lord doesn't.

[LordTheNightKnight]

Your criticism of my long posts is unwrranted.

 

I have given your points detailed consideration and argued back asking you for evidence. I have continually stated I an armed with tons of it , and have reasoned how pharmacuticals and other intersted parties are in on the swindle. I could write you a book on it if you like telling you how many senior politicians have stciky fingers in pharmacuticals that truly torture animals while they pretend to be for them. I have masses of VALID information about this hypocrisy. I repeatedly bring up helicobactor and papilloma because millions have died unecessarily because of the emphasis on lifestyle cause of disease and the medical establishment knows it. I still await a credible response from you arguing against that.

 

Okay let us make this a short one. We will start with the beginning:

 

AGAIN WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE THAT THE NAZIS BANNED SMOKING IS A LIE?

 

Here it states that they didn't ban it, as much as make strident efforts to do so.

 

And the history is not what you seem to think. Hitler had an almost psychotic obsession with health. He tried ANYTHING that he thought would work. He emphasized exercise, but also experimented with any drug he could think of, and mixed them a lot. Basically he went with anti smoking because it looked plausible to him, regardless of any actual evidence. If someone had caught his ear that opera was harmful, he would have burned Wagner records instead of playing them.

 

BTW, most of those doctors were dead after the war, so there was no way that American anti smoking groups would have heard of it.

[Guest]

LTNK is absolutely right. YOu have more patience for debunking ToS than I have.

 

Another ToS Red Herrring. Using anything related to Hitler as th basis for ANYTHING is bogus form the git-go. How can a lunatic be used for any meanigful disscussion except when talking about lunacy.

 

Of course this is the opening comment for ToS's next run at this

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFF

[Guest]

You guys seem to have an odd idea...not your fault that is the way it is portrayed by our lowest common denominator culture and media...that Hitler was the "lone gunman" on the proverbial fascist knoll; and that what happened re the holocaust was a dreadful but isolated abhoration in history the result of that one evil man.

 

That is UTTER cobblers.

 

You have no appreciation of how credible Nazi ideology was not just in Germany but around the world, and particularly how the greatest scientific minds (with the notable exception of Jewish scientists though even some of them collaborated) rushed to back their claims...funded as they were by the nazi party and German industry.

 

Mainstream scientists in the USA especially flocked to prove the idea of racial superiority and they were pretty persuasive too in their methodology. Of course, just like the health fascism. such "evidence" is easily debunked.

 

After the war Lord, you are completely incorrect. Most of the German scientists were not dead; they were wooed by the United States for the Space Programme and their incredible advances in medicine; the result of experimentation on human subjects: still the greatest indcitment of animal research btw.

THOUSANDS of nazi scientists were given refuge by the USA, escaping the justice of the hangman

[Guest]

Quote Lord

 

"I meant the ones about smoking. The rest were perfectly in line with American values, just on the wrong side during the war. "

 

You said it not me.

 

You have to realise Lord that the whole world of science was intrinsically tied up with Nazi values. The whole thing of master race, superior intelligence, survival of the fittest, health education, technological advance, global corporate business visions fully supported by and serving the state's values (the Volkswagen: peoples car); animal rights used as an excuse to seize land from aristocrats; the subjegation of beauty to function and order (brutalism)....it was all tied up with the same ideology and what we are seeing all over te world today is the saintised version of that vision; tempered with a new "liberal" outlook that isn't on the face of it racist but is diabolically pitted against other cultures through moral imperialism.

 

So when New Labour ban foxhunting in free admission that it is an act against landed gentry culture, ban smoking, ban even licensed gun clubs; stop the wearing of the burkha , start talking about eugenics (preventing future crime by dealing with single mothers on council estates); take up the moral high ground on behalf of the nation by declaring mink farming banned in the interets of"public morality"; allowing Police death squads to murder an innocent Brazilian; introduce ID cards; discourage cash through a network of legal obligated snitches to monitor cash transactions; lie through their teeth by faking evidence on a variety of issues and issuing complete propaganda lies to back their legislation; introduce 3000 new laws intefering with individual liberties; read the Parliament Act at the House of Lords; sell peerages to stuff the lords with friend shwo will vote for them; put in "frindly" judges into High Court to wave their laws through when onbjected to on important legal grounds; enforce western values through wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; having concentration camps for immigrants; stop models working because they are too thin or take cocaine because they are bad role models; order tv and media to stop smoking and fur appearing; start interfering with what we eat; threaten Prince Charles for speaking out; consider abolishing the monarchy and replacing the head of state with apresidential system; etc etc etc and then start talking about A NEW WORLD ORDER; yes; I am damn worried.

 

Now the USA doesn't have all that; but it is from US so called Liberalism that most of it comes; or the compensation culture that gives the state the right to nanny the individual.

 

The irony of it all being, the only GOOD thing the Nazis did was invent nice uniforms, which they go nuts about anyone wearing to a fancy dress;

Prince Harry for example.

 

It's like someone said look, if we try again without the overt racism and the uniforms, we can build the New World Order without anyone noticing.

 

Well some of us are going to fight.