Did the BBC behave appropriately?

It has almost become a national sport these days when British politicians are embarrassingly set up in elaborate sting operations, and the unfortunate and hapless target this time has been Newark MP Patrick Mercer, who it has to be said hasn’t been one of David Cameron’s favourite MPs. So you can rest assured that call me Dave won’t be losing any sleep over his demise.  I’m sure you’ve been following the story which has been loudly trumpeted by the left-wing raddled organization the BBC, in conjunction with the lefty rag, the Daily Telegraph. Neither of these two media entities cover themselves in any veneer of glory or self respect. I'll come to that in a moment.

If Patrick Mercer has behaved inappropriately then quite rightly he must of course pay the price for his misdemeanours. In fact he has resigned his party’s whip which I think was the right and honourable thing to do, so as not to embarrass Cameron and put the party in a difficult moral position (I refer of course to the cash for questions issue which has become so prominent over recent years), but of course his critics are calling for him to step down as constituent MP for Newark…I suppose you wouldn’t expect anything less from his opponents would you? I do think it has to be said that Mercer hasn't been at all a bad MP and he does and has done a lot of good work for his constituents. I think he has been one of the more likeable Tory politicians with sensible views.

My real problem with this whole affair – which incidentally won’t affect Cameron because of Mercer’s swift action – is the way the BBC and the Daily Telegraph have behaved. I don’t believe it’s ethical for any broadcast media to collude with a national newspaper to deliberately target a Member of Parliament with the sole intent to entrap and subsequently bring about a desired result which is to remove this MP.

Some may argue that it’s for the benefit of us all and this action stiffens the moral fibre of the nation. Bullshit I say! This is nothing more than the media playing politics for its own benefit. Let me explain. According to some commenters Mercer had been suspected for some time of being paid for lobbying on behalf of those that may have a vested interest in using his services as an MP. Well fine…then if evidence exists then why not report this to the Parliamentary Commissioner on Standards rather than set a trap?
It is not the business of media entities to try and ensnare politicians for political gain – we know that both the BBC and the Telegraph want a Labour government returned at the next election.
On Question Time this sting was continually referred to as an investigation. It wasn’t anything of the sort, if you’re investigating something of this nature then that implies prior wrongdoing. They were not investigating prior misdemeanours they were creating a misdemeanour by entrapment and that is deeply unethical by anyone’s standards.
Incidentally and you might have guessed, that the Panorama programme is being screened before Question Time, well now that’s a surprise – just in time for the let’s twist the knife brigade. I’m sure they’ll be lots of spontaneous applause for any points scored against Patrick Mercer.

The BBC and the Daily Telegraph should hang their heads in shame!

Tell tale pants

There are times in Tobacco Control when something so ludicrous comes along that it’s impossible to caricature it. Take this nonsense for example. I must confess I had to look at the calendar to see if it was April 1st, but guess what, no it wasn’t.
This it would appear is genuine. Like most politically correct crap that infests our society it will eventually paddle its way across the pond from the US and dump itself on our shores – much to the delight of course of the rabid mouth frothing anti-smoking zealots.

Just like quangos here in the UK which are awash with tax-payers money, it’s more or less the same in the US only it’s the Universities that gobble up tanker-loads of money from hard working people. The University of Alabama is the recipient of $402,721 (approx £270,000) from the National Institute of Health (NIH) for a 3 year study being run by Dr Edward Sazonov and associate professor, which so far has produced a prototype of a monitoring system that (you’ll love this) is in the form of a pair of under pants which when worn can tell when and how often people smoke, and how deeply smokers inhale.

So rather than ask people how much they smoke and expect honest replies under controlled conditions then these pants will supply that information which will then be fed to a computerized data base. Fuck me almighty – eh? What kind of sick shit is this? I bet our Dr Sazonov was salivating at the prospect of getting this loot for such infantile bollocks – or perhaps he was wetting his pants eh? Oooh matron – no pun intended.

The idea of this paranoia with smoking crap invention is to eliminate the need for self-reporting about how much people smoke, so that improved smoking cessation strategies can be forced upon the poor hapless and beleaguered smoker over time. I’m not sure how this would pan out on a practical basis in the real world. Anyway, when you’re going for balls out prohibition then everything is up for grabs – right? Demonise, harangue, and persecute for the sheer hell of it, why not – after all nobody will care will they?

He was asked if he will be applying again for grants when this tranche of funding ends this summer, Dr Sazonov replied, “We definitely want to continue with this research, yes.” I just bet he fucking does – hell, would you jump off the world’s biggest gravy train when you didn’t have to?

But does he intend at some stage that people be forced to wear them so that monitoring can take place to satisfy the sick heads of tobacco control? Will smokers be herded into specially built centres; you know something akin to WW11 nissen huts…for their own good you understand. At first the whole thing might be voluntary, but if that doesn’t work what then…legislate?

But there is one glowing advantage though and it’s a big one. Maybe this twat and three-quarters can tweak the pants so that every time you light up they’ll give you a blow-job.
Or how long you do think it would be before this nutty cunt would have this light bulb idea…fitting them to babies nappies so that they can detect if parents are smoking when handling their babies at any time and anywhere. Oh man, isn’t that beautiful…ha, ha, ha the possibilities are endless!

Listen…I’m going outside to whack my head really hard against a brick wall…care to join me?

Simon Chapman can actually talk sense!

Yes indeed the title of my blog post might seem ridiculous but there is some truth to this...Chapman could actually be on the mellow. Why not read on and see what you think. I must confess I could hardly believe it myself at first. I've had to go and lie down in a cool room with a warm mug of cocoa and a rich tea buscuit!

Now then - pull your pants (or panties if your a lady), up tight and listen in.

It would appear that even the most strident of anti-smoking zealots will only go so far. Simon Chapman seems to have a conscience after all. Hard to believe isn’t it? Now, the New South Wales government according to Chapman has gone way too far with its restrictive practices on not allowing psychiatric patients to enjoy the dignity of enjoying a smoke without the incessant interference of bullying authorities wanting to coerce patients into following a smoking cessation programme whether they want to or not.

A young man called Ashley Coleman suffering from schizophrenia was found dead at a nearby railway station after committing suicide because he didn’t want to submit to any smoking cessation programme rules brought in by the NSW Parliament last year. Each and every patient must now engage with the lovingly entitled ‘tobacco replacement programme’. Included in this bullying kit, are of course, the ubiquitous nicotine patches (which don’t work and never have), classes to educate the poor saps daring to smoke – and if you’re really good and you’ve eaten all your porridge – you might even get a pass to leave this hell hole for a short while. Nice huh?

Our dear Professor Chapman said that he favours ''dedicated smoking zones where people can go''. No kidding, er anything else? Wait for it – make sure you’re sitting down for this, he goes on ''There are some important and under-discussed ethical issues in depriving people of their rights,'' he said. ''But somehow, when you are a patient, your rights to do as you please are suddenly suspended - even if you are not hurting other people.'' Jesus did he really say that? Don’t know about you but I’m going to read that again! Did he talk about depriving people of their rights? This from a man who has previously oozed zealotry in bloody big dollops and doesn't believe that smokers' have rights.

A second incident took place in another Hospital’s mental health ward when an autistic and schizophrenic patient who wanted to smoke but was told he couldn’t – unfortunately gave way to an emotional outburst. He then was punished for this behaviour by being put in ‘total isolation’ for 48 hours. Great eh? Now that’s what I call humanity.

Anyway here’s real compassion from some rotting fish head called Anne Jones of Action on Smoking and Health Australia who says “mental health units were given a much longer period of time to go smoke-free and it would be a ''retrograde step'' if they returned to the ''bad old days''. They were given a much longer period to go smoke free. So what – that’s completely meaningless. Her arse goes on to say ''There is overwhelming evidence that the health and treatment of people with psychiatric illnesses is significantly worsened if they smoke - and significantly improved if they quit''. Overwhelming evidence? From where...would you like to share this evidence with us anytime soon?

Well there you have it. Chapman doesn’t suddenly see eye to eye with fellow zealots and wants to show some compassion – well I never.

Be careful Professor Chapman – otherwise you’ll find yourself on some zealot's hit list if you start turning into a real human being with compassion – and worse still you don’t have their permission.

Will Nigel Farage one day save smokers?

For many smokers it wouldn't have gone unnoticed that UKIP, led by the excellent Nigel Farage, is now without reservation the third main party in British politics, having seen off the limp-wristed Liberal Democrats who are now a tarnished brand because of the issue of student fees. So many voters eyes are turning towards UKIP. Not only is UKIP's kudos improving, but Nigel it seems is the only politician that has two enviable habits that an awful lot of people happen to like. One is to smoke (although like me he would call it a pleasurable pastime), which of course he does with some style (remember that interview in that cafe in Brussels?) and the second, is to tell it like it is.

He is no champion of the botty licker, he is a straight and direct talking politician, which is why his party has gone from strength to strength within a few short years. Whatever your thoughts about Farage, he has most certainly brought a breath of fresh air on to the political stage.

Of course his critics would say that they're a one issue party...but that only serves to miss the point. The political landscape has changed somewhat over the last few years with less voters prepared to trust just one party in power to deliver on their promises. Should UKIP link up with either Labour or the Conservatives to form the next government then quite naturally, Farage will have some influence, he might just have a big enough stick with which to beat a few backs with.

But perhaps a more credible argument exists elswhere, and it's this. It's the issue of gay marriage. Many in the Conservative party are unhappy with this - and are deserting the tories in droves and going to UKIP, what's more many constituent MPs have received angry mail about going down the road of allowing gay marriage from their voters. Churches too won't play ball (imagine the Catholic Church performing such ceromonies) with being forced by legislation to marry gay couples. Cameron at the next election might just find himself between a rock and a hard place, strangely it won't be Europe that rips the Tories apart it will be the issue of gay marriage, and of course this will work to Farage's advantage.

This will be a major part of UKIP's election plank in the European elections in 2014. If it turns out that UKIP could one day hold the balance of power then Nigel Farage could conceivably be more than just a friend of the  beleaguered smoker.

At the last count the Coalition for Marriage has 620,505 signatures. Which of course Cameron has totally ignored.

Yes our national treasure with the buckled nose, is for the umpteenth time on our screens over the festive period. His syruppy tones oozing copiously from our tv sets, blathering, warbling, smug,  cuddlesome, and curdling all at the same time. Sadly though he's on no less than 189 times over the next two weeks. Many appearances will be repeats of the QI quiz which is pants rippingly boring and too far up its own arse. It's often said that less is more - so it's about time Fry followed that advice. When is enough...enough? Anyone for some tinkly ticklesome botty tickling?

BBC chairman Lord Patten came unstuck when coming up against the increasingly effective Tory MP Philip Davies. Patten basically indulged himself in some indignant flouncing whilst giving evidence to the Culture select committee earlier this month. This man is sneering and intolerant of those he thinks beneath him. When asked by Philip Davies if he would give details of his diary, Patten told him not to be ‘impertinent!’
Davies had every right to ask him that question, because of the number of jobs Patten does on a part-time basis, the suggestion being, could he be devoting enough time to the job of BBC chairman. With the grand Lord’s energy often spent elsewhere he is not considered as effective as perhaps he seems to think he is.
You will of course remember that the Savile scandal happened on his watch, and when interviewed on Today’s Radio 4 programme, he refused to apologise for his lack of competent handling over the Savile affair.

A thoroughly supreme arse!

I’m sure you can remember this twat Sir Mark Thatcher, 2nd Baronet, back in 1984 getting lost in the Sahara desert during the Paris-Dakar rally and getting the taxpayer to pay for his retrieval. But even more compelling about this greedy mans’ character was that he became involved in a coup d'état to overthrow President Obiang of Equatorial Guinea.
The coup failed, and while Simon Mann was sentenced to 34 years, which after a pardon was reduced to 4 years, Sir Mark Thatcher escaped with just a fine of 3 million Rand, equivalent to £265,000 – which of course was paid by his mother Baroness Thatcher. What a lucky bastard eh?


This all happened back in 2004, and what is his gratitude to his mother who is now in failing health – well quite simply he just stays away, and really doesn’t give a shit as you can see from the picture above. There he is in Barbados water skiing strutting his stuff while someone else provides company at Christmas for his mum.

What an overfed, over indulged monsterous cunt!

How's your maths?

Some years ago I bought a puzzle to amuse myself whilst on a long and boring train journey. I’m not going to tell you what the puzzle is called, you can find that out for yourself if you’re that interested. I’m sure that this puzzle is like no other you have enjoyed solving. Well anyway, it’s a wooden puzzle consisting of 8 discs on a board with 3 pegs, just like the illustration left.
You have to move the discs from the middle peg (although you can start on any peg you wish) to 1 of the outer pegs and back again. You have to try and complete the puzzle in so many moves, although you can take longer if you wish, and there are only two rules to this puzzle, which are.
1) You may only move one disc at a time.
2) You cannot place a larger disc on a smaller one.
When you start with the 8 discs, then the minimum number of moves that you could complete this puzzle in is 255.

Now, if you want some more fun, then there is a formula that you can use to calculate how many moves it would take to complete the puzzle if it had any number of discs. Ok...Let us assume that the number of discs is represented by the variable n. So, in the following formula, T corresponds to the number of moves required in relation to the number of discs used in the puzzle. Here is the formula. T(n)=2n-1(2 to the power of n).
OK, for all you mathematicians’ out there – here’s your test, why not try and work out the number of moves it would take if you had 9 discs instead of 8.
5 discs = 31   moves 2power5-1
6   "     = 63   moves 2power6-1
7   "     = 127 moves 2power7-1
8   "     = 255 moves 2power8-1
9   "     = ?
I have to tell you that if you haven’t played this before, then you'll find it both absorbing and fun. What is even more astonishing is the maths involved in working out how long it would take you to complete the puzzle if you had a total of 64 discs, as suggested by the French mathematician who invented the game - well, he did indeed work it out and the figures involved are truly astronomical.
I went to my local village hall where members of the local raffle and chess club were competing with each other to be the first to solve it, and I told everyone of my sucess with the puzzle...I was the only one to complete it in the minimum time...so excited was everyone that two members hoisted me up and tried to carry me aloft in celebration around the hall, but sadly they both colapsed under my weight and were taken to A and E shortly afterwards and released - heavily bandaged - the next day. Still, we all had a good laugh about it.

Here's a clue to how long it would take if you played with 64 discs...how old is the Universe...and that's just a start!

Just mouse over this pic

Warning Label Common Sense.

Common sense has emerged from the US in the form of district judge Richard Leon, who has told the US Government that forcing tobacco companies to plaster disgusting images about the so called hazards of smoking all over their products is an action that should it be allowed, would amount to a violation of free speech under the US constitution. It's nice to hear that freedom of speech still means something these days...its been in desparately short supply just lately...particularly with regard to anyone that dares to enjoy a legal product called tobacco. Anyway, these ludicrously fake images - which bear absolutely no resemblance to real life - were dreamt up by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) some yeasrs ago, which shows a prime example of a nanny ministry in action.
However on this occasion they've been put firmly back in their box...and it would appear that their interference for once has been roundly kicked into touch...and about time too. This same judge granted a preliminary injunction last year, which effectively stopped any of these labels being forced to be displayed on tobacco products in 2012, which the Obama administration has already appealed in the District of Columbia Circuit. It's nice when nose prodding politicians suffer this kind of indignity...it reminds them that they aren't above the law anymore than we are. Naturally you can bet the Government will appeal this new ruling.
There are about nine images that have been photo shopped for our convenience and were released last June by the FDA, ready to go on tobacco products by September 2012, and this would be the first change in 25 years. I'm sure they want to make up for lost time - eh?
Here is some wonderful and sound commonsense from the Judge: "Unfortunately, because Congress did not consider the First Amendment implications of this legislation, it did not concern itself with how the regulations could be narrowly tailored to avoid unintentionally compelling commercial speech,".
Notably a spokesman for the Justice Department, representing the FDA in this case, had no comment to make. You sometimes wonder what kind of legal advice they would have had wouldn't you? A great day for common sense though. 

I just have to wonder why our courts over here in nanny-land can't be persuaded to do the same thing.

Smokers are pariahs...

Surprise surprise! A Cambridge University Press study has found that smokers are the new unclean lepers of our society. No kidding! I don't know how much this study has cost the taxpayer...a good few thousand I should think...but all they had to do was to simply ask a few smokers what they thought society was doing to them...so much easier and cheaper don't you think?
An adviser to the DOH (department of health), Professor Hilary Graham is someone that overwhelmingly believes that society has now made lepers of the very people that nannies like herself were ostensibly trying to help. It sure took them some time to come around to that obvious conclusion...perhaps they've spent some time in the blogosphere reading and understanding what those that are most affected by the ban think. I think the Americans call it thinking outside the box.
I have to say though, she has called for the relentless anti-smoking campaign to be withdrawn to allow some sort of hiatus to develop whereby society doesn't continue this vilification for a while. Well that's nice...a bit late though...once this persecutory behaviour has established itself in the human Psyche, then it will stay permanently. Trying to roll this backwards will be virtually impossible to do...at least for the next few decades.
The report raises issues about social class, I'm sure that you've read many times that poor people do most of the smoking and therefore they in some way should be pitied...after all they can't help it can they? How deeply patronising! Don't people from other classes smoke regularly, it has never been simply confined to one socio-economic class, smoking straddles and always will - the complete social divide.

Still any acknowledgment that this smoking ban legislation has created a group that can be legally hated is better than no acknowledgment...and that as far as were're concerned is called progress.