Thursday, February 15, 2007

The United Kingdom is beginning to resemble a police state!

Ever since this NuLabour government came to power, the United Kingdom has started resembling, more and more, a police state.

Everywhere one goes these days, one is under surveillance, be it in the supermarket, in the Underground, on a railway platform, or on the roads. Nay, especially on the roads! Our motorways are simply plastered with speed cameras. Speed cameras are dotted here, there, and everywhere, just waiting for the motorist to fall foul of the speed restrictions. In fact, speeding fines have become a big revenue-earner for this government.

NuLabour has done its level best to make people ‘wards of the state’. About one in three households are now depend on the welfare state for a large part of their income. This, of course, empowers the politicians, since it takes away people’s independence. The more dependent people are on the state, the more likely they are to elect the current régime back into office. After all, they cannot afford to bite the hand that feeds them!

But this is not all. Tony Blair’s government has systematically taken people’s freedoms away from them. No other government has passed so many new laws in so short a time, and just about all of them banning something or other. Fox-hunting has been banned. Parents’ rights have been taken away. After July 1, nobody will be able to smoke in any public building, be it an office, a restaurant, a public house, a school, a hospital, or wherever. We are told that private homes have been spared. Mercifully! I dare say that they will devise a way of banning smoking in the home, too, given time. And note this: thousands are being trained to police the smoking ban with on-the-spot fines. Even Hitler didn’t try to ban smoking in all public places, even though it is said that he loathed the habit.

We are being treated like recalcitrant schoolchildren! Whilst smoking is not a good habit, indeed, many would argue that it is a dirty habit, it should remain the prerogative of the adult to make up his own mind whether he wishes to smoke or not, despite the health risks involved.

Arguing about second-hand smoke is a red herring. Nothing has been conclusively proven that second-hand smoke, especially to the extent that most people are subjected to it, causes cancer. In any case, even if it does, people should have the freedom to choose whether they smoke or not. This is, after all is said and done, the mark of adulthood. It is what distinguishes adulthood from childhood. In childhood, we have to do what our parents or authority figures tell us; in adulthood, we are supposed to be able to make up our own minds.

But whether one can smoke in a public place or not is hardly the issue. The main issue is this: Too much is being banned. Indeed, NuLabour have raised the practice of passing laws to ban activities into an art form! The EU is doing just about the same. Last week, it was announced that the EU wishes to make it a criminal offence to pick wild flowers! Punishable, of course, by a gaol term!

One can argue about the merits and demerits of fox-hunting, smoking, and picking wild flowers until one is blue in the face. The activities are hardly the point now. It has gone past that. What is the point is this: How many more freedoms are going to be eroded by a government determined to control the people and their every move?

Personally, I preferred the world as it was, for all its shortcomings. There was a place for all people. Smokers and non-smokers alike, fox-hunters and non-foxhunters alike, and all the rest in between.

If all these activities are so abhorrent, then this is hardly a reason for banning them. It might well be a reason for educating people to lead healthier lives, and this is precisely what has been done over the years with regard to smoking. Today, a far smaller percentage of people smoke than before. But this situation has not come about by banning tobacco products; rather, it has come about by a process of information and education.

In today’s Britain, it is difficult to see where it is all going to end. It isn’t much different in the USA, either, especially on the east coast and in California. The health freaks have taken over the place. The interesting thing is this: they target only those who smoke cigarettes and cigars. The druggies are left alone. How logical is that?

We have entered a period of intolerance and disdain for the rights and freedoms of others. The journey to bondage has only just begun. Far worse is surely on its way.

Ronald Reagan and Mrs Thatcher came to power to free up the people. Tony Blair, by contrast, has come to power to put them everywhere in shackles. In Blair’s Britain, the power of the state is everything; the rights of the individual count for nothing. Zilch! Zippo!

Surely it is high time for this nonentity to spend more time with his family, for we, the people, have truly had enough of him. When a country starts meddling in the affairs of the family and prying into the private lives of each and every individual, then that political system is veering away from the democratic and is sailing close to the wind of totalitarianism. Beware of that wolf in sheep’s clothing, that leader, who sweet talks the electorate whilst at the same time enslaves them! Such a man is not to be trusted. You can also bet your bottom dollar that he is passing petty laws because he is inadequate to deal with the main, important issues of the day. Radical Muslims are determined to bring down the system; yet all Blair and his cronies can do is worry about second-hand smoke! Welcome to that new dark age!

Thousands trained to police smoking ban with on-the-spot fines

Where you will be able to smoke?

Put that fag out!

©Mark Alexander

21 comments:

cybercrusader said...

Mark, Let me congratulate you on remarkably great restrait in naming TB. More than anyone else around, you have 'hit the nail on the head' when you say:

You can also bet your bottom dollar that he is passing petty laws because he is inadequate to deal with the main, important issues of the day. Radical Muslims are determined to bring down the system; yet all Blair and his cronies can do is worry about second-hand smoke! Welcome to that new dark age!

Clearly TB and GWB and their colleagues cannot deal with the REAL threats and issues of our day, such as the encroachment of the psuedo religion, Islam, so they spend their time in passing laws against citizens pursuing their freedoms. What pathetic human beings and what incompetent and cowardly politicians they are. We certainly deserved better, but it appears that there are no REAL men or women insight.

Mark said...

THESE politicians are DISGUSTING human beings!

USIconoclasticPatriot:

Thank you! I appreciate your comment. Can you see what we, in the United Kingdom, now have to put up with? Perish the lot of them!

Ronbo said...

Another excellent article, Mark that I will post on my Blog, because what the neo-communists do in Britain today will be done tomorrow in the USA.

BTW, you'd think the FBI would have its hands full going after the scores of HAMAS sleeper cells and other Islamofascist organizations in the USA, but it now appears that they spent millions and started a riot in my city of Orlando last year to bag a few traditional white fascists.

Details:

FBI Responsible For 2006 Riot In Orlando

Sir Henry Morgan said...

This government has created a little over 3000 new offences since coming to power.

This, of course, is one of the reasons the crime rate keeps going up. Create new crimes and by definition you create new criminals.

Anonymous said...

Mark, let me echo usiconoclasticpatriot's comment, you certainly do have the measure of TB and friends.

THESE politicians are DISGUSTING human beings!

Took the words right out of my mouth. However, I am beginning to think that there is another class of scurrilous vermin running around, which are equally as disgusting, and that is those people in the media, read that as most of them, who are willfully hiding the truth. It is no longer a question of ignorance, (for nobody can be that dim), only active association with the enemy, or latent ideological opportunism as in a Marxist's wet dream...the final destruction of Western Capitalist society.

Once again Mark, another excellent essay. Thank you.

Anonymous said...

In keeping with the theme of your comment as to the inadequacy of our political masters, I do have to wonder if it is not a case, that the rise of the environmentalist movement, as a sort of parallel at the same time as the resurgence of Islamic fundamentalism, is actually nothing more than a refuge for those lesser souls lacking any true moral fortitude, in the face of a clear and present danger. A grand transference if you will. A place to hide from real danger while maintaining a facade of pious usefulness and self-actualized resolution; after all, they are taking on the big bad Capitalists!

John Sobieski said...

In California and maybe a couple of other states, they have now passed smoking bans for attached housing, i.e., condos and townhomes. Yes, if you smoke and OWN a townhome, you cannot smoke inside. Why? Because the smoke may seep between the walls and infringe on your nonsmoking neighbor.

Welfare state, nanny state, big brother coming soon to everyone. It's interesting that our federal budget and laws expand every year, more govt workers, more busybodies, but you NEVER hear anyone say we should review the govt's programs and take a knife to it. NEVER. As long as you can get more tax money, the govt will grow to consume it. That is a fact.

While our govt actively appeases the Muslims and the illegal aliens, even financing them and given them privileges over the nonbelievers and the legal citizens, they completely ignore the cries of its true citizens to stop destroying them. That is the truth. We need a revolution.

Mark said...

John:

Welcome, my friend. It's good to have you back again.

We need a revolution.

I fear you are right. The way things are going, life is going to become intolerable for all decent people.

I'm becoming more and more annoyed with the way that our rights are being taken away from us. For example, I am a moderate smoker. I enjoy a cigarette, and I make no bones about it. And nor do I make any excuses for the habit. It's a habit of my own choosing. I could give it up in a heartbeat. And that's a fact. I know I could because I have given up the habit several times in my life without any problems. Cigarettte smoking is NOT the nicotine addiction which the do-gooders keep brainwashing smokers with. It's a lifestyle choice, and nothing else.

It is my belief that these do-gooders are doing people more harm than good by trying to convince people that they are 'hooked'. The fact is that if a person really wishes to give up smoking, he can. And relatively easily! It's all in the mind. If one BELIEVES that one is 'hooked' on tobacco, then one IS! It's as simple as that.

I believe that if the very worst things that I do between now and my grave is to enjoy a cigarette or a glass of Scotch or wine, then in this corrupt world, I'm doing just fine.

At the moment I am staying in New England. It is impossible here to go to a bar or restaurant and have a cigarette with a drink or after a meal. It sucks! The result of all this is that when I come to the States on a vacation, I end up staying indoors and relinquish the dubious pleasure of going to a restaurant or bar. After all, where is the pleasure in leaving a glass of Scotch on the table in the bar to go outside, like a dog, to smoke a cigarette (which I really don't enjoy, because smoking like that is smoking for the sake of smoking)? I feel that to stand outside to 'have a drag' is a most un-gentlemanly thing to do. It irritates me greatly. Soon, the same state of affairs will prevail in England. Scotland and Ireland are already smoke-free. Wales will go smoke-free on April 2. Welcome to the INTOLERANT world!

What will be next? Alcohol? I think so. Then we will be well on the way to Islamising the Western world.

Tony Blair has been a dreadful prime minister. He has done everything wrongly and, moreover, he is a control freak and a latter day Puritan. Beware the Puritans! They are trouble.

The fact remains that if they ever manage to achieve this smoke-free UTOPIA they dream of, people will have moved on to other things to get their kicks. Man has always looked for ways of getting his kicks. The authorities may find that the new way of getting kicks will be far worse and far more unhealthy for the people than the smoking habit.

We have so many problems in British society. Drug-taking (and I speak here of real drugs) is at an all time high. In addition, 40% of all children are being born outside of wedlock. You know what that means just as well as I do. There used to be a name for such fatherless children. Political correctness doesn't allow one to use the term anymore. After all, isn't it a selfish lifestyle choice of the woman to have a baby out of wedlock and expect the state to pick up the tab?

It's a pity that the politicians don't have better things to do with their time than worry about whether someone enjoys a cigarette or not; and I wish all those do-gooders would go and wrap themselves in Saran wrap (cling film) and hermetically seal themselves off from the world around them. Perhaps they could go and live in a bubble, and lie there waiting for Godo!

How the world has changed, John? And how rapidly it has changed! In my lifetime, things have changed so dramatically that they are unrecognizable.

You can probably tell that I am very annoyed about the way things are going in my country and in the EU. Those idiotic bureaucrats in the EU need a real job of work to do instead of dreaming up more ridiculous schemes of robbing people of their freedoms.

The pleasure of life is rapidly disappearing. Bring on the revolution!

mirrorman said...

rusty, that link does not work, it should be this I think:
http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2007/01/is-nuclear-weapons-attack-against.html

yes we are being prepared for the next phase of the unstoppable events planned to destabilize the West.
The Litvinenko story so concentrated on by the media was just that, a story. Perpetrated to disguise the fact that the terrorists are at an advanced state of planning for "the big one," already smuggling their shit into place.
Blaming it all on Putin was a smokescreen, that the media just lapped up.
The authorities know they cannot control what is set to happen, they can only delay it.
How can a few thousand security people control 2/3 million terrorists, because that is effectively what we will have if they get upset.
Why do the police grovel to explain to these people when an operation has to be taken based on intelligence?
They issue leaflets, tour areas with high profile PR gimmicks and bow and scrape in the media, in an effort to "keep on side" the majority of the "others"
It is obvious to many, that advanced planning has taken place for what may be the inevitable coming attacks of major impact.

I personally doubt if the brainwashed morons are capable of big "N" attacks, but they will certainly try, given the right help from those that are further up the scale.
A dirty bomb in London is what the authorities are preparing for, I would guess.
This is no really big deal, in physical terms, I mean London survived the Blitz, but what we will witness, should this occur, is a psychological pandemonium which will likely destabilize everyday life much more so than 9/11 type events.
This will lead to ever more draconian controls on public life.
We ain't seen nothin yet!
And fag smoking bans will be our least worry. (sorry M.)
NewLabour government will use opportunities to remain in power
and the control freaks will have their dreams fulfilled.
Censorship will be a major part of their control.
I am disgusted by your average liberal wanker-type, but there is some common ground between Liberalist, and Traditionalists, but as we all know, to divide is to rule.

I noticed this on a Liberalish site, and although it is massively long, I think it is very telling.
If the author sees this then please credit yourself, cause I lost the link. here goes;

"The further back you look, the further forward you can see." (Winston Churchill)


In July 1933, Germany under the National Socialists was embarking on a journey consolidating its power in a country that was virtually bankrupt.

A review at the time by William Conrad Kessler, on July 15, 1933, and published in The American Economic Review show how Adolf Hitler intended to move forward and finance his new policies.

He wrote: These laws are expressions of the policy of the new national socialistic government in Germany, of the fascistic attempt to combine the benefits of private initiative under liberalism with the protection of the common welfare by the state through socialism and economic planning. But at the same time it should be emphasized that the products of the legislation of previous German governments have not been cast aside with one blow.

Although written in 1933, the same could have been written about the UK in 2007.

As Hitler knew then, and Gordon Brown will have to impose here soon, is that to remain in control you cannot leave the economy to the market, and new Cartel Laws will have to be passed here. They are already being discussed in Europe.



The Reichstag Fire Decree of February 28 1933.

One of the most repressive acts of the new Nazi government, this one allowed for the suspension of civil liberties in the wake of the false crisis created by the Nazis as a result of the fire that gutted the Reichstag (parliament) building on the previous day. Without firm evidence, it was put about that it had been set by the Communists as the opening act in the attempt to overthrow the state. The president was persuaded that the state was in danger and, hence, that the emergency measures embodied in the decree were necessary. Even though under Art. 48 of the constitution, the decree would have been withdrawn once the so-called emergency had passed, any hope of this happening was prevented by the establishment of Hitler's dictatorship following the Enabling Act (see below). It was in fact never withdrawn and remained until the end as an instrument of Nazi terror against ordinary citizens who ran foul of the regime.



The UK equivalent of the Feb 28 Decree passed by this government is the Civil Contingencies Act 2004.

The last known meeting of the Civil Contingency committee was last week during the Letter Bomb campaign, although main stream media (MSM) reported it as a COBRA meeting, but David Milliband let slip during a BBC interview.



The Enabling Act

Although Hitler won the office of German chancellor in legal fashion (the Nazis, after all, were the largest group in the Reichstag or lower house of parliament), he was, of course, determined to rule Germany without the restraint of a democratically elected parliament. For this to happen he had to set aside the guarantees of civil rights and democratic procedures established by the Weimar Constitution, a tactic that required the approval of two-thirds of sitting representatives. This was achieved by calling a new election (which increased the Nazi vote) and using force and intimidation against the existing parties, especially those of the Socialists and Communists, many of whose elected representatives were jailed as political enemies or forced to flee the country. Once assured of the votes of the Catholic Center party, the two-thirds majority was assured. Thus, over the unavailing opposition of Socialist deputies, the March 24 session gave Hitler approval of legislation enabling him to exercise dictatorial rule for four years, leaving the Nazis free to suborn Germany's hitherto free institutions and subordinate both state and people to the ideological demands of the new regime. Of course the compliant Reichsrat (upper house) followed suit. Inevitably, the Act was renewed in 1937 and persisted until the collapse of Germany in 1945.

The official name of the Enabling legislation was "Law for the Removal of the Distress of People and Reich."

The Reichstag [the lower house of parliament] has passed the following law, which is, with the approval of the Reichsrat [the upper house], herewith promulgated, after it has been established that it satisfies the requirements for legislation altering the Constitution.

ARTICLE 1. In addition to the procedure for the passage of legislation outlined in the Constitution, the Reich Cabinet is also authorized to enact Laws. . . .

ARTICLE 2. The national laws enacted by the Reich Cabinet may deviate from the Constitution provided they do not affect the position of the Reichstag and the Reichsrat. The powers of the President remain unaffected.

ARTICLE 3. The national laws enacted by the Reich Cabinet shall be prepared by the Chancellor and published in the official gazette. They come into effect, unless otherwise specified, upon the day following their publication . . .

ARTICLE 4. Treaties of the Reich with foreign states which concern matters of domestic legislation do not require the consent of the bodies participating in legislation. The Reich Cabinet is empowered to issue the necessary provisions for the implementing of these treaties.

ARTICLE 5. This law comes into effect on the day of its publication. It ceases to be valid on 1 April 1937:



The UK equivalent of the Enabling Act passed by this government is the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006

Read carefully the articles of the Enabling Act and compare them with the LRR Act.



In the first two years of his chancellorship, Hitler followed a concerted policy of "coordination" (Gleichschaltung), by which political parties, state governments, and cultural and professional organizations were brought in line with Nazi goals. Culture, the economy, education, and law all came under Nazi control.

NuLab influence and control in all these areas are remarkably similar, except Blair and Brown call them ‘reforms’, and include the policy of data sharing.

Gleichschaltung (trans: "forcible-coordination" or synchronization)



One goal of Hitler’s policy was to eliminate individualism by forcing everybody to adhere to a specific doctrine, social order and way of thinking and to control as many aspects of life as possible using an invasive police force.

Now think about NuLab’s pre-emptive policing laws, such as ASBO’s, Voo’s, Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, Police and Justice Act 2006, Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, The Crime Prevention (Designated Areas) Order 2006, Identity Cards Act 2006 to name but a few, the results of which we have already seen being used, firstly in a socially acceptable way, but then what. Will NuLab do away with these laws once the petty criminals have all been cleaned up, or expand its use of them.

Tony McNulty, Home Office Minister, in a Commons debate last Wednesday said: “changes in the law on the right to silence, have made it easier to convict the guilty”

Amazing, but this is not the only change in laws that moves the governments emphasis away from the view that people aren’t guilty unless they are convicted. Guilt is now assumed, until you can prove otherwise.



The Nazi party's desire for total control required the elimination of all other forms of influence. The period from 1933 to around 1937 was characterized by the systematic elimination of non-Nazi organizations that could potentially influence people, such as trade unions and political parties.

Those critical of Hitler's agenda, especially his close ties with industry were suppressed or intimidated.

Gordon Brown has the same problem with his association with the Smith Institute and the IT Industry association Intellect. See here.



Totalitarian regimes maintain themselves in political power by means of secret police, propaganda disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, regulation and restriction of free discussion and criticism, the use of mass surveillance, and widespread use of terror tactics.

The above is now enabled by UK legislation and commented here.

The original meaning of the word (Totalitarian) as described by Mussolini and Gentile, was a society in which the main ideology of the state had influence, if not power, over most of its citizens.

According to them, thanks to modern technologies like radio and the printing press, which the state could, and probably would, use to spread its ideology.

Critics of the concept say that the term lacks explanatory power. They argue that governments which may be classified as totalitarian often lack characteristics said to be associated with the term.

They may not be as monolithic as they appear from the outside, if they incorporate several groups, such as the army, political leaders, industrialists, which compete for power and influence. In this sense, these regimes may exhibit pluralism through the involvement of several groups in the political process.


One law that NuLab have not yet plagiarised from the Nazi’s, but it is expected one day.


Law Against the Establishment of Parties, July 14, 1933

The German Cabinet has resolved the following law, which is herewith promulgated:

ARTICLE 1. The National Socialist German Workers Party constitutes the only political party in Germany.

ARTICLE 2. Whoever undertakes to maintain the organizational structure of another political party or to form a new political party will be punished with penal servitude up to three years or with imprisonment or with imprisonment of from six months to three years, if the deed is not subject to a greater penalty according to other regulations.

"The further back you look, the further forward you can see." (Winston Churchill)

Dear old Winnie, we need your spirit now!

Anonymous said...

Thank you Mirrorman, and thanks to the anonymous author of that piece. I have read something very similar elsewhere. The parallels are quite frightening, though I am not so sure that Mark's comment as to the inadequacy of our current leaders, would not tend to trip them up over the final hurdles; though this of course assumes that fortune does not favor them entirely, for then of course all bets are off as both of those rats definitely have the necessary degree of arrogance and self deceit to ascend to the peaks of Mt. Olympus. I do however think that phony Tony has an inherent desire for the adulation of the crowds, and as a consequence he might balk at some of the necessary measures required to maintain control as the transition to outright totalitarianism gains momentum, Gordon on the other hand has no such qualms, he'll be smiling to his smug self every step of the way.

As to the first part of your comment about the Litvinenko story, yes I agree, it is a far more plausible story than that fairy tale postulated by the media; but then that's all the media are good for ...fairy tales. Ever since they rode to fortune and irrelevance over a normal everyday occurance almost 30 years ago with the tale of a fairy princess, as in "The peoples Princess", they have been telling porkies on a grand scale: so the truth is that they are not much good for anything other than fairy tales. But they did confirm one thing, that the people will believe anything when stated with enough conviction, though in their case it's the credibility that's lacking . So yes, we could indeed be faced with the prospect of one or more dirty bombs going off within Britain. Though this would of course present Tony and co with a possible serious problem....what if the people blame them for the total mismanagement of the whole disaster, especially as some of their actions of late would point to a prior knowledge of that possibility/probability; after all, if George Bush is responsible for Islamic terrorism, hurricane Katrina, the Asian tsunami, Global Warming, all industrial pollution everywhere on earth, and the melting of the polar ice caps on Mars, surely Tony and Gordon will catch a little flak for one or two cities turned into chaos and radio active turmoil, but then of course, life isn't fair. The big question is, could they hold onto power in the confusion and outrage such a catastrophe would engender. The planing may be all there, but the reaction of the populace may not be quite as expected, for remember, this is not a government riding on a wave of popularity right now, the truth being that they are largely despised, though I readily concede the possibility of your premise. However, we alas, are in the dark, the authorities do have us at a disadvantage for they are better informed as to the true nature of the danger. How did we allow such venal parasites into power and control over us?

Mark said...

Mirrorman:

Having finished my breakfast, I came to read your comment in its entirety. I found it to be illuminating, but very disturbing. Thank you for taking the time to share all this with us. There is much food for thought in those lines.

Mark said...

Thank you too, JAR, for your great comment.

You asked the question how we have allowed these people to rule us. I think the answer to that is simple: Most people elect politicians for all the wrong reasons. Looks count for everything; substance counts for nothing. If only people would take some time out of their busy schedules to think about whom they are voting for.

Always On Watch said...

Mark,
Excellent essay! Sorry that I was delayed in getting here. Even now, I don't have time to read the comments thoroughtly.

Smoking in the privacy of one's home has not been banned--YET. But I see Western govenments all over the world lining up to do just such a thing. I predict that the first such ban on smoking in private homes will occur in California, the bastion of leftism. Already there, since at least the late 1970s, smoking has been banned in privately owned vehicles when traveling on certain roads; the rationale is that the area is a fire zone. But the fact is that the majority of wildfires in CA have not been caused by tossed cig-butts.

The issue, of course, isn't smoking. The issue is government surveillance of and intrusion into private lives. Meanwhile, the rights of Muslim groups are closely guarded, and Western leaders are failing to address the Islamic threat to the Western way of life. Ugh!

How long before art galleries are targeted as offensive to Muslims? Certain types of music performed outdoors? Western "wardrobe"? Don't laugh. I predict that such confrontations with Islam will happen.

Question: Are hookahs going to be banned?

leelion said...

i've been reading about the rise and rise of crime in Britain especially the soaring murder rate and other violent crimes (but don't worry, Mr. Blair says no need to get too concerned) yet they are focusing on anti-smoking laws... hmmm

and the future?

Mark said...

Winesy:

man, i've had enough of this country. they cant tackle the recent shootings and gun crime in london, yet i'm a criminal for smokin at a bus stop!!!

I think many people have had enough of the UK by now. We all need to find a bolt hole to depart for. And yes, one is a 'criminal' (or at least an offender) for smoking at a bus stop. Crazy, isn't it? It seems to me that this government has got its priorities all screwed up. It is determined that people do not have any pleasure in their lives. That's for sure.

Britain must be the only country in the world in which two adult men can 'marry', yet a man cannot smoke a cigarette in public! And before anyone accuses me of being homophobic, let me assure you that I am not. Certainly not. But this does seem a somewhat strange anomaly in the system to me. I wonder what my father's generation would have thought about such a state of affairs?

well i'm off to hunt some foxes, go through some speed camares on the A13 (to london) buy 20 bensons and smoke myself to death

Yes, Winesy, beware of all those traps that have been set up for you, and for us all. The unsuspecting are bound to fall foul fall of the system rather easily these days. It appears to me that we all have to become 'Philadelphian lawyers' just to survive these days. There are so many laws to fall foul of. Can an ordinary person really be expected to retain all this info about what he is allowed to do and say, and what he is no longer allowed to do or say.

GOOD NIGHT

I hope you had a good night, Winesy. I hope, too, that all those Bensons haven't had a deleterious effect on your well-being today! :-)

Mark said...

Always:

Mark,
Excellent essay! Sorry that I was delayed in getting here. Even now, I don't have time to read the comments thoroughtly.


Thank you for the compliment. I'm so glad you enjoyed reading it. I know how busy you are. You mustn't feel under any pressure to comment. Comment when you can. But I must add that I always appreciate your comments, and I love to read them. They are always so insightful.

Smoking in the privacy of one's home has not been banned--YET. But I see Western govenments all over the world lining up to do just such a thing. I predict that the first such ban on smoking in private homes will occur in California, the bastion of leftism.

Well, Always, I, for one, shall not be obeying any such law banning the smoking of cigarettes in my private home. The government will be able to do anything it likes about it. My home is MY private space, and if I wish to smoke in it, I shall do just that. That would be a total infringement on my rights.

The issue, of course, isn't smoking. The issue is government surveillance of and intrusion into private lives.

Exactly! This is just my point. In any case, I do not wish to live in a nanny state. I want control over my own life. If I choose to smoke, then so be it. After all, it isn't a simple question of a healthy life and an unhealthy life. I am a moderate smoker who happens to live a clean life, eating good quality, home-made food. What about the man who doesn't smoke, but eats a crap, junk food diet? Is he more likely to live longer than I? And what is better, for a child to have a smoking dad, who is loving and kind and giving, and who teaches the child good morals, or to have a father who is a non-smoker, but who leads a terrible, dissolute life and provides a very bad rôle model for the child?

Meanwhile, the rights of Muslim groups are closely guarded, and Western leaders are failing to address the Islamic threat to the Western way of life. Ugh!

Oh, the rights of Muslims will not be infringed. You can bet your life. And as you say, they won't dare ban hookah bars. Hasn't this already occurred in New York. Bloomberg has totally banned smoking in New York, but, as I am given to understand, has allowed hookah bars to fall through the net!

How long before art galleries are targeted as offensive to Muslims? Certain types of music performed outdoors? Western "wardrobe"? Don't laugh. I predict that such confrontations with Islam will happen.

Question: Are hookahs going to be banned?


It won't be long now, and spineless 'leaders' such as Blair will surely not put up much resistance. You can bet you bottom dollar.

We are living in awful times. The good days are well and truly over.

Mark said...

Leelion:

i've been reading about the rise and rise of crime in Britain especially the soaring murder rate and other violent crimes (but don't worry, Mr. Blair says no need to get too concerned) yet they are focusing on anti-smoking laws... hmmm

The crime rate in Britain is soaring. Several kids have been murdered only recently. Yet, as you have stated, all this Blair government can do is faff and fiddle around, concerning themselves about second-hand smoke! It shows us all the measure of the man.

Mark said...

Oh, and Leelion, you asked about the future. The future, my friend, looks bleak indeed!

Mussolini said...

The problem with a police state nowadays is that they have a propensity to push subjugaqtion of the masses to the enemies of the state.

Aunty Belle said...

Howdy do, ya'll...very fine essay here, Mark.

One little point that I see lot's of ya'll wanna make--about moral fortitude--well, trouble is that to have moral fortitude ya' first gotta have some morals.

TOO many of our polly-ticians ain't willin' ter stand up for regular morals--no surprise then that they cain't find the gumption to repel true evil of Islam. In one sense, we can say that our flaccid moral
position softened us up to remain supine when Islamic Jihad came a'callin'.

beakerkin said...

Mark

Police cameras are an important law
enforcement tool. I have zero problem giving law enforcement the tools it needs to do a tough job. No person gets stopped more by local police than I do.

The rest of the problem is with the idea of the state knows all. An anti-smoking law was recently passed in VT mostly by far left transplants who have zero clue about VT values and want to turn the state into Grenwich Village North.

Hunting and gun ownership are part of the popular culture here. It is a matter of time before the University Marxists start restricting guns in VT.

Mayor Bloomburg has taken transfat
out of my beloved KFC.

However, do note that the same anti tobacco militants like Bill Clinton are silent on pot.