18 Sep 14: Be honest about yourselves Public Health

[Anjaffm]

Be honest about yourselves Public Health

(caution: language in the linked document)
Midnight Musings: Be honest about yourselves Public Health

MAN-UP PUBLIC HEALTH. Your lies, deceit and dishonesty to achieve your aims WILL be your downfall. If you cannot win a straight scientific, evidence-based argument with me, then bloody admit it. In return, I will give you the same courtesy. But you will never get either my respect, courtesy or trust while you continue to blatantly lie, obfuscate and conspire behind paywalls or in private.

BE HONEST ABOUT YOURSELVES. STOP LYING !!

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

Now, Clive Bates wrote a very well-worded (though very clear) "Memo to publc health grandees"
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...h-grandees-vaping-vapers-you-clive-bates.html
- and I very much recommend reading it and passing it on -

And this guy now, he is a vaper, and he says what we, as vapers, feel. What we feel about being insulted, derided, dismissed like so many worthless pieces of trash, by those who allegedly care for the health (haha) of the public (that is us, by the way, in case anybody has not noticed).

Caution: language in the document.

.......

Why am I posting this?
Maybe, just maybe, some people who still say "oh, it cannot happen in the US / in my country ... oh, it cannot happen to me.. oh, they will not take my healthier choice away from me" - maybe some of these people will wake up. Will join CASAA, will write to their representatives, will get active to defend their rights as human beings.
Because this document describes in no uncertain terms what we are up against.

 

[dragonpuff]

Absolutely wonderful blog post, thank you for sharing!

I love the way the writer so eloquently describes the gradual rise of the public health lobby:

"The problem is that today's society has produced a parasite otherwise known as the Public Health lobby. Since the 60's, these people have gradually increased in number without us knowing. In 2014, we now have what can clearly be seen as an incestuous multitude of different groups all parading under different banners, but all of them invariably linked (sharing trustees, directors, board members etc). At first, they kept to themselves, merely advising and pointing out what we should be careful of in regard to our health. But as time has gone on, they have slowly become more and more vociferous to the extent that they now openly lobby elected politicians to try and sway them to the 'dark side'. Now the politicians are little more than the public mouthpiece of these unelected bureaucrats."

He illustrates so clearly how insidious this gradual takeover is, and why so many of us suddenly (often upon beginning to vape) find ourselves marginalized and often persecuted by organizations we barely realized were even there before. This kind of control cannot happen overnight, or the people will revolt - rather, it takes baby steps, over several generations, to achieve the level of power the public health lobbies have achieved in so many nations today.

People cannot have this kind of social control, government or otherwise, simply thrust upon them. Instead, they have to spend their whole lives under bits and pieces of it, so they learn to accept it as normal before more social control is sought. People get trained from the time they are babies to think that this is just the way things are, and so they are less likely to fight it when the ropes are tied just a little tighter.

 

[DC2]

Outstanding.

 

[DC2]

Absolutely wonderful blog post, thank you for sharing!

I love the way the writer so eloquently describes the gradual rise of the public health lobby:

"The problem is that today's society has produced a parasite otherwise known as the Public Health lobby. Since the 60's, these people have gradually increased in number without us knowing. In 2014, we now have what can clearly be seen as an incestuous multitude of different groups all parading under different banners, but all of them invariably linked (sharing trustees, directors, board members etc). At first, they kept to themselves, merely advising and pointing out what we should be careful of in regard to our health. But as time has gone on, they have slowly become more and more vociferous to the extent that they now openly lobby elected politicians to try and sway them to the 'dark side'. Now the politicians are little more than the public mouthpiece of these unelected bureaucrats."

He illustrates so clearly how insidious this gradual takeover is, and why so many of us suddenly (often upon beginning to vape) find ourselves marginalized and often persecuted by organizations we barely realized were even there before. This kind of control cannot happen overnight, or the people will revolt - rather, it takes baby steps, over several generations, to achieve the level of power the public health lobbies have achieved in so many nations today.

People cannot have this kind of social control, government or otherwise, simply thrust upon them. Instead, they have to spend their whole lives under bits and pieces of it, so they learn to accept it as normal before more social control is sought. People get trained from the time they are babies to think that this is just the way things are, and so they are less likely to fight it when the ropes are tied just a little tighter.

Great post.

And once again another opportunity to expose who they are and what their plan has been for decades...
Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger
FORCES International - News Portal

These "Public Health" organizations are the new mafia, but they use more advanced tactics.

And we are the boiling frog...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

 

[Kent C]

Great post.

And once again another opportunity to expose who they are and what they plan has been for decades...
Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger
FORCES International - News Portal

These "Public Health" organizations are the new mafia, but they use more advanced tactics.

For now.... I don't think it entirely out of the question that some bricks might be thrown through windows of our vaper lounges.

 

[DC2]

For now.... I don't think it entirely out of the question that some bricks might be thrown through windows of our vaper lounges.

Sometimes bricks flow in the opposite direction.

 

[sonicdsl]

For now.... I don't think it entirely out of the question that some bricks might be thrown through windows of our vaper lounges.

8-o Don't give 'em any ideas!

 

[DrMA]

Very nice blog. Thanks for posting.

 

[Anjaffm]

Absolutely wonderful blog post, thank you for sharing!

I love the way the writer so eloquently describes the gradual rise of the public health lobby:

"The problem is that today's society has produced a parasite otherwise known as the Public Health lobby. Since the 60's, these people have gradually increased in number without us knowing. In 2014, we now have what can clearly be seen as an incestuous multitude of different groups all parading under different banners, but all of them invariably linked (sharing trustees, directors, board members etc). At first, they kept to themselves, merely advising and pointing out what we should be careful of in regard to our health. But as time has gone on, they have slowly become more and more vociferous to the extent that they now openly lobby elected politicians to try and sway them to the 'dark side'. Now the politicians are little more than the public mouthpiece of these unelected bureaucrats."

He illustrates so clearly how insidious this gradual takeover is, and why so many of us suddenly (often upon beginning to vape) find ourselves marginalized and often persecuted by organizations we barely realized were even there before. This kind of control cannot happen overnight, or the people will revolt - rather, it takes baby steps, over several generations, to achieve the level of power the public health lobbies have achieved in so many nations today.

People cannot have this kind of social control, government or otherwise, simply thrust upon them. Instead, they have to spend their whole lives under bits and pieces of it, so they learn to accept it as normal before more social control is sought. People get trained from the time they are babies to think that this is just the way things are, and so they are less likely to fight it when the ropes are tied just a little tighter.

absolutely!
Before I started vaping, I also had no idea of the existence of these parasites.
And parasites they are: they syphon off tax money (our money) to feed themselves. Without creating any value whatsoever. Instead, they cause harm to those off whom they feed. Parasites.

Great post.

And once again another opportunity to expose who they are and what their plan has been for decades...
Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger
FORCES International - News Portal

These "Public Health" organizations are the new mafia, but they use more advanced tactics.

And we are the boiling frog...
Boiling frog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

excellent links, thank you very much!

 

[Stubby]

Another take on public health. Very interesting connection to the prohibition movement of the early part of the last century.

Dear Public Health: the public despises you, so you are probably doing it wrong | Anti-THR Lies and related topics

 

[Anjaffm]

Another take on public health. Very interesting connection to the prohibition movement of the early part of the last century.

Dear Public Health: the public despises you, so you are probably doing it wrong | Anti-THR Lies and related topics

Excellent! Great find, thank you!
Long but very much worth reading.
A great - and very precise - explanation of the thinking, attitudes and true goals of those who call themselves "public health".

This is the logical and inevitable (through predictable subconscious processes) extension of the underlying public health pseudo-ethic: The longevity and purity of bodies is the only goal that matters. Sometimes the annoying actors who occupy those bodies want to do things that are contrary to the goal, at which point they need to be forced, cajoled, or tricked into doing the right thing (compare: insects sometimes want to eat the crops, and they need to be manipulated into not doing it). But now some of those people are not merely quietly taking bad actions; they are actively speaking up against the public health goal and those who pursue it. As such, they are no longer just automata who need to be reprogrammed (without sympathy for their preferences, but also with no more personal hatred than one directs at the weather). By speaking up, the public have become the active enemies of the goal of public health.

Public health professionals — and this is not just the extremists but most everyone who exists in that culture — are so narrow-minded that even this obvious contradiction is not enough to make them realize the fundamental flaw in their worldview.

So the actual people who make up the public go from being ignored by “public health” to being genuinely hated. And with that, the temperance nuts find their home, not so much because they destroyed public health, but because public health made its way to them. They always hated people, thinking of them as sinners who needed to be controlled. The rest of public health joined them in this hatred when the public started rebelling against their pseudo-ethic and the grandee opinion leaders in the field redoubled their defense of it because they are not capable of seeing its absurdity.

 

[DrMA]

I can't believe they reinstated that buffoon.

 

[Anjaffm]

Yeah, that is terrible.

There you have it "public health" despises the self-same "public" whose alleged "health" they allegedly wish to improve.
And they can insult that self-same public with impunity.
Carl Phillips has put it very well indeed.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

The fact that the board reinstated him says they agree with him. If this had been the president of just about any publicly held corporation the boards message would have been don't let the door hit you on the way out.

It just proves how spot on Dr Phillip's essay is.

 

[Kent C]

The fact that the board reinstated him says they agree with him. If this had been the president of just about any publicly held corporation the boards message would have been don't let the door hit you on the way out.

It just proves how spot on Dr Phillip's essay is.

NFL comes to mind....

 

[DrMA]

Excellent! Great find, thank you!
Long but very much worth reading.
A great - and very precise - explanation of the thinking, attitudes and true goals of those who call themselves "public health".

WOW! what a powerful essay by Dr. Phillips. Here's what I found most spot on:

«The weather, like those pesky preferences and volitions [of the public], is a critical variable that sometimes cooperates with the goal — which is not about the weather any more than the goal of “public health” is about making people happy» [emphasis added]

The reason I found this statement so critical is because it highlights the fact that the actions of so-called "public health" are in violation of basic and inalienable human rights. I hope this sounds familiar to most of the readers:

«We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ——» [emphasis added]

Here we have a case for pressing charges of human rights violations in The Hague against all ANTZ. Elsewhere, I started a list of names for the indictment using the glANTZ 129 from the FUD letter to WHO. We should obviously add Ashton and his gang to it, and others that you know of.

List of human-rights violators masquerading as "public health".

 

[Nate760]

There you have it "public health" despises the self-same "public" whose alleged "health" they allegedly wish to improve.

They despise anyone they perceive as a threat to their vision of a socially-engineered utopia in which everyone behaves as their benevolent public health overlords think they should. That's the main line of reasoning behind the "quit or die" mentality; people who are unwilling to behave compliantly must be removed from the equation for the greater good of creating Public Health Utopia. If that removal involves them dying a miserable, agonizing, unnecessary death, then oh well.

 

[Kent C]

WOW! what a powerful essay by Dr. Phillips. Here's what I found most spot on:

«The weather, like those pesky preferences and volitions [of the public], is a critical variable that sometimes cooperates with the goal — which is not about the weather any more than the goal of “public health” is about making people happy» [emphasis added]

The reason I found this statement so critical is because it highlights the fact that the actions of so-called "public health" are in violation of basic and inalienable human rights. I hope this sounds familiar to most of the readers:

«We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ——» [emphasis added]

Here we have a case for pressing charges of human rights violations in The Hague against all ANTZ. Elsewhere, I started a list of names for the indictment using the glANTZ 129 from the FUD letter to WHO. We should obviously add Ashton and his gang to it, and others that you know of.

List of human-rights violators masquerading as "public health".

While I commend your efforts, you're conflating two concepts that are, in fact, contradictory.

"Individual rights" (or the natural rights of John Locke and others of that same philosophy of Classical Liberalism - which today would be called Libertarianism) which are in the Declaration.

...and

"Human Rights" as defined by the UN (by Eleanor Roosevelt and others in 1948). They are 'wishes' not rights.

Individual rights are not, as your link tag suggests, "human rights" as defined by the UN and The Hague, where you say "we have a case".

In fact, The Hague/UN is very likely to uphold the case FOR Glantz et. al. They operate under the same philosophy - progressivism.

And while in the US we would and should 'have a case' against the violation of individual rights along the lines you suggest, that unfortunately is no longer the case either, and for basically the same reason.

Ayn Rand explains it like this:

If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor.

Any alleged “right” of one man, which necessitates the violation of the rights of another, is not and cannot be a right.

No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or an involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as “the right to enslave.”

----
And here, where the UN type "human rights" are in quotes:

There is no such thing as “a right to a job”—there is only the right of free trade, that is: a man’s right to take a job if another man chooses to hire him. There is no “right to a home,” only the right of free trade: the right to build a home or to buy it. There are no “rights to a ‘fair’ wage or a ‘fair’ price” if no one chooses to pay it, to hire a man or to buy his product. There are no “rights of consumers” to milk, shoes, movies or champagne if no producers choose to manufacture such items (there is only the right to manufacture them oneself). There are no “rights” of special groups, there are no “rights of farmers, of workers, of businessmen, of employees, of employers, of the old, of the young, of the unborn.” There are only the Rights of Man—rights possessed by every individual man and by all men as individuals.

 

[Nate760]

Any alleged “right” of one man, which necessitates the violation of the rights of another, is not and cannot be a right.

Not only that, but special/selective rights are incompatible with the concept of equal protection under the law, which is supposed to be the bedrock principle of our form of government. Now, that's not to say the granting of such "rights" to certain groups and individuals, or under certain circumstances, cannot be a worthwhile and morally justified thing (because it sometimes very much is). But such acts should not be confused or conflated with the basic, elemental rights to which every person is entitled simply by virtue of being human.

 

[dragonpuff]

And here, where the UN type "human rights" are in quotes:

There is no such thing as “a right to a job”—there is only the right of free trade, that is: a man’s right to take a job if another man chooses to hire him. There is no “right to a home,” only the right of free trade: the right to build a home or to buy it. There are no “rights to a ‘fair’ wage or a ‘fair’ price” if no one chooses to pay it, to hire a man or to buy his product. There are no “rights of consumers” to milk, shoes, movies or champagne if no producers choose to manufacture such items (there is only the right to manufacture them oneself). There are no “rights” of special groups, there are no “rights of farmers, of workers, of businessmen, of employees, of employers, of the old, of the young, of the unborn.” There are only the Rights of Man—rights possessed by every individual man and by all men as individuals.

According to these rights, as stated:

If a person or group of persons (say, Kangertech) chooses of their own volition to manufacture vapor products, and also chooses to make them available for purchase by any other persons, then another person (say, dragonpuff) therefore has the right to purchase said vapor products and vape with them.

I really can't argue with that