Friday, July 20, 2012

Why Is It................

....that the greens want to ban smoking tobacco but are dead keen to legalise marijuana?

....that so many people wander along the footpath in the main street of town during the day with their heads down while texting?   (Not just youngsters either.  Adolf today shouldered out of his way two fat women in their forties.)

17 comments:

Marc said...

Imagine the social disgrace if you lit up a B & H at a Greenpeace meeting, but pass around a doobie ...

Oh the hypocrisy!

James Stephenson said...

A related question occurs:

Why is it that the Green party using taxpayer money to abuse the CIR process is a good thing and "giving people a voice" or somesuch, wheras Philip Morris setting up a website to give adult smokers a voice is "disturbing" according to Kevin Hague?

Richard Watts said...

They want to decriminalize it, not the same thing.

Anonymous said...

"Why is it that the Green party using taxpayer money to abuse the CIR process is a good thing and "giving people a voice" or somesuch, wheras Philip Morris setting up a website to give adult smokers a voice is "disturbing" according to Kevin Hague?"

Because tobacco companies make money out of giving people cancer, whereas allowing people a vote on privatisation isn't known to be carcinogenic. Moron.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Anonymoron @ 7:21

GMH and Ford make money killing more people each year than does Philip Morris.

BTW, people had their vote on this issue not very long ago, less than a year, in November.

So don't come around here calling people morons, you thieving fucking moron.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

"GMH and Ford make money killing more people each year than does Philip Morris."

That's only true if 1.2 million is higher than 6 million. Fail maths did we?

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Anon @ 1:18

Not at all. I was in the top quartile of pass results if you must know. Id did very well also at comprehension and logic, where you appear to be deficient.

Philip Morris is not the only cigarette manufacturer so I suspect you'll struggle to find accurate figures on how many people who smoked their brands over a long term contracted lung cancer. While you're at it, you might care to investigate the number of non-smokers who died from lung cancer.

I suspect your six million figure might not survive much scrutiny.

Anonymous said...

My numbers are waaay better than yours, Einstein; you haven't posted any. As for logic and comprehension, not to actually have a point is as Ford and GMH aren't the only car manufacturers either.

And 6 million is smoking related deaths, not lung cancer. In short your statement was asinine (look that one up).

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

You're sailing close to the wind Anon.

I expected you to raise that one. You people are like a book.

Ford and GM manufacture a far greater proportion of the world's motor cars that does Philip Morris manufacture cigarettes. BTW who collated your figures? Lancet by any chance?

Anonymous said...

Who collated your figures? Oh that's right, no one as you haven't posted any. Until you do we can just assume you're making things up. Wouldn't be the first time.

Anonymous said...

"Ford and GM manufacture a far greater proportion of the world's motor cars that does Philip Morris manufacture cigarettes."

Bzzzt wrong. Thanks for playing. Combined market share of GM and Ford is about 17%. Philip Morris has a lock on around 19% of global cigarette production (and six times as many deaths as the automakers). I'm not going to provide the links, as you need to learn to do your own homework and stop making things up.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

No, it's not that easy.

Where did you get your figures?

vyvyan said...

The internet. Where did you get yours? Oh, that's right, your haven't provided any. Do your homework, there's a good boy.

Hukford said...

Adolf, numbers aside don't you get that cars provide something more important that cigarette?

Cars get you places for a chance of dying.

Cigarette get you very slightly high for a chance of dying.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Hukford

I have no doubt cigarette smoking contributes to many deaths. That's why I gave it away at age 42. I was smoking (burning) sixty a day at uni. However, one hears little about those who smoke and DON'T contract lung cancer. The Cook's mother smoked heavily until a week before she died at the age of 94.

It's the double standard of the shouters which irritates me. Their only answer to anything is to ban it.

For my money, I'd make the use of marijuana, cocaine, heroin and 'P' legal and I'd inflict th4e severest of penalties on those caught selling the stuff. With a bullet in the back of the head for sellers of 'P.'

Might enable the cops to get on with solving more burglaries.

Anonymous said...

Its not neccessary to smoke the stuff. Various preparations exist which enable the user to swallow it.