PDA

View Full Version : Re: buying ciggies online


SHW
June 22nd 03, 04:27 PM
"Gavin Gillespie" > wrote > > Paul
> > (Guinness drinker, smoker and 3:52 marathon runner.)
> >
>
> I always found it amazing, how many long distance runners seem to collapse
> with heart attacks, whilst out running, perhaps you have solved the
mystery
> ;o)
>
I always wonder how many of those long distance runners who did collapse
and die of a heart attack (very few as a matter of fact) would have done so
a lot sooner had they not kept so fit?

Perhaps you are right...and I guess only time will tell in my case.

My next effort is Dublin City Marathon in October. Given that I am only a
social smoker (i.e. I only smoke when I go out for a drink) and that I will
of course be partaking of copious amounts of the black stuff whilst in it's
home town, I will no doubt be giving your theory it's greatest ever test.
Here's hoping I see next Christmas!

;0)

Paul

Monty
June 22nd 03, 07:36 PM
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 11:56:38 +0100, "Stephen \(aka steford\)"
> wrote:
>It makes less sense you are looking for cheaper ways of killing yourself and
>others.
Its not only tobacco smoke that kills people Stephen I never see any
of you car drivers complaining about killing people with the nasty
petrol exhaust fumes from your cars ! .
My Father smoked 20 a day every day that a knew him and died from a
none smoking related illness at the age of 82 now if I last till I am
82 I shall be quite happy and I have no intention of depriving myself
of one of the few pleasures in life that I have just to please you NO
SMOKING FANACTICS .
Incidently I buy my hand rolling tobacco for £ 4.00 for 50G's £ 8.17p
in ripoff Britain and the people I get it off are making a profit the
pouch is marked up at 2.50 Euros .
Monty .

Stephen \(aka steford\)
June 22nd 03, 07:41 PM
"Monty" > wrote in message
s.com...
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 11:56:38 +0100, "Stephen \(aka steford\)"
> > wrote:
> >It makes less sense you are looking for cheaper ways of killing yourself
and
> >others.
> Its not only tobacco smoke that kills people Stephen I never see any
> of you car drivers complaining about killing people with the nasty
> petrol exhaust fumes from your cars ! .
> My Father smoked 20 a day every day that a knew him and died from a
> none smoking related illness at the age of 82 now if I last till I am
> 82 I shall be quite happy and I have no intention of depriving myself
> of one of the few pleasures in life that I have just to please you NO
> SMOKING FANACTICS .
> Incidently I buy my hand rolling tobacco for £ 4.00 for 50G's £ 8.17p
> in ripoff Britain and the people I get it off are making a profit the
> pouch is marked up at 2.50 Euros .
> Monty .

Britian is a rip off indeed but tax on fags has to be right - the strain on
the NHS from smokers and their children, the mess in the streets, the
redecorating of places where smoking is allowed, fires started by disgarded
fags etc etc. It's one thing the govt is doing right in my opinion.
Cars kill too. I cycle.

SHW
June 22nd 03, 09:31 PM
"Capitol" > wrote in message
...
> Everybody that I know who took up exercise has died! Including the
> exsmokers.
> Regards
> Capitol

So does that prove that they would not have died if they had never taken up
exercise? More to the point, does that prove that they would no have died
sooner if they had not taken up exercise?

Many people give up smoking and/or take up exercise on the advise of their
Doctor AFTER a problem has been diagnosed, in order to give them a better
chance of survival.

Paul

Monty
June 22nd 03, 10:31 PM
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 20:07:42 +0100, "HP" > wrote:
>When all of us smokers quit smoking, and swap over to bikes instead of cars,
>where do you think the government will turn to to make up all the lost
>revenue from petrol and ciggies?
Steve mentioned the mess that smokers leave on the streets of our
towns and cities smokers don't leave BLOOD on the streets has do the
boozers of this world .
Monty .

Monty
June 22nd 03, 10:36 PM
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 20:10:59 +0100, "Capitol"
> wrote:

>Everybody that I know who took up exercise has died! Including the
>exsmokers.
All this " I'm going to the gym " is just a way for the showoffs to
show off a little more. I'l keep my little bit of spare fat for when I
am unable to eat for a week or two for some reason .
Monty .

Monty
June 22nd 03, 10:41 PM
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 20:31:16 +0100, "SHW" >
wrote:
>Many people give up smoking and/or take up exercise on the advise of their
>Doctor AFTER a problem has been diagnosed, in order to give them a better
>chance of survival.
Paul I have smoked since I was 18 and I am 61 now and I have sat on
my arse for up to 12 hrs a day for the last 40 years and never seen
the inside of a gym since I left school in fact I hardly went into the
school gym. And I haven't had a days serious illness in my whole life
and I'l be damned if I am going to start jumping through hoops now
to please doctors you or anyone else .
Monty .

SHW
June 22nd 03, 11:30 PM
"Monty" > wrote in message
s.com...
> I'l be damned if I am going to start jumping through hoops now
> to please doctors you or anyone else .
> Monty .

Fair play to you Monty.

Your attitude is the same as that of my father, whose 66th Birthday is
tomorrow. He is lying on the sofa in my front room two doors away as I
write, dying of stomach cancer. It was the drink that did for him I think,
as much as the fags. Suffice it to say he will be out tomorrow downing
Guinness and Jamesons until he falls over to celebrate his Birthday. To give
him his due, he always said he would live 'till he died and that is exactly
what he is doing. He is not asking for sympathy, and for my part, he would
not get it. I told him long ago that by abusing his body the way he did, he
was going to kill himself. He told me that if he gave up all the things he
was not supposed to do, there would be nothing left worth doing!

His two sisters, who have also died of cancer in the past two years, both
went to hospital and had treatment, but died none the less. My dad swears he
would have died by now had he let them treat his cancer, and he was
diagnosed before both of his sisters.

I am not making a judgement here. At the end of the day, I got fit because I
wanted to run the Marathon. I would not swear it will prolong my life, and I
certainly would not do the kind of exercise I do just to try to prolong my
life. But I enjoy what I do and having been to both extremes (couch potato,
fat, smoker, heavy drinker to ultra fit, sleek racing snake, no drink, no
smokes) I feel far better being the latter. Having said that, I still enjoy
a good drink and a smoke on a regular basis.

Paul

SHW
June 22nd 03, 11:43 PM
"Monty" > wrote

> All this " I'm going to the gym " is just a way for the showoffs to
> show off a little more. I'l keep my little bit of spare fat for when I
> am unable to eat for a week or two for some reason .
> Monty .

Monty

I knew a chap whose father became ill with heart disease. He visited the
Doctor and was given a course of pills. These pills were very powerful and
he was given strict instructions as to how they should be taken. He had to
take one pill on Monday, skip Tuesday, one pill on Wednesday, skip Thursday,
two pills on Friday, skip Saturday, skip Sunday and start again Monday.
After just two weeks he died. When this chaps son went back and told the
Doctor of his fathers death, the Doctor was very shocked, claiming that
these pills had never failed before. The chap explained that he did not
think it was the pills which had killed his father, but all the skipping.

;0)

Paul

Major ChrisB
July 9th 03, 11:32 AM
"Chris Nelis" > wrote in message
...
> We could also save the health service a lot if people did not smoke.....
>

ok can I say ******** and point out how un-informed you are.

Cigarette smokers cost the NHS approx 1.2billion a year treating smoke
related illnesses. Tax ftom tobacco which funds the NHS is around 7
billion.

1.5 billion a year is spend treating illegal visitors and imigrants to this
country and that only illegal ones mind, not including the several hundred
thousand asylum seekers who come into this country without any
immunisations.

There is an STD clinic in london which recently discovered 95% of it's aids
patients were illegal african imigrants who were either squatting in london
or travelling back and forth.

these people pay no taxes and dont work, they bring nothing to the country
and never will.

Now tell me smokers are a drain on the NHS. and before you start on how
passive smoking gives others lung cancer, that too is ******** propaganda
spread by the government as there has only ever been one, yes one, study
thats ever found any connection between 2nd hand smoke and lung cancer and
they were taken to court in the mid 90's and lost after it was proved they
made up number, ignored several test results and exagerated figures.....yet
amazingly this is the study both american and UK anti-smoke lobyests use to
try and get your attention. That and the WHO study which released a press
release saying somehting like "second hand smoker dangerous - can cause
cancer" but then those who bother to read the study will see it acctually
says inside that no significant link was found.

we had the whole publication of Roy Castle dying of lung cancer and never
smoking and they saying it was passive smoking....that may be true but it's
just speculation, no one has ever been able to prove anything, more people
have credibly said it's not true than those who have made things up and said
it is...

the whole anti smoking organisation is pure stupidity. The NHS spends
millions a year producing anti-smoking adverts on TV. Why? It'd be like
the BBC paying for prime time advertising space on ITV saying "eastenders is
****"

Smoking is what gives the NHS money, without it there would be no NHS or, if
there were out taxes would almost double...

Gavin Gillespie
July 9th 03, 12:26 PM
"Major ChrisB" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Chris Nelis" > wrote in message
> ...
> > We could also save the health service a lot if people did not smoke.....
> >
>
> ok can I say ******** and point out how un-informed you are.
>
> Cigarette smokers cost the NHS approx 1.2billion a year treating smoke
> related illnesses. Tax ftom tobacco which funds the NHS is around 7
> billion.
>

So you are not taking into account the costs placed on other taxpayers, by
people who can't work, and will never work again, through smoking related
illnesses, or the costs due to people being temporarily off work through
smoking related illnesses. The costs to taxpayers of supporting the
dependant families of those that die early through smoking related diseases,
the costs to the community of those that cannot walk through smoking related
illnesses. These extra costs took just a couple of minutes to come up with,
and there must be many more, so if you want to equate what smokers cost,
against what they contribute, then please include the full picture. Also
remember that if someone can't work, and is still smoking, then they are
probably buying their cigarettes with other taxpayers money in the first
place.

As regards passive smoking, and there being no proof that it damages the
health of others, how many years were we fed propaganda from the tobacco
companies that there was no proof that direct smoking causes lung cancer,
how many millions did they spend in the courts fighting cases, and arguing
against those that said there was a link with cancer, now read what they
print on the cigarette packets.

If someone still wants to smoke, knowing all the risks to themselves, and
their families, then that is their decision, but to try to make out that by
doing so, they are doing the rest of us a favour, is sheer stupidity.
--
Gavin Gillespie
Nottingham UK
www.Giltbrook.co.uk
www.LawrencesEastwood.co.uk

HP
July 9th 03, 03:05 PM
"Gavin Gillespie" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Major ChrisB" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Chris Nelis" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > We could also save the health service a lot if people did not
smoke.....
> > >
> >
> > ok can I say ******** and point out how un-informed you are.
> >
> > Cigarette smokers cost the NHS approx 1.2billion a year treating smoke
> > related illnesses. Tax ftom tobacco which funds the NHS is around 7
> > billion.
> >
>
> So you are not taking into account the costs placed on other taxpayers, by
> people who can't work, and will never work again, through smoking related
> illnesses, or the costs due to people being temporarily off work through
> smoking related illnesses. The costs to taxpayers of supporting the
> dependant families of those that die early through smoking related
diseases,
> the costs to the community of those that cannot walk through smoking
related
> illnesses. These extra costs took just a couple of minutes to come up
with,
> and there must be many more, so if you want to equate what smokers cost,
> against what they contribute, then please include the full picture. Also
> remember that if someone can't work, and is still smoking, then they are
> probably buying their cigarettes with other taxpayers money in the first
> place.
>
> As regards passive smoking, and there being no proof that it damages the
> health of others, how many years were we fed propaganda from the tobacco
> companies that there was no proof that direct smoking causes lung cancer,
> how many millions did they spend in the courts fighting cases, and arguing
> against those that said there was a link with cancer, now read what they
> print on the cigarette packets.
>
> If someone still wants to smoke, knowing all the risks to themselves, and
> their families, then that is their decision, but to try to make out that
by
> doing so, they are doing the rest of us a favour, is sheer stupidity.
> --
> Gavin Gillespie
> Nottingham UK
> www.Giltbrook.co.uk
> www.LawrencesEastwood.co.uk
>
>

I have a feeling that a lot of people with lung cancer live in a polluted,
smoke filled environment anway, I certainly dont get much clean air, living
in London as i do....ciggies are just an excuse...I am not sure what the
figures are but ther ehas to be a hell of a lot less smokers now than there
was in the 60's-70's and 80's, but has the cancer rate increased or
decreased? does anyone know?



>

Gavin Gillespie
July 12th 03, 12:48 PM
"Halla" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 11:26:57 +0100, "Gavin Gillespie"
> > blethered:
>
> >
> >"Major ChrisB" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>
> >> "Chris Nelis" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > We could also save the health service a lot if people did not
smoke.....
> >> >
> >>
> >> ok can I say ******** and point out how un-informed you are.
> >>
> >> Cigarette smokers cost the NHS approx 1.2billion a year treating smoke
> >> related illnesses. Tax ftom tobacco which funds the NHS is around 7
> >> billion.
> >>
> >
> >So you are not taking into account the costs placed on other taxpayers,
by
> >people who can't work, and will never work again, through smoking related
> >illnesses, or the costs due to people being temporarily off work through
> >smoking related illnesses. The costs to taxpayers of supporting the
> >dependant families of those that die early through smoking related
diseases,
> >the costs to the community of those that cannot walk through smoking
related
> >illnesses. These extra costs took just a couple of minutes to come up
with,
> >and there must be many more, so if you want to equate what smokers cost,
> >against what they contribute, then please include the full picture.
>
> Uh - how do you know that isn't covered in the cost stated there?
> 'Treatment of smoking related illnesses' would seem to cover it, you
> know.
>

Because it specifically states "Cigarette smokers cost the NHS approx
1.2billion a year treating smoke related illnesses", and not 'cost the
various Social Security departments' which are separate departments from the
NHS.

Rest of comments not replied to, for not paying attention to detail in the
first instance, and being too narrow minded to listen to reason, if I had
taken the trouble to respond.
--
Gavin Gillespie

Major ChrisB
July 12th 03, 04:17 PM
"Paul F" > wrote in message
...
> "Major ChrisB" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Chris Nelis" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > We could also save the health service a lot if people did not
smoke.....
> > >
> >
> > ok can I say ******** and point out how un-informed you are.
> >
> > Cigarette smokers cost the NHS approx 1.2billion a year treating smoke
> > related illnesses. Tax ftom tobacco which funds the NHS is around 7
> > billion.
> >
> > 1.5 billion a year is spend treating illegal visitors and imigrants to
> this
> > country and that only illegal ones mind, not including the several
hundred
> > thousand asylum seekers who come into this country without any
> > immunisations.
> >
> > There is an STD clinic in london which recently discovered 95% of it's
> aids
> > patients were illegal african imigrants who were either squatting in
> london
> > or travelling back and forth.
> >
> > these people pay no taxes and dont work, they bring nothing to the
country
> > and never will.
> >
> > Now tell me smokers are a drain on the NHS. and before you start on how
> > passive smoking gives others lung cancer, that too is ********
propaganda
> > spread by the government as there has only ever been one, yes one, study
> > thats ever found any connection between 2nd hand smoke and lung cancer
and
> > they were taken to court in the mid 90's and lost after it was proved
they
> > made up number, ignored several test results and exagerated
> figures.....yet
> > amazingly this is the study both american and UK anti-smoke lobyests use
> to
> > try and get your attention. That and the WHO study which released a
press
> > release saying somehting like "second hand smoker dangerous - can cause
> > cancer" but then those who bother to read the study will see it
acctually
> > says inside that no significant link was found.
> >
> > we had the whole publication of Roy Castle dying of lung cancer and
never
> > smoking and they saying it was passive smoking....that may be true but
> it's
> > just speculation, no one has ever been able to prove anything, more
people
> > have credibly said it's not true than those who have made things up and
> said
> > it is...
> >
> > the whole anti smoking organisation is pure stupidity. The NHS spends
> > millions a year producing anti-smoking adverts on TV. Why? It'd be
like
> > the BBC paying for prime time advertising space on ITV saying
"eastenders
> is
> > ****"
> >
> > Smoking is what gives the NHS money, without it there would be no NHS
or,
> if
> > there were out taxes would almost double...
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Dear Major Major Major
>
> So you only support freedom if it is cost effective. You want the freedom
to
> smoke, justifying it by claiming the Government gains a net profit from
your
> hobby. But you want to question others' right to move around the world.
>
> 'These people', as you term them, do bring something to the country. They
> bring themselves. Thats often all they have.

tough ******** is all I can say to that. If people have nothing to bring
this country then they shouldnt gain from it. sure if someone on holiday
from australia or brazil was to take ill, yeah we'd treat them, but then
they'd have followed the rules and the law to get here. If someone has
gotten themselves infected with aids in another country and illegal gets to
this country to exploit the NHS is becomes a bigger strain on our government
that smokers, drinkers, drug users.

Do you think any briton would safely get into the USA or India and claim
free med care on their helth systems? I doubt it....

We give millions and billions to these countries in aide every year and
still help any internationals that come to briton for help.

Look at the asylum seekers, be they chinese, indian, isreli, pakistani,
afghani's or whatever....

how many countries do these people get too before being told nope keep going
till you get to britan, I'm sure france isn't the only idiot country. We
have someone in this country, an asylum seeker, running as a councilor.
He's been here about 5 years, speeks no english and still dresses in
traditional clothing, as does his wife. I've seen many people walking
around Glasgow in full dress and I've had to deal with customers who havn't
bothered learning english yet they try and get by on hand signals. No,
thats not good enough, if countries like France can just pass these people
onto us and they're coming in here, getting housing, benefits and money and
medical treatment when our hardworking parents and grandparents can't even
get on waiting lists. They dress like they're still in their native land
and talk like we all speek their language....NO! Thsi has to stop. If they
want to be british fine, if not they go back ASAP. If they're coming here
they should be made to integrate into our society. They constantly moan
that they're been many asylum seekers attacked or bullied. Well no f-ing
wonder. they come into a country thats alreay in a **** poor state and
force us to give more of our financial resources to a group of people who
shouldn't be here in the first place, who don't bother learning our language
and don't intergrate into our culture. they expect us to do all the work.

The asylum seekers is one thing that the government hasn't properly delt
with but theres many more coming into this country illegally that cost us
just as much money and thats not being delt with either. No wonder we have
to pay an absolutly rediculous amount of basic income tax in this god
forsaken country



> It is ridiculous to claim toleration in the context of your xenophobia.

I have no idea what that means....

Paul F
July 14th 03, 12:30 AM
(NB: apologies for first having this emailed to you personally by mistake)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Major ChrisB" >

> >
> > 'These people', as you term them, do bring something to the country.
They
> > bring themselves. Thats often all they have.
>
> tough ******** is all I can say to that.

That sentence is effectively all you said in your long and tedious email.
There are two kinds of people in this world, and you tell us you are the
kind who says 'tough ********' in the face of the hardships and sufferings
of others. The trouble will be, for example, if you come up against your
kind when its you who are in need. If you are unfortunate enough (continuing
the context of this discussion) to contract cancer, you are going to have to
count on finding someone who doesn't just say 'tough ********' in the face
of your misfortune, but instead offers you treatment. If someone bigger than
you decides they want what you have, you're going to have to hope you can
count on someone else not merely saying 'tough ********' when you want help
or justice. If and when you're old, you're going to have to hope the state
or whoever you look to for support doesn't just sneer at you and tell you
'tough ******** Major Major Major'.

I say hope, because you have no right to expect it. You're one of the
corrupt people who think they can claim all the benefits of civilisation
without accepting any duty to the values that make it worth having. Yours is
a criminal mentality.

And you are also a ****.

(snipped various racist ****e)

>
>
> > It is ridiculous to claim toleration in the context of your xenophobia.
>
> I have no idea what that means....

I am afraid that is because you are thick as ****.

Paul F

(Again, apologies for first having this emailed to you direct)

Google