The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I bought some fags this morning, and thanks to the new legislation on advertising, they now come with a warning that covers over half the pack. Mine says “SMOKING KILLS”.
Good job they told me that, I had no idea. Wow, just think – there I was thinking I was going to live forever but now I guess I’m doomed to pass away like a mortal.
Bummer.
Now, it’s all very well the government suddenly taking such an interest in my well-being and physical health. But something just doesn’t add up for me.
They want to protect me from indulging in something that may be harmful should I continue over a long period of time. Fair enough, thanks for caring.
What I’m wondering is when they will do the same for alcohol?
When we will have warnings on beer that says “Warning, alcohol kills. Oh, and it can also make you obnoxious, violent, unfit to drive, impairs functionality of your body, can induce vomiting if ingested, has been known to exaggerate feelings of depression and unhappiness when consumed in quantity and is also responsible for unprotected sex – which can lead to sexually transmitted diseases, unwanted children and even death”
Seems a little unfair to me to single out cigarettes. Sure they may eventually cause cancer, but that’s all. That’s the most serious thing that can happen to me should I continue to smoke, I die.
Same holds true with alcohol though. Smoking damages the lungs, true. Drinking damages the liver.
So the government decides to ban tobacco advertising in an attempt to “prevent youngsters from starting”.
What they neglect to mention is that cigarette advertising is not aimed at luring new customers, it exists to promote brand loyalty. The idea behind is not “Let’s get people smoking”, but let’s convince the addict that our brand is better than their current choice.
But they have decided to band cigarette ads. Oh, but not in Formula One for another couple of years. This has no link to Bernie Eccleston donating over £2 million to the Labour Party though, and you’d be a fool and a terrorist sympathiser to think so.
So why ban advertising? If the government feels that strongly about it, then ban it. But they wont, because of the billions generated in revenue from smokers. If they were that concerned, they’d treat it like they do cannabis (which is less harmful than cigarettes because of the lack of carbon monoxide, carcinogens and ammonia included to keep it burning. That’s why joints go out so easily, there are no chemicals impregnated to ensure it stays lit).
Why do you think government got so huffy about Duty Free and the abolishment of personal limitations (or at least the relaxing of amount)? Because we all go to France, pay half-price and the UK loses out hundreds of thousands of pounds in taxation.
Bad smokers! Imagine that, an addict seeking the cheapest method of feeding the addiction.
Yet smoking has become almost as intolerable as child-molesting in the eyes of some people. People who, in all probability, drink.
Now to me, drink is far worse than a fag. Why?
Because I cannot ride up on the pavement and kill a child because I smoked 9 before driving home that night.
Because I am not going to have a fight with a stranger because I’ve been out smoking all night with my mates.
Because I can never end up homeless because of a raging nicotine addiction.
Because an alcoholic is unable to function correctly without a drink, whereas a smoker just gets angry.
Now I’m not saying ban drink, I’m saying take a step back and think like a reasonable human being instead of reacting immediately and condemning.
It’s an addiction, other addictions are looked upon as medical conditions. But not smoking.
“Well it stinks” – so does someone out boozing all night
“It can damage my lungs” – so can a drunk driver
“It can kill if used correctly” – so does alcohol.
“It’s anti-social” – worse than public disorder and violence?
Where I get really angry though is the smokescreen (pun intended) that is deployed every single year come budget day.
Fags rise by 10-15p a pack every year. Yet spirits and beer rise minutely, if at all.
Yet more people drink than smoke, it would be faster to collect revenue by taxing alcohol more than cigarettes.
So why doesn’t this happen?
Simple.
Because if booze is cheap, it’s the easiest way to escape the problems you are faced with every day.
You work in a climate of fear and uncertainty about job security. You are being told over and over about terrorist threats and tanks on the streets. You worry about money, whether you’ll be happy, whether your kids will grow up well and safe.
A climate of induced fear and paranoia.
And a carpet-bomb method of advertising a quick and easy way to escape those troubles – Have a drink!
Get drunk and forget your worries, it’ll be alright.
Soap Operas with the pub as central gathering point. Commercials on tv for beer, ads in cinemas making booze look cool, alco-pops aimed at the lucrative teenage/underage drink market.
Hook ‘em young and they’ll be in forever.
Flavoured vodkas, jelly-shots, shandy (for kids to drink and pretend to be drunk! Laugh at your 7yr old already displaying signs of seeing alcohol as an amusement center!!!!).
Keep the population frightened of imminent attack from Arabs or immigrants, they’ll be compliant and too scared to question things like military vehicles at airports.
But hey, keeping them scared isn’t enough because after a few months of waiting for this soon-to-happen end of world event that never occurs, they’ll start to question you.
But don’t panic, booze is cheap and readily available. Encourage your citizens to drink. They’ll soon forget about things and be so terrified by the news each day and papers screaming about Albanian refugees that before you know it, we’ll all be begging for identity cards to keep us safe and could we please have CCTV in our homes in case Saddam uses his bombs on us.
Let’s just stay in and lock the door, if things get too hard we can have a drink and feel better.
Alcoholism is an affliction, just as smoking is. Nobody forces you to drink, just as nobody forced me to smoke.
So why is a substance that can alter moods, destroy brain cells, incite violence and hatred, affect your reactions and perceptions (wow, it’s almost like I’m talking about cannabis – except for the violence) deemed acceptable and ok to promote on tv, cinema, magazines and billboards?
Again, for the reactionaries or those that haven’t manage to reach the bottom – I’m not saying ban alcohol.
I’m saying grow up and think for yourself instead of meekly accepting what you are told.
Because cigarettes don’t kill people, people do.
Let’s ban us instead.
Good job they told me that, I had no idea. Wow, just think – there I was thinking I was going to live forever but now I guess I’m doomed to pass away like a mortal.
Bummer.
Now, it’s all very well the government suddenly taking such an interest in my well-being and physical health. But something just doesn’t add up for me.
They want to protect me from indulging in something that may be harmful should I continue over a long period of time. Fair enough, thanks for caring.
What I’m wondering is when they will do the same for alcohol?
When we will have warnings on beer that says “Warning, alcohol kills. Oh, and it can also make you obnoxious, violent, unfit to drive, impairs functionality of your body, can induce vomiting if ingested, has been known to exaggerate feelings of depression and unhappiness when consumed in quantity and is also responsible for unprotected sex – which can lead to sexually transmitted diseases, unwanted children and even death”
Seems a little unfair to me to single out cigarettes. Sure they may eventually cause cancer, but that’s all. That’s the most serious thing that can happen to me should I continue to smoke, I die.
Same holds true with alcohol though. Smoking damages the lungs, true. Drinking damages the liver.
So the government decides to ban tobacco advertising in an attempt to “prevent youngsters from starting”.
What they neglect to mention is that cigarette advertising is not aimed at luring new customers, it exists to promote brand loyalty. The idea behind is not “Let’s get people smoking”, but let’s convince the addict that our brand is better than their current choice.
But they have decided to band cigarette ads. Oh, but not in Formula One for another couple of years. This has no link to Bernie Eccleston donating over £2 million to the Labour Party though, and you’d be a fool and a terrorist sympathiser to think so.
So why ban advertising? If the government feels that strongly about it, then ban it. But they wont, because of the billions generated in revenue from smokers. If they were that concerned, they’d treat it like they do cannabis (which is less harmful than cigarettes because of the lack of carbon monoxide, carcinogens and ammonia included to keep it burning. That’s why joints go out so easily, there are no chemicals impregnated to ensure it stays lit).
Why do you think government got so huffy about Duty Free and the abolishment of personal limitations (or at least the relaxing of amount)? Because we all go to France, pay half-price and the UK loses out hundreds of thousands of pounds in taxation.
Bad smokers! Imagine that, an addict seeking the cheapest method of feeding the addiction.
Yet smoking has become almost as intolerable as child-molesting in the eyes of some people. People who, in all probability, drink.
Now to me, drink is far worse than a fag. Why?
Because I cannot ride up on the pavement and kill a child because I smoked 9 before driving home that night.
Because I am not going to have a fight with a stranger because I’ve been out smoking all night with my mates.
Because I can never end up homeless because of a raging nicotine addiction.
Because an alcoholic is unable to function correctly without a drink, whereas a smoker just gets angry.
Now I’m not saying ban drink, I’m saying take a step back and think like a reasonable human being instead of reacting immediately and condemning.
It’s an addiction, other addictions are looked upon as medical conditions. But not smoking.
“Well it stinks” – so does someone out boozing all night
“It can damage my lungs” – so can a drunk driver
“It can kill if used correctly” – so does alcohol.
“It’s anti-social” – worse than public disorder and violence?
Where I get really angry though is the smokescreen (pun intended) that is deployed every single year come budget day.
Fags rise by 10-15p a pack every year. Yet spirits and beer rise minutely, if at all.
Yet more people drink than smoke, it would be faster to collect revenue by taxing alcohol more than cigarettes.
So why doesn’t this happen?
Simple.
Because if booze is cheap, it’s the easiest way to escape the problems you are faced with every day.
You work in a climate of fear and uncertainty about job security. You are being told over and over about terrorist threats and tanks on the streets. You worry about money, whether you’ll be happy, whether your kids will grow up well and safe.
A climate of induced fear and paranoia.
And a carpet-bomb method of advertising a quick and easy way to escape those troubles – Have a drink!
Get drunk and forget your worries, it’ll be alright.
Soap Operas with the pub as central gathering point. Commercials on tv for beer, ads in cinemas making booze look cool, alco-pops aimed at the lucrative teenage/underage drink market.
Hook ‘em young and they’ll be in forever.
Flavoured vodkas, jelly-shots, shandy (for kids to drink and pretend to be drunk! Laugh at your 7yr old already displaying signs of seeing alcohol as an amusement center!!!!).
Keep the population frightened of imminent attack from Arabs or immigrants, they’ll be compliant and too scared to question things like military vehicles at airports.
But hey, keeping them scared isn’t enough because after a few months of waiting for this soon-to-happen end of world event that never occurs, they’ll start to question you.
But don’t panic, booze is cheap and readily available. Encourage your citizens to drink. They’ll soon forget about things and be so terrified by the news each day and papers screaming about Albanian refugees that before you know it, we’ll all be begging for identity cards to keep us safe and could we please have CCTV in our homes in case Saddam uses his bombs on us.
Let’s just stay in and lock the door, if things get too hard we can have a drink and feel better.
Alcoholism is an affliction, just as smoking is. Nobody forces you to drink, just as nobody forced me to smoke.
So why is a substance that can alter moods, destroy brain cells, incite violence and hatred, affect your reactions and perceptions (wow, it’s almost like I’m talking about cannabis – except for the violence) deemed acceptable and ok to promote on tv, cinema, magazines and billboards?
Again, for the reactionaries or those that haven’t manage to reach the bottom – I’m not saying ban alcohol.
I’m saying grow up and think for yourself instead of meekly accepting what you are told.
Because cigarettes don’t kill people, people do.
Let’s ban us instead.
Page:
Goatboy wrote:
> I live in hope.
Ok, you want us all dead for our blatant crimes of ignorance and lack of intelligence, but to me, this is undermined because you smoke. Sure, people who watch Big Brother deserve to die in your eyes, along with the Pop Idol audience, e.t.c., because you're claiming they're basically people who have done nothing with their lives and are stupid.
You're sticking chemicals in your body which, odds on, means you will die from a cancer when your time finally comes - and it's not one of the better ways to go, especially for your relatives who have to see it all happen, how does this make you any better than someone who watches a stupid program ? To most non smokers you're equally as stupid for smoking, even if you do enjoy it.
~~Belldandy~~
> I live in hope.
Ok, you want us all dead for our blatant crimes of ignorance and lack of intelligence, but to me, this is undermined because you smoke. Sure, people who watch Big Brother deserve to die in your eyes, along with the Pop Idol audience, e.t.c., because you're claiming they're basically people who have done nothing with their lives and are stupid.
You're sticking chemicals in your body which, odds on, means you will die from a cancer when your time finally comes - and it's not one of the better ways to go, especially for your relatives who have to see it all happen, how does this make you any better than someone who watches a stupid program ? To most non smokers you're equally as stupid for smoking, even if you do enjoy it.
~~Belldandy~~
Sorry I used man ribs to make Big Brother contestants. Again I really should have thought that one through. I have great plans for the appendix though.
Women?
We've got PS2 and DVD now, can I have my rib back please?
We've got PS2 and DVD now, can I have my rib back please?
Goatboy wrote:
> I was busy on my knees praying for death-from-above.
>
> But then I woke up and it was ok.
> I think god has forsaken me
No I'm just busy at the moment doing some photocopying. Should never have created stupid trees, seemed like a good idea at the time. But then so did women.
> I was busy on my knees praying for death-from-above.
>
> But then I woke up and it was ok.
> I think god has forsaken me
No I'm just busy at the moment doing some photocopying. Should never have created stupid trees, seemed like a good idea at the time. But then so did women.
I was busy on my knees praying for death-from-above.
But then I woke up and it was ok.
I think god has forsaken me
But then I woke up and it was ok.
I think god has forsaken me
Missed youm on MSN last night.
Had my purple gown and love-cuffs out and everything...
Had my purple gown and love-cuffs out and everything...
I consider it a gift.
You do have a way with words, Goaty.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Before or after showering the country with its own nuclear arsenal?
---
Before.
And then when the moon-faced voters are applauding wildly, I shall turn to face the crowds. I shall light a cigarette and ask for quiet.
Once there is a pregnant pause in the air, an expectant jubilation I shall smile slowly and offer my last speech as Prime Minister:
"Who here likes to watch television?"
Crowd goes wild
"Who here thinks immigrants should be prevented from entering?"
Blood-lust screams
"Who here voted in Big Brother?"
Screams of agreement
"Who here told someone close they loved them this morning?"
A smattering of cheers and whoops
"Who here can say with hand on heart they are happy with their lives?"
Light dusting of clapping, some sheepish gazes at the floor.
"Who here has thought 'That's not right', yet done nothing about it?"
Uneasy silence
"Who here actually believed that Iraq posed any kind of threat whatsoever to the UK, despite having no air-force and never displaying any aggression towards the West?"
Silence
"And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why in precisely 3 minutes you will all be dead."
Polite laughter
"No, really."
Sirens go off
"Here that? You now have 157 seconds to regret all your mistakes and wish you said goodbye to your loved ones this morning"
Skittish panic
"120 seconds left now. No point in running, there are enough missiles headed here to liquify you, your family and your stupid banners"
Silence and thousands of disbelieving faces
"60 seconds left. I hate you, I really do hate you people. I find this amusing to think the last moments of your lives were spent mutely listening to someone else instead of doing what you want to. That's called symbolism you grovelling insects...whoops, 17 seconds left now. I hope, at the moment your hair catches fire, that you take a moment to wonder what may have happened if you stopped watching Eastenders for 10 mins and used the internet to research just how corrupt all leaders and governments are."
Mushroom clouds.
---
I live in hope.
> Before or after showering the country with its own nuclear arsenal?
---
Before.
And then when the moon-faced voters are applauding wildly, I shall turn to face the crowds. I shall light a cigarette and ask for quiet.
Once there is a pregnant pause in the air, an expectant jubilation I shall smile slowly and offer my last speech as Prime Minister:
"Who here likes to watch television?"
Crowd goes wild
"Who here thinks immigrants should be prevented from entering?"
Blood-lust screams
"Who here voted in Big Brother?"
Screams of agreement
"Who here told someone close they loved them this morning?"
A smattering of cheers and whoops
"Who here can say with hand on heart they are happy with their lives?"
Light dusting of clapping, some sheepish gazes at the floor.
"Who here has thought 'That's not right', yet done nothing about it?"
Uneasy silence
"Who here actually believed that Iraq posed any kind of threat whatsoever to the UK, despite having no air-force and never displaying any aggression towards the West?"
Silence
"And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why in precisely 3 minutes you will all be dead."
Polite laughter
"No, really."
Sirens go off
"Here that? You now have 157 seconds to regret all your mistakes and wish you said goodbye to your loved ones this morning"
Skittish panic
"120 seconds left now. No point in running, there are enough missiles headed here to liquify you, your family and your stupid banners"
Silence and thousands of disbelieving faces
"60 seconds left. I hate you, I really do hate you people. I find this amusing to think the last moments of your lives were spent mutely listening to someone else instead of doing what you want to. That's called symbolism you grovelling insects...whoops, 17 seconds left now. I hope, at the moment your hair catches fire, that you take a moment to wonder what may have happened if you stopped watching Eastenders for 10 mins and used the internet to research just how corrupt all leaders and governments are."
Mushroom clouds.
---
I live in hope.
That would explain the scales.
Page: