This story involves mass murder. Worse yet, it involves government and corporate sponsored mass murder. The murder victims, some 100 MILLION of them, represent the single biggest serial murder spree in all history.
Do we have a perpetrator? Indeed we do. (In fact, we have three).
Do we have supporting evidence? Indeed we do. (For obvious reasons, it will not be presented here).
Do we have a murder weapon? Indeed we do. It’s the humble cigarette.
Do we have motive? Oh, yes. Yes we do. In abundance.
So, we have victims, we have suspects, we have a motive, and we have the evidence.
Let’s go through it together.
The victims were smokers. The victims are dead. The victims are still dying. In their millions.
I went to the World Health Organisation website for the number of deaths claimed to be caused by smoking tobacco. The WHO says that worldwide, around 5 million people die per year due to “tobacco related diseases”. I multiplied 5 million by the number of years since a safer cigarette has been researched and ready for production and I arrived at 200 million. As you will see, the safer cigarette recipe is “at least 50% less harmful”, so I say that we have 100 million murder victims. Many of the second 100 million may have suffered grievous bodily harm, and remain the victims of a most serious assault on their persons.
Almost 40 years ago, a recipe for a reduced risk cigarette was provided by the Smoking and Health Program of the National Cancer Institute. This recipe proved to be at least 50% safer than existing products. The recipe was suppressed by those corporate entities with a completely different agenda. These particular corporates needed smokers to suffer and die. They needed customers for their wares. For their therapies, their creams, their medicines and their anti-depressant pills. They had to maintain and increase profits. They had targets to meet. They had shareholders to answer to. This is our Prime Suspect. The suspect’s name is Big Pharma. In 2001, the recipe was revived, this time by the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine. Despite being reminded of their guilt, the recipe was again suppressed by Public Health Authorities. This may help to explain:
- They (Public Health Authorities) had an official association with Big Pharma (see official partnership of the WHO with the industry for the last eight years, which suggests a much older love affair, probably 20 years or so). The obvious reason for the suppression of the safer cigarette is that a safer product does not require a “therapy”. Any official endorsement of the RRC (Risk Reduction Cigarette) would put Big Health in a contradictory stand and especially would hurt the interests of Big Pharma.
- The miscalculated goal of “America smoke-free by the year 2000” (and, I suppose, the consequential world smoke-free by 2010), that induced them to think that it was faster and better to eliminate smoking than offer a safer product.
- The fanatic ideology/policy of abolitionism rather than risk reduction, stemming from the contempt for the habit and the pursuit of a theoretical “perfect health” situation.
- The political opportunism of having an industry and a class of people as scapegoats – something far more politically distracting and profitable than making a product safer and in that way perpetuate its existence and the way of life that comes with it.
- Simple, straight-forward lust for power, no different than that which propelled the First Prohibition in the USA, based on moralistic issues, and now based on a neo-religious fanaticism centred on health and leading to the sequential equations:
physical health = moral virtue >> freedom of choice of lifestyle = lack of physical health >> freedom of choice of lifestyle = moral vice.
All that is not scientifically demonstrated, of course. But religion and ideology, by definition, are decoupled from science as they are based on faith.
Suspect Number Two is, of course, Big Tobacco. We have long known that Big Tobacco is no friend to its 1.2 billion customers. That they did not fight harder to get this product to market is their admission of guilt. More damning is the fact that when asked, they deny that a safer cigarette is possible. I know because I have asked them. Several times. Right now they have the opportunity to confess.
Suspect Number Three is Big Government. As you would imagine, there is no way on earth the government would not be informed that there was a safer cigarette to be had. And you would be right. The government, steered (badly) by Public Health outfits, has been aiding and abetting Big Pharma forever. Right now they have the opportunity to confess.
Money. As we have shown, Big Pharma only ever looks at its bottom line. What are 100 million deaths compared to a healthy balance sheet? Legal drugs are a multi-trillion dollar industry. Big Tobacco, it seems, could care less. They make money either way. The government? Hell, they need us to die. They have no interest in smokers living to 95, costing them a fortune in medical care and accommodation charges. As long as we reach retirement age, that’s good enough for them. Once we have spent 45 years chipping in our taxes, and our National Insurance Contributions and the whole array of stealth taxes that they dream up, we just become a drain on the economy.
The article I link to below is the most illuminating document that I have read in the last two and a half years. Although it answers many of my questions, and hopefully many of yours, it also serves to raise many more questions. (1) Who allowed these murders to take place? (2) Who are the pharmaceutical companies involved? (3) How many scientists stood by, or were actively involved, and let this genocide take place? (4) Which governments are involved? (5) Is there any written evidence? (6) Is it available to charge these criminals in a court of law? (7) Can these serial killers be stopped?
The answers to these questions, and many many more, are archived safely. They will be used at the right time and in the right place. One thing you can be absolutely sure of; the suspects won’t be rushing to court to challenge this data. I have made the accusations in the full knowledge that the evidence against the suspects is water-tight. But they know this already, because they provided it. They conspired to bury it, just like their victims, but we found it. We took care of it. Its a great pity that they did not show the same level of care for their victims.
The information I have provided here comes, in part, from the paper that I link to which was written by one of the most respected professionals in the scientific research field, namely, Dr Gio Batta Gori and his research team. I urge you to read and digest his words, and for a fuller explanation you might want to purchase the complete story, entitled “Virtually Safe Cigarettes; Reviving An Opportunity Once Tragically Rejected”. (Publisher details can be found at the bottom of page 4 in the linked paper)
So there we have it. An ugly story, a horrible story, covered in greed, wrapped up in corruption, and surrounded by an unholy desire to control. We have at least 100 million needless deaths spread over 40 years, we have several suspects, and they are still at large. Still murdering people, and still getting away with it. But not for much longer. The Sword of Damocles is about to fall. Retribution cometh.
Enough really is enough. Its time to put these murdering bastards where they belong.
Some observations and some notes
Just what is a “safer cigarette”?
It is known in the tobacco industry as a Risk Reduction Cigarette (RRC); the recipe demonstrates how at least 50% of the toxins can easily be removed and it recommends that the nicotine be doubled. The concept is this: an RRC contains more nicotine, reduces inhalation and increases satisfaction, so if I smoke 30 cigarettes a day now, once I switch to the RRC with double the nicotine, I will now smoke 15 per day because I am saturated, and that cuts my consumption in half. In addition, the 15 cigarettes that I do smoke have had 50% of the toxins removed, so in reality, I am only smoking 7.5 cigarettes per day. It should be pointed out that the average statistical risk threshold for lung cancer hovers around 10 cigarettes per day. Can you see the dilemma? Sales would halve, which means that Big Tobacco have nothing to gain, and half of their profits to lose, likewise, Big Government lose half of all those lucrative taxes (and we can provide a strong argument for halving the tax in any case, if RRC’s only do half the damage), and finally, poor old Big Pharma lose all of their profits! Most consumers, me included, assume a safer cigarette to be the Holy Grail of Big Tobacco. Not according to the drug companies, and not according to the tobacco companies. Their bottom line is more important to them than smokers health. We have been getting screwed for 40 years. Its payback time.
Many people, particularly scientists, believe that tobacco kills far fewer people than is generally reported. As amazing as it sounds, not one death can be solely attributed to smoking tobacco. There are far too many other “bad guys” in our environment to simply hoist all the blame on tobacco. I mention them all the time but as a reminder, some of the other perpertrators that should be in every line up include: Radon, Asbestos, Diet, Education, Socio-Economic Status, Industrial Pollution, Vehicle Emissions, Radioactive Particles from Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Chernobyl, Trinity, Three Mile Island etc. That there is a much stronger case to be built using these alternative suspects is not lost on us, but I genuinely believe that Public Health NGO’s have studiously avoided all mention of them. No money in it, see? Who amongst them is brave enough to tackle Big Oil, Big Nuclear, or Big Industry? None of them. Not while easy targets like us “nasty” smokers exist.
If this is true, (that smoking tobacco kills far fewer people), then it puts an end to any need for indoor smoking legislation. If the suspects have told lies about primary smoking, it confirms that they are also lying about SHS. All bans can be rescinded, immediately and all over the world. So the suspects have a choice: they can tell us the truth about tobacco related deaths, they can confess to exaggerating the numbers, and be damned.
Alternatively, they can confirm that tobacco does kill 5 million people per year, but that 2.5 million are dying needlessly because they kept a virtually safe cigarette off the market, and that they conspired to murder 100 million people, and be damned.
This is the day you dreaded. This is the very stuff that causes your nightmares. And so it should.
The jig is up boys, and we want answers.
Either way you are screwed.
How does it feel?
Go To Story »