The lady with the big boobs

There is a way to display boobs (with cleavage) in the most tasteful way. I am not against cleavages - or boobs!

But I am really tired of seeing large ladies displaying big boobs, wobbly and folded under the armpits with uplift, cleavages that disappear in the infrastructure of underclothing, when boobs of that magnitude and flaccidness should be absolutely hidden from view. No question.

Large ladies with uplifted big boobs in skimpy tops or evening wear. are not sexy. They would never display their large gnarled thighs in an attempt to look sexy because it is understood by most, that doing so would bring on them derision rather than admiration.

Yet so many women in the UK flaunt their boobs. Going out is boob flaunting time. It's the strangest thing to me. It's a cultural "flaunt it if you've got it" mentality it seems to me. But just having big boobs doesn't mean they are good enough to show off or that we like looking at them. There are nice big boobs and there are horrid big boobs that should be hidden.  Every woman should have the sense to tell the difference.

But it seems they don't. Ladies with the horrid kind of uplifted creasing, in-your-face look-at-me-flaunting-it boobs make me cringe with shame for showing how ugly boobs can look. They confirm to onlookers that what they have deluded themselves to think desirable that is not really up to much at all.

An eye for a drone and a tooth for shock and awe.

No UK Media, nor the police or government seem to have mentioned that the attack in Woolwich was a beheading. Yet it is assumed? and reported by independent news sources. I find that strange. In the UK we have only been told the attackers "hacked" at their victim.

If it had been a beheading, done clean and neat, one could assume it was a well planned terrorist event.

But it was botched, incompetent and brutal. Barbarous. A home-made botch up job.

I find it strange that the police took so long to arrive on the scene, and didn't shoot to kill, only to wound. Isn't that surprising? Did they not kill on purpose? The attackers hung around waiting for the police. Did they expect to sacrifice their lives in a hail of bullets? By not not shooting them dead, the police have not made martyrs of them, but made them accountable. Even so, these men have become notorious their message indelible, but they are not martyrs.

“We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reasons we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day. This British soldier is an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. We must fight them. I apologise that women had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government. They don’t care about you.” see here 

I find it most frightening that ordinary men, made unbalanced by hatred, planned this "home made"? protest in a democratic country which they don't call "our land", and that modern technology will spread their message around the world as clearly as any sophisticated terrorist plot.

 Here is an audio eyewitness account that is very moving.

 

The new McCarthyism - propaganda central - Tobacco Control

In the 50's people were made paranoid about communism through Government propaganda. Thousands were brought under investigation for being communist sympathisers in The United States. The Mccarthy Era, is rightly considered an embarrassment. It was a time when "the practice of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or political criticism." was used to sculpt society and persecute people.

It was a shocking and shameful period of history.

The techniques it used, are not dead. Today, there is a new McCarthyism. against smokers and smoking instead of communists. Paranoia is spread by dodgy science especially covering Second Hand smoke. It keeps the people in fear. The latest bit of rubbish, that "Even brief periods of passive smoking have been found to cause lasting damage to the brains of children under 10, leading to negative changes in their behaviour." are rediculous, unsubstantiated accusations.

These researchers have been anti smoking infected. They might not even be the generation that know anything real about smoking at all. They might have never heard of McCarthyism. But what they do by publishing such junk is instantly recognised and ridiculed by people to who grew up with smokers, who are smokers, who  are old enough and wise enough to have been infected themselves with SHS, to know how absolutely perverted this kind of "science" is, and who are not yet dead!

McCarthyism is not dead either - just used by Tobacco Control instead.

I believe much of the science against smoking and smokers, and now vapers is propaganda in it's most devious form. Unfortunately, the people, the citizens, the sheeples will remain under it's spell, hoodwinked, brainwashed and infected themselves by the new McCarthyism.

We all just wanna have fun..

Something weird is going on in our culture. We have only one synonym for happiness - "fun". Everyone wants to have fun.

Fun is pushed on almost every kids channel - no all kids channel TV. All school lessons are expected to be fun. Learning is promoted by telling kids how fun it is. Parents take their kids out to fun days, shopping, eating, playparks, ballpools, fun animal farms and other commercially constructed areas where fun can be had and paid for.  They can go on holiday where organised fun is expected as part of the package - for them too. Nights out must be fun - obligatory. Fun is our most promoted adjective. Observe how often it is used.

How do we know we are having fun? Well laughing, shrieking/screaming, clapping and grinning are taken as symptoms of fun. People having fun are people experiencing happiness it seems. If we are not having fun, we are missing something. Everything in our world tells us to have fun. We are offered manufactured fun constantly. Fun is an industry.

When we are really having fun, the novelty of it causes our brain to release a pleasure chemical that makes us feel good. It makes us healthy too. Fun is an important aspect of life - a necessity almost.

Fun is transitory, lighthearted. When we aren't having it and think we need it, we are offered more - for a price usually. And we become pleasure seekers, addicts really, paying for another shot of fun. When we are having fun, time flies. We can forget reality. Reality is not fun.

Yet reality is where happiness lives and happiness is not the same as fun. Happiness is felt along a continuum from contentment, gratitude to bliss. The symptoms of happiness can be imperceptible. And can be felt whilst perfectly still, whilst not outwardly having fun. Happiness is a condition, once discovered, can last a lifetime.

Happiness cannot be bought or sold. But fun is the next best thing, easily sold, easily manufactured and easy to charge for. And everyone wants it.
 





 

Aaaaaarghhhhhh - NO! Its always NICOTINE. What is wrong with these people?

Nicotine, nicotine, nicotine! There are many benefits to Nicotine. It's been so badly damaged by the anti smoking group, in that it is contained in cigarette smoke, that you just mention it in company and everyone screams and hits the deck.

If nicotine is SO addictive, where are all the people addicted to nicotine patches?

I can't read the whole thing because I am not going to pay for it but here is the conclusion

Preventing Sin: The Ethics of Vaccines Against Smoking


"In this paper, we consider whether it would be ethical for parents to vaccinate their children against smoking if a nicotine vaccine were to be proven effective as a preventive intervention for children or adolescents. We begin by explaining the current state of nicotine vaccine science and suggesting some likely ethical concerns about allowing parents to have their children receive a vaccine. We then present a preliminary argument for making vaccination permissible, at least if nicotine vaccination substantially reduces the probability that someone subsequently becomes a smoker. We consider a series of possible ethical objections, which are useful for identifying the conditions under which it would be ethical for parents to vaccinate their children against smoking. We conclude that it would be permissible for parents to give their child a nicotine vaccine if the following conditions were met: the vaccine is expected to result in a net benefit to each individual vaccinated, the expected harms from the side effects of the vaccine are lower than the nonvoluntary harms caused by smoking, and there are no other, less manipulative methods available that are as effective at preventing smoking initiation."

Aaaaaarghhhhh!

NO!

And **** you too. Wake up peoples. Who needs satan - we have the EU!

I think there must be something wrong with me - I can't accept authority or something. And it's true - I am arrogant enough to think I am my own authority. I think, on the whole, I'm a good person, trying to be a good person. And many people I know are the same as me. I think people should be left alone - to be as free as possible.

So I am glad I have this blog to write out my anger when my blood boils. And today it's boiling! I have been so distracted by what is happening in the vaping world and watching the ENVI workshop on electronic cigarettes, that I have overlooked other things happening in the EU. The EU is one crazy, sinister place! How is it that we let it control us? Who ARE the people pontificating in the EU? They are no better than you or I - yet they make laws and bring in rules and legislations according to THEIR directives  After watching the Electronic cigarettes workshop, I realised that the people who are, in effect, controlling the world - are very ignorant of the areas in which they rule.

I don't know how much work The Seed Growers in Europe had to do, to get this ruling even slightly changed, but I bet it was as much as we vapers have been doing.

Look at this - All ABOUT THE New EU Seed Law as laid before EU Commissioners on May 6th

"On Monday May 6th a draconian new law was put before the European Commission, which creates new powers to classify and regulate all plant life anywhere in Europe.
The "Plant Reproductive Material Law" regulates all plants. It contains immediate restrictions on vegetables and woodland trees, while creating powers to restrict all other plants of any other species at a later date.
Under the new law, it will immediately be illegal to grow, reproduce or trade any vegetable seed or tree that has not been tested and approved by a new "EU Plant Variety Agency, who will make a list of approved plants. Moreover, an annual fee must also be paid to the Agency to keep them on the list, and if not paid, they cannot be grown."

It goes on - and gets worse. How absolutely offensive is that?

I am coming to the conclusion that, far from being benevolent, the EU is one one the most malevolent organisations ever allowed to meddle in human affairs. They are completely, totally and utterly corrupt without any principle. How can we allow it? What RIGHT do they have to even exist? What is the real power behind it all? Money? Monopoly? Control? The EU seems to be the absolute antithisis of democracy or freedom.

Wake up peoples! A massive creature is devouring our freedom.

Childrens' rights - the poverty of touching.

http://www.soscn.org/rights.html

Along with “rights” for just about everything (except Smokers!) - Womens' Rights, Gay Rights, Civil Rights, Religious Rights, Atheist Rights, Fathers' Rights, Grandparents' Rights, Animal Rights – whatever - you name it - we now have so many rights that no one has any rights (especially not smokers). And Children have the most rights.

In truth, no one has ANY rights – Nature does not work like that. The big animals eat the little animals and so on down.  In animals that care for their young, the young are taught to conform, behave, adjust to the community in which they live. They are taught to survive and they are cared for (in apes, elephants and others) by the communities in which they live. They are physically touched. If they overstep the mark, they are corrected – by anyone, even the other members of the community. They are touched, guided, helped, clobbered, chided, led, fed. But they are touched.

We are told we are but animals.

Over time we have made our own rights. And we have, in modern times, emphasised children's rights. This is quite a new right. Children have the right not to be physically touched. Playcentres now need permission simply to change a toddlers nappy. Teachers may not touch pupils - not even when they are requiring it by common sense. Carers in homes may not comfort children crying in the night via touch, a cuddle or a hug.

We have gone kid protection crazy. But we may use the emotional abuse concocted by psychologists to keep them under control. And schools may brainwash children to the current political correctness. That's called good parenting and "education".

Kids in our culture live in a cold touch-less world where they only know poverty of touching. They actually do not know physical poverty - poverty as experienced in the world is not here in the UK. Many of these untouched children will be watching violence and sex on TV or Sky, or the Internet. They will text their friends in truncated English on their Blackberries, wear their designer trainers, listen to their parents complaining about cuts, or Benefits, the NHS, whatever – and even if they are physically abused at home (i.e. smacked), their experiences with the wider community, charities, institutions and schooling will be mercilessly “non-touch”, using policies regulated by Oxbridge politicians educated by the new academics and implemented by obsessively fawning, obsequious adults with no rights because children have greater rights than anyone else.

http://www.soscn.org/rights.html

Great Balls of Fire - sex with the innocent

We hear much of how in the 60's 70's and 80's it was the "culture" to have men hitting on adolescents for sex. Having lived through those times with adolescent children of my own, it was something NOT accepted in the circles I moved in. I will not accept that lame excuse to explain the actions of Saville, Hall and their ilk. THEY were out of order, feeding off the silliness and innocence of young people seeking attention.

I point out the story of Gerry Lee Lewis, whose English tour finished his career. That was the culture at the time. Sex with adolescents was NOT accepted in society.

Marriage to a minor

Lewis's turbulent personal life was hidden from the public until a May 1958 British tour where Ray Berry, a news agency reporter at London's Heathrow Airport (the only journalist present), learned about Lewis's third wife, Myra Gale Brown. She was Lewis's first cousin once removed and was only 13 years old at the time. (Brown, Lewis, and his management all insisted that she was 15.) Lewis was 22 years old. The publicity caused an uproar and the tour was cancelled after only three concerts.
The scandal followed Lewis home to the US, and as a result, he was blacklisted from radio and almost vanished from the music scene.

GREAT BALLS OF FIRE

No - I don't like it. Snooping on smokers and vapers

I have been in a good mood after three pieces of news uplifted my spirits. The first was that "plain" packaging might have not be intoduced in the UK. The second was that the legal team investigating the  EU tobacco Directive question the legality of making electronic cigarettes medical products. The third is that UKIP rocked the boat during the elections in the UK.

I have felt quite upbeat about the sorry state of affairs of the current culture on this strange planet. That's unusual.

But today I found this and the MOTIVE behind the report induced grumpy to return in me.

"ABSTRACT
The article provides an overview of the potential biomarker which can be used to detect nicotin levels among the smokers. Cotinine, a metabolite of nicotine, has been successfully detected in the urine, blood and sweat. However, nicotine hair analysis (NHA) remained a debated issue due to its feasibility in research. Till date it faced unresolved questions of influence of hair treatment, hair colour, and growth rate on nicotine levels in hair, which need to be addressed in order to further refine this biomarker for exposure assessment. Cotinine also faced an inherent problem of short shelf life in blood, urine, sweat and saliva which could be successfully resolved with the use nicotine in hair analysis. However ambiguity surrounding the nicotinine hair analysis (NHA) has been laid to rest following its proven reliability and measure of longer term exposure that can be readily applied in dental and medical research."

I don't quite know why my grumpy was stirred, but I felt this was a new way of snooping on smokers. I think they endure enough already. Imagine going for a job interview or insurance cover and you are asked for your hair sample? Vapers would be classed as smokers, yes? And people on patches and NRT too.  Smokers aren't the only ones with Cotinine in their hair.

Yes - Mrs Grumpy is back. I don't like the idea at all.