This week’s main topic here has been whether the drones should be saved or tormented. I tried saving them, they didn’t want that. Then I tried tormenting them and they love it. They lap up the most absurd declarations. These people want to be terrified. They want to be punished. It would not surprise me to see them wailing in the streets while beating themselves with barbed wire. If they thought it would ward off second hand smoke… hmmm.
Besides, the hate and bile spewed forth by the antismoking drones is contant. There is no end to it. It is based on lies and prejudice and spite and yet they will not look at actual evidence. They prefer just to vent their hatred at us. That wears you down, no matter how much you resolve to rise above such things, so it is no surprise to read the comments under Frank’s article on the latest regurgitations by the latest in a long line of bovine propaganda spouts.
Actually she’d be quite pretty if she didn’t hold her face like a particularly vindictive librarian who has just heard someone whisper in the reading room.
I’m not the only one who wants them in torment. Far from it.
JJ sent a plan by Email, a plan to set up the most absurd study with the most ridiculous recommendations and ‘leak’ it to the BBC and other outlets. It would work. It could be done. Sorry, JJ, but the trouble is I really think they’d actually implement it all. They would definitely believe it all.
I no longer believe the drones can be made to see sense. No matter how far you push, no matter how ludicrous your statements, no matter if they are contradictory or just plain nuts, they will take it all in and accept it all without question. As long as it supports ‘what they already know’ – that smokers are evil and subhuman, they will accept anything at all.
I’m sure there are those who doubt that, those who see some good in everyone and the possibility of a return to sanity for all. I really wish there was some truth in that view. I really do.
Well, take a deep breath before you read the comments on this article on sugar.
The government has decided, for once, that they don’t want to impose the latest WHO made-up numbers on us all and will instead just take note of (ignore) them. That’s a refreshing trend. Let’s hope it continues.
Naturally, the Mail is incensed and gives full vent to its fury at those ‘in the pay of Big Sugar’, as does the ex-Saltie who is now most Righteously anti-sugar. That is only to be expected. The Mail, like all news outlets, is staffed by gullible idiots.
The comments are jaw-dropping. Instead of ‘Good, they are leaving us alone for once’, the drones are demanding to be taxed for their sugar!
Look. In one way, sugar is like tobacco. If you don’t want any, don’t buy any. You don’t need a PhD to work that one out. I don’t like almonds so I never buy them. I don’t buy things with almond flavouring either – but I don’t want them taxed or banned. Other people like them. They can have all the almonds, I don’t want any. Why is this so difficult?
Why tax it so that you can give it up? Just bloody well give it up, if that’s what you want. As for all this ‘hidden sugar’, well dammit, look at the ingredient list on the side of the packet and the label telling you how much carbohydrate/sugar is in there. Those labels list protein and salt and fat levels and have to be there even if none of those things are in the can! Sugar is not free. Food manufacturers don’t put it in there while giggling. like some kind of sweet joke. They put it in because nobody will eat the crappy tasteless stuff if they don’t.
Then there is the sugar that is naturally present in foods. Cereals are full of starch which is made of (gasp) sugar. Is that what they mean by ‘hidden sugar’? It’s only hidden from those whose schooling did not include any actual learning. There’s much more than that hidden from you folk, you know.
The drones want to suffer. They actually want to live in Panoptica. I’m not being cruel when I push their paranoia to new heights. I’m performing a free public service. What a sweet man. Almost… sugary sweet. Oh yes, I am going to play with sugar next time I get a drone in conversation. They love mental torment.
They really believe they are addicted to sugar in the same way smokers were conned into believing they were addicted to nicotine and they cannot make the connection. They will never make the connection because they will not try. Expect to see this sort of business expanding into sugar-beet seedlings quite soon.
Which reminds me, the weather is getting less harsh. Time for me to go to seed.
Fortunately you don’t need sugar to make beer. Not if your barley is properly malted. You do need it for wine though and spirit makers will need some too. Maybe not malt whisky, I’m not sure. I have visited distilleries but to be honest, most of my attention was focused on the free samples at the end. Always volunteer to supervise such trips if there are lots of Muslim and other non-drinking students in the group. I like Muslim students. They work hard and efficiently and they give you their whisky. Lovely people.
But consider – a tax on sugar is a tax on many kinds of homebrew and on many commercial brews too. Backdoor minimum pricing, even if you make it yourself. Sneaky, eh? Fortunately the government have balked at this latest control freakery – for now. I bet Oily Al is considering it though. Ho hum, off to Poundland for a few bags of Whitworth’s finest tomorrow.
Maybe a few more bags of salt too, and some cheapo plastic containers to keep them in. I hear Poundland is floating on the stock market. I’ve given them enough mentions to have earned a few free shares, surely? Come on, Big Cheapo, how about it then? I know I haven’t spent an awful lot of money in your shop but that was kinda the point of the shop, surely?
There is no way to save the drones. They cannot be reasoned with and they cannot be pushed to a point where they see the insanity of it all. These people cannot be helped – because they don’t want to be helped. They revel in their eternal torment and they want more. When they arrive in Hell, Satan is going to be baffled.
The trouble I have with Panoptica is that I didn’t want a Winston Smith. He saw the ‘wrongness’ in ’1984′ and tried to rebel. What I want is a mindset that fully accepts that world, then is forced to confront it. Writing in that mindset is next to impossible. It’s hard to believe anyone can be that compliant and, well, just plain stupid.
I think, after that sugar article, I have moved a little closer to the ‘thick as a brick’ mentality.
Reading the comments certainly sucked the life force out of me for a while.