It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The cigarette conspiracy

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 10:24 PM
Smoke pot its better than cigarettes.

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 10:28 PM
reply to post by bettermakings

It's not the work of the Democratic Party per se, but people who have bought them out

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 10:40 PM

Originally posted by raj9721
270 million smokers in the U.S. (1998)

i think your number is way off,,,, from the census burea 2008 total pop for usa is 303,146,284

and even wikpedia says for 2009 is 306,892,000

by your figure 9 out of 10 people smoke

granted either way i see the point your making and yell every time i buy a single pack instead of by the carton

7.80 a pack,,,,, ten years ago i paid 2.25,,,, that's some killer inflation

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 11:00 PM
Good thread... I was thinking of posting this myself, when about a week ago I noticed in the news that the Australian Govt are going to put the price of cigarettes up to $20 a pack... they currently stand at around $10 - $11.

now 'that' is a bloody big hike

Not being a addictive smoker myself... I have been in the past but kicked the habit... I dabble now and then , but its been a few months since I had a puff

Nevertheless... I would only smoke the 'organic' cigarettes when I did, made by a company called American Spirit... which you can get in America lol... but they are imported here to Austs.. and they are hard to find in the stores, as I know of only 2 stores that sell them.

These cigarettes are so nice, I highly recommend anybody that smokes to try them, please... They last longer, and you can really tell the difference with not inhaling all those chemicals...

I have also heard (though I do not know if this is 100%) that it is actually the chemicals that are the most addictive... not the actual 'nicotine' as such...

I must say that I noticed myself after a bit of a 'bing' smoke on these American Spirits... I found it very easy to stop smoking when I wanted to...

Recently the Australian Government has very kindly handed out a whole bunch of dosh for the day to day struggling folk... I guess they had to get it back one way or another

Foot Note: Ah you are so lucky to be living in America.. there are so many things that are not available on the Austs market...

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 11:25 PM
Is this less to do with smoking, and more to do with Nicotine? Does Nicotine have natural properties that are beneficial? Perhaps the control over tobacco has much to do with Nicotine's benefits and less to do with eliminating the population via first and secondhand smoke.?

look up what other industries may be using nicotine aside from the cigarette mfgs... Any positive uses for nicotine?

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 11:27 PM
reply to post by TheAmused

The whole point of the junk food industry is that it's cheaper and quicker than eating an organic granola fruit parfait.

Only some types of junk food are ridiculously expensive, mostly pastries. People who want those expensive types of junk food could probably afford an increased tax.

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 11:30 PM
reply to post by iang423

By any chance, does the appearance of FSC happen to coincide with decreased rates of spontaneous human combustion?

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 11:34 PM
reply to post by iang423

Wow, an "avid smoker"

Please explain

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 12:15 AM

Originally posted by leisuredrummer
It is the equivalent of the government taxing the heck out of food and then taking out a good amount of nutritional properties, therefor making a person increase their consumption.

Apparently, THEY are doing just that. It's called Codex Alimentarius. Looks it up, you might be interested in what some people are saying.


posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:13 AM
Hey everyone, I'm happy to say that after roughly six months of "lurking" on the multitude of fascinating and mentally-stimulating topics that seem so hard to come by on a "normal day," .... I'm so glad to finally have joined the ATS community, you guys are a great group of intellectuals and I commend the site's concept so much!

I've spent about two hours reading all four-and-a-half pages of this post to avoid repetition as much as possible.... Hell; I'd rather avoid being reminded about the existence of subconscious-influence/manipulation.

Originally posted by Walkswithfish
Taxing a highly addictive drug is a great way to collect revenues for both state and federal government.

If you can regulate the nicotine levels in the products you have the ability to make it even more addictive.

They really do not want people to quit smoking, in fact they could become increasingly dependant on the revenues generated from tobacco sales.

Some day you could actually see news of federal agents and SWAT teams surrounding homes, raiding them, making arrests, and even killing people for growing their own tobacco, making cigarettes etc and sharing them with others.

If you've seen how they deal with illicit drugs, which they make NO revenue from, imagine what they will do with people who produce a legal but federally regulated and taxed product at home!

Tobacco, the new drug war!

Civilians verses the states and federal governments.

[edit on 12-7-2009 by Walkswithfish]

Walkswithfish, I am definitely considerably fearful about the potential for "national/homeland security" manifesting its constitutionally-infringing nature to this horrid extent. (I'm sorry if I'm a tad-bit too wordy; I can thank a middle school Language-Arts teacher for that)! Just like many people seem to be indulging in nowadays, I have expressed much interest in the "organic movement." It's worth mentioning that I try to eliminate my own personal-bias as much as humanly possible, as to avoid being blinded by the "truth;" I wonder how safe products such as soy milk are.... after finishing a third carton of the liquid I came across a disturbing article about Phytoestrogens.... it's worth researching. Just a quick example (I skimmed over the page):

Originally posted by _damon
It is like the others "smoking threads", that say smoking isnt dangerous. I don't understand these people claiming there is a conspiracy behind the anti smoking campaigns. Of course the people that make these threads are smokers lol what a joke. It is only coz u fear that one day u wont be able to smoke anymore so u think it is a conspiracy? That is ridiculous. Im open minded proove me that smoking doesnt damage nor the lungs neither the body? You created this topic only because of your selfishness, you only want to smoke forever because you are addicted.

This is why I mentioned the fact that I try to eliminate personal-bias; I'll backup this thinking-setup in this reply. I just quit smoking last week, from about 2-5 cigarettes per day... my income simply can't cover it; or I suppose it can and did, but I'd like to invest in other things if I must lower and degrade myself to the use of the "fancy-green papers." I apologize for going somewhat off topic, if my diversion was perceived that way. I do read the dictionary for pleasure, it can be a decently-rewarding and mentally-stimulating activity.... that explains the wordiness. I also do have ADD and it's 2:07 A.M. right now and I may drift somewhat.

_damon, Please don't assume that the initial poster was simply creating this thread out of selfishness. After all; we conspirators tend to avoid the mainstream media.... but as the great book, "You Are Being Lied To: A Disinformation Guide", mentions; the mainstream media is still worth studying because it could prove essential to be informed about possible propaganda-methods.

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:15 AM
I started digging deeper and found out that the government is now gearing up to ban cigarettes in the military (Link) . But why would the government ban something that is completely legal? By taking away things that people enjoy the government only gains more control over the people (for example your Mom taking away your favorite toy as punishment when you were little OR for example, Nazi Germany: (Link) Tobacco has been a staple in American culture since day one. It is an establishments right to allow smoking or no smoking at their venue. If someone doesn't like it, simply leave. I wouldn't go to a rap club and demand they play rock music, I would go somewhere else.

Going deeper, WHO says the swine flu is expected to return this Fall/Winter. The swine flu has so far been mild with a low amount of deaths, as far as epidemics go. Swine flu has been suspected of being man-made, perhaps a population deflater. But how could an epidemic as mild as the swine flu become a a population deflater? Well now WHO is warning of something called a Cytokine storm (Link). A Cytokine Storm is a fatal reaction when your immune cells actually work too good. So far most swine flu deaths have only occured in young, elderely and people with low immune sytems but this is soon to change if cytokine storms rise as WHO says. Go figure that nicotine can prevent and or reduce a cytokine storm and possibly save ones life (Link). Why rush legislature to lower nicotine levels and create smoking bans nationwide in public places when WHO is currently spouting off about something that can actually be prevented by nicotine?

Money, power and control, these are the important things to this government. They simply hide behind the "saving lives" cover story.

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:20 AM
Well well, my wife and I used to spend AU$300 (US$234) every two weeks on cigarettes. They increased the tax to AU$20 a packet of 40 cigarettes, and we simply couldn't afford them after that.

So we quit smoking.

I'm currently on Nicorrette Nicotine Inhalers and my wife is on Nicobate CQ Patches. I've only purchased one packet of inhalers which was around AU$40, and its been two weeks already, and I got enough to last another 6 weeks.

The taxes seemed to have gone up everwhere on the cigarettes. Again as some mentioned, it would be better to increase nicotine, decrease number of cigarettes in packets and remove all additives to it if the gov 'really' wanted to help people give up, instead they're finding a way to murder us, and make us literally pay for it. Cigarette related deaths are on the increase.

Give up smoking....if you can

[edit on 13/7/2009 by Im a Marty]

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:39 AM
_damon, I use many "metaphors" or "examples" that parallel points that I try to make. No, I'm not affiliated with the Disinformation authors or anything; I'm not advertising the product, I promise!
Personally, I loathe advertising and what it stands for.... and its subconsciously-manipulative nature!!
Anyways; I want to remind everyone the potential dangers of being oblivious to one's self and personal-bias.

If person-Q enjoys the opinions expressed in literature-X, he is probably less likely to read, consider, or agree with the "polar-opposite" views and opinions of literature-Y. This can be dangerous because "person-Q" could be missing out on information that might actually coincide or parallel the opinions in his first work of literature. In other words; if we always follow the same mental road, we can become desensitized to its ways.... reinforcing old habit(s) and blinding ourselves to the opposing traffic..... Sure, the other drivers might be irritating and seem irrational; but why not try to respect the fact that we cannot "jump inside" those peoples' minds and truly understand what it means to "walk around in their skin" and FEEL their emotions and self-logic.

Trust in yourself, all of you! Many times I wonder, can anything ever truly be "proven?" Sure, our senses might ring clear to evidence of the blueberry muffin and its sweet and soft taste; but are we seeing the muffin as it "really is?" That is, what does it look like without our minds "filtering" its objective nature? Is there an objective nature?

I might seem to ramble on many different topics, but all of them circulate and surround my intent and message as far as this example; smoking conspiracies and the information within the thread. I use the concept of "bisociation" (Meaning: The mixture in one human mind of visual physiognomies from two contexts or categories of objects that are normally considered separate categories by the literal processes of the mind. The thinking process that is the functional basis for metaphoric thinking. Translation: Considering one idea and another that seems completely different, and then finding similarities between the two...and possible hidden meanings, of sorts).

My point: Without a PhD in chemistry and botany (or adequate knowledge learned elsewhere); how can we verify any of the statistics, theories, claims, statements, etc. that cigarettes contain all 4,000 chemicals.... or how can we prove that "organic" or homegrown tobacco is void these added chemicals? How can we know what someone's initial and true intent was... from an explicit and verified knowledge, this seems impossible/highly unlikely.... that's what I mean when I don't agree with assuming others' intent. I'm not trying to insult anyone, just throwing my "two cents." Personally, I'm not afraid about not being able to smoke; I can live without it and I do admit that I feel so much better after kicking the habit, eating a balanced diet, exercising, and meditating to conquer a two/three-year-long debilitating depression. Anything is possible; the big-G almost definitely adores money.... why would they let something like genuine-concern to humanity get in their way of earning more PROFITS from cancer-sticks? On the other hand, 'medical bills/insurance coverage' for smoking-related problems might deter those profits.... eh, who knows anything anymore; right?

~~~~~~After some research~~~~~~ .......

I was going to post this here, but I couldn't get through... and that actually worked out great because now I know that "double-posting" discouraged.

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:42 AM
I finally have quit smoking (over about two weeks now), on my own; mainly due to those outrageous tax increases. The concept of using an electronic-cigarette and inhaling VAPORIZED NICOTINE (without any carcinogens or heat-dangers due to its temperature being lower than that of a COMBUSTIBLE product such as typical government-regulated cigarettes).

If one compares the amount of nicotine in the average cigarette (roughly 1.7mg.... I've done my research, do your own if you want more evidence).... takes into account that the 20-pack of cigarettes is about $6.50 average nationally.... and compares the costs of NICOTINE GUM, CIGARETTES, AND ELECTRONIC ("E-CIGS"), one may find where good old money is residing in most abundance.... in other words, COMPARE PRICES FOR ALL NICOTINE-RELATED PRODUCTS versus QUANTITY.

5 Refill Cartridges for an E-CIGARETTE: $15.00 = equivalent to about 30 Traditional Cigarettes; ("njoy" brand; 0mg, 6mg, 11mg, or 16mg nicotine CHOICE...just from this specific brand, I'm sure others vary in nicotine content).

20 Pack Cigarettes = Roughly $6.50 national average (1.7mg average!)

Nicotine Gum = from $20 to $50! (2mg, 4mg, or 9mg). I love how this site's [ ] dosage guidelines include "Take no more than 25 DOSES A DAY." The math:

25 pieces of Nicotrol-brand nicotine gum; 2mg each = 50mg NICOTINE IN ONE DAY.
20 cigarettes/one pack of cigarettes in one day, 1.5mg each = 30mg nicotine per day.

Hmmmm..... looks like there might be some hypocrisy going on as far as the G-overment and World Health Organization(WHO) goes...

High taxes on cigarettes containing over 4,000 KNOWN chemicals, higher nicotine content in "SAFE NICOTINE GUM" than in cigarettes, and Electronic/E-cigs which have zero carcinogens or toxins since it is being VAPORIZED and THERE IS NOT COMBUSTION/BURNING OCCURRING!

Why does our government want to ban a safe alternative to cigarette smoking such as the E-cigarette? Sure; nicotine is nicotine, and not all addicted will quit, that's a given. Yeah, the "best" solution would be to quit smoking; but wouldn't A SAFER OPTION BE BETTER? WHY BAN THE SAFER ALTERNATIVE AND TAX THE LEGALIZED YET MORE HARMFUL CIGARETTES? CLAIMS DO NOT ADD UP, contradiction seems evident, in my opinion and perception of them.

You may choose to take my research with "a grain of salt,"(as my father might say), I might not even get this comment approved... whom truly knows anything in Reality? You decide.

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:55 AM
government wants to convince people one way or another to just stop smoking so that the youth will grow to dislike smoking. smoking anything. government needs to stop the youth from smoking. period. marijuana is a huge threat to national wellness. do you know the amount of money that slips through? do you know the effect on the youth population? government must stop smoking.

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 02:21 AM
well having read the posts of others and seeing the fact that the new cigarettes have these chemicals, "bands" for fire safe tobacco products, and seeing the raised taxes, my question is, if america stands for democracy and the cash crop is part of the foundation of the American people, why have soo many chemicals been added in the first place, and who called for the smoking citizens of this country, to vote for this state and federal tax increase, or the addition of these chemicals, we are not in control of this product nor the taxes. We are subjegated to them both, tobacco is a natural plant, used for serveral purposes, it cost more money to regulate it than it should, and why should the government step in and tell me thier helping me by "making" (forcing) the product more safer with more chemicals, thats my choice as an individual. and i have never started a fire with a cigarette... lots of burns but never a fire... those taxes are more money from us we cant track as common everyday citizens, the lie they are selling us is that its going to schools and such... why is it not giong to the cures of cancer, and hospitals and organizations who are fighting cancer, emphazyma and the likes of these dieases... (cause and effect). we should fight this tax increase in the name of of the founding father who were trying to limit the governmental control. regulations are one thing but but taxes are another, we the people can't afford to pay for the money managements mistakes of the few who are in control. we dont owe the Governement $4!t.

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 03:10 AM
I dont live in the States, but this clearly shows that your government is trying to reduce the number of smokers. They want to make you pay a lot for less nicotine. (If I understood it right). Less nicotine more money. Doesn't sound worth it for the smoker?!? Cant believe you guys pay $9.00

We pay about $2 for a pack of 20!!

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 04:22 AM
Once again I am amazed. I thought Most ATS users were pretty smart until I read these posts.

First of all U.S. Cigarrette manufacturers add 499 chemical additives to tobacco to make it as addicting as they can (1 of them is fermented human hair). Years ago I felt a law needed to be passed stating they can not add any additives to tobacco and could only sell natural tobacco. This would reduce dependancy and save lives.

The industry has never been regulated and we are consuming these chemicals with no knowledge of why they are there or what they do to us. We desperately needed the FDA to regulate the industry no doubt.

Yet here on ATS taking out the most addictive element is not going to allow you to stop. It is a conspiracy to get you to smoke more. Ya right!

If Nicotine is the ingerdient that makes tobacco addictive than it will be easier to quit if you are no longer as addicted.

How is this going to make someone smoke more?

If you removed the ingredient that makes you have to have it, or even reduce it, you will be less dependant and will have a easier time quitting.

Smokers will stand in a blizzard to get that fix. Why do you think that is? It has become as addictive as heroine and the industry needs to be put in check. Big time.

Tobacco use is slowing and the money made off it by the government was going down so they raised the taxes to make more money. Simple. Also we have to pay for Obama's I mean Rahm's BluePrint for Change.

Sit back and think about the effect of things before you assign a conspiracy to it. Some of the best debunkers out there are on this site and something as simple as reducing a dependant chemical will have the opposit effect of reducing your dependency. Okay.

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 08:52 AM
The solution to this one is simple:

Stop relying on Phillip Morris to roll your cigarettes and take some pride in the products you consume. Go to your local 7/11 store, buy a pack of roll-your-own tobacco (American Spirit = no additives, very high nicotine content) and enjoy!

I made the switch from Marlboro Blend No. 27's to filter-less roll-your-own butts and I feel healthier (going from filtered to non-filtered has made me feel better, I credit it to the lack of additives), spend less money (cheaper product), smoke less (more nicotine) and enjoy my smokes more (less smoking, again more nicotine).

All in all, it's a win-win situation... roll-your-own for the win!

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 09:09 AM
reply to post by leisuredrummer

Of course it's all a conspiracy. Do you really think our government really cares if we're healthy or not. Nope. Government is a business and they think in those terms. There is a lot of profit to to be made when people are sick, but sell them the illusion that they are taxing us on cigarettes, cut down on the leaset dangerous ingredient in them, control what we consume and tell us what's healthy and not healthy all for our own good. Every single thing in there is spot on with this big scheme. So much money is being robbed of it's people as is health. If things continue, this generation will probably be one the most short lived in recent history.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in