I Quit Smoking

[h1s_l0rdsh1p]

AND I FUCKING HATE IT!!!!


I DON'T CARE WHAT PEOPLE SAY, IT'S THIS REALLY REALLY IRRITATING FEELING!! I CAN FEEL IT! MY BODY NEEDS THE SMOKE! I CAN FEEL IT PUNISHING ME FOR NOT HAVING IT.

AT CERTAIN MOMENTS I CAN GET MY MIND OFF OF IT.. BUT WITHIN A MATTER OF MINUTES, IT FINDS IT'S WAY BACK INTO MY HEAD!!!


I feel weak because of this. But it's like this duality is going on.

One side knows how bad it is, and sees how good things can be without smokes.

But then the other side knows how much I like it. How I am perfect for what it stood for. A rebellion of sorts and such.




I need a cookie. :(

[tinmenace]

Consciousness over mind! Don't pick one up again, find something to take up your time and take your mind off smoking. You'll be so disappointed in yourself if you smoke again.

And you'll be all stinky again. Yuck!
:o

[eternal_spirit]

([[[[[[[(((((((((((((((((((()~~o~~~0~

I know the feeling well hislordship. I lasted 4 days last time without. Good luck. Sorry about the unsubliminal above.

The older you get the harder it is to stop, word of warning to any young smokers here.

[richmick]

I wonder if one reason that the tobacco companies have taken such a "hit" is because they would not completely sell out to the chemical companies who wanted to buy them out years ago like the food and pharmaceutical companies sold out to those chemical companies?

http://www.joevialls.co.uk/transpositions/smoking.html

Smoking Helps Protect Against Lung Cancer
And here are some of the mice who helped to prove it!

Every year, thousands of medical doctors and other members of the “Anti-Smoking Inquisition” spend billions of dollars perpetuating what has unquestionably become the most misleading though successful social engineering scam in history. With the encouragement of most western governments, these Orwellian lobbyists pursue smokers with a fanatical zeal that completely overshadows the ridiculous American alcohol prohibition debacle, which started in 1919 and lasted until 1933.
Nowadays we look back on American prohibition with justifiable astonishment. Is it really true that an entire nation allowed itself to be denied a beer or scotch by a tiny group of tambourine-bashing fanatics? Sadly, yes it is, despite a total lack of evidence that alcohol causes any harm to humans, unless consumed in truly astronomical quantities.
Alas, the safety of alcohol was of no interest to the tambourine-bashers, for whom control over others was the one and only true goal. Americans were visibly “sinning” by enjoying themselves having a few alcoholic drinks, and the puritans interceded on behalf of God to make them all feel miserable again.
Although there is no direct link between alcohol and tobacco, the history of American prohibition is important, because it helps us understand how a tiny number of zealots managed to control the behavior and lives of tens of millions of people. Nowadays exactly the same thing is happening to smokers, though this time it is at the hands of government zealots and ignorant medical practitioners rather than tambourine-bashing religious fanatics.
Certain governments know that their past actions are directly responsible for causing most of the lung and skin cancers in the world today, so they go to extreme lengths in trying to deflect responsibility and thus financial liability away from themselves, and onto harmless organic tobacco instead. As we will find later in the report, humble organic tobacco has never hurt anyone, and in certain ways can justifiably claim to provide startling health protection.
Not all governments around the world share the same problem. Japan and Greece have the highest numbers of adult cigarette smokers in the world, but the lowest incidence of lung cancer. In direct contrast to this, America, Australia, Russia, and some South Pacific island groups have the lowest numbers of adult cigarette smokers in the world, but the highest incidence of lung cancer. This is clue number-one in unraveling the absurd but entrenched western medical lie that “smoking causes lung cancer.”

[richmick]

The first European contact with tobacco was in 1492, when Columbus and fellow explorer Rodriguo de Jerez saw natives smoking in Cuba. That very same day, de Jerez took his first puff and found it very relaxing, just as the locals had assured him it would be. This was an important occasion, because Rodriguo de Jerez discovered what the Cubans and native Americans had known for many centuries: that cigar and cigarette smoking is not only relaxing, it also cures coughs and other minor ailments. When he returned home, Rodriguo de Jerez proudly lit a cigar in the street, and was promptly arrested and imprisoned for three years by the horrified Spanish Inquisition. De Jerez thus became the first victim of the anti-smoking lobbies.
In less than a century, smoking became a much enjoyed and accepted social habit throughout Europe, with thousands of tons of tobacco being imported from the colonies to meet the increasing demand. A growing number of writers praised tobacco as a universal remedy for mankind’s ills. By the early 20th Century almost one in every two people smoked, but the incidence of lung cancer remained so low that it was almost immeasurable. Then something extraordinary happened on July 16, 1945: a terrifying cataclysmic event that would eventually cause western governments to distort the perception of smoking forever. As K. Greisen recalls:
“When the intensity of the light had diminished, I put away the glass and looked toward the tower directly. At about this time I noticed a blue color surrounding the smoke cloud. Then someone shouted that we should observe the shock wave travelling along the ground. The appearance of this was a brightly lighted circular area, near the ground, slowly spreading out towards us. The color was yellow.
“The permanence of the smoke cloud was one thing that surprised me. After the first rapid explosion, the lower part of the cloud seemed to assume a fixed shape and to remain hanging motionless in the air. The upper part meanwhile continued to rise, so that after a few minutes it was at least five miles high. It slowly assumed a zigzag shape because of the changing wind velocity at different altitudes. The smoke had pierced a cloud early in its ascent, and seemed to be completely unaffected by the cloud.”
This was the notorious “Trinity Test”, the first dirty nuclear weapon to be detonated in the atmosphere. A six-kilogram sphere of plutonium, compressed to supercriticality by explosive lenses, Trinity exploded over New Mexico with a force equal to approximately 20,000 tons of TNT. Within seconds, billions of deadly radioactive particles were sucked into the atmosphere to an altitude of six miles, where high-speed jet streams could circulate them far and wide.
The American Government knew about the radiation in advance, was well aware of its lethal effects on humans, but bluntly ordered the test with a complete disregard for health and welfare. In law, this was culpable gross negligence, but the American Government did not care. Sooner or later, one way or the other, they would find another culprit for any long-term effects suffered by Americans and other citizens in local and more remote areas.
If a single microscopic radioactive fallout particle lands on your skin at the beach, you get skin cancer. Inhale a single particle of the same lethal muck, and death from lung cancer becomes inevitable, unless you happen to be an exceptionally lucky cigarette smoker. The solid microscopic radioactive particle buries itself deep in the lung tissue, completely overwhelms the body’s limited reserves of vitamin B17, and causes rampant uncontrollable cell multiplication.
How can we be absolutely sure that radioactive fallout particles really cause lung cancer every time a subject is internally exposed? For real scientists, as opposed to medical quacks and government propagandists, this is not a problem. For any theory to be accepted scientifically, it must first be proven in accordance with rigorous requirements universally agreed by scientists. First the suspect radioactive agent must be isolated, then used in properly controlled laboratory experiments to produce the claimed result, i.e. lung cancer in mammals.
Scientists have ruthlessly sacrificed tens of thousands of mice and rats in this way over the years, deliberately subjecting their lungs to radioactive matter. The documented scientific results of these various experiments are identical. Every mouse or rat obediently contracts lung cancer, and every mouse or rat then dies. Theory has thus been converted to hard scientific fact under tightly controlled laboratory conditions. The suspect agent [radioactive matter] caused the claimed result [lung cancer] when inhaled by mammals.



The overall magnitude of lung cancer risk to humans from atmospheric radioactive fallout cannot be overstated. Before Russia, Britain and America outlawed atmospheric testing on August 5, 1963, more than 4,200 kilograms of plutonium had been discharged into the atmosphere. Because we know that less than one microgram [millionth of a single gram] of inhaled plutonium causes terminal lung cancer in a human, we therefore know that your friendly government has lofted 4,200,000,000 [4.2 Billion] lethal doses into the atmosphere, with particle radioactive half-life a minimum of 50,000 years. Frightening? Unfortunately it gets worse.
The plutonium mentioned above exists in the actual nuclear weapon before detonation, but by far the greatest number of deadly radioactive particles are those derived from common dirt or sand sucked up from the ground, and irradiated while travelling vertically through the weapon’s fireball. These particles form by far the largest part of the “smoke” in any photo of an atmospheric nuclear detonation. In most cases several tons of material are sucked up and permanently irradiated in transit, but let us be incredibly conservative and claim that only 1,000 kilograms of surface material is sucked up by each individual atmospheric nuclear test.
Before being banned by Russia, Britain and America, a total of 711 atmospheric nuclear tests were conducted, thereby creating 711,000 kilograms of deadly microscopic radioactive particles, to which must be added the original 4,200 kilograms from the weapons themselves, for a gross though very conservative total of 715,200 kilograms. There are more than a million lethal doses per kilogram, meaning that your governments have contaminated your atmosphere with more than 715,000,000,000 [715 Billion] such doses, enough to cause lung or skin cancer 117 times in every man, woman and child on earth.
Before you ask, no, the radioactive particles do not just “fade away”, at least not in your lifetime or that of your children and grandchildren. With a half-life of 50,000 years or longer, these countless trillions of deadly government-manufactured radioactive particles are essentially with you forever. Circulated around the world by powerful jet streams, these particles are deposited at random, though in higher concentrations within a couple of thousand miles of the original test sites. A simple wind or other surface disturbance is all that is needed to stir them up again and create enhanced dangers for those in the vicinity.
The once-innocent activity of playfully kicking sand around on the beach in summer could nowadays easily translate to suicide, if you happen to stir up a few radioactive particles that could stick to your skin or be inhaled into your lungs. Stop poking fun at Michael Jackson when he appears at your local airport wearing a surgical mask over his nose and mouth. He may look eccentric, but Michael will almost certainly outlive most of us.

Twelve years after the cataclysmic Trinity test, it became obvious to western governments that things were getting completely out of control, with a 1957 British Medical Research Council report stating that global “deaths from lung cancer have more than doubled during the period 1945 to 1955”, though no explanation was offered. During the same ten-year period, cancer deaths in the immediate proximity of Hiroshima and Nagasaki went up threefold. By the end of official atmospheric testing in 1963, the incidence of lung cancer in the Pacific Islands had increased fivefold since 1945. Having screwed your environment completely for 50,000 years, it was time for “big government” to start taking heavy diversionary action.
How could people be proved to be causing themselves to contract lung cancer, i.e. be said to be guilty of a self inflicted injury for which government could never be blamed or sued? The only obvious substance that people inhaled into their lungs, apart from air, was tobacco smoke, so the government boot was put in. Poorly qualified medical “researchers” suddenly found themselves overwhelmed with massive government grants all aimed at achieving the same end-result: “Prove that smoking causes lung cancer”. Real scientists [especially some notable nuclear physicists] smiled grimly at the early pathetic efforts of the fledgling anti-smoking lobby, and lured them into the deadliest trap of all. The quasi medical researchers were invited to prove their false claims under exactly the same rigid scientific rules that were used when proving that radioactive particles cause lung cancer in mammals.
Remember, for any theory to be accepted scientifically, it must first be proven in accordance with rigorous requirements universally agreed by scientists. First the suspect agent [tobacco smoke] must be isolated, then used in properly controlled laboratory experiments to produce the claimed result, i.e. lung cancer in mammals. Despite exposing literally tens of thousands of especially vulnerable mice and rats to the equivalent of 200 cigarettes per day for years on end, “medical science” has never once managed to induce lung cancer in any mouse or rat. Yes, you did read that correctly. For more than forty years, hundreds of thousands of medical doctors have been deliberately lying to you.
The real scientists had the quasi medical researchers by the throat, because “pairing” the deadly radioactive particle experiment with the benign tobacco smoke experiment, proved conclusively for all time that smoking cannot under any circumstances cause lung cancer. And further, in one large “accidental” experiment they were never allowed to publish, the real scientists proved with startling clarity that smoking actually helps to protect against lung cancer.
All mice and rats are used one-time-only in a specific experiment, and then destroyed. In this way researchers ensure that the results of whatever substance they are testing cannot be accidentally “contaminated” by the real or imagined effects of another substance. Then one day as if by magic, a few thousand mice from the smoking experiment “accidentally” found their way into the radioactive particle experiment, which in the past had killed every single one of its unfortunate test subjects. But this time, completely against the odds, sixty percent of the smoking mice survived exposure to the radioactive particles. The only variable was their prior exposure to copious quantities of tobacco smoke.
'Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.'
Vishnu, Bhagavad-Gita

Government pressure was immediately brought to bear and the facts suppressed, but this did not completely silence the real scientists. Tongue in cheek perhaps, Professor Schrauzer, President of the International Association of Bio-inorganic Chemists, testified before a U.S. congressional committee in 1982 that it had long been well known to scientists that certain constituents of tobacco smoke act as anti-carcinogens [anti-cancer agents] in test animals. He continued that when known carcinogens [cancer causing substances] are applied to the animals, the application of constituents of cigarette smoke counter them.
Nor did Professor Schrauzer stop there. He further testified on oath to the committee that “no ingredient of cigarette smoke has been shown to cause human lung cancer”, adding that “no-one has been able to produce lung cancer in laboratory animals from smoking.” It was a neat answer to a rather perplexing problem. If government blocks publication of your scientific paper, take the alternate route and put the essential facts on the written congressional record!
Predictably, this hard truth drove the government and quasi medical “researchers” into a frenzy of rage. By 1982 they had actually started to believe their own ridiculous propaganda, and were not to be silenced by eminent members of the scientific establishment. Quite suddenly they switched the blame to other “secret” ingredients put into cigarettes by the tobacco companies. “Yes, that must be it!” they clamored eagerly, until a handful of scientists got on the phone and pointed out that these same “secret” ingredients had been included in the mice experiments, and had therefore also been proved incapable of causing lung cancer.
Things were looking desperate for government and the medical community overall. Since the anti-smoking funding had started in the early sixties, tens of thousands of medical doctors had passed through medical school, where they had been taught that smoking causes lung cancer. Most believed the lie, but cracks were starting to appear in the paintwork. Even the dullest of straight “C” doctors could not really make the data correlate, and when they queried it were told not to ask stupid questions. “Smoking causes lung cancer” converted to a creed, a quasi religious belief mechanism where blind faith became a substitute for proof.
Even blind faith needs a system of positive reinforcement, which in this case became the advertising agencies and the media. Suddenly the television screens were flooded with images of terribly blackened “smoker’s lungs”, with the accompanying mantra that you will die in horrible agony if you don’t quit now. It was all pathetic rubbish of course. On the mortuary slab the lungs of a smoker and non-smoker look an identical pink, and the only way a forensic pathologist can tell you might have been a smoker, is if he finds heavy stains of nicotine on your fingers, a packet of Camels or Marlboro in your coat pocket, or if one of your relatives unwisely admits on the record that you once smoked the demon weed.

The black lungs? From a coal miner, who throughout his working life breathed in copious quantities of microscopic black coal dust particles. Just like radioactive particles they get caught deep in the tissue of the lungs and stay there forever. If you worked down the coal mines for twenty or more years without a face mask, your lungs will probably look like this on the slab.
Many people ask exactly how it is that those smoking mice were protected from deadly radioactive particles, and even more are asking why real figures nowadays are showing far more non-smokers dying from lung cancer than smokers. Professor Sterling of the Simon Fraser University in Canada is perhaps closest to the truth, where he uses research papers to reason that smoking promotes the formation of a thin mucous layer in the lungs, “which forms a protective layer stopping any cancer-carrying particles from entering the lung tissue.”
This is probably as close as we can get to the truth at present, and it does make perfect scientific sense. Deadly radioactive particles inhaled by a smoker would initially be trapped by the mucous layer, and then be ejected from the body before they could enter the tissue.
All of this may be a bit depressing for non-smokers, but there are probably one or two things you can do to minimize the risks as far as possible. Rather than shy away from smokers in your local pub or club, get as close as you can and breathe in their expensive second-hand smoke. Go on, don’t be shy, suck in a few giant breaths. Or perhaps you could smoke one cigarette or small cigar after each meal, just three a day to build up a thin boundary mucous layer. If you cannot or will not do either of the above, consider phoning Michael Jackson to ask for a spare surgical mask!

[midwich cuckoo]

Actually the more 'they' tell us not to smoke and what/where we can't smoke, the more I do it. They can stick their laws where the sun doesn't shine. :)

[stikmata]

IMO, smokers are some of the most brainwashed people in the world... and i was one for a full decade up until just before the new year. I didn't make any new years resolution to quit... I just decided to quit lying to myself... and get over the fear of not having that "crutch"... which was really just an addiction. I was already a month or so into being done w/ nicotine forever when i read it... but Allen Carr's book ( Allen Carr - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) helped w/ my perspective on being on non-smoker... and i bought a copy for my Father (i read the .pdf).

It really is easy and quite pleasurable to quit smoking when you get into the proper mind frame... you gotta jump for joy that you're free from the mental and physical bondage of nicotine rather than whine about what you think you've lost in your life.... because you're regaining a multitude of things and omitting some terrible bullshit.

:)

[graflok]

I quit about 12 years ago after smoking 2 packs a day for many years. Haven't touched it since.

It wasn't easy but it wasn't all that hard either. After all, it's not painful to quit, like it is with quitting some drugs. You just have to put up with annoying sensations that smoking normally quenches.

graflok

[richmick]

You know, we all agree that our government doesn't do us any favours, i mean they couldn't give a hoot about yours or my health. Cigerettes reap huge tax bundles for our governemnt, one of the largest taxes they covet for themselves. So why all of a sudden a huge movement towards forcing us to give up the weed. What puts them in such a place, that they are willing to lose alot of money just to see us quit smoking. Something smells fishy to me, it's all part of the NWO agenda i'm sure. Like Icke says himself, all those people who die of lung cancer needlessly, simply because they believe the pap. If yeah dont wanna smoke then give up sure, but give people the right to make that informed choice and not something that is force fed us, to what ends?. Who knows maybe smoking interferes with their haarp operations, maybe smoking puts us on another channel, that they cannot access. I mean, anything is possible with this lot imho.

[midwich cuckoo]

...So why all of a sudden a huge movement towards forcing us to give up the weed. What puts them in such a place, that they are willing to lose alot of money just to see us quit smoking. Something smells fishy to me...

That's what I was getting at. ;)

[tru3]

You know, we all agree that our government doesn't do us any favours, i mean they couldn't give a hoot about yours or my health. Cigerettes reap huge tax bundles for our governemnt, one of the largest taxes they covet for themselves. So why all of a sudden a huge movement towards forcing us to give up the weed. What puts them in such a place, that they are willing to lose alot of money just to see us quit smoking. Something smells fishy to me, it's all part of the NWO agenda i'm sure. Like Icke says himself, all those people who die of lung cancer needlessly, simply because they believe the pap. If yeah dont wanna smoke then give up sure, but give people the right to make that informed choice and not something that is force fed us, to what ends?. Who knows maybe smoking interferes with their haarp operations, maybe smoking puts us on another channel, that they cannot access. I mean, anything is possible with this lot imho.

according to david n. hawkins, lung cancer wasn't an issue for smokers until big tobacco started spraying the tobacco with pesticides in the 50's.

[tinmenace]

I quit about 12 years ago after smoking 2 packs a day for many years. Haven't touched it since.

It wasn't easy but it wasn't all that hard either. After all, it's not painful to quit, like it is with quitting some drugs. You just have to put up with annoying sensations that smoking normally quenches.

graflok



Good for you Graflok! I quit almost 14 years ago and haven't touched it since. I still dream about it sometimes and if I'm out at a bar, or a party (which is rarely these days....getting old y'see) the old familiar craving will come back. Craving might be a strong word, but just the lust for a smoke creeps back.

[unicorn]

The older you get the harder it is to stop
That's a limiting belief... :eek: ...get rid of it!

MY BODY NEEDS THE SMOKE! I CAN FEEL IT PUNISHING ME FOR NOT HAVING IT.
No no no good sir... you are not being punished by your body!!! Stop this victim bull & get a grip on your ultimate reality... do you want to give up smoking, really???? It's only when you're 100% sure that it suddenly get's easy, without all this stress. If it's this stressful, spark up & enjoy, & get yourself ready for when you are there to give it up for good.

I smoked for 12 years & could never imagine giving up, until I returned from travelling where I'd had the pleasure of smoking normal tobacco & the taste of shitty cigs here in the UK turned my lungs into yukky tasting evil that made me suddenly realise I had to give up.

What worked for me was repeating 'I don't want to smoke'. For days part of me would reply 'yes I do, yes I do, yes I do!!!' & then one day I got up, went to spark up, thinking 'I don't want to smoke'... & I really didn't. I had made it true for me, it felt soooo weird, I was sure I wanted to smoke, but I didn't need to anymore. Then came the 'wow'... this is new, what shall I do now??? It's an awesome feeling, a powerful experience that you can create it you really want to. If not, get yourself motivated & in the right frame of mind & try again!

The reward... being free from the controlling need, having more time & more money... yipeee! Once you've given up you realise how much focus smoking took up in your life. It's worth it, & allow it to be easy for yourself as the stress might be worse than the smoke! :)

[janeway]

Once I read an article (cosmic awareness) about the reptoids and that they don't like human flesh of people who smoke:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

o.k. I smoke and you know what?
It is so good for my health:cool:
And since I create my own reality that is the truth!

[i am all i am]

AND I FUCKING HATE IT!!!!

I DON'T CARE WHAT PEOPLE SAY, IT'S THIS REALLY REALLY IRRITATING FEELING!! I CAN FEEL IT! MY BODY NEEDS THE SMOKE! I CAN FEEL IT PUNISHING ME FOR NOT HAVING IT.

AT CERTAIN MOMENTS I CAN GET MY MIND OFF OF IT.. BUT WITHIN A MATTER OF MINUTES, IT FINDS IT'S WAY BACK INTO MY HEAD!!!

I feel weak because of this. But it's like this duality is going on.

One side knows how bad it is, and sees how good things can be without smokes.

But then the other side knows how much I like it. How I am perfect for what it stood for. A rebellion of sorts and such.

I need a cookie. :(

http://www.coffinails.com/index.html

Buy some seeds and grow your own brother.


With LOVE.
________________________________________

WHEN PAIRED OPPOSITES DEFINE YOUR BELIEFS, YOUR BELIEFS WILL IMPRISON YOU.

[tinmenace]

o.k. I smoke and you know what?
It is so good for my health:cool:
And since I create my own reality that is the truth!



Yeah but it's stinky for everyone else. ;)

[graflok]

Good for you Graflok! I quit almost 14 years ago and haven't touched it since. I still dream about it sometimes and if I'm out at a bar, or a party (which is rarely these days....getting old y'see) the old familiar craving will come back. Craving might be a strong word, but just the lust for a smoke creeps back.

Yes, same here. :)

graflok

[tru3]

No no no good sir... you are not being punished by your body!!! Stop this victim bull & get a grip on your ultimate reality... do you want to give up smoking, really???? It's only when you're 100% sure that it suddenly get's easy, without all this stress. If it's this stressful, spark up & enjoy, & get yourself ready for when you are there to give it up for good.

thanks, unicorn. see, all it takes is the willingness, to quit; when the willingness is strong, spirit takes over. in aa, we had a phrase: "white knuckling" things. life becomes this massive internal struggle; who are we fighting, really? who are we angry at? an invisible third hand choking our throats.

i spent decades pounding my square peg into a round hole. all i got was a smashed peg. i've been smoking a pack a day for 25 years. i understand the purpose my smoking serves: it is a way to create boundaries between me and people (a "smokescreen", if you will). ;) i believe i had some kind of borderline personality disorder when i was in my teens and twenties; my emotional body was swiss cheese due to years of abuse. victimhood? maybe; but maybe just acceptance, too. i can't make lasting change until i accept where i am. otherwise, it's just an evasion of what's before me. changing external circumstances and habits and expecting internal peace of mind doesn't work, ime. peel it back and you have energy in the form of beliefs and attitudes that the habit of smoking supports. same energy, same habit-- or the addiction gets switched. that happens all the time. sex instead of alcohol, gambling instead of drugs.

i don't want to quit. i've slain enough dragons in my life, thank you very much. as for lung cancer, that's all bullshit, imo. it's the pesticides and the accelerants, not the nicotene. i smoke additive free cigarettes (american spirit, which are a little pricey, and winstons ultra lights, the only major additive free brand).

h.l. i'm in your corner, man. like i said in the purification thread, "easy does it". making all these changes at once may be just too much for you right now. the path is the goal. be kind and gentle with yourself. sometimes, that's scarier than beating up on oneself! :)

[unicorn]

Know where you're coming from, Tru3.
'You aint what you eat, you're what you think,
& it's the stinkin' thinkin' that's causing the problem!'
(thought you might like the stinky part, tinmentace!!)

Smoking doesn't cause cancer. Attidue & repressed emotions do. These will compromise your immune system which will not be able to protect your lungs as well until you've released all that. But when you've released all that, you won't be wanting to smoke anyhows! :probably: eeek!

[tinmenace]

Hehehe Unicorn! Thanks, yeah I have super sensitive smell and I can smell cigarette smoke if my neighbor lights up on his own front porch. They say the worst non-smokers are ex-smokers and I have to agree. I'm simply awful about it. Hate dirty ashtrays! Hate the smell of it on someone's clothes or hair (or breath!) and then they wanna hug you! Grrrross! :p

But, hey Janeway, just having fun with you, not at you. Hope you know that ;)

[neondestiny]

I just had a thought of a way to make you quit smoking for good his lordship, see if you can find a picture of the wankers you are making rich by smoking and paste it on your fridge or somewhere you will see it as many times as possible, refuse to give that rich fatcat anymore of your money and it should make it a whole lot easier to quit.
The mind works in pictures, then we elevate to that picture in our mind to bring it into reality, why not make your picture, a happier, healthier, stronger, much richer you?
Good luck with it hislordship
neonxxx

[tru3]

Hehehe Unicorn! Thanks, yeah I have super sensitive smell and I can smell cigarette smoke if my neighbor lights up on his own front porch. They say the worst non-smokers are ex-smokers and I have to agree. I'm simply awful about it. Hate dirty ashtrays! Hate the smell of it on someone's clothes or hair (or breath!) and then they wanna hug you! Grrrross! :p

But, hey Janeway, just having fun with you, not at you. Hope you know that ;)


i understand the purpose my smoking serves: it is a way to create boundaries between me and people (a "smokescreen", if you will).

exactly! you proved my point! for me, it's mission accomplished!! :D

[stikmata]

according to david n. hawkins, lung cancer wasn't an issue for smokers until big tobacco started spraying the tobacco with pesticides in the 50's.

also according to David Hawkins.... Freemasonry, Walmart, George Bush and the head of the CIA all calibrate very high according to his "applied kineasiolgoy".... so i might take what he purports w/ a grain of salt.


Yes, the pesticides and radiation are a big reason why smoking is so unhealthy... but it's also the STYLE of nicotine abuse. To tribal folks tobacco used to be a sacred plant used for special ceremonies... but today, 10-20 smokes a day for the average smoker... coughing and hacking and killing themselves on something that they don't REALLY enjoy.. they're just mad hooked on it.


it doesn't seem like it when you are addicted... but life as a non-smoker is exponentially more enjoyable and relaxing... and it's easier to get there than one thinks as a smoker... it's mainly about overcoming fear, IMO.

[limelady]

tru3...

don't want to quit. i've slain enough dragons in my life, thank you very much. as for lung cancer, that's all bullshit, imo. it's the pesticides and the accelerants, not the nicotene. i smoke additive free cigarettes (american spirit, which are a little pricey, and winstons ultra lights, the only major additive free brand).

Ha ha....you could use this for your next av :D

http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/4770/screenhunter419bm2.jpg


richmick....

Who knows maybe smoking interferes with their haarp operations, maybe smoking puts us on another channel, that they cannot access. I mean, anything is possible with this lot imho.

...So why all of a sudden a huge movement towards forcing us to give up the weed. What puts them in such a place, that they are willing to lose alot of money just to see us quit smoking. Something smells fishy to me...


janeway...

Once I read an article (cosmic awareness) about the reptoids and that they don't like human flesh of people who smoke

Here is my opinion.....

There is definitely an agenda at work with regard to smoking and the programming is literally everywhere, movies, TV, magazines, etc. Over the weekend I finally caught up with The Butterfly Effect and I was waiting for it.......sure enough, there it was, in one scene his mother was dying from lung cancer and smoking was implicated. You can be SURE it is not our health they have in mind with this sort of ubiquitous programming, and we ought to be very suspicious when mainstream is pushing anything at people so hard.... like with the currently 'humans are responsible' for global warming thing currently being pushed down our throats.

If there really is an agenda to take out 80% of the population (?) and if Joe Vialls and other are right about smoking protecting people from lung cancer caused by toxic atmospheric particles (depleted uranium etc.....and there's heaps of that floating round the planet now) ....then they certainly wouldn't want anything getting in their way of their plans would they? If depleted uranium was part of their plan to cull the population and smoking protects folks from that, well you can understand why they want to get rid of the obstacle wouldn't you?

Actually, when you think about this, its WIN, WIN, WIN and MONEY, MONEY MONEY all the way for the NWO crew. They first blame lung cancer on smoking and passive smoking, while pouring the real reason for lung cancer into the atmosphere like fury. People are making mega bucks out of developing these weapons that cause deformities and poison the masses. If people get lung cancer (for any reason) they blame smoking, while at the same time making BILLIONS of dollars out of their poisonous, toxic treatments which far from curing anybody, actually end up the REAL cause of their victims death. Big pharma (the backbone of the industrial medical complex) are traitors to the people and almost without exception everything they do is motivated purely by money and their NWO plans for domination.

If this is not so, why else would they have allowed (in fact encouraged) such terrible 'known' toxic chemicals into children's vaccines? nother of their plans to destroy the brains of future generations? I believe their plan IS is to dumb-down the population and cull a few as well. The easiest way to do this is to get them when they're kids under the guise of vaccines 'protecting' children. Yeah right!

These same people have systematically removed EVERY cure for cancer that has ever become available, leaving the way clear for ONLYTHEM to use their toxins on every victim of cancer they can round up.

Sometimes it pays to stand back and take a look at the bigger picture when discussing such issues as smoking. Personally I don't believe ANYTHING our health authorities are 'directed to peddle at us. IMHO I feel if you take the opposite view to the one currently being peddled so invasively (programming mantras) by 'mainstream', you are likely a lot closer to the truth on many matters.

However, having said that, far be it for myself or anyone to promote smoking as a preventative for reptilian posession, cancer prevention or anything else.

People must make up their own minds....but growing your own sounds like a good idea IMO ;)

[richmick]

tru3...



Ha ha....you could use this for your next av :D

http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/4770/screenhunter419bm2.jpg


richmick....




janeway...



Here is my opinion.....

There is definitely an agenda at work with regard to smoking and the programming is literally everywhere, movies, TV, magazines, etc. Over the weekend I finally caught up with The Butterfly Effect and I was waiting for it.......sure enough, there it was, in one scene his mother was dying from lung cancer and smoking was implicated. You can be SURE it is not our health they have in mind with this sort of ubiquitous programming, and we ought to be very suspicious when mainstream is pushing anything at people so hard.... like with the currently 'humans are responsible' for global warming thing currently being pushed down our throats.

If there really is an agenda to take out 80% of the population (?) and if Joe Vialls and other are right about smoking protecting people from lung cancer caused by toxic atmospheric particles (depleted uranium etc.....and there's heaps of that floating round the planet now) ....then they certainly wouldn't want anything getting in their way of their plans would they? If depleted uranium was part of their plan to cull the population and smoking protects folks from that, well you can understand why they want to get rid of the obstacle wouldn't you?

Actually, when you think about this, its WIN, WIN, WIN and MONEY, MONEY MONEY all the way for the NWO crew. They first blame lung cancer on smoking and passive smoking, while pouring the real reason for lung cancer into the atmosphere like fury. People are making mega bucks out of developing these weapons that cause deformities and poison the masses. If people get lung cancer (for any reason) they blame smoking, while at the same time making BILLIONS of dollars out of their poisonous, toxic treatments which far from curing anybody, actually end up the REAL cause of their victims death. Big pharma (the backbone of the industrial medical complex) are traitors to the people and almost without exception everything they do is motivated purely by money and their NWO plans for domination.

If this is not so, why else would they have allowed (in fact encouraged) such terrible 'known' toxic chemicals into children's vaccines? nother of their plans to destroy the brains of future generations? I believe their plan IS is to dumb-down the population and cull a few as well. The easiest way to do this is to get them when they're kids under the guise of vaccines 'protecting' children. Yeah right!

These same people have systematically removed EVERY cure for cancer that has ever become available, leaving the way clear for ONLYTHEM to use their toxins on every victim of cancer they can round up.

Sometimes it pays to stand back and take a look at the bigger picture when discussing such issues as smoking. Personally I don't believe ANYTHING our health authorities are 'directed to peddle at us. IMHO I feel if you take the opposite view to the one currently being peddled so invasively (programming mantras) by 'mainstream', you are likely a lot closer to the truth on many matters.

However, having said that, far be it for myself or anyone to promote smoking as a preventative for reptilian posession, cancer prevention or anything else.

People must make up their own minds....but growing your own sounds like a good idea IMO ;)

Nice post..i think we need to go with our intuition on this..mine tells me, they need to stop us smoking, because smoking interferes with something they have planned for us..what that is, not sure..but if people are still smoking it would become obvious they are not being effected, by what ever they plan to pollute us with and other people will see this and question why. Hope this makes sense. Always go with your intuition and not fear. Fear is the mind killer, not cigerettes..;)

[tinmenace]

they need to stop us smoking, because smoking interferes with something they have planned for us..what that is, not sure..but if people are still smoking it would become obvious they are not being effected,

Prolly something that the side effects of smoking neutralize. You know what I mean? The poisons left in your body from smoking probably stop whatever it is they want to unleash on us. So, it won't be as effective. Maybe the body doesn't have the ability to absorb properly when you smoke, and they want us to get the full dose, so they need everyone to be clean.

I'm not going to start smoking again. No way!

[stikmata]

Nice post..i think we need to go with our intuition on this..mine tells me, they need to stop us smoking, because smoking interferes with something they have planned for us..what that is, not sure..but if people are still smoking it would become obvious they are not being effected, by what ever they plan to pollute us with and other people will see this and question why. Hope this makes sense. Always go with your intuition and not fear. Fear is the mind killer, not cigerettes..;)


i've read a story that was like "They Live", but the cigarettes were the glasses... but there was very few people who smoked because society had banned it nearly everywhere.

all B-to-the-S, IMO... anything to justify the addiction.

how do you expect to be free from the "NWO", when you can't even seem to free yourself from bondage of nicotine?

Free your mind... from nicotine.

[richmick]

Prolly something that the side effects of smoking neutralize. You know what I mean? The poisons left in your body from smoking probably stop whatever it is they want to unleash on us. So, it won't be as effective. Maybe the body doesn't have the ability to absorb properly when you smoke, and they want us to get the full dose, so they need everyone to be clean.

I'm not going to start smoking again. No way!


yes, you could be right. The full hit would be best. If they nuke iran i think we will be getting lots of illnesses transpire from the fallout across the middle east and possibily europe. Depends on how much is dropped on the innocent people of iran. Time will tell. But note, our government does not do anything in the intersts of the people, but only for their own interests and agenda. Question why they want to stop smoking, the real reasons ..because i'm pretty darn sure it isn't out of concern for our health...:rolleyes:

[tru3]

also according to David Hawkins.... Freemasonry, Walmart, George Bush and the head of the CIA all calibrate very high according to his "applied kineasiolgoy".... so i might take what he purports w/ a grain of salt.




thanks for pointing that out. :) this would require another thread entirely to hash out, but i have used kinesiology long enough that i have seen it's accuracy with respect to the human bodymind. i am highly skeptical about it being able to test concepts.

let's put it this way: i understand your concerns. ;) thanks for paying attention!

[janeway]

Smoking is 100% psychologically.
It is not a nicotine addiction! Think about it: if it is nicotine why don't you wake up from your sleep cause your body is asking for nicotine?

I have stopped twice, each time about 3 years.
Just stopped like that; because I CHANGED MY MIND!
My partner smoked and it didn't bother me at all. Eacht time it was as if I never had never smoked before. No problems at all with it.
I started (twice) at the moment a very close person died and I was there at that moment supreme. That kind of triggers me to be fatalistic, so it seems, so psychologically it is, at least for me.

Now I sometimes forget to smoke; even if there are people around me who smoke; I just sometimes forget it. That is not possible if it is a nicotine addiction.

I stopped because of the smell; which is not nice indeed:(
And although I smoke now; I also don't like full ashtrays. So it keeps me busy, so to speak.

[limelady]

i've read a story that was like "They Live", but the cigarettes were the glasses... but there was very few people who smoked because society had banned it nearly everywhere.

all B-to-the-S, IMO... anything to justify the addiction.

how do you expect to be free from the "NWO", when you can't even seem to free yourself from bondage of nicotine?

Free your mind... from nicotine.

You have a point stigmata. It is a shame that smoking for most people is an addiction. Is this due to the the nicotine or perhaps an additive? Or is it just that humanity is very inclined to addictions of all sorts....whether it be sugar, coffee, playing games on their PCs, gossip magazines, texting on their mobiles, watching TV, adrenaline 'extreme' sports, etc? Should people be equally encouraged to "free their minds" from all such addictions in order to thwart the NWO?

[jimijams]

But note, our government does not do anything in the intersts of the people, but only for their own interests and agenda. Question why they want to stop smoking, the real reasons ..because i'm pretty darn sure it isn't out of concern for our health...:rolleyes:
It's also interesting to note that they make one law for us another for themselves..

Congress Exempts Itself From Indoor-Smoking Ban
Washington, D.C.'s new ban on indoor smoking won't apply to the U.S. Congress, which routinely exempts itself from such workplace regulations, the New York Times reported Feb. 12.
http://www.jointogether.org/news/headlines/inthenews/2006/congress-exempts-itself-from.html

[h1s_l0rdsh1p]

Well...

I gave in last night.
I bought a pack of Camels.


But, I haven't given up the rest. I have still had no coffee, or meat. :)

[jimijams]

Well...

I gave in last night.
I bought a pack of Camels.


But, I haven't given up the rest. I have still had no coffee, or meat. :)
Never mind, heres something that might cheer you up..:D

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/3001/camelcigarettesmc2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[stikmata]

thanks for pointing that out. :) this would require another thread entirely to hash out, but i have used kinesiology long enough that i have seen it's accuracy with respect to the human bodymind. i am highly skeptical about it being able to test concepts.

let's put it this way: i understand your concerns. ;) thanks for paying attention!

agreed... i definitely don't flush the baby w/ the bathwater.


You have a point stigmata. It is a shame that smoking for most people is an addiction. Is this due to the the nicotine or perhaps an additive? Or is it just that humanity is very inclined to addictions of all sorts....whether it be sugar, coffee, playing games on their PCs, gossip magazines, texting on their mobiles, watching TV, adrenaline 'extreme' sports, etc? Should people be equally encouraged to "free their minds" from all such addictions in order to thwart the NWO?

they should... absolutely. Why go after some hidden oppressor when we're still oppressed by the self?

though it seems to me in many cases the "Illuminati" load up the gun put it in our hand and lead the barrel into our mouths and calling it a food propeller... but we still make the decision to pull the trigger.

[tinmenace]

Well...

I gave in last night.
I bought a pack of Camels.


But, I haven't given up the rest. I have still had no coffee, or meat. :)

Whoa, that's a lot to take on at one time.

[unicorn]

So why all of a sudden a huge movement towards forcing us to give up the weed. What puts them in such a place, that they are willing to lose alot of money just to see us quit smoking. Something smells fishy to me...

'They' are not willing to lose alot of money from people giving up smoking, they're raking in the money big-time & merely pretend to have concerns for our health. In the UK a pack of 20 cigs costs OVER £5, that's at least £3.50 on each packet that goes straight onto tax... Like they care about health, c'mon!!

I'm not even sure that they want to stamp out smoking of weed, as it's them that's pushing all drugs (from sugar to smack) & raking in the money with it, plus sedating a whole load of people who are replacing spiritual growth with coffee, sugar, smokes, drugs etc...

Janeway: Smoking is 100% psychologically. It is not a nicotine addiction!

Well said Janeway! There has to be an unfulfilled need for an addiction in the first place. Addiction is just a poor replacement for whatever is lacking in life, be it love, connection to self, god etc... Now don't addictions pale in comparison to these....

Giving up an addiction is not about health or cancer or money... it is about allowing yourself to find what you are trully seeking, instead of compromising your reality with a poor substitute ;)

[unicorn]

I have still had no coffee, or meat.
:) :) :) :) :) :)

Yipeeee HL!!! Keep up the good work!! (Meat carries more death vibration than any tobacco!! Just bless your smokes & enjoy them in the mean time!!

[tru3]

Never mind, heres something that might cheer you up..:D

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/3001/camelcigarettesmc2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

:D :D cheered me up, anyway! <puff, puff, ahhhhh>

http://dismuke.net/howimages/cokesmall.jpg

"i'm sorry, kitten, but jimmy's climbing the walls this morning; mother get the ritalin!"

ah, the good ol' days.

[seanx]

h1s_l0rdsh1p,

Try out this great free Quit smoking site - www.quitsmokingonline.com (http://www.quitsmokingonline.com)

It runs a free 10 day online course to help you deal with the
psychology of giving up smoking - and HOW to deal with the FEELINGS
you get when you can't smoke.

I used it nearly 8 years ago to quit - and I haven't smoking since.

Good luck

[seanx]

Tru3 wrote:

according to david n. hawkins, lung cancer wasn't an issue for smokers until big tobacco started spraying the tobacco with pesticides in the 50's.and

i smoke additive free cigarettes (american spirit, which are a little pricey, and winstons ultra lights, the only major additive free brand).

Interesting idea.

Although I could never go back to smoking cigarettes ever again - they
really are an obnoxious, death-agent creation - the idea of smoking
NATURAL tobacco like the Native Americans did is appealing.

They seemed to treat it as a sacred plant - is this true or just romantic bulls****?

I have only discovered through the internet one simply organic brand of cigars - Plasencia Reserva Churchill.

They say they make it like the indians did - but don't say if it fully
organic but NO chemiclas at all added to it.

Anybody ever tried it or know anything about it?? Or know of true natual organic cigars

[unicorn]

They seemed to treat it as a sacred plant - is this true or just romantic bulls****?

Nope, 'tis true. Tobacco was a sacred plant used for prayer, the smoke carries the prayers to the heavens. Also smoked in the peace-pipe... trully beautiful. It was valuable & offered as an exchange for healing. A totally different concept altogether...

(Just realised altogether = All Together, aaahhh :) )

[tru3]

Nope, 'tis true. Tobacco was a sacred plant used for prayer, the smoke carries the prayers to the heavens. Also smoked in the peace-pipe... trully beautiful. It was valuable & offered as an exchange for healing. A totally different concept altogether...

(Just realised altogether = All Together, aaahhh :) )

if i'm at a place i've never been before, especially travelling, i always crumble the tobacco out of one of my cigs and leave it as an offering (and put the filter in my pocket). :)

[stikmata]

h1s_l0rdsh1p,

Try out this great free Quit smoking site - www.quitsmokingonline.com (http://www.quitsmokingonline.com)

It runs a free 10 day online course to help you deal with the
psychology of giving up smoking - and HOW to deal with the FEELINGS
you get when you can't smoke.

I used it nearly 8 years ago to quit - and I haven't smoking since.

Good luck

very nice site... it's basically the same method that Allen Carr teaches.

I had been quit for about 3 weeks before i read his book and i think there was a high probabililty for relapse i didn't read it.

i belive this pearl of wisdom in particular helped save me:
http://www.quitsmokingonline.com/lesson10dd.htm

i was starting to want to "test myself" (something i still struggle with in the dream state) and i'm pretty sure that even if i only had 1 cigg or one puff, it would increse the likelyhood that i might relapse down the road.

so yea, excellent site

[whitelightrabbit]

if i'm at a place i've never been before, especially travelling, i always crumble the tobacco out of one of my cigs and leave it as an offering (and put the filter in my pocket). :)

very cool tru3. natives still use tobacco in their rituals too.

i think tobacco needs to be respected.

[seanx]

Glad the site www.quitsmokingonline.com (http://www.quitsmokingonline.com)helped you.

As I said , I used it eight years ago - and I like to tell people about it.

It's totally free and non-profit making and compared to all the rubbish
on the web about quitting cigarettes, while charging a fortune -
it's a breath of fresh air.

Yes, it's based on the ideas of Allen Carr combined with the simple
insights of Zen meditation.

Essentially, it says instead of fighting and resisting the
'terrible' craving you get when you can't smoke - make
friends with it.

Simply spend time with it - and get comfortable with your discomfort.

And when you can do that, you'll experience the great paradox:
Once it doesn't bother you anymore - it will get up and leave.

But what most people do when they get this craving?

In fear- and in terror - they buy patches and gums - and you
name it - to help and protect themselves against this 'horrible enemy'.

They start a war with it - and what you resists simply persists -
and that's why most people find giving up smoking so difficult.

As the site says, it's not the cigarette, it's people's beliefs about
giving up that is the problem.

[lydia78]

Hi Seanx,:)

Know this a abit of an old thread, but had to say thanks for the smoking website, I feel inspired to give it another go......last time went totally tits up!!Gonna show mum this too as she's turning into a chainy again.....

Again Many thanks!!!:):)

[friendsinthesky]

If smoking protected smokers from lung cancer, then most of you non smokers should be dying of lung cancer accordingly to theories raised. But you're not.

Maybe the good guys are trying to help us, with alittle whisper in the ear of evil. (....psssttt ban smoking)

As for the associated (health) messages with smoking; mind games.

I'm currently smoking American Spirit (100% Additive Free Natural Tobacco) cigs for the past fornight. I've gone through the withdrawal phrase which is never pleasant, I like smoking but I don't like waking up in the middle of the night weezing (asthma).

I'm on track to "kick it" my way.

Best of luck to anyone kicking a habit/addiction.

P.S FYI: American Spirit can be purchased in Australia (I'm in Melb) it's a matter of asking a tobacco chain store, or request to order.

[synergy777]

are there any places in the uk, bulk buying american spirit etc.
i will smoke till the day i die, tobacco/weed , stay high till ya die, lol. alcohol i can give or take, weed on weekends, meat is going to be next to cutdown.

i think meat/bad food, and alcohol are the big killers. alcohol will be severly controlled soon, just look at the weekly reports they keep coming out with, drink driving, asbo kids, binge drinking, warning labels, etc. fascism is very progressive, lol