Saturday, 19 June 2010

Eddy Butler

Two questions for Eddy Butler.

1) If you become leader of the BNP will you guarantee to change the constitution so that the party becomes a white organisation again, no black members, no Asians (of any religion), no orientals, no half castes and no Jews?

2) Will you stop the BNP from moving ever closer to becoming a Christian fundamentalist party obsessed with Islam and acknowledge that the only reason we have a problem in this country with Islam is because of all the non whites living here and if they were all repatriated then a tiny handful of white Muslims would pose no threat?

If you can answer yes to both questions then you have my vote for the party leadership.

If you cannot then what is the point of supporting you. The main problems in the party will not change.

Friday, 18 June 2010

The EU

It will come as no surprise to Nationalists but the findings of a new poll (Angus Reid Public Opinion Published on Jun 01 2010) shows that the majority of British people, even those that vote for the pro EU Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties, do not want to be part of the EU or the Euro currency.

Here are the findings:

In the online survey of a representative national sample of 1,984 British adults, 51 per cent of respondents say EU membership has been moderately negative (26%) or very negative (25%) for the United Kingdom.

Conversely, seven per cent of Britons say the EU has been very positive for the UK, and 31 per cent regard it as moderately positive.

If a referendum on the UK’s permanence in the EU were called, two fifths of Britons (42%) would vote in favour of pulling out, while 35 per cent would vote to stay.

If a plebiscite on the UK adopting the euro were called, a large majority of Britons (79%) would vote against abandoning the pound as the national currency. Only nine per cent of respondents would welcome the euro.

Overall, party allegiances make some difference in how people in Britain feel about the EU. Conservative voters are largely inclined to say EU membership has been detrimental for the UK (66%), but so are many Labour (41%) and Liberal Democrat (41%) voters.

Almost half of Labour (48%) and Liberal Democrat (46%) followers would vote in favour of remaining in the EU in an eventual referendum, while a majority of Tories (57%) would vote to pull out.

Adopting the euro is out of the question for most Britons of all political stripes. At least seven-in-ten Liberal Democrats, Labour and Tory supporters would vote against embracing the EU currency.

Friday, 11 June 2010

Smoking ban and heart attacks

A new study has shown that the smoking ban has helped reduce the number of heart attacks suffered by people in England and saved the NHS over 8 million pounds.

The study, which was carried out by researchers from the University of Bath, has reported that there were 1,200 fewer hospital admissions for heart attacks in England in the year after July 2007 - when the smoking ban came in. The researchers suggest that this may be due to the general population being exposed to less second-hand smoke since the legislation came in.

The study looked at whether there was a difference between the number of people admitted to hospital with a heart attack in the five years before the smoking ban began in England compared to the 15 months afterwards and was the largest, most comprehensive study to date on the effects of smoke-free legislation anywhere in the world.

Separate research by the London Health Observatory carried out on the basis of these figures suggested a saving to the NHS of £8.4m in the first year after the ban on smoking in public indoor spaces was introduced in England.
A similar kind of study was done in New York. According to this study, heart attack rates have dropped by 8 percent following the Clean Indoor Air Act of 2003 that prohibits smoking in bars, restaurants and other public places. The report, issued by the state Health Department, found that hospitals admitted 3,813 fewer patients for heart attacks in 2004 than would be expected in New York without the indoor smoking ban. Studies elsewhere have reached similar conclusions. In one case, the rate of admissions for heart attacks returned to normal after the ban was lifted.

Similar results were obtained in Scotland. Following the introduction of smoke-free legislation the health of individuals has improved significantly and the heart attack rates have dropped dramatically. Hospital admissions for heart attacks have dropped by 17 percent after the legislation was introduced in Scotland.

The number of acute coronary events such as heart attacks in adults also dropped significantly after a smoking ban in public places in Italy. Researchers in Rome compared acute coronary events in the city for five years preceding a public smoking ban with those occurring one year after the ban. They found an 11.2 percent reduction of acute coronary events in persons 35 to 64 years and a 7.9 percent reduction in those ages 65 to 74.

As a result of smoking in public places, passive smokers or non-smokers are the ones that are mostly affected as they tend to inhale all the dangerous chemicals released due to tobacco burning. Most of these chemicals have been reported to cause cancer and heart attacks. Physiological effects of tobacco smoke on cardiovascular functions include stiffening aorta, platelet activation resulting in damaged artery lining, disturbed heart rhythm and vasoconstriction. Smoking also causes development of plaques inside blood vessels leading to heart attacks. The smoking ban has reduced the exposure to smoke in the general population.

So there we have it. Yet more evidence that the ban on smoking in public places is good for all of our people.

How can anyone still oppose it?