enhanced by
Bookmark:
iT WOULD SEEM THAT THE Scottish Licensed Trade Association's members ARE ONLY CONCERNED WITH PROFIT AND ARE UNCONCERNED ABOUT THE HARMFUL EFFECTS OF SMOKING
Businesses concerned about profit. Whatever next?How many people are hurt every year crossing the road? Lets ban that too!! Too many people are unconcerned about the harmful effects of crossing the road.
I just wish smokers would stay home permanently. I'm sick fed up walking past smokers blocking our pavements, throwing down fag ends in the street, standing outside pubs and clubs and generelly being a total nuisance by sending all that disgusting fag smoke in the direction of people who don't want to inhale it. Infact, these selfish stupid people who care as little about the health of others as they do about their own, take over all the outside tables when the weather is good and non smoker have been forced to go inside to get away from their filthy breaths. Tsk, the legislation needs to be more stringent and ban smoking in ALL public places including the street.
I have only one objection to the smoking ban.
Pubs used to smell of cigarette smoke - which I dont think is entirely unpleasant. But now some pubs (there are three come to mind in the Tollcross area) have an entirely different aroma - that of the gents toilets -which was presumably masked by cigatette smoke for years.
Maybe some of these pubs need to think about some kind of cleaning/refurbishment as it is the main reason I am staying away from many of them. So an indirect impact of the ban.
Ban cars, ban planes and ban First choice buses!! All these put together probably kill more people than smoking alone. They also have the added benefit of polluting the planet!
is it only me who thinks so or is it a good thing that pub profits are down. it shows that we are drinking less. Anyway i am now able to go out without my cloths stinking of other peoples smoke. no smoker ever offered to dry clean my jacket because it stank from his smoke. and surely any actions taken by publicans now offsets future health law suits from smoking felated illnesses
the more that I hear smokers greetin' and moaning the more I enjoy the smoking ban!
Who's losing if the SLTA poll is correct? Not those like me who are happier (than ever!) to continue to go to a bar for a pint now that there's no smoke stink. And how many holders of licensing certificates took part in this propaganda exercise? let's be told! There's nothing in the article about this nor on the (totally non updated) SLTA web-site. Nor is it clear how representative SLTA is as a trades union of those in the licensed trade. This is a totally biased survey to found the continued special pleading of those in the licensed trade who refuse to accept that they have colluded for years in the spread of the harmful effects of the use of tobacco.
Eamon says that we must be drinking less if pub profits are down. What utter nonsense. Pub profits are down because we are now buying our alcohol from off licences and supermarkets instead because a) its cheaper and b) we can smoke in our homes.
Does anyone remember that in the first few weeks of the ban all the anti's and organisations like ASH were falling over themselves to proclaim the ban a success because pub footfall was up....erm, ever heard of the honeymoon period? The novelty factor?
You pillocks. Why are people like Charles having a go at the licensed trade? Its not the publicans fault that smoking is legal but illegal in enclosed places. The publican is simply the latest in a long line of public folk devils. It used to be devil dogs (remember them?).
The Scottish Executive is so bereft of proper ideas it has legislated in areas that should be left well alone.
Any by the way, im FOR a ban on smoking in pubs but it would have been better if publicans had been given the right to elect to be smoking or non smoking. Then people could make up their own minds about where to go for a drink.
The highest suicide rates by profession in this country are dentists and publicans.
It could be that they've all listened to the Scottish Executive's exhortation not to buy a round!
If there was such a demand for non-smoking pubs before the ban why were there not any?
Yes, businesses exist to make profits, but when the products they sell are potentially harmful, this needs to be balanced by some social responsibility. Otherwise, we might as well allow them to sell heroin to kids.
The drinks industry has plenty of clout in Edinburgh (look at George Street) and it's natural for them to whine at the first sign of a drop in profits. This doesn't mean the smoking ban should be reversed.
As someone else observed, smoke used to mask all kinds of things from urine smells to bad decor. Maybe pub owners should spend some time making their premises more attractive to their customers.
#3. senga: I agree, Their not thinking about thous of us who don't smoke (the majourity).
The second hand smoke sometimes gives me pain (cramps) in my tummy. I can't be the only one!
I wish:1) They wouldn't Smoke outside the door.2) Smoke at the same part of the street.3) Create an area for thouse of us who don't smoke to walk by so we don't inhale their poisus fumes.
the smoking ban IS here.so just get used to it as its not going away.
I fully support the smoking ban as I can now take my young child to cafes in the town without him enjoying the stench of fags from selfish smokers who would happily put their cravings and false sense of entitlement above the health of a beautiful child.
Not being a selfish person, pre ban I would go elsewhere if a cafe had an incumbent wheezer but this was often not a courtesy extended to my family by smokers.
Firstly I am a NON smoker but I believe in freedom. To all the righteous 'woolie jumper brigade' where is your pride? You are all rolling over and getting your tummy tickled by a ridiculous Scottish Executive who have no real serious agenda for this wonderful country except to threaten peoples livliehood.
I can, and do, agree with the smoking ban but why could there not have been smoking and non-smoking licensed premises? I'm sure that it would have been possible. Surely the Breweries could have re-arranged staff so that non-smoking employees were in non-smoking pubs and employees that smoked relocated to smoking pubs.
How selfish of us non-smokers. We should be happy to stink of smoke, happy to suffer raw throats and weeping eyes, happy to keep dying of cancer caused by other people's smoking. If we don't like it, well we can just keep out of pubs and restaurants, can't we? Anything rather than see the minority of smokers restricting their habit or the licensed trade and their shareholders having to drop a few bob. Heaven forbid that our desire to live a bit cleaner or a bit longer should interfere with licensees' profits.
Get real, smokers - you're the dinosaurs now and the smoking ban is here to stay. Because most of us don't smoke and most of us like it that way. As to the SLTA's whingeing - well, they would say that, wouldn't they?
I gave up going out to pubs and clubs in Edinburgh when the smoking ban came in. While the righteous out there go on about the health benefits of non smoking they may want to ponder on the fact that there is less people smoking now than in the entire history of humanity and yet cancer is now affecting one in three people at some point of their lives. So if people who like a puff and yet are treated like social lepers choose to take their business elsewhere just remember it's now becoming apparent that although smoking can cause cancer it ain't the main villain you all thought it to be and if the tax we all paid on it went to our own individual private health care, i would like to see what effect that had on NHS funding. Also if you have done any research into that 1918 Flu, you will find that smokers were the least likely to be affected by it. I am not advocating smoking but this present witch hunt has no basis in fact and IS affecting businesses right across the board based on knee jerk stupidity as apposed to the application of a little COMMON SENSE
To Alex - in what kind of freedom exactly do you believe? The kind where you roll over and let a minority of smokers pollute and kill you? I don't wear a woolly jumper, but I understand that while smokers have a perfect right to pollute and kill themselves if that is their personal choice, they do NOT have a right to pollute and kill me at the same time if my personal choice is to stay alive and unpolluted.
A non-smoker's decision not to smoke affects only him or herself. A smoker's decision to smoke affects everyone within range of the killer fumes. Nothing to do with the Scottish Executive - everything to do with freedom FROM smoke being more important than freedom TO smoke.
Scott,
My that IS a most convincing argument I find myself reaching for the humidor for the "natural Tamiflu" known to the initiated as Cohiba.
The smoking ban is the best piece of work the MSP's have done since they came into existence.
It does make me laugh to hear the whining coming out of the smokers which I much prefer to the usual carcinogens.
Do you have any idea how many carcinogens there are in fuels mate. I will quit smoking if YOU all get bikes
PRS - it makes no difference how far away the next bar is - there's a smoking ban there too!
Gordon #30. Maybe non-smokers can't get into the pubs round your way because of all the Fag-Ash Lil's blocking the doorway.
And I don't believe there are any beautiful people in Stirling. You made that bit up for a laugh!
Oh really Angus, what do you call a good looking chick in Leith.................Lost :)
Scott #34. On the game, actually. But at least they have made an effort.
Gordon #35. Fair cop, pal. I've not been to Stirling since the ban, but to get into Leith pubs you have to brave the smokescreen.
Scott, you are a grade A choob. There is a significant difference between the pollution from the internal combustion engine, which most of us are prepared to accept as a necessary evil if we want to get anywhere (and a pushbike won't get you to Majorca on your hols or even deliver your naaasty fags to Tescos from the factory) and cigarettes, the effects of which most of us are NOT prepared to suffer any longer and which serve no useful purpose in society - unless you consider polluting and killing smokers and non-smokers alike is a useful purpose.
When they take cigs out the equation mate, who are you going to blame for a one in three cancer rate then
Gordon, #30 - sorry, pal, but you are typical of so many selfish smokers. You think you have some divine right to smoke when you want, where you want and to hell with the non-smoking majority. You don't much care who you pollute or kill in the process so long as you can do exactly what YOU want, when you want it.
Nothing to do with grief in my life, by the way - my wife was caught early and is still here, no thanks to selfish gunts like you. I have no desire to make anyone pay for anything, but I'd quite like to see future generations protected from the selfishness of smokers. By all means smoke yourself to death, it'll be one less choob on the planet, but you have no right to kill anyone else in the process.
DC, lets keep it light hearted dude, great to hear about you wife mate :)
Scott, #38 - do you know ANYTHING at all about cancer and cancer rates, or are you just making it up as you go along? You do realise that the vast majority of lung cancer and heart disease is suffered by smokers? Do yourself a favour - have a look on the Cancer Research website and acquaint yourself with some of the facts, rather than come on here and let your belly rumble.
http://www.worldwithoutcancer.com/ try that for size ;)
I hope that individual responsiblity and reducing nanny state control will be a central pillar of the Scottish Conservative manifesto next year.
I'm sick fed up of being told what I can and cannot do - Don't Drink, Don't Smoke, Don't Eat fatty foods. With all this state interference, I expect to be told how to think soon.
The Scottish Conservatives were the only ones brave enough to stand up to this legislation. All the others ethusiatically went along with the Executive's current lifestyle mantra: pan it and ban it. The sad thing about it was the Lib Dem position - they seemed to have forgotten what 'liberal' means.
To all Scots, vote for a party that will restore your freedom ( and that ain't the SNP/Lib/Labs!
Well done Scottish Executive, Hitler would have been proud of your level of state interference!
Does The the non-smoking ban include "Private" clubs?Where membership is necessary?What about the Casinos? is smoking allowed in them?If You can smoke in "Private" clubs & Casinos---the Pub owners should declare their establishments a "Private Club" admission by membership only.Charge a nominal fee so smokers can smoke.
Agreed Gordon
Scott, #43 - the US is full of nutty stuff like this. If you look hard enough on the net you can probably find someone claiming that cancer is caused by visiting aliens rather than smoking.
But there is plenty of reputable research to show the clear link between smoking and cancer, the effects of passive smoking, the cost to the NHS of treating the wide range of smoking related illnesses (cancer, heart, bronchial etc). All good reasons why a ban makes sense.
Gordon, #42 - good, one less smoker then. Not forcing a guilt trip on anyone, not least because I have yet to meet a smoker with a conscience and thus wouldn't bother wasting my time. Nothing self-righteous about pointing out that non-smokers are now the majority. That's a FACT. Or that smokers have no divine right to kill non smokers. That's only my opinion of course, but if you think smokers DO have a divine right to kill the rest of us, I'm happy to listen to your reasons.
I have never really regarded my not smoking as a "failing". Maybe that says more about your mindset than mine.
Scott and Gordon - I think a special "members only" club for the pair of you (as suggested by Fox) would be an excellent idea. You could call it "Jurassic Park" or "The Land That Time Forgot" or something like that. Make sure that Jethro Tull's "Living in the Past" and Mary Hopkin singing "Those Were The Days" are on rotation on the jukebox.
The rest of us can just go on living in this century.
To DC, what a great idea dude and i bet it would take off like a rocket. Hey Gordon you up for it ;)......To the business community....Gordon and I are looking for sponsors and i could ask half the bands on my site ;)
Gordon, #49 - Scottish pubs have always permitted smoking throughout. Snug bars (which I am well old enough to remember) were not for smokers, they were generally for grannies and lone women in the days when nice women didn't go into pubs unaccompanied. Society has moved on from that nonsense as well.
What's paranoid about suggesting that passive smoking can kill non-smokers? Are you suggesting that all the research is faked? Spurious to suggest that non-smokers are now the majority - so you reject the figures on that as well? I cannot ever remember a claim that vegetarians were a majority either. Do you reject all official research and statistics which do not support your own narrow argument? Now THAT'S paranoia.
On #51, there is research to prove almost anything. The fact that the BMA published it does not mean that the BMA endorsed the findings, that is not how it works. What you have to do is look at the BODY of research - and there is plenty of that to detail the effects of passive smoking. Choosing not to accept the findings because they don't fit with your preconceptions does not invalidate the findings though.
If your argument is that there is no need for a smoking ban because there is no proof that smoking actually kills anyone, you are one of a very small minority. But then there are people out there who still believe the world is flat.
It's worth remebering on avearge it take a smoker 7 time of trying to quite to give up for good.The ban has't been law long engought, to alow for that much of suport to be given.
This bans the best thing the Scottish Parlement hs done.
Scott, #52 - I wasn't really thinking of a rocket, but that's an even better idea. When all you dinosaurs had got together we could simply fire you off into outer space. You could just orbit the earth partying till the booze and fags ran out :-)
I think someone should take DC up on his idea but they should make it a combined smokers/soap allergy sufferers/irritable bowel club.
After all isn't smoking just an unholy hum that for many years was socially acceptable and now is not.
As for the unproven nature of the health issues related to smoking, it does amuse me when people make out sucking down tabs is not bad for your health.
comment 55*DC i think you have a winner there dude, what a party ;)
Gordon, #58 - if you define "self righteous" and "resorting to personal attacks" as "I think you are talking utter mince out your backside", then I plead guilty.
A "lobby" at a Labour Party Conference is exactly that - a "lobby". One gets many mad lobby groups at Conferences but no thinking person would accept their views as definitive research findings, especially not at Labour Party Conferences where lobbies can be madder than most.
Experts do not keep contradicting themselves about the risks and effects of smoking. There is a huge body of evidence available, from Richard Doll onwards. There are also a few contradictory studies (mostly funded by the Tobacco industry, funnily enough) but received opinion now is overwhelmingly that smoking, both active and passive, is pretty damn bad for you.
I don't know what pubs you have been drinking in, but I have been doing it legally all over Scotland since 1967 (and illegally for a while before that) and have NEVER been in a pub where smoking was voluntarily restricted to the snug bar. In fact I have never even been in a pub with a non-smoking snug.
I'm out of here - going to take my wife out for a nice meal in a non-smoking restaurant, followed maybe by a nice pint in a non-smoking pub, then home in a non-smoking bus. Oh joy :-)
I love going to pubs now there's no smoke, and so do my friends.
I and three of my colleagues have lost our jobs due to this smoking ban. I did think it would be a good thing as I am a none smoker. Now I have to feed my wife and two little girls age 3 and 6 on dole money. This new law has completely ruined my family life. I have been trying for the last 6 weeks to get a job back in the bar trade alas no one wants to hire anyone. I am now at my wits end.
As a taxi owner driver here in the Borders, I have noticed the rapid decline of the pub trade, Monday to Friday the pubs and clubs are almost empty, especially the Royal British legion.It has hit my takings also.it is OK for the city dwellers to look down there noses at rural areas but don't forget there is nothing ells for the locals in rural areas to do, and we don't have the same moneyWhat is going to happen when pubs, and clubs start closing ! Job loses, 2 loss of rent and rates, and,3 loss of revenue for the Government.The Scottish Parliament need to have a rethink on the ban they should have only baned it from any place that sells food, and left the pubs and clubs alone, and one further question why have England put back there ban by one month, it stinks
Gordon, #61 - you're right, Government policy is formulated by small groups of nutters at Labour Party Conference, the BMA now believes that contrary to previous advice smoking is good for you and a surefire cure for cancer, and for the past 40-odd years publicans have forced smokers to confine themselves to snug bars.
Erm, can I go now? I still have to feed and water the flying pigs :-)
Aye DC @66, you can go now. You seem to have a huge, irrational hatred of smokers and smoking. This is indicative of a form of psychosis which manifests in outbursts of intolerant bile, such as lauding delight at the prospect of smokers killing themselves.
I know I would rather smell slightly of cigarette smoke than stink of antismoking bigotry like you.
Mind you, if there was a proper indoor air quality standard which establishments had to meet, there would be no smell of smoke, as modern ventilation can take care of that. What decent ventilation can't do however, is remove the stench of you're intolerance DC.
Gordon, after reading all the articles you still never really got an answer did you.It seems to me if the people are told the Ban is working well and the pubs are doing well, they must be. So where are the promised anti non-smokers, the ban was NOT wanted by the majority, smokers have partners and friends, ventilation and NON-smoking pubs would have been the way forward.The ones who are enjoying the ban, when the pubs are forced to close because there are not enough of you using them-everyone suffers.It is also obvious to most people that when you ban things it makes them more appealing to the age group you want to protect.Irelands tobacco trend is on the increase since the ban.So all that donated money could have been put to better use.For those who think smokers take so much out of the NHS, you need to look how much they put into it.
Gordon 68, propoganda or mere facts?
Bye Bye ..DC@66
Where did you go before the ban ..stayed at home ??
not suprised at all by these figures, winter looks bleak for the hospitality industry thats for sure.
Yes, couldn't agree more martin. What's more, when some of these anti smokers find some of their favourite pubs and cafes closing etc then they'll sing a different tune. In many rural areas in Ireland, villages have been devastated by the loss of their pubs and tourism commentators are already remarking how the social life has been affected.
ahh, it's so good to see anti-smokers telling the truth for once, no point arguing the science, there isn't any. Even ASH bragged about the hoax in the national press.
Truth appears to be.. smokers are selfish filthy people, selfish, selfish, they make your clothes smell.....................
But non-smokers had all the cinema's, library's, cafe's, public transport and many fine restaurants, can't those selfish, selfish smokers just have the pubs?
No!!, the anti-smokers have a human right to entertainment, selfish smokers don't.
But can't the smokers just have a few of the pub's?
No!!!! because if a non-smoker wants to go in their clothes will smell and that's selfish.
oh, well what about the ex-service men's clubs, full of people from the war generation who suffered things just as bad as smelly clothes?
No!!!, they are all selfish.
But doesn't it make you feel bad to make an 80 year old man who risked his life for you in the war stand outside in the rain?
No!!!, he's a selfish filthy smoker
Maybe just a little shed out the back of the pub then, to shelter him?
No!!! a non-smoker has the rights to go in that shed too without having to put up with filthy selfish smokers.______________________________
Well the passive smoke myth may well have been dispelled but the anti-smokers still have their invented human right to entertainment in someone else's pub without selfish smokers around.
Next those selfish smokers will be blamed for the hole in the ozone; get them off the streets, they're so selfish.
And to think, here I was thinking it was the anti-smoking hate groups that were selfish for wanting everywhere.
Now it seems they lied about those 150 studies on passive smoke for our own good; after all it gets rid of selfish smelly smokers!!
Bet you can't wait for the alcohol ration books; get rid of those selfish smelly drinkers too.
We could easily lose half of the pubs in Scotland and never miss them. We have twice as many as we need because every community had to have two at very least - one for the 'calf-licks' and one for the 'proddies'. Now we are all hedonists, so who cares?
In fact banning football talk and TV from pubs, might have been a more practical health measure, than banning smoking. As for job losses, most bar staff will be going home when they graduate anyway, and our thriving economy will mop up the few career ones that are left.
As a scot living in Berwick - we can still smoke here in England (albeit in designated areas) while Westminster makes its mind up on a "BAN" from next yearI am sure they are watching the Scottish Guinea Pig trials as to how many village pubs go under before they implement their banMy guess is they will follow the Spanish legislation which allows a Landlord of an establishment underso many square metres to decide whether he/she want to allow smoking or not As a frequent Spanish Visitor, those that have chosen non smoking are failing
And with all this hype on smoking - should not Sir Walter Raleigh have his title now removed and be portrayed as the infamous culprit that brought tobacco to Britain rather than a hero from yesteryear
The problem is that Goverment (Big Brother) now treats everyone as numpties with no common sense
Wear a seat belt, Dont eat or drink whilst driving, have a TV licence, etc etcwhere will it end when they cant manage the real culprits of society and Drugs apart from Nicotine are freely available everywhere they know the pushers but what do they doFind someone who,se tac disc has just expired or who has been clocked by a camera at 44 in a 40mph zone at 3 am
Common sense needs to be injected to police officers and the law lords
Not so long ago , when your mother or gran went out dailt to the local shop to get her shopping in her message bag - she would meet Neighbours who would inform her of how much of a rascal I was which would result in a clout over the lugNow with supermarkets - that peer pressure is gone.People dont know their neighbours anymore
So let publicans decide whether they are a smoking pub or not Market forces will dictate
For the past 3 years I have tried in vain to get the Scottish Executive to introduce Indoor Air Quality Standards as being used more frequently in Europe. Na they know better, 4 weeks into the ban, Andy Kerr hails it as a success, 6 months down the road...he now claims it is too early to say how the ban is working for businesses. The ban is failing businesses all over not only in bars, it has a knock on effect in other areas as well. and will only get worse as we head into winter, already 6 bingo halls have closed with more likely. But do the Executive care...na...but well they might be changing their tune with an election in mind next May. Look at Ireland, smoking has gone up in the past 2 years and now they are being told that they are over taxing the ciggies and must reduce the cost or be fined. Passive Smoking is nothing more than an irritant that can be successfully removed by ventilation, air filtration and modern scientific technology rendering the air clean.
smoking kills.
solution?
ban it :-)
Totally agree with #79 Publicans should decide, it is their business going to the wall after all. The chances of this Labour Government winning the next election are zero. People are fed up being told what to do. I personally will never vote Labour or again and this from a diehard Labour family! It didn't matter what their core vote wanted THEY DIDN'T LISTEN. Bingo halls too are losing money hand over fist they should ask for compensation as well. As for Andy Kerr saying he has never met anyone who wanted to turn the clock back? I know more than a few!! I would have had more respect if they had banned the evil weed altogether - but hey they still want your money. The hypocrisy makes me sick to my stomach.
A smoking ban I Love it!!!Best thing to ever happenI dont think you can really take this survey seriouslyI was in a pub in Abedeen recently and the manager told me his food sales had more than doubled and his drink sales went down 2% but had now recovered 8%so there you are a different answer to all this nonsenseNow I dont need to wash my shirt next morning after being in the pubLove it folks!!!!!
Andy [more nurses,more doctors,more consultants,more b.llsh.t,]kerr states it,s too early to realise the impact of the smoking ban,six months after saying the ban is a success, his deputy muppetlewis mcdonald stated yesterday that the ban is a success.Do these clowns not talk to each other as to get their story right.kerr also states that since the undemocratic ban he has not met one person who is against it,now, to me that suggests as if he is living on another planet or does,nt leave his big hoose except to appear at FMQ to bawl hear,hear,hear,hear, when his wee pal jack is spouting his mince.It should be up to the individual publican to decide about smoking in his or her pub.NOT use bullying people on to the street in the pissin rain by an executive that use monkey see monkey do policy,s from across the big pond.I will never vote labour again.Beware, your beer is kerr,s next target.you have been warned.
Given that this is a survey rather than based on real figures, I think we should take it with a pinch of salt. How many pubs have gone out of business as a result of the ban so far? I can't think of any. Even if we do believe it, there are bound to be winners and losers - remember that the SLTA was against the ban and still is, as well as resisting attempts to improve the environment for non-smokers for years (which is why this legislation was needed). Were the SLTA not saying a few months ago it was too early to judge and we would need to wait until after the winter months to tell - then why are their figures any better now? Remember that Paul Waterson is also owner of a group of hotels so he is hardly an independent observer.
lc (86)
im most definatley voting tory, and it sickens me to have been left with only them as my only choice.i hate the tory party, so it saddens me that this country is in such a state that the tories are worth voting for.
Martin #87. Confused, aren't you?
I don't think I've seen anybody mention that smoking is an addiction too. I've read that tobacco/nicotine is more addictive than heroin, that only a few cigarettes is enough to get you hooked. Once hooked you are dripping roast, to mix metaphors, for the greedy vultures that run the tobacco companies. The tobacco companies, particularly in the USA, have fought tooth and nail to deny they knew that tobacco was a dangerous substance.If it was to come up for licencing today there is no way that it would be approved, in any way, for human consumption.
What did all you rabid anti-smokers whine about before the smoking ban? I take it none of you are overweight drinkers who drive a car? if you are, then hang onto your chips kiddos because you're gonna be next! type 2 diabetes here we come!
FoxHunter 56: I too am a typical american. I care enough for the common good that I support the shedding of my countrymens' blood to uphold freedom everywhere. Even when it benefits the likes of you. I also proudly support the great concept of civil disobedience, since it puts a strict limit on the ability of bad politicians to force the rest of us to behave as cowardly P.C. sheep. It also shows up arrogant cowards... And as for the "sovereign nations" (read: military dictatorships) we invade, well they sure don't need us to kill their women and children. They already have the sorts of vermin you love to lick the boots of doing it for us:
'SADDAM BLINDED ME' Post Wire Services
August 24, 2006 -- BAGHDAD - A survivor of Saddam Hussein's poison-gas attack on Kurdish villagers took the witness stand yesterday to curse the dictator for the chemical weapons that blinded and horribly burned her.
"I lost my sight. My children lost their sight . . . My house was razed to the ground. May God blind them all," said Adiba Owla Bayez, 45, pointing at Saddam and his six co-defendants.
Two other villagers followed her to testify about the 1987-1988 gas campaign.
