Q & A. Why Ban Smoking? Isn’t Depopulation The Aim Of The OWG? Etc

If I was a smoker, I’d be tempted to roll my own.  At least that way I’d be sure I was smoking tobacco, and not a series of chemical additives.

Q.1. Hi Mr. Tap, Just to say you’ve written some cracking blog posts lately. As you know I’m a keen reader of your blog, mainly because my views are the same as yours regarding the NWO and OWG/E. trend (aim?) of reducing the population.

There is something I find rather puzzling though, that doesn’t seem to fit in with the general trend

That is the Campaign in this country to encourage people to quit smoking. Most people are aware of the dangers of smoking, the Government is keen that people should stop. It seems to me that given the amount of money the treasury receives from tobaco sales i.e. a lot, plus the fact that smokers, if the figures are accurate, die earlier. It doesn’t make sense for the Government to actively promote an anti-smoking campaign, as it’s clearly a win win situation for them, if people keep on smoking. Or, am I missing something here?

Kind Regards,


A.  It’s all about control.  They want to create a society where the state decides what everyone does, and is seen to be doing so, so that further invasions of our right to free choice seem merely routine.  It’s not that smoking is being made illegal anyway.  It’s just that people are being made to to see smokers being shepherded around like cattle, and made to stand outside in all weathers.

Only passive smoking is being reduced.

They are able to increase rates of cancer and illnesses that accelerate dying even without the contribution of passive smoking, which is debatable as  to how great a carcinogen it is anyway. 

The primary reason that cancer is increasing is wrong diet and the lack of B17.  Heart disease is accelerating due to lack of magnesium.  If people ate enough of the right seeds and nuts, like ground linseeds, apricot kernels and almonds, rates of death would tumble.  Which is why health foods which could save millions of lives, are being made illegal under an EU ban.  The intention is that more people will die of cancer and heart disease.

Fluoride and other toxins are being fed into the water supply.  Vaccines are spreading experimental viruses, and nerve-killing mercury.  Food additives like aspartame are also known killers.

Who would suspect such things from a government that apparently cares enough about health, to force people to smoke out in the street?  All very cunning.  The science of depopulation is far more complex than you think.  All these effects are being carefully calibrated for their health outcomes, and for the purposes of ensuring the population doesn’t realise they are being targeted.

From Comments –

It wasn’t smoking that killed them.  It was the pharmaceutical products that claimed to be saving their lives.


Q2.  Dear Mr Tap,  Thank you for addressing my query regarding smoking and the Government’s position on it.

Yes, I am willing to accept your reply that it is indeed a control thing.  The sight of smokers having been herded like cattle
into draughty bus-shelter like arrangements is very telling.
I have been doing a bit of research into healthy natural foods.  In particular apricot kernels. It’s all a bit confusing, with some people saying they contain cyanide!  I guess what I want to know is:  Is the apricot kernel really safe to eat?  YES.

and if so, how much and how often, and what about the other source (the name of it escapes me at the moment) a derivative of ap. kernels, made in the USA, but later banned (for being too effective).

The derivative is Laetrile.  My mother has at least two kernels a day, and one laetrile.  She’s had skin cancer and various operations for it, a mastectomy for breast cancer, and was coughing with a patch on her lung.  It has since stopped bothering her, and her condition has improved.  Take the kernels as part of your daily diet, or ground up linseeds and make sure you eat others of the B17 bearing foods, of which there are over 1000 plants on the planet.  The cyanide only releases when it meets tumours.  

Salt is Sodium Chloride which has a chlorine molecule.    That doesn’t stop people eating salt.  Same goes for the cyanide in apricot kernels etc.  The cyanide does the tumour killing, and is used by the industry to put people off B17.  What would the medical profession be without cancer?
I have recommended your web-site to many people since I “discovered” it last year.  Many of those people have been appreciative
(like me) of the abundance of information it contains.
Finally, I would just assure you that I am not going to become an email pest to you.  I am sure you are a very busy man.

Kind Regards,

A.  I get a lot of good stuff sent in by readers, Gillian.  This is a recycling effort.  Only a fraction of the things on here are original thoughts.  I messed up the colours again!

Thank you very much for the info. re the above.  Most useful, it even got my husband’s attention!
Your poor mother, what a rough time of it she must have had.  Glad to hear she’s doing okay now.

A. That’s kind of you to think of it, Gillian.  She makes it out it’s all just a minor inconvenience.  I wish I’d read World Without Cancer a few years ago, but better late than  never.

The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.

3 Responses to “Q & A. Why Ban Smoking? Isn’t Depopulation The Aim Of The OWG? Etc”

  1. Stuart Fairney says:

    I can point to credible researchers who will tell you the whole passive smoking/cancer link is entirely imaginary

    I might be careful about B17 exposure if I were you however

  2. Tapestry says:

    Why avoid B17? You mean the Boeing version?

  3. Anonymous says:

    Champix and patches are the killers.
    Google Champix deaths.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.