Tuesday, 19 February 2013


Electronic perfumed cigars?  Lighten up!
by James Leavey


There are strong signs that Ireland is at last witnessing the green shoots of recovery after the fall of the Celtic Tiger.

Or maybe it's just the shamrock growers getting ready for St Patrick's Day (March 17 – you heathens!).

Whatever.  To me, it's just another great excuse to celebrate life with a fine cigar.

Talking of which, a fellow nicotine lover recently asked me why you rarely see a priest in an Irish cigar shop.

'That's because nobody under the age of 18 is allowed in,' I told him.

Talking of feckin' chancers, some of those shady companies trading in electronic cigarettes are thinking about extending their range to include perfumed electronic ciggies, and, God Help Us and Save Us, electronic fucking cigars.

Now here's the thing...it turns out these electronic devices that appear to simulate a smoke are more dangerous than the real thing.  It's that liquid nicotine they use to suck in smokers.

Besides, any tobacco that needs the addition of another flavour is, in my opinion, not worth igniting.

That includes those cheap cigarillos flavoured with all kinds of noisome shite.

Think about it...if the tobacco in  a cigar is good it doesn't need enhancing or ruining with something else.

And as most of the flavours suggested for electronic puffs or any other electronic alternative tobacco products, is sweet...they may appeal to young idiot potential smokers who have already been conned into serious boozing via alco-fucking-pops.

The fact is that most of those companies who have leapt onto the anti-smoking bandwagon don't actually want their customers to stop smoking.  They just want them to try and quit, and with this in mind sell them a piece of crap at vastly inflated prices.

It's cheaper and far better to smoke less by smoking better – so maybe it's time to switch to the occasional premium Havana instead of chain-smoking cheap tobacco.

Meanwhile, the anti-smoking lobby want to take over the smoking market but don't seem to be too bothered – unlike the tobacco companies they are trying to take down – to produce alternative smoking products that are actually safe to use.

As for electronic cigars...maybe they should only produce very wide girth, long versions into which they can insert a couple of AA batteries, turn them into vibrators, and stick them up their arse.

Now, for those of you who are serious dedicated cigar lovers like myself, may I suggest you turn your attention to some of the new cigars on the market and currently available from The DCE in Dublin, especially the Don Antonio premium long filler Dominican brand which comes in three tubed sizes: the Churchill, the Lonsdale, and, my absolute favourite, the delightfully smooth and  more-ish Don Antonio Robusto.

And the great thing is, it doesn't need batteries.


3 comments:

  1. Would it appeal to you if the NHS would charge real money for treating smoking related illnesses?
    I don't mind anybody smoking anything that is willing to burn but I only object to pay for the outcome.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks, Anon. You can relax...every smoker in the world pays extremely high taxes which more than pay for treating smoking related illnesses...and there's enough left over to prop up national health services everywhere. That's why very few governments have even considered a complete ban on the sale of smoking products, for the difference in taxes would have to be found elsewhere, such as on booze, fast food and other forms of personal fun and hobbies. In fact, if every smoker stopped buying tobacco for one week there would be a mass desperate outcry. As for objecting to paying for other people's pleasure, maybe you should think of extending this to all the people who drink too much, own and drive fast cars and bikes, indulge in dangerous sports, and drug addicts (the vast majority of whom don't pay any kind of tax on their habit). Personally, I object to my tobacco tax being used to keep anti-smokers healthy while they have the fucking cheek to insult total strangers - most of whom never light their tobacco in non-smoking areas.

    ReplyDelete
  3. In response to the Anon comment regarding the use of taxation revenue to fund public health services, and his disdain toward it being used on the possible health effects of smoking, two lines of thought apply: James is quite right, smokers do pay exorbitant tax rates which more than account for their "fair share" of the public sector deficit burden, so the pithy comment is unfounded. Secondly, and more appropriately, Why are taxes this high? Tobacco is an entirely legal good,yet we are overly stigmatized into feeling apologetic for so doing because the socialized costs that the original poster bemoans: The solution? Don't have a public health system, don't tax consumption, allow freedom to prevail, and I guarantee the anti-tobacco brigade will be crying out for our tax revenue within weeks when their NGO, Charity subsidies, Children's allowances, and social housing payments (and all those other things your average law abiding high tax paying Havana smoker do not benefit from) are not covered. Thanks James for your insightful & I'm sure, cigar smoke fueled posts every few weeks. The Don Antonio are lovely and smooth, another I would recommend to any discerning smoker is the in house blend Flying Pig corona size: The Piglet. Top quality.

    ReplyDelete