Wonder What The Reason Is? :)

E-mail from Andrea :-

From: Andrea Brooks
To: "nothing_2_declare@ymail.com"
Sent: Thursday, 14 June 2012, 14:05
Subject: Fw: Update?

Hi SH,
           I sent this and resent it a week later to Simon Clark about the removal of advice for crossborder shoppers on FOREST. He didn't reply and FOREST still has no advice up for shoppers.

Speaks for itself. doesn't it?

Andrea  xxx

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Andrea Brooks
To: "simon@forestonline.org"
Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2012 2:28 PM
Subject: Update?

Hello Simon,
                    do you remember giving me this reply?

Andrea, you are absolutely right, no excuses. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. We have deleted the relevant section and will update it shortly.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011 at 23:13 | Unregistered CommenterSimon

lt's now May 2012 and there is still no information on FOREST for cross border shoppers.


Rolls eyes


  1. Beats me why Andrea wants information from FOREST when all information required for cross border shoppers is displayed on N2D.ME
    Maybe a second opinion.

  2. I don't really have 'friends'- partly because every man I've ever called a 'friend' has almost instantly then gone and died on me, which fuels my 'Jonah' complex. But mainly I don't have 'friends' cos I'm just an anti-social git.

    However as far as I understand this whole 'friends' thing it works like this: if I know my friend is being ripped off or 'arse raped' to the tune of hundreds of pounds a month then, as his 'friend', I am duty bound to 1.tell him and 2. tell him how to avoid being conned in future- assuming I know.

    I think I have the basic theory right, yeah?

    Sooo why is our, we smokers, self professed friend FOREST not giving us the advice and help we need? UK Smokers are being ripped off to the tune of billions a year and I'd expect our friend to be telling all UK Smokers 'stop being ripped off- buy abroad. This is how to shop abroad/Go To N2D.Me'

    But apparently my 'friend' Simon thinks it is ok for UK Smokers to continue to be arsed fucked. For us to be despised, outlawed and persecuted at every turn AND THEN HAVE TO PAY FOR THE PRIVILEGE!

  3. Er, it's because N2D's aim and sole purpose is to get the information out to as many shoppers as possible.
    For example, Freedom2Choose arranged to put a link button to N2D on their home page, purely as a service to their own readers and members.

    1. My post would have made more sense had Blocked Dwarf not posted in between George's comment and my answer to George...

    2. Sorry Girl, like I said...'anti social':p Maybe SH can edit the posting times?

  4. Clark's ego stands in the way, that's the reason. All he has to do is what F2C have done but because it's N2D he refuses to do so. He'd rather thousands of x border shoppers get robbed than mention N2D.

  5. Simon Clark is, and always will be, a complete and utter bollock. If you don't suck up to him or you're not a celebrity he doesn't give a shit.

    He loves his jollies.

    Martin Davis

  6. Simon also now hides behind moderation of comments so he can get rid of dissenting comments. The lack of info from Forest for people buying their tobacco abroad is an f'ing disgrace.

  7. I asked Clark if Lembit Opik and Anthony Worall-Thompson would be on the up-coming boat trip and that I couldn't wait to meet them, since they have done so much for smokers civil liberties.

    He didn't publish the comment.

    Martin Davis

  8. I wonder if we are being rather hard on Forest? I think that we have to take into consideration that Forest is essentially a political body, and that maybe it would be better to let Simon Ckark get on with that aspect of the struggle against the Holy Zealots.

    Have we considered what ASH ET AL would do if Forest did link to N2D? They would have a field day, accusing Forest of 'promoting' smuggling etc. Of course, they would use words and phrases which only imply such actions so as not to be accused of lible.

    Having said that, I see no reason that Forest should not adivise travellers in the EU of their rights, and what they should carry as 'proof' of their honest intentions.

    1. Yeah that sounds right Junican, Clark is too scared of his beloved Arnott to tell people their rights. Thats their rights mind, not made up speculation but their rights. Has N2D ever asked to be linked to his sites? lf they have it's news to me. Clark should grow some but he wont. He's as much use as a choccy fireguard. He told Andrea he'd put up the advice so where the fuck is it?

  9. "Has N2D ever asked to be linked to his sites? "

    The very opposite is the case! SH has publically told Simon he doesn't want or expect a link-all SH wants is that *if* FOREST advises Shoppers of their rights then that information be accurate (it wasn't before) and that, perhaps, FOREST tell people that they can and should record the UKBA! FOREST however seems to prefer that UK Smokers who choose to shop abroad have their goods unjustly seized and their vehicles too.

    1. Voice and friend of the smoker! With friends like these who the fuck needs enemies? Forest should be done under the trades description act!

    2. I got so p*ss*d off with FOREST I set my own organization up FOREST2, the Freedom Organization for the Right to Enjoy Shopping for Tobacco Too. But now N2D.ME does it for me


  10. Successive governments have embraced the European Union, a free trade system in which we are encouraged to buy where goods (including tax) are cheapest.

    Buying tobacco in Europe is not a loophole, it's what the EU is for. There is nothing naughty or dodgy about it.

    Forest doesn't like it though.

    Forest is the voice and friend of the industry. There is some overlap with the interests of the smoker, but the industry will not allow Simon to dilute his influence by irritating the Goverment, unless it directly benefits his masters.

  11. It's about time N2D stopped this obsession about Simon clark, this childish squealing and crying because he won't listen to you is pathetic.

    Simon Clark only concern is the next rung on career ladder and his expenses account and wether the red carpet laid on for him at the next event reflects his importance.

    He dosen't smoke except for a couple once in a blue moon when he can't really avoid having one infront of V.I.P guests and then he worries he looks like a non smoker.

    stop visiting, stop posting on Taking Liberties, Simon hasn't achieved anything, he dosen't want to give good advice to the little man, he dosen't bother with any other blogs.

    Simon the media man aint going to be around for long and hopefully things might change then, but for now N2D stop trying to get him to give you credibilty becasue it appears you are desperate for it.

    1. So you're going to sit there and do nothing but hope that someday Simon will move on. FFS people like you piss me off. You openly admit that Simon does sweet fa for smokers but you wont do sweet fa about it either. Have you actually read this thread? N2D dont need credibility cos they already have it in bucket loads.They state they dont want links from Forest. Desperate for credibility my arse! People who dont know about N2D go to Forest for info but theres none there despite Simon promising to do it. l back N2D a 100% on highlighting this. How many people have been ripped off by Customs because of this? As l said the likes of you and Simon piss me off! You aint even got the guts to put your name so do one and take Simon with you.

    2. Are you a schizo anon 11.46?

  12. We don't seek credibility. Forest has a lot of media exposure, and funding. Ordinary people naturally go there for advice.

    If Forest used that funding to look after the smoker, we could stop doing all this unpaid work!

    If Forest ceased to exist, people would look elsewhere. Maybe find one of the many real support/info sites. Forest is actually an impediment. A decoy.

    Just my opinion. Many people whom I respect, disagree with me.

  13. I agree with one of the comments above. It is unreasonable to ask Forest to post such advice. Firstly, Forest is funded by the Tobacco Industry, which can't be seen to suggest UK smokers avoid tax by purchasing tobacco abroad and secondly, ASH would have a field day if Forest made such suggestions. It is unfortunate it is funded by the Tobacco Industry, but who else would pay?

    1. Firstly Jonathan, it is not avoiding tax, all taxes are paid as per EU regulations and directives. No-one has ever suggested that FOREST advise smokers to purchase their tobacco abroad ... only advise what the regulations are IF you do so.

      Secondly, what is unreasonable in saying something like :-

      "Please be aware that UKBA do not record the Excise interviews. lt is in your interests to record these interviews as is your right to do so.

      ln regards to signing their notebook to validate it's contents, l believe no solicitor in the land would advise their clients to do such a thing without legal representation."

      l'd bet my last penny that ASH wouldn't say a damn word.

  14. "No-one has ever suggested that FOREST advise smokers to purchase their tobacco abroad"

    I have done, do and will continue to do BUT-as I always try to make clear- I don't speak for N2D.me.

    Oh and Jonathan, it's UK Duty we avoid not 'tax'(although we then do avoid the UK Value Added Tax)and they are two very different animals.

    Further more FOREST has in the past openly supported Xchannel Shoppers -indeed Simon has claimed falsely that it was FOREST who got the MIL's raised and was prepared to take the loss resulting from pissing off their sponsors.

  15. Hi Guys. Thanks or your comments. I know there is nothing illegal or even immoral about paying the tax in a different part of the EU. That, though, is not how many will perceive it. Look what happens to people who use legal tax avoidance schemes. That's the point I was making.
    I didn't realise FOREST had changed tack on cross channel shopping. That is a little mysterious.

    1. I'd love for ASH to bring this up ... but they won't. Being afraid of what your adversaries might say means you've already lost in my view.


"In the eyes of the Tribunal the review letter contained several preconceptions, prejudgments and non-sequiturs"

"the absurdity of this reason is demonstrated by simply stating it"

"We therefore find that Mr Sked misdirected himself as to the Policy in carrying out the review and his decision is therefore one that no reasonable review officer could have arrived at."

... commonly known here at N2D as 'Skeds' ... that is to say these are Judges comments regarding UKBA Review Officer Ian Sked's reasons for rejecting peoples appeals against seizures.

Comments are now moderated to keep out spam and those with malicious intent. The author of this blog is not liable for the content of any comments ... period!