The European Union & It's Problems.

[BIAD]

When dealing with the shifty mainstream media and their continuing struggle to deliver neutral information,
disciplines that Journalists used to carry, are forgotten.

I don't work in the match business or know anyone in the manufacturing of matches.
But this type of word-smithing is something I've seen before.

Don't get me wrong, I think the whole set-up with the European Union is a controlling device in order to create
a super state like the US. A massive project involving a small selection of the people who deem themselves
superior to those who make up the population of the countries involved and wallow in the piles of money they
rake in through their ponzi scheme, the EU in a nutshell.

But this Express article is duplicitous in it's meaning, the fading-out of this type of match has gone on for quite
some time and in the United States, this product has already been discontinued due to it's ingredients involving
chemicals that shipping-companies deem hazardous.

Discontinued doesn't mean it's banned, the reasons can be many. The market may be low for such a product
or safety-regulations of transport can have a bearing, something called 'The Hazmat Surcharge' in the US.
It seems that the overall cost for match-makers was too much and so, let that particular product fall away.


An email about the realities of product-shipping.

Back to the EU and let's start in the 'cynical zone'!
If you were in the circles where influence could be applied to urge customers to purchase a type of product,
wouldn't you invest in the companies that created such products?
That's really all the many EU Commissions are about, steering people into accepting what they advise and
benefitting from the possible outcome.

However, that doesn't mean the true reason is about leading the masses by the nose in order to profit from
banning certain products.

In this particular case, the chemicals that go into manufacturing 'strike-anywhere' matches are classed as
dangerous and in today's volatile environment (one which I think the mainstream media are deliberately stirring
up!)... the chemicals can be a problem.

This could be nothing more than an alignment of regulations with the United States and nothing really to do with
a manufacturer's decision. If the product is seen as dangerous goods, think about transport, disposal of the materials
-before retail and after, the possible external negative uses of such chemicals and the overall costs involved.

But... the above doesn't sound sexy as a headline!
It's way of journalism today, they lie to the customer in the heading and then explain a watered-down truth in a lower
paragraph. It involves little investigatory skill and after receiving the EU directive via official websites, a saucy-little
outrage-piece like this can be knocked-up before you slip out to the cafe for your morning affogato.

They use the word 'ban' because it incites... and when you're angry, you just might buy tomorrow's paper to feed
that emotion that makes you feel strong. They are sneaky bastards, which is Latin for Journalists.