THE DEFEAT OF HIPPOCRATES - Added February 28, 2001 - 'So, in the name of universal well-being, in the race towards the crazy dream of a society of good men by decree, we have started butchering all those categories of people we do not like. In the name of civil rights, we have removed the enslavers and the tyrants of the past, and replaced them with a Vaseline-coated dictatorship, a condescending tyranny which, every day, emanates brand new racial laws: it is the Therapeutic State. It is health nazism. We are at the daily mercy of an "expertocracy". We chase these "wise ones" in the hope they will dictate the twelve tables of Utopia to us.'

BOISTEROUS DEMAND FOR CHOICE IN TOLEDO - Added February 28 - A spirited crowd voiced displeasure with the Toledo-Lucas Board of Health's plan to ban smoking in that county.  Tempers flared as ban proponents trotted out the phony claims of health hazards due to secondhand smoke that just aren't setting as well with people now that the scientific frauds are becoming well known by the general public.  The hearing provided a good example of how the smoking ban proponents are incapable of presenting any valid reason for intruding into the business affairs of property owners.

The health board may prevail in Toledo but it is clear that the free ride anti-tobacco has enjoyed is nearing an end.  A lie, no matter how big, is still a lie and eventually will be found out. 

GARBAGE IN - GARBAGE OUT IN TOLEDO - Added February 28 - [Dr. David Grossman's] machine-gun is filled with blanks that amount to noisy assertions designed to scare the public, but with no legal or medical substance to support his claims about the dangers of Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS)."

Grossman is the head of Toledo-Lucas Board of Health who seeks to wipe out smoking in Toledo.  The author of this piece, Neil McGregor, is a thorn in Grossman's side.  The McGregors of the world are feared by anti-tobacco because they know a scam when they see it and aren't afraid to demand proof that secondhand smoke is hazardous.  The more they ask, the more anti-tobacco dissembles and the more the ETS fraud becomes known. 

The researchers of this bilge are silent on why all the services are falling short in their recruitment efforts except the Marines which has no trouble attracting and keeping people.  The reporter also doesn't break down by service the number of smokers who are being discharged early.

The assembly-line of guilty pleas hit a snag when David Kjono pled not guilty.  Kjono says that, in his instance, the individual working with law enforcement presented him with a military identification card that appeared valid.  Court employees appeared startled with Kjono's not guilty plea but set a pre-trail date of March 9.  The Public Defender's Office doesn't represent people for this offence and the Hawaii statute has no affirmative defense.

The amount collected by the court for just four of these cases was $1,575 as some individuals were fined less than the $500.  On of those who pled guilty was a 17-year-old girl.

The Maui News February 18, 2001 issue reported that 10 clerks were cited in the January sting for selling cigarettes to 16 year-old girls.  The paper reports that clerks were nailed if they sold to the minor without making any effort to verify the age of the minor.  Fines begin at $500 for a first-time violation and range from $500 to $1,000 for a second offence.

The media's report, as usual, skimmed the surface of Maui's January sting, relying on Police Department press releases and quotes from anti-tobacco operatives.  None of the sting victims were interviewed, leaving their stories to be heard before the judge - if indeed, their stories are allowed to be heard.

One clerk caught up in the web is Dave Kjono, a convenience store employee.  According to Kjono at 10:30am on January 27, a young Asian woman entered the store and asked for a pack of Marlboro Lights.  Because she looked as if she could be under 18 years of age, Kjono demanded to see her identification.  Having been in the military himself, Kjono was familiar with the military dependant ID that the woman presented.  Additionally, as a new employee, he had recently undergone training on how to spot a phony ID.  He checked the quality of the lamination of the brown-colored ID, examined the photograph and looked for spelling errors.

"It looked like a valid ID so I sold her the cigarettes," Kjono says.

The instance the young women exited, a burly man entered, flashed his badge, identified himself as a detective and said, "You just sold cigarettes to a minor."

"No I didn't," Kjono replied.  "She has a valid military ID."

"I don't know what she showed you but she's a minor," said the detective.  "It's a done deal."

While the detective wrote the citation, Kjono continued helping customers.  When asked to sign the citation, Kjono asked to see the detective's identification and was refused.  Addressing the customers in the store Kjono asked them to be a witness to the detective's refusal to display his ID and that he was signing the citation under protest.  

Appearing disturbed by Kjono's non-subservient attitude, the detective was then joined by another police officer, a huge Hawaiian, who approached Kjono, glanced at the tattoos on his arms and said, "Nice tattoos, you'll do well in jail."

Jail is a real possibility since defending oneself on this charge appears problematic under Hawaii law.  Unlike many other states, Hawaii's statute regarding underage sales prohibits an affirmative defense.  Other states do allow such a defense, including California.  Common affirmative defenses include that the appearance of the minor buying tobacco was not what could be reasonably expected of a person under 18 years of age or that the identification offered by the minor was such that it be reasonably relied upon to determine majority of the purchaser.

In addition to being forbidden an affirmative defense, Kjono will be on his own in court.  Lacking the money to hire a lawyer himself, the Public Defender's office in Maui has informed Kjono that they do not have anyone available to handle that one particular offence.

Kjono suspects that by tying defendants' hands in such a way, the only option left is to plead guilty and pay the fine, thereby providing revenue to the state and the justification that stings are necessary for the public health thereby oiling the spigot that dispenses the grants to anti-tobacco special interests.

Kjono's hearing is today where he plans to plead innocent to the charges.

DRINKING DOWN, SMOKING UP - Added February 26, 2001 - According to this report, tobacco sales went up 14% in New Zealand -- despite a huge tax increase. NZ ASH director Trish Fraser said, "We were hoping there would be a drop, particularly with the huge increase in taxation last year." Really?... Despite the cartel's (including the WHO) crusade to raise tobacco taxes astronomically everywhere because it is said that this will stop people from smoking, the proof in NZ is that this propaganda is not true - not that we expected anything different. The deficient minds of the antismokers keep missing an important truth: robbing defenceless smokers does not mean that they believe antitobacco frauds. Thanks again, antitobacco mafia - and we mean that sincerely! As usual, you have increased our numbers. Keep up the good job. Perhaps one day there will be enough of us again to reach critical political mass, and then, it will be time to put all the antismoking con work under a magnifying lens. In that case, certainly new jails, and prosecutors, would be needed all over the world.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? - Added February 26 - Anti-tobacco goons are pressuring city and state government throughout the country to enact smoking bans on private property.  The targets are bars and restaurants where resistance to smoking bans are most intense.  The goons present studies and surveys that claim smoking bans don't damage the finances of restaurants and bars.  As proof, they present California where smoking has been banned in restaurants since 1995 and in bars since 1998.  They contend that bans don't hurt business and in fact are welcomed by establishments because their non-smoking clientele increases.  To no one's surprise anti-tobacco is lying.

From San Diego Country comes more evidence that smoking does reduce customers.  Bars in the county risk fines to cater to smokers so the powers-that-be are now charging the defiant owners with engaging in unfair business practices.  Allowing smoking brings in the crowd while banning smoking puts bars out of business.  In a classic, an effective, divide and conquer strategy, Big Health is turning bar owner against bar owner.

What would stop the financial bleeding would be a concerted and cooperative refusal of all bars and restaurants to refuse to comply with a law that is unconstitutional and wildly unpopular with patrons.

In a related story, Santa Barbara has allocated increased funds to beef-up the smoke police in that city.  Apparently even that upscale city is filled with people who want to have a smoke with their drinks and establishments that want to cater to their needs.  If banning smoking is so good for business, why is there still massive non-compliance of the smoking law into its sixth year?

WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE... - Added February 23 - Two smokers have joined Racine's (WI) new Tobacco Free Coalition. Their aims are to make sure that smokers aren't railroaded without representation, a laudable goal but you've got to wonder when they say things like:

"A lot of people who've smoked for a long period of time are embarrassed by this habit," she said. "We shouldn't be made to feel ashamed of our addiction."  

Weidner made the comment after one member of the coalition suggested that smokers should be viewed in the same light as someone who spits on a sidewalk.

With representation of this sort who needs enemies!

Edward Sweda of the Tobacco Control Resource Center took up the challenge and submitted his evidence to the New Bedford resident who pens his response in South Coast Today. 

What delights us is that people throughout the country are catching on that the emperor has no clothes.  The secondhand smoke scam is slowly but surely unraveling as intelligent and skeptical people from all walks of life examine the studies and pronounce them inconclusive. 

SMOKING RATES UP  - Added February 22 - The upswing in smoking that is taking place in the United States has crossed the Atlantic.  Smoking rates are up in the United Kingdom despite the propaganda spewed by the Tony Blair government and anti-tobacco pressure groups.  As in America, there appears to be a direct correlation between strident hectoring by the nannies and rebellion against an ethos that attempts to stamp out an innocuous pleasure.

It's telling that BBC News, which reports the upswing, is so in the pocket of the anti-tobacco enterprise that it is incapable of providing any meaningful analysis of the trend and insults the reader by rehashing the same old scare tactics that the public obviously doesn't buy.

The media is chronically behind the times and could become more up to date by ingesting the old chestnut about how you can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time but never all of the people all of the time.

Bob Jobin, an owner of a diner in Mesa, Arizona is a walking repudiation to the mendacious claim that banning smoking is good for business.  Jobin lost $75,000 when he adhered to the city's ban on smoking in restaurants.  The figure is not pulled out of a hat or concocted with statistical models.  It is the amount a law abiding American lost when anti-tobacco convinced the politicians in Mesa that their citizens were too ignorant to make their own decisions and choices.  Fortunately for Jobin, the Mesa law contains a provision that allows restaurant owners to allow smoking if they can prove that enforcing the ban causes them to loose business.

Since Mesa's law went into effect, the Environmental Protection Agency's secondhand smoke report, the basis on which the Mesa law was justified, has been ruled a fraud by a federal judge.  A well known anti-tobacco operative's study that claimed there is no financial hardship when smoking bans are put in place has also been revealed as a flawed and wildly deceptive piece of propaganda.

Still, the bans still move forward.  Smoking will never be eliminated and smoking in restaurants, bars and other private property will eventually resume.  Until then, businesses must never forget that anti-tobacco's seizure of private property has nothing to do with health.  Whether restaurants or other businesses go out of business is irrelevant to the operatives who make big salaries bullying the taxpayers and producers of this country.

An inaccuracy in this report by The Washington Post must be noted.  The story states that the smoking was banned in Mesa by the residents of that city.  This is untrue.  The ban was imposed by the city council.  An attempt to overturn the ban through a referendum was unsuccessful although the smoking ban was subsequently watered down due to a public outcry.

In a deal that has important political ramifications, 11 anti-tobacco law firms have converted $12-billion in future legal fees, awarded by the tobacco settlement, into a $301-million wad of current, cold cash.  The lawyers may be foregoing a large chunk of their ill-gotten gains but by taking an early payment they ensure they have the seed money to derail any legislative attempt to curb their rapaciousness and greed.

This deal is also an admission that overturning the tobacco settlement is a real possibility.  Should that occur, institutional investors will now forfeit the billions that will be paid over 12 years.

In addition to fighting all tort reform, the lawyers plan to use their money to finance assaults against segments of American business and even against the citizens themselves.  One of the law firms is exploring the possibility of suing the country on behalf of the descendants of slaves.

The obscene greed and rapaciousness will only end when politicians develop a backbone and clip these vultures' wings.

The activist board of health, under the direction of Health Commissioner David Grossman and prodded by the usual anti-tobacco suspects, began proceedings last September to impose a California-type ban on the county.  Grossman disagrees with the councilman and argues that his health board, under its own authority, has the right to ban smoking countywide.  He further argues that permitting each elected body in the county vote on the smoking ban would create chaos and a confusing patchwork of regulations from city to city.

Uh, Dr. Grossman.  That's the way our government works.  It's very distressing for the Health Reich to be confronted from time to time with democracy.  How much easier it would be if boards of health reigned supreme and could save us all from ourselves by using brute force.  Fortunately for the residents of Toledo-Lucas County, the people's representatives are standing up to the ideologues and bullies on the board of health.

Preparing children for the future: antitabacco, junk science, and fingerprints SCHOOLS USE FINGERPRINT SCAN

Added February 22 - Heaven forbid we let the children learn responsibility. And by all means, get them used to this system while they are young, then it will become common and acceptable to them. All in the name of security, efficiency, and health - what more can we desire?

This study could well be garbage -- the term "environment advocacy group" coupled with the University of California is quite often a clue that special interest mischief-making is in progress -- but possible junk science is not relevant to this story from the Los Angeles Times.  The relevant portion of this story is the response to this possible hazard from unnamed "health experts".

Midway through the story, the reporter inserts a sentence that reveals much about the Los Angeles Times,  the mainstream's rabid anti-tobacco advocacy and the health establishment's diminishing credibility.

"Health experts say other pollution sources, such as secondhand tobacco smoke, pose a greater hazard to children, and they note that lung cancer is rare in children."

Not only is there no evidence that secondhand tobacco smoke poses any hazards to anyone, including children, but by what twisted standard is tobacco smoke, the result of burning plants, ever equated to the burnt residue of fossil fuels?  Why is tobacco smoke worse than marijuana smoke?  Why is tobacco smoke worse than burning leaves?  Why are the infinitesimally small amounts of tobacco smoke considered deadly to kids but clouds of diesel smoke are not?

The answer appears by following the money.  Billions of dollars are appropriated by the multitude of anti-tobacco rackets.  The only justification for this extraordinary expenditure of public funds is to convince the taxpayers that secondhand smoke is the only hazard facing society.  Just as the "sick building" syndrome increased when smoking was banned indoors, so kids choking on soot are not at risk because they are sheltered from even the glimpse of a smoking cigarette.

Anti-tobacco is the real smoke screen.  To enrich the racketeers, every real problem facing children is subordinate to protecting them from tobacco smoke. 

How quickly they forget!  From Connecticut comes an example of arrogance of a representative whose memory has been wiped clean of all the promises he made to the citizens of his state.  A voter, concerned about the avalanche of anti-smoker bills burying Hartford wrote to Senator Sullivan seeking some simple assistance:

Now let's see.  Kevin Sullivan is the author of a bill that prohibits smoking in restaurants.  Unless he received a vision from on high prodding him to take this action, he must base his legislation on some presumed public good.  A resident of his state who will be negatively affected by his legislation asks for some information on the bill and is directed to some web sites maintained by pressure groups.  One would justifiably wonder just what the citizens of Connecticut get for their votes and the tax money they send to Hartford to keep Senator Sullivan ensconced in state.

To be fair, Senator Sullivan may be directing inquiries to the real source of the legislation.  Of course no one voted for the American Lung Association or The American Cancer Society although they and the other special interest groups that originated the anti-smoker legislation do seem to be running Connecticut.

ANTI-KID LAW SQUELCHED - Added February 9, 2001 - Anti-tobacco's tack from the mid-1990's on has been to cloak its anti-American agenda in clouds of pious rhetoric proclaiming that what it does is beyond reproach because it is "for the children".  The results, unsurprisingly, of the perpetual anti-tobacco campaigns have been solidly anti-children.  Valuable school time is wasted by duplicitous tirades against smoking, children are encouraged to turn against their smoking parents and hysteria over non-existent risks have been whipped up.  Anti-tobacco is responsible for suicides and sadistic punishment.

Anti-tobacco operatives bully state legislatures to crack down on smoking teenagers by levying fines, expelling them from school and, the latest, by confiscating their drivers' licenses.  California and Florida now show their love for children by taking their licenses away for having a smoke and such a law was introduced in Utah by a fanatic who believes he is ordained to raise other people's kids.  To the credit of his fellow legislators, this ridiculous law was killed before it made it out of committee.  Good news for parents, bad news for anti-tobacco.

DISRESPECT FOR THE VETS - Added February 8, 2001 - 'On the other hand, there is an enormous PR issue when a town is trying to take rights away from individuals who fought to protect our rights and freedom.'' 

One unexamined aspect of anti-tobacco is that the ideology that motivates the true believers is antithetical to the principles upon which this country was founded.  With rare exceptions, those who clamor for smoking bans, high tobacco taxes and hardball litigation against the cigarette manufacturers are people who have a profound contempt for the United States, its history and the constitution.  On any given issue, with the glaring exception of abortion, they come down on the side of government control on individual behavior.  Many of them are products of the 1960's intellectualism that denigrated property rights, individual responsibility, the work ethic and rationality.  Above all they disdain the generation that preceded them.

They have transported their frat house B.S. sessions to the seats of power.  As the current ruling class they are hell bent on snuffing out the remnants of true individuality, real choice and liberty.  It's no coincidence that the first American president to demean the office by preaching anti-tobacco was the draft-dodging Bill Clinton.  

In Marblehead, Massachusetts we have the sad spectacle of the America haters trashing the men who went to war to make this country safe for those who now spit in their faces.  

The health department banned smoking in Marblehead last April.  The ban included the bar at the local Veterans of Foreign Wars club and a fine was issued when a customer was "caught" smoking.  The president of the club, Richard Russo, a non-smoker, refused to pay the fine and was set to move ahead with a challenge when a decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Court derailed his plan.

The Supreme Court a few weeks ago ruled in favor of the Health Board of Barnstable which had imposed a smoking ban.  This ruling means that un-elected boards of health throughout the state are now free to do as they wish.  It doesn't take a crystal ball to prognosticate that before long smoking will be banned everywhere in Massachusetts.  Boards of Health have become a favored perch for the 60's alumni who now are in the position to impose their utopian vision of total control.

In the ensuing outcry over the disrespect shown to the veterans, Marblehead dropped its charges against Russo but he isn't happy.

"We're not supposed to be police officers.  We're not supposed to be Big Brother.''

You are correct, Mr. Russo.  You are not Big Brother but you are expected, as are we all, to obey Big Brother and enforce his will even if it means ejecting an 80-year-old D-Day survivor out into the snow for the crime of smoking a cigarette.

TOBACCO COMPANY WINS SUIT - Added February 8, 2001 - A South Carolina jury rejected a claim that a major cigarette manufacturer is liable for the death of a smoker.  The suit had been brought on behalf of a man who died of cancer in 1999.  The plaintiffs' attorneys are a firm of lawyers who are major players in tobacco suits.

Tobacco business analysts note that this win continues a trend of tobacco company wins.  The industry has won 17 of 21 cases since 1996, an excellent record for any industry.  Since the suits against the tobacco industry are by their nature fraudulent, the industry should consolidate its winning position by aggressively pursuing legal redress against the myriad of special interest groups who whip up anti-tobacco sentiment in order to share in potential settlements with the industry.  Anti-tobacco is the same as any other organized crime syndicate with one important difference.  The thugs who shakedown building contractors or neighborhood saloon owners don't kid themselves or the public that they are in the rackets for the good of society.  

THE NANNY AWARDS - Added February 6, 2001 - Guest Choice has announced the Nanny Awards for the year 2000 and what a crew they honor.

Our favorite anti-tobacco maniac, Alfred Muller, didn't win the top prize but we are thrilled to see he won the prize for Public Disservice.  Perhaps the good mayor of Friendship Heights can use this award as a character reference in his upcoming trail for sexually assaulting a 14-year-old boy.

LEGACY LIES STRIKE A RAW NERVE - Added February 5, 2001 - What exactly do you and your bunch of anti-cigarette, police-state nut cases want done with the tobacco companies? Should we nuke 'em?

The American Legacy Foundation's anti-tobacco ads are raising the ire of all sorts of people.  From the Arkanas Democrat-Gazatte comes a caustic rant from Pat Lynch who is mighty peeved that the ALF invaded his home during the Super Bowl.  Mr. Lynch represents the majority of American citizens who have no reason to doubt the anti-tobacco propaganda he has been fed for years but rightly realizes that what he is being fed is objectionable swill.

To answer his preceding question.  The ALF is supposed to "educate" the public about smoking.  Since the anti-tobacco cartel has come up with no new facts about tobacco that Grandma didn't know, the only direction the ads can take is to demonize the industry that makes ALF possible.

Mr. Lynch would be more angry if he knew that the American Legacy Foundation receives $290-million per year for five years for anti-tobacco education targeting young people.  In addition they receive $25 million per year for 10 years for who knows what.  Perhaps luxurious digs, extravagant trips and huge salaries.  This enormous wad of cash comes from the tobacco industry which raised cigarette prices to pay for the ALF.  

Further angering him would be the composition of the American Legacy Foundation.  On the board are Steven Schroeder, chairman of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Lonnie Bristow of the American Medical Association.  The AMA is heavily funded by RWJF, which is the largest stockholder of the huge pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson.  Another member of the board is Mitch Zeller, a stooge of former FDA Director David Kessler.  Zeller owes his appointment to his work in the Food and Drug Administration investigating the tobacco industry.  Zeller also has close ties to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the wonderful folks who harangue the public for eating movie popcorn, consuming coffee, indulging their tastes for Mexican, Chinese and Italian food.  Quite a cast of nannies and drug company operatives, each supported lavishly by the tobacco industry and its customers.

WYOMING SNUBS TAX INCREASE - Added February 5, 2001 - Congratulatory cheers are in order for the Wyoming State Legislature.  By a narrow vote the Revenue Committee voted against sending a cigarette tax increase to the floor.  Bipartisan opposition killed the bill which was supported by the American Cancer Society.  

Two laughable comments came from the ACS operative and the legislator pushing the tax increase.  Rep. Jane Warren-Democrat, claimed that smokers supported the tax as an inducement to quit smoking, while Barbara Melin of the ACS, countering arguments that the tax would hurt fixed-income senior citizens, said that for the most part smokers don't live to be that old.

Oh really, Barbara?  If smokers don't live to be that old, why are most of the oldest people on the planet smokers?  Why do most of the "400,000 people killed by cigarettes" live well past average life expectancy?

Unmentioned by the story is the fact that right next door to Wyoming is the state of Utah where the major metropolitan area is an hour or so from the cheap smokes.  Caravans of Utah smokers fed up with that state's high tobacco taxes are are major boost to economies of border towns like Evanston.

Wednesday Muller turned himself in to the Washington, D.C. police after being charged with sexual abuse involving a juvenile.

According to the warrant for his arrest, Muller grabbed the privates of a 14-year-old boy in a bathroom at the National Cathedral.  The boy was able to identify Muller from a picture of the mayor from a recent issue of People magazine.

The People article was a story about Muller and his attempt to ban smoking in Friendship Heights.

Trial is set February 21, one week after a hearing on the legality of Muller's outdoor smoking ban law.

THE BIG LIE EXPOSED - Added February 1, 2001 - When New York City first passed its smoking ban law in 1994 anti-tobacco had a big advantage that it no longer enjoys.  Few people knew then that the Environmental Protection Agency's report on secondhand smoke was a sham.  The ignorance then in operation is a thing of the past as knowledge of the secondhand smoke lie has become widespread.

Sidney Zion has nailed Peter Vallone, the councilman who wants to expand the smoking ban, very well in this article from the New York Post. 

SILLY ADS - Added February 1, 2001 - The big time for advertising is the annual Super Bowl in January.  Last Sunday viewers not only watched the game but also were presented with the most expensive advertising spots on television.  The average 30 second spot cost $2.3-million.

Most of the spots were selling products but this year viewers were treated to anti-smoking advertisements presented by the American Legacy Foundation, the outfit set up by the tobacco settlement.  Super Bowl viewers gave a resounding thumbs down to the Legacy ads which demonstrates that the American public is not as stupid as anti-tobacco believes.  Despite the bad reviews by real people, advertising industry types will most likely give the Legacy ads some sort of award.  The ad industry knows what side its bread is buttered on.  Government accounts are highly desirable since effectiveness is not a criterion for the spending of public money.