Landmark seeks documents relating to the involvement of outside groups in regulatory actions taken by the EPA.

Observers of the EPA and Carol Browner are not surprised that the agency ignored an order not to erase evidence documenting the influence of special interest groups.  It was under Carol Browner that the EPA cobbled together its report declaring that secondhand tobacco smoke is carcinogenic.  The anti-tobacco enterprise was the instigator in persuading the EPA to violate its own standards and methodology to produce the results that have been the basis of all the smoking bans in the United States and Canada.  The report has been ruled a fraud by a federal judge in 1998.

Under Carol Browner, the EPA was a tool of the special interests and a close examination of its internal records is long overdue.  The destruction of incriminating records is a part and parcel of the EPA's records of disinformation.

The ailment is shyness, described by the Post as a "debilitating social anxiety".  The treatment is a wonder drug called Luvox, or Voice (vox) of Love.  Aldous Huxley, author of "Brave New World", a prescient look at social engineering and societal drugging gone amok, would have been hard pressed to coin a more absurd appellation.  From the story:

• Psychiatric illness supposedly afflicts 10 percent of U.S. children

• Symptoms include: shyness; not wanting to go to school or sleep alone; worrying about a test at school

• 575,000 children have been diagnosed with "anxiety disorders", 136,000 of them under 10 years of age

• 390,000 children have been put on drugs such as Zoloft, Paxil and Prozac, 89,000 of them under 10 years of age

Although the symptoms  would have been described as an integral part of childhood behavior a few years ago, the pharmacartel and its psychiatric/therapeutic shills have turned childish behavior into a disorder that justifies the horrific numbers of kids on tranquilizers.  Note that Ritalin users are not included in these tabulations.

Mark Riddle, a mouthpiece for Big Drugs and author of the study, says, "We don't want a Prozac nation.  We want to make sure we are not doing anything to harm youngsters. On the other hand, it can be a huge disservice to children to minimize the true significance of psychiatric impairments that do require treatments. It's the latter that can get lost in the very easy and popular position to take, which is 'Don't drug our kids.' "

The above numbers demonstrate that "Don't drug our kids" is hardly a popular position in a country where parents are so panic stricken by orchestrated hysterias that so many of them are willing to feed their kids pills in order to keep the drug company profits rolling in.

A better assessment is provided by psychiatrist and Ritalin critic Peter Breggin who describes the Luvox study as part of an "old boys' network of drug pushers."

“A discrete-time hazard model is used to assess the impact exogenous covariates have on adolescent’s probability of starting smoking. The dependent variable is known as the starting hazard. The starting hazard can be defined as the probability that an individual starts smoking in a given time period conditional on not having smoked in any previous wave of data. This probability is modeled using weighted dichotomous probit equation in all model specifications. The weights are used to account for the over-sampling of high-risk individuals in the sample. In addition, to account for the correlation among multiple observations on an individual subject a Huber/White robust method of calculating the variance-covariance matrix is used. The robust estimator relaxes the assumption of independence of observations by allowing the observations to be independent across individuals, but not independent within an individual.”

It goes without saying that technical matters require technical terminology but what health reporter for any of the media that is hyping this study is willing to wade through this verbal morass to verify that these utterances are anything other than gobblygook?  If any are so inclined, the study can be accessed on line.

Most legal analysts find no merit in the government's case and theorize that former President Clinton urged the suit as a last ditch effort to imprint himself upon the so-called war on tobacco.  Prior to announcing the suit, the Justice Department had consistently advised Clinton that filing the suit would be a waste of time and money but he prevailed upon former Attorney General Janet Reno to take legal action.

A dismissal of this suit would be an end to the deplorable harassment of an American industry by the U.S. government.  At one time the Clinton Justice Department was conducting six criminal investigations against the cigarette manufacturers.  After millions of dollars spend, Justice very quietly wrapped up the investigations and issued a statement, ignored by the media, that no criminal activity had been found.  As those criminal investigations were groundless, so too is the federal lawsuit an example of special interest corruption of the American legal system.

"We oppose turning tobacco settlement funds into tax breaks," said Ralph DeVitto, a senior vice-president for the American Cancer Society.

Operatives such as DeVitto issue press releases and take out expensive television ads to misinform the public about what the tobacco settlement means to Florida.  The settlement was an agreement between the cigarette manufacturers and the State of Florida in which the industry reimburses the state for the cost of medical care for sick smokers.  Leaving aside the obvious problems of such a deal by which the industry was denied any defense and in which no proof that smoking cost the state anything, the results of the settlement are clear.  The state can use the money as it sees fit.

The anti-tobacco enterprise wants most of the money for itself.  In private communications, operatives constantly refer to the billions of dollars as "our money" and ever since the settlement went into effect have waged a holy war against those politicians brave enough to withstand the vitriol dished out.  Despite their threats and intimidation, it is an undeniable fact that the funds from the tobacco settlement are "public money" and should be used to benefit the public rather than filthy rich special interest groups like the American Cancer Society. 

Because there is no evidence to back up the bans, anti-tobacco must manufacture the excuses to push through the agenda of prohibition.  With millions of dollars anti-tobacco has purchased the PR to repeat the lies and influence the population.  Sounds grim but lies always are exposed.

Sidney Zion, a New York City columnist but essentially a layman on this issue, compiles a list of the lies and presents them to a public that will eventually realize they have been had.

This development is good news for Montana taxpayers and parents.  Wherever special anti-tobacco education programs have been enacted teen smoking rates have risen dramatically.  In addition to its failure rate, anti-tobacco programs are fiscally irresponsible and prone to cronyism.  It appears that the failure of California's and Massachusetts' anti-tobacco education programs are giving other state's legislatures a good lesson on what not to do with tax dollars.

The governor claims the tax is needed to adequately fund public education.  Many legislatures appear dubious of that claim and believe that money can be found elsewhere for education spending increases.

Stephen O'Connell was 85 years old.

A VICTORY IN IOWA - Added April 18 - A win for the good guys when a federal judge stuck down the provision in a state law that forbade stores from giving away cigarettes.  The law, which banned giveaways and promotion gimmicks such as two packs for the price of one, was written by anti-tobacco operatives for the sole purpose of harassing business owners and their customers.

The state's argument before the judge lacked any rationale for the ban and boiled down  to "we pass such laws because we can".  The judge disagreed and ruled in favor of the store owners who contended that federal law precluded the state from enacting tobacco advertising restrictions.

Unfortunately, another part of the law which creates a commission to sponsor anti-tobacco advertising has not been challenged.  Of the two issues the creation of a ministry of propaganda is by far more sinister. 

These two businessmen have the right idea.  A compromise with the devil is never a smart idea.  Stick to your guns.  Your business is private property into which the public is FREE to enter.  The Smokeless Coalition and the city of Lubbock have no right to dictate your smoking policies unless they are willing to outlaw the use of tobacco within the city limits.

Poor Delaware, saddled with a representative so out of touch that he hasn't kept current on anti-tobacco's talking points.  Senator David McBride is several years behind and needs to be presented with a newspaper dated July of 1998 describing how a federal judge vacated the Environmental Protection Agency's contention that cigarette smoke is a Class A carcinogen.  Anti-tobacco's new tack is that smoking must be banned because government can do so.  No valid reason is needed.

Delaware, a small but generally civilized state, is poised to exchange civility for the upheaval that passes for society in benighted locations such as California.  McBride's bill is the usual almost absolute ban that brings ruin to restaurants and other small businesses.  The good news is that McBride expects opposition.  On that he is correct.

Norman Lockman doesn't know much about the issue but as a "man-in-street" commentator his views are very important  indeed.  He certainly has it right that smoking bans are a backdoor effort to ban tobacco.  He also is able to discern the absurdity in  public health effort that has nothing to do with real public health.

"This is what happens when you smoke," Capt. Rob Pankiw, drug demand reduction administrator with the Delaware National Guard's Counterdrug Task Force, told a gaggle of wide-eyed adolescents in Dover."

In reality the lung that was exhibited to a bunch of children during a tobacco hate session once belonged to a pig that had been injected on purpose with various carcinogens.  Not too concerned with truth is Captain Pankiw which makes him a typical member of the anti-tobacco brigade.  Because their anti-smoking ideology is impossible to support with science, logic or rational argument, anti-tobacco is reduced to lying and over-the-top emotionalism.  It's nice to see one of them caught in a lie but it's mighty discouraging that the liar, rather than being abashed, is quite proud of himself.

"We need a financial incentive to encourage Americans to take care of themselves," says Kenneth H. Cooper, a candidate for Surgeon General.

Those who keep their weight down, lower their cholesterol and blood pressure and, of course, stop smoking would receive tax deductions up to $1,000.  What would happen to the concept of equal taxation for all citizens has not yet been addressed by the good doctor.  Cooper also has some other great ideas on how to intrude Big Mother into all aspects of our lives.

These include offering tax breaks for companies that offer "wellness" programs,  force-feed students vegetables and fruits, and more regulations for the vitamin and diet industries.  Just what this country needs, more rules and regulations!

It's time to eliminate the Surgeon General position.  After the embarrassing antics of C. Everett Koop and Jocelyn Elders, what little dignity and utility that was once attached to the office evaporated long ago.

Tonight the investigative program "Frontline" on PBS takes a cautious look at Ritalin.  It is not surprising that despite the explosive subject matter -- kids, drugs, money and the dubious validity of the ailment treated -- this examination of Ritalin is brought to us by the Public Broadcasting System rather than the three commercial networks.  A cursory tabulation of the prescription ads on ABC, CBS and NBC reveals the financial dependence of the networks on drug money.  

Despite the indifference shown by the politicians and the mainstream media, private individuals are questioning whether the ailment treated by Ritalin is real.  Several legal actions and congressional inquiries have been instigated.  The Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology has information that can supplement "Frontline's" examination of Ritalin.

Consult your local television listings for the time of the "Frontline" program.

It's the national lottery.  Shysters whip up the hysteria and greed of people who want something for nothing and to court they go and go and go.  Every item we purchase contains a hidden cost of a potential or settled lawsuit.  Playgrounds have been neutered because school districts fear legal action.  Companies go broke, jobs are lost and the people have contempt for the law.  The only winners are the lawyers.

The restaurants of Duluth, the largest city with a smoking ban, report that business is down and several City Council Members are looking into modifying the law. The Duluth News Tribune provides some unbiased coverage on the issue.  Of those quoted, only the professional, highly paid anti-tobacco operatives are in favor of smoking bans.

Below is a summary of Minnesota smoking ban efforts:

What David Bowie hadn't noticed was that he was smoking in an area where smoking is prohibited.  He didn't notice because he doesn't have to.  He's a celebrity.  In case no one has noticed, smoking bans are for the middle class.  The poor people can smoke because the health police dare not enforce the smoking bans in the bad parts of town.  The rich and famous can smoke because they can do anything.

To her credit, actress Natasha Richardson is working to derail the desire of a few New York City politicians to impose a California-type ban in that city.  More power to her but it will be cold comfort to the millions of New Yorkers who may be thrown into the streets that Miss Richardson and her friends won't really be affected by any ban the anti's can thrown New York's way.

This change in policy is an excellent example of business working directly with the people who count, the customers, rather than the professional anti-tobacco agitators.  People who objected to the no smoking policy let Renaissance know that they would take their business elsewhere unless the cruise line made all passengers welcome.  Renaissance responded positively and deserves credit for its smart move.

Thank you, Renaissance Cruises, for listening to us.

AHA'S DEMANDS FOR MORE MONEY FALL FLAT - Added April 6 - The west coast edition of The New York Times, March 28, was graced by a full page advertisement taken out by the American Heart Association.  In it AHA demands that Governor Gray Davis increase funding for anti-tobacco education by $105-million per year.  The funds are already in the state, coos AHA, courtesy of the tobacco settlement and what better use could they be put to but to pay for more of the wonderful programs brought to you by the American Heart Association?

In its reasons for increasing anti-tobacco funds, AHA states that its education has saved 59,000 lives from heart attacks alone between 1989 and 1997.  Considering the programs AHA touts only began in 1989 we are asked to believe that hundreds of thousands quit smoking upon viewing the first anti-smoker ad during the first year of the program.  So sure of itself, in fact, is AHA that it is not ashamed to admit that after an initial decline in adult smoking rates, matched, by the way, with corresponding decreases in states having NO anti-tobacco programs, the quit rate in California has "stalled" at 16.7% to 18.6%.  Since the anti-tobacco ads have been an ubiquitous staple on California television and radio since 1989, AHA's admission that the decline in adult smoking has halted is quite a candid admission of failure.

Looking more closely at the stall rates, it seems fair to ask AHA why there is a span of 2 percent between the two figures.  If AHA doesn't know how many people smoke, despite the millions of dollars devoted to anti-tobacco research, it would seem an investment of public funds into yet more dollars for research and education has every sign of being a bad business decision.  

AHA and its buddies told the state that in 1994 the percentage of adult Californians who smoke was 18%, therefore the statewide smoking ban set to go into effect in 1995 wouldn't affect all that many people.  The ban would also prompt people to quit smoking.  Taking the lower percentage of 16.7, AHA can argue that its prognosis was correct but taking the higher percentage of 18.6, AHA has egg on its face.

In 1999, the cigarette tax rose by 50 cents per pack.  Almost immediately AHA announced that the price increase had reduced smoking rates.  If taking the 16.7 rate it seems that AHA is correct but again, using AHA's figure of 18.6, AHA is wrong.

With every anti-smoker action taken AHA predicts declining smoking rates yet even its own figures indicate otherwise.  AHA has a track record of either failure or incompetence in counting.  AHA is incapable of presenting any credible evidence to Governor Davis that more funds spent on anti-tobacco education will reduce the smoking rate in California to 10%, as AHA promises to do by the year 2006, if the state shuffles hundreds of millions to the coffers of AHA and its associates.  If the American Heart Association's promises had come true over the past 10 years the smoking rate would already be 10% or less.  Does anyone remember SmokeFree 2000?

In the ad AHA glosses over anti-tobacco's failure to reduce smoking rates by casting blame upon the tobacco industry's advertising practices.  Perhaps AHA hasn't noticed that television and radio are clogged with anti-tobacco messages yet not one tobacco ad has been on those media for decades.

A cigar explodes in the American Heart Association's face when Californians are asked to support its effort to plunder public funds.  So caught up in its narrow, self-serving agenda, AHA seems unaware that California is undergoing an energy crisis.  

Governor Davis delivered a speech to California eight days after the AHA ad appeared.  In it he listed the problems, various solutions and a call for Californians to pull together to weather the energy crisis.  Since the crisis began, the state's surplus has disappeared, a major energy utility has declared bankruptcy and the rolling blackouts are projected to be widespread during the hot summer months.  Higher utility bills will be the order of the day and companies are beginning the exodus to states where power is reasonably priced and reliable.

The American Heart Association's demand for more public money is not likely to be persuasive for Californians sweltering in a blacked out house wondering where they are going to get the money to pay their energy bills.

It was in Miami in 1997 that the big cigarette manufacturers coughed up $300-million to settle a class action suit brought on behalf of flight attendants by a pair of ambulance chasers.  At the time the tobacco companies were clearing up all the mine fields of litigation prior to entering into the so-called tobacco settlement.  The industry's capitulation on the secondhand suit was the most spectacularly short-sighted action they had ever taken and a blow to everyone of their customers.

Now that the tobacco settlement is secure, for now, the industry will fight the individual secondhand suits.  There certainly will be more of them.  The industry will win some and lose some.  These malicious suits will continue until "Big" Tobacco lives up to the adjective and begins crushing its opponents starting with the well-financed anti-tobacco "activists".

Now that the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has invested heavily in anti-tobacco and persuaded people who should know better that tobacco is highly addictive, even after just one smoke, the addiction scam is now paying off.  A high school in Portland casually admits that it is passing out nicotine patches and gum to students who smoke.

"It's only when they make the effort to quit that they realize how difficult it is, and the thought that it's addictive comes to their mind," nurse Norma Furlong says. "And very often, that's when they'll come in and seek help."

Addiction comes to their mind, Nurse Furlong, because Big Drugs and shills like you harp incessantly on how addicted they are.  They come to you for help because if they continue smoking they can be expelled, fined and humiliated.  Financially anti-tobacco is brilliant.  It gets kids to smoke through its constant emphasis on an adult pleasure and when they start they are penalized and then hooked on pharmaceutical nicotine.

In this episode Sweda questions the qualifications of the judge who vacated the Environmental Protection Agency's secondhand smoke report and questions the integrity of scientists who don't back up the discredited report.  The letter by Laura Hirschmann is a knock out as are the responses to Sweda's lame rebuttal.  Scroll down to "A Ban Is Still A Ban" then down to "Reader Responses".

Anti-tobacco is constantly screeching about its concern "for the children".  Its actions indicate anything but concern for young people.  Because of anti-tobacco, children have been expelled from school, kicked out of school sports and in at least one case driven to suicide.  Additionally, smothering the children with lies creates an attitude of cynicism that hampers integration into society.  Kids are not stupid.  At some point they know they are being fed a load of garbage and are being outrageously manipulated by people whose only concern is the agenda that pays their salaries.

Something called SmokeLess States operates in an ever expanding number of states.  As described by the AMA, "SmokeLess States is a collaborative effort administered by the American Medical Association (AMA) and the AMA Foundation, and funded by the nation's largest philanthropy devoted exclusively to health and health care, The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation".  

The collaborative effort is designed to extract money from smokers, pass smoking bans, prohibit tobacco advertising all the while rendering those who enjoy tobacco pariahs in their own communities.

As the largest holder of stock in Johnson & Johnson, the drug company that peddles pharmaceutical nicotine, RWJF toils tirelessly delivering to the corporate bottom line.  Every smoking ban enacted, every smoker nagged to quit and every curb on tobacco advertising enhances the value of RWJF's holdings.  It ain't about health, its about bursting portfolios.

Take a look at what RWJF is doing to your state.  Ask yourself how long the Mafia would be allowed to get away with what RWJF is getting a way with.

In California, for instance, RWJF and its comrades were instrumental in getting Rob Reiner's tobacco tax passed.  The plunder is distributed amongst the groups that worked for its passage.  This technique will be used in every state in the Union.

RWJF is a non-profit, tax exempt corporation.  What monstrous perversion in our laws allows this rich foundation to impose taxes on hardworking Americans who struggle to make ends meet and who send a check to the Internal Revenue Service each April? 

The 20th amendment went into effect 81 years ago.  By prohibiting alcohol It sought, by law, to make the whole Nation into enforced teetotalers and to put an end to all evils associated with drinking. It sought to eradicate a taste deeply rooted in the habits and customs of a large part of the population through outlawing the business that ministered to its satisfaction (Hu, T.: The Liquor Tax in the U.S.: 1791-1947, New York City: Columbia University Press (1950).

Sound familiar?  The prohibition effort had it all.  An elite dictating the choices of others, the demonization of a legal industry, junk science -- if a man had been drinking when a child was conceived that child would be born "retarded", the breath from a person who had been drinking was hazardous to those around him -- and above all a "save the children" appeal to the parents of the land.

The linked cartoon, although having an antique appearance, is very much a part of our age.  The only thing standing between us and tobacco prohibition is the anti-tobacco enterprise which doesn't wish cigarette sales to end until every lost drop of money has been extracted from the tobacco industry and its customers.