|
January 2003
Dateline- "Redmonton", Alberta:
I admit I didn't have much faith in Edmontonians. The city of Edmonton has the dubious distinction of electing the biggest collection of ideologues and yahoos this side of Ontario. Look at the cast of characters coming out of Edmonton-you'd think this was Toronto. Mayor Bill Smith, City councilor "Boleshvik" Bob Bolstadt, and worst of all Canada's Health Minister, and "Occasional Smoker" -- whatever that is -- Annie Get Your Gun McLellan. "Redmonton" has managed to outdo Toronto, Vancouver , Halifax, and even Winnipeg in electing a collection of goofy social engineers. What makes the Edmonton smoking ban different from the other smoking ban proposals in the rest of Canada is the sheer hypocrisy of Edmontonians. The ink is not dry on the outpouring of Edmontonians screaming that the Kyoto accord was based on :junk science, would decimate Alberta business, cost innumerable jobs, and accomplish nothing, and was in reality just transparent social engineering. All of which is very true. The Ontario Auto industry, unlike the Alberta Oil industry has of course been exempted from the Kyoto accords. Ontario elected 108 Liberals, while Edmonton ONLY gave Canada Anne McLellan. (For this Alberta deserves to be punished. One would have thought after the National Energy Program, Alberta would have had enough of the Liberals) For those of you who believe that the stories of second-hand smoke are the HOAX of the Century-the arguments about global warming are even more ridiculous. One would have thought after Kyoto Edmontonians would have had enough of unsubstantiated alarmist claims from agenda driven social-engineers who produced no evidence, that threatened to decimate an industry and lead to widespread unemployment. The ink isn't dry on the Kyoto accord pushed down the throat of Alberta and Edmonton city council wants an all encompassing smoking ban that includes even outdoor patios. What's the pretext for this? Second-hand smoke causes global warming? Why not? Its been "linked" (without one iota of evidence, mind you) to everything except leprosy and the heartbreak of psoricissis. We're anxiously waiting for those claims to be made too. Thus I will repeat the suggestion of Kerry Diotte --- and show the rest of us in Canada that Edmontonians are real Canadians -and bitch. Bitch like you've never bitched before. Get in touch with your inner bitcher. Here is a partial list : Citizen Action Center- 496-8200 cacenter@edmonton.ca BillSmith@edmonton.ca To the citizens of Edmonton show us you're real Canadians and start bitching. Dateline - "Hellthism"an encapsulation of our enemies
"While young professionals subject themselves to an arduous schedule of
physical exercise and dietary controls designed to keep death at bay...ordinary people, on the other hand, accept the body's decay as "Upper-middle-class liberals,...fail to reckon with the class dimension of their obsession with health and moral uplift. They find it hard to understand why their hygienic conception of life fails to command universal enthusiasm. They have mounted a crusade to sanitize American society; to create a "smoke-free environment", to censor everything from pornography to "hate speech",...When confronted with resistance to these initiatives, they betray the venomous hatred that lies not far beneath the smiling face of upper-middle-class benevolence. Opposition makes humanitarians forget the liberal virtues they claim to uphold. They become petulant, self-righteous, intolerant ...they find it impossible to conceal their contempt for those who stubbornly refuse to see the light-those who" just don't get it." Christopher Lasch, The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy, p.28.1995. Dateline Brantford, Ontario
According to local media reports the Ontario Government's Brantford casino suffered a 25% loss in business when the no-smoking by-law came in. Now a brand new state of the art smoking room equipped with all the amenities is being built to accommodate smokers. No glorified cage to "De-Normalize" smokers either. Lets face it smoking rooms are just a face-saving gesture to appease the anti-smoking nuts' bogus claims. But for the moment its better than nothing. For those of you in Canada suffering smoking bans in your localities the message is clear. If you refuse to patronize establishments where your rights are not respected, things can and probably will change. If you go along with the anti-smoking by-laws they won't. In fact they will spread by those pushing anti-smoking by-laws. They will incorporate your acquiescence in their propaganda. Don't be fooled by the anti-smoking nuts propaganda. This has NOTHING to do with anyone's health. This has EVERYTHING to do with their campaign of "De-normalization" and behavioral control of smokers. I'd like to report a couple of follow-ups to stories that were covered by Forces Canada. Dr. Frederick Ross, the Winnipeg doctor who refused to treat smoking patients and winner of the coveted Forces Jack-Ass of the Week award, is now running as a candidate for the LIBERAL PARTY of CANADA in the next Provincial election. There is a certain symmetry to Ross running as a candidate for the LIBERAL PARTY of Canada. According to a column today by Licia Corbella in the Calgary Sun the who's who of Canada's anti-smoking nuts, the Cancer Society, Gar Mahood etc has lined up to denounce the new Alberta law that criminalizes youth smoking with a $100 fine. According to Mrs.Corbella's column the tobacco companies are in favor of the law. It is because "Big Tobacco" supports criminalizing youth smoking that Mahood et al are opposed. Now if only "Big Tobacco" would come out in favor of smoking bans, cigarette taxes, moronic propaganda...As they said in Alice in Wonderland" Things just get curiousier and curiousier." Dateline - "Redmonton", Alberta,
"In July 1943,a law was passed making it illegal for anyone under eighteen to smoke in public." Robert Proctor, The Nazi War on Cancer, The Campaign Against Tobacco, pp201-203 I always receive hate-e-mail from anti-smoking nuts complaining about the Nazi analogies. To paraphrase that great Canadian Mike Myers from a Saturday Night Live skit: "I'm all verklempt. (Choked up). I'll give you a topic. Discuss amongst yourselves. Why is Hitler's anti-smoking campaign indistinguishable from Canada's"? Alberta criminalizes youth smoking, with a $100 fine for these under age criminals. The Edmonton police forces already announced that they are not going to bother enforcing the law. Nova Scotia also criminalized youth smoking but without the $100 fine. A couple of years ago, I was interviewed by Saskatchewan's largest radio station about a similar proposal. I explained that Forces mandate was to stand up for the rights of consenting adults to consume a legal product free of harassment, but speaking as an individual I thought the criminalizing of youth smoking was a harebrained idea. None of us at Forces( mostly parents and some grandparents) have ever encouraged any kids to smoke. None the less, in a very cynical attempt by anti-smoking nuts to politicize youth smoking we keep getting dragged into this. Have you ever heard a single action against smokers where THE CHILDREN tm were not invoked? I said on Saskatchewan radio:" If the tobacco companies had hired the anti-smoking activists to get kids to take up smoking-they couldn't have done a better job. When Canada put gross" warning labels" on cigarette packs kids were buying cigarettes to trade the grossest warning labels like Pokemon cards. In the Forces Canada archives there is a story by the Montreal Gazette on how widespread this became. We at Forces Canada posted the warning labels on our sight so kids would not have to buy cigarettes to get the labels. We apparently registered a million hits. The easiest way to get a kid to smoke is to tell them not to smoke 500 times." The Canadian Police have a stellar track record in keeping kids away from alcohol and marijuana, and sex. We at Forces in conjunction with our ideological soul mates "Big Tobacco" applaud this strategy as a brilliant thought-through strategy for combating the "epidemic" of teen smoking (Has anybody else noticed how it only became an epidemic since the 90s when the "De-normalization" campaigns got going). Criminalizing teen cigarette smoking, pot smoking, beer drinking, and sexual activity is much better left to the police than parents. In case any of you are wondering Nazi Germany, despite the Canadian style war on smokers recorded the highest documented rate of teen smoking in recorded history at 50%. It seems that Hitler Youth and the League of German Girls, who were compelled to take" Smoke-free "pledges for Hitler-didn't. ("You Have a Duty to Be Healthy"). Despite the taxes, propaganda, restrictions on indoor smoking, and finally the criminalizing of youth smoking-one out of two German teens took up smoking. But this time it will be different. Staying in Edmonton, Mayor Bill Smith is proposing a city-wide, comprehensive smoking ban that even includes OUTDOOR patios. The people of Redmonton keep electing the Bill Smiths and Canada's Health Minister-and" Occasional Smoker" -- whatever that is --"Annie Get Your Gun" McLellan. Edmonton Sun columnist, Kerry Diotte offered this advice to Edmonton smokers" Don't bitch to me. Bitch to City Councel." Sounds good to me but one reaps what one sows. Dateline Moncton, New Brunswick
What kind of grade could a first year law student expect from Prof. Bouchard or any of his learned colleagues from one of Canada's other 23 Law schools (how many of you actually knew that Moncton had its own University, never mind Law school?) if that hypothetical first year student had twisted the law on child protection, supplied absolutely no evidence to substantiate any claim, to make a cheap polemical point? Prof. Bouchard: do you know what the legal term "VACATED" means? It means NULL and VOID. It means there is no EVIDENCE to substantiate a given claim. The exact definition is:" To annul; to set aside; to cancel or rescind; to render an act void; as, to vacate an entry or record, or a judgment "(Black's Law, Fourth edition) I suggest Prof. Bouchard go to the FORCES evidence archives( no need to waste your time digging through law journals) to see the results of two celebrated cases where the rules of EVIDENCE apply that go the heart of Prof Bouchard's claims regarding smoking around children becoming child abuse. In a 92 page decision in U.S. Federal Court virtually every spurious myth about second-hand smoke and children was "VACATED"-null and void. I will cite the case number and exact worded judgment for our learned professor. (Osteen, North Carolina,6:93 V00370,17/July/98).The following claims were "VACATED." "In Children: ETS exposure is casually associated with an increased risk of lower respiratory tract infections LRIs such as bronchitis and pneumonia. This report estimates that 150,000 to 300,000 cases annually in infants and young children up to 18 months of age are attributed to ETS.-VACATED. "ETS exposure is casually associated with increased prevalence of fluid in the middle ear, symptoms of upper respiratory tract irratation, and small but significant reduction in lung function-VACATED. "ETS exposure is casually associated with additional episodes and increased severity of symptoms in children with asthma. This report estimates that 200,000 to 1,000,000 asthmatic children have their condition worsened by exposure to ETS.-VACATED "ETS exposure is a risk factor for new cases of asthma in children who have not previously displayed symptoms."-VACATED. I would also like to draw the learned law professor's attention to the similar verdict by Australian Federal Court Judge Peter Finn Federal Court of Australia, Tobacco Institute of Australia Ltd &Ors v National Health and Medical Research Council & Ors (1996)1150 FCA 1(20 December/1996)Judge Finn wrote:
Oliver Wendell Holmes once described legal genius as cutting through the technicalities and going for the jugular. What if the REAL CHILD ABUSERS are not those who smoke around their kids-but those who induce asthma with their own neurosis? What if the smoking bans and hyper-sterilized environments are DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for inducing asthma through a process called "Lazy-Lung"? Would that be considered child-abuse on a massive scale? What about the presence of a cat in the home? Is that child abuse as well. The evidence of a cat in inducing child-hood asthma unlike second-hand smoke is unequivocal. Are pet lovers guilty of child abuse as well? The author of the "Lazy-Lung" theory that explains why asthma rates have skyrocketed among the very children who have grown up in these secure and sanitary smoke-free utopias, is the very same author of the mostly VACATED and widely discredited link between second-hand smoke and asthma- Dr. Fernando Martinez, director of respiratory sciences at the University of Arizona. Dr. Martinez has retracted his previous claims linking second-hand smoke and asthma. Dr. Martinez was recently quoted as saying:
It sounds like you have a great case to take to the Canadian media - we think Canadian Courts would laugh this one out. Your star witness has recanted. There are Court Judgments that have dismissed your claims. And there is a mountain of epidemiological and scientific evidence on the question of second-hand smoke that refutes your contention to a metaphysical certainty. Isn't there an ambulance in Moncton for you to chase? Dateline Halifax, Nova Scotia: Student Newspaper Halifax Commoner - "Could Nova Scotia Outlaw Tobacco?" January 17, 2003 - Today's Hitler Youth
Dalhousie University in Halifax is very much like the University of California at Berkley. There is no question that both Universities are among the best, and most selective in North America. The problem with both Berkley and Dalhousie (and I would include Brown University in Providence Rhode Island) is that in their quest for ideological purity: truth, evidence, decency, common sense, any "oppressive" quantifiable and empirical data has been sacrificed for very adolescent ideological posturing. This is demonstrated by the special smoking issue of the Halifax Commoner. For those of us who were teenagers in the 60s,this kind of teenage expressionism/political surrealism-gets real tiresome, real fast. What brought on this critique of today's spoiled, bored, lazy, indulged, rich kids-who are so quick to tell the rest of us how to live? Last week the Student Newspaper of Dalhousie University phoned me three times as Forces Canada President asking for an interview. We had long discussions on the issue. The particle story on Forces Canada and myself was O.K. It wasn't the hatchet job we're used to when we're not being ignored. Nor was it a vulgar sarcastic diatribe that I'm also used to. It was OK. Much of the rest of the Halifax Commoner's special issue" Could Nova Scotia Outlaw Tobacco?"-with the odd exception-was total bullshit. An endless collection of diatribes and tautology (an assertion devoid of evidence-very common in commentaries on tobacco in student papers composed by kids who have not done their homework.) The January 17th edition of the Halifax Commoner (with a couple of notable exceptions) reads like something literally out of Hitler Youth. Hitler Youth and the League of German Girls used to publish these kinds of hysterical diatribes on smoking. Their slogan was" You Have a Duty To Be Healthy." Inside was all the garbage about "passive" (second-hand) smoke, unsubstantiated unverified claims in purple prose warning of the dangers of smoking around children, celebrating Hitler's imposed "smoke free-Germany". Smokers were "De-normalized" as a motley crew of "Jews, Africans, Indians, loose women and decadent intellectuals." Draconian bans were sold as a cruel but necessary punishment of Germans who did not subscribe to Hitler's vision of" a secure and sanitary utopia...a smoke free Germany." Jews were banned from smoking in 1938.Most anti-smoking propaganda contained anti-Semitic and anti-Black caricatures. The first restaurant smoking bans applied to only Jewish owned restaurants-as a health hazard, of course. While it is true that Penn State historian Robert Proctor, ("The Nazi War On Cancer") maintained that anti-smoking campaigns were not INHERENTLY fascist, BUT, Hitler's was. Proctor labels Nazi anti-smoking campaigns "in some sense just as fascist as Yellow Stars and Death Camps.". The Commoner celebrates Halifax for outdoing Hitler in draconian bans. Here the Halifax Commoner gives the greatest revisionist account of Hitler as 90s guy since Ernst Zundel's celebrated attempt: "In the 1930s and 1940s,Nazi Germany had the world's strongest anti-smoking movement. Hitler called tobacco" the wrath of the Red Man against the White Man for having been given hard liquor," "According to an article written by Pennsylvania history professor Robert N. Proctor, by the late 30s smoking was barred in many workplaces, government offices, hospitals and public transit systems throughout Germany. "Proctor is careful to point out that anti-smoking movements are not inherently fascist. Germans were the first to make a scientific link between smoking and lung cancer and regardless of their motivations, they were concerned about the nations health." Name one tyrant or monster in recorded history that DIDN'T use the alibi of the nations health as justification for the "necessary" imposition of barbarism. The punch-line of Hitler's war on smokers-huge tax increases, draconian indoor and some outdoor bans and a moronic propaganda campaign -was eventually the highest documented rate of smoking in recorded history-50% by 1939..Youth Smoking numbers ebbed and flowed in Nazi Germany-just like in Canada. Hitler Youth and the League of German Girls were compelled to take "smoke-free pledges" for Hitler. Most ended up smoking. Karma might not be instantaneous-but it is inevitable. Here is a brief encapsulation of Hitler's personal 100,000 Mark donation for the epidemiology linking of smoking to lung cancer-and imposing a Canadian style war on smokers-using the same lies, and tactics. Here was Hitler's "proof" linking smoking and lung cancer: if you smoke 35 cigarettes a day, AND work in an asbestos mine or dye factory AND didn't eat your fruits and vegetables, IF you get lung cancer there was a one in a million chance p>0.000001)smoking didn't play a role. (Robert Proctor, The Nazi War on Cancer.P196-198).Forget tobacco for a moment. Lung Cancer has 40 causes for non-smokers. Heart disease has 300 causes. Asthma has thousands of causes. If the demagoguery regarding smoking is not inherently fascist-what is? Albert Camus once said a just means leads to a just end. Truth, Honesty, Decency, and basic civilized values are just collateral damage in Canada's war on smokers. If you think I'm kidding read the Halifax Commoner. Dateline Ottawa - "Propaganda all is phony" - Bob Dylan
The $71 million dollar propaganda campaign is really just a Liberal slush fund. You cannot turn on a Canadian TV program without getting the message "Second-hand smoke kills." (Go to the Forces evidence archive to see how ridiculous that statement is.) The big recipients of this Liberal largess just happen to be in no particular order, the CBC, Bell Media, (CTV Network, the Globe and Mail), Canwest Global, (TV stations, the National Post, and a bunch of rags throughout the country-the Ottawa Citizen, the Vancouver Sun and Province etc). The CBC receives $1-billion dollars in direct government funding. The obnoxious anti-smoking ads are just icing on the cake. Bell media-talk about synergy. The phone company owns the biggest private broadcaster in Canada CTV and Canada's most influential paper, the Globe and Mail, which I always refer to it as" The Grope and Flail" All by the way are co-incidentally major Liberal Party supporters and (with the sometime exception of the National Post) rabid anti-smoking nuts. If you feel that the Canadian media has been unfair to smokers there is a reason for this. It's called the carrot and stick approach by the Federal Liberals. Just keep lying about smoking and rarely if ever criticize the Federal Liberals and you can have all kinds of advertising from the Government of Canada. Any brave souls at CBC want to tell the truth? The Liberals are holding the $1 Billion in funding over their head like the Sword of Damocles. Just suppose CTV or the Grope and Flail want to tell the truth/and or exhibit journalistic integrity? Bell Canada may not get to gouge Ontario and Quebec phone users for a change. Phone charges in Canada are federally regulated. The CRTC (which imposed no-smoking ordinances in Canadian Broadcast facilities) also controls broadcast licenses and renewals, as well as local telephone rates. If I were Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada I wouldn't worry about a decrease in moronic propaganda coming from Ottawa. Advertising is slow. CBC, Bell Media and Canwest Global could sure use the Propaganda dollars. This effort is of course about HEALTH not money. Yeah, right. Dateline Vancouver B.C. - Here Comes Da Judge
The interviewer from CBC expressed great surprise that I as the President of Canada's largest smokers rights group did not leap to her defense. I got news for the CBC. I am interested in the rights of ALL, not just the rights of the powerful and well connected. I am interested in the rights of business owners, workers, and patrons to be able to consume a legal product without government harassment. The ridiculous rationale for the special treatment for the B.C. Judge was that it would have cost far more than the $19,000 if she retired early. According to the B.C. attorney-general her judicial skills are indispensable. Charles De Gaulle once said that the graveyards are full of irreplaceable people. Its not the $19,000- it's a principle at stake. Businesses in B.C. probably lose more than the $19,000 in lost business and tourism in minutes because of the smoking ban. When the smoking ban was first imposed in B.C., according to the March23, 2000 edition of the National Post after just the first 3 months 730 jobs and 6 businesses were lost because of the smoking ban. God knows how many millions were lost by B.C. businesses. Nobody has quantified how much tourism was lost because of the smoking ban. I can attest from personal experience visiting Vancouver and Victoria in August 2001,the restaurants were ghost towns. But as the anti-smoking nuts keep telling us this is about health not money. And ventilation systems don't work. Isn't it funny how quickly the tune changes when it's someone powerful and well connected who is unconvinced. On a CBC radio call-in show, I compared this to Bloomberg exempting cigar bars in New York City so as not to inconvenience the rich. Its ok for us mere mortals to freeze our ass off in the freezing cold to have a cigarette-but we must make special provisions for the rich, powerful and well connected. I'm sorry I didn't feel like playing Joan of Arc over this issue. Dateline -Winnipeg:
In the 1970s there was a TV show called Fernwood 2Night.One of their hilarious skits involved the world exclusive claim from a doctor at "the highly prestigious Fernwood Community College". This doctor claimed that Leisure suits caused cancer. His evidence? He had a bunch of rats dressed up in leisure suits and they all got cancer. This is about the level of evidence of Mrs. Crowe's claim. Last week I was interviewed about Heather Crowe's claim by a radio station in Kitchener, Ontario. I said that this was a political not medical diagnosis. There are 40 known documented causes of lung cancer in non-smokers. Second-hand smoke ain't one of them. There are about 100 epidemiological studies in the Forces evidence archives. Not one remotely suggests any link. There are court judgments in the Forces evidence archives where this claim was "Vacated" (ruled null and void). If it wasn't second-hand smoke-what caused Mrs. Crowe's lung cancer? Maybe she was working in a restaurant with high levels of asbestos. Maybe she didn't eat her fruits and vegetables. Maybe she didn't exercise properly Maybe she wore a leisure suit in the 1970s.Maybe 37 other things were involved. What we do know is that second-hand smoke had nothing to do with her getting lung cancer. I owe the readers of Forces and Forces Canada a huge apology. In my last commentary I relied on the reporting of a Winnipeg Free Press story that Brandon Manitoba's smoking ban was going to be modified. In a surprise 5 to 5 vote that even surprised the mayor the proposal was defeated. The next review comes in June. Lets all hope and pray that Brandon smokers maintain their boycott until then. A letter of mine as President of Forces Canada was published Monday in the Halifax Daily News. I have been inundated with correspondence from smokers in the Halifax area. The student newspaper of Halifax's Dalhousie University is writing a story about Forces Friday. I promise the smokers of Halifax that I will write a commentary about Halifax and the Maritimes next week Dateline Brandon, Manitoba:
Brandon is a small city whose population is measured in thousands. Brandon, was, until the smoking bans were imposed, a wonderful city that I always enjoyed visiting. According to the Jan13, 2003 edition of the Winnipeg Free Press, many others felt that way as well. Tourism has taken a huge hit. According to the Free Press: "The Brandon economy has lost $2-3 million since Bylaw 6696 began. Even a gas station on the Trans-Canada highway inside Brandon claimed to lose $15,000 in one week because truckers weren't stopping. Much of the truck traffic began stopping in Virden instead. "The big thing is truckers. We used to get two or three a night at the Trails West Motor Inn (the owner quoted in the Free Press puts her loss since the smoking ban in the six figures) and now they completely bypass us." "The loss of customers affects everyone from from staff who get less hours or fewer tips and may even have to be laid off, to suppliers of food and liquor to the bars. It also effects employment of musicians performing in beverage rooms". "...Brandon bars are seeing a 40-55 per cent drop in VLT (Video Lottery Terminal) revenues." In response to a bar owner's "sob story" Brandon City Councilor Errol (the error) Black (my nominee for the Marie Antoinette "Let them eat cake" sensitivity award) told bar owners, "Then go find another business." He said drinking establishments are disappearing as society adopts a healthier lifestyle." As someone who has in the past been a tourist in Brandon, I challenge Errol "the error" Black to put his own money into a California style Juice/Oxygen bar in blue-collar Brandon and let us know how long it takes to go bankrupt. Brandon ain't Berkeley on the prairies. Thank God. In 1920s America the cry of the prohibitionists Carrie Nation and Billy Sunday was" First alcohol-then tobacco." Now the cry of the modern day intellectual descendents like Brandon's Errol "the error" Black is "First Tobacco-then alcohol." Dateline Northern Ontario:
Over the past few days the Ontario media has been going crazy writing
editorials praising the antics of Peter Sarsfield who has no use for such
niceties as democracy, evidence or really any other values one thinks a For about the millionth time. There is not one iota of evidence to
substantiate any of these claims. Folks-this has nothing to do with health-and everything to do with social engineering. Its part of a "Tobacco For those of you who don't know a "Blood-libel" was part of a propaganda campaign orchestrated against Jews in Eastern Europe. The purpose of a "Blood-libel" is to spread hate and fear. There is never any evidence ever supplied by those spreading "Blood-libels" and they were overwhelmingly believed. Even in the 20th Century in Czarist Russia, a common "Blood-libel" was that Jews killed Christian babies to use their blood to make Passover matzo. Honest. This inspired countless pogroms. In virtually the same way, "Blood-libels" about second-hand smoke lead to calls for smoking bans. By the way this is not the first time in history this kind of manufactured hysteria was pushed in the media. In Nazi Germany, Hitler called second-hand smoke" a Jewish plot to poison the Aryan race. "Propoganda warnings about second-hand smoke contained caricatures of Stars of David and dollar signs. No evidence was ever supplied, but a campaign of hate and fear was sold. For good measure Hitler passed a law outlawing the ridiculing of German anti-smoking nuts. Indoor and some outdoor smoking bans were part of Hitler's campaign for "a secure and sanitary utopia...a smoke free Germany." The real goal however was the "De-normalization of smokers." In Nazi propaganda smokers were caricatured as "Jews, Africans, Indians, loose women and decadent intellectuals." Any similarities between what is going on in Canada now is not purely co-incidental but fully intended. Dateline Northern Ontario:
If the courts allow this-, what is pernicious about all this kookiness is that this is not being imposed by elected representatives accountable to voters but by a non-elected bureaucrat, who should be worrying about the water supply and pollution in Northern Ontario. And you thought Canada was a democracy. Dateline Brandon, Manitoba:
A couple of years ago I was interviewed by Saskatchewan's largest radio station about a proposal by the Saskatchewan NDP (another hotbed of idiocy) to"criminalize"youth smoking. I explained to the interviewer that Forces' mandate was to stand up for the rights of consenting ADULTS to consume a legal product free of harassment, but speaking as an individual and parent, I labeled the proposal "Harebrained." I said" If the Tobacco companies had hired the anti-smoking groups to get kids to smoke they couldn't have done a better job. In the early 90s smoking among youth was about 25% and falling. Now after a decade of tax increases, draconian smoking bans, and a moronic propaganda campaign, it about 35%and rising. What could possibly be a dumber strategy than getting kids mixed up in contraband."? In a sarcastic tone of voice I said" The Police have a wonderful record of keeping kids away from drugs and alcohol-and now society expects them to chase around kids smoking cigarettes. A brilliant strategy." On this one even the usual shrill hyenas of the anti-smoking movement such as Gar Mahood of the Orwellian named and government financed "Non-Smokers Rights Association", in the National Post and the editorial board of the "Grope and Flail"(Globe and Mail) called it self-defeating and guaranteed to backfire. No kidding. In case any of you are wondering who came up with this idea first, it was none other than Adolph Hitler in 1943. "In July 1943 a law was passed making it illegal for anyone under the age of eighteen to smoke in public. Smoking was banned on all German city trains and buses in the spring of 1944;Hitler personally ordered the measure to protect the health of young women serving as ticket takers."(Robert Proctor, The Nazi War on Cancer, P.203) Dateline Brandon, Manitoba:
The proponents of the smoking ban predicted that Brandon smokers would quickly cave in. Just like smokers have caved in elsewhere. But the proponents of the ban underestimated the tenacity and determination of freedom fighters in Brandon. It's almost a year later and smokers are refusing to go along with the ban. According to media reports from the Brandon Sun and the CBC, Brandon city council will shortly revisit the issue. Various proposals are on the table from scrapping the smoking ban to smoking rooms. The point of this is simple. If we give in to smoking bans-we lose. If we refuse to patronize establishments where we can't smoke-we at least have a chance to have our rights respected. To those smokers in communities in both Canada and the U.S. facing smoking bans-remember Brandon. These bans are not etched in stone. They only succeed if we give in. And don't buy the argument that this has anything to do with "Health". For the umpteenth time there is a mountain of evidence at the Forces archives that this is nothing but transparent social engineering. Period. Smoking rooms, ventilation systems is just a face saving gesture to appease the antis. Dateline North Bay, Ontario:
What Have These Good Old Boys Been Smoking?
Over the last few days I have been fielding calls from people asking me my opinion. Here is what I said," The rich in Canada smoke pot, drink alcohol, and gamble. The rich don't smoke cigarettes." Today there was unanimity of pack journalism in Canada (editorials in the Globe and Mail, National Post, Winnipeg Free Press, Winnipeg Sun. etc.) applauding the decriminalization of marijuana. Except for the National Post this is the same pack always screaming for more smoking bans and tax increases on cigarettes etc. Last week in the Toronto Sun Linda Williamson (Canada's answer to Nurse Rached (One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest) on the smoking question came out for the legalization of marijuana. Other noted loud-mouths on the smoking question such as Mindelle Jacobs of the Edmonton Sun while preaching and cheerleading the punishment of smokers are very "progressive" when it comes to the de-criminalization of medical marijuana-AND safe, secure shoot up rooms for junkies. This is Canada. Junkies have rights. Smokers have no rights. By the way in case any of you wonder where Canada's priorities lie, the age of consent in Canada to put someone's genitals in your mouth is 14.The Canadian Senate's proposed age of consent for putting a joint of "decriminalized" pot in your mouth is 16.The age of consent for putting a drink in your mouth and gambling is 18. The age of consent for putting a cigarette in your mouth is 18, 19 in Ontario and a couple of other Provinces. A couple of years ago the Fraser Institute (a conservative public-policy think tank headquartered in Vancouver-according to our enemy Gene Borio of Tobacco.org receives funding from "Big Tobacco") wrote a very cogent study of Canada's war on smokers. The study can be found in the archives of Forces Canada. Their earth shattering findings? Canada's war on smokers was" rich Canada's war on the poor." AND various levels of government "are interested in picking smokers pockets and not in saving their souls." No kidding, eh! The big lesson here for my fellow Canadians is that if the rich in this country would put down their joints and pick up a cigarette, they would make the showing of Reefer Madness compulsory in the schools, people would be going to jail for possession of pot and cigarettes would still cost about $2 a pack and you could smoke anywhere- before the 90s kicked in. < Back To "I read the news..." > |
TOBACCO
NEWS FROM CANADA
January
31 - In an earlier commentary I passed along the suggestion from Edmonton Sun
columnist Kerry Diotte that Edmontonians start bitching to their city council about Edmonton's proposed smoking ban. Guess what? A few of you
actually bothered and its starting to show results. Two city councilors are
starting to get cold feet on this issue.