|
Dear Forces,
I am a big fan of your website, and I just had to write to you. I’ll keep
it as brief as possible. I read two recent articles. One was that there was
legislation in California that they were trying to make smoking in a car
illegal if children under 6 were also in the car. The second article was
about ASH’s position that smoking parents should be charged with child abuse
if they smoke near or around their kids. I was absolutely appalled after
reading this. You website had some great commentaries about this like
equating parents who take their children to McDonald’s, or let their
children have high cholesterol, or high fat, or high salt, or become
couch-potatoes, should also be charged with child abuse. These are of course
good points, but I just came up with the best one of all, that would show
the anti’s just how idiotic they really are…This is the undeniable truth
that your articles missed, and it’s GOOD-You ready!
If the goal of the Anti’s is to protect children from a supposed 20%
increase in health problems from SHS, they have to also support the fact
that child abuse can occur from parents who either
1. Run red lights with children in the car
2. Get caught speeding with children in the car
If studies show, and CONCLUDE, that speeders have a 50% or HIGHER chance of
getting killed or killing their passengers while driving, wouldn’t speeding
with your children in the car warrant an investigation into child abuse?
Wouldn’t being a chronic speeder also warrant a child abuse investigation?
Furthermore, shouldn’t the anti’s also support bans on anyone driving a car
with over 1 at fault accident in a year or more than 2 speeding tickets. If
the anti’s really had the best interests of the children in mind, they would
support legislation to ban chronic speeders or those involved in at-fault
accidents from having any children in the car.
They would also support legislation to charge them with child abuse.
Studies show that poor and careless driving is FAR MORE dangerous than SHS.
If the anti’s don’t also support citing child abuse for speeders, red light
runners, and a parental driving ban of parents with over 1 at-fault accident
in 3 years, then they are biased and their SHS arguments are null and void.
The answer is of course they wouldn’t support these types of bans/child
abuse charges because it has the potential of actually getting child abuse
charges AGAINST THEM directly, but then by default they would have to throw
out the SHS bans too! A police officer who cited a parent for smoking in
the car with children could just as easily cite a parent, under the same
line of thought, for speeding with a child. The anti’s can’t have it both
ways! I would love to watch the anti’s squirm after hearing this point,
because it is absolutely indisputable and directly related. Feel free to
take my idea and run with it. I thought of it, but Forces can do a lot more
with it…so take it please.
Regards,
Robert
Dear
Robert,
It is nice to meet you. We can't do much better than you've done in drawing
attention here to the logic the anti-smokers use.
As you are obviously aware, the antis are short-circuited when confronted
with logic and honesty. You describe a problem that is in fact more genuine and greater than SHS; a problem
that probably affects health more realistically than SHS does and --
what you describe is certainly indisputable and directly related.
But, as you
are no doubt aware by now as a regular FORCES follower, the antis insist on
having it both ways. To
understand their thrust against smoking, you have to think like a crook.
So, let's see:
-
We have a
blatant epidemiological fraud in our hands (the 20% increase in risk is
false - to know how it is arrived at,
read here).
-
We have
similar manipulations on active smoking.
-
We have
successfully trained people to hate other people (non smokers hating
smokers).
-
As for
all hate campaigns in history, we have a perfect, fraudulent apologism
constructed for the purpose: smoking kills - active or passive, no matter.
-
We have
an easy scapegoat for politicians and corrupt health authorities, who have
become nothing more than politicians specialized in statistical health
trash. Hysteria is created to distract people from real problems and
attract politics and money to artificial problems for personal gain.
-
We have
programs and ambitions for social engineering.
-
We have
hundreds of millions of dollars in pharmaceutical money available
to us only if we jump on board of the antismoking fraud programs and, in
so doing, open the market for pharmaceutical products. That is why Big
Pharma finances antismoking trash in the first place.
-
We have
millions, billions of dollars available in public funds - either stolen
from the bent-over tobacco industry or from the gullibility of citizens
and governments, once again conned by the
epidemiological frauds promoted
by corrupt health authorities.
-
All we
have to do is persecute smokers to get all of that.
Why then should
anyone care about the real risks that careless driving poses to children?
Show a few million dollars and they'll do that too! They are whores for hire,
and fanatics in search of a fat bank account! That's what those people are, Robert - and they are con artists too.
The only way to change this is to create a
political force strong enough to destroy them and the criminal system
they have created - or, at least, to hold them in check so that we can undo
some of the evil things they have done – and don’t count on mass-media to do
that, either. The mass-media always cater to the top dog; were we ever to
become the top dog, the mass-media would rediscover integrity of
information.
Any attempt to reason with antismokers - or even to ask oneself why this
nonsense is going on - is naive to say the least. Let's use that energy
politically against them instead.
Thanks again for your contribution.
Regards,
Gian Turci
FORCES International C.E.O. |
A GREAT POINT AGAINST THE
ANTIS
