In the morning of August 6th, 1996, the phone rang at my place, and I was told that the condition of my father, affected by terminal cancer, was considerably worsened, and the end was near. My presence in Genoa, Italy, was required immediately. This did not take me completely by surprise, since my father's condition got progressively worse since the cancer's detection in 1994.

My father was a non-smoker, and he lived in a totally non-smoking environment. Despite this an invasive cancer spread to his vital organs, including the lungs.

The first airplane available was a Scandinavian Airline flight from Seattle. To my pleasure, it was a smoking flight, so I could relieve some of my anxiety by having some cigarettes during the flight.

When I got to the Seattle airport, I felt I was entering the environment of the movie "TXH 1138". In that 1970s feature film, the first for director George Lucas, society is a controlled by computers taking care of everything with magnificent control, repression, and a total emptiness of humanity. Social interaction has become automated.

I was reminded of that movie at the airport. Messages, broadcast endlessly through the speaker system of the airport, were repeating no-smoking announcements every thirty seconds, together with warnings on the consequences of leaving your car illegally parked.

Trying to make myself immune from the psychological drilling, I took the subway to the International Terminal. When I got there, I had about 1 1/2 hours to wait. The terminal was, of course, non-smoking and sealed. Getting out to have a cigarette would have meant getting through endless security checkpoints, as well as another trip on the subway train.

I asked a terminal employee if there was a smoking room. To my surprise he told me that there was one available at the Scandinavian Airlines boarding point.

When I got to the room, I was surprised and disgusted. The room was no more that 20' x 20' x 10' in size. The ventilation was so weak, a household fan would have been more effective. The air was so thick with smoke, my eyes wept almost immediately, while the ashtrays were overflowing, and the ceiling and walls were loaded with yellowish, thick nicotine. The whole thing was a stomach-turning display.

There were so many smokers in the room, I had to stand up. They all were complaining about the pitiful conditions in which the room was kept. While one American smoker was cursing Bill Clinton and Mrs. President, European visitors were clearly disapproving while talking to each other in their language.

Being a curious person, I wanted to find out why the smoking room was kept in such poor condition. I walked out of the room, and found an airport caretaker, to whom I complained. The older black man told me: "Do not complain to me about it, sir! The room was put up after many complaints from smokers and foreign airlines, but I was told not to maintain it because the people should see the filth smokers create. If you have a problem, call the Management".

Gathering some courage, I asked the man: "Don't you think that America has found its 21st-century niggers?" The old man sadly smiled, and moved away without a word.

Of course, I did not have the time to give the management a piece of my mind, though I intend to write a nasty letter soon.

Going for a walk in the terminal for an emotional cool-off, I was impressed by the number of no smoking signs in the room, so I decided to count them. In a room of about 350 by 500 feet there were over 280 NO SMOKING SIGNS! Something to say for an American obsession.

The boarding call came on time, and soon we were rolling on the runway. I couldn't help but think about the enormous amount of pollutants that the airplane carrier was leaving behind on the runway of the nonsmoking Seattle airport.

A few seconds after the wheels were off the ground, the nonsmoking sign went out, as it should.

A couple of hours into the flight, I started chatting with my travelling companions. The chatting was sparked by an American passenger, seated well into the nonsmoking section of the airplane, who asked the flight attendant for an oxygen mask to protect himself from the emissions of the smoking section!

Little the poor guy knew about the air that is always being pumped out from the back of the airplane, thus moving ventilation from head to tail, where the smoking section always is.

After being told that the oxygen masks are for emergency only, the poor goof yelled: "This is an emergency, those suckers in the back will give me cancer!"

The flight attendant relocated him to a forward seat. While moving ahead in the plane, the American was reached by a voice from a big Danish passenger, also sitting in the nonsmoking section. He joked: "Eh, steward, why don't you open the door and throw him out for some fresh air?"

We all laughed, and started talking. The girl sitting next to me was a Norwegian student who spent three weeks in Seattle on a student exchange programme.

"I'll tell all my friends what happened to me," she said.

She told me that one day she went to a party, and she had her cigarette pack in her blouse pocket, but she wasn't smoking. Asked by a guy in the room if he could see the pack, she handed it to him. He promptly twisted and destroyed the pack, then threw it on the floor, handed her three dollars as compensation, and said: "There is no smoking in this Country!"

Another time, while she was smoking on the sidewalk of a road in Seattle, a man came to her, yanked the cigarette our of her mouth, thew it on the sidewalk, and put his foot on it. Then he walked away. No words, no explanation.

When I told her that if something like that would ever happen to me the perpetrator would quickly need a new set of teeth, as well as a new nose, she said, still blushing with rage at the memory: "I understand, I am very sorry for you who live in North America, I will never set foot on American soil again!"

At that point, another young girl from across the aisle cut in: "I am from Berkeley, California," she said, "what happened to you is nothing! Imagine that in my city you can't even smoke on the sidewalk unless you are at least 15 feet from a window or a door! I am going to Europe for the first time in my life, and I chose Europe for my holidays because I heard that I will be able to smoke openly while still being treated like a person with freedom and dignity!"

I tried to compete by stating that in Abbotsford, British Columbia, the no-smoking law imposes penalties of up to $10,000 for smoking in a public place, though smoking in restaurants and pubs is still allowed.

The Scandinavian passengers listening to this conversation then all pitched in by telling stories of a similar nature. One of them had an experience in Vancouver. They all agreed that this was their first and/or last time in North America.

An aging gentleman said: "I believe we all thought that we were going to free, hospitable countries. We heard about the nonsmoking policy in our news, but we thought that the news was much exaggerated for sensationalism. We see now that we were in error: it is far worse than our news reported." Finally, a guy seated in the nonsmoking section bordering with ours said: "I don't smoke, but I was so irritated by the paternalistic prohibition and propaganda! Will Americans ever grow up?"

As every smoking passenger should do when flying on a carrier that allows smoking, I filled a customer card thanking the airline for showing respect for the freedom of choice, and stating that I would fly Scandinavian for as long as they will accommodate smokers.

Several hours later we landed at the Copenhagen airport, where I had to wait for my connection to Milan for three hours. In exploring the airport, I paid attention to the "smoking details", as I always do everywhere. Ashtrays all over. The no-smoking areas were many, and clearly defined. One could smoke while walking in the airport, yet there was no smoke odour because of adequate ventilation.

No endless tapes warned you of what happens if you smoke, park the car in the wrong place, or breathe in a way the system does not like. No "TXH 1138". Yet everything was orderly, and clean. It tasted, smelled and looked like order, liberty and respect. Just like North America used to be long ago, before it decided to get better. It was moving and reassuring to see that there are still places that respect the choice to smoke in the world. Civilization survives.

The trip to Milan lasted only two hours. Smoking flight of course.

During the journey I was reflecting on how regulated, controlled, puritanically uptight we have become in North America, not only for smoking, but for almost everything else. Everything is socially pre-engineered, pre-formatted. Poor or no human interaction is all too common in everyday exchanges with strangers, thus affecting our ability to really communicate outside our immediate social circle, and sometimes even within it. The fear of violence is everywhere. Humanism, the real power of man, is under attack. And to judge from the almost obsessive media attention to issues of "safety" in our society, we are quickly adopting a "zero risk" mentality. Zero- challenge mentality, I'd call it.

Where is the North America I found when I came -- young and full of hope -- 22 years ago? What has become of the 60's generation -- my generation? Where are the American baby boomers who repealed the values of the war generation in the name of new freedoms? Now they are so fearful of liberty, they are trying to regulate it out of their lives! They have become the generation that "didn't inhale".

Perhaps they inhaled liberty so much, they over-dosed. But in Europe the 60's left a permanent mark. Why not in North America? Did I do the right thing in moving my life over there?

Obviously, the North American path of ever-tighter regulation and ever-tighter citizen control and though legislation is not leading anywhere. The more the powers that be tighten their fist, the more the situation slips though their fingers. Witness the rise in youthful smoking during the current anti-smoking propaganda blitz. Witness the losing fight against drugs. Europe has understood the dynamics of this phenomenon, why haven't we?

My thoughts were interrupted by the landing of the plane, and replaced by the anxiety of seeing my father. My old friend picked me up at the airport, and we rushed to Genoa.

When we got there, I learned that my father was dead.

Looking at the body of my beloved father consumed by that terrible disease, I was shockingly reminded of our mortality. In true European tradition, the body was not "made up" for the fearful living in order to mask the looks of the Great Peacemaker, and the stench of death violently underlined the futility of all our efforts to put off the inevitable appointment. There it was, staring at me in the face, laughing at all our greed, hypocrisy, and laws! Why do we have to make our lives so miserable? An arm hugged my shoulder. "Death reminds us to celebrate life," said the undertaker, "just remember to enjoy as freely and intensely as you can. How long it lasts, it doesn't matter, for it's just a lightning in the dark. Make it a bright one!"

After the funeral, I was told I would have to stay in Italy for at least three weeks, because of the lengthiness of the bureaucracy for succession procedures. I had plenty of time to explore the European reality, as far as smoking, and other issues are concerned.

With the gradual consolidation of the European Union, one notices the stabilization of the common economy, and the cultural exchange of countries that have been enemies for centuries. Those centuries of wars and suffering, the experiments with repressive regimes and their devastating consequences, all have been absorbed to create an environment of endless dialogue, to form a fluid reality that keeps changing. The immortal principles of liberty and civil rights are never seriously questioned, even in the wake of increasing violence that is mainly due to the rearrangement of European society after the integration of Eastern Europe.

The approach to the smoking issue splendidly reflects this attitude. Here is just an example.

One evening, while watching TV, a commercial break was promoting a product called Logado. This product is a tobacco substitute. The claim is that by sniffing it, you feel like you smoked. I am going to try it! At any rate, here is how the commercial goes:

Good looking man with pregnant wife. He says: "I like to smoke, I really do! But he doesn't" -- zoom on wife's belly -- "So, when I can't have the pleasure of a cigarette, I sniff Logado, and I feel the satisfaction of smoking. Logado allows me to smoke without the smoke, and does both of us a favour," concludes the man while holding the wife's belly.

That's it. No patronizing, no prohibition, no guilt. This approach is very unlikely to make anybody feel constrained or irritated, while having better chances of achieving the desired goal.

Everywhere I have been, smoking is not depicted as an addictive, evil beast. It is called what it really is, a pleasure. The smoker is not portrayed as an irresponsible, stupid individual who deserves at best patronizing looks and head-shaking from six-year-old children, like we see in the pathetic anti-smoke TV commercials in British Columbia, sponsored by the Health Ministry with taxpayers money. The only effective result we can expect from this stupid campaign is to teach children disrespect for their parents. Well done, Health Ministry!

Europe accommodates smokers in restaurants, trains, and other public places, while respecting nonsmokers through separation. As far as I could see, education on the smoking issue is considerate, respectful, non-rhetorical, and very effective. Differently from North America, Europe is experiencing a dramatic, steady decrease in smoking, while providing accommodation for smokers almost everywhere.

It is said that the smoking population of Europe has decreased from 149 million to 100 million in the last five years, without the state clamping down on smokers in any significant way.

With gentle, considerate education, Europe is turning the people's choice to smoke into a choice not to smoke without heavy-handed, repressive measures.

To tell the whole truth, there are some (failed and isolated) instances of North American-style public smoking crushes. In Genoa, about eight months ago, the Chief of Police, probably a pro-American who watches too many cop movies, decided to enforce an anti-smoking law passed in 1975, but never enforced since. All of a sudden, the police were entering bars and restaurants and issuing fines to smoking customers and restaurant owners.

This went on for a few weeks, while the protests of smokers and restaurateurs went unheard. Then the glorious Genoese decided to turn to an old, very effective, all-Italian fighting technique: civil disobedience.

Bar and restaurant owners -- forced to put up no-smoking signs mostly against their will -- placed an ashtray under each sign. The customers were told to smoke, and ignore the signs.

If the police came in to issue fines, the fines would not be paid, while the constitutionality of the law, as well as each single fine, was challenged in court. The police themselves -- many of them smokers -- were irritated because they were ordered to waste so much time enforcing a stupid law while being diverted from fighting crime.

The whole exercise lasted about a month and then, faced with massive non-compliance and overload of the judicial system, City Hall relented. The enforcement of the law was discontinued, and the fines revoked. While the non-smoking signs are still up on the walls -- still with ashtrays underneath them -- people smoke in restaurants and pubs, as they have been doing for centuries.

Common sense won. To set things straight, sometimes all it takes is some backbone. A splendid (and hopefully inspiring) example for North American smokers and restaurateurs.

However, this does not mean that there are no truly smoke-free places. One cannot smoke inside government buildings (but smoking employees are accommodated - no loitering outside the door anywhere). In restaurants and bars where the owners really mean no smoking in their places, one can tell without asking, because there are no ashtrays under the no smoking signs.

The owner and his clientele decide -- the way it should be.

While having an "espresso" in a bar, I was enjoying a cigarette. A gentleman came to me from a nearby table and said with a smile: "Excuse me, sir, I see that you are smoking. I am an asthmatic, and smoke really bothers me". Before I could reply, he added: "I realize that you have no fault for my asthma, but if you put your cigarette out, that would help me. I'll be gone in ten minutes, anyway", he concluded with a wink.

I was only too happy to comply! When asked in such a civilized way, how can anyone say no? I even apologized to him as he was moving away, and he waved his hand as to say: "Think nothing of it".

Doesn't anybody think that approaches like this are way more effective than repressive smoking bans? Do we really need the state to manage (actually: prevent) our personal interactions? Social interaction is indispensable for developing the skill of living together in a human dimension.

Or do we have to grow for a few more centuries before realizing that personal communication, respect and kindness work better than bruta forza?

The difference in the European attitude on the smoking issue is evident from the type of media reporting that is done on the subject.

First of all, coverage of the issue is quite limited, suggesting that Europeans have better and more important things to think about and discuss.

When the issue is discussed, there's a total lack of paternalism and sensationalism. On TV, the news is just reported, giving equal time to opposite points of view. No on-the-fly editorial comments tucked into what is supposed to be simply a news report, no catering to prevailing opinions in order to score viewing points, no subliminal messages such as a mildly contemptuous facial expression flickering across the face of an anchor person.

It is interesting to see that Italian newspapers still retain party political or at least ideological affiliations that are unconcealed. In addition to national and local papers, papers from other cities are available on virtually every newsstand. It makes for great debate on any issue, and Italians generally buy two or more newspapers daily.

When the media reported that the U.S. FDA now classifies nicotine as a drug, the Italian Ministry of Health did not rush to announce tougher smoking restrictions, like the Canadian government did. Rather, the whole move was criticized as ineffective: just another electoral stunt.

In Italy as in most of Europe, while the promotion of tobacco products has always been forbidden, minors of all ages can purchase alcohol and cigarettes. Nevertheless, the percentage of smokers is comparable to what we find in North America. It is worth noting that it is quite unusual to see a smoker younger than 17, and the percentage of alcoholics and alcohol-related accidents is lower than in North America by orders of magnitude. So much for the "tough" position of the U.S. and (of course) Canadian governments on substance control! For the smokers who choose to quit, un-biased education is available for all ages.

One simply doesn't find attention-captivating media and state fanfare, prohibition, and contempt with respect to this subject. No big attraction, no big show. I believe it is for this reason that a large majority of Italian youth are apparently simply not interested in smoking, or drinking. I saw very few youngsters on the street smoking, in sharp contrast to the small-town B.C. community where I live. The people I talked to -- including a 22-year-old university student who assured me that as a smoker he is in a small minority among his friends and schoolmates -- told me that youth have a sort of blasé attitude to the subject. Apparently, smoking is not considered particularly "cool" among the young, nor particularly "hot" as an issue.

All this, however, does not mean that there is indifference to the issue.The debate very much exists, but it is proceeding on a basis of equality and mutual respect regardless of the "size" of the two sides, with the final goal of achieving a modus vivendi while things change.

In the meantime, the social system lives with both the positive, and negative consequences of tobacco use. The state-run equivalent of Medicare bears the extra-costs of treating tobacco- related illnesses, but the state also enjoys the multi-billion dollar income from tobacco tax revenue, to be spent for the benefit of all.

While nonsmokers have to put up with the sometimes unwelcome smell of cigarettes, all enjoy the cultural and social benefits of tobacco. Everywhere in the world, tobacco companies have been very generous sponsors of cultural and sporting events of all kinds, while employing very many thousands of people in every country. It is thanks to tobacco manufacturers that we enjoy more music, ballet, cultural debates, charity and sporting events than we otherwise might. All that generates jobs and revenue, while enriching society. If indeed tobacco shortens the lives of smokers, it gives back much social contribution and enrichment. Hard to swallow? Maybe, but it's true.

Everybody understands that tobacco has been in virtually every culture for the last 500 years or so, and it cannot be simply "wiped out" in a few years with a bunch of laws and propaganda. It is going to take several decades. It is a multi-generational project. To achieve a final, permanent result, the system needs time to adjust socially, psychologically, and financially. People need to understand, and choose not to smoke of their own volition.

In Europe, very few underestimate the tremendous power and importance of personal choice. And this is key to the process of dialogue: as soon as someone starts to underestimate that power, a host of ordinary citizens will rush in with reminders.

When I described to Italians what is happening to North American smokers, I found myself forced to prove it, or I was not believed. A display of the news clippings I had brought generated a reaction of laughter and contempt .

One such conversation occurred at the travel agency where I went to confirm my return trip. I was asked, "how is it going in Canada?" So I talked about the on-going repression of smoking, and the various laws designed to "protect" the public from the "dangers" of environmental smoke.

To the surprise and considerable interest of the other customers there, I described the all-out smoking bans enacted in Toronto and Vancouver. I spoke about the hysteria of the people who believe that smokers present an alarming physical danger to them, and the harassment and social outcasting of smokers -- all fuelled by state propaganda. I mentioned the bias of the media, and the rhetoric of local Health Boards. The final "bang" was the size of fines for non-compliance with a smoking ban -- which in some areas are up to $10,000. In Italy the amount for non-compliance in a non-smoking area rarely exceeds $5.00, since the social system still believes that the penalty must fit the crime.

The effect of my little speech was the cancellation on the spot of three trips to North America -- one to the States, two to Canada -- by the customers in the travel agency. Two couples decided on the spot to go to the Bahamas instead. And the travel agency employees told me that they would make customers aware of the North American smoking restrictions from now on.

My trip was coming to an end. I moved to Milan, the headquarters of the Italian Smokers Association, and my point of departure. My visit to the Association was quite a revelation. This highly effective organization is 100,000 members strong, growing by 10,000 members a month, and represents 13 million Italian smokers. It promotes culture, arts, and social dialogue and debate.

At the first indication that the Italian government was tempted to follow the American path, the organization threatened to give the government exactly what it appeared to want. They called on all Italian smokers to quit smoking overnight in a smoking strike that lasted several days. The resulting decrease of only 10% in cigarette consumption (2 cigarettes a day for an average smoker) made the point, and the association was quick to point out that a sustained strike could create a tax "hole" of about 100 million U.S. dollars each month in the government's coffers. Moreover, Italian smokers took to the streets in demonstrations that blocked traffic on major highways.

Soon after, talks with the government initiated a process that has led to proposed legislation soon to be discussed in Parliament. This law, when passed, will protect the rights of nonsmokers and smokers alike, on a basis of equality, mutual respect, and mutual accommodation. The action of the Italian Smokers Association has possibly prevented the onset of a North American-style persecution of smokers, while setting an example of activism now widely followed in Europe.

Congratulations, and thank you, Italian Smokers Association! I only hope that North American smokers will follow your example.

I spent the evening before departure at a booth put up by the Association at a major popular event. The ISA does this continuously, to maintain and develop contact with the public. Presently, they are collecting hundreds of thousands of signatures in support of the proposed legislation for the regulation of tobacco use.

My camcorder was rolling continuously, and it was fascinating to see events unfold.

The booth was attended by one man and three attractive young girls. One of the girls was continuously stopping people to start dialogues and ask for signatures. People gathered around the booth, which was decorated with pictures, art work, and association T-shirts. Also featured was a translation (with original English copy) of a sign I had brought for the occasion. This sign, from a U.S. company, forbids the entrance onto company facilities of anyone who has smoked up to two hours earlier, unless he/she consents to taking a decontaminating shower! Hundreds of people read the sign, and all shook their heads.

Three books were open for signatures: nonsmokers, ex-smokers, and smokers were invited to sign in their own book. In front of each book, there was a line-up of people for almost all the four hours I was there.

Sometimes the signatures did not come easy. Sparked by the ISA's request for a signature, the dialogue was often hot, but there was a dialogue. It was moving to see men and women of all ages and walks of life, smokers or not, arguing, touching and interrupting each other, waving their hands in typical Italian fashion, sometimes with emotions, but never contempt or name-calling. The dialogue never turned into a pissing contest.

In that warm September evening, I have seen a furnace smelting opposite points of view, with the impurities of posture and prejudice falling to the bottom of the cauldron. The resulting intellectual alloy was lighter, different and stronger than the original components. Arguments of health and costs were weighted against arguments of liberty, history, culture, and economy -- damn, how do we find a solution? I see your point, do you see mine? How do we absorb and integrate, so that we can live together? People -- not government -- were at work.

Of course, I actively participated in the discussions when not rolling my camera. As an outsider, my contribution was influential and appreciated. In most cases, my descriptions of the North American reality were considered as a time capsule from a possible future that nobody wanted -- even the most convinced against smoking.

The sign I brought and my stories convinced at least fifty persuaded anti-smokers to sign. "I still think that smoking is disgusting," one of them told me while approaching the booth, "but as long as you stay away from me with that f...ing cigarette, I'll be damned if I help to create a situation like that!" he said pointing to the sign. While signing the book, he added: "You know, my father used to say that a longer life without freedom just sucks harder. I want my kids to live in liberty, even if I don't like that liberty," he concluded, pointing at my cigarette.

At the end of the evening, over 500 signatures were collected. One of the girls complained: "Tonight has been a bad night, probably because is a weekday. During weekends, we collect at least 1,000 signatures per night".

During the trip back home, I had mixed feelings. While being happy because I was going to rejoin my children and my beloved wife, I was filled with apprehension about returning to an environment -- this is painful -- of oppression and brainwashing. Difficult to take after experiencing the inebriating feeling of human freedom. But at home in B.C. I cannot turn the TV on, or read a paper without being inundated by the anti-smoking rhetoric. It is like having a 100 pound weight on your chest. Oh, Canada. I didn't expect this.

A few days after my return, the B.C. government announced with great fanfare its intention of suing the tobacco companies for damage to smokers. Health Minister Joy McPhail stared stonily past the camera, her lips pressed tight, her eyes fixed. On the CBC's Pamela Wallin Live the night before, a Canadian lawyer commented that he expected that Canada would soon move to "catch up" with the United States on smoking litigation. There is so much that the United States is doing that we need to catch up with, it seems.

If our government sues the tobacco companies for creating respiratory disease, it must surely sue the automakers and industrial polluters for the same reason. And then, what about alcohol distillers? Thank you very much, B.C. government, for your protection, I feel so safe now!

When talking about the European approach to smoking in my Italian accent, sometimes my enlightened anti-smoking opponents remark: "You are just home sick! If you think that over there is so much better, why don't you f... off back to the old country, and smoke yourself to death? Europe is so far behind on the scale of civilization! We don't need that shit here anymore"!

So much for advanced dialogue on the scale of civilization. I just say to them that I have a choice, and they don't. Though this is my home now, I may come to feel the need to leave this country for the protection of my physical and intellectual liberty, and the liberty of my family.

For now, I will make a point of exposing as much as possible of the lies and manipulations bestowed on us by a government that has managed to cheat so many into the belief that they are in danger when they are not. I believe that Canada, the country I came to make my home, deserves this effort from me. I will denounce the radical anti-smoking movement world-wide, and I will try to damage this trend of repression to the best of my abilities.

Unfortunately, this trend does not affect just smoking. Free thinking and diversity, threatened by social opinion engineering, are at risk. Privacy is at risk, as Canada's vigilant federal privacy commissioner has pointed out in his reports. So is welfare, pensions, education, and much more. Perhaps technology and carefully worded press releases about the studies and statistics that should direct our opinions will provide the subtle means of controlling us for our own good.

The concentration of media ownership in this country is sure to make for more rewrites of those press releases and less real reporting -- original, in-depth reporting is, after all, a considerable expenditure best stimulated by tough business competition.

Statisticians, doctors, bean counters and political demagogues are already running the country by using the media to induce and pilot fears, nudging us to support the latest measures for our "protection". At the election polls, Canadians are offered the choice between liars and incompetents, or both in the same package.

When the phone rings, it could be a survey for the latest study in progress: "How many times a week do you have intercourse with your wife"? Don't scoff -- it happened to a couple in Edmonton recently.

Maybe some day, the news will report: "Link between smoking, AIDS, and oral intercourse found."

TXH1138 is already here.

Gian Turci