Just when you thought you’ve heard all of the laughable ideas that anti-tobacco and the media can spread regarding smokers, the UK’s BBC News has published a gut-buster.
In case you ever doubted the willingness of the media to propagate anti-smoking’s hysterical fantasms, The UK’s BBC News is reporting on a new laugher– workers who step outside for a smoke and talk to each other are making non-smokers "suspicious".
No, it’s not smoking that’s worrying the non-smokers this time –it’s the "conspiratorial" way of people the BBC characterizes as "bedraggled" "pavement puffers".
In a statement defying both credulity and description, "behavioural and workplace expert" Judi James is quoted in the article linked below stating that "Smokers’ workplace bonding has always given them a very unfair advantage."
The article goes on to explain Ms. James’ belief that "the default body language of smokers is gossipy and conspiratorial…. and this can create suspicion amongst non-smokers."
"Suspicion"? Suspicion of what, exactly? Being "conspiratorial"? If so, what are smokers standing outside their workplace supposedly conspiring about?
Who are these suspicious non-smokers that Ms. James speaks of? Where are they?
Meanwhile, BBC News fails to acknowledge the obvious. People huddled outside workplaces aren’t "bedraggled" or being "conspiratorial". Rather, they’re working people trying to make a living. They go outside to smoke because they’re complying with workplace laws that the anti-smoking establishment forced upon smokers many years ago. Beyond that, they’re just normal people talking to each other.
Smokers and non-smokers alike should take note of this irresponsible and, frankly, immoral characterization by BBC News. Stating that smokers participate in "bonding" which gives them an "unfair advantage" while also stating that they are "suspicious" and "conpiratorial" is a clear attempt to imply that smokers are somehow participating in some ridiculous, undefined, plot. Supposedly against their non-smoking co-workers . It’s preposterous.
Regardless how one feels about smoking, it should be known that the same anti-tobacco establishment that delivers all of the fears regarding smoking to the public is the very same force promoting such ludicrous and dangerous views.
Ms. James also might want to take a closer look at those groups gathered on the sidewalks. She might notice that many of the people aren’t actually smoking, or even in the possession of tobacco products. Non-smokers go outside on their breaks, too. And, because they don’t share Ms. James’ divisive mentality, non-smokers will stand in a crowd and talk with their smoking co-workers.
Should these non-smokers then be characterized as "bedraggled" co-conspirators? Ludicrous.
0 Comments