Why this Blog?

A place where I can lament the changing times; for eccentric comments on current affairs and for unfashionable views, expressed I hope, in cogent style; also occasional cris de coeur largely concerned, I regret to say, with myself.


I welcome your comments, so do please write. Please note however that all comments are moderated prior to publication. Whilst I fully appreciate that life can be frustrating, nevertheless, abuse, SMS language and illiteracy will not be tolerated!

Sunday 20 February 2011

More Anti-Smoker/Smoking Balls

First I begin with a site from Canada, called Citizens Against Government Encroachment.

I reproduce the latest article in full, since I consider it vitally important:


When it comes to the smoking issue (and to a lesser extent the obesity issue), many people have expressed to us how amazed, baffled and even disgusted they are at how some of our fellow citizens have turned into arrogant, obnoxious, hateful individuals almost overnight.
Indeed, as we read open letters to the various media, listen to open lines on the radio or television, follow newspaper and other forums on the internet, we can not help but notice how ugly some individuals become when they hide behind the veil of relative anonymity. When opponents of banning smoking scenes in movies attempted to have a civil debate in a CBC forum, one poster using the alias of Dennis Brady had this to say :

“Smoking is hated - as is any foul smelling addiction. We would have no less disgust for people whose habit was sh*ting on public beaches or on park benches. We would be as disgusted by people who refused to bath or use deodorant.

We DO want smokers segregated - removed from all contact with non-smokers.

Do you understand? Need I repeat it”

In a Globe & Mail forum about beach bans, one poster using the alias “doggiez” suggested this final solution to the “problem”:

“Put even MORE cancer-causing chemicals -- tar, formaldehyde and the other 700 -- into cigarettes to hasten their deaths.”

When challenged with logical arguments and unable to offer any reasonable responses, many such commentators accuse their opponents of being in the pay of what they refer to as “Big Tobacco”. Here is a response from the so-called “Dennis Brady” that is typical of many smoker de-normalization proponents with very little substance to defend their point of view:

''The people have learned to never trust anything coming from the tobacco industry or its shills and apologists.''

You may want to read or reread how C.A.G.E. was also a victim of the same tactic: ''THE RIGHT THING TO DO'' NSRA STYLE
We strongly suspected that this hostile attitude demonstrated toward individuals or associations with differing opinions were not the doings of ordinary citizens, however one must always give the benefit of doubt: perhaps public opinion had changed overnight when public smoking bans were adopted? Well, you can relax folks. All this time, it was not your next door neighbor, co-worker, friend or relative who was turning into an aggressive “Mr. Hyde” when protected by the cover of anonymity. We now have tangible proof that most of the people who are posting obnoxious and hateful material are simply following orders from the anti-tobacco industry:

We have obtained the manual on how to effectively implement outdoor bans published in September 2010 by Physicians For A Smoke-Free Canada (PSFC) : SMOKEFREE OUTDOOR PUBLIC SPACES: A COMMUNITY ADVOCACY TOOLKIT.

We share with you here below a few of the more disappointing passages that we have uncovered.

For proof that they have tobacco control advocates planted in the various internet forums look at the footnotes on the page that gives advice on how to refute arguments from the tobacco industry or their ‘’front groups’’ (page 22):

‘’ Comments from tobacco control advocates also appear refuting “Vince’s” comments. Accessed August 6, 2010 at http://openfile.ca/node/908/.’’

Note that we at C.A.G.E. know ‘’Vince’’ and we can assure you that he is an authentic grassroots poster from Manitoba who has absolutely nothing to do with the tobacco industry.
Also appalling and very hypocritical is the manner in which they recommend infiltrating their opponents whom they conveniently label as “the tobacco industry and their front groups” :

“Whether they are funded by the industry or not, to stay on top of any organized opposition sign up for their mailing lists, preferably using an alias. You can also search online for organizations that oppose your campaign and sign up to receive email alerts, preferably at a home email address or some other location that doesn't link you to your position in the coalition. Be sure to share these communications with your key coalition members so that everyone is in the loop and you can collectively decide how to counter the industry most effectively.”

The entire 101 page manual is a most interesting document that exposes the tactics of the anti-tobacco industry and we suspect that after they see us bringing this document to the attention of the public, it will quickly be altered or totally vanish. Not to worry we have made back- up copies in anticipation. The following are some of their other tactics and while they did not shock us as much because we had noticed them practicing these strategies since a long time, we are, nonetheless, surprised that they would be so arrogant and self-confident as to make their tactics public.

.....write (or sign ghost written) letters to the editor, etc. (pages 31 & 33)

.....submit at least two letters to the editor each month during the campaign, under the names of different authors”. (page 33)

.......Nothing can ruin a campaign faster than public disclosure of financial wrongdoing (intentional or unintentional) ? something your opponents would love to expose if given the opportunity. (page 34)

Interestingly, in the following paragraph they acknowledge that there are in fact authentic citizens (labeled as angry smokers) expressing themselves and that it is not the tobacco industry and their ‘’front groups’’ who are doing the complaining. Furthermore, they are acknowledging that most non-smokers don’t complain leaving us to conclude that indeed most of what we read in the various media must therefore be plants of the tobacco control industry.

....... A key aspect of any smoke-free campaign is to mobilize the silent majority. Most non-smokers do not speak out against smoking, but you have to tap into their power to win your case. Angry smokers who feel they are losing what they feel is their right to smoke will likely speak out in a variety of ways
--- letters to the editor, comments sections of online articles, radio call-in shows, etc. Their voices can seem very loud, even though they represent a significant minority of the population. (page 36)

........ For the next few months, strive to ensure there are positive media stories, letters to the editor, etc., that tout how well the bylaw changes are working. There will no doubt be a backlash from smokers in the beginning until they get used to the changes. In the meantime, you have to counter their negative comments in the media, in comment sections of online news pieces and blogs, on radio call-in shows, etc. Your job is to make politicians continue to believe that they did the right thing. It is not unheard of for councillors to backtrack on their decision and water down legislation. (page 48)

........ Plant stories in the media about non-smokers politely asking smokers to move to a designated smoking area or outside the smoke-free area and smokers complying. Create the impression that the bylaw is working and it will! (page 48)

There are many other examples, far too many to list here, but we invite you to peruse the whole document yourself and get an eye-opening education about how anti-tobacco operates. The late Gian Turci often said that this was a war. Sometimes we thought he exaggerated. To our dear freedom and justice-loving friends, we must now admit that Gian was right and that this is in fact a real war. But rest assured that we will continue to use the truth as our only weapon because when this war will be over, we do not only want to stand victorious but we also want to stand proud for not having stooped to such depths of deceit.

No comments: