A Vicious Assault

H/T Magnetic for Tough Love For Smokers: A vicious assault on the nastiest habit in the world that will make your eyeballs bleed and help you quit smoking, by Ken Austin.

The introduction starts:


No, actually, I’ve been smoking for 45 years. And nothing is telling me that I want to quit. Nothing ever has. So I’m not looking for a nudge in any direction. And, no, that’s not why I started reading this book either.

I started reading it, in fact, because I hoped it might give me a little insight into the twisted minds of professional antismokers.


Well, it certainly looks like it’s heading that way. And I’m sure Ken Austin would like to see public beatings of smokers, and quite likely gas chambers too.

But I don’t think the regulations and laws are going to continue to pile up – if only because when you exclude and demonise a quarter, or a third, – or even a half -, as in the Middle Eastern countries I was looking at yesterday – of your population, you create a deeply divided and malfunctioning society. It doesn’t matter whether it’s smokers this is done to, or any other social group: a house divided against itself cannot stand.


What are these lies the tobacco companies tell? Is it that they’ve cast doubt on the idea that smoking causes lung cancer? If so, they were right to do so.

And no, the rest of society doesn’t feel extreme, nearly pathological hatred for smokers. If they did, I’d never have had any non-smoking friends. But I had lots of them. It’s really only psychotic antismokers like Ken Austin who feel that way, and imagine that everybody else does, when actually they don’t.

And lying in the rank, soiled sheets of a hospital bed? That was how my non-smoking grandmother died. That’s the way more and more people – smokers and antismokers – end up these days, unfortunately.


Ah, so he’s an anti-smoking professional! It seems to attract psychopaths.

toughlove5Also included was a table of contents, shown at right (click on the image to enlarge).

Chapter 1 is “The Stench”, of course. But I’ve always liked the smell of tobacco smoke. I liked it long before I took up smoking. Back in my childhood, none of us kids hated the smell of it. It takes years of poisonous indoctrination to get people to hate and fear it.

And back when I worked in offices, none of my colleagues loathed me. If they had, I’m sure that I would have known. And I wouldn’t have become good friends with some of them, as I quite often did. Nor did my employers ever target me: I never got fired from any job I had.

What spews out of this book is really nothing but the author’s own pathological hatred for smokers. He doesn’t ‘love’ them at all, not even in any ‘tough love’ sense. He hates them, and he wants to kill them. And that’s something he’s been taught to do. That’s something he’s been conditioned and programmed to do.

The person he’s really describing is himself. He’s the “moron”. He’s the “weakling, white trash, herd-mentality slob”. He’s someone who has swallowed every single lie he’s been told about tobacco, and all he’s doing is vomiting it back up.

Yet this might be a good book to buy, and to show to a few non-smoking friends, just to let them see the depths of antismoking hatred that’s around these days.

Anyway, as for “ruined appearances”, here’s Kate Moss again to take the nasty taste away:



About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to A Vicious Assault

  1. Pretty amazing. Both the book and Kate … in somewhat different ways of course.

    134 pages of psychosis for only $10? Heck, Brains is three times as long and only twice the price! Something tells me he probably doesn’t have the proportional equivalent of references either! LOL!

    On a more serious note, he’s probably a classic sufferer of ASDS, AntiSmokers’ Dysfunction Syndrome — http://wispofsmoke.net/recovery.html — and it’s interesting to see how similar his psychosis is to that of Stanton Glantz. Glantz has been well-known for years for his incredibly monomaniacal view of the world. E.G., simply because HE has a bug on his brain about smoking in films, he’ll tell the press that most parents will avoid taking their kids to see something like Avatar once they learn that Sigourney Weaver is shown smoking onscreen for about 1% of the film’s run-time.

    When he says something like that I think he actually, truly, believes it to be reality: he has a hard time understanding that his particularly distorted pair of reality goggles isn’t seeing quite the same universe as the rest of humanity. Because of the inundation of money to his cause from US taxpayers, he’s been reinforced in that belief to such an extent that it’s unlikely he’ll ever be cured — no matter what reality might come down the road. If the Antismokers eventually get thrown off their horse and shuttled back into their proper holes in the ground, he’ll simply ascribe it to “the massive power of the evil tobacco companies” — just as the “Tough Love” author seems to think that people like Frank and I and Magnetic and Leg and most of the rest of us reading this are “Astro Turf” manipulated by tobacco company claims from fifty years ago.


    – MJM

    • Rose says:

      But oddly fascinating as an insight into such minds for more normal people.
      It reminds me of watching Dexter . Not my choice, but the family was rivetted.

      “Dexter is an American television drama series which debuted on Showtime on October 1, 2006. The series centers on Dexter Morgan (Michael C. Hall), a blood spatter pattern analyst for the fictional Miami Metro Police Department who also leads a secret life as a serial killer.

      Tobacco Control, Stigma, and Public Health: Rethinking the Relations

      “To confront such malefactors, some believed, anything that might work had to be considered, even heavy-handed moral opprobrium. In the New York Times, a psychiatrist wrote,
      “What we need is a national campaign that results in the stigmatization rather than the glorification of the smoker. This, in my opinion, would be the most effective way of reducing the number of smokers and confining their smoke to the privacy of their homes”
      New York Times. July 30, 1977

  2. magnetic01 says:

    MJM, banning/R-rating of smoking in movies isn’t a Glantz peculiarity. It’s a WHO initiative – who would have guessed?

    Glands is just the useful idiot to push the agenda. You can imagine the WHO phone call to their good buddy, the glorified mechanic. “Yep, yep, not a problem”, replies Stantonitis. “I’ll whip up some research while I’m on the toilet tonight”.

    MJM, you know how it goes. You get some junk research going which becomes mounting evidence. According to some phase of the moon, the mounting evidence becomes “settled science”. Long-hijacked organizations such as the Office of the S-G and the CDC will take up the issue, making causal claims. Then the antismoking miscreants can use the logical fallacy of “appeal to authority” or “argument from authority”. And that’s where we’re up to already. The S-G has claimed that smoking in movies not only influences but “causes” smoking initiation. For an image on a screen to “cause” smoking initiation it would have to emit something like, say, a hooobilooby ray that comes off the screen and impregnates the minds of the impressionable Children™. You would never use the term “cause” in this sort of flimsy “research”. But when has sensibility ever been a concern of antismoking? Think I kid you?

    “The U.S. Surgeon General, the nation’s doctor, has concluded there isn’t just a connection, there is a causal relationship between children’s exposure to smoking on screen and their starting to smoke….”

    And if that wasn’t enough, let’s add a further dollop of derangement. The other propaganda mob, the CDC, has again prostituted its authority:

    “To encourage this process, CDC editorial announced that it “will now track and report annually on tobacco use imagery in youth-oriented movies as a core surveillance … [that] will be added to regular CDC reports to the public on smoking prevalence among youth and adults, total and per-capita cigarette consumption, and progress on tobacco control policies.”

    The CDC goes on to say “… the movie industry has a responsibility to protect our youth from exposure to tobacco use and other pro-tobacco imagery in movies that are produced and rated as appropriate for children and adolescents. Eliminating tobacco imagery in movies is an important step that should be easy to take.”

    This action puts the smoking that the big media companies put in their movies on the same category as other disease vectors.

    “New study published by CDC: More Onscreen Tobacco Use in
    Movies Aimed at Young Viewers … means more kids will start


    And it’s not only America (although the lead comes from the WHO/America). Yesterday’s link to Australia’s latest antismoking derangement includes looking into smoking in movies:

    • magnetic01 says:

      It always helps if you can get some other buddies to lend their weight. Right on cue, we have 30 A-Gs also attempting to influence 20th Century Fox into censorship.

      Attorney_General, Washington

      A-G, Ohio

      A-G, Kentucky

      “About 30 Attorneys General, including Kentucky’s Jack Conway, say the movies are getting too ‘smoky.’

      The Kentucky Post quotes the Centers for Disease Control saying on-screen cigarette smoking has gone up in the last two years.

      Now 30 Attorneys General have signed a letter to Rupert Murdock, of 20th Century Fox, asking him to take smoking out of any movie rated G, PG, and PG-13.

      The group is concerned about the possible influence on young people.”

      Make no mistake as to the sickly intent here. If the antismoking bigots can get censorship passed for movies, it can then bypass time-consuming piecemeal bans. If The Children™ need to be protected from images of smoking in movies, then how much more do they need protection from people actually smoking. The only “resolution” according to the bigots would be to entirely ban smoking in public for consistency’s sake. We’re right to the heart of the Godber Blueprint where smoking is viewed on a par with sexual acts that should only be permitted in private (alone or between consenting adults, and with additional provisos) lest The Children™ be “led astray”.

  3. magnetic01 says:

    Frank, have a comment awaiting moderation.

  4. Marvin says:

    The Anti-Smoking industry now have their own Julius Streicher.
    And they get peeved if you mention the Nazis – ha!!

  5. Some other Tom says:

    Amazing to browse the index/contents. What a disgusting and hateful sack of shit that soul is.

    On the one hand, it makes me grateful for free speech – I like it when people like that actually say what they really think, as it does far more damage to their ’cause’ than anyone else possibly could in a debate. If anything, I hope he becomes well known and the new face/voice for the entire anti-smoking movement. He’s the perfect spokes-model, really, because it’s only ever been about inciting fear and panic in the many based on the hatred of a few.

    I’ll echo your sentiment about ‘the stench’… There’s not been a day in my life when I didn’t love the aroma of tobacco smoke, be it a pipe, a cigar, or a cigarette. When I was growing up, long before I ever even tried it, I knew I’d smoke someday. I still find it to be one of the happiest things I’ve ever smelled.

  6. smokervoter says:

    Bingo! It just dawned on me who I was thinking of with yesterday’s ‘Yoo hoo Eddy’ error. ‘Twas Edward Bernays. I recently penned an article which references him and public relations and healthism. A PR queen from Florida has an article out there in circulation, actually more of a press release, odiously titled “Many voters dislike smokers, smoking” which I take exception to.

  7. Matt says:

    Some other Tom: I remember loving the smell of pipe smoke from a very young age, although this never corresponded to a desire to actually smoke one. I know of life-long non-smokers who say exactly the same. One friend’s mother (who has never smoked) recalls how she would often go and stand by his uncle whilst he smoked his pipe, just so she could enjoy the smell.

  8. magnetic01 says:

    Frank, have another comment awaiting moderation.

  9. garyk30 says:

    There will be no public beatings in places that allow citizens to carry concealed weapons!!!

  10. Junican says:

    It has been my experience in life that very often the harshest and toughest approach to a problem is the best

    Who’s problem is he talking about? If it is my problem that he is talking about, then I would rather that he minds his own business.
    And there, is another indication of the psychopathic nature of these people. They arrogantly assume that they have some right to demand that you solve your problems by allowing them to bully you.

  11. Chuck says:

    Wow, this book is amazing. I bought it for Kindle last night after seeing this post. It makes me wonder how many anti-smokers are equally hateful but keep the sentiment publicly quiet. There’s a section in the book complaining about third-hand smoke left behind in apartments:

    “If only the self-serving animal of a smoker were there at that moment, you could drive a crowbar into the back of his head and then when he is laid out on the floor, pry his rancid mouth open with the crowbar and blow a load of puke right down his throat…It wouldn’t come close to making up for the toxic second-hand fumes you have inhaled from a life-time of ignorant smokers, but it would at least make some amends.”

    The publication is filled with similar vitriol. It clearly has no intent of helping smokers quit, and in one place admits that “this whole book-length rant is meant to play into smokers’ emotions and hammer home the reality of what non-smokers think of them….”

    In a section called “Smokers Roast” is is suggested that “Hundreds, or perhaps thousands of smokers could be lured” to a site where families of people killed or injured in fires would be invited to beat them–but not to the point of death. The smokers would first be tied to wooden poles where “a few sticks of kindling could be shoved up the asses of some of the smokers and set alight to get things going.”

    I am dumbfounded. But I suppose there may be a small sub-population of anti-smokers who might enjoy this book as fantasy wish fulfillment.

    • nisakiman says:

      The guy sounds seriously in need of medication. Or perhaps a frontal lobotomy would be more appropriate.

      I sometimes wonder about people like him. So full of hatred. He certainly appears to have a quite severe psychosis. Maybe he had a very troubled childhood. Whatever, it’s when people like him manage to grab the reins of power that the unpleasantness begins.

    • smokingscot says:

      “But I suppose there may be a small sub-population of anti-smokers who might enjoy this book as fantasy wish fulfillment.”

      And Stephen Williams MP (Lib/Dem) steps up to the plate.

  12. Barry Homan says:

    What does this Austin turd look like? Thinning red hair, sparse beard, dark little blots for eyes, and oatmeal lips? Anyone have a photo they can post?

  13. jay says:

    Is this for sale on Amazon? Has it got any reviews? Just askin…..

    • Chuck says:

      I just submitted a review to Amazon:

      This book is pure tripe–page after page of the vilest insults against smokers. It purports to be an aide in quitting smoking, but it’s no more than hate speech recommending unspeakable crimes against smokers. Poorly written, it keeps changing its perceived audience, first speaking directly to smokers to insult them, but primarily speaking to non-smokers to suggest that various crimes against smokers–such as assault, burning alive, staking and torture–are not only reasonable but necessary and inevitable. The book is sloppy, poorly edited and inconsistent; it mixes genres, throwing fiction into the middle for no apparent reason. It’s actually painful to read such poor writing. The author claims to be an English teacher, but the amateurish quality of the prose leads one to imagine him sitting at a card table in his grandmother’s basement, pounding away on a keyboard, drinking bottle after bottle of Mountain Dew while endlessly watching repeats of “Gilligan’s Island” on a 13-inch TV. I paid three bucks for the Kindle version of this book and I wish I had it back–it’s awful to think that I’ve encouraged such a terrible writer with any amount of money. You may be curious enough (as I was) to purchase the book. I urge you to repress that curiosity. Even if you hate smoking yourself, I guarantee you’ll feel guilty about supporting such vile, egotistical, self-indulgent hatred.

  14. Frank Davis says:

    Might it be this guy? This particular Ken Austin was a one-time alcoholic, who has worked in alcoholism treatments. He founded a successful dental equipment company. However, he must be aged 80 right now


    Ken Austin, who along with wife Joan, founded A-dec Inc. in Newberg, is another active board member and advocate for DePaul Treatment Centers…

    Austin understands recovery because he’s been there.

    “No one even knew I had a problem,” says Austin. “I never drank on the job, never had a drink at lunchtime. I would leave and pick up a six-pack of beer. I’d think, tonight I’m not going to drink too much, and I’d wake up on the floor at three a.m., the television is fog…get up…go to bed. I never was late to work, here at 8, stayed til 6. In the latter stages I was tired—sick and tired of being sick and tired…

    The same fellow told Austin about a book, “Alcoholism: The Exposed Family,” that he credits with leading him to sobriety. “The fourth time I read the book through,” Austin recalls, “it hit me that all I had to do was admit I was powerless over alcohol and that I couldn’t drink…

    Austin’s work with Neff would be yet another opportunity to pay it forward, and the Austins’ business success would make it possible. The business, A-dec, employs about 900 people in Newberg, with worldwide distribution and offices in England and Australia…


    The husband and wife team of Joan and Ken Austin founded A-dec (an acronym for Austin Dental Equipment Company) in 1964 with a $2,400 loan from Ken Austin’s father and a local dentist, and the goal of having ten employees in five years. Austin, a life-long tinkerer, had trained as an engineer at Oregon State University, from which he graduated in 1954. Upon graduation, Austin served in the Air Force, first as a radar controller, then as a radar site repair crew supervisor, on active duty in Korea, and, finally, as an aircraft maintenance officer in the United States…

    When his lack of tact once again led to unemployment…

    vollum award


  15. melinoerealm says:

    Please take a minute to vote yes, and engage your friends to do the same, thank you.


  16. magnetic01 says:

    The same Ken Austin has written another book:

    Bangkok Filth: The Freaks, Frauds and Failures of the Expat Community in Thailand

  17. johnnyrvf says:

    I could fancy Kate Moss; if she had bigger tits……..

  18. melinoerealm says:

    Here’s professor Grieshaber’s blog. He’s been making some excellent points.

    ‎”The WHO, in war against smoking, has the pharmaceutical industry as an ally.
    What is the success rate of smoking cessation according to WHO estimates?
    How many euros are spent for this?
    Which revenue is expected in the pharmaceutical industry by 2018?
    Prof. Romano Grieshaber – http://grieshaber.wordpress.com/2012/11/27/das-kleine-tabakkontroll-ratespiel/


    • beobrigitte says:

      Very short but very thought provoking!

      Don’t we all know that any pharmaceutical smoking cessation product is equally as good as placebo; so there is a business adventure beckoning. I simply press flour (no sugar added as this would interfere with the war on obesity) into pills and get Deborah to sell them for me.

  19. beobrigitte says:

    Tough “love” for smokers……….
    Firstly: the book title is misleading.
    Even with the best of intentions I cannot detect LOVE in any of the listed chapters, but I do detect barely hidden hate.

    Quite frankly, this book is a waste of paper (How many trees had to die for this nonsense?). How published this?
    Ah, I see.
    Publisher: Ken Austin (December 10, 2012)

    I have only read the excerpts Frank put up here – I still feel dizzy due to vigorous head shaking. No wonder he had to publish this thing himself! The manuscript for this book would be rejected by ALL publishing companies! (Perhaps it has been………)

    So, he (as well as the 7 other antis) declare smokers as the “lowest of the low” and “that there will be sanction after sanction until there is no-where for smokers to HIDE”.

    Perhaps a little more transparency with respect to what exactly is meant by “sanction after sanction” would be in order.
    Well, it will be quite easy to round me and a lot of others up for extermination.
    Are we smokers to:
    1.) having to wear a button, stating SMOKER?
    2.) are we to be stripped of our clothes and led to a “shower” room?

    What are these lies the tobacco companies tell?
    This is something I have asked myself for a long time. All business companies are selling their products.

    Which businesses apply greater pressure to the public to buy their product?


    or these:

    By the way, I have learned today that every day 22000 children die due to starvation in Africa. I believe, the antis are already there and are lobbying for smoking bans.

  20. DP says:

    Dear Mr Davis

    The table of contents reads like a parody of ani-smoking hatred.

    I wish the anti-smoking campaign would ease off – I had to smoke 9 cigarettes last year due to the Stoptober waste of taxpayers’ money – up from 3 the previous year.


    • Junican says:

      Oh dear………you’re doomed.

    • beobrigitte says:

      I wish the anti-smoking campaign would ease off – I had to smoke 9 cigarettes last year due to the Stoptober waste of taxpayers’ money – up from 3 the previous year.

      This explains it!!! I was wondering why people who usually smoke rarely were constantly “borrowing” cigarettes from me last October.

      Perhaps floptober has enlightened some government officials, too.

  21. Magnetico, the WHO is a latecomer to the party. Glantz has been getting millions for his “Smoke Free Films” nonsense for a LONGGG time…. stretching back to near or even into the ’90s. You’re better at digging up funding dirt than I am: you might want to check out Glantz and ANR and the SFF budgets: I *think* I’ve seen a figure of $10 million for Smoke Free Films, possibly even $20M, but don’t remember the source.

    They pressured Time Warner years ago to chuck dozens of old 1950s era cartoons into the dustbin because various characters smoked in them.

    Hmmm… check this link from 1999: http://pages.videotron.com/abc/films-movies/ and note that it links to Glantz’s home base at UCSF. And this series of over 90 ads in the NY Times et al since 2002: http://www.smokefreemovies.ucsf.edu/ourads/index.html and finally, note that they had spots shown at the Cannes Film Festival in 2003. This is a VERY big project for Glantz and the Antis: they’re basically trying to reprogram mass social psychology by creating the perception via movies and TV that no one in the world actually smokes. They even get upset when the BAD guys smoke!

    In the TV series Dexter that was mentioned, we have the HERO routinely killing and then chopping people up into little pieces in every single family-friendly episode. Meanwhile the Antis raised high holy hell because ONE of the good characters, Dexter’s cute but tough cop-sister who regularly hops into bed with anyone who has three legs, occasionally snuck a quick puff or two in a few episodes during the first four seasons. The blood ‘n gore was allowed to remain, but her smoking had to go — and then, to pay penance for their sins, the show allowed smoking to be shown in two places in the fifth(?) season: one smoker was a raspy voice sleazy motel owner, and the other(s) were a group of pedophiles living under a bridge. Oh, and then, on the side, they had a forensics detective exclaiming over a cigar ash found in a pool of blood: “Look at this! An ASH! It’s 2011, NO ONE smokes anymore! What a lead!”

    The Antismokers are *truly* crazy.

    – MJM

  22. Pingback: The Hidden Antismokers | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.