Terrorist Assault on Democracy

A couple of things I noticed today. Firstly in the Irish Times:

Terror campaign directed at smoking applies a faulty logic

…Graphic warnings seek to emotionally shove consumers towards the “correct” choice. In championing this policy, Reilly and Borg place far too much faith in the power of fear. In truth, Irish and continental consumers are capable of, and responsible for, shaping their own lives. They do not need the intrusion of well-intentioned, yet deeply misinformed, public health regulators.

It is indeed a form of terrorism. It’s intended to scare people, after all.

And are these terrorists ‘well-intentioned’? I don’t think so.

The other one, on the same topic, was from an antismoker in the Guardian, after expressing his hatred and disgust for smoking:

Despite this, I am more than a little uneasy at the creeping demonisation of smokers by society…

The thing is, the prospect of plain packaging of cigarettes reminds me strongly of visiting East Berlin. Plain packaging is deeply opposed by many people – not just tobacco companies, retailers and special interest groups. Even if plain packaging were a successful intervention and decreased the number of cigarettes smoked, it is a Soviet era-style restriction that does not sit well in a liberal democracy.

An assault on personal freedoms in the name of health is still an assault on democracy. Isn’t it?

Not very often you come across hardcore antismokers with reservations about what’s happening. An ‘assault on democracy’.

Add the two pieces together, and you get a terrorist assault on democracy.

About Frank Davis

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

16 Responses to Terrorist Assault on Democracy

  1. harleyrider1978 says:

    The entire anti-tobacco scam has always been a terror plot! Lying to people that a lil smoke will kill them within 30 minutes or alter their DNA and start a cancer process immediately!
    Fear,Fear,Fear its all they ever had,then they moved into its for the children another scape goat of tyrannical despots.

    Then tonite Ellen Hahn comes up with the latest victim on an outdoor patio setting around smokers!

    Jamason Coles continue to suffer from exposure to secondhand smoke. Jamason suffered a life-threatening asthma attack at work after being exposed to secondhand smoke outside on a patio. Jamason was simply trying to make a living and it almost killed him. Our children and loved ones deserve better.

    Fear,Death,children and the oh so laughable make a living B.S.! All in a tidy single short paragraph! It dont get much more terroristic than that.

  2. harleyrider1978 says:

    O/T
    Not enough signatures for vote on Casper smoke ban

    CHEYENNE, Wyo. — An effort in Casper to let voters decide on a partial repeal of the city’s smoking ban has failed to collect enough signatures to put the issue on the ballot.

    The City Council voted last month to repeal the ban for certain businesses including bars not associated with restaurants. Bar owners complained of lost business to competitors in Mills and Evansville, two nearby towns that still allowed smoking.

    Opponents to the change needed 2,554 signatures to put the issue to a vote. The signatures had to belong to registered voters living in Casper.

    KTWO-TV reports (http://bit.ly/1469wQj ) the group Smokefree Natrona County turned in more than 3,000 signatures but fell 61 signatures short Wednesday of the required number of valid signatures.

    The City Council smoking ban went into effect last year.

    Read more here: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2013/07/24/2597939/not-enough-signatures-for-vote.html#storylink=cpy

  3. waltc says:

    Here you go, smokervoter, Having lost their bid to raise cigarette taxes by $1 last year, the CA Dems are being pressured now to raise them by,,,$2. Or as Audrey commented when she sent me the link: :”They…never….go…away.”:

    http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news%2Fpolitics&id=9184220

    BTW, you do know that she once did run for Mayor on the Libertarian line.

  4. harleyrider1978 says:

    Tobacco Smuggling in Ireland Increases
    A new report shows that the average citizen is not aware of the impact illegal cigarettes is having on the economy.
    July 24, 2013

    DUBLIN– Ireland has the dubious honor of ranking third in tobacco smuggling among European countries, the Irish Times reports. Between 13% and 29% of all tobacco products are illegal, a new report finds.

    The report also discovered that the “man on the street” who purchases smuggled cigarettes has no understanding of what that really means, said Damien English, who chairs the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation for the government.

    The “Factbook on the Illicit Trade in Tobacco Product (ITTP)” pointed to high prices for cigarettes, laughable penalties for smugglers and available suppliers as to why the contraband cigarette trade in Ireland is flourishing. Illegal cigarette sales costs Ireland between €200 million and €250 million each year.

    Smuggled tobacco also has had a detrimental impact on retailers. Tobacco smuggling is a “multi-million euro, global criminal and paramilitary run racket which is making huge profits for those behind it,” said English.

    In September, the Oireachtas committee will give a report on tobacco smuggling. However, English has already contacted Michael Noonan, the minister for finance, on how the country should tackle contraband tobacco in the upcoming budget.

    Among English’s recommendations are to give more money to the Revenue Commissioners to go after smugglers and to perhaps ask for funds from retailers and tobacco companies to pay for additional scanners at airports and ports. Ireland is moving forward with plans to mandate plain packaging for cigarettes.
    http://www.nacsonline.com/News/Daily/Pages/ND0724134.aspx#.UfDxPG19ycd

    • beobrigitte says:

      The report also discovered that the “man on the street” who purchases smuggled cigarettes has no understanding of what that really means

      The man on the street FULLY understands that if he buys smuggled cigarettes, it is:
      1. CHEAPER
      2. No anti-smoking idiocy is funded with the tax levied on this tobacco.

      It’s a win-win.

  5. Frank J says:

    Reading the comments in the Guardian (masochist or what?) I have the impression that it is, really, more about any opportunity to belt ‘Corporations’ than tobacco, per se. These ideological idiots will support anything that ‘restricts Corporations’.whether it be drink, food, oil, finance or tobacco, without any consideration of any effect on themselves. It’s a knee jerk response.

    And the article is, of course, complete crap!

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      The funny thing about these petty Nazis is their political party always comes full circle to screw itself in the arse!

    • beobrigitte says:

      These ideological idiots will support anything that ‘restricts Corporations’.whether it be drink, food, oil, finance or tobacco, without any consideration of any effect on themselves.

      And when they find out, they’ll blame the weather – or the smokers.

      I begin to believe that short-sightedness is an anti-smoker induced religion.

  6. harleyrider1978 says:

    John Davidson Section 2 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Kentucky says “Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority.”This would also make all the smoking bans in cities in ky UNCONSTITUTIONAL on its face!

  7. beobrigitte says:

    WOW… the Guardian is on a roll…………………………… Pity for them it has been used toooooooo many times before. People have become immune. (It’s a bit like natural vaccination; you hear/read the same nonsense, albeit in different words, over and over again – your mind just kills it.)

    This has to be the crown:

    to this day I have smoked fewer than ten cigars, and no cigarettes at all. I hate cigarette smoke. I hate what it does to walls and the atmosphere and my lungs.
    To the walls. WHAT walls? Sorry, anti-smoker, it’s your problem if you are lazy. (Laziness will not help you progress in work, d’you know?)
    My walls at home are BRILLIANT WHITE.

    The atmosphere……… WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ?Global warming.

    My lungs…………..
    Don’t worry, love. Generations have grown old encountering in a day more “passive smoke” than you did in you life. Btw; these generations nowadays provide a a massive headache to any government; they are ready to claim their PENSION.
    However, fear and stress is something that cannot be sustained biochemically for a long time; your mental ability is being diverted into the land of nonsense whilst the “fight-or-flight” hormone(s) interfere until there is a full system shutdown.
    In short, you do not die of cigarette smoke, you die of FEAR of cigarette smoke, whilst I light up another cigarette and RELAX.

    I hate the effect it has on unborn children.

    I don’t. ALL my offspring was delivered before term, as they otherwise were too big for me to do so. All my offspring is university educated. Not all of my offspring are smokers. In fact, only one is.

    So, please do lieto me again about the effect of smoking on unborn children.

    I used to avoid going into pubs because I would start sneezing and come out reeking of tobacco.
    Ah, that is why MILLIONS of non-smokers are storming the pubs since the smoking ban was introduced and all the pub closures are a lie?

    I hate the stench of death clinging to patients on drips outside hospitals.
    If you hate that “stench of death” – why do you force these people into wind and weather? Can you tell the disease the patients on drips outside are suffering from?
    I am sorry to say that e.g. testicular cancer does not have a smell. But it does kill many men.

    • beobrigitte says:

      I have not closed a bracket somewhere…. Hope it still makes sense. * apologies *

      • cherie79 says:

        Totally agree, mine are fine too despite around 60 cigs in labour, very civilized in the 60s, and neither smoke, their choice. Some people refuse to see the evidence of their own eyes prefering false stats and junk science.

  8. harleyrider1978 says:

    July 24, 2013
    Will U.S. Face Trade Sanctions for Anti-Smoking Law?

    As Deadline Passes for U.S. to Alter Law Curbing Teen Smoking, Ruled Against by WTO, Final Decision on Administration’s Anti-Smoking Policy Could Shift Back to WTO

    As the World Trade Organization (WTO) deadline passes today for the United States to comply with a WTO ruling against a U.S. ban on sweet-flavored cigarettes targeting youth, the spotlight shifts back to the WTO, which could now authorize trade sanctions if requested by Indonesia, the country that won the WTO challenge.

    “We now have to wait and see whether the World Trade Organization will slam us with trade sanctions because the United States wants to maintain a policy to keep tobacco companies away from our children,” said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch. “After last year’s rulings against U.S. dolphin protections and popular consumer labels letting Americans know where their food comes, will the WTO depart from its anti-consumer legacy or choose to punish the United States for a common sense public health law?”

    Yesterday, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requested public comment on an issue related to the WTO ruling: the health implications of menthol cigarettes. The Obama administration stated that FDA’s action constitutes compliance with a 2012 World Trade Organization order to alter a key component of the Obama administration’s landmark Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 (FSPTCA).

    That law bans sweet-flavored cigarettes that entice youth to smoke. It shut down the sales of chocolate, strawberry and other sweet-flavored cigarettes sold only by U.S. firms as well as the sale of clove-flavored cigarettes that both U.S. and foreign tobacco companies were marketing. The WTO’s April 2012 final ruling against the FSPTCA concluded that the United States could only ban sweet-flavored cigarettes marketed to youth if it banned all flavored cigarettes, including menthols. The FDA will receive comments for 60 days on potential regulation of menthol cigarettes, after which the administration will decide what, if any, action will be taken.

    It remains to be seen whether Indonesia will accept the FDA announcement or appeal to the WTO to enact trade sanctions against the United States. Indonesia convinced the WTO that the ban on its U.S. sale of clove-flavored cigarettes violated WTO anti-discrimination rules. U.S. consumer and health groups were outraged by the ruling, which effectively forbade incremental policies designed to target anti-smoking efforts at key populations – in this case, children.

    The WTO’s April 2012 ruling against the anti-smoking FSPTCA law was soon followed by WTO rulings against two other popular U.S. consumer policies. In May 2012, the WTO ruled against voluntary “dolphin-safe” tuna labels that, by allowing consumers to choose to buy tuna caught without dolphin-killing fishing practices, have helped to dramatically reduce dolphin deaths. In June 2012, the WTO ruled against the popular U.S. country-of-origin labeling (COOL) meat labeling program that informs U.S. consumers where their meat comes from and assists regulators in tracking food-borne illness outbreaks.
    The administration recently announced solutions to both cases that strengthen rather than weaken consumer and environmental safeguards. Mexico and Canada have threatened to challenge the new U.S. meat labeling policy at the WTO, which would issue a final decision about whether the new labels meet WTO rules. Mexico has also vowed to challenge the enhanced dolphin-safe labeling program, which would place that policy before the WTO as well. If the WTO does not rule that the strengthened U.S. safeguards satisfy WTO requirements, Mexico and Canada could impose trade sanctions against the United States unless and until the U.S. policies are changed to the satisfaction of the WTO.

    http://citizen.typepad.com/eyesontrade/2013/07/will-us-face-trade-sanctions-for-anti-smoking-law.html

  9. jaxthefirst says:

    Y’know, I’m not sure that it’s all bad that this chap comes out with all the old anti lines in this article. Oh, for sure, we’ve heard them all before and worse, but I think it’s good for someone who is so obviously an anti to be taking some tentative steps along the “hang on a minute – this is getting a bit worrying” path. At least he can’t be accused of being a Big Tobacco shill when he’s so obviously wedded to the “poo-stinky-poo-we-don’t-like-you” club. And if a few antis like him can show that it’s possible to remain an anti whilst not joining the braying mob of “any means justifies the ends,” (to which most of his commenters still seem to belong), then maybe some other antis will start thinking more rationally and reasonably, too. Or perhaps it’ll start filtering into the minds of more-reasonable-but-not-very-concerned non-smokers reading articles like his that enough is now enough and that things are now starting to get out of hand …

  10. junican says:

    It would be nice if the new puritans would offend a few more million people first, Jax.

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.