My copy of Michael McFadden’s Tobakkobacht arrived today. I haven’t read it yet. But I read the author’s preface, and in my view for that alone the book is worth every penny I paid for it. Because he writes:

…what is being done to smokers today is truly not that much different from what was being done to Germany’s Jews in the very earliest presages of the Holocaust, the period when virtually no one, either in Germany or elsewhere, would ever have believed in the possibility of what was to come.

That’s what I think too. And it’s what I’ve written in my blog many times. But this was the first time I’ve ever read it printed in ink in the one of the opening pages of a book that I was holding in my hands.

He continues:

Even though I do not believe the “War On Smokers” will ever extend much beyond personal animosity and economic, housing, and medical persecution, I have been horrified to see such widespread acceptance of the growth of such persecution. It has been very disturbing to see it met with total complacency amongst a generation that, just thirty years earlier, was screaming high holy hell against any and all behavioral control by authority; the hippies who believed that all people should be loved and practically all non-violent behaviors should be tolerated and accepted as each and every individual was allowed to do their own thing.

I have seen the sea-change in attitude over those thirty years and I have seen how reluctant people are to stand up to authority, no matter how illegitimate, if it dons the robes of acting in the public interest, or for the children, or even just to save tax money.

I have seen people radically alter their views of reality, not because of any sound and rational argument, but purely because they have been hit, over and over and over again, with sound bite philosophies that come to be accepted without thought or question upon the hundredth unchallenged repetition.

I have seen people treat and accept treatment of friends and family members in ways that would have been unimaginable twenty or thirty years ago: tossing grandparents out onto snow-covered porches, evicting elderly patients from long-term care facilities, rudely accosting strangers who are engaging in “misbehiour” a dozen yards away in the open air, even teaching their children to regard certain sorts of folks as “dirty,” while training them to make nasty faces and fake coughing sounds upon the sight of such folks.

I have seen the majority of the population welcome extortionate taxation of a minority simply because they have been given an excuse to vote for taxing someone else without guilt.

I have seen people tossed out of homes they had lived in for years simply because they refused to change their lifestyles to be in accordance with a new fiat regarding their perfectly legal behavior, and I have even seen people threatened with the denial of needed medical treaments unless they agreed to adopt the current medical ideal and alter their behavior accordingly.

I’ve seen all that and finally, many years after graduating with a degree in Peace Studies, I have begun to understand just how subtly hate can be built up against a minority with almost no one objecting, and almost no one believing how far such hate can eventually go as it develops step by step.

And that’s pretty much my experience too. And over the past few years, I too have begun to at last understand what happened in Nazi Germany 80 years ago, and how it was done – because it is now happening all over again, more or less everywhere in the world.

I’d simply add that it’s happening all over again because the eugenic philosophy that underpinned Nazism never went away. It has remained the orthodoxy. And in its view the human race is to be improved, like a herd of cattle, by culling the weakest and sickliest and least desirable members of it. In Nazi Germany, those were, among others, the Jews and the Gypsies and homosexuals. The new undesirables are now smokers, drinkers, and fat people. And these are the ones who are now being subjected to exactly the kind of insults and smears and innuendoes that were used 80 years ago. And these are the ones who are now being refused jobs, homes, and medical treatment.

And, ultimately, this eugenic philosophy is inherently murderous in nature. Refusing people jobs and homes and medicine is simply a slow way of killing them. Tobacco Control isn’t trying to ‘help’ smokers: it’s trying to exterminate them. But this time, instead of herding them all into gas chambers, they’re setting out to gradually decimate their numbers in a multiplicity of small ways, all of which have the same end result.

And this is why there can be nothing to discuss with Tobacco Control, why smokers cannot engage in any meaningful debate with such people. There is nothing to discuss: This is a war. It’s a naked fight for survival. And the sooner the world’s 1.5 billion smokers wake up to this fact, the better.

And the more books like McFadden’s that explicitly and unhesitatingly point out how history is repeating itself, the better.

I don’t yet have a link for where to buy this book (mine is an advance copy), but maybe Michael McFadden can provide me with one.

About Frank Davis

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

68 Responses to TobakkoNacht

  1. ladyraj says:

    Thank you for sharing excerpts from MM’s book…I just might buy a copy! Personally, I realized the depths of indoctrination of anti-smoker messages via harm to others in my own home. My 15 year old grandson invited his girlfriend over to watch a movie. I busied myself with chores while the kids settled themselves in the living room. Approximately halfway thru the movie I told the kids I was going to have a smoke in my room. I had my smoke, waited about 20 minutes, then opened my bedroom door….the girl immediately started coughing and holding her chest gasping for breath. She ran to the patio for air because “her lungs were freezing up”. I sent my grandson to check on her and he coaxed her back into the room which triggered more coughing. I was concerned enough to ask if she suffered from asthma and needed an inhaler. Her reply was that she didn’t have asthma but she was super-sensitive to tobacco smoke.

    I could have left the issue alone but…I couldn’t. I asked her if she had the same response to a fireplace, no. How about a campfire…no. Does she have that reaction to anything other than tobacco smoke…she said it was only tobacco smoke that hurt her lungs. I asked her if she saw any smoke leak into the room when I opened the door….her reply was no. (Please note I waited for 20 minutes after smoking a single ciggie before I opened my door.) When I asked her how her lungs could seize up from tobacco smoke when she admittedly didn’t see any smoke emerge from the room she began crying and professed she was allergic to the smell.

    I tried to explain to this individual that she was in my home, a smoker’s home, and that if she were that hyper-sensitive to smoke that perhaps she and my grandson can meet up elsewhere. After all, I wouldn’t want to be responsible for a guest becoming ill. Her reply was that I should simply stop smoking and all would be well. Imagine that….

    Over the next week I spoke with her parents to inquire about the health of their daughter. I was promptly informed their daughter was ill from the experience with an ill-defined undiagnosed cold/respiratory problem. Hmm…it seems the smell of smoke travels across town and infects caretakers as well. perhaps 3rd hand smoke is to blame! lol

    The funny thing was…..I smoked a ciggie in my room at the beginning of the movie….I just didn’t announce that I was going to beforehand. The unannounced ciggie didn’t trigger any physical reaction at all.

    • prog says:

      Well, it’s a well known fact that tobacco is the most dangerous of all nature’s creations. It’s only a matter of time before smoke bombs are deployed against non smoking civilians in the Middle East….

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      LadyRaj I think this will explain what happened quite well to the lil girl…………..

      Nord Med. 1994;109(4):121-5.
      [Environmental somatization syndrome. How to deal with the external milieu syndrome?].
      [Article in Swedish]
      Nilsson CG, Göthe CJ, Molin C.
      SourceMed Rehabiliteringskliniken, Huddinge Sjukhus.

      Somatization is a tendency to experience and communicate psychogenic distress in the form of somatic symptoms and to seek medical help for them. Patients suffering from environmental somatization syndrome (ESS) consider their symptoms to be caused by exposure to chemical or physical components of the external environment or by ergonomic stress at work. ESS is distinguished by mental contagiousness and a tendency to cluster. Sometimes it explodes in wide-spread epidemics that may be escalated by mass-media campaigns. Extensive ESS epidemics have been connected to, i.a., arsenic, carbon monoxide (“generator gas poisoning”), mercury (“oral galvanism”), carbon-free copy papers, electromagnetic fields (“electric allergy”) and repetitive movements (“repetition strain injury”, RSI). The typical patient directs the interest on the external environment, refuses alternative explanations of his symptoms and abhors any suggestion of a psychogenic etiology.

      The community is often placed in difficult positions by lobby groups calling for drastic measures to eliminate alleged disease-inducing exposures. When hygienic evils occur simultaneously with an ESS epidemic, it is essential to strictly differ the hygienic problems from the ESS problems. If mismanaged, measures aimed at reducing hygienic inconveniences may aggravate the complex of ESS problems.

      Pretty much spot on Ehh!

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Fear inducing campaigns or the mere mention that a something could harm is enuf to create a panic………..This is the result of weak minded individuals buying into black magic claims of harm from nothing. Especially small children in an indoctrination program at school. Luckily small children by age 10 or 11 have overcome these early brainwashing stories from D.A.R.E classes in America. Only the weakest minded will still maintain a fear that was never there. Perhaps if you explain Ive been smoking xxx number of years and Im here alive and well to the child she will snap out of here lil fit. If not Id suggest a nice old fashioned bust dat ass moment!

      • lordsid says:

        I like that study h.r. Of course the short version is hypochondria-which many of us have been saying for years.There are many reasons/excuses (or combinations there of) used by ratz.But none of them actually have much,if anything,to do with health.

    • prog says:

      Actually, I can kind of understand this response. Are there any among us who have never, to a greater or lesser extent, felt nausea, anxiety or anger when coming into contact with the world of anti tobacco? Symptoms made worse because we know most of it is bullshit, and that most people have been duped.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Its quite easy to spark up the debate and put it to rest……………….simply tell them whats in the smoke via percentages then look to the grill where they cook your meal and tell them theres about 10,000 cigarettes over there at one time………… really makes go DUHH! Then they go your kidding right………you just smile and say Nope!

      • lordsid says:

        Ah! Undoubtedly the ratz are causing much stress which likely “kills” 9 billion people a year.(like the ratz I’ll ignore that this isn’t possible,besides-this stress would be carried by radio/tv waves out into space where “aliens” will be slaughtered in droves)

        h.r. I believe you’re referring to 2 hours of exposure to a BBQ is equivalent to 220,000 cigarettes.

  2. Klaus K says:

    The reason why todays anti-smoking crusade looks like the Nazi health crusade 80 years ago is that they have the same financial sponsors: The pharmaceutical cartel & their medical complex. It is all documented in the papers from the Nürnberg Process against the leaders of the old chemo- & pharma-cartel, I.G.Farben. That cartel worked as closely with Hitler & the nazis at that time as the pharmaceutical companies coorporates with governments today. Some of the companies from that time are even the same today:

  3. Frank … It means a lot to me that you focused on those portions of my Author’s Preface. They were very important to me as I was writing them. I hope you like the rest of the book as well.

    For the moment the only place to order a book is through a somewhat limited selection of advance copies I still have on hand by using Samantha’s graciously provided SmokersClub link at:

    I have to ask Canadians and Euro/other folks to hit the Donation button and add in a bit more because of extra costs but it’s a donation so I’ll leave the amount up to you! :) (Hint: US folks are welcome to hit that button too of course! LOL! I spent five years on this project ‘n I’m in debt up to me eyeteeth!)

    They’re also available on Amazon at about the same price after taxes etc: just enter “TobakkoNacht” as the search term. Be aware: “TobakkoNacht — The Story” on Kindle is simply the opening tale plus a few chapters from Brains. I put it up there in January 2009 when I still had the outstandingly foolish idea that I’d have the rest of the book done in a few months. Heh… you can see how well THAT idea went, eh?

    LadyRaj, that is one of the saddest aspects of the antismoking crusade: they have introduced real suffering, albeit psychosomatically-based suffering into the lives of millions of people out there. And even if tobacco smoke were to disappear tomorrow, the roots of that suffering would simply transfer to something else not so easily avoided. It’s the creation of that atmosphere of fear in children as they are growing up that is the crime.


    • Frank Davis says:

      they have introduced real suffering, albeit psychosomatically-based suffering into the lives of millions of people

      What’s psychosomatic about making smokers stand outside? What’s psychosomatic about firing smokers from their jobs? What’s psychosomatic about refusing smokers medical treatment? These are ways of killing people. And they are well-understood ways of killing people.

      If in any one year 1 in 1000 smokers who are made to stand outside, or fired from their jobs, or refused medical treatment, wind up dying prematurely, then in a global population of 1.5 billion smokers that’s 1.5 million smoker deaths per annum. And over five years, it adds up to 7.5 million smokers.

      That’s a holocaust of the same scale as the Nazi holocaust.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Sounds like a lot of ” WRONGFUL DEATH SUITS” to me……………..Are the lawyers listening yet!

      • Frank, the psychosomatic comment wasn’t aimed at what’s being done to smokers, but what’s been done to those ordinary nonsmokers who now suffer true psychosomatic reactions to even the smallest hint of smoke, i.e. reactions that they themselves may *feel* are real — even if, absent the Antis’ campaigns, they would never have occurred. The percentage of the claimants

        – MJM

        • beobrigitte says:

          Michael, I only do debit card. I would like a copy of your book – ideally whilst I am over here. (It’s quite a long flight back home and I have learned that Amsterdam Shiphol airport does not sign out the very few smoking places there very well. When you’re in transit you have little time to search for them!)
          HOW can I get Tobakkonacht over here?

        • Brigitte, send me an email at Cantiloper at gmail and we’ll see what we can work out. Have you ever met Wiel over there? I think he’s not that far from Amsterdam!

          Cherie, did you get an email from me in response? If the payment goes through I will almost always manage a response within 24 hours.


        • cherie79 says:

          Yes Michael. got it ok, we have exchanged a few emails since then?

    • cherie79 says:

      Have ordered the book with donation via PayPal so hope it is ok, I rarely use it as a method of payment.

    • Marie says:

      Michael, I am very moved by this excerpts from your book.
      Thank you.

  4. raybarfoot says:

    dear frank, I am appalled at ladyrajs story but it does not surprise me greatly either. Antismokers and their ill bred spawn are just what I have always thought they were:uncouth, uncareing, louts and that is all there is to them. like you I don’t have anything for them but woe and war.if they should someday find themselves before tha old bailey, I earnestly hope they are after trail of course senteneced to hang for the ills they have foisted off on us all.they may learn that they made the trap in wich they wallow .i hate them each and every one of them, and for my existing they have only themselves to blame for they made me.i will not stop smoking now or ever.they indeed are NAZI ss! there I have said my piece and a good day to you and others. Raymond barfoot

  5. Supergran says:

    Frank – Michael, fantastic piece. EXACTLY how I have been feeling for years. Amazing. This morning at work, a guy came back in after having a cig. Two colleagues were ACTUALLY vocalising “eeew, you stink” – “jeez John, have you not got any mints”!!! They make my stomach churn with anger. Not one of them dares to tell a woman who works here she stinks of BO (discussed behind her back), not one of them tells the guy who has a drink every night that his breath stinks of stale ale every morning (frankly I like a drink most nights and am not bothered about any adult doing anything they are comfortable with – mine is not to judge), so it doesnt bother me but again – discussed and gossiped about behind HIS back. Some peoples breath actually DOES stink (halitosis, spicy food etc) and no one tells them. Its like any weeky little timid prick and say ANYTHING disgusting and nasty to you if you are a smoker.

    I always say, if anyone does the funky-chicken coff dance around me, or comments on my smoking “have you had a dose of “courage” juice today”???

    • Supergran says:

      Should have read (last sentence) Its like any WEEDY little timid prick!! hehe

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Perhaps we need to use a certain gay rights movement activity. ”WE’RE IN YOUR FACE AND WE’RE SMOKERS”……………..Then quite possibly we can marry our cigarettes at the end of the day! Then demand equal rights in public places.

      As radical as that sounds,it worked!

    • Emily says:

      It seems like as few as 5 years ago people didn’t even notice the smell so much. Since smoking has been so denormalized and fewer people smoke in public, and since people have become unaccustomed to smelling tobacco smoke indoors, it’s made the smell stand out to people much more. That, combined with the fact that they feel free to make any rude comments to smokers that they want.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        I just kinda sit back and make sure they kinda see my gun……………..Seems to keep the peace quite well when out eating in smoking establishments.

  6. John Watson says:

    I have on and off likened tobacco regulation to the Nuremberg Decrees for some considerable time, the similarities are so pronounced as to be almost verb abatim.

    Personally I consider the annual anti-smoking conferences to be an equivalent of the Wansee conference headed by Adolf Eichmann and Reinhardt Heydrich which decided the fate of around six million Jews as well as countless numbers of gypsies, homosexuals, the infirm and mentally ill as well as political dissidents including the White Rose organisation. That charities both legitimate and fake with their supporters adhere to such views expressed by both the Nuremberg Decrees and the Wansee conference dilute the good works done by charities that do not support such views, just as the views of the BMA does for those who work in the medical community.

    Such comments usually invoke ‘Godwins Law’ to which my response is that ‘Godwins Law’ is Hitler’s shield and those who invoke its protection it must support Hitler, his policies and his party, why else would anyone invoke a ‘law’ in defence of such a regime?

  7. lordsid says:

    Speaking of books,the subject & reference to Nazis etc. reminded me of this (which I came across recently in a post by someone else) I still haven’t read all of this (long with many links),but it seems to cover the history of “anti-smoking” quite well.

    • LordSid, yes, DiPierri’s book is AMAZING! I was fortunate enough to get one of the few hardcopies back when it first came out!


      • lordsid says:

        Bit of a twist.Here the ratz are comparing tobacco to the Nazis.

        They stripped the links from my comment so this “was” it;

        Since we’re using comparisons to National Socialist era Germany,it may interest many to know that they used the same policies as tobacco control does today.A large increase in their smoking rate was the result.

        Similarly,another group of people,smokers,are being vilified in the same way as Anne Frank’s group was.(supposed to spread disease,be a cost to society etc.) Both groups have had people killed by this.

        In essence,both National Socialist Germany and tobacco control today both fund terrorism through high tobacco taxes.Both also garnered much revenue by exploiting Jews and smokers respectively.One huge difference here,the National Socialists had to return as much as possible.

        As for reducing smoking rates,we would have achieved better results without this harmful intervention.(may have actually hit a goal for once) Smoking rates were declining at good rates before all this nonsense began.Because of this intervening,quit rates have stalled or some smoking rates have shown increases.This social engineering (smoker bashing) certainly hasn’t helped.

        Since smokers are the least cost and the healthy are the most expensive (obesity about the middle),and the goal is making as many as possible healthy,then reducing tobacco use will increase cost.Since drug costs are supposed to be one of or the greatest health care costs I suppose that we should sue pharmacy or perhaps stop using drugs.Having babies is the greatest cost billed to private insurance.Would you ban that because it’s expensive?

        As for the WHO study,I’ve read many of their’s (& others) that show no risk from ETS.

    • woohoo02 says:

      Have a look at this Harley, quite interesting!!

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Torches of Freedom” was a phrase used to encourage women’s smoking by exploiting women’s aspirations for a better life during the women’s liberation movement in the United States. Cigarettes were described as symbols of emancipation and equality with men. The term was first used by psychoanalyst A. A. Brill when describing the natural desire for women to smoke and was used by Edward Bernays to encourage women to smoke in public despite social taboos. Bernays hired women to march while smoking their “torches of freedom” in the Easter Sunday Parade of 1929 which was a significant moment for fighting social barriers for women smokers.

        Quite right woohoo perhaps todays emancipation is everybody should smoke regardless of age! Itd serve them right to see all the kids smoking after what they’ve done to the parents and the rest of us who already smoke!

  8. Nightlight says:

    Back in 2005-6, I suggested (in Speakeasy forum which is gone now) in thread that smokers should carry an black armband with yellow star and put it on whenever going out to have smoke in the street. The idea was to mock the tormenters by getting ahead of the curve that I saw taking shape and show the public where we are heading. Unfortunately, it must have been too early and some members of the forum were offended by the comparison.

    • chris says:

      Maybe a better dramatic protest would be to have a small group dress as fake “smoke nazis”–in uniforms reminiscent, but not exact–and have them go to smokers and warn them that although they can’t legally do anything to them now, the day may soon be coming when they can. This should be done in full view of the general public and it wouldn’t be a bad thing for the “smoke police” to intimate that they may be branching out and going after other behaviors, too.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Public health police enter homes via obAMA care…………………

        The purpose of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Competitive Grant program is to award Development Grants to States that currently have modest home visiting programs and want to build on existing efforts. Successful applicants will sufficiently demonstrate the capacity to expand or enhance their evidence-based home visiting programs. The funding provided will build on the formula funding already provided to States and territories to support the quality implementation of home visiting programs. Additionally, this funding opportunity will continue the program’s emphasis on rigorous research by grounding the proposed work in relevant empirical literature, and by including requirements to evaluate work proposed under this grant. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, approximately $12,000,000 will be available to support competitive Development Grants to eligible States and jurisdictions under the MIECHV program. $125,000,000 will be awarded on a formula basis to grantees funded under HRSA-11-187 for the MIECHV program. Successful applicants will be awarded FY 2012 competitive Development Grant funds, in addition to the FY2012 MIECHV formula based funds. Priority for Serving High-Risk Populations and Programmatic Areas of Emphasis As directed in the legislation , successful applicants will give priority to providing services to the following populations: a) Eligible families who reside in communities in need of such services, as identified in the statewide needs assessment required under subsection (b)(1)(A). b) Low-income eligible families. c) Eligible families who are pregnant women who have not attained age 21. d) Eligible families that have a history of child abuse or neglect or have had interactions with child welfare services. e) Eligible families that have a history of substance abuse or need substance abuse treatment.


        f) Eligible families that have users of tobacco products in the home.

        g) Eligible families that are or have children with low student achievement. h) Eligible families with children with developmental delays or disabilities. i) Eligible families who, or that include individuals who, are serving or formerly served in the Armed Forces, including such families that have members of the Armed Forces who have had multiple deployments outside of the United States.” In addition, the Health Resources and Service Administration (HRSA) and the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) have identified the following programmatic areas of emphasis. Applicants may propose to address one or more of these areas in response to this funding opportunity announcement: o Emphasis 1: Improvements in maternal, child, and family health o Emphasis 2: Effective implementation and expansion of evidence-based home visiting programs or systems with fidelity to the evidence-based model selected o Emphasis 3: Development of statewide or multi-State home visiting programs o Emphasis 4: Development of comprehensive early childhood systems that span the prenatal-through-age-eight continuum o Emphasis 5: Outreach to high-risk and hard-to-engage populations o Emphasis 6: Development of a family-centered approach to home visiting o Emphasis 7: Outreach to families in rural or frontier areas o Emphasis 8: The development of fiscal leveraging strategies to enhance program sustainability For a more detailed description of each area of emphasis, please see Appendix A: MIECHV Programmatic Emphasis Areas.

  9. harleyrider1978 says:

    The slippery slope just became a busted dam!

    Take a look at the use of ”EVIDENCE BASED” term thru out the writing on the HHS webpage limked………….

    The bluff of ‘evidence-based’ policy
    My blog post at the IEA discusses Jamie Whyte’s book Quack Policy and its critics.

  10. One extra note here: I’m still “setting up” the roll-out of the book and it will probably not be fully available on Amazon until October, so while I’m certainly loving Frank’s blog on it and people’s reactions here, I’d prefer if it didn’t get talked about much out there in general for the next few weeks until I’ve had a chance to set up a proper web site and media reviewers have actually had some time to read it and stick reviews in their queues etc.



  11. Judy says:

    I’m a disabled senior, I’m on a low fixed income, and I’ve been smoking since I was 19. My disability is not smoking related, and my lungs are perfectly healthy. I just plain like smoking. I also suffer from depression and anxiety disorder, and smoking relieves both of those.
    Well, until about three months ago, I was living in a comfortable, affordable one-bedroom apartment. I’d been there for about a year, with no problems. My 91-year-old landlady (who lived upstairs) and I got along wonderfully. I was a quiet, clean, very responsible tenant. My landlady knew I smoked when I moved in, and she was fine with it. One day she showed up at my door and told me a young friend of hers had visited and had been very upset because she could smell a bit of cigarette smoke, and had started coughing and choking. This friend of hers, who had never even laid eyes on me, apparently went on and on to my landlady about how I was ruining her property, that, as a smoker, I was untrustworthy and filthy, that I would be the cause of my 91-year-old landlady’s death (!), and that if I didn’t quit smoking, or just smoke outside, my landlady should evict me. I was shocked, but agreed to smoke outside. Then, on an extremely cold winter day (it was like 7 degrees Fahrenheit), when my disability was acting up more than usual, I decided to have my morning cigarette indoors. I smoked it in the bathroom, opening up the window and blowing the smoke outside. Wouldn’t you know it, my landlady’s anti-smoker friend just happened to be upstairs, got a whiff of the smoke, and the next thing I knew, my landlady handed me my 30-day notice.
    SO – here I was, homeless, on a low fixed income. Needed to wait at least three months to get into an affordable senior apartment complex (long application process). So I applied to the YWCA, which was the last thing I wanted to do, but, hey, a roof over my head is pretty important. I’d heard that the Y at least had a smoking lounge. Well, the YWCA informed me that they no longer had a smoking lounge, and if you wanted to smoke, you had to go outside to a designated area – which happened to be a rather dark, scary street with unsavory people loitering all over the place.
    They accepted me, but I turned them down, as a friend of mine – a smoker – had invited me to stay at her place until I got into a senior apartment complex. (wonderful luck!!!)
    Anyway, I went over one of the two highest-rated senior apartment complexes to apply. It was a friendly place. Some residents were lounging outside on comfortable chairs, talking and smoking. There were residents sitting in the lobby, talking, laughing and smoking, and they were really nice to me and readily included me in their conversation. I met with the office manager and she handed me an application. Then she said, oh, by the way, tomorrow I’m breaking the news to our residents that in one week the entire building will be smoke-free. I was like, WHAT? Here are all these 63-and-up people having a fine old time smoking and socializing, and you’re going to BAN SMOKING, even in one’s own apartment? She went on to tell me that there would also be no smoking anywhere outside, except in one small place – WITHOUT EVEN A ROOF – that was all the way to the side and a not-so-short walk away from the building. Oh, I felt so horrible for these residents..many of them on walkers, and in wheelchairs…and in this state/city it gets REALLY hot in the summer and REALLY cold in the winter… and guess what? A few weeks later, I had occasion to return to that apartment complex, and NOBODY was socializing in the lobby. Or outside. The whole atmosphere of the place had changed from upbeat to….numb.
    Luckily, the senior apartment complex I moved to does allow smoking in one’s own apartment. But I wonder how long that will last…
    Anyway, that’s what happened to me…

    • smokervoter says:

      Dear Judy:

      You have just broken this rough tough framing carpenters heart. Your story belongs on the front page of the New York Times so that millions of people and our vindictive, ex-smoking President, who has surrounded himself with the vilest of the vile antismokers (Sebellius, Corr, Hamburg, DeParle, Frieden, et al.), can read it and search their blind and rotten souls.

      He just took a belated bow on the 50th anniversary of Reverend King’s speech and no doubt likes to think of himself as a liberator of the oppressed. Well, let him read your story and reflect on it. During the PBS interview I watched he made mention of his strong desire to fund free preschool education. He proposes to accomplish this with an unconscionable, ultra regressive tax on smokers. There is absolutely zero correlation between the act of smoking and early childhood education and he knows it. He’s doing it out of sheer political cowardice and expediency. He’s got a captive, hated minority singled out, so he won’t have to pass the hat around universally to fund this program.

      In the process he is promoting the kind of cruelty and mean-spirited bigotry that you and your fellow senior citizens are experiencing.

      The man is lower than dog feces in my estimation.

      There, I’ve just transformed from an almost weeping sadness to a seething anger for these folks. Nazis, Ku Klux Klanners or Taliban nutjobs caning smokers in public, the label isn’t important. It’s the frothing hatred by any other name and the results like yours that make me want to utterly destroy them.

      With a 25-ounce, waffle-faced carpenters hammer.

      • Judy says:

        Aw, thank you for your empathy, sympathy, concern and understanding, Smokervoter. Hey – guess what just happened? The manager of this smoking-is-allowed-in-one’s-own-apartment building came to my door and asked me if I could get an air filter because a few residents on my floor are complaining they can smell smoke in the hallway, and I happen to be the only smoker in my wing of 10 apartments. I don’t know how they can smell it, because the four large windows of the apartment open up to the outside of the building, and the my door to the hallway is very well insulated, but they do know I smoke because they’ve seen me smoking outside. I told the manager that I couldn’t afford to get an air filter for another two months, as my finances were hit hard by the deposits and such that I had to pay in order to move in here in the middle of July, as well as a sudden, huge, inexplicable cut in my food stamps. She said there was no way I could be asked to leave because of this, as smoking here is 100 percent legal, and I certainly didn’t have to get an air filter right away, but her main concern is “keeping the peace.” I am the last person who wants to make anyone else’s life uncomfortable, and I wouldn’t mind buying an air filter as soon as I can afford one, but I get the feeling (maybe I’m becoming mildly paranoid?) that this could be a precursor to smoking being banned here…
        And I just realized what might have happened. My across-the-hall neighbor and next-door neighbor both have grandchildren who visit, and they’re right smack-dab in the middle of the age group that does the fake-coughing-choking thing at the slightest whiff of cig smoke…
        Anti-smoking propaganda – reaching seniors too – it’s sooo wrong…
        By the way, I did try to stop smoking twice in my life. It was horrible. HORRIBLE. Both times I ended up in the hospital for major depression. Both times, that depression was alleviated when I went to the smoking lounge and had a smoke. I remember, after that first smoke, I came out of the lounge and my doctor was walking by. He looked at me and said, “Oh! This is the first time I’ve seen you smiling!”

        • smokervoter says:

          Aw, Judy you’re more than welcome. Your story really does tear me up inside. I’m so glad there is a compromise solution at hand. Smoking cheers all of us up, that’s part of the charm I suppose.

          I have a friend who owns one of those filters and he swears by it. He’s a cigar smoker and believe it or not, cigar smoke makes me wince at times myself. I’m a cigarette man myself. He paid $120 for his. He says he’s seen them for $75 (used?).

          This problem with senior citizens smoking needs to be addressed by other means than just an iron-fisted, zero-tolerance harshness. You’re outliving their dire medical prognosis’ and that really makes their science look bogus and they’re reacting with a jilted vindictiveness.

          Obama wants one dollar per pack to fund his preschool education initiative. Well, that’s $365/year to the pack-a-day smoker; enough to purchase three of those filters each year. Another compromise solution that I’d like to see done with some of the 38 billion dollars a year that we smokers send to the treasury would be to subsidize those HEPA filters for seniors.

          How about the landlord leasing the $120 per unit machines out to the smoking tenant at $10/month until it’s paid off. I’d gladly subsidize that.

          By the way Judy, check out Marcus Aurelius’s great website Clearing the Air. Pay special attention to the Shop for Aircleaners link. It is off at the right hand margin and down at the bottom. I’m not sure how current the page is but it’s certainly informative.

          What the heck, let’s shortcut this – here it is
          Shop for Aircleaners

          I still want to clobber them all with my framing hammer.

  12. Judy, very very sad. :/ I don’t know if it’s something you could do, but you *might* be able to help those people my giving them information that would inspire them to fight back. Go to and consider printing out and binding/stapling a few copies of it to leave in that lounge or with the residents outside. Make it very clear AS you are handing it to them that it is something that will help them fight AGAINST the smoking ban — otherwise they will instantly assume that it’s just antismoking literature.

    John, I talk a bit about Godwin’s Law in the book. Sometimes the motivation for “invoking” it is honest: people don’t realize the extent of the building prejudice and discrimination against smokers and resent the comparison to the Nazis because there’s still a very clear difference between the two situations. Even if smokers were being rounded up and jailed en masse it would STILL be a very different situation. What I’ve tried to do in TobakkoNacht is show the similarities to the beginnings of it in Nazi Germany in the earlier-mid 1930s. That “ancient history” is something that’s been frighteningly lost today. Of the fifty or so people who I’ve shown the book or its cover to I would say that no more than three or four made the connection to “The Night of Broken Glass” on their own, and less than half of those under 40 seemed to have any knowledge of the event at all even after being reminded of it.

    Those beginnings that preceded the Holocaust, and the dangers of government manipulation of division and hate in pursuit of political goals is something that should never be forgotten and the message it carries is fully valid and it’s good that it gets out to people. But simply labeling the Antismokers as “Nazis” is a problem: they’re clearly NOT doing the sort of thing that most people historically associate with the Nazi movement so the comparison gets shrugged off as too extremist to be meaningful. And I have no fears that things will escalate to anything like a true Nazi level in terms of governmental action. At most we’ll see smokers eventually treated as being a step or two below heroin addicts: hated, abused,* jailed, having their children taken away, etc. Am I saying that’s a minor thing? Of course not. And the reason I put energy into something like writing TobakkoNacht is to prevent that sort of thing as it applies to smokers, and to keep awareness and memories alive to help prevent it from happening to other groups in the future.

    But it *IS* important to recognize the clear distinction between what was officially done by the Nazi government to the Jews, Gypsies, and other “undesirables,” and what is being done or is likely to be done to smokers. If the comparison is simply “slapped on” without that comparison it *does* have the simultaneous harm of both reducing understanding and appreciation of what happened during the Holocaust and also reducing respect for all the quite solid claims and complaints we currently have as smokers.

    – MJM
    *P.S. The “hated and abused” part of it is clearly already widespread after the encouragement it’s received, quite deliberately, from the Antismokers over the last 35 years. I devote a later part of the book to the question of hate, just as I did in Brains originally.

    • Frank Davis says:

      I have no fears that things will escalate to anything like a true Nazi level in terms of governmental action. At most we’ll see smokers eventually treated as being a step or two below heroin addicts:

      Why do you have no fears? What’s your reasoning?

      Ten years ago I had ‘no fears’ about a smoking ban of the kind that we now have. Now I think I was just being complacent, and that more or less anything is possible now.

      The only reason why I personally think that it won’t escalate to a ‘true Nazi level’ – i.e. gas chambers – is because there are quite simply far too many smokers.

      But it’s perfectly obvious to me that the logic of the War on Smokers leads in the long run to the ‘true Nazi level’. That’s where eugenic thinking always leads. Because it’s inherently murderous.

      simply labeling the Antismokers as “Nazis” is a problem: they’re clearly NOT doing the sort of thing that most people historically associate with the Nazi movement so the comparison gets shrugged off as too extremist to be meaningful.

      Well, from the failure of most people you know to make the connection between Tobakkonacht and Crystalnacht, it would seem that most people don’t know much about Nazi Germany.

      Who cares if the comparison gets shrugged off as ‘too extremist’ by such people? And who cares what they think anyway? I don’t give a damn what they think.

      You sound to me like you’re looking for some middle ground which will permit dialogue or negotiation and compromise. But when has Tobacco Control ever compromised? They never compromise at all. And there was never any dialogue either.

      And that means that this now is simply a war. It’s the end of discussion – the discussion that was never had.

      But it *IS* important to recognize the clear distinction between what was officially done by the Nazi government to the Jews, Gypsies, and other “undesirables,” and what is being done or is likely to be done to smokers.

      How do you know what is ‘likely’ to be done to smokers?

      I think anything is possible.

      About the only thing that’s different is that we’re not being gassed yet. Everything else is EXACTLY THE SAME. They are not trying to help smokers. They are not trying to improve health. Everything that they do is done to marginalise and exclude and demonise smokers. And they are doing it in the UK with the full support of all the main political parties, and the entire mass media.

    • Marie says:

      He, he, Michael. I was one of those, who immediately associated your title to Kristallnacht ;)

  13. harleyrider1978 says:

    Mike the simple fact it was Hitlers anti-tobacco propagandists who coined the phrase passive smoking is enough to connect the dots to todays movement just on its face. Then the old term Safety Nazis……..These came about way back when it was all going down in the 1970s and even before. Nazi is applied to so many agendas and groups in the past and today……….Its basically become street language against todays anti-smoking Nazis……………I understand your connection and fully agree as its the same thing with these public health officials and the Eugenics movement from way back. If not for American California Eugenics movement and the rest across the country,Hitler wouldn’t have had the use of the Eugenics movement to forward his plans…………. That is where the real fear is and is where your connection becomes a totally valid argument in and of itself………….If its not stopped it could very well lead into extermination camps maybe not in here but in some place in the world where a small sickly,mentally deranged person waits and waits for the moment to take over and fulfill the 21st century Eugenics Movement the Fuhrer began 80 years ago. We simply cant allow that to happen……….even in a small way.

  14. harleyrider1978 says:

    Altermatt claims anonymous email silenced smoking ban proponents

    Written by Tom Lawrence

    Did mean-spirited, anonymous emails stifle the discussion on a proposed smoking ban in Powell?

    Sharon Altermatt, the team leader of Prevention Management of Park County, proposed the ban to the Powell City Council in June. But during a lengthy public discussion on the issue on Aug. 19, Altermatt stood silently in the back of council chambers and did not come to the podium to speak.

    She had been the subject of an anonymous email sent to Mayor Don Hillman and at least one member of the council, Josh Shorb, as well as to the Tribune. The email contained hurtful personal information about her and a relative and had an extremely harsh tone.

    Her husband, Jerry Altermatt, called the Tribune on Aug. 20 and said the email and other online attacks on his wife helped reduce support for the proposed ban.

    “I believe so,” Jerry Altermatt said. “There was an intimidation factor.”

    Sharon Altermatt said she tried to make an issues-oriented case, but she feels the anonymous emails got in the way.

    “I had provided the council with the information they needed to refute all the business rights arguments,” she said in a statement to the Tribune. “I had emphasized many times that you pass these ordinances not just to protect people from second-hand smoke, but because it’s one of two things that make people quit and keeps youth from starting. I felt they ignored this and went directly to the business rights issue every time, so I was wasting my time.”

    Then, after the issue of business rights came to the fore, the emails were sent to city officials and the Tribune. The sender identified him or herself as “Air Handler” and used the email address

    “Air Handler” declined to identify himself, for now anyway, but said in an email response to the Tribune that he felt since Altermatt was paid via federal grant dollars, her private life was open for discussion. He said all councilmen received the email.

    Jerry Altermatt said the couple was stunned when Shorb shared the email with them. Sharon Altermatt said when others who were to speak at the council meeting learned of the attacks, they were reluctant to speak publicly.

    Four anti-smoking speakers were on the agenda, but only one showed up. Hillman said he doesn’t know if the emails silenced one side or prevented some pro-smoking ban speakers from coming forward.

    “It doesn’t matter if the accusations were true or not, who wants to be exposed to downright nastiness? No one in their right mind,” Sharon Altermatt said. “I had people who wanted to speak but then lost their courage, and I’m not going to fault them. Even the councilmen that were for this initially — and there were some — flip-flopped, especially after the mayor spoke.”

    She said she is not sure whether she should have brought the issue to the council, and she wonders if she should have continued a public education campaign instead.

    “In all honesty, I think we’ve lost our window of opportunity in Wyoming and I seriously doubt if another one of these ordinances will be passed, and the state has spoken loud and clear that they won’t take it on,” Altermatt said.

    She said the federal government may step in at some point and mandate no smoking in public places, as it did with seat belts and the drinking age. But she said despite how it ended, she is glad she did it.

    “Am I sorry I brought this forward? No, it was my job; it is prevention at its core,” Altermatt said. “Could I have done a better job? Certainly.”

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      I say anonymous let everyone know about federal lobbying laws! That’s why none of them spoke theyd have broken Federal Lobbying laws where grant money is involved and she goes onto say she shoulda stayed with an education campaign instead,thats what makes me think it was a email telling them all about lobbying laws!

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        “In all honesty, I think we’ve lost our window of opportunity in Wyoming and I seriously doubt if another one of these ordinances will be passed, and the state has spoken loud and clear that they won’t take it on,” Altermatt said.

        Here she is hoping the Federal govmnt thru congress will impose a nationwide ban as she has given up on Wyoming ever passing another ban anywhere within the state!

        She said the federal government may step in at some point and mandate no smoking in public places, as it did with seat belts and the drinking age. But she said despite how it ended, she is glad she did it.

  15. Michelle Gervais says:

    To MJM – just bought your book and of course, I added a generous donation. You are well worth every penny!

  16. harleyrider1978 says:

    Hospital sells one of its controversial smoking shelters after u-turn

  17. cherie79 says:

    I had half forgotten my studies of Nazi Germany and the rise of Hitler at university years ago. The parallels are truly frightening. It is hard to believe that in only a few short years it has gone from being perfectly normal to smoke and very few were bothered by it to the horrors today. It Just shows how easy it is make people to believe anything if it is drummed into them long enough. I am tired of arguing with people who should know better, I don’t know what has happened to common sense, No one who asked me not to smoke in my own would be welcome to visit, if they don’t like it don’t come. Why don’t they just ban smoking? don’t suppose it would stop any of us any more than drug laws stop drug use. Of course that would put all TC out of business but they would just find something else to demonise. Glad I own my home and anyone who object can go elsewhere, I wouldn’t be friends with people like that anyway. Must buy the book if it is easy to pay!

  18. To those who feel I’m being a bit too conservative in using the Nazi label as applying to Antismokers, I’d like to say that there’s a method to my madness…. :>

    Quite aside from whatever personal beliefs I might have about the future, the major issue is one of communication, of reaching out to the “passers-by” who are not strongly committed one way or the other to sides in this issue. Over the last 20 years great numbers of those “Innocents” have been recruited, at least mildly, to the antismoking cause through the power of the constant media drumbeat made available to them through their professionalism/funding (or as some might like to describe it, “through their hired muscle.”)

    Part of their success, I will admit, *is* due to their extremism. Contrary to what most of us, even at the heart of the Free Choice movement, would have expected just 15 years ago, smoking is now officially banned in most bars and pubs in North America, the UK, Europe, Australia, and in many individual areas on other continents. Contrary to what I wrote in “TobakkoNacht — The Story” back in the 90s, we didn’t have to wait until the late teens of the 21st century for outdoor bans to begin taking place in office plazas or even at beaches and parks. Nor to we have to do any waiting to see a world in which new moms bundle their babies up and scuttle quickly by groups of smokers out of neurotic-bordering-on-psychotic worries about their babies breathing in “poisons.” The Antis have never been afraid of being extremist, and it’s worked for them. I can’t argue with that.

    But I think the REASON it has worked for them is simply because they had so much money to back it up. The Master Settlement Agreement here in the US has pumped $500 to $900 million PER YEAR into tobacco control. Big Pharma and the so-called “charities” have pumped tens of millions more annually into attacks on smokers to sell their products, elicit contributions under the cover of doing “educational work,” and probably to subtly push for their favored political candidates without ruffling their non-partisan-non-profit tax status. With THAT much money, you CAN establish the “drumbeat” that makes even the most extreme and crazy pronouncements begin to take on solidity. Just take a look at how thirdhand smoke went from being a joke five years ago to being a subject worthy of millions upon millions of dollars being offered in grant payments to “researchers” today.

    WE don’t have that kind of money. When WE voice opinions or offer information that clashes too strongly with the general societal perception I fear that we’re just ignored… even if we have solid backup: people just won’t keep their ears open long enough to be convinced of something they’ve been led to deeply believe is wrong. That’s why I believe so strongly in pushing at the edges: finding those areas where “The Innocents” still have some reservations or doubts, things like thirdhand smoke, outdoor bans, obviously excess taxation, home/apartment bans, and job/medical discrimination. The foundation of the Antis’ castle under those particular towers is particularly weak because the “facts” to back them up are so easily ripped to shreds that we can DO such ripping in just a few sentences in a convincing way while people are open to hearing that ripping both because they still have some degree of doubt themselves and because the ripping can be done without complicated explanations that surpass strongly limited attention spans.

    And that’s why I’ve always tread lightly with the Nazi comparisons: DESPITE any degree of truth in them, they almost always lose the attention of the passers-by immediately… and those are precisely the folks we don’t WANT to lose. In order to win this battle we need to make sure that they listen our information and facts carefully enough and for long enough that our positions will begin the displace the not-quite-entrenched positions of the Antismokers in such areas. The Plaza scene (The Spark) in TobakkoNacht was totally far-out science-fiction when I wrote it just fifteen years ago. Today the setting for it is already an absolute reality in some parts of the world. The “Flame” could probably occur at some point within the next five years in some areas if the Antismokers aren’t stopped. But the succeeding portions of The Story, TobakkoNacht! itself and, in particular, The Ashes, i.e. the post-TobakkoNacht! portion, both of which are clearly in the fulfillment of the Kristallnacht/Nazi pattern of history, are still off in the future: we ain’t there yet, and hopefully never will be.

    But that’s exactly why we’re all here doing what we’re doing: to make sure of that, AND to roll back the underpinnings that could make such events possible. Currently we’re the Jews in pre-Anschluss Österreichs Austria, with most of us putting up complacently with the “little” restrictions/prejudices/discriminations that we’ve been fooled into “getting accustomed to” over the past 20 years. Most of those Jews refused to believe what could happen in the future because it was simply too unbelievable. We need to make sure that both the present AND the likely futures ARE believable not only to smokers but to the vast number of generally uninterested nonsmokers out there — because without a decent portion of them on our side our future is bleak.

    OK… sorry for blithering on so long. Heh, as you’ve seen from the book if you have it, it’s a subject I’ve put a lot of time and thought into over the past few years!

    – MJM

    • Frank Davis says:

      finding those areas where “The Innocents” still have some reservations or doubts, things like thirdhand smoke, outdoor bans, obviously excess taxation, home/apartment bans, and job/medical discrimination.

      But are there any “Innocents”?

      In my experience, people just fall firmly into one camp or the other. Prior to the UK smoking ban, most of my long-term (30+ years) friends gradually gave up smoking. It was no big deal at the time. It was their choice. I chose to carry on smoking. And we continued to get along just fine, even though some of them started banning smoking in their own homes. Once again, it was their choice, like it was their choice what colour to paint the walls. This peaceful coexistence ended with the introduction of the smoking ban, because at that point I became (and remain) very strongly opposed to it, while they very largely agreed with it. In fact, they were in some cases quite vociferous in their support for it, in ways that they never had been in previous years/decades. Although a few, rather touchingly, disapproved of the ban to the point that they’d stand outside with the smokers in solidarity with them. I can’t think of a single one that ever said anything like, “Well, y’know, I supported this ban to start with, but now, on reflection, I think it’s a bad idea.” In my experience, people take positions, and stick to them.

      It’s the same with global warming. Or the EU. Or anything else. People fall on one side or the other.

      And if there are any characteristic differences which serve as predictors of which way they’ll go, it seems to me that it’s to do with whether they believe authorities or experts or not. The ex-smokers I knew believed the antismoking propaganda they’d been bombarded with for decades. And I didn’t. And I didn’t primarily because I’d encountered the strongly antismoking Dr W, who I thought was somewhat insane, and had thereby been inoculated against it. And I tend not to believe experts anyway.

      So the way I see things, a deep division has opened up in society, and everyone’s either on one side or the other. And, for one reason or other (e.g. Dr W) they always have been on one side or other.

      And one consequence of that is that I don’t spend very much time in trying to argue antismokers around from their views. Because I don’t think it can be done. Instead I spend most of my time trying to confirm smokers in their views, telling them that they’re right to hold those views. And the reason that I don’t think that you’ll be successful either is simple: you’re not an annointed expert. You’re not an acknowledged authority. And none of these people will believe you until you pull a certificate out of your pocket showing your degree in tobacco studies from the University of Brobdingnag. At which point they will believe absolutely anything you say.

      Nevertheless, people do change their minds. I think that if people do change their minds about these things, it’s probably because something else happens. I can imagine, for example, that while a lot of people in New York might have liked Bloomberg’s smoking ban, they didn’t like his soda ban and some of the other things he banned. The e-cig ban is another good example of ‘something else’.

      Anyway, my view is that if we smokers are going to get ourselves a better deal, it will be by getting together and making a big fuss, rather than trying to persuade other people to back us. There are enough of us already. There’s 1.5 billion of us. That’s an army big enough to do anything.

      • Well thought out and well stated Frank! And you may be more correct than I am. I’m often fond of pointing out that none of us has truly found the “magic bullet” that will win the war here. In the last section of TobakkoNacht, “The Endgame,” I explore some projects and paths that I think the Free Choice movement could productively concentrate on. And in thinking about things in light of your post, I’ve realized something: While both Brains and TNacht were designed with a lot of thought toward disturbing the mild antismoking complacency of those Innocents, a great deal of thought also went into presenting things with an eye toward activating the anger that smokers feel when they are treated unfairly: pointing out to them that there is no sound REASON for the unfairness and that it’s simply a result of an attempt at social engineering and behavior modification. Smokers have been treated like rats, with bans and taxes being the electric shocks to make them behave “as desired” by the experimenters, and I want them to get ANGRY about that treatment.

        Every time we can clearly point out a lie that’s been used to promote such treatment we’ll get smokers angrier and we’ll make nonsmokers more questioning of what they’ve heard in those MTV commercials. Both effects are in our favor and it doesn’t matter too much which factor we believe to be more important: the weapon of choice remains the same. I’m constantly pointing people to because I see it as a beautiful introductory tool in that area that people can cheaply copy and produce themselves to “spread the word.” I see that booklet as generally a more powerful tool for us than book-level efforts in terms of “reaching the masses,” whether the masses of Innocents or the masses of smokers. I see our books, mine, Snowdon’s, White’s, King’s, DiPierri’s, Lair’s, and the others I point out in the Recommended Bibliography section of TNacht as generally playing more of a role “after the fact” — among people who are already angry or questioning, and who are looking to resolve those feelings by exploring the arguments and history around them in more depth through reading in sources that they haven’t generally been exposed to before.

        And yes, the e-cig ban, and throwing seniors and vets and sick people out on the streets, and the massive rise in smuggling and pub closures, the general unreasonableness of open-air bans, and the failure of the bans to significantly reduce kids smoking…. these are all “something elses” that open people’s minds to hearing what we have to say…. and they are all areas we should be working on.

        – MJM

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          TobakkoNacht itself in title alone enforces the term Anti-Tobacco Nazi……………That one quip is the easiest and most profound term people remember and when you start proving who these Nazis are the people now have an identifiable enemy to hate for being subjugated and criminalized.

          The people and that basically includes all of us including the Nazis have run the causes in so many directions under the guize of public health that everyone is turning on them and they want names,groups. They want who is responsible for todays forced and mandated attacks on them…………. It brings rise to the actual problem Political groups in which the Nazis have placed their people and in those sub groups that tell the politicians how to vote! The people then move to groups like UKIP and other Independent parties that come right and say enuf is enuf and they offer change a return to normalcy and an end to attacks on us all! The main parties then call them fringe groups,but it doesn’t take but a few percentiles of voter block to make the changes happen and even the big dog parties have to take notice then or be forced to later have to form coalition governments with these people! Its easier for the big boys to tell the Nazis to shove it and then take away their moneys,their powers and basically wipe them out of existence………..That’s already starting to happen as the people of the worlds nations turn on those in power!

          Extremism in pursuit of liberty is no vice! There Nazis Mikle and that’s just how it is!

          People remember that name and its associations and we can easily make that association without playing the middle ground to win over fence setters…………….

          Even fence setters eventually have to choose a side or get caught in the crossfire of those radical enuf to fight for liberty and freedom………….Frank and you too have that in you and have fought the best fight ever and for decades. Im a relative new comer but by gawd they know when I show up and so many others like Magnetic……………..Its game over!

          All there left with is the hate and they show that in nearly every comments section the world over after a battle is won!

  19. harleyrider1978 says:

    Mikle all those areas/the other things all cross paths with our fight such as anti-obesity,the drinkers and well all of it and it comes from the exact same sources. We’ve even run up on certain anti-tobacco writers that also write global warming pieces in the past. We find that every one of these purported public health attacks on us is in reality a position being pushed much higher up to a certain end game. It comes from not just Washington Progressives and RINO’S but from Brussells and the UN itself. Weve identified much of their plan especially the building block of the precautionary principle that allows them to push their agenda of anything can harm you so we will outlaw anything with a few linked to studies to make the case! It doesn’t matter the subject as it doesn’t even have to be about health!

    Ive seen the abuse of epidemiology in every facet they have ever done in global warming they used it,they even used it against the Veterans Administration to force a review of 100% vets!

    Psuedo-science is the tool and it matters not what anyone else says,they just create trash and then do it! Remember the phrase……the debate is over! There never was a debate about any of it.

    Its been that way for over 50 years! Its time we radicalized to the umpteenth end! The whole world view is at stake. If we don’t well hell 1984 by orwell maynot just be reality but 1000 times worse in reality.

    Its Obama and his ilk behind those things……………..Somebody is calling the shots along with all kinds of groups saying this and saying that to try and direct it all…………. There has to be a master plan somewhere from which they draw there ideology from and directions………….

  20. harleyrider1978 says:

    Another thing its like science via proof died after Polio was cured! Its been a massive scientific failure ever since! Link it seems to be all that matters to so called science any longer!

    Its like nobody cares to prove a damn thing any longer…………….Linking it is all the proof they want so they can pursue an AGENDA!

    • Nightlight says:

      Whenever there is something valuable, such as science and technology, there will be parasites swarming over it. The atomic bombs have kicked off our modern wave of scientific parasitism, which then got boosted by space explorations and Moon landing. With computers and internet technologies, the pseudo-science parasites became like meth addicts.

      But this phenomenon of scientific parasitism goes way back to ancient history. For example, when some sharp folks back in the age of ancient Egypt figured out how to correlate positions of stars with Nile floods, it didn’t take long before there were secretive priesthoods which puffed up the power of those few useful techniques and claimed to have powers over life, disease, disasters and death (fear of death always sells e.g. today, just look pharma commercials or pitch of their medical industry salesmen).

      The scheme didn’t begin with humans either. E.g. you can look at mimicry where non-venomous insects or snakes or fishes put on the bright colors and shapes of unrelated toxic counterparts. In these cases the valuable technology (for production and delivery of venoms) is an irresistible attraction for parasites which dress up into similar clothing, as it were, to claim the same powers.

  21. John Watson says:

    When I posted on the subject of the Nazis I really did not expect to see a reasoned debate, In general such comparisons are ignored or dismissed out of hand. Every argument presented has its pro’s and cons, which is true of every debate.

    George Santayana’s often truncated and paraphrased quote that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it is rapidly becoming a truism, While I can agree that some of the lessons learned from the history of the Third Reich are detrimental simply because some people do not want to believe it could happen again, other lessons like how National Socialism came about are beneficial, even relevant to todays political climate.

    Say the word Nazi and the first thought most people have is the death camps, little thought is given to what brought those death camps about, the political ideology, the lobbying behind the scenes that enabled the Nazi dream, Few even know of the Nuremberg decrees or the Wansee conference that led to the final solution, comparison to such legislation is in it’s own way a double edged sword, to some it may be educational to others merely propaganda, to all however it is historical fact that cannot and must not go away.

    Could similar camps come for smokers and the obese, for those who enjoy alcohol? In truth I do not know, I do know that there is enough similarity between the political/economical situations between then and now, that anti smoking legislation is moving toward the same values as the Nuremberg Decrees and that there is a risk of paralleling the entire spectrum of National Socialism albeit a small risk.

    It will always be debatable as to whether or not National Socialism is dead or alive, or whether it is a useful tool or a burden in the fight against the Tobacco Control Industry, the truth is it is a mixture of the two just like any other topic of debate.

    • Well stated John. What we DO know however is that the same basic mechanisms are being used, and are always used, by governments and power sources, to control people’s behaviors and keep them from causing trouble. I don’t know if it’ll be accepted by the Mods, but I just posted the following note to a glowing story about a ban being implemented at a popular outdoor American racetrack:

      “A lot of people are already used to this so it shouldn’t be a big problem.”
      Excellent! People will generally do what they’re told if they are given the expectation that everyone else is obeying and going along with the program. Controlling group behavior is much easier than controlling individual wills, and controlling small aspects of behavior leads to a conditioning where larger behaviors can be directed well.
      Directing smokers to special areas rather than simply designating portions of the general stands as nonsmoking for those who worry about such things in the midst of racing fumes serves a useful purpose in terms of denormalizing them and separating them from “normal” people. That separation helps the rest by making such things as special taxation or job or housing discrimination more acceptable. The combination of negative stimuli works on people the same as if they were rats being given electric shocks as part of a behavioral conditioning regimen.
      And, once the beginning control level has been asserted and accepted, then next season it will be an easy matter to expand the control: food areas can be declared off-limits “since people are trying to eat healthy food” and areas where those under 21 might be within eyesight can be gradually banned since we want to shield impressionable children from seeing undesirable activities such as smoking or unsafe driving habits.
      Overall, it looks like you’ve got the beginnings of a great plan! Aside from the planned expansion of the clean zones, it might help if you could find an easy way for fans to identify smokers in their midst so that they could keep their distance. Perhaps require smokers to wear a distinctive unremovable badge or somesuch if they want permission to enter the contaminated zones?

      Heh, part of the fun in thinking about the Moderating is picturing a moderator who totally fails to see the irony and just thinks I’m praising what they’re doing.

      – MJM

  22. John Watson says:

    Thank you Mike, I think your post regarding the American racetrack posted above is a masterpiece of irony. it demonstrates the will of the minority over ruling the will of the majority which when you come down to the bottom line is what legislation is in reality! The real Irony is that legislation is enacted in the name of the people, yet the people have no input in the formation of legislation.

    In many of his speeches Adolf Hitler cited the will of the German people, in fact he went further by stating that his will WAS the will of the German people! In this modern politics has not changed, I have little doubt for example that President Obama will intervene militarily in Syria and claim it as the will of the American people just my own government opposes military intervention and claims it to be the will of the British people. While this is not the time or place for debate on the issue of Syria it is comparable to the tobacco Control Industry who are a minority of citizens dictating to a majority via legislation. Most people accepted the status quo, there are people who smoke tobacco, now legislation denies the people that acceptance, so what is the way forward?

    Do we do what Hitler did, take the case to the people themselves argue it out in the bars, which is where National Socialism began, form a political party as he did, and as has happened in Australia, granted they did not make much headway but the issue is now out there, and in time it will gain traction just as UKIP are gaining traction in the United Kingdom. It should be remembered Hitler was lawfully elected after all.
    The will of the people is democracy, and should be paramount in politics, not the will of the lobbyist, not the will of industry but the will of the people, only when the people themselves express their will opposing minorities imposing their will on the majority will we win the war imposed upon us by the Tobacco Control Industry.

  23. anono1955smartin says:

    Hello Frank, and fellow fighters for truth. You may want to go to the Supreme Court of Indiana site and look up AND WATCH the oral arguments in the VFW vs the City of Evansville case just heard last week. It pretty well describes how the government, on all levels, is interested in making big bucks off smoking bans, otherwise known as the “denormalization of smoking”, or “getting people to quit smoking”.

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    The government, in all but Illinois and Ohio, does not want a smoking ban in casinos, as casinos make campaign donations, bring in more revenue to municipalities, and have big lobbying firms.

    Elected officials get the campaign donations and vote to federally fund illegal lobbying by 501c3’s, such as the American Cancer Society, the Heart and Lung Associations, the AMA, etc., then these federal funds are mixed with pharma funds, and move into what I call the Champagne Tower of Pro Ban. Ms Sebelius, HHS, is a big partner to pharma NRT company Johnson and Johnson, as is the CDC, through which the illegal funds are laundered into the Tower. (Read Cause of Action report on the CPPW grants.)

    Board members of Johnson and Johnson, are on the CDC FOundation, and one is the president of the Univ of Michigan, which produces more pro ban pulp fiction “studies” and “polls” than just about anyone except Stanton Glantz, who is at the Univ of Cal at San Francisco, and they get truckloads of dough to produce garbage propaganda!

    The grant spongers and moochers of pro ban are on every level of the government. They are IN the IRS, HHS, FDA, CDC, EPA, and the White House.

    The object of the pro ban operation is to get money into the hands of pharma and grant moochers, and politicians. This is real simple.

    Univ of Michigan and others get paid to produce propaganda. The media is paid to publish propaganda by the government AND pharma. Elected officials get money in campaign donations from pharma. “Charities” get money from pharma and the government to lobby in local areas for bans, abusing their 501c3 status.

    When the public has been properly brainwashed into accepting the junk science due to the overwhelming media blitz by pharma and government grant spongers, then it’s alright to close small businesses who cater to smokers, and it’s alright to raise tobacco taxes to the moon. And, the biggee, it’s alright for this government to buy useless patches and gums from J&J for public handouts! It does not matter that they don’t work.

    In fact, if the crap worked, J&J would not need to buy the government and elected officials to maket this for them!

    Smoking bans are about making money for pharma, pure and simple. J&J’s private 501c3 “philanthropy”, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, runs the illegal lobbying and inserting themselves into HHS and the CDC. They run the Champagne Tower. The IRS seems to have no interest in stopping the illegal activities of RWJF, or of the ACS and ALA.

    Obamacare, for those who don’t know, will fund these illegal activies for billions of dollars, a year, in the immediate future. This will guarantee that the “charities” and foundations will continue to support further government interference in all our lives. They will continue to lobby to promote the government tell you what to weigh, and if you’re over, they’ll get you on J&J obesity products!

    If you’re not fighting back yet, get moving.

No need to log in

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

You are commenting using your 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.