Why Fight For A Freedom You No Longer Have?

As al-Qaeda splinter ISIL (or ISIS) captures Mosul, shoots and beheads opponents, and advances on Baghdad:

Leaflets distributed around the city instructed all citizens to pray at their local mosques five times daily. Smoking and drinking were outlawed and women ordered to dress modestly and stay indoors. The rules were issued in the name of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams (ISIS), which said that rule breakers would “be killed or crucified, or have hands or feet cut from opposite sides or be exiled”.

Sounds like they don’t much like Western freedoms. Because smoking and drinking, and wearing what you like, and not having to go to your local mosque five times a day, might be more or less a definition of what Western freedom is all about.

Or was, until smoking bans started being introduced more or less everywhere in the Western world.

Our Western antismoking zealots always hail any new piece of progress in the war on smoking. So will ASH’s Deborah Arnott be issuing a press release applauding the outlawing of smoking in Iraq? And if she doesn’t, will she explain why not?

And what are we fighting for, if it’s not for the freedom to live our lives the way we want to, and not as tyrannical and murderous zealots demand?

Not that anyone is fighting for freedom. Perhaps they never were?

The convention center in the Green Zone (where the new Iraqi parliament meets) is one of the ugliest buildings I’ve ever seen, a massive concrete structure that looks like a fortress. For years after the invasion, the building was a no-smoking zone. Uptight Americans would reprimand everyone who lit up, including Iraqi political leaders. A group of Iraqi politicians and aides would gather and look guiltily around until they hit a crucial number — maybe 15 or so — then everyone would light up at once. It was a weird sight. And then some American would tell them to put it out.

The above report was from 2006. Harley wrote today that Hillary Clinton was behind the Iraq smoking ban proposed in 2009. It’s not clear whether it was actually in effect by 2014:

But following the lead of Scotland, the rest of Britain, France, America and other western nations, Iraqi MPs are now seeking to marginalise smoking in public life, much to the annoyance of many of their constituents.

Today they are set to consider a law banning smoking in schools, universities, government offices and a wide range of private businesses, including restaurants and cafs. Hoardings advertising cigarettes, which wallpaper the business areas of Baghdad, would be outlawed. And cigarette companies would be forced to print more explicit health warnings on labels.

Since about 40% of adult male Iraqis are smokers, maybe that might begin to explain why they haven’t been fighting very hard for a freedom that they had under Saddam Hussein, but maybe no longer have. Why fight for a freedom you no longer have?

Anyway, antismoking US president Obama seems quite happy for antismoking ISIL to take over the country, and butcher thousands. The only people who seem to have reacted rapidly are the Iranians.

Iran is coming to the aid of its historic nemesis, sending elite fighters to Iraq in the wake of a Sunni insurgency that has claimed two key northern cities and now threatens Baghdad, Fox News has learned.

Some 150 fighters from the Revolutionary Guards elite Quds force have already been dispatched by Tehran, and the division’s powerful commander, Qassem Suleimani, met with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki Thursday and pledged to send two notorious Iranian brigades to aid in the defense of Baghdad. That could amount to as many as 10,000 soldiers sent to fight the Sunni group known as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS).

Maliki is believed to be considering the offer, especially in light of reported decisions by the U.S. to reject his request for American airstrikes against the Al Qaeda-affiliated militants who have recently overrun Mosul and Tikrit and appear to be preparing for a march on the capital. The two brigades that Suleimani offered are Asaab Ahel Haq, a Shi’ite paramilitary unit, and the Shi’ite insurgency group Kata’ib Hezbollah.

Iran, of course, has its own smoking ban. But perhaps not quite as strict as it was.

Revoking a smoking ban may seem an unlikely way to boost election turnouts. But in Iran, authorities are hopeful that allowing the traditional hubble-bubble, or water pipes, back into tea houses could encourage reluctant voters to go to the polls.

The government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has signed into law a bill that removes tea houses from the list of places where smoking tobacco is prohibited, Iranian newspapers reported on Thursday.

The move comes only two weeks after Iran’s court of administrative justice, a judicial body independent of the government, banned the smoking of all sorts of tobacco in traditional restaurants and tea houses. Iranians were allowed only to smoke certain types – perceived to be less dangerous – in the past.

Since Ahmadinejad first took the office in 2005, water pipes have intermittently been banned from, then allowed, in tea houses.

In his early years in power, Ahmadinejad came under pressure from conservatives to curb water pipe smoking, which had become a popular pastime for the young people but was seen as culturally decadent by the regime, despite being an integral part of the Persian culture for centuries. A smoking ban was eventually passed in October 2006 but was lifted later to allow certain kinds of tobacco.

Interesting that Iran lifted restrictions on water pipes “to encourage reluctant voters to go to the polls.” I can well understand that. After all, I’m myself a reluctant voter for the exact same reason.

About Frank Davis

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

42 Responses to Why Fight For A Freedom You No Longer Have?

  1. “Our Western antismoking zealots always hail any new piece of progress in the war on smoking. So will ASH’s Deborah Arnott be issuing a press release applauding the outlawing of smoking in Iraq? And if she doesn’t, will she explain why not?”

    VERY excellent question!

    – MJM

    • waltc says:

      I wish someone (Frank?) would ask that question in a letter to the editor attached to any article about the march thru Iraq. It’s too good to waste and could considerably and publicly embarrass her,

      Yes, that;’s the article I referred to about the Green Zone., Glad you found it,

    • Twenty_Rothmans says:

      I think that Deborah Arnott should be sent on a fact-finding mission to Iraq, lasting say, two years, immediately.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      You want an army in Iraq to fight with,simply tell the smokers we are fighting for your right to smoke!

    • beobrigitte says:

      So will ASH’s Deborah Arnott be issuing a press release applauding the outlawing of smoking in Iraq?

      A very good question!!! ISIL (ISIS) definitely has demonstrated it’s stand on smokers and cigarettes; Debbie’s little heart must be overjoyed!!!

      And if she doesn’t, will she explain why not?
      Looking forward to hearing……. NOTHING. The coward!!!!!!

  2. waltc says:

    Marie–
    On lung cancer among nonsmokers, the stats are all over the place. In addition to Rose’s link, here’s from my files. I’ll break it up into several posts to outfox the dungeon.

    2009: In one lung cancer study, the most telling observation was that… the rate of cancer detection was almost the same in smokers as it was in nonsmokers—
    http://discovermagazine.com/2009/new-science-of-health/new-rx-for-cancer-ignore-it-sometimes

    2009: URL no longer works but.,.,

    In fact, non-smokers now account for 15 percent of all new lung cancer cases and over 50% of new lung cancer patients are former smokers, many of whom quit decades ago, says the Alliance for Lung Cancer (Alcase), a Vancouver, Wash.-based non-profit group..

    2010: Smoking causes most lung cancers. However, about half of patients who are diagnosed have never smoked (15%) or are former smokers (35%).
    http://www.lungcancercanada.ca/Education/Did_you_know.html

  3. waltc says:

    Part 2
    2010 report on 2006 rates:
    http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20101119_In_the_race__with_luck_and_most_of_my_lungs.html

    “Sixty percent of lung cancer cases diagnosed in 2006 were in people who had quit smoking, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s most recent report on the subject. (Another 21 percent were in people who had never smoked.) Given prevailing trends, ex-smokers’ share of cases could be even higher now.

    2011: http://lungcancer.about.com/od/causesoflungcance1/a/smokinglungcancer.htm

    The majority of lung cancers (over 50%) now occur in former smokers that have quit, and roughly 10% of men and 20% of women with lung cancer have never smoked

    2012 reporting 2010 study: 1/3 of all new diagnoses among never smokers not exposed to ets
    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/725138

    2012: “Overdiagnosis is even more of a concern for spiral CT, because it can detect far more abnormalities than chest X-rays. In fact a screening program in Japan found about 10 times as many lung cancers with spiral CT as had been found in the same population using chest X-rays. More remarkably, the chance of having lung cancer detected by spiral CT was almost the same in nonsmokers and smokers.”

    Click to access NYT_cancer_screening.pdf

    • Marie says:

      Thank you very much, waltc. I did not see your post until now. In fact the first Url is OK, but the next one is broken.
      I will save all these good links :)

  4. waltc says:

    Part 2 is in fact apparently still in jail

  5. SomeFrenchBloke says:

    Or you can try the Australian Statistician (Ian Castles):

    tctactics.org/images/6/60/Smokers_have_the_fewest_number_of_sick_days_-_Australian_Report.PDF
    or:

    Click to access 2047635850-5943.pdf

    Smoking is on pp. 19 to 28 of the pdf (See tables on pages 21, 23 and 24).

    • Twenty_Rothmans says:

      Jesus Christ, according to that, I was a high income earner!
      The bit they left out was the the government raped most of it out of you.

  6. Furor Teutonicus says:

    xx in light of reported decisions by the U.S. to reject his request for American airstrikes against the Al Qaeda-affiliated militants xx

    Of COURSE they refuse. After all, Al Qiditch are Buttfuck O’Bummers best mates.

  7. harleyrider1978 says:

    Jihadi Militants Ban Smoking And Guns In Conquered Territories

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/13/jihadi-militants-ban-smoking-and-guns-in-conquered-territories/#ixzz34cdxaMGD

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      We are witnessing what I just wrote below in the comments from the story above!

      Danny K • 6 minutes ago
      There you go progressives, your utopia.

      picric_acid • 3 hours ago

      Michaelah al-Bloombergi’s policies at work.

      Yeah, Obama’s a Communist • 4 hours ago

      I find it interesting that Muslims are determined to control every
      aspect of your life, in much the same way that liberals are determined
      to control every aspect of your life. Could that be why these two groups
      seem to get along so well?
      If you don’t behave the way Muslims demand, they tend to kill you.
      That has been the dream of progressives for a century.

      John H. Shuba • 10 hours ago

      Sounds like former Mayor Bloomberg may have finally found the constituency he’s been looking for. He and ISIS may have a few rough spots at first but politics makes strange bedfellows and with a little effort they can make it work,.

      That’s just a few of them

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Jdove47 • 17 hours ago

        Wow! A liberal’s wet dream! They get conquered, told not to smoke, because,
        you know that causes cancer, and made safe from the big, bad gun owners. They must be spasming with pleasure on that fantasy become reality for
        unfortunate people.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          So they claimed………..

          Edict not funded by NYC
          mayor: Muhammadiyah

          Arghea D. Hapsari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | National | Sat, March 13 2010, 10:26 PM

          An organization owned by the mayor of New York City has channeled over US$390,000 to Muhammadiyah as part of a global anti-tobacco campaign, but the country’s second largest Islamic organization denied the funding influenced its recent edict banning smoking.

          A. Fattah Wibisono, a deputy secretary at Muhammadiyah’s council tasked with issuing religious edicts, acknowledged that his organization was cooperating with the Bloomberg Initiative to Reduce Tobacco Use, a philanthropic organization established in 2006 by Michael R. Bloomberg to fight tobacco use in low- and middle-income countries.

          The US$125 million global initiative was extended with a new $250 million commitment in 2008. The initiative funds related projects in Indonesia and many other countries. Its website says that Muhammadiyah was a recipient of grants totaling US$393,234 from November 2009 to October 2011.

          Other recipients include the Bogor City Health Agency, National Commission for Child Protection (Komnas PA), and the Demographic Institute at the University of Indonesia’s School of Economics.

          The Bloomberg Initiative says on its website, http://www.tobaccocontrolgrants.org, its program with Muhammadiyah aims “to mobilize public support towards obtaining religious policy on tobacco control and to support FCTC [Framework Convention on Tobacco Control] accession”.

          Muhammadiyah issued an edict banning its followers from smoking on Wednesday, basing its argument on the Koran, which bans Muslims from taking their own lives. It also urged the government and the House of Representatives to ratify the FCTC.

          Fattah, however, maintained that the council did not receive funding to issue the edict.

          “Muhammadiyah is committed to creating a clean environment and a healthy society. We have a program for that and Bloomberg knew of this program and they offered [to fund it],” he told The Jakarta Post.

          http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/03/13/edict-not-funded-nyc-mayor-muhammadiyah.html

  8. harleyrider1978 says:

    And what are we fighting for, if it’s not for the freedom to live our lives the way we want to, and not as tyrannical and murderous zealots demand?

    Frank you just set down the reason to fight for ” FREEDOM” and smoking has now become the reason to fight for liberty against the jihadists. Its in the mainstream Media now too!

    Once you connect a subject to a means it becomes a pathway to building the fight against the bad guys. Fighting the Jihadists has now been firmly rooted in a fight against smoking bans………….

    Its a point we need to push to no end. If you support smoking bans you in fact support our enemies in the radical moslem community of terrorists. These folks are using anti-smoking as a terror weapon! In the west second hand smoke junk science is used as a TERROR WEAPON no less than the Jihadists using the death sentence or the lobbing off of feet and hands if you don’t stop smoking. In the west they threaten you with JAIL TIME,HIGH HANDED FINES, EXTORTINATE PENAL TAXES, The loss of your business license and your livelihoods!

    The acts of terror against those who smoke and those whose livelihoods depend on smokers are just as extreme as the Jihadists……………..Only the state in the west tends to protect itself in Casinos and its takings to keep their cut of the profits. Save Idiot states like Illinois that just as soon banish us smokers and cut their nose off with Casino losses likely 2 Billion in lost revenues since their ban.

    Anti-smoking is now officially tied to TERRORISM!

  9. harleyrider1978 says:

    SMOKING GUNS: Benghazi to Baghdad – Obama’s Secret Deal to Arm Jihadists Explodes Into a Looming Muslim Caliphate

    Over a year ago, in May of 2013, LibertyNEWS.com ran a series of investigative and analytical reports on what really happened before, during and after the deadly attack on the U.S. facilities in Benghazi. Since those stories were published, our analysis has been confirmed in many respects by various sources inside and outside government.

    The basics are these:
    1. The American compound in Benghazi was a control/staging area for the gathering of heavy weapons scattered around Libya after the fall of Muammar Gaddafi.
    2. The weapons were secretly being shipped out of Libya, headed toward Syrian rebel forces engaged in an anti-Assad offensive.
    3. The attack on the compound was a coordinated, military-style assault, possibly intended to seize control of those weapons, determine their location, interrupt the flow or cover up the clandestine operation.
    4. Many weapons, including powerful surface-to-air missiles, essentially “disappeared” into the hands of various rebel factions, largely in Syria.
    5. Barack Obama and others in the administration (including then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) either directed, assisted with, knew about, ignored or helped to cover up the truth about Benghazi.

    Now, it appears those very weapons stolen from or smuggled out of Benghazi may be in the control of vicious insurgents — jihadists fighting their way toward Baghdad, Iraq. Insurgents associated with an organization known as ISIS. These ISIS militants are bloodthirsty Muslim insurgents who have installed strict Sharia law in the major Iraqi cities they have quickly and systematically overrun on their march to the capital

    The situation in Iraq is perilous for the U.S.-backed government. It appears likely to fall, as its military crumbles and defenses defining the country’s border with Syria collapse. And substantial Iranian forces — the fearsome Revolutionary Guard — enter Iraq under the pretense of helping to bring an end to the turmoil. And now, reports from the region tell us that leaders of this newly risen Islamist insurgency are talking openly of creating a caliphate — a vast Islamic state ruled by a religious/political leader — and of having a direct confrontation with the United States. President Obama says the United States will not send troops to Iraq, that the country must take care of its own problems. That, however, is something it appears the government of Iraq is completely incapable of doing. And does Obama know this? Is that, quite possibly, okay with him? Other tough but reasonable questions must be asked as this crisis resonates and amplifies across the region… 1. Is the Benghazi-to-Baghdad connection — Syrian rebel forces armed with weapons from Libya — is that connection part of a plan? 2. Was letting Iraq fall into chaos leading to an overthrow of the government and the takeover by Sharia-following, war-minded Islamists part of a plan? 3. Will a dominant Islamic caliphate rise from the Iraqi ashes, uniting Iraq, Syria and Iran…moving toward a takeover of Egypt…essentially guaranteeing the destruction of Israel? The dark dots of a sinister diagram of deceit and downfall are now connecting. Truly, let’s hope the picture that’s formed is not what it appears to be. For if that picture is one of Islamist strength and unity, fortified by weapons supplied by or once in the control of the United States, than we must ask… – See

    more at: http://www.libertynews.com/2014/06/smoking-guns-benghazi-to-baghdad-obamas-secret-deal-to-arm-jihadists-explodes-into-a-looming-muslim-caliphate/#sthash.eOrAod6T.dpuf

  10. harleyrider1978 says:
  11. harleyrider1978 says:

    Peter Goers: Smokers unfairly whacked by extortionate prices and ineffective plain packaging

    Peter Goers
    Sunday Mail (SA)
    June 14, 2014 10:00PM

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/peter-goers-smokers-unfairly-whacked-by-extortionate-prices-and-ineffective-plain-packaging/story-fnii5yv7-1226954298865

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Adlin Sila, a researcher at the Ministry of Religion who has studied this debate extensively, said that overseas anti-tobacco NGOs may be funding Muhammadiyah to continue their controversial campaign against tobacco. Piet Khaidir, the director of the Centre for Dialogue and Cooperation among Civilisations, a subsidiary of Muhammadiyah, identified an ulterior motive: politicking. The fatwa was apparently the brainchild of a Muhammadiyah leader with aspirations to be chairman of the organization. Rumors swirl about the true motivation for this fatwa, but Khadir revealed that even within the Muhammadiyah headquarters, there has been no decrease in smoking. “The joke,” Khaidir said, “is that there are two groups in Muhammadiyah. The majority is smoker while the minority is nonsmoker.” This trend is no exception; the fatwa is notoriously ignored and often lambasted by other Muslim organizations and even other anti-smoking organizations, which do not believe that religious doctrine is the most effective way to enact change.

  12. harleyrider1978 says:

    overseas anti-tobacco NGOs may be funding Muhammadiyah to continue their controversial campaign against tobacco

    http://tctactics.org/index.php/NGOs

    Non-governmental Organisations involved in Tobacco Control

    World
    WHO, World Health Organisation
    Creator of the FCTC, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Is heavily supported by the pharmaceutical industry in the area of lifestyle diseases. Has been heavily criticized for its amount of spending on “1st World” concerns like promoting smoking bans while neglecting concerns of nations whose children are dying of dysentery, cholera, and malaria. Framework Convention Alliance
    This alliance is made up of over 350 organizations from more than 100 countries working on the development, ratification and implementation of Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). Global Smokefree Partnership
    A multipartner initiative formed to promote effective smokefree air policies worldwide. Globalink
    Globalink is a network of international tobacco control activists making use of the internet to communicate ideas and strategies against the use of tobacco. It is part of the Global Tobacco Control Movement strongly supported by the American Cancer Society and the UICC. Although Globalink does not declare their dependence upon pharmaceutical funding on their website, here’s what we can read in bold on page 34 of the Strategy Planning for Tobacco Control Movement Building: “Links to Drug Companies That Have Funded Tobacco Control Action GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Pharmacia Corporation (now owned by Pfizer)” Dr. Michael Siegel (an insider) exposed how the groupthink mentality runs rampant in the globalink network. Excerpts from his blogpost Globalink: A Forum for Global Groupthink in Tobacco Control: It (Globalink) is a mechanism for preventing critical discussion of research, science, and policy issues in tobacco control. It serves to stifle thoughtful discussion of ideas, suppresses dissenting opinions, and plays out as a forum for malicious individual attacks against researchers, advocates, or citizens who dare to go against the mainstream opinions within the tobacco control movement. Another former Globalink member – Dr. Kamal Chaouachi – had this to say: I was banished (from Globalink) several times and eventually expelled once and for all. Over the years, I have also been amazed by the extent of endorsed intolerance. For instance, there have been, believe it or not, “debates” on whether it is ethical or not to give a last cigarette to a person confined to bed and doomed to death… Then, one discovers the pharmaceutical industry connections (Pfizer in particular) (WCTOH, 2009; Mesbah 2009) and how Globalink’s policy has been drawn with “a velvet glove” pulled on an iron fist named Simon Chapman, ex Editor in Chief of the world famous antismoking Tobacco Control Journal.

    World Lung Foundation
    Funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the World Lung Foundation offers funding and anti-tobacco advocacy techniques to low-and middle-income countries.
    USA
    Americans For Nonsmokers’ Rights
    Berkeley, CA Action on Smoking and Health
    Washington, DC American Legacy Foundation
    Washington, DC Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
    Washington, DC Center for Disease Control and Prevention
    Atlanta, GA GASP
    With chapters across the USA Institute for Global Tobacco Control (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)
    Baltimore, MD
    On top of the above, the alphabet organizations such as the American Cancer Society, the American Lung and Heart Associations, the CDC and others lobby governments at all levels for higher tobacco taxes, and more stringent tobacco restrictions such as outdoor and home smoking bans. As well, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of smaller parasitical groups in the USA promulgating anti-smoking messages and smoker intolerance.

    Its a rather long list of GUILTY PARTIES FUNDING THE TERRORISTS EHH!

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Note Kentucky Tobacco Prevention and Cessation Program
      is a part of the NGO’S possibly funding the terrorists in anti-smoking

  13. Senzar says:

    Al Quaida/Isis/Isil/al Nusrah have imposed non-smoking in Syria wherever they have ‘gained’ an advantage. They claim it’s written in the Koran/Quaran.

    Of course, they’re full of shit just like every Western anti-smoking group.

    So, it has to be asked, is al Q/ISIS/ISIL/al Nusra just another anti smoking org alonside ASH?

    If so what is the benefit to those groups? What is Ash’s affiliation with the islamic terrorist pawns? Is Ash just another Islamic terrorist front?

    I do hope Debbie gets her head removed from her neck at some point in the not too distant future. With a rusty knife of course.

    The bitch deserves to die along with Glantz, Bauld and Chapman et al. I do hope I live long enough to see the Tumbrels roll again.

    • SomeFrenchBloke says:

      “I do hope I live long enough to see the Tumbrels roll again.”

      Well, there is also a concurrent “live shark bait” proposition.
      While positively subhuman on many essential levels, antismokers nevertheless remain human from a biological standpoint. With that in mind, wouldn’t they be put to better use as guinea pigs in tests of carcinogenicity on humans ?
      Cancer prevention and detection have been delayed and led astray for long enough by the lies an fallacies they’ve been spreading. They owe science a couple of breakthroughs in compensation…

  14. smokervoter says:

    In private conversations I’ve been half-jokingly referring to antismokers as the Tobacco Taliban for years now and everyone seems to get the connection pretty easily.

    There’s no mistaking the similar brooding, puritanical and my-way-or-the-highway approach to their great crusades. The main departure is in the manner of dress. Western tobacco reformers are Talibanistas in double-knits and gabardines.

    Personally I’ve always noted that the Taliban look a whole lot like 60s vintage hippies that you’d see all over Santa Cruz back in the day. And I think it’s quite likely that more than a few of the upper echelon of the western variety of the Tobacco Taliban are the sort of organic food obsessed ex-hippies you’ll find wandering the isles of your local Whole Foods Market, that is when they’re not busy working hard on pushing a harsh new smokefree ordinance through city council.

    Of course, the Western counterparts aren’t beheading smokers or publicly caning them. No, instead they’re slowly but surely torturing them by robbing them blind with taxes, getting them thrown out of their homes and livelihoods, and banning them from higher education facilities unless they kowtow to sacred smokefree campus policies.

    Gee, in comparison, they’re all heart.

    • beobrigitte says:

      Of course, the Western counterparts aren’t beheading smokers or publicly caning them.

      The western Talibans are lobbying governments to exclude smokers from the society they live in – especially the older people (who no longer matter to this society) are condemned to a life in a society that tells them that ‘they may as well be beheaded’ – no one cares.
      The public caning started with the ‘denormalisation programme’ – light up a cigarette and you will find out all about it!!!
      Western Taliban counterparts are worse than the original Taliban – at least the original ones don’t pretend.

  15. Amazing. And an actual tie to Bloomberg antismoking funding. Incredible!

    ==

    also, as a side note, smokervoter opined that: “the Taliban look a whole lot like 60s vintage hippies that you’d see all over Santa Cruz back in the day.”

    Have you ever seen the TV series “Portandia”? It seems to be a (only slightly?) satirical take on a US West Coast city where the hippie-wanna-be’s of the 80s and 90s are still alive and well and hippieing today in the ‘teens. The first few episodes are fun (picture stories built around such things as a post-hippie couple at a restaurant ordering an organic free-range chicken named Bob and who comes with a color photo and a printed family tree certifying his contented life.) though it gets a bit repetitive after a while. It *may* not be that far from reality: I saw a town like that once in the early 80s here on the US East Coast: Brattleboro, Vermont. It seemed like heaven in a way at that time, particularly for bicyclists — but I was also scared by it. Even in those “early days” I could feel the danger of political correctness enforced invisibly as motorcycles put-putted slowly and quietly along and people stood at quiet street corners devoid of traffic while waiting for the traffic lights to change.

    I think a fair amount of what we’re seeing in upper-middle class Euro-American culture nowadays is a second-generation outgrowth of the “Nuclear Disaster Is Inevitable And We’re All Gonna Fry!” syndrome. Things like the EU and the various “elite groups” trying to “plan the world’s future” are a direct response born out of a desperate attempt to avoid the BBQ, while the antismoking and healthist movements are a similarly desperate attempt to deny our mortality — a mortality that the kids of the 60s and 70s had staring them in the face every day every time they’d hear a siren or see a contrail in the sky. (Hmm… maybe that’s what brought the fear of “chemtrails”?)

    – MJM

    • Marie says:

      The “hippies”, I knew in the 70s where all smoking :)

      • Ahhh… but WHAT were they smokin’ m’lady? :>

        Actually, by the late 70s, a lot of the “Quakerly activist” type hippies had started to migrate into the antismoking camp, motivated by pushes from various directions (respect for people with disabilities, concern for the environment, anti-corporatism, quest for eternal youth/life, rebellion against parental values, having babies and wanting to raise them “pure and organic,” — all combined in different ways to push in the same direction.

        – MJM

        • Marie says:

          They were smoking cigarettes all day log AND – sometimes, some of them – hash. But not on a daily basis ;) Hash instead of bear. Not much bear was consumed.

          (Is it possible to upload photos here?)

  16. Pingback: A Religious War on Smoking | Frank Davis

No need to log in

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

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