government treats smokers as enemies?

Penelope has endured ten years of victimization from anti-smoking fanatics, and she believes that life under the Islamist Taliban in Afghanistan cannot be much worse than it is for her and other fellow citizens who smoke, and wonders why her government is treating smokers as enemies.

"I can appreciate that the Islamists and the anti-smokers truly believe in the barrow they are pushing," says Penelope, "but they don't ever seem to question the propaganda that feeds their cause. They just accept it as if it were an incontrovertible truth and repeat it so often that they sound like parrots."

"I am prepared to listen to the arguments the government puts forward about cancer, passive smoking and everything else -- I don't have much choice, really, when it's pushed into my face every day," says Penelope, "but I cannot in all seriousness accept all of it.”

“Most of it has been discredited and while I don't mean to be disrespectful, something that makes me feel so good cannot be all bad. It's as simple as that."

"It's a pity they are not prepared to listen to what smokers have to say," sighs Penelope, 'but brainwashed fanatics are, by definition, incapable of seeing both sides of an issue so I don't bother trying any more."

"Frankly, after putting up with the anti-smoking terrorists at home for ten years, I fail to see how life under the Taliban could be very much worse," says Penelope. "In fact, it would be a lot easier to accept being terrorized by them because they're not the same race and religion as myself -- as my current intimidators and torturers are."

“Now I know how the Jews felt in Nazi Germany,” says Penelope. “I feel like a non-citizen in my own country.”

Read more from Penelope on this subject:

brainwashed anti-smoking terrorists

brainwashing v education

tobacco war doing better than terror war!

recession smokers

Nessie works near the financial hub of the city and she's noticed a lot more smokers huddled outside buildings, puffing madly, since the recession started to bite.

"I've also noticed a lot less discrimination against me from passers-by when I dash down to have a quick smoke," says Nessie, "so I guess the recession is good, in a way, for smokers and other victims of government health fads because it distracts the bullies, giving them something more important to do with their time than interfering in other people's enjoyment of life."

"I'm not a vindictive person, but if this recession is going to cause the government to offload all of the health fad parasites in its various departments in order to save the nation from bankruptcy, then it's three cheers from me," laughs Nessie. "Let them find a real job in the real world rather than swanning around their smoke-free offices finding more and more ways to victimize smokers while living a fat-cat life on our tobacco tax money."

"Let them find out what it's like to be removed from their comfort zone and their addiction to living like parasites on our tobacco tax."

"In fact, let them apply their own sanctimonious advice to themselves when they find themselves reaching for their tobacco tax-funded pay packets and find them empty," laughs Nessie. "Let's see how easy it is for them to give up their addictive comfort zone -- patch that if you can!"

"It would be poetic justice, indeed, if some of them -- stressed out with it all -- took solace in a cigarette," says Nessie. “Very few people are able to quit one addiction without taking up another one.”

"I do, however, feel sorry for all the ex-smokers who've lapsed with the stresses of the recession," sighs Nessie. "It must be terrible for people who've lost money or fear the loss of their jobs to cope with it all -- and who can blame ex-smokers in this situation who say 'to hell with it, I need a smoke’!"

"If they had quit smoking in the first place because of exorbitant tobacco taxes, then they are going to be in a far worse financial situation taking the habit up again," says Nessie. "It's always bothered me why governments would tax so heavily a product that calms people down and makes them feel good – without any nasty repercussions, such as violence or risky behavior -- but I suppose in good times governments can do what the hell they like."

"I imagine that recession worries are causing a whole lot of other 'reformed' people to lapse, too," adds Nessie. "When times are bad, people naturally turn to comforting substances like sweet and fatty foods, alcohol and drugs to make them feel better, so watch out for a lot more drunks and druggies on the streets!"

"Now that the times are bad," suggests Nessie, "I think the government should reduce tax on tobacco -- even hand out packets for free!"

"I don't know about you, but I'd prefer a mass of recession smokers on the streets than a mass of recession drunks and druggies."

pushy railway smokers

An incident on an outdoor railway platform at Farningham Road, Kent – involving two young guys smoking under a footbridge, an antismoking older woman, a push, a stumble and a fall onto the tracks – has brought out another spate of venom against smokers and Soraya – the same age as the victim, Linda Buchanan – is angry because this is what happens when governments pass laws without teeth, failing to give relevant authorities the funding necessary to enforce them.

"The ban against smoking has only been in force for a year," says Soraya, "and if the government is serious about its nonsmoking policy then it should have given the railways the funds necessary to hire more staff to patrol stations rather than leaving it up to strident members of the general public, like Linda Buchanan, to enforce it."

"Those two guys were described as being about 25 and have probably been smoking for over 10 years already," says Soraya. "By giving naive people like Linda Buchanan the false impression that all smokers can change their habits so quickly and easily, or want to – for no other reason than because the antismoking lobby has spent millions of taxpayer funds promoting how disgusting the habit is – the government has exposed her to the wrath of two young thugs who, quite clearly, have no intention of quitting and resent interference in their enjoyment of what is, after all, a legal product."

"Actually, I am loathe to call them thugs because although they were obviously cognizant of the smoking ban, but lit up regardless, they did their smoking under a footbridge, far away from the main platform, being courteous towards fellow commuters who did not want to smell cigarette smoke,” explains Soraya. “They were providing themselves with a quiet smoking space – making a protest, of sorts, against the stupidity of applying the smoking ban to outdoor areas – not expecting someone like Ms Buchanan to go out of her way to confront them at 7am, three days in a row.”

"I’m not a heavy smoker, I certainly don’t smoke at 7am and I’d never push someone who shoved me verbally,” says Soraya, “but I do think that the total smoking ban is unreasonable. It would be civilized to have a smoking section in all indoor public areas, but failing that it is cruel, hypocritical and nonsensical to ban smoking in outdoor areas where toxic fumes and evil smells from trains, planes, vehicles, factories, homes and restaurants are already polluting the air or offending the nostrils."

"What was thuggish about their behavior was not their furtive smoking but their over-reaction to being told to stop smoking, three days in a row, by a woman who is very lucky that they gave her a push rather than sticking a knife into her," says Soraya. "And, if it comes to that, they were very lucky that she wasn't a gun toting lunatic."

"They had absolutely no right to touch the woman -- no matter how much provocation she gave them -- and this is their crime, not their smoking, but all the anti-smokers out there fail to make this distinction," points out Soraya. "Had Ms Buchanan not stumbled, fell onto the railway tracks and caused the guys to run away in panic, she could have had them charged with assault and lumbered them with a criminal record that would affect the rest of their lives -- and she still can, of course, providing they are located -- but she can't have them charged and given a criminal record for smoking."

"Smoking in a non-smoking area is an offence and, like a multitude of other silly offences under the New World Order, it is not a crime like murder, rape and theft; and if everyone believes they have the right, as Ms Buchanan did, to tackle strangers for committing these silly offences, then the actual crime rate is going to escalate and there'll be dead bodies everywhere."

"Being the same age as Linda Buchanan, I cannot understand what on earth possessed the woman to think that strapping young men of about 25, on their way to a laboring job by the description of their clothing, would pay any attention to her," laughs Soraya. "Having tried once to stop them smoking, what possessed her to impose her will on them, 'lawful' though it was, a second and then a third time? If she was so incensed, so out of her mind with rage, why didn't she approach the railway staff and get them to do their job rather than doing it for them?"

“Is she nuts or something? I wouldn’t approach two young women of that age to ask them the time, let alone two young men to tell them to stop doing something that offended me. I’d just walk away, as would most sensible older people.”

"Would she have similarly approached two men her own age doing the same thing?" asks Soraya. "I very much doubt it, and what we are seeing here is perhaps a woman with adult sons of the same age who won't let go, who continues to treat them as children, and that is why her last words to them was to 'grow up' before they gave her the push that made her stumble and fall onto the railway tracks."

"I'm surprised, really, that two young laboring men would be taking a train to work in the first place -- most commuters where I live are older people," says Soraya. "And yet as the cost of running a vehicle becomes prohibitive, forcing more and more people out of private transport onto public transport, I suppose this sort of incident is going to become rife -- if not for smoking then for any number of silly offences."

“But it doesn’t surprise me that this incident happened in the South-East, the most overcrowded part of the UK, a tinderbox of hostilities waiting to be ignited,” says Soraya. “Even where I live, where it’s not so overcrowded, I’m into cocoon survival.”

"Those two guys were probably still living at home -- for the same reason that they cannot afford private transport to get to work -- and were probably subject to constant nagging by their moms," explains Soraya. "When nagged young men are confronted three times by someone else's nagging mom, I guess they snapped."

"I'm not making excuses for the young men, I'm merely pointing out that every railway platform in the country, if not the whole world, is seething with people suffering from all sorts of afflictions and private miseries and the slightest thing can set any one of them off -- a whiff of cigarette smoke, a crying child, a piece of litter, a cell phone ringing, you name it, something is sure to offend someone – and if we are to survive as a harmonious society in an increasingly overpopulated world then governments should be promoting tolerance rather than pandering to divisive lobby groups such as ASH.”

"What about the Greyhound bus passenger in Canada who had his head cut off by the lunatic sitting next to him?" adds Soraya. “He wasn't smoking, he wasn't littering, he wasn't drunk and disorderly or in any way annoying the lunatic sitting next to him -- but something about him ticked off the lunatic -- the smell of his aftershave, an inadvertent touch, a cough, who knows?"

"And this is why governments that pass silly laws trying to control every aspect of human behavior are wasting taxpayer's resources."

"If governments must pass silly laws telling us where we can and cannot eat, smoke, drink, fart, urinate, defecate, expose our body bits, have sex, make noises, etc, etc, then at least put some teeth into these laws by requiring all authorities -- in this case public transport operators -- to raise their act and take 100% responsibility for the safety and comfort of commuters," says Soraya. "It was grossly negligent of the government to pass the nonsmoking ban without enforcement patrols to go with it, leaving people like Linda Buchanan with no option but to do the job herself (and heavy smokers like those two guys with enough rope to hang themselves)."

"If I were Ms Buchanan I'd try suing the government because her actions were based upon a reasonable belief that the government was serious about the smoking ban, why else would they pass the law?” points out Soraya. “However, because the majority of the population doesn’t trust anything the government does, preferring to remain cynical, minding its own business, I don't fancy her chances."

"Everyone else on that railway platform in Kent, except for Linda Buchanan, was minding their own business," says Soraya. "If she had minded her own business and the railway staff had been given government funds to properly mind theirs -- patrolling the platform 24/7 -- her wrist wouldn't be broken and two young men would not now be on the run, hunted down like animals, their future lives in ruin should they be located."

airbrushing smokers

When the control freaks are airbrushing out the cigars and cigarettes from old photographs and films and drawing up lists of books to ban or burn when they achieve total power and can rewrite history to their liking, Segolene believes it is not just smokers who should be worried.

“Enjoy the Internet whilst it lasts," sighs Segolene. "What's normal and abnormal today is sure as hell going to be abnormal and normal tomorrow if we allow these control freaks to get away with it much longer."

"It's happened before in history and it will happen again if too few sane people stand by and allow the control freaks open slather on our freedoms."

"Remember when you could drive a car without buckling up and when you could ride a motorbike without a helmet and feel the wind in you hair? When you could fish without a licence? When you could expect same-sex wards in hospitals? When you could smack a naughty kid? When you could fell a tree, light a fire, party all night, smoke a cigarette in a bar and do a million other quite normal things without the Spanish Inquisitors descending upon you?"

"They -- the Spanish Inquisitors -- say it's for your good, or for the good of society, but we all know whose good it is for," says Segolene. "Society managed just fine without all of these abnormal laws, people tolerated each other and Darwin's Law operated just as it was supposed to. These guys are just control freaks, using these laws to justify their jobs and existence in the same way that the old religious leaders once did."

"At what point will the masses tip? Will routine cavity searches at airports do the trick? How about routine house searches at 3am? Or routine drug testing and weigh-ins at work or school? Or compulsory registration and rationing to buy alcohol, cigarettes, hamburgers, twinkies, gas or whatever? Or compulsory sterilization for hereditary diseases? Or carbon footprint naming and shaming? Or prohibition on pets? We aready tolerate public screening of court cases, how about public screening of toilet use and
handwashing -- all in the public good, of course?"

"Muslims aren't out to get us, passive smoking won't kill us, there are more paedophiles at home than at public parks, climate change has been going on since time immemorial and the sky isn't falling," says Segoline. "If we allow ourselves to be seduced by any more mass fear-mongering our grandchildren will be forced to live in a time worse than the Dark Ages.”

“What's more, they will be deprived of knowing what life was once like before their ancestors (us) allowed the control freaks to take charge and airbrush out of history everything that disagrees with their peculiar mindset."

Read more by Segolene on this subject:

has cctv replaced god?

abnormalizing the normal

Barack Obama Smokes?

Barack Obama’s losing fight to rid himself of the smoking habit is now public knowledge and is causing a stir among the chattering classes and Sissy wants to know why on earth it should matter.

“Many voters did not even know that he had ever smoked and are righteously indignant and shocked that a person with such an ‘abominable, filthy and disgusting’ character flaw could ever stand for office,” says Sissy. “But, in view of the legality of the habit, and his quitting smoking not being a requirement of nomination, what business is it of anyone’s?”

“As long as he can perform the duties of office and uphold the social contract we invest in him,” says Sissy, “then I really cannot see why a smoker in office would be worse than a drinker or a drug-taker, especially when tobacco calms the nerves and aids concentration.”

“I don’t understand why he ever bothered to take it upon himself to do the ‘quitting’ thing in the first place,” says Sissy. “And why is a presidential candidate’s smoking habit more important to voters than slaughter in Iraq or the state of the economy?”

“I would say that drinking, drug-taking, womanizing, gambling, lying, violence or abuse of women and children are far worse character flaws than smoking,” says Sissy, “and I certainly wouldn’t vote for anyone with those flaws.”

”To my mind, Obama risks being considered a wimp for trying to fit in with the Politically Correct herd mentality if he went on the quitting train,” says Sissy. “I’d rather that he remain his own smokin’ man.”


Read more by Sissy on this issue:

once a smoker always a smoker

backing a winner?

addictive friends

peace up in smoke?

walking on water

a life changing vote

who’s the boss?

candidates and spouses

and check out:

Secrets of Barack Obama’s Age

Obama, Clinton or McCain?

once a smoker always a smoker

Reports that Barack Obama has broken his pledge to quit smoking by sneaking a few cigarettes now and again – and comments about his deteriorating performance - do not surprise Sissy as much as his ridiculous decision to quit smoking in the first place.

“People lapse and lose focus when they quit smoking, so why did he put himself through all this totally unnecessary public humiliation?” asks Sissy. “Frankly, his timing to quit smoking – running for office - was atrocious, as was his estimation of his willpower.”

“He doesn’t seem to have much insight into why tobacco smoking first attracted him and always will,” explains Sissy. “He’s not so much a nicotine addict as a smoking addict – chewing Nicorette isn’t going to help him when he needs to see and smell smoke and take it into his lungs. Can’t he see that?”

“It pains and embarrasses me to see him so unfocused,” sighs Sissy. “I’m sure the other candidates take a shot of something or other before they go on stage, and if this guy needs smoke in his lungs in order to function at his best then he should just do it – and do it openly (it’s legal!) We are sick to death of hypocrites in politics.”

“On the other hand, if he is serious about quitting for good then being the type of smoker he is it may take him several years, and many relapses, before he succeeds,” says Sissy, “but even then he will always be a ‘smoker’ and just like a drinker on the wagon it will be a day at a time, a personal fight against a personal demon for as long as he lives.”

“Obama ignored all of the basic principles of giving up smoking,” says Sissy. “You do it because you want to quit not as a promise to someone else; you choose a calm, stress free time to commence the quitting process; and, if you’re a lifetime smoker (as he was) rather than a social smoker, you must have realistic expectations about your success.”

“That he’s now falling off the quit wagon and performing badly doesn’t surprise me,” says Sissy, “but it does make me feel angry that some idiot has compromised Obama’s chances by filling his head with so many illusions about what he is capable of doing, and what he is not capable of doing without a great deal of pain, effort and help.”

“His deteriorating performance since quitting smoking is so painfully evident that I shudder to think what he would be like in office, with more stresses than ever,” adds Sissy. “If he doesn’t pull himself together right now, while the race is still on, recant his pledge to Michelle and announce to the world ‘I’m a smoker, take me or leave me’ then I don’t see how he can win.”

“Even if he beats Hillary, he has ultimately to face McCain and the formidable Republican machine and things are going to get really dirty and nasty,” sighs Sissy. “But, since the GOP is in league with the tobacco companies perhaps Obama may have won himself a get out of jail free card on his smoking!”


Read more by Sissy on this issue:

Barack Obama Smokes?

backing a winner?

addictive friends

peace up in smoke?

a life changing vote

who’s the boss?

candidates and spouses

and check out:

Secrets of Barack Obama’s Age

Obama, Clinton or McCain?

has cctv replaced god?

Segolene believes that the former all-seeing, all-knowing god has been replaced by electronic transaction tracking and closed-circuit television cameras (CCTV) with infra-red night vision which peer down on us from street corners, banks, offices, airports and shopping malls – and are soon coming into a bedroom near you.

"Once upon a time the fear of an all-seeing, all-knowing god was enough to keep the masses in line -- it was for this very purpose that god was invented," says Segolene, "but since the Enlightenment man has been able to use reason to deduce, increasingly, not only that no god exists but also that those pushing a fear of this imaginary person were the most corrupt."

"Once the fear of god was removed, and their hypocrisy exposed, the control freaks moved into government and went crazy with legislation which, by and large, was totally ineffective because law-breakers knew they could get away with it – the ridiculous prohibition on alcohol in the 1930s, for instance, was the most lawless period in modern history."

"Robbed of their traditional cushy occupations as moral leaders -- and seeing more and more of their celestial palaces turned into housing for the godless masses -- those who would have entered the god industry are now finding alternative employment in government positions and while such employment may be less lucrative it is definitely more amenable to their purpose in life which is, as we all know, to chastise, control and tell people to do what they want them to do (whilst often doing the exact opposite themselves)."

"For instance, most of us grew up believing homosexuality to be abnormal -- because religious leaders told us so -- and it is no coincidence that as more and more of the religious hypocrites were exposed as raging gays, and moved on to new jobs within the government, that homosexuality gradually came to be seen as normal."

"Just about everything our religious leaders told us was abnormal is now normal," laughs Segolene, "and while a hard core group still holds fast to their old beliefs about the abnormality of homosexuality, abortion, masturbation, adultery, sex before marriage, women's submission to men, stem cell research and other such things, the general consensus is that these things are now as normal and wholesome as apple pie."

"So normal, in fact, that one's right to do some of these once abnormal things is now enshrined in law."

"Without getting into a philosophical discussion about man's innate corruption," sighs Segolene, "it would appear to me that the more laws are passed, the more lawless we become. What happened to parental and personal responsibility?"

"Normally, I'm a mild manner woman, but increasingly I'm becoming abnormally angry at being frisked at airports, having my every move being monitored, my every transaction being recorded and my whole life being reduced to a mass of data to be mined by faceless control-freaks,” says Segolene, “and in many ways I wish we could return to the old God.”

“With the old God we had personal responsibility; with the CCTV god we have none.”

cigarette muggers

Zaina and her partner were recently mugged for their cigarettes and she points out that this is what happens when governments regularly increase tax on a legal product that is addictive -- like cigarettes -- in order to fund schools and hospitals. The time has now arrived when cigarettes have become too expensive to buy for many smokers and some will necessarily resort to crime in order to get what they want. Is this how we want our schools and hospitals funded?

"I was standing outside a restaurant with my partner having a smoke when we were mugged by a gang of youths," says Zaina. "Okay, they didn't actually bash us up -- they pushed my partner and stole his packet of cigarettes -- but the effect was the same as a mugging."

"We felt violated and wounded by this experience," explains Zaina, "and more so because we had no redress -- we could hardly call the police and complain about being pushed around and having cigarettes stolen, could we?"

"This sort of thing never happened when restaurants allowed people to smoke inside," says Zaina, "and, as the tax on cigarettes goes up even more, I expect these muggings to increase and become even more violent. Is this really how we want our schools and hospitals funded?"

"By forcing us outside to smoke the restaurant owners are exposing us to muggers," says Zaina, "but I don't blame the restaurant owners because they are merely complying with the new rules. It's the fault of the mugging government in every respect!"

"The government enforced the no-smoking rules on public establishments and imposed draconian taxes on cigarettes and it might find the whole exercise backfires when someone gets badly hurt and takes legal action -- reversing the whole legal process that started the non-smoking campaign in the first place."

"Already we've read about lots of smoking-related violence -- smokers reacting violently against people trying to stop them lighting up in non-smoking areas, and anti-smokers behaving violently towards smokers smoking in smoking areas," says Zaina. "I don't know how many smokers have been mugged for their cigarettes like we have -- it's not the sort of thing that makes front page news, is it? -- but I predict an increase in this sort of crime when the taxes increase so much that poor people can no longer afford to buy their cigarettes."

"A huge increase in cigarette smuggling to avoid tax is also going on," sighs Zaina. "It's really upsetting to see a pleasurable thing like smoking attracting criminal elements."

"The government is crazy if it thinks that people will just cut down or stop smoking when it becomes too expensive for them to buy cigarettes," sighs Zaina. "We're talking about an addiction here, not a preference for one thing over another like buying a cheap bottle of wine when you can no longer afford French champagne, or a bottle of methylated spirits when you can no longer afford a cheap bottle of wine."

"Most smokers have already been forced by exorbitant taxes to buy cheaper brands of cigarettes, and when the cheapest brand become too expensive to buy the ugly consequences of the anti-smoking campaign are really going to manifest themselves big time."

"The government knows that cigarette smoking is most prevalent among low socio-economic groups," says Zaina. "What plans does it have to prevent theft, violence and slaughter when it raises the taxes on tobacco products to the tipping point?"

"I believe most smokers are honest law-abiding people -- we have accepted the new smoking rules and accommodated to them without stirring up a revolution," says Zaina, "but I do not know whether my partner and I will be able to sit by silently while not only the government bullies us but the poorer smokers, too."

"After our mugging experience we have decided to stay home from now on -- or to restrict our dining out experiences to places where there is a private smoking area," says Zaina. "But now we worry about being mugged at the point of sale -- places where we buy our cigarettes."

"When people get desperate they do desperate things -- and even if tobacco outlets are set up as fortresses the purchasers are exposed to muggers when they leave such establishments."

"Imagine having to look around and see who's watching you every time you buy a pack of cigarettes," sighs Zaina. "It's not a nice way to live and I am angry that the government is creating a criminal environment around the sale and use of a legal product."

"It is almost as if the government is deliberately creating a crime situation by raising taxes so much that poor people have to resort to crime to get their cigarettes (and then it can take the ultimate step to ban smoking altogether)," muses Zaina. "but since it makes such a big deal about tobacco tax being used to fund our schools and hospitals I can't see any logic in that argument."

"If our schools and hospitals are funded by tobacco tax, and everyone who smokes suddenly quits, buys their cigarettes tax-free off smugglers or mugs for them, then what? Where is the money for the schools and hospitals going to come from?"

"No, I don't think the government's ulterior motive in increasing tax on cigarettes is to create such a bad crime situation that it has a good reason to ban smoking -- that would be like cutting off its nose to spite its face," says Zaina. "So, that leaves me with the horrifying realization that the government hasn't a clue."

"It had no idea what Pandora's box it opened when it targeted smokers and put the tax screws on them, but it's going to find out pretty soon," sighs Zaina. "Reminds you of the invasion of Iraq, doesn't it?"

"In the meantime, I can't understand why schools and hospitals can't be funded by regular taxes," sighs Zaina. "If tobacco is so bad, then it's mind-boggling that the government would depend upon it in this way."

"And, if it's not so bad, then it's mind-boggling that the government would tax it to the point where consumers can no longer afford it and have to resort to crime."

are anti-smokers so perfect?

Neva reports that there's a quotation from an ex-president of ASH on the Freedom2choose website saying words to the effect that he's no role model, and she makes the valid point that people who make a living out of reviling other people's lifestyles should have a moral duty to be perfect in all respects themselves.

"Frankly, I have better things to do than waste time investigating the lifestyles of prominent anti-smokers and those who run ASH and our health departments -- and besides which what they do in their private lives is none of my business," says Neva, "but there are plenty of smokers who are so incensed by the hypocrisy of the holier than thou anti-smokers that they will most definitely make it their business to expose the nasty little secrets of these people."

"Actually, since most of these anti-smokers are being funded by taxpayer dollars it is really the civic duty of all citizens -- smokers or not -- to ensure that their money is being spent wisely and that the people spending it stand up to moral scrutiny."

"We've recently seen how easy it is for terrorists to get employed by health departments -- and to get paid with our taxes to blow us up," says Neva, "so what other type of people are being employed by health departments and their ancillary bodies?"

"It wouldn't surprise me if the whole health system -- from the top to the bottom -- is riddled with unsavoury characters," laughs Neva. "As far as I am concerned, the lunatics have been in charge of the asylum for a long time because who else would have foisted multiculturalism and political correctness upon us?"

"It is not sufficient to be a non-smoker to set yourself up as a voice against smoking," explains Neva. "You've got to be perfect in every respect in order to convince everyone that you are good and smokers are bad." "That ASH and other bodies like it have no 'face' and, as far as I know, no address or telephone number, leads me to believe that the anti-smokers are hiding something."

"Could it be that they are all such terrible role models that if the general public saw them they would be laughed out of town?"

"Let me see," muses Neva, "are they all fat slobs? Are they drunks? Are they psychiatric patients? Are they drug addicts? Are they wife beaters, pedophiles, tax cheats, pornography merchants, criminals, fundamentalists or what?"

"Like the puny little Wizard of Oz, when people make a big noise but prefer not to be seen there is generally something terribly wrong with them -- even if it is merely a lack of stature or just plain old age."

'The anti-smokers are smart enough to know that their appearance or character or creed is so unacceptable that their message is better promoted with advertisements and written literature than with public appearances," explains Neva. "And, when a public face is required they hire consultants (ie actors) to do it for them, or brainwash children into their cause."

"In view of the fact that a lot of good people have had their social lives ruined by anti-smoking propaganda," says Neva, "I can't blame smokers for wanting to expose the anti-smoking propagandists for what they are."

"Personally, the only anti-smokers I have come across are the brainwashed variety," says Neva. "When I ask them why they are opposed to smoking they invariably say that their teachers, parents or pastors told them it was a bad thing to do."

"I suppose if I took the trouble to ask teachers, parents and pastors why they are opposed to smoking -- and make sure that the children in their care are opposed to it, too -- they would invariably cite ASH or health department literature."

"So, by exposing the nasty little secrets of the anti-smokers in ASH and the health departments we would be able to discredit their anti-smoking propaganda," says Neva. "By exposing themas terrible role models, we destroy the credibility of their anti-smoking literature."

"It's all very nice in theory," sighs Neva, "but just like brainwashed religious fanatics don't turn away from their religion upon discovering their leaders are pedophiles and frauds,I doubt whether the brainwashed masses would stop hating smokers just because a health minister, for instance,was discovered to be a heroin addict."

"Smokers would need to expose every single anti-smoking propagandist as a fraud before the brainwashed masses woke up to themselves," says Neva. "and then it would take another generation before the anti-smoking hate subsided."

"As I see it, the anti-smoking propagandists know a lot about the power of generating hate in the masses -- and singling out a particular group to vent it on," says Neva. "And, while those who make a living out of reviling other people's lifestyles should have a moral duty to be perfect in all respects themselves, they very often get away with having far worse lifestyles than those they are reviling."

anti-smokers target women, avoid men

After several attacks from anti-smokers who deliberately avoided smoking men in order to target her, Gilda, 56, is wondering whether the anti-smoking crusaders are chicken-livered cowards or whether the campaign is designed to stop women, not men, smoking.

"Traditionally, men have always smoked in our society -- they had smoking rooms and smoking jackets and tobacco clubs where they hung out -- but it's only in relatively recent times that women took up the habit," explains Gilda. "It was very popular with emancipated women from the 1920s onwards, but didn't catch on with working class women until the 1950s."

"We all know what happened after the late 1960s," laughs Gilda, "and I'm wondering whether the anti-smoking campaign is just another backlash by men and their dependent women against feminism."

"Nobody in their right mind could object to the image of a macho guy smoking, let alone try to stop him -- he's so cool," laughs Gilda, "but it's a different story with women smokers, isn't it?"

"Guys of my generation -- the baby boomers -- are reasonably comfortable with women smokers," says Gilda,"It's the older men, the younger men and immigrant men of all ages who seem to have trouble with women smoking."

"Where I lived last year was an elderly couple in their 70s and although the wife was pleasant the husband was incredibly hostile to me -- not only attacking me for smoking but for being a single women, too," laughs Gilda. "He was from the old school who felt a woman's place was at home, under a man's thumb, and that smoking was something guys did, not women!"

"That guy would have a lot in common with Islamic men and might enjoy living under Sharia law where he could stone a few women to death," sighs Gilda, "and his beliefs are pretty widely held by men, and dependent women, of his generation. Too young to have fought with the smoking men and women in WWII, and too old to have enjoyed the 70s. Poor, lost souls."

"There were other smokers in the apartment block -- mostly male -- but that guy left them alone and just attacked me!"

"With immigrant men from backward cultures who denigrate women you expect a bad reception -- and I've had plenty of those in recent years thanks to our government opening the flood gates to middle-eastern refugees," sighs Gilda. "They just don't seem to understand -- or want to understand -- that women in our society have equal rights to men, including the right to smoke."

"At a outdoor coffee bar one lunch-time I was accosted by a middle-eastern man who screamed at me for smoking and raised his hand as if to strike me," says Gilda. "I didn't even see him arrive with his wife and baby and sit behind me. I was too busy reading. Considering we were seated on the sidewalk with vehicles belching out their poisons I was surprised that he didn't see the irony of what he was saying and, why, indeed, he didn't use the non-smoking section of the coffee bar if he objected to cigarette smoke."

"Again, several male smokers were seated outside but this guy left them alone and attacked me," sighs Gilda. "And guess what, the male smokers smirked rather than coming to my aid. Very gallant of them, eh?"

"Young men, too, seem to be particularly averse to women smoking," says Gilda. "I'd be a rich woman if I were paid a dollar for every young man who thought it was his male prerogative to insult a lady for smoking."

"But it's not just men who behave badly towards smoking women," says Gilda. "Women of all ages -- even my own -- seem to be coming out of the woodwork and beating up on members of their own sex who smoke."

"And, like the cowardly male anti-smokers, they target women smokers and leave the male smokers alone," says Gilda. "The young girls at my office have similar complaints so it's not just older women being targeted. In fact, some of the young girls have told me stories about being physically assaulted for smoking by the men in their lives."

"While it's sensible for female crusaders to avoid male smokers in case of violence, it's downright cowardly for the male crusaders to attack women and leave male smokers alone, isn't it? asks Gilda. "So, what is it? Are we looking at deliberate discrimination against female smokers, or just cowardice?"

"Do the anti-smokers want to stop everyone from smoking, or just women?"
"Is the hidden agenda of the anti-smoking campaign to regain tobacco for exclusive male use?"

"Are macho male smokers behind it all?"

"Don't laugh," sighs Gilda. "In this crazy world of government spin and faceless male elites ruling the world behind the scenes, anything is possible."

"You'd think, wouldn't you, that after fifty years of feminism we'd have more respect and political clout than we have today," adds Gilda. "We're going backwards -- no doubt about that -- and I blame globalization and immigration for eroding the feminist values that the grand old dames of the 20th century won for us."

"And, yes, smoking is a feminist issue," asserts Gilda. "Remember the cigarettes Virginia Slims and their slogan 'you've come a long way, baby'? It's all about being treated equally, and if women are being victimized for smoking and men aren't, then something is going on that all women,smokers or not, should be alerted to because you don't know what's coming next."

fleecing smokers

Calista, 48, applauds Martin Whisker's brave protest against the new smoking ban by refusing to stub out his cigarette in a Scarborough pub, but accepts that it's likely to be the only protest because most smokers cannot afford a fine of £50 (reduced to £30 if paid within 15 days)or one of £200 if they are prosecuted and convicted by a court.

"Sometimes I do feel that smokers are like stupid sheep and deserve to be fleeced," says Calista, "but what you can do when you've grown up being bombarded with cool ads for smoking and were considered a wimp if you didn't smoke?"

"My parents didn't smoke -- or drink," says Calista, "so it's not something I learned at home. I picked up the smoking habit -- and drinking -- when I was at school and there was nothing my parents could do to stop me."

"Smoking and drinking were normal social habits when I was growing up and I was almost ashamed of my parents for being so backward."

"They're in their seventies now and are delighted with the smoking ban," laughs Calista, "but they won't be entirely happy until alcohol is banned, too. Fat chance!"

"Are we going backwards or forwards, or what?" asks Calista. "I can't believe that so many young people today are against smoking -- and yet they're into drugs that I wouldn't even dream of taking."

"Maybe I should consider changing my drug habits because I am fed up to the teeth being fleeced by the government," says Calista. "Tax on alcohol isn't too bad, but the tobacco tax is really killing me."

"Sure, they make tobacco tax astronomical because they want us to quit," says Calista, "but the alternatives to smoking are scary. I don't want to become an alcoholic drowning my sorrows in cheap wine -- that would be a horrible scenario."

"What does the government offer us in return for quitting?" asks Calista. "I mean, with what are we supposed to fill that void in our lives? Don't the do-gooders understand that we are hooked on the habit and previous governments were responsible -- sort of -- for our becoming addicted to cigarettes in the first place?"

"If the government wants to change a culture it should offer something better to replace it," explains Calista. "What is better than smoking? Drinking?"

"Are the 24/7 liquor outlets supposed to represent a better culture?" asks Calista. "Is the government in cahoots with the liquor industry? Do all the politicians have shares in alcohol production and distribution outlets? What the hell is going on?"

"The government promotes an anti-smoking culture forcing smokers to quit and then promotes expensive patches and drugs made by Big Pharma -- with whom it is also probably in cahoots -- and that's it?" asks Calista. "Whether we smoke or quit, it's still big money for the government and its backers. What's in it for us?"

"Better health? Oh come on!" laughs Calista. "Most quitters cope by increasing their drinking and then risk dying of alcohol poisoning or cirrhosis of the liver. Is that a better deal than lung cancer?"

"What's the good of quitting and taking up expensive patches and drugs?" asks Calista. "You're no better off financially and the void left by smoking will eat away at you -- as shown by so many ex-smokers who are like bleating lost sheep."

"The fashionable drugs these days are all tax free and banned -- bought off dealers -- and while I would love to snoot my nose at the government for fleecing me of my hard earned cash for so many years, I worry about exchanging one dependency for another and becoming hooked on something I don't know much about."

"The young people seem very cool about their so-called recreational drugs and don't seem to worry about being busted, getting a criminal conviction or frying their brains," says Calista, "so am I being old-fashioned by sticking to smoking?"

"Should I throw away my fags and take up heroin, cocaine or crystal meth?" muses Calista. "Or, should I stick to the devil I know and accept being fleeced by the government?"

"To remain a smoker is a sheep-like decision, I know," accepts Calista. "Martin Whisker's protest was merely that of an outlaw ram butting his horns against the railings and the rest of us didn't follow suit -- as we should have -- maybe because he wasn't the leader of the pack, we're too damned comfortable where we are or we didn't want to cop another fleecing in fines on top of the tobacco tax we already pay."

"So, what do you want me to say?"

"Baa-aaaaa!"

anti-social smokers?

Contrary to the belief that smoking is mainly a sociable habit, taken up by impressionable young people in order to fit in with a crowd -- a belief upon which anti-smoking deterrents are based -- Topaz, 23, took it up because she wanted to keep people -- especially men -- away from her!

"It's the most effective way I know to avoid unwanted attentions," laughs Topaz, "and when some pushy guy dares to break into my personal space to tell me how much I stink, and how unattractive he thinks smoking women are, it only reinforces my belief that smoking is one of the best defences a girl can have."

"I know that a lot of smokers -- men and women -- feel very threatened by this sort of abuse," says Topaz, "but in today's anti-smoking climate you cannot really expect people to behave otherwise towards you."

"Social smokers are extremely vulnerable to this sort of abuse," explains Topaz, "and that's why they're quitting in droves. They cannot handle people hating them. They want so much to be loved that they'd eat dog poo is someone influential told them it would make them more lovable. Poor souls!"

"The self-medicating smokers are terribly defensive when faced with abuse from anti-smokers," says Topaz. "They are likely to respond with equal abuse or slink back into their shells of despair depending upon their personalities or size."

"As for anti-social smokers like me, it's water off a duck's back," laughs Topaz, "and yes, I do understand the irony of my situation. I realize that smoking in public is likely to attract attention -- which I don't want -- but if I did NOT smoke I would receive a lot more attention. Get it?"

"Some girls -- consciously or otherwise -- actually put on weight to avoid unwanted attentions," says Topaz, "and that option was not attractive to me. I wouldn't like myself if I were fat. Smoking suited my purposes perfectly."

"If you cannot understand why I took up smoking to avoid unwanted attention then you are either a man or a very ugly girl," laughs Topaz. "I have been hassled by men since I was a little girl, and I just didn't want to be preyed on any more."

"Also, I didn't want other girls being mean to be because I am better looking than they are."

"I didn't want to solve this problem by making myself unattractive --- putting on weight, wearing ugly spectacles or wearing false buck teeth," laughs Topaz, "and I couldn't hide myself in a burka like women in other cultures do, so I decided to take up a dirty, stinking, disgusting habit that would make me a universal pariah."

"It worked like a charm," laughs Topaz, "and what's more, I enjoy it."

"No, I wouldn't say that I am anti-social -- a loner -- by nature," explains Topaz, "but I am probably a lot more self-contained than most people are."

"I have a good job, I'm paid very well and my boss -- a woman -- disapproves of my habit without disapproving of me," says Topaz. "She understands why I started smoking and just tells me not to smoke around her!"

"As for boyfriends," laughs Topaz, "I choose them rather than them choosing me."

"When I see a guy I like, I won't smoke if he's not smoking -- and yes, I can stop smoking when I want to because I'm not doing it to medicate myself."

"Preferably, I'd choose a guy who doesn't smoke because I don't want to take on a guy who may have problems," says Topaz, "and besides which I want children one day."

"I wasn't raised in a smoking home and I wouldn't want my children to be exposed to extra pollutants while they are developing," explains Topaz. "Our environment is toxic enough with vehicle and industrial pollutants and while adults can take it I don't believe little children can."

"Am I an anti-social menace because I smoke?" asks Topaz. "Well, I suppose I am in a way, but in a society that's anti-social towards me -- encouraging men to be predatory and women to be their playthings -- a girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do to protect herself."

smoking milch cows

There are so many lawyers, anti-smoking organizations and government health departments stacked up against the tobacco companies that Eileen, a social worker, is convinced that the whole smoking issue is one big Milch Cow.

"It's not just the tobacco companies getting milked for all they are worth but us, the stupid smokers, too," says Eileen, "and I'm not apologizing for using the 'stupid' word for smokers because that's what both sides of the issue think of us, and frankly I sometimes think of myself like that, too."

"The smoking issue is the most convoluted thing I've ever come across and because lawyers are involved I believe it is going to get a lot worse before it gets better."

"What's a cosy legal battle in plush offices for them is a dirty war of abuse on the streets for us," says Eileen, "and I am angry with the tobacco companies as well as the others for turning the lives of smokers upside down, robbing us of our hard earned money and causing others to abuse us."

"On a social level, the 'suits' from the tobacco companies and their so-called enemy 'suits' in the other camps probably do lunch together every day, entertain in each other's homes and send their kids to the same posh schools," says Eileen. "And, if they ever DO think about the fallout abuse that their cosy little war costs us, the stupid smokers, it would be followed invariably with peals of sneering laughter because -- wait for it -- I have yet to find evidence that any of the tobacco company guys actually smoke."

"The tobacco companies make such an absolute fortune from us -- the stupid smokers -- that the other stuff, the legal war, is merely a game they enjoy playing," explains Eileen. "And because money is no problem for either side, they are going to keep their legal wars going forever -- and don't the lawyers love that!"

"Do you realize that we -- the stupid smoking Milch Cows -- get slugged with income tax and tobacco tax to pay the other side as well?" asks Eileen. "We are paying for the whole thing! How does that grab you? Doesn't it make you feel uber stupid?"

"In my social work I get to see the real victims of the smoking war," explains Eileen. "Low income and disadvantaged people -- including single moms, disabled people and the elderly -- who are already victimized by society because of their circumstances. On top of this, they then get abused for smoking."

"Most of these people smoke to make their miserable lives a bit better," says Eileen, "and every day I think how much better off they would be if they could stop smoking (impossible, I've tried) or if this stupid smoking war would end and give them back a bit of dignity -- and a lot more dollars in their pockets."

"In my social work I also get to see some of the BIG people involved in the tobacco war from the government's angle," says Eileen, "but of course I don't work with them like I do the victims of tobacco. I just 'see' them swanning around in their power suits, puffed up with importance, believing they're on a crusade to save us from tobacco when everyone knows what they're really doing."

"Oh sure, there are some genuine souls who naively believe that giving up smoking to spare yourself a horrible death is a good thing," sighs Eileen, "but they just don't understand that most of the people I'm working with would die a horrible death in any case, one that is totally unrelated to smoking."

"When they think of a smoker -- if they ever do -- they are probably thinking of someone like me," says Eileen. "Someone with a bit of education who should know better and, with a bit more pressure, might give up the deadly habit."

"Well, if I ever do succeed in quitting it will be to avoid kicking myself over and over again for being milked by these guys," laughs Eileen. "It will have nothing to do with the health benefits I might gain because I know I will suffer far worse health problems by quitting. My life may be better than those of the poor people whose troubles I try to resolve, but it is still miserable in its own way and smoking helps get me through it all."

"I get dizzy trying to count the number of do-goody organizations on the tobacco gravy train -- oops, sorry to mix my metaphors," laughs Eileen. "Every day a new one seems to pop up and our tax payer dollars just keep on flowing for them."

"Can you believe that all this has been going on since 1964 when Congress protected the tobacco companies from the effects of litigation by means of the Surgeon General's warning label?" sighs Eileen. "I was born a year later, so all of my life this rubbish has been going on and it is never going to stop."

"When the first of these do-goody organizations came into being its purpose was to educate the public and hold the tobacco companies to the same degree of accountability as other industries," explains Eileen, "and, as far as I am concerned, that purpose was achieved long ago. But, seeing the dollars rolling in and a life-time career ahead of them, these guys dug in and encouraged a multitude of other parasitic types to join in for whatever other purposes they had in mind."

"I make no apologies for using the parasitic word either," says Eileen, "because that's what most of them are. They feed off our addiction, our desire to smoke and the miseries of our lives that caused most of us to start smoking in the first place."

"Even if their purpose were genuinely to help us stop smoking so that we could save money and live a healthier life," says Eileen, "they can offer us nothing to fill the gap that smoking filled, a gap that we might fill with something far more dangerous."

"These people know nothing about 'gaps' or their myriad causes," confides Eileen, "and that's why they have no right to dictate what is good or bad for us. Like most think tank types, they think of other human beings as cohorts or metrics on a chart, stripped of all humanity. They make pronouncements from ivory towers that even they, in their saner moments, must find appalling."

"It has been said over and over again -- by smokers as well as non-smokers -- that if tobacco is the killer they make it out to be then it should be banned," says Eileen, "but these guys have no desire whatsoever to put the tobacco industry out of business or to make cigarettes illegal. They don't see the inconsistency of what they're telling us and even if they did, they don't care. Why should they? Parasites by nature only feed off hosts certain to keep the milk and honey flowing forever."

"The tobacco industry, as I see it, has fulfilled all of the requirements asked of it and the burden of responsibility has now shifted fairly and squarely to the cigarette smoker," says Eileen. "It's time for these do-goody organizations to go away and find some other milch cow."

"We are, of course, still stuck with the government -- the biggest parasite of them all because without tobacco tax it wouldn't be able to fund invasions and do other goods things," sighs Eileen. "So, even if the others disappeared off the scene we are still going to get milked."

"Moo!"

marginalizing minorities

Mina makes the point that a civilized society is mostly judged by how it treats its minorities, so how civilized are we in comparison to other nations in relation to our treatment of people who don't exactly fit the socially acceptable norm?

"We've largely overcome our distaste for lepers and homosexuals, for instance," says Mina, "and other races and religions are now mainstream by virtue of constitutional rights or increased numbers -- they are no longer minorities -- but what about smokers and obese people?"

"I know they're out there -- the media is constantly focusing on the health problems they are causing and the astronomical amount of our taxpayer money being wasted on them," says Mina, "but I just don't see as many of them around as I once did."

"For many of us, their marginalization -- their disappearance from our workplaces, streets, parks, beaches and malls -- may be welcome," says Mina, "but I believe it is incredibly hypocritical of us to demonize these people, sweep them under the carpet and pretend that we are a civilized society."

"Come to think about it, it's not just smokers and obese people who've disappeared off the radar but disabled people, too."

"It wasn't so long ago that it was part of normal, daily life to deal with someone who was deaf, blind or intellectually challenged -- or a little person or someone in a wheelchair," says Mina, "but these days I could go for months without seeing anyone with a disability."

"What's going on?"

"I remember one young man in a wheelchair once telling me that it was a hassle trying to negotiate his way through a busy city -- and he hated people staring at him," muses Mina. "I can imagine how someone like that can give up trying."

"And because smokers and obese people have to put up with a lot more than people staring at them -- the bad publicity they get makes them open slather for insults and abuse from the crazies among us," sighs Mina, "I guess they have given up, too."

"I hear that a lot of smokers and obese people have left to live in more hospitable countries such as Spain, Greece or Cuba," says Mina, "but that would be only those who have the financial ability to do so."

"The ones who remain must necessarily be the poor," says Mina, "and with a fat tax being proposed in line with tobacco tax, these poor people are going to become destitute soon."

"No wonder they are nowhere to be seen!"

"The options our government offers these people seems to be shape up or ship out (get out of the country or die -- from social isolation, abuse and exorbitant taxes or from the greatly exaggerated risks of smoking or over-eating)."

"Neither option is particularly civilized," sighs Mina. "If I were obese I wouldn't like to be forced into stomach stapling or a strict diet for the rest of my life; and if I were a smoker I wouldn't like to be forced into taking socially acceptable nicotine patches or antidepressants."

"A civilized society embraces all people, warts and all, doesn't it?"

"The crux of this matter seems to be when on earth did our government gain the right to dictate what people can and cannot do in their private lives, especially in relation to legal substances?" asks Mina. "We can buy tobacco and junk food on every street corner, so why are we demonizing and marginalizing those who buy these products?"

"It doesn't make sense to me," sighs Mina, "and neither does the media focus on crazy government statistics and weird scientific experiments in relation to the health costs of obesity and smoking."

"What about the health costs of vehicles, alcohol and -- dare I say it -- old age itself?"

"Logic tells me that the main blow-out in our health care costs is due to people living longer," says Mina, "and yet we're not staring at old people, abusing them and marginalizing them, are we?"

"Oh, hang on, I think we're doing that, too."

"I remember a health official once proposing to deny surgery to everyone over 70," says Mina. "He was laughed out of town, of course, but in its efforts to cut costs I can see the government being forced one day to reexamine proposals such as this."

"Already, smokers and obese people are being denied surgery in some countries -- despite having paid tax all of their lives," says Mina, "and the rest of us, being non-smokers of normal weight, are not batting an eyelid. Why? Because the government and its media minions have carried out such a successful hate campaign against these minorities."

"All the government has to do is wage a similar hate campaign against the elderly -- or SUV drivers, or gun owners or any other minority group that you care to nominate -- and before you know it these people are marginalized and denied services (not necessarily health care) which their tax dollars were paid to provide."

"When you marginalize people you create a climate of revolution," says Mina. "On their own, smokers, obese, disabled and elderly people are seen as pathetic and weak, easily swept under the carpet and forgotten, but as a united force they could have the numbers to take on the rest of us."

"And why shouldn't they demand to be treated better?" adds Mina. "They are part of the social contract, too."

"The trouble with these minorities is that they are short on funds -- either being in low paid employment or on disability or old age pensions," says Mina. "Even if they were able to disregard their differences and meet on common ground, their revolutionary spirit would soon fizzle out with a threat from the government to cut off their pensions."

"Maybe there's an opportunity here for a bright young lawyer to shoot to stardom by putting the civil back into civilization and the demos (people) back into democracy."

anti-smoking propaganda or hook?

Shayne is 21, a student and a smoker, who maintains that all the anti-smoking propaganda that has bombarded her generation since birth has not been a deterrent but has actually been a ‘hook’ to get kids addicted to a legally purchased product from which the government rakes in a lot of ‘sin’ money.

"The government deliberately makes those graphic warnings on cigarette packs ridiculous because it knows smokers won't believe them," says Shayne. "It wants to keep us hooked.”

“To non-smokers, it looks like the government is the good guy, doing the right thing, but it's not."

"If it weren't so serious I'd be laughing at these pathetic attempts to stop me smoking -- or keep me hooked," says Shayne. "What are they going to try next? Are they going to waste more public funds -- most of which is provided by the exorbitant taxes smokers pay -- to give us auditory scares as well as visual ones.”

“Will I open my pack one day and be greeted by the sound of a terminal cough?"

"Every time an anti-smoking or a quit product advertisement appears on TV I automatically reach for a cigarette," laughs Shayne, "and I bet those advertisements have the same effect on all the poor, deluded suckers trying to quit."

"Governments make more money from cigarette taxes than from any other type of tax," says Shayne, "and they know exactly what they are doing with all of their hypocritical anti-smoking propaganda."

"It's the cleverest bit of reverse psychology I've ever seen," laughs Shayne. "Sure, I'm a sucker for getting hooked but what chance did I have as a kid to work out what that anti-smoking education was really all about?"

Read more from Shayne on this subject:

two-faced health warnings

stop government advertising!

gory tobacco ads

education or propaganda?

smokers should read gay pride book

Justina is single, 52, and a smoker but she's not a happy one thanks to the abominable antics of the anti-smoking zealots. She thinks it's time for all smokers everywhere to counteract the hate by adopting the collective tactics of the gay pride movement -- or are smokers too laid-back or individualistic to bother about a collective fight-back?

"If you're as old as I am you'll remember how gays were once vilified to the point where bashing up a homosexual man was applauded," says Justina.

"Disgusted families would turf their homosexual sons out onto the street or send them to psychiatrists for re-programming or shock therapy. The whole scene for gays -- at school, at work and at play -- was so bad that gays had to literally live in the closet in order to survive."

"In the early 1980s, homosexuals were blamed for the AIDS epidemic, the rise of venereal diseases, the corruption of youth and falling birth rates."

"Terrible campaigns were focused on homosexuality as an unnatural abomination -- unfortunately it still is in some circles -- but by banding together and fighting the forces of evil the gay pride movement won so much support that it is now a hate crime to discriminate against homosexuals."

"Hooray for the gays," laughs Justina, "but unfortunately all the hate crusaders in our society have now turned their venom against smokers."

"There are plenty of correlations between gays and smokers," says Justina, "and while I've yet to hear about a smoker getting bashed up -- simply for being a smoker -- it's probably not far off."

"First comes artificial coughs, lip curling sneers, impolite comments." says Justina, "then comes a spit in your face, a push and a shove and before you know it we become fair game for a bashing."

"Homosexuality and smoking are ancient practices, preceding all religions and all laws."

"To be drawn to fire and one's own sex is part of the diverse nature of human behavior," says Justina. "And, by the same reasoning, so is being drawn to vilify and hate and murder others. A truly free and good society is one in which checks and balances exist to ensure that the zealots never take control."

"Being a homosexual or a smoker is not a lifestyle choice as the hate crusaders would have us believe. It's an innate part of our make-up. Before cigarettes were invented, smokers were probably drawn to professions that brought them into contact with fire -- cooks being a good example."

"Sure, plenty of gays and smokers can be forced or cajoled or shamed into converting," says Justina, "but you can no more turn a smoker into a genuine non-smoker than you can turn a gay into a genuine straight. The desire will always haunt them."

"Never mind that we started off living in caves filled with smoke from the fires we needed to keep us alive, and smoking was a traditional cure used by shamans for all sorts of ailments in ancient civilizations," laughs Justina. "These people think that smoking is unnatural and has no benefits whatsoever!"

"I think twice these days about going to see my doctor about a cough or cold because I know he is going to use the opportunity unfairly to lecture me on smoking," sighs Justina."I suppose gay men once had the same problem about seeing a doctor about a simple problem 'down there' that had nothing to do with their sexuality."

"How many gays -- and now smokers -- are going to die of something other than AIDS or lung cancer because the climate of hate caused them to avoid seeing a doctor?" asks Justina. "And while I've never heard of homophobic doctors refusing surgery on gays it's pretty common these days to hear about smokers being refused surgery by hate crusading anti-smoking doctors who are a disgrace to the Hippocratic Oath."

"And just like psychiatrists and psychologists made a lucrative living off gays -- even including homosexuality as a mental disease -- they are now making a lucrative living off unhappy smokers who have been pushed by the hate crusaders into seeking help to stop smoking."

"I wonder, too, if smokers are capable of being as collectively vociferous as the gays," adds Justina. "Individually we grumble about the extra tax we must pay and the extraordinarily abusive behavior we are subjected to, but so far none of us has made a call to arms (figuratively speaking). Why?"

"The gay pride movement -- as I remember it -- was almost exclusively led by young people. Are smokers, as a group, too old to take to the streets?"

"Or, because smoking is mostly a solitary pleasure -- something we do when we kick back and pick up a book to read -- are smokers too laid-back or imbued with individualism to bother about a collective fight-back?"

"There's no doubt that gays are party animals and that homosexuality, by definition, requires two people," says Justina, "so maybe gays naturally have the edge over smokers when it comes to collective action. Let's face it, I don't need another smoker in my life in order to enjoy smoking and, in the confined space of my home, two people smoking would create a need for increased ventilation."

"Or, could it be that as a group we are indeed suckers -- easy to scare and push about?"

"What is it that makes smokers so reluctant to collectively fight the anti-smoking hate crusaders?" asks Justina. "Or, let me put it another way, what will it take to tip us out of our comfort zones and into the streets with the placards?"

"We vote, too!"

"I must admit that my first reaction to some abominable behavior by an anti-smoking hate crusader who confronts me smoking in a park or outside a building is to shrug my shoulders and remember Churchill's reply to a lady who once accused him of drunkenness -- you know, in the morning I'll be sober but you'll still be ugly -- but there will inevitably come the day when this behavior extends to the personal space of my vehicle or home or when someone attacks me physically."

"I think invasion of personal space or physical assault would be the tipping point for most smokers," says Justina. "But, as with the gay community, how many invasions of personal space or physical assaults or violent deaths will be necessary before hard hitting collective action is taken?"

"For years I've passively fumed at the venom spewed by the anti-smoking hate crusaders and if laws were passed forbidding my smoking in my own space -- or if one of these zealots ever dared to lay a hand on me in spaces where I am legally allowed to smoke -- I would hope I have what it takes to override my good manners and turn-the-other-cheek-Christianity and do what needs to be done."

Read more by Justina on this issue:

New York Gays Win, Smokers Lose