Thursday, March 30, 2006

The Province
Friday Mar. 24/06

Why does our "tolerent" society let anti-smoking zealots run amok??
By Betsy Hart( a well known columnist)

This week a place called a "tobacco bar", Marshall McGeary Tobacco Artisans, was all over Chicago and national news. Like other major cities, Chicago has recently gone "smoke-free" in most public places of any kind. But there is a place that's excempt. The tobacco bar is set up as a tobacco manufactuer(owned by tobacco giant R.J. Reynolds) and it's free from the anti-smoking law. Customers actually chose from loose tobacco blends, and an expensive pack of cigarettes is then made to the customer's order. Then, patrons can puff away right there inside a closed space, and legally. Scandalous. Is it possible that the anti-smoking do-gooders will leave such folks alone? After all, the adult smokers are there freely of their own accord, choosing to partake in a legal substance, and not bothering anyone else. No way. No sooner did news stories of the new establishment surface than do-gooders were vowing to stamp out the loophole that allows such "treachery." (Somehow, I think if it were discovered the place was a gay men's bathhouse. many of these same folks would be strangely quiet instead.) I'm not a smoker. So I won't be going to the tobacco bar. But where does this Taliban-like anti-smokers campaign come from? It can't really be this stuff about second-hand smoke. The famous 1992 Envirornment Protection Agency study showing a casual relationship between second-hand smoke and cancer was so roundly debunked as junk science it was declared "null and void" by a federal judge. Sure, second-hand smoke can be annoying, and it can't be healthy. But, if you relagate smokers to their own enclosed space, who can object?? The anti-smoking Taliban, of course. We are a culture that has been conditioned that we must make no value judgements about anything that really matters. Adultery, divorce, addictions,things that are profoundly destructive to our young people, behaviours that involve moral choices, these things are all off the table. With few exceptions, we don't legally try to limit such things. And, if the fellow next door leaves his family for a series of girlfriends, or the mom leaves to "find herself," we are not to offer a value judgement. But if after the no-fault divorce the departed parent comes to pick up the children and is smoking a cigarette, watch out, the "Taliban" will smugly denounce that mom or dad as a "bad parent." We are, at our core, moral beings. We want to make appropiate moral value judgements. But in our culture we no longer dare do so. So, enter the self-righteous anti-smoking Taliban. Smoking is the stand-in,the scapegoat.It's the one thing, an easy thing, we can dump on. It requires no personal sacrifice. We can carelessly condemn smokers, literally run them out of town and feel delicious about ourselves. We shouldn't be surprised, then that there is an inverse relationship between our increasingly "tolerant" culture-- and our anti-smoking zealotry --Scripps Howard News

Tuesday, March 21, 2006


Stores face tobacco crackdown
Under the new system, retailers will get a ticket or suspension if caught selling to minors

Lindsay Kines, Times ColonistPublished: Tuesday, March 21, 2006
The B.C. government moved Monday to make it easier to crack down on shopkeepers who sell cigarettes to anyone under 19.
Health Minister George Abbott introduced legislation that will make B.C. the first province in Canada to set up a quasi-judicial process to deal with offending retailers.
Previously, cases got bogged down in lengthy and costly court cases, Abbott told the legislature. "Cases are not pursued due to competing court and Crown counsel time. Even when they are pursued, it may take months or years before a penalty is imposed."
As a result, relatively few cases made their way through the courts, Abbott said in a later interview. "It's been quite unsuccessful to be blunt about it."
Under the new system, retailers will get a ticket or suspension if caught selling to minors and can then argue their case before an administrator, Abbott said. If retailers disagree with the administrator's final decision or penalty, they can ask a judge to review the case.
Barbara Kaminsky, chief executive officer of the Canadian Cancer Society's B.C. and Yukon division, welcomed the legislation. She called the previous system "unwieldy" and said retailers didn't take it seriously, because they were unlikely to face penalties.
"This looks like it's going to be administratively more efficient, will lead to actual consequences for people who are violating the law by selling to minors, and we think it's a good thing."
Kaminsky, who met with Abbott and Finance Minister Carole Taylor Monday, will speak to MLAs today to push for further changes in B.C. The society has been advocating a number of strategies, including that pharmacies stop selling cigarettes, and that B.C. ban smoking in all public places, including eliminating designated smoking rooms in bars and restaurants.
Abbott said Monday's amendments to the Tobacco Sales Act mark one step in the government's efforts to reduce tobacco consumption in B.C. by the 2010 Olympics.
"Right now, about 15 per cent of British Columbians smoke," he said. "In order to bring that down, it's going to require some considerable energy."
Abbott said the provincial government wants to work with the Canadian Cancer Society, and remains open to other strategies for cutting the number of people who smoke.
The amendments to the Tobacco Sales Act also clarify what retailers must do to check the age of people buying cigarettes. In addition, the legislation will ensure that tobacco enforcement officers receive updated information about where tobacco is being sold.
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2006

Monday, March 20, 2006

Medical researchers caught faking it

Federal grant recipients Margaret Munro, CanWest News ServicePublished: Thursday, March 16, 2006

* * More than a dozen scientists and doctors, several of them recipients of sizable federal grants, have been faking research, destroying data, plagiarizing or conducting experiments on people without necessary ethics approvals, the country's lead research agencies report. One medical researcher, who was awarded $1,347,445 for various projects, fabricated and falsified data and was permanently barred last year from receiving more federal money, according to documents obtained by CanWest News Service. Another researcher altered and destroyed data and cannot apply for funding for three years.
A third researcher, who engaged in "academic dishonesty in publication," has been barred from receiving more federal research money until next year. Officials at the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) say they cannot, under federal privacy laws, identity the researchers.Officials at the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) say they cannot, under federal privacy laws, identify the researchers. But CIHR says it awarded more than $12-million to projects in which researchers have been found to be violating research ethics or integrity rules since 2003. They worked at Dalhousie University, McGill University, McMaster University, Sunnybrook & Women's College Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, the University of Alberta, the University of British Columbia, Universite de Montreal, and Universite de Sherbrooke.

No effort has been made to recoup the funds. The $1.3-million awarded to the researcher permanently barred from applying for CIHR funding has been transferred to his research partners, says Dr. Mark Bisby, the agency's vice-president.CIHR and NSERC distribute almost $1.5-billion tax dollars a year to close to 16,000 researchers and thousands more graduate students across the country. Four Vancouver research projects, part of studies that received more than $3-million in federal grants, did not have ethics renewal certificates required under federal rules. The researchers stopped enrolling patients in one trial and funding for the other projects, which UBC says were behavioural studies, was suspended until the certificates were in place.
Minutes of CIHR meetings show officials talked about freezing funding to all UBC researchers but CIHR officials decided against making the threat. John Hepburn, UBC vice-president of research, said this week that cutting off all UBC funding -- which he likened to "the atomic-bomb threat" -- would have been "a grotesque overreaction." He said it was not necessary since the university was anxious to resolve the problem. He said UBC has spent several million dollars to improve the management and effectiveness of its ethics review process and remains committed to having the the best process in the country.
Under Canadian rules allegations of research misconduct received by CIHR are forwarded to the university where the alleged misconduct occurred. The university is asked to investigate and report back to CIHR, which has the power to freeze projects and bar researchers from receiving more research money. American authorities appear to take a more direct approach. Last year, the U.S. Office of Research Integrity tracked down Dr. Eric Poehlman at the Universite de Montreal and charged him with faking research on menopausal women between 1992 and 2002. Dr. Poehlman moved from Vermont to Montreal in 2001 and subsequently received more than $1-million in Canadian research funds. Dr. Poehlman's job at the Universite de Montreal was terminated in January, 2005. He pleaded guilty in March, 2005, in what U.S. investigators called the worst case of scientific fakery in two decades. U.S. investigators also revealed in 2003 that University of Alberta researcher Jianhua (James) Xu had been sneaking into a lab and doctoring experiments and altering results of a project funded by a U.S. agency. The university fired Mr. Xu, and U.S. authorities ruled that he had engaged in "significant" scientific misconduct and barred him from receiving U.S. funding for four years. CIHR has also complained that its investigations are hampered by government secrecy and unco-operative universities. The documents released by CIHR reveal universities, in some cases, have let misconduct investigations drag on so long that researchers accused of faking results or unethical conduct had moved on to new jobs or left the country. Health Canada also refuses to share information that can be key to misconduct cases, according to the documents. Health Canada is bound by privacy laws and is limited in the information it can share, says Jirina Vlk, a Health Canada media officer. But she said the department is working with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to "facilitate the flow of information."© National Post 2006

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Subject: US Lung Cancer Rates Soarhttp://www.rense.com/general69/soar.htmDepleted Uranium - USLung Cancer Rates Soar>From Karl W B Schwarzkwbschwarz2@snet.net3-9-6So, what is the plan?
On the March 8, 2006 edition of the CNN American Morning program with Miles O'Brien and Soledad O'Brien, they made a startling announcement. On average there are 175,000 new cases of lung cancer each year in the United States.
For just the months of January and February 2006 there are 172,000 confirmed, newly diagnosed cases of lung cancer. This is not just a little spike on the charts and much worse news is coming. That is already averaging this year about 6 times the normal incidence of new lung cancer cases in a year. They tried to attribute it to second hand smoke, but second hand smoke and cigarettes are nothing compared to being exposed to Depleted Uranium ("DU")and particulates created by DU explosions.
You can smoke for 30 years and not do the damage that DU can do to you in 30 days. How long does it take to get lung cancer after being exposed to DU andnano-particulates? On average 2-5 years is the correct answer. We started bombing Afghanistan in October 2001 or four and a half years ago. We started bombing Iraq again in March 2003, or just shy of three years ago. The effects of those bombing attacks were registered as far away as the UK according to the Aldermaston Report we and others released February 19,2006. We do not know yet what was registered in the U.S. because the U.S. government is not saying and they definitely do not want you to know. The link between DU exposure and lung cancer has been known for many years. The correlation between DU and lung cancer versus cigarettes and lung cancer is even stronger for DU. They are making plans right now to bomb Iran, even knowing full well that they will be spreading more nuclear pollution. Here are the action items that need to happen:1.
We (PatmosNanotechnologies, LLC) are in discussions with multiple parties to quickly address the medical treatment needs of the veterans that have been exposed to DU and derivative nano-particulates. That will require a lab unlike any medical lab in the United States due to what it is testing for and developing treatment regimens. We will be putting out a call to raise funds to provide the needed travel, lodging and treatment for the veterans. Since Patmos is already aligned with a hospital and a group of doctors, and several key players in the heavymetal detoxification area, our emphasis on biotech will be re-shifted to be one of addressing the sheer medical needs of the veterans including treatment for heavy metal toxicity, DU detoxification and developing a widerange of options to deal with the many problems the troops are having. If the US government will not do it, we shall and we shall be asking Americans to do the right thing and help out. We are also establishing a DU Detoxification Center in the Atlanta area and will be expediting the treatment to veterans that our military is trying to avoid. Lives are at stake as well as quality of life. What got my attention focused on this matter is how many of our young healthy soldiers come home and are fundamentally fully disabled and the government ignoring that for to do otherwise would be an admission of guilt and creating a papertrail of evidence that leads up to and includes criminal conduct. This is not just a civil matter. We might have to create an ADOPT A VETERAN program where families with means are helping to pay for the medical needs of these soldiers. The Red Cross raised over $1 billion for the tsunami victims and their plight pales incomparison to this DU contamination catastrophe. Americans sent hundreds of millions for the tsunami relief fund and it is now time to make some of that American giving count here at home for Americans. Many of our troops need our help. If they do not receive help, many will spend the rest of their lives disabled or will die much sooner than God had intended. Where they do not have the financial means, we are going to ask Americans to make it happen.If you can provide funds in general or sponsor a specific veteran for the treatments, you may be saving their life and ultimately your own. We already have contingency plans that if the U.S. government tries to bar us from treating the soldiers they are intentionally neglecting, for fear of creating an evidence trail, there are several places offshore where the treatments will be offered and the logistics to get it done. The team we are assembling includes a hospital, specialist doctors, a new biotech center Patmos will build, firms that have detoxification treatments already that are proving to be very effective, and a lab that can detect not only molecules but nano-particulates too. This DU problem will require the services of laboratories, the medical specialties of endocrinology, internal medicine, neurology, urology, gastroenterology, oncology, and others. Most of all, Patmos has already developed several technologies that may prove to be very useful in addressing what has been done to our soldiers and all of us. We are tired of talking about it and waiting in vain for Washington, DC to do something right for a change. It is time for action. As some say, it is lead, follow or get the Hell out of the way time.2.
LEGAL ACTION. Our government knows DU is deadly and harmful to the troops and other populations, but they do it any way and they keep right on doing it any time they see fit. They knew it in 1989 and have continued to deploy troops four times in major engagements and have continued to fire these weapons on US bases around general civilian populations. The answer to that is a Class Action Lawsuit aimed right at the problem. We are soliciting attorneys at this time to assemble a team and address this matter in the courts. It would sort of be The Citizens of the United States, Active Duty and Veterans of the US Armed Services v. The United States Government, certain Defense Contractors, Certain Individuals. My guess is the true price tag for their criminal negligence could easily top $1 trillion in damages the Plaintiffs should be entitled to. When the whole truth, nothing but the truth is known about this matter ­America is in for a very rude awakening. You will not want to watch Shock and Awe on TV when you find out to what extent it has been delivered into your life. This DU issue makes asbestos pale in comparison. The figure does not even scratch the surface on what it will cost to even attempt to clean up the mess they have made in targeted countries like Iraq, Bosnia, Afghanistan and the collateral damage of harming general populations many miles away. Turning another nation and this nation into a nuclear waste dump is not a no harm, no foul situation. Army Regulation 700-48 requires mitigation of nuclear waste from these weapons when used, and they just conveniently ignore that and keep right on polluting. In short, they are required to put into effect environmental remediation and medical treatment for those parties exposed and they just never seem to find time to obey the law. The nations of Italy, Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, Ukraine, Canada, and many others are seeing the health problems in their soldiers and civilian workers that entered into these nuclear waste zones. Bahrain is about 500 miles from Iraq at its closest point and recent information from there shows that a high percentage of Bahraini citizens and US soldiers stationed there are highly exposed to DU. The UK towers at Aldermaston reported DU spikes shortly after the bombing was done many milesaway in Afghanistan and Iraq. The harmed parties within this nation alone are our soldiers and US citizens. The defendants have tried for years to cover this up or ignore it. We are going to put out a call and a website to collect donations for the war chest that will be needed to fight this lawsuit through to completion. It will take many millions of dollars to wage what might be the most important legal battle of our time and the defendants have billions of dollars to defend themselves. They will spend whatever it takes to win because a defeat would be the ruin of them. What they cannot hide is the truth but they will resist the truth from ever becoming generally known. The truth will not set them free nor will thetruth do anything but deliver back to them the same impunity with which they have treated millions of people. Many have already died; many more will die while this problem continues to be ignored by Washington, DC. It is time to make them stop ignoring it. If you can donate to the Lawsuit Fund, please send me an email with contact information.
3. ALL DEFENDANTS WILL BE NAMED. It is quite apparent that the governments of the US and UK, their militaries, the elected officials and the defense contractors have a long list of target countries and they all share one thing in common ­ they either have oil and natural gas or they have the land for oil and gas pipelines to get the oil to ocean ports and distributed around the world. These policies that have so many Americans concerned are driven by Big Defense and Big Oil ­ so Big Oil and its influence in making these idiotic policies would be targeted too. Even 9-11 was a staged show for Americans so they would support these war policies. There is no Global War on Terror except this nation being the world's greatest terrorist for oil, military supremacy and petrodollar supremacy. Gore Vidal said it best in an interview I saw and I am paraphrasing here ­"there is no Global War on Terror. That is nonsense, it is just rhetoric. They might as well declare a Global War on Dandruff".
4. ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING. We are going to deploy our own army to take soil, water, plant life and air samples around all US facilities where these weapons are made, fired, stored, and generally used. We will also be putting teams in place to take soil and water samples, as well as meeting with affected parties in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq. One of our affiliates has just uncovered a massive amount of DU exposure and confirmed human cases in Bahrain. The Aldermaston Report is confirmed at least for Bahrain in that this deadly stuff does in fact spread out to large areas. It has been detected in the UK and it has been confirmed in Bahrain. How confirmed? A very high percentage of the people tested in Bahrain are floating in DU contamination and it is being detected in their urine samples so it is internal, not just laying around on the sand. We have preliminary indications that deaths as far away as Denmark might have happened while this dirty little secret is being hidden from the world. It is not hard to find US or UK or coalition troops that went and became so sick they no longer have a quality of life. It is also not hard to find many that have died while being neglected by the governments that did it. We have contacted many of the purported environmentally concerned groups and none of them have responded. It is growing more apparent that they have an agenda that is not totally about clean air, clean water, and healthy environment. This environmental testing will include randomly buying food around the US and having it put under very exacting testing regimens to determine to what extent this toxicity is in our food chain. We have a pretty good idea of what will be found and it is not a pretty picture. Over the coming months our medical affiliates and our company will be announcing some things that are nanotechnology based (or combine nanotechnology with existing treatments) and will be directed at addressing this DU and nano-particulate contamination problem. Due to the wall of harassment we have received we will be making these products outside of theUnited States as well as an entire new generation of medical machines. The DU contamination is present, it is real and people need to start working in unison to address the problem. This DU issue is a nuclear contamination calamity and DC intends to do nothing about it.
Every state that has had either National Guard or citizens called up as Reserves or sent as active duty troops should be moving to implement mandatory DU testing laws. If nothing else, either be a squeaky wheel or build an eight foot fire under those bureaucratic butts. The states of Connecticut and Louisiana have implemented such laws. New York has a bill in motion as well as about 11 or 12 other states. Bottom line is all 50 states need to do what is right for the citizens of their states and put such mandatory DU testing laws in place. I think we have provided you with enough information to establish why they are covering this up. Most criminals do cover up their conduct if possible. Every US soldier or soldier of a foreign nation that we treat is yet another piece of evidence. That chain of evidence will not only prove what was done to them, it will prove what has been done to many Americans that have never left the United States yet have been exposed enough to ruin their health or kill them. If you know veterans in your area, or if you know some of the state level elected officials, please contact them and urge them to start the process of putting mandatory DU testing in place.
6. FEDERAL LEVEL ACTION There is a move in the US House to make the US government take care of the veterans. Watch them make this go away as fast as the Republican majority can and even many of the Democrats since the full expose on this would implicate Clinton, Gore and manyDemocrats in Congress.
HOUSE DEMS CALL FOR VETS CARE TO BE INCLUDED IN IRAQ SUPPLEMENTAL"Providing for Veterans Is Continuing Cost of War"Tuesday March 7, 2006Contact: Nayyera Haq (Salazar) 202.225.3319 Geoffrey Collver (Evans) 202.225.9756WASHINGTON, DC ­ Led by their most junior and senior Members on the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, Congressman John Salazar (D-CO) and Congressman Lane Evans (D-IL), House Democrats today moved to prevent a repeat of lastyear's shameful shortfall in funding for the Department of Veterans'Affairs. In a letter sent to Speaker Hastert this morning, more than 120 House Democrats called for the inclusion of $630 million in veterans' healthcare funds as part of the President's $72.4 billion Iraq War Supplementalrequest: "We believe that providing for our military veterans and their families is a continuing cost of war and an important component of our national defense. We are concerned that the Administration may have once again under estimated the total number of veterans that will seek services at the VA, including new veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Mr. Speaker, we strongly urge you to correct the Administration's oversight and recognize that caring for our veterans is an ongoing cost of war."Said Salazar: "With the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, we've created a whole new generation of veterans who need our care. We cannot have a repeat of last year's shameful budget shortfall. It is time for us to be honest in our budgeting and recognize the urgency of providing full funding for veterans health care. Our troops bravely put their lives on the line and it is our moral duty to provide them with the care and benefits they were promised."The complete text of the letter and the full list of signatories follows:Honorable Dennis HastertSpeakerU.S. House of RepresentativesWashington, DC 20515Dear Mr. Speaker:
We believe that providing for our military veterans and their families is a continuing cost of war and an important component of our national defense. We simply have no excuse for not meeting their needs. For some, it easy to forget that budgets and numbers ultimately reflect our priorities and affect real people. Indeed, by failing to include any money for veterans' health care and readjustment services in the $72.4 billion emergency war supplemental request, the Administration again has failed to acknowledge the added stress and resource demands the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are placing on the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Accordingly, we respectfully request that you work with the Appropriations Committee to provide additional resources for the VA within the emergency war supplemental. We believe that at least $630 million is urgently needed to care for troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the heroes from prior conflicts who rely upon the VA for their health care. Specifically, we are seeking $250 million to support increased demand for mental health services for returning troops; $200 million for direct medical services, including treating traumatic brain injury and other complex blast injuries, and additional resources for the VA's Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers; $110 million for increased demand for VA prosthetics; $15 million for medical and vocational rehabilitation services; and $55 million for increased staff to process the growing disability claims backlog of more than 370,000, including claims homeless disabled veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars who are waiting months for decisions.
Mr. Speaker, last year, we saw the VA face disgraceful shortfalls in its health care budget, shortfalls that had a direct impact upon the care received by veterans. Ultimately, the Administration begrudgingly admitted these shortfalls and was forced to request additional resources. We are concerned that the Administration may have once again underestimated the total number of veterans that will seek services at the VA, including new veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Mr. Speaker, we strongly urge you to correct the Administration's oversight and recognize that caring for our veterans is an on going cost of war. Sincerely, John Salazar Now that you have read this information about VA funding and Democrats'concern, note that there is not a single word about addressing the Depleted Uranium calamity. They know and they are terrified on both sides of the aisle of a paper trail of evidence being created. Remember, this is an election year and they are more concerned about votes and breaking up the Republican monopoly than they are the veterans suffering. It is all about power and money and greed, not about lives and quality of life. You see, I wonder at times why Washington, DC is so callous about the elderly, Medicare, Social Security, the veterans and their health needs, which would not be necessary if this nation had not put them into nuclear waste dumps. The answer is growing clearer to me every day ­ they know and if we die their problems go away. They really could not care less in Washington, DC if you live or die. You are a constituent and that makes you a present and long term liability to our leaders, not an asset. They constantly wrestle with the quandary of how to feign doing right for you and how they have to do right for their wealthy contributors and direct the wealth to them. It is a very steady shift of federal funds from those that do not need it and away from those that need it the most. Illegal aliens are flooding into this country and getting better treatment than our veterans. That is their version of Problem-Reaction-Solution. I trust you find mine more to your liking. Best regards, Karl"A patriot is mocked, scorned and hated; yet when his cause succeeds, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Message:


Up in smoke (II)
Print Edition 11/03/06 Page A22
On June 1, the Smoke Free Ontario Act comes into effect, banning smoking in all enclosed workplaces and enclosed public places. This raises the question: Will it be illegal for a trucker to smoke in the cab of his 18-wheeler while driving in Ontario?

Thomas Laprade
Thunder Bay, Ont.

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Ban smoking!

Wednesday, Mar. 8, 2006

Just in time for today’s House vote on a proposal to ban smoking in bars and restaurants, a UNH poll found that 85 percent of Gra´nite State voters say the right of employees and customers to breathe clean air is more important than the right of smokers to light up. That’s great news — for ban oppo´nents.
The poll also found that 79 percent wanted smoking pro´hibited in all workplaces, in´cluding bars and restaurants. Great! Legislators can now toss out Rep. Sheila Fran´couer’s silly smoking ban. It isn’t necessary.
How’s that? The public wants smoke-free establish´ments, so legislators must mandate them by law, you say? Just the opposite.
Such overwhelming desire for smoke-free places of busi´ness means one thing: Busi´ness owners will ban smoking on their own if they want to keep their customers and em´ployees.
This poll shows unmistak´ably that customers and em´ployees demand smoke-free environments. Without ques´tion, business owners will move to meet that demand or they will suffer the repercus´sions.
The trend in New Hamp´shire already favors smoke-ý010 . 0000.00þfree bars and restaurants. It won’t be long before estab´lishments that allow smoking will be difficult to find be´cause demand for them is shrinking rapidly. Banning smoking now, right when the state is on the verge of going smoke-free voluntarily, is foolish and unnecessary.
Let’s leave people free to make their own choices. New Hampshire has always prided itself on doing that, and his´tory shows that when govern´ment does that, most people make the right decision. If second-hand tobacco smoke is the great health menace its opponents say it is, then peo´ple will ban it on their own. If a few establishments contin´ue catering to smokers, so what? The owners, employees and customers will have made their own decisions, and who are we to forbid them from doing so?
Smoking is on its way out as a socially acceptable be´havior. The state doesn’t need to hasten its demise with laws invasive of private property rights. The people of New Hampshire, who are smart enough to be trusted with electing their represen´tatives, are smart enough to decide for themselves when and on what terms they will purge smoking from public life.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006


A questionMarch 08, 2006

Dear editor,

On June 1, the Smoke-Free Ontario legislation comes into effect, banning smoking in all enclosed workplaces and enclosed public places. It begs the question: Will it be against the law for a trucker to smoke in the cab of his 18-wheeler while driving in the province of Ontario?
Thomas Laprade

Thunder Bay, Ont.


Neo-Fascism, the Collective Mind-set and the Liberal Party of Canada

We are all aware that fascism originated with Benito Mussolini in the 1930’s in Italy. We are also all aware that originally the meaning of fascism was limited to a description of that regime. Times have changed. We are now all aware that when words become part of the common usage that they take on a broader meaning and/or significance. So it is with the word fascism or how it is often referred to now, neo-Fascism. It would be useful to understand traditional criteria of fascism before trying to analyze how it has metamorphosed through common application into current and subtler forms. What are these classical criteria? 1. A national chauvinism often accompanied by a militaristic and belligerent stance vis ‘a’ vis relations with other nations. That was certainly the case with Mussolini’s Italy and the National Socialist or Nazis regime in Hitler’s Germany. Curious enough it did not apply to Franco’s Falangist regime in Spain during the same time period who turned their belligerence inward against their own people but remained in isolated in terms of international relations and stayed neutral during the conflict of WW11. This regime however was and is widely regarded as having been fascist in nature despite not meeting all classic criteria. 2, An authoritarian government headed by an all-powerful strong man who delegates limited authority downwards to assorted henchman. Often these secondary men are kept in competition with each other for the arbitrary and fickle favours of the strongman and thus kept off balance. It is through these techniques of divide and conquer that the strongman remains supreme and holds onto power. A recent example of this type of leader was the recently deposed Saddam Hussein of Iraq. The Baathe regime that Hussein controlled was and is widely regarded as fascist in nature. 3. A strong and exclusive relationship between the ruling political party and the business and religious elite. It is this elitist triad that which sustains and maintains the balance of power to the mutual advantages of the concerned parties to the exclusion of the common man and any political party which may represent him. The Duplessis era in Quebec, Canada, up to Duplessis’s death in office in 1959 is a classic example of this type of cozy power relationship. Although an elected politician under an ostensibly democratic system in Quebec at the time, Duplessis maintained a stranglehold on Quebec politics for over twenty years. He achieved this in part with his largely exclusive relationship with the business community and the Roman Catholic Church, and with the aid of the notoriously corrupt provincial police force who were not above using heavy-handed intimidation tactics against Duplessis’s political opponents and a confrontational labour movement. Duplessis may not have been a fascist according to all classical criteria but as history has amptly demonstrated he displayed many marked fascist tendencies during his long political reign. If we could use one word to summarize the intent of classic fascism that word would be control. Fascism is about implementing and maintaining as complete control on a given society as possible brooking little to no competition. Now, moving beyond the classic criteria for defining fascism, we shall now consider current manifestations of fascism or neo-fascism, which have become subtler and thus more insidious. We shall attempt to investigate how control is implemented and maintained by current post-modern neo-fascist techniques. One of the most effective techniques the neo-fascist utilizes to maintain as absolute a form of control as possible is through the passing and rationalization of arbitrary legislation in the name of political correctness and/or social well being and the public health. Consider the anti-smoking legislation in Canada. This legislation is based on pseudo-scientific findings about the negative effects of secondhand smoke, which have been largely discredited, but continue to be used by the neo-fascists to justify their arbitrary and demonstrably unnecessary legislation. As a result of this anti-smoking legislation thousands of restaurants and bars throughout Canada have been forced out of business, because a majority of their regular clientele were smokers. Great emphasis was put on the need to protect non-smokers rights but apparently tax paying smokers are not supposed to have rights nor are the bars and restaurants who cater to them to make their living. Even the restaurants and bars who can afford to create separately ventilated smoking rooms for their smoking customers will have those rooms also made illegal by 2008* according to the current legislation. The separately ventilated smoking rooms create conditions where non-smokers are not affected at all by second-hand smoke, but they are still to be outlawed eventually. Thus we see that this arbitrary legislation is finally not based on the need to protect non-smokers health at all, that was merely the excuse not the real motivation. The real motivation behind this arbitrary legislation is the further tightening of control. It is a witch-hunt whereby the neo-fascist collective mind seeks to impose further control on the individualistic minority who opt to think for themselves. In the words of the great Canadian bard, Bruce Cockburn, “Don’t let the system fool you, all they want to do is rule you.” For the neo-fascist it is all about control. Another example of arbitrary legislation in Canada was the long gun registry implemented by the Liberal Party of Canada. This registry was ostensibly created under the erroneous reasoning that somehow a registered weapon would reduce the likelihood of that weapon being used in a violent manner against another human being. All it served to accomplish however was to inconvenience the Law abiding long gun owners who don’t misuse long guns and at significant cost to the public purse. It did nothing at all to hamper the criminal classes who never bother to register their guns. Somehow the reality that criminals do not play by the rules, which is a feature that distinguishes the criminals from the rest of us, escapes the reasoning of the Liberal Party of Canada. To date this inane registration has caused the Canadian taxpayer upwards of one and half billions dollar ($1.5 billion) and has accomplished nothing, but its hidden agenda of implementing further arbitrary control on Canadian citizens. Recently, in reaction to the recent rash of handgun shootings in Canada’s urban centres, the Liberals are now promising to implement a complete hand gun ban if re-elected. A total ban on handguns will achieve the same result as the long gun registry, which is to say nothing and further great cost to the public purse. If handguns are removed from lawful private collections, then approximately 50% of the handguns used by gangs, which have been stolen from private collections, will become unavailable for misuse by the criminal class. Currently however, the other 50% of the guns used in gang shootings are smuggled in from the U.S. Nature, which abhors a vacuum, will quickly rush in to fill the void and soon 100% of the handguns used for gang shootings will be smuggled in from the U.S. I must repeat again a fact, which is obvious to everyone, but the Liberals, to wit, criminals do not use legal handguns and will not comply with any handgun ban. If the thugs cannot get their handguns from one source they will get them from another. So what will be accomplished? The answer is nothing at all except to impose further arbitrary control on the law-abiding Canadian public, which is finally it primary objective. Not satisfied with their arbitrary legislation to date, the Paul Martin Liberals are now going to take this madness one step further and remove the Federal use of the notwithstanding from the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, itself another arbitrary misuse of power, thus making it harder for any further responsible government who might replace them to rescind the arbitrary and neo-fascistically motivated legislation created by the Liberals. In conclusion we can now understand that neo-fascism, unlike its clumsier predecessor, classic fascism, is insidious with subtle, creeping and evasive now you see it, now you don’t qualities. Its tools are political correctness and claims of operating in the public interest in terms of health and safety or the protection of minority rights. Its objectives however are something much different. Its objectives are about imposing tighter and tighter controls on society. Each time a law abiding society submits, even if unwittingly to these controls, then to that extent another part of their freedom of choice to make responsible decisions for themselves in their lives is removed. The final objective of this is to reduce law-abiding citizens to the malleable and controllable pawns of the neo-fascist state.
POSTED BY MUGGERIDGE At 5:20AM ET on January 18, 2006
Permalink Trackback

http://www.preventcancer.com/losing/acs/wealthiest_links.htm"American Cancer Society: The World's Wealthiest "Nonprofit" Institution, Samuel S. Epstein M. D.Conflicts of Interest- Mammography Industry - Pesticide Industry - Drug Industry - Board of Trustees The American Cancer Society is fixated on damage control — diagnosis and treatment— and basic molecular biology, with indifference or even hostility to cancer prevention. This myopic mindset is compounded by interlocking conflicts of interest with the cancer drug, mammography, and other industries. The "nonprofit" status of the Society is in sharp conflict with its high overhead and expenses, excessive reserves of assets and contributions to political parties. All attempts to reform the Society over the past two decades have failed; a national economic boycott of the Society is long overdue....." (read more)

Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Sent to the Toronto Sun

Editor, Mar.7/06

I noticed in the article"Dana Reeves dies of Lung Cancer", there was a statement from a doctor that said,' Doctors say one in five women diagnosed with the disease never lit a cigarette.'

Does that mean if a woman lights up a cigarette, her chances of getting Lung Cancer is 80 per cent.

Thomas Laprade
Thunder Bay, Ont.

Monday, March 06, 2006

Toronto Sun
Dear Editor, Mar.7/06

Watch Marketplace on Sunday Night.
Wendy Mesley-'Chasing the cancer answer.'

She said ,'2 to 10 percent of Cancer is caused by Environmental Toxins.' and the Cancer Society don't see it as a 'big' deal.

Having said that, Why is Mr. Jim Watson, The Minister of Health Promotion in Ontario so adamant on pushing for 'no-smoking' legislation'?

Thomas Laprade
480 Rupert St.
Thunder Bay, Ont.
Ph. 807 3457258


The beautiful thing about proposed health care in Alberta is the fact the public will have the best of both worlds.

Thomas Laprade
Thunder Bay, Ont.
(The jury remains out.)

Friday, March 03, 2006

The Rest of the Story Mar.2/06


Thursday, March 02, 2006


YOUR editorial, "Smoke in our eye," asks: "Is there any excuse for Philadelphia not finally joining the 21st century on this health issue?"
Yes, there is an excuse, and a very good one. Smoking bans have usually passed in other areas not on the basis of sound science but on the basis of massive spending by special interests. For example, in Washington State last year, the American Cancer Society invested over a quarter-million dollars to "buy" ban-petition signatures through paid gatherers.
Here in Philadelphia, it's more subtle, but just think about how many expensive TV commercials you've seen with cute little children coughing from thick clouds of smoke. The fact that by far the main venues to be affected by a ban will be bars and strip clubs doesn't slow the use of the "Save the children!" propaganda card.
Smoking ban laws are bad laws not just because they eat away at our social structure and freedoms or because they cause economic damage, but because they are based on lies. If you're an American who cares about the integrity of our government and our system of laws you should take the time this week to let your councilfolks know that you don't want Philadelphia to follow the misguided path laid by some of our neighbors.

Michael J. McFadden, Philadelphia

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?