Monday, April 14, 2008

Listen hard, and you can hear pants being pissed...

This was published last week by Freedom 2 Choose, a pro-choice organisation dedicated to the amendment of the smoker ban in public places:

Hackers Target Freedom Organisations
The websites of two prominent pro choice organisations campaigning against smoking bans were yesterday targeted by hackers in a "pharming" incident that redirected traffic to the NHS Smokefree website. The DNS poisoning, a high level and sophisticated hacking technique, affected all UK based internet service providers.

Andy Davis, Vice Chairman of Freedom to Choose, one of the affected websites, says: "It appears that Freedom To Choose has annoyed someone high up, it seems they don't want the truth to get out."

Stephanie Stahl, President of Forces International, claims: "To re-direct our UK visitors to an anti-smoking website shows that the antismoking movement must be very nervous about the information our pro-freedom groups provide.

Domain names are sacred on the free-spirited information super highway; we trust that those responsible for this serious violation will be identified and held accountable. "

Both groups campaign against government interference in private life and property, maintaining that blanket smoking bans are based on fraudulent scientific claims about passive smoking. According to Andy Davis: "5 out of 6 studies show second hand smoke to be entirely harmless. In the UK the ban is needlessly devastating the hospitality and entertainment industries, yet modern air filtration can remove 9.97% of airborne particles and make indoor air cleaner than outdoor, regardless of smoking."

The hacking incident has been reported to the relevant authorities and is under investigation.

As was pointed out on 'England Expects', you won't have seen that in any mainstream journals.

Well, the cowardly little fuckers have just done it again tonight. If you click on the F2C link to the right, you'll go straight to Smokefree England; the quangoid wankfest dedicated to telling everyone how great it is that 1700+ pubs have gone to the wall since last July.

Someone, somewhere seems to be getting frightened. Good.


snowbird said...

There has never been a single study showing that exposure to the low levels
of smoke found in bars and restaurants with decent modern ventilation and
filtration systems kills or harms anyone.

As to the annoyance of smoking, a compromise between smokers and non-smokers
can be reached, through setting a quality standard and the use of modern
ventilation technology.

Air ventilation can easily create a comfortable environment that removes not
just passive smoke, but also and especially the potentially serious
contaminants that are independent from smoking.

Thomas Laprade
Thunder Bay, Ont.
Ph. 807 3457258

Mac the Knife said...

Perfectly true Sir, you're preaching to the choir in my case.

What worries me are the subsidiary aspects of the whole enterprise.

A single-issue lobby group managed to completely hijack the 'debate' using bogus statistics and with the enthusiastic compliance of both MSM and government.

This is Not a Good Thing.

The fact that now they are rampaging around the net attempting to muzzle dissent and succeeding is also Not a Good Thing.

The fact that they feel the need to do so when according to them 'the Debate is Over' does however offer a measure of hope, and reinforces the need to fight liars and scumbags wherever we may find them.

Thanks for commenting.

snowbird said...

If you ask most people, they'd tell you they're not big fans of hypocrisy and political correctness.
So how is it that journalists, of all people, can fall prey to those two nasty traits?
For the last couple of weeks, board members of a national journalism association have engaged in some heated discussion over an advertisement a lobby group wanted to place in Media magazine.
That's the publication for the Canadian Association of Journalists (CAJ). I'm one of 13 people on the CAJ's national board.
Normally, we see eye-to-eye on motherhood issues, including freedom of speech, fairness from bias, truth, accuracy ...
But when a pro-smoking group called Tobacco Smokers of Canada wanted to advertise in our national magazine, all bets were off. I've learned one lesson: Where there's smoke, there's ire.
In a display of hypocrisy and political correctness, our magazine publisher turned the group down flat, claiming the ad violates Canada's Tobacco Act. Most all board members agreed with the decision.
No lawyer was called for a legal opinion, I'm told.
In my view and the view of an Ottawa consultant intimately familiar with the Tobacco Act, the ad is perfectly legal, especially since the magazine is targeted only at people over the age of 18.
Political correctness and hypocrisy were behind the decision, not rule of law.
Judge the ad for yourself:
"Dear News Industry: The opposing side of the tobacco smoke issue is not being reported. Many researchers, scientists, even doctors and politicians, as well as millions of news reading, taxpaying voters, do not believe the anti-smoking claims about second-hand tobacco smoke.
"We tobacco smokers appeal to you all. Please, also report our side of the tobacco smoking issue in accordance with the principles and ethics of journalism and the news industry's fiduciary duty to the public."
The group then rubbed a little salt in the wound by quoting, in the ad, the CAJ's principles and ethics guidelines that include the defence of free speech and the belief in allowing "disparate and conflicting views."
Clearly, the ad is not advertising tobacco and the smoking group had a right to its opinion.
That seemed lost on most CAJ board members.
Some said we'd have to investigate the group's claims and delve into the studies disputing the extent of harm caused by second-hand smoke.
Others figured the group spokesman should write a column, not buy an ad.
When I asked one board member if they would grill every potential advertiser on the facts of every ad submitted, I received this response: "Yes, every time someone wants to place an ad dealing with any product proven to kill people I would definitely ask these kinds of questions."
lt's obvious from that some people just have blinders on when it comes to the topic of tobacco, which is, last I checked, a legal product in Canada.
A major study published in the British Medical Journal backs up the group's view that second-hand smoke is not as deadly as most anti-smoking activists claim.
In that study, more than 118,000 adults were monitored for almost four decades. Essentially, it found that people exposed to a life of second-hand smoke were about as healthy as those who weren't.
It concluded: "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco-related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect."
It's tragic when political correctness trumps freedom of speech.
E-mail Or see:

Visit Kerry Diotte's Blog on Canoe

Submitted by

Thomas Laprade
Thunder Bay, Ont.

Mac the Knife said...

Yes, I read that piece on the Forces International website.

It's sadly indicative of the steep decline in rigorous and analytical journalism.

Where's the Walter Winchell des nos jours?