Seeking Support of new draconian smoking bans in Ontario.
I have read your request and I appreciate you have allowed my voice to finally be heard .The request however is seen to be disingenuous in its stated intent. The smoking Ban as described by George Smitherman is not in keeping with Canadian values of inclusion. It is known to be dangerous to public health and is entirely suspicious in origin and real intent. The Public consultations in my view were an illegal expenditure of public funds to purchase politics and promote industry products of competing nicotine delivery systems. A shameful abuse of power.
Your contention The Health ministry has the ability or the mandate to deal with a broad range of issues in fact all issues leaves me aghast. How many issues do not properly belong to the Health ministry to the detriment of taxpayers funding other duplicated departments? A recent debate recorded in Hansart discussions included a declaration the Health ministry now believes road building to be a Health issue. The funding of such areas in a broad perspective of health issues as opposed to the public perception of simply funding of medical infrastructure indeed can be seen as embarking down an evil road known all too well by every student of political science. A road previously traveled by those known in infamy as Mussolini and Hitler. The centrist view adapted by the Liberals of late would increase this suspicion. The policy adoption of the Right and the Left in a centrist positioning can only be explained as intent to adapt the virtues of the third way.
The Federal Government and Health Canada are known to be extensively interfering with Provincial issues. The broadening of scope to include the work of other departments’ leaves us wondering what these other departments are to do, and what reason we have for maintaining them. Smoking is an environmental issue best dealt with in science and discovery not in propaganda campaigns based in consensus realities as opposed to scientific facts. The Health Canada website in an explanation of Social engineering tells a belief government has a right to dictate what we think as opposed to listening to what we do think, a dictators view to rights of decision. Use of ad agency creations such as political correctness can therefore be seen as a whip to keep us silent while the government dictates moral opinion through description of the extremes and outright deceit.
The Federal Liberals contend the Conservatives want an American Healthcare system the Conservatives counter the Liberals want to dominate and indeed dictate provincial matters. These are discussions of extremes and do not deal with anything substantial in direction. The obligation of the Provincial government should be to protect our provincial right to direct our own healthcare spending. The Federal Government needs to define in the Canada healthcare act a clear definition of Healthcare as the funding of medical infrastructure and eliminate the waste through duplication of other ministerial responsibilities. In an aging and growing population can their be any doubt as to why lineups are growing when money designated for healthcare can be directed in huge amounts to all other areas of concern? If you contend an adoption of the third way will serve the public perhaps that, is where public debate should be headed and lets see where that goes.The public consultations as they were called indeed allowed no true representation of the public as it's name seemed to indicate. Rather the voices of an organized lobby working in concert and named by Mr. Smitherman in the announcement of his bill. They were allowed to dominate every discussion on the matter. The Liberal Government allowed the list to include only the voices they wanted to hear with few exceptions. Silenced were the voices of affected industries who came with real research and this included the Government's own research all without consideration quickly brushed aside in public announcements of bias. How would we see the participating stakeholders with similar restrictions applied? Every one to a name will see gains from the ban. Whether financial or political all will have something to gain. Yet, those voices were allowed to reign supreme regardless of the enormous damage known to be inevitable with the passing of this legislation. The ministry of the environment was curiously absent in the assessment of the harm of second hand smoke. Or in the simplified dismissal of DSRs as a legitimate alternative. (The solution supported by the vast majority of the population smokers or non.) If they had been asked an opinion of a suspected harm they have been monitoring and regulating for years. What would be the result in assessing the fears allowed to be inspired and given to the public in Ad agency terms? What will be the effect of driving women out into unsheltered parking lots were untold harms of insect bites weather conditions and attacks by predators in robbery and sexual attacks. What solutions to these problems have ever been discussed and where do I find the conclusions of trading one harm determined by consensus devoid of scientific fact, for another larger one know to be the reason we have jails courts and police officers. Is the ban respective of crime reduction efforts or was downside logic even considered?I further object to children being taught the hate being not only approved but also endorsed in recent actions of the Ministry of health. A website named stupid the focal point of government opinion? Reinforcing hatred against those who choose to use a legal product. Killers of Babies, child abuse, smelling like dog fescues? Words of a government I want no part of. Further abuse in published threats by a Health ministry Quit or be punished? Punishment is for the courts otherwise the threats need to be seen as a criminal act by a government official who seeks to punish not a crime but a personal choice. The great harm in science by consensus as opposed to the old fashion type by discovery and laws of real science is the immeasurable damage done to the credibility of rules and integrity, which allowed society to evolve into a just and caring place known as democracy. Liberal governance is now evolved into a force of destruction. Laid to waste in its path are values of ethics and morals, which have always served us well. Even the very cultural traditions which have made this place unique and the envy of the world will now be deemed as repugnant under the political wheels of governance so destructive it seeks the aid of even Hitler himself in it's promotions. You have asked me to participate in your campaign I respectfully decline, as I can no longer involve myself in a plan of imposition to line the pockets of others.. The letter in it's true intent is another farce to give those who inspired this ban an additional opportunity to further impose upon my rights and furthering of their goals.The effect of lobby groups is being seen as a huge industry based in the ability to control weak governments and impose the values of self serving industries to promote products such as the incredibly high priced cessation products being seen and openly advertised by your government. It is well known the lobby groups claims of contents of Smoke include man made chemicals which do not exist in a regulated product sold here for years prior to the government allowing the unrestricted imports of much more dangerous tobacco from sources with ecological disasters for growing conditions. If the agenda is public safety why has your government made no effort to examine these claims? Why is the public not aware of alternate products attacked vehemently at the mere mention by your advisors? Snu smokeless products were adapted by 80% of smokers in Sweden because of a 90% reduced health risk in use of smokeless tobacco however the price is also 90% reduced. Would cost and benefit be the real motivation behind public heath advocacy as easily proven in this but one example? If you are seeking to improve public health real honest study irrespective of those who will gain from the implementation of the bill needs to be a priority and not furthering the goals of the fear mongering crowd with a financial reward for actions the real motivation of anti smoking advocacy regardless of harm.The rising violence seen on the streets in Toronto can be seen clearly a result impositions and poverty. As the government grows bureaucracy so grows poverty and hate on our streets. Inclusive values would not have this effect the summary dismissals of your government is proof of a failure by policies to protect us resulting in immeasurable harm. The misguided folly of pursuing 47,000 preventable deaths with only 10% of that amount actually statistically linked smoking and of those ¾ occurring after 70 is proof enough of lack of wisdom in assessing harms and a total lack of credibility of a government supporting the values of Dither.It is Irrefutable the Federal Government is imposing it’s will as agreed to in the international smoking treaty with The World Health Organization your actions are not as noble as you would portray. It seems incredible for a provincial legislature to not only instill the wishes of the Federal known to be corrupted Liberal party but allow them to stay clear of the blame. The Federal voice is absent in the advocacy as they fear repercussions leaving it to the co-operating Provincial ministries to tell the tales so easily discredited being given to the public as news daily. Paid for by our apparently naïve provincial representatives who will one day share the blame and ridicule. The historic view of prohibitionists is well known. The wealth and power of organized crime in North America would not have been possible without it. Sale of black market cigarettes rises with every increase of tax one fact the lobbies fail to recognize in the advocacy of greed.Can we all see it prudent to be chased from a Diesel powered bus for fear of a measured value of 160 nana grams of 5000 mixed ingredients of varying levels of largely unknown harm in a smoke filled bar as opposed to 4 -10 milligrams per cubic meter of chemicals thousands of times as harmful? Think about that next time you see a mother unaware of the harm she instills on her child when pushing a carriage into a bus terminal or a publicly promoted subway train. The measure of harm and the failure to deal with it is evidence enough to determine the real motives behind anti smoker advocacy as purely monetary and political promotion. Elimination of the public voice is further proof this is not a kind and gentle protection but a fraud and an imposition. Regardless of what polls and ad agencies will admit common sense and word of mouth are far more effective in creating lasting public perceptions than anything the ad agencies have ever produced to date. In the way of a positive note, history shows a steady decline to eventual elimination of every government who has ever attempted to legislate morality. When those impositions are for fun and profit the decline is much swifter. After the ban is fully implemented, an election will follow. I and many others have pledged the word Nazi will be heard at every opportunity in connection with the word Lieberal.
Friends will not let friends vote Lieberal.FXR
Parallels cannot be ignored
Word for word the Lieberal red book
“Historians and epidemiologists have only recently begun to explore the Nazi anti-tobacco movement. Germany had the world's strongest anti smoking movement in the 1930s and early 1940s,encompassing bans on smoking in public spaces, bans on advertising,restrictions on tobacco rations for women, and the world's most refined tobacco epidemiology, linking tobacco use with the already evident epidemic of lung cancer. The anti-tobacco campaign must be understood against the backdrop of the Nazi quest for racial and bodily purity, which also motivated many other public health efforts of the era.”
“The guiding light behind Thuringia's antismoking campaign and the man who drafted the grant application for Astel's anti-tobacco institute, was executed on 1 October 1946 for crimes against humanity. It is hardly surprising that much of the wind was taken out of the sails of Germany's anti-tobacco movement.”
“Perhaps the ultimate overlooked point of this work is the suggestion that Adolph Hitler with his anti-tobacco, anti-religion, pro-animal rights, pro-government intrusion would find success as a modern day liberal." --Steve Fantina
Doctors don’t generally make great leaders
Basis for smoking bans
The dominance principle
Purchasing media credibility
Reality bites when you are found to be wrong
The fat campaign fraud was discovered long before Ontario Lieberals decided to start one of their own.
Possible suspects
The voice of reason a view beyond scary stories
Lots if evidence
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=937
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=913
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2827
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2731
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2732
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2758
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2769
No comments:
Post a Comment