Smoking Is Healthier Than Fascism

Smoking Ban Is About Government Control; Believe it or not, the state really doesn't care about your health
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Jan. 31, 2007

The regulation of the personal habit of smoking, including new legislative moves in San Francisco to ban cigarettes in private homes, and its enforcement by an eager cadre of state snoops and snitches, represents nothing more than a move on behalf of big brother towards the complete subjugation and shackling of the individual. To this end, smoking is healthier than fascism.

Two new developments today have once again brought this issue into focus and the true agenda behind it needs to be exposed.

In France, a nation once noted as being rich in tobacco connoisseurs, 175,000 "cigarette police" have been given the task of randomly snooping around offices, schools, factories and any other "public spaces" in order to sniff out flouters of a new total ban on smoking.

In San Francisco California, a city ordinance described as "the most stringent tobacco regulation in America" would ban smoking everywhere, including private homes and apartments, sparing only large detached family homes - and if they squeeze this one through expect those homes to be targeted next.

This is not a debate about the dangers of passive smoking, we all know smoking is bad for us and those around us. On an individual level, freedom includes the right to do dumb things and whether others should be subject to our vices comes down to two questions, is fascism more unhealthy for a society than passive smoking and does the government really care about your health?

Dare I suggest that western governments raining down depleted uranium in all corners of the world, spraying chemtrails in our skies, playing Dr. Frankenstein with our food, drugging us into oblivion with psychotropic poison pills, shooting x-rays to expose our naked bodies, and injecting us with toxic vaccines really care about our physical well-being?

Do an elite that openly advocate culling the majority of the world's population really want to put a stop to cancer?

The answer is no, so why the transatlantic obsession to have us stub out our cigarettes?

It's all about control, it's all about letting you know who the bosses are. If the government can regulate personal habits and behavior, what's next? If the state is so concerned about our good health as they would have you believe, why not use the latest scientific advancements to remove that nasty aggressive gene that causes so much unhappiness? Well, you're causing those around you distress and harming their health so why not? Are your political opinions a mental illness? Are they harming society? Perhaps we should ban certain types of "free" speech that is offensive to others.

You see where this is all heading - how long before our wall mounted personal x-ray body scanners are accompanied by special smoke detectors that inform on you to the local Stasi if you dare to light up?

Smoking may be very unhealthy but I'd certainly rather be around a bunch of smokers than a bunch of Fascists.

If you have never smoked and couldn't give a damn if it gets banned then consider the fact that cell phones are emerging as the new kid on the bloc as far as cancer's best friend goes. British expert Professor Lawrie Challis said last week that mobile phones could turn out to be as harmful as cigarettes. How would you react if the government suddenly announced that your Blackberry was off limits because the anti-cell phone lobby got a bill through?

We live in a paranoid world overpopulated by ninnying jellyfish who dare not dip their toe in the water in case there's a law against it, it might upset someone, or it might be bad for their health.

Writer Alan Caruba adds the following, "There are few, if any, people that do not know there is an element of risk involved in the decision to smoke. There is risk involved when any American gets into his car and goes anywhere." "Driving kills over 40,000 Americans every year. It is the price we pay for the mobility and other benefits cars and vehicles provide. There is, in fact, risk in every human activity including the enjoyment of alcoholic beverages and even the simple act of eating."

Here are some more examples of fascism being unhealthier than smoking.

- In Omaha Nebraska, city police are encouraging residents to call 911 if they see a smoker in a non-smoking area. So when your wife is being raped by an illegal immigrant or a gang banger, be assured that the cops have a good reason for their absence - Joe Bloggs just lit up a Marlboro and he's going to get Tasered.

- Bangor City Council approved a measure that criminalizes smoking in your own car with a child present.

- In Okemos Michigan, an insurance business boss ordered all his employees to take urine tests to determine if they had smoked, even in their own homes. Smokers were warned that they would be fired.

- In New York, Mayor Bloomberg's tobacco stormtroopers raided the offices of Vanity Fair no less than three times, attempting to catch noted journalist Graydon Carter smoking. All they found was an unused clean ash tray but Carter was fined and given a warning nonetheless. Numerous other instances of infamous "ash tray raids" have occurred in New York City.

- In Scotland, social services are drawing up a master list of smokers and warning residents against smoking in their own homes unless they wish to risk being cut off from government services.

Many of the people reading this will have had relatives die directly due to smoking. I am not advocating smoking, I am simply advocating the fact that I'd rather live in a society of smokers than a society of control freak fascists who slavishly seize upon any action of the individual in order to create yet another pretext for creating a Stasi system of informants, locking us all up and building the infrastructure of the prison planet.