Tuesday
Jan292008
Cat among the pigeons
Tuesday, January 29, 2008 Last week I reported that Roger Helmer (MEP and chairman of the Freedom Association) had been invited to lock horns with ASH before a so-called "People's Jury". Roger has now written about the event on his own blog. He begins:
Last Wednesday (Jan 23rd) saw me in Shoreditch Town Hall, at a "People's Jury", organised by ASH (the anti-smoking lobby group), on the question "What more should the government do to reduce smoking?". I rather threw the cat amongst the pigeons by arguing that it had done too much already.
And concludes:
"It's time for the government to back off, and leave the citizens with at least a little elbow-room to make their own choices and live their own lives."
Click HERE for the full blogpost.
Reader Comments (27)
Good for him.A man with sense which seems rare these days.
With friends like Roger Helmer who needs enemies. His discription of smokers as sad little addicts, his acceptence of smoking statistics, which are outragiously distorted and mean nothing, and are ALL based on the same assumptions and ingrained brainwashing that's gone on for decades. This is someone fighting ASH ?! Don't make me laugh.
After that display I think they'll feel really worried if they come up against him again.
He lost the battle at the first hurdle..... smoking's bad but.....defeated already. You cannot defend something that you've addmitted is bad. When will these people learn that the scum of the likes of ASH need to be torn apart in any public debate and shown up for the dispicable cheats that they are, not given ammunition that they will happily use to destroy any dissent.
Zitori writes "You cannot defend something that you've admitted is bad." Of course you can - that's what freedom is all about. The whole point people like Roger Helmer are making is that we should be tolerant of things of which we may not approve. If one were to follow Zitori's line, one would start off immediately losing the sympathy of the large majority of the population that doesn't smoke and doesn't like smoking. That way lies disaster for any campaign to defend smokers' rights.
Although Roger is a non-smoker and hates smoking, his answers sounded good to me. I would like to know what ASH had to say.
Sorry Roger, but for someone who is an MEP, (and a chairman for the Freedom Association), simply saying that the government has done too much already is too easily countered. My easy retort if I represented ASH would be…if you genuinely wanted us to be a healthier nation, with special consideration for our young…then perhaps you could say this government is not doing enough! Now then – how easy was that?
How about creating a mini agenda of your own Roger? Ask – is it true that 100,000 people died last year from ‘passive smoking’ and can you validate these figures for us here today? Or – why is there no definitive yearly figure from epidemiologists…do they only guess at the figures?
This would immediately put ASH on the back foot. It would create the prospect of drawing them into a debate that they wish to ignore. Very quickly it would open up a very big can of worms.
No such ludicrous figure of 100,000 exists of course…but they would have to answer a question that may reveal what evidence they have that others don’t.
Questions that put them under pressure are the only ones worth asking. Soft questions or statements that can be too easily batted away – aren’t worth the oxygen being used to ask them. Did you do any homework Roger…did you put together some decent questions?
Perhaps it’s time to look for those that are capable of asking the tough questions. I believe the Americans’ call it ‘playing hard ball’, the problem Roger…is that you only measure up just now for ‘soft ball’.
Thanks Chris for your point about a healthier nation. Of course the government can make us all healthier. It can ban chocolate. It can threaten us with prison if we don't take exercise and eat five portions of veg a day. It can outlaw alcohol and bungee-jumping. I don't disagree that this would make us all healthier. But that's not the sort of society I want to live in. We have to be free to take risks -- and to drink and smoke if we want. We have to put the government back in its box.
Roger...you have completely missed my point! I was merely posing an answer that ASH would use - not me.
ASH would reply to you saying that this government is going to far...with...would you not consider the health of the nation ect; that is how they - would counter your argument.
Just go back Roger - and read my post S.L.O.W.L.Y!
I don't usually respond to my own posts, but I make an exception in this case. Chris and Zitori, yours are the type of responses that make my blood boil. Here we have a non-smoking politician who is prepared to stand up and be counted in support of smokers and all you can do is sneer, criticise, or seek to find fault. Roger is an ex-smoker. I am a non-smoker and I too have been criticised on occasion for not being more "aggressive" in my response to ASH and the anti-smoking lobby generally. (It is true that Forest seeks "compromise" solutions and if that is not "playing hardball" we will just have to agree to disagree about tactics and strategy.) You are welcome to your point of view, but biting the very few hands that are prepared publicly to support people's right to smoke in some public places (and oppose further tobacco controls) strikes me as irresponsible and self-defeating.
Simon (Richards), you are absolutely right. Well said.
Simon, I do appreciate Mr.Helmer's stance in opposing ASH's position, but I'm afraid the reality of the situation is that no amount of easily parried questions by well meaning but unfortunately misinformed MEPs will cause the slightest dent in the anti-smoking crusade, and it makes 'my blood boil' to think that after all the so called debates between Forest and the antis over the years, you still feel that it will work. Well, wake up and look where we are now!
As far as Simon Richard's comments go, any
inch given to the likes of ASH and you are defeated instantly. You CANNOT defend something that you've admitted is bad, for freedom, because in that case you've just agreed with there argument. This may be about freedom to you, and I agree, but to the whole Healthist crusade this is about freedom from 'bad' things, although it's really about money and power.
I don't believe that grilling ASH for the truth would alienate the public at all, it's long overdue. I don't think you realize just what you're up against. There is NO reasoning with these people. It's been tried over and over and ALWAYS fails, otherwise we wouldn't be in this situation now, would we!
Just to add to my previous post. The ONLY way to change the public and political perception of this vile organization and the ideology behind it is to expose the huge 'non-scientific fraud' it is based on. The only argument there should be. Then you can talk about freedom being taken away by deceitful propaganda.
Otherwise their response is always the same...'you want the freedom to kill other people?'
Unfortunately I know that Simon Clark thinks of my comments as 'militant', but the proof is in the pudding. ASH do NOT feel threatened in any way by Forest, and are looking forward with great glee to putting in place much more invasive laws very soon. The time is indeed right for much tougher action against them. They will NEVER compromise with anyone and never have, and if you don't know that by now, then do something else with your time.
Simon - You may feel that some of the contributors have been acerbic with their responses to the efforts made by this MEP and FOREST. We are grateful to any support whether it comes from smokers or non-smokers. However, there is a real anger out there about how smokers are being treated.
I have taken all steps to avoid going into pubs and buy my cigarettes duty free at every opportunity. Anything to stop Gordie McBean using the tax proceeds to enact more draconian laws and social engineering. Quite frankly,I/ we are sick to the back teeth of this incumbant government and many are seeking a life abroad. What a sad state of affairs.
Hence, you will forgive us, if we seem less than grateful for the support given and come across as militant. The kid's glove approach never worked and organisations such as ASH need to be confronted robustly in future on every occasion.
Bill.
Zitori, it's not about "reasoning with ASH", it's about reasoning with the general public in order to create a groundswell of opinion that says enough is enough; that this whole anti-smoking crusade has gone too far. It's also about engaging with politicians and the media in a reasonable, responsible manner.
BTW, it's hard enough fighting this battle without being attacked publicly by people who allegedly share our opposition to smoking bans and want to do something about it. (I have no problem with criticism, but if it comes from "our" side it should be done privately.) We have a lot to learn from the health lobby which (publicly at least) is united, remarkably well organised and, occasional lapses apart, very professional (in a hard-working, spin doctor type of way).
Bill, if you don't think we are robust enough, you clearly haven't heard many of the hundreds/thousands of interviews we have done over the years. Any more robust and the only time anyone would ever hear us would be on late night talk radio where we could rant to our heart's content.
PS. I agree with Zitori about the need to expose the passive smoking fraud. No-one in the UK has done as much as Forest to publicise the truth - see our publications, including a 50pp report Prejudice & Propaganda: The Truth About Passive Smoking, and our many, many interviews/quotes on the subject - but we're up against a well-organised, well-funded industry that has the ear of government, local authorities and the media.
What I'd like to know is how and why that tiny bunch of extremists have those 'ears' over and above the reasonable voice of the majority of ordinary members of the public.
Is it just a case of squeaky wheels getting the grease?
Simon
If I were to attend an ASH ‘People’s jury’, why should I not use this as an opportunity to ask poignant questions that ASH might find intrusive and embarrassing?
This organization isn’t concerned about health…it’s agenda is politics. They want to ban smoking everywhere, not just in public places – and they have been relentless in that pursuit.
I suggest you visit their website. In the United States, anyone living in an apartment block whose neighbour smokes, can contact ASH…and for a fee receive legal advice that would lead to an eviction of that smoker!
One of the more ludicrous developments is about drifting smoke. They say that smoke can drift from one apartment to the other…if you can smell it, then perhaps it’s killing you…. how about that? How long will it be before such developments become apparent here?
This pernicious organization has a strategy that engenders malicious intent that is devoid of mercy. They have a ruthlessness that would put any dictatorship to shame. Soft and cuddly approaches to these zealots hold no sway…and elicit no compromise.
You say that countless interviews have been given…I’m sure you’re right…but I’ve never seen one – and that’s the problem. Our impact has been ineffectual and minimal. The company that is making a programme about the ‘nanny state’ with the help of Forest, could just be the shoe-in that will take us into the public eye.
But you must remember Simon, the people who post on this site are passionate about having their pleasures and freedoms desecrated. Many will tell of friendships that have been destroyed by this mindless ban. I can no longer meet with my friend of many years who is also a pipe smoker…that makes me angry…and hurt!
You don’t smoke, so it doesn’t affect you in the same way – you can still meet with friends of yours that don’t smoke.
Like many millions of others we are now pariahs without a social home…decent human beings – that have become victimised by a tyranny that knows no bounds.
So, I’m sure you will excuse me if I make your ‘blood boil’, because I upset Roger Helmer’s sensitivities, although I’m sure he can look after himself. However there is a sanction I’m willing to accept…if you wish to prevent me from voicing my opinions on this site in future, then I will understand.
This would pale into insignificance – compared to the loss of my social freedom.
Struggling Spirit,
The squeaky wheels are being paid a kings ransom by the real drivers of this vindictive legislation.
Big Pharma project annual sales of NRT to be £2.3 BILLION by 2015.
That's a lot of grease.
Big Tobacco have been gagged and hog-tied.
Forest are having an impact. This site alone takes a huge number of hits, which indicates that people are looking for direction.
F2C are doing what we can with what we've got. Which is nowhere near enough.
Is it any wonder the politico's cave in? The onslaught from these cultists is almost ceaseless.
I believe that the only way this will all end is if we get the "killer" into a courtroom.
It is time to end the fairy tales about SHS.
Human rights don't work.
Property rights don't work.
But the science is black and white.
Which is why it will be a cold day in hell before we get the anti's in a courtroom.
They wouldn't stand a chance.
And they know it.
Likewise, I am very pleased that Roger Helmer had the balls to take on ASH but would nevertheless be pleased if he acquainted himself with the facts, as opposed to repeating some of the very concocted and unproven statistics about death rates from smoking as just one example of the misinformation imposed upon the general public week in week out. It is precisely that kind of misinformation that persuaded this witless and moronic government to introduce smoker bans in the first place.
Therefore. I would ask you politely Roger, to please undertake some much more thorough-going research as many of us, including many, many other non-smokers who fight in our corner, have taken the trouble to do.
I shall also point out to you, Simon, that whereas I am unaware of the numbers of non-smokers that Forest has as members, F2C now has a considerable number.
Quote
(“BTW, it's hard enough fighting this battle without being attacked publicly by people who allegedly share our opposition to smoking bans and want to do something about it.”)
Simon, it is hard for me to understand your reaction. The diversity of opinion on your blog can only strength your position in fighting your battle.
In the end it is the British way of life where everyone has right to express own opinion without fear from persecution.
I guess that majority of the non smoker including the life long non-smoker will agree with your, Simon Richards and Roger Helmer opinion.
And as well I guess but I am a little bit more sure that majority of the smokers will agree with Zitory opinion.
But again, that is just my guess. It will be very productive if is possible to prove on democratic way where people can vote.
I think that only the smokers can understand the real misery that we face today where the ordinary- simply British people are forced to give up their British way of life.
It is strange to me that some British people saying to the people who are forced to go outside if they want to smoke that they have FREEDOM TO CHOSE between give up smoking or to go outside if they like to smoke.
The British people who are forced to go outside if they want to smoke doesn’t ask nothing to choose, they just want their British way of life back that is treacherously taken from them.
I think that those people deserve to have Political Organisation that will enable them to fight for their humans’ right.
Zitory, Chris F J Cyrnik, Bill, Struggling Spirit, I agree whit your opinion and thank you for posting.
Zitori,
just when I posted I realised that I twice misspelled your name. I am sorry. I hope you won’t take offence.
BTW I didn’t use to write.
I think it's important to recognize that we all share the same aims, and I appreciate everyone who is trying to fight, evem though we may disagree here and there. It's also very important to realize that everything that has been done, in the past, has come to absolutely nothing.Nobody can deny that.
Seeing it in this light, it is now obvious that a different approach is needed.
A much tougher, well informed attack, or we will be seeing extensions of this law that will make the present one look mild. They think this is just the start, well let's make it a new start for us.
Zitori: No, I am not asking for freedom to kill people. I am arguing for the right of individuals to take informed risks if they choose to do so.
I was stating what ASH would accuse you of, if you agree with the principal that smoking is all bad. I thought that was clear.
Mr Helmer.
After seeing, for many years, the way the anti-tobacco crusade works, and watching it spread around the world, due to the massive monetary input by pharmaceutical companies, and the US Master Settlement Agreement, the notion of arguing for 'rights of individuals' is not realistic at all, although admirable. It cannot be realistic until the fraud is dealt with first, because it is the fraud that gives them a reason to take away peoples rights.
Anti-tobacco trains it's operatives well, and they are easily able to deal with any mention of rights, by turning your 'rights' into the 'right to poison children'. You cannot argue with that unless you address the fundamental FACT, that this law is based on the biggest fraud that's ever been put upon a population, and now the world.
Anti-tobacco is now a 'faith' a belief system that a few decades ago was thought of as the domain of 'cranks',religious prohibitionists or just 'extremist nutters'. These people now have frghtening financial power, and are now translating this into political 'control' agendas around the world, for finacial gain, and ,for some of them, the joyful realization of their fanatical aims.
The whole movement is based on lies so extreme that they are the ONLY things that should be attacked in any confrontation.The only way to bring them down is to expose them for what they are. Criminals. If you think that may be harsh Mr.Helmer then you have a lot to learn about the anti-smoking crusaders.
I appreciate and support your fight against them, but study the real facts of the fraud, and stock up on that ammunition, or they will eat you up. Good luck.
Gentlemen, gentlemen, order please. If I can bring some analysis to the replies and sum up the current situation. It seems instinctive from socialists and "liberals" to interfere in our daily lives and with most of the burning ideology coming from Europe, we are on a hiding to nothing. The devil has found work for idle hands. At the risk of sounding obsequious, I think Forest have been effective, God knows what would happen if ASH had a free rein. However, my natural tendencies of compromise and diplomacy have worn thread bare now and I am taking a more militant stance. For example I expect to be in Hereford for Tony Blows' final day in court on February 13th and Paul Hooper of ASH will be getting the benefit of my wisdom whether he likes it or not. I am planning to meet my MP in the next 3-4 weeks and will be making my robust comments to the ban and the Labour Party. I think Roger has made a valuable contribution to the debate, however I wish he had consulted with some of us, more frankly informed people before his presentation.
Believe you me, I am in an ugly mood now.
Simon
How could you ever forgive me for being so beastly to Roger?
So, to make up for my brazen impudence…I’ve framed two questions that I hope Roger will ask at the next ASH ‘People’s Jury’.
Here they are.
I warn you though these two are real bomb-blasts! In fact you could be arrested for cruelty to members of a deeply honourable organization. So, beware.
OK Roger – pull your pants up tight and listen in. Are you ready for this?
1. There are thousands of people dying each year from SHS (second hand smoke), what is ASH doing about it!
2. A mere whiff of SHS, can suddenly induce a heart attack within thirty seconds – when will ASH lobby the government about this?
Now then Roger…what about those monster questions – eh?
I can’t wait to hear what their response is…bet you can’t either!
I had more questions Roger…but they were just too tough!
I think it's up to Roger to speak for what concerns him and from what he knows. I never think it's a good idea to bash people for doing something, when they could just as easily have done nothing at all.
At the same time, I understand the anger and frustration at a lost opportunity that I'm sure many of those most angry here would have relished. Perhaps this whole thing could have been pre-empted if questions had been invited from concerned posters, and Roger could have selected those he felt comfortable arguing for. A possible lesson for next time? (If there is a next time).
On a related note, can anyone answer this. Is it true that ASH have refused to debate in public with anyone other than the tobacco companies? If true, can anyone elaborate on why that is?
On a practical note, despite going to the "Dr Foster" site (publised on the first post that announced the event) I really can't grasp the nature and purpose of the "trial by jury". Who and how many were on the jury (if there actually was one)? Why did ASH commission it? Did they want to gauge possible support for their future objectives or were attendees movers and shakers who they want to influence? Did ASH invite Mr Helmer specifically to play devil's advocate? Is reporting of the event to be made public or is it for ASH's internal use?
I'm assuming that all members of ash walk everywhere they go so that their exhaust fumes aren't killing people as they drive around, noses in the air feeling smug and inhaling deeply of everyone elses exhaust fumes...