Blogging at the Big Dog

I learned a very important journalistic lesson from the feedback to my column posted below and originally published in the July 18 print edition of The Interior News.
Headlines can be a double-edged sword.
In retrospect, I think the headline “Smokers living under a Nazi regime” detracted from the intent and impact of the piece.
It would certainly be an exaggeration to actually equate the status of smokers in Canada today with the status of the Jews under Hitler all those years ago or with anyone who has ever lived under a truly oppressive regime.
Nevertheless, I stand by the content of the column and the feedback of anti-smokers proves I am right.
Let’s start with the language. One guy wrote about an inconsiderate smoker who decided to light up near “people.” Not near “other people,” not near “people who don’t smoke,” near “people” implying smokers are not.
Another complainant asked: “You think smokers should have more rights?” From the context of the letter you could virtually hear the derision in the question.
No concern for their fellow man, but outright hatred for these modern social pariahs, scapegoats for all the ills of society.
They complain about going to shopping centres and being subjected to second-hand smoke by the non-persons smoking near the entrances. They decry sitting on a restaurant patio as evil-doers puff away nearby.
Meanwhile, hundreds cars are driving by and tractor-trailers belching deisel fumes idle by the delivery bays. They’re not worried about that, they’re worried about accidentally catching a whiff of some tobacco smoke.
Other writers objected to my use of the word hysteria. Let’s have a look at that. Hysteria is a reaction totally out of proportion with reality.
That is the nature of scape-goating, you don’t need a rational argument or any kind of proof, you merely need a majority of people who believe it and willing to blame some arbitrary minority group.
The fact of the matter is, most smokers are more than considerate about where they smoke and legislation has already made the places where someone can light up so restrictive I’m wondering where exactly are all these innocent non-smokers being subjected to supposedly life-threatening quantities of tobacco smoke. Aside from a very occasional, accidental and cursory exposure, I challenge the anti-smoking zealots to demonstrate exactly how smokers are actually infringing on their comfort and health.
Even if they’re willing to grant second-hand smoke exposure isn’t that much of an issue, they say merely seeing people smoke is a bad example for kids. Whose responsibility is that? Once again, we are trying to legislate something that should be in the hands of parents and educators. It’s not up to me to set a good example for someone else’s kids. I think driving recreational motor vehicles is a bad example for kids, but I don’t go around advocating outlawing ATVs and dirt bikes.
I think obese, sedentary people in revealing clothing are a bad example for kids, but that’s their business.
Finally, let’s talk about health. After the anti-smoking hysterics have vilified the smoker with all the irrational arguments, they go for the jugular citing the cost to society. Billions of dollars devoted to smoking-related diseases choking the health care system, wasting their tax money, they say.
First, smokers are taxpayers, too, but not only that, the B.C. government will rake in $745 million this year in tobacco taxes alone on top of the income, sales and other taxes smokers are paying.
Even if it could be proved smokers are more of a drain on the health system, which it cannot, smokers are paying for it.
Many years ago, I took a smoking cessation course. The leader was a doctor and member of the group Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada. He told us about a royal commission that was engaged to prove smokers were a drain on the health system. It did not, so the study was buried.
Few people, smokers and non-smokers alike, would argue smoking is good for your health. We know that’s not true, but let us not forget, tobacco is a legal product. As such it is taxed to max. If the government and anti-smoking lobby were really serious about stamping out tobacco use, they would help smokers quit.
Why are drug addicts and alcoholics eligible for rehab, but smokers are not? Why are nicotine patches more expensive than smoking and why aren’t they covered under medicare?

Living in big cities all my life, I never much thought about where my meat came from.
I knew, of course, there were people out there growing and killing things to fill the coolers of my local Superstore, but I didn’t much care about the politics of farming.
Last week, I made my first farm gate purchase, a big juicy chicken and a dozen farm-fresh eggs. They were really good and I felt a little more connected to my food.
If I’m being honest, though, if it weren’t for the impending new regulations banning farm-based slaughter operations, I would likely go happily on my way being disconnected, exercising my choice to support Safeway for being conveniently located and packaging stuff in easy-to-use portions for me.
I don’t share the same philosophical attachment as many Valley residents do to locally-grown food.
What does pique my outrage, is the relentless attack on personal freedom and responsibility. Our humanity is being legislated into obscurity. Our liberty bought and sold by mega-corporations and special interest groups like a commodity of the modern age.
What is truly insidious about all of this is the powerful lobbies are able to sell their oppression to unwitting politicians and bureaucrats by capitalizing on the current health hysteria. Take the latest innovation of the anti-smoking zealots. The Town is considering making public places Tobacco-Free Zones. It won’t be a “law” or “regulation” says head zealot Karla Biagioni – although you can bet your life that won’t be long in coming.
It will be a suggestion and encourage the poor, besieged majority of non-smokers to further publicly ostracize and demonize their fellow man, who chooses, even if it may be a poor choice, to light up.
She cites statistics about the thousands of British Columbians, smokers and non-smokers alike, who supposedly die every year of “smoking-related diseases.”
I’m sure it has nothing to do with the millions of cars on B.C. roads or the factories, mills and power plants belching carcinogens into the atmosphere or sedentary lifestyles, fast food and industrial chemicals coursing through the water supply.
No, it’s the evil, inconsiderate smoker. It’s not enough to relegate them to outdoors and specially designed smoking rooms — which local bar owners spent tens of thousands of dollars on to accommodate non-smokers — they must be completely deprived of any possible avenue to enjoy their personal freedom and take responsibility for their own choices.
By extension, business owners must be deprived of their right to cater to any clientele they want.
I purposely juxtaposed a sympathetic group, small farmers, with a non-sympathetic group, smokers, to make a point. Try substituting the word Jew or Indian into the propaganda and see how fast it gets shut down.
It’s a slippery slope and nothing short of widespread public defiance is going to stop the infringement on our rights to live as we see fit.

A couple of days ago, I got a comment on this blog regarding my May 31 post, Ian Bush Inquest overdone but not over or done that took the side of Const. Paul Koester (see comments below).

This is interesting and good. Finally, someone willing to stand up and dispute all the outpouring of grief and disbelief surrounding this event.

Oh wait, I take that back. The writer of the comment did not stand up. It’s easy to post something anonymously, it’s something altogether to put your name to it.

I think I’ve covered this story in as balanced a way as possible considering the deafening silence that accompanied the RCMP’s side of this tragedy until Koester himself testified nearly 19 months after-the-fact.

When I have voiced an opinion, you’ll notice my name and even my picture goes along with it.

This blogger, who signed on as RK, made some interesting accusations against Ian Bush that, if true, would certainly shed new light on the situation, if not explain the very questionable manoever the officer allegedly pulled off to to kill him.

The author also made a very dangerous philosophical assertation: “How dare anybody question this police officer’s version of the incident,” RK wrote.

To me, that reads: How dare anybody question authority. It is that kind of attitude that leads to regimes like Nazi Germany.

It is our job in the fourth estate to question authority. I don’t know what happened in that room on Oct. 29, 2005, but I do know that nobody, including cops, want something like this to happen. Putting “them” above “us” is no way to run a justice system. I do know that not questioning something is complicity.

Shortly after I broke the story of who the officer involved was, Houston Today, Feb. 22, 2006, I was accosted on the streets of Houston by an irate woman. She gave me a tongue-lashing about our coverage I won’t soon forget. That is fine. Although I was quite taken aback, I was eager to have another viewpoint because, up until that point, we only had Bush family’s and friends’ reaction to the shooting.

“Who are you?” I asked.

“That’s not important,” she said.

Actually, it is more important than her opinion. Without a name behind it, it’s moot. Without context there is no perspective. Without relationship there can be no compassion.

The reason Linda Bush is so compelling is because she is Ian’s mom. The reason the RCMP are not is because Staff Sgt. John Ward and Cpl. Pierre Lemaitre are professional media hacks trained in obfuscation.

It must be very frustrating for supporters of Koester’s to feel so handcuffed, to be bound by duty or association to abdicate their Charter right to free speech, but that is their choice.

I respect any well-informed opinion, but I cannot and will not give any credence to words crafted in anonymity.

Please, people, have the courage to stand by your convictions, put your name forward or forever hold your piece.