Stand FAST: Fight Anti-Smoker Tyranny

A few months back, I told readers of this blog that I’d begin making regular posts and adding a few new features to make the blog a little more interesting. I had intended to do just that. But, I got sidetracked.

At the time, I was doing a little research into the antics of the anti-smoker fanatics and their efforts to ban smoking across Canada. What I found was a well organized, well financed worldwide attempt to eradicate smoking by eliminating smokers.

It’s not a conspiracy. It’s an open, well orchestrated war on smokers which relies on misinformation, corrupt science and deceptive statistics to deceive the uninformed, smokers and non-smokers alike; a propaganda campaign worthy of the Der Furher himself.

In a process they openly refer to as de-normalization, anti-smoker organizations irresponsibly promote fear, hatred and intolerance and advocate discrimination against smokers. Many recent initiatives go far beyond any credible claims of protecting anyone’s “right” to clean air or the alleged hazards of secondhand smoke.

Included in these: efforts designed to deny a smoker’s right to hold a job; proposals to deny smokers a right to rental accommodation; initiatives to declare smoking parents child abusers and deny smokers the right to adopt or foster children; efforts to deny smokers appropriate medical treatment; smoking bans that deny business owners of private property rights

These are morally reprehensible acts, not to be tolerated by any “free” society.

Defenders of a free society should strive for compromise achieved through reasoned debate, not the imposition of the “will” of the majority; especially when that will has been suborned by tainted science, dishonest statistics and outright lies. True democracy defends the rights of the minority; it doesn’t deny or trash them “in the public good”.

And, the non-smokers in the house shouldn’t get too complacent or convince themselves that it’s not their fight. It’s no longer about smoking or secondhand smoke. Those who condone, and in a growing number of cases support, the initiatives of tobacco prohibitionists; who condone or support discrimination against smokers in housing, employment and medical treatment should be very cautious.

Anti-smoker, anti-fat, anti-abortion, anti-alcohol; all these obsessions challenge personal liberty and individual rights. Those who support the repression of free choice may wish to re-evaluate their position when it’s their turn to be pilloried for making a particular lifestyle choice.

If anti-smoker fanatics are allowed to continue and intensify their attacks on smokers, there is no telling who the next target will be.

I’ve hated bullies since I was a kid. And, the anti-smoker Nazis are just another incarnation of the bullies we all knew growing up.

I can’t fight back the way I could as a younger man. But, I have a reasonable command of the English language and a computer. Maybe, in some small way, I can help get the truth out.

Like the Nazis in the thirties, no one took the anti-smoker brigade seriously. No one believed their propaganda efforts could fool an entire civilized society. But, they have and, at this point, it will be an uphill battle. I may not make much of a difference, but then, it won’t be the first time I’ve found myself pissing into the wind.

Unfortunately, considerable research and reading is required, which means I won’t be able to continue the fun part of blogging, at least for the time being.

But, for anybody out there still interested in reading what I have to say, drop by my new blog: Stand FAST

I’m still here, just busy elsewhere

For anyone who thinks I haven’t made a post in the last month because I was too drunk to find the damn keyboard, you’re wrong. I’ve been busy doing a little research into the anti-smoker brigade and smoking bans around the world.

Not a shred of evidence that secondhand smoke is likely to kill anyone. They’re running a con game to justify bans, punitive taxation and other discriminatory practices directed at smokers. And, some polls place the number of people who believe the lies and distortions of science as high as 80%. And, worse, even smokers are beginning to believe their bullshit and bafflegab.

Check out my other blog to find the truth about the alleged hazards of secondhand smoke. Stand FAST

I’ll return to making regular posts to this blog, probably twice a week, in about a week. I’ll also be updating the music files within the next week or so. For now, here’s a little bit of lunacy from merry old England.

Bureaucracy run amok

Eighty-two year old Jean Raine and a friend were driven to the mall in Kendal, Cumbria (England boys and girls, England) by a neighbour. Miss Raine, who suffers from Parkinson’s disease, has a valid disabled parking permit. She had her neighbour park in a handicapped parking spot and placed her permit in the front windshield.

Feeling unwell, she told her friends to go about their shopping and stayed in the car to rest, and, promptly fell asleep.

A parking warden (Parking Control Officer) noted Miss Raine asleep in the car. He also noted that her permit was upside down. So, he issued a ticket with a fine of 35 pound sterling ($ 68.00 Canadian). He didn’t bother to wake Miss Raine, simply placing the parking ticket on the windshield.

Miss Raine and the driver of the car appealed the ticket.

A council spokesman said: “If anyone feels they have reason to challenge a penalty charge notice (ticket) then they can appeal to the council in the first instance, followed by an appeal to an independent tribunal if they choose.

"Guidance notes (instructions) issued with the badge and parking disc (permit) clearly state that it should be clearly and correctly displayed at all times."

So, we have a valid parking permit placed in full view with an elderly woman asleep in the vehicle. And, we have an overzealous parking control officer so anxious to make his quota that he’s willing to give the old girl an $68.00 ticket because the damn permit was upside down. And, even worse, we have a pompous bureaucrat defending the injustice and refusing to deposit the ticket where it belonged – in the nearest garbage can.

What are they smoking?

I’ve written a few posts over the last month about the extremes to which some parents and school officials will go to “protect the children”. Often such incidents provide a laugh or two, like the school in Britain that covered the faces of children with smiley faces in their on-line newsletter. The objective, apparently, was to protect the children from on-line predators. The easier way, of course, was not to publish the photos in the first place.

But an article published in the Washington Post earlier this month contained no element of humour at all. Post reporter Brigid Schulte described an incident in which a male student slapped a female classmate on the butt during recess. He was promptly hauled before the principal who, just as promptly, called the police.

The title on the incident report prepared by school officials said, “Sexual Touching Against Student, Offensive”. Uh-huh. Guilty of sexual harassment. And the incident report will stay on his record for his remaining school days and maybe beyond.

The Potomac View Elementary School student was a six year old first grader. The school officials were, allegedly, adults.

Although it’s unlikely the six year old was capable of forming any criminal intent, he has been branded as a sex offender by these highly trained child care professionals. Calling 911, school officials claimed later, was simply the result of a “misunderstanding”. Uh-huh.

Schulte, in the same article, reports on a case that occurred in Texas a year or so ago. Apparently, a school official in Texas accused a 4-year-old of sexual harassment after the boy was observed pressing his face into the breasts of a teacher's aide when he hugged her before boarding the school bus.

One must assume the teacher’s aide was bending down to hug him back if his face was pressing into her breasts; four year olds aren’t usually all that tall. Fortunately, the school official who observed the incident took positive action and had the little pervert suspended.

Isolated incidents? Overly zealous school officials? Not according to Schulte. She believes the real culprit is the ever increasing number of “zero tolerance” policies cropping up across the country.

She notes in her article that, last year in the state of Maryland alone, 16 kindergartners and three preschoolers were suspended for sexual harassment. Nineteen kids aged six and under branded as sexual offenders before they graduated from first grade.

School officials (what ever in hell they are) and teachers are supposed to be trained to deal with children. Even without training, the application of a little old-fashioned common sense should have resolved any difficulties that might have arisen.

Zero tolerance policies in schools are one thing, but suspending four year olds for sexual harassment is lunacy.

Anti-sealer activists jailed

You’ll read a lot of angry rhetoric about the boarding and seizure of the anti-sealer ship, Farley Mowat, just off the coast of Cape Breton Island. The ship was boarded, her crew arrested and the ship impounded by an elite RCMP marine team last Saturday.

Loyola Hearn, Canada’s Minister of Fisheries, said he had to take action before someone was killed on the ice. Throughout the weekend, Hearn said he was taking steps to ensure the safety of seal hunters; claiming, at one point on March 30, the Mowat came within nine metres of a group of sealers, shattering floes as sealers scrambled to get back to their small boat.

Did the Minister have cause for concern? Damn straight he did!

Harvesting seals requires climbing from the relative safety of the vessel onto the treacherous ice floes in the Gulf. A ship the size of the Mowat getting within nine metres of a sealer is a very dangerous situation. But then, maybe the activist scum aboard the Mowat got a chuckle out of seeing men scrambling for their lives across the ice.

The activist vessel had been forced from the harbour in St. Pierre/Miquelon, French islands just off the South coast of Newfoundland, following comments made about four sealers who drowned a week or so earlier.

"We don't accept those kinds of people in St-Pierre," fisherman Carl Beaupertuis told the CBC. "We cut the rope and let the boat go. If they want to come back I tell you this time there's going to be some violence, 'cause we won't let him back in the harbour."

Four crewmen from the Acadian II, all from the Magdalen Islands in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, drowned in the frigid waters off the Cape Breton coast when the sealer went down. Three of the bodies were recovered; the fourth was never found.

Paul Watson, of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, which operates the Mowat said, “The deaths of four Magdalen Islands sealers were a tragedy, but the slaughter of young seals was a greater tragedy. These men are sadistic baby killers."

While Watson’s crude and extremely offensive remarks may play well in the upper middle class suburbs up the line, maritimers, who know better, take a somewhat different view.

Fisheries Minister Hearn heaped justifiable scorn on Watson's group. "These are a bunch of money-sucking manipulators," he told a news conference in Ottawa. "Their sole aim is to try to suck as much money as possible out of the pockets of people who really don't know what's going on."

Letters in local newspapers echoed the Minister’s sentiments.

“Isn't it convenient that Watson badmouths this country from the comforts of NYC, while his minions do his dirty work on the front lines? The gall of this man, to imply that the boarding of this vessel is "an act of war" against the Netherlands, a country that was liberated by Canadian soldiers! If Watson's followers are convicted, what better place for them to be sentenced to community service than the Magdalen Islands, whose dead were besmirched by this **** attention-seeker.

“Why did we board these miscreants when they would have provided good target practice for our frigates and subs? If it's war, then let's do it right.”

The Minister was right. Canadians can hold their heads high. Watson’s insensitive remarks deserved a response. The Mowat’s crew ignoring Canadian law and endangering Canadian lives deserved a response.

The Minister, and the Mounties, responded admirably.

Mounties seize the Farley Mowat (Part 1)

Stunned and angry, crew member David Jonas of the Farley Mowat complained that some of his shipmates were placed under arrest, forced to lie down on the deck, escorted to the stern of the ship and kept under armed guard. “Canada,” he said, “did not have a right to board us and bring us to Sydney." Oh-no.

On March 30, some seal hunters called for assistance from the coast guard, complaining that the 54-metre Farley Mowat was getting too close to them on the ice floes north of Cape Breton. The captain of the Cathy Erlene, the sealing vessel which called for help, said, “The arrests were long overdue.”

Nova Scotia sealer, Shane Briand, said at one point the Mowat broke the ice up beneath a sealer as he stood on a floe. Briand said the much larger Mowat harassed his ship and crew until a coast guard icebreaker arrived and put itself between the two ships.

The Canadian Fisheries Department later said its 98-metre icebreaker Des Groseilliers responded to the scene and was "grazed" twice by the Farley Mowat. The crew aboard the Mowat admitted they were told not to approach the ice-covered area where seals were being harvested, but the crew refused to comply with the order.

Officers of the Farley Mowat, a 54-metre ship operated by the U.S.-based Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, were charged with steering the Mowat to within 900 metres of the hunt. That's an offence under Canadian fisheries regulations unless you have an observer’s permit. The Farley Mowat didn’t. The charges were announced by federal Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn last week, but he gave no indication how the summons would be served.

The Sea Shepherd Society, under various names, has long used militant tactics to interfere with the seal hunt. The group claims to have sunk six whaling ships since 1979, in their efforts to “protect” whales and other marine wildlife, saying no one was hurt in those actions.

On Saturday, the RCMPs' elite marine team was called in by the Minister. The armed Mounties launched their speedy Zodiacs from two coast guard vessels, boarded the Mowat and arrested her 17 man crew. The ship was seized and taken to Sydney Harbour.

Crew member Merilee Nyland, one of six who spent the night in a Sydney jail cell after refusing to submit to immigration checks, said the arrest was traumatic. "I came around a corner and all of a sudden there were three men with guns in my face," said the 23-year-old from the US.”

Er, excuse me Miss Hyland, but “all of a sudden . . .?” What did they do, jump out from behind a bush? Were the two Coast Guard vessels from which the Mounties staged their attack operating under a “cloak of invisibility?”

Those “men with guns” were police officers. They enforce Canadian law. You and your colleagues entered Canadians waters, approached a restricted area and endangered the lives of Canadians engaged in a lawful activity. Then your Captain ignored a lawful command from the Canadian Coast Guard, forcing a collision with the Des Groseilliers and further endangering Canadian lives.

Meanwhile, from the relative comfort of a New York hotel room, the president of the society, environmental crusader Paul Watson, described the seizure and arrests as an "act of war." because the vessel is registered in the Netherlands.

There’s more to the story. We’ll look at some of it in my next post.

Not for sissies

Sometimes, I wonder just how I managed to survive my childhood with only the slight amount of brain damage I’ve actually suffered. And, sometimes, I wonder just how I managed to survive my childhood at all.

Back in the fifties, I actually rode my bike every day without a helmet, knee pads or elbow pads. And, as I recall, my Dad once drove my mother, me and my little brother, all the way over Gillis Mountain to spend a week camping at Gillis Lake, without seatbelts. OK, so maybe my brother Tom should have been in a car seat, but nobody can say for sure that’s when he sustained the head injury. Besides, they hadn’t been invented yet.

When I, or my four siblings, got underfoot, my parents would often say things like: “Why don’t you kids go out and play.” I’m sure that many of the same hazards that exist today existed back in the fifties. Maybe parents back then just weren’t sophisticated enough to appreciate the hazards to which they were exposing their children with that simple admonition.

Back then, no one would dare wear a helmet when playing hockey for fear of being laughed off the bog that served as our local hockey/skating rink. Besides, going through the ice was a far greater hazard than getting hit in the head with a puck. (The town council solved that problem; they just filled in the bog with slag from the coal mine, forcing the kids to play street hockey.)

What got me to thinking about this stuff was a brief piece in a blog called Nobody’s Business , written by Rogier van Bakel. It’s a good site and I drop by there on a fairly regular basis.

In his post, Rogier had written, “Kids. They're precious, aren't they? So why not protect the delicate little flowers with an adorable Thudguard helmet, to be worn around the clock?” Following the link provided, I wound up on the homepage of an outfit called Gizmodo: The Gadget Weblog

According to Gizmodo, “Babies and toddlers aren’t best known for their ability to stop and go on command. This results in them spending much of their time using their head as the brake for most of their unexpected manoeuvres.”

“Meet the Thudguard, a helmet specifically designed to make sure your little Einstein doesn’t damage their brain along the way to learning how to walk and run. It’s targeted at kids aged from 7 months to 2 years old. And yes, if you send your child to crèche (a day nursery) wearing one of these, it will be singled out and bullied.” Uh-huh.

I suspect the folks at Gizmodo were being just a little sarcastic. And, some of the comments to their post were just as sarcastic. Here’s a small sample.

• I thought it was some form of a Mickey Mouse cult, look at those ears, lol
• I need one of these for everyday living. You never know when you might get kicked in the head by a ninja, so this could come in handy. Give me 12 of them for family and friends. Christmas shopping finished early this year
• Falling down and hitting your head is a very valuable experience. It teaches you things like: get out of the way, don't hang on that, don't push people, and just because you can reach, doesn't mean you should pull it off the shelf.
• Looks like my drinking helmet. I am not allowed to leave the house on weekends without it.

I need comment no further. Besides, when the McGinty government gets word of this, they will likely pass a law mandating these safety hats for use in every home and playground in Ontario. The Thudguard “infant safety hat” is available (seriously) for only 20 pounds sterling (roughly $40.00 Canadian). Visit their site here: ThudGuard

Protecting the kids

Parents, more often than not, tend to be somewhat protective of their offspring. It’s instinctive.

While surfing the net a few days back, I came across an article which brought back an incident that happened while I was living on the east coast back in 1991-92. My 15 year old daughter was recounting the experience of her afternoon swimming at Georges River. After listening to her describe the “fun” of jumping off the Georges River Bridge into the water below, I began a lecture on the perils of such activity.

I had barely begun when the younger of my two brothers interrupted with, “Uh, just how old were you again, the first time you went off that bridge?” Sometimes uncles should be seen and not heard.

“That’s not the point,” I countered.

But, of course, that was the point. Sometimes parents, out of concern for the well being of their children, begin to see menace in every shadow; boogiemen lurking behind every bush. It’s instinctive.

And, some “public service” organizations and government bodies have latched onto this trait of parental concern and are using it to further their own ends. “We’ve got to put an end to this or that threat . . . for the good of the children.”

And parents, because protection of their offspring is instinctive, stand ready to shelter their young from dangers both real and imagined. The trick, I suspect, is in how we determine what constitutes a real threat and those alleged threats which are merely the result of an overactive imagination or personal bias.

The article which had me thinking about these mundane matters was a 2006 news brief from the Associated Press and concerned two volunteer cheerleading coaches who were dismissed because one of them pulled up her shirt and “exposed” about three inches of her belly to a group of seven and eight year olds in their charge at a youth football game.

Christine Smith, an assistant coach with the Frederick Youth Sports Association, and head coach Debbie Wheaton, had drawn an image of a smiley face on Smith's abdomen to cheer up their young female students. "Every time the girls weren't smiling, I showed them the smiley face. They thought it was hilarious," Smith said.

However, the president of the association, Kathy Carey, said three people complained about the incident and she agreed with them. "Pulling your shirt up is inappropriate and it's not what our organization is about. The community can understand we need to protect the kids and the integrity of the organization," Carey said.

"The community can understand we need to protect the kids . . . " Uh-huh.

But, from what were the children being protected? Was a little good-natured fun with their coaches really so injurious?

"I didn't feel it was inappropriate," Smith told the Frederick News-Post. "Those girls at that age level are put in extracurricular activities to have fun. The intention was meant to be funny; it was blown completely out of proportion."

Maybe we need to define the true nature of a threat before we go overboard protecting our children from it.

Crispy Frickin' Chicken

Help! Somebody wake me up and get me out of this nightmare. I’m seriously starting to believe that surfing the net can adversely affect a person’s (mental) health. Consider some of these news item lifted from across the web.

Mar 5, 2008 Bordeaux, France (Reuters)
Cemetery full, mayor tells locals not to die

The headline says it all, folks.

According to the article from Reuters, “The mayor of a village in southwest France has threatened residents with severe punishment if they die, because there is no room left in the overcrowded cemetery to bury them.”

An ordinance posted in the council offices warns the 260 residents of the village of Sarpourenx that "all persons not having a plot in the cemetery and wishing to be buried in Sarpourenx are forbidden from dying in the parish," adding, “Offenders will be severely punished."

The 70 year old Mayor, Gerard Lalanne, claims he was forced to take drastic action, saying, "It may be a laughing matter for some, but not for me." Planning on going somewhere soon, Mr. Mayor?

I wonder just what the ordinance means when they say, “Offenders will be severely punished." What additional punishment can you inflict on a dead man?

---

Mar 26, 2008 The Evening Standard (London)
Protecting the children

Hall Primary School in Clacton, Essex, decided to protect the children from pedophiles by covering their faces with “smiley faces” in the schools on-line newsletter.

Frank Furedi, a sociology professor at the University of Kent, said the school was being alarmist. "Every time a school takes silly measures, it says we see the world through the eyes of a pedophile. They think that any innocent picture of school children will somehow be subverted and manipulated.” Uh-huh.

The school has, apparently, taken down the controversial pictures from its website. A message on the website says: "Our newsletter section is undergoing maintenance. Back soon!" Uh-huh.

---

Feb 28, 2008 AP Altoona, PA
Crispy Frickin' Chicken

The Associated Press article advises that, “A convenience store chain's billboard, advertising its fried chicken sandwich, is ruffling the feathers of some residents.” The sandwich, known as the “Crispy Frickin’ Chicken” sandwich had apparently upset some residents with its fowl language.

(By-law) enforcement officer Fran Calarco said "There was a lady who left an angry voice mail, and a man called and said he had small children and didn't think they should be exposed to that type of language. I told him I completely understood and agreed."

The convenience stores are owned by Sheetz Inc., based in Altoona and operating stores in Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia and West Virginia. They took down the billboards a week later when the ad campaign was scheduled to end.

Maybe I should post an “Adult Content” warning on this site to keep the frickin’ assholes out?

The Moral Statistician

I was browsing through an old copy of “Popular Mechanics” I had stashed on the top shelf of my bedroom closet the other day. When I say old, I mean old; the pages yellowed and brittle. The date was November 1919 which was ironically, the year of my father’s birth and one of the reasons I have kept the magazine around so long.

The magazine contains a full page ad touting the advantages of quitting smoking and offering a smoking cessation program for less than $2.00 (plus postage). Apparently, the tobacco prohibitionists have been around for a long time.

Later, while surfing the net, I came across the following essay by Samuel Clemens (better known as Mark Twain) on a smoker’s choice web site. Mr. Clemens didn’t care much for the anti-smoker fanatics in his day either.

Both the graphics and the essay are in the public domain, so I reprint them here for your consideration and amusement.

The Moral Statistician
By Samuel Clemens
Originally published in Sketches, Old and New, 1893

I don't want any of your statistics; I took your whole batch and lit my pipe with it.

I hate your kind of people. You are always ciphering out how much a man's health is injured, and how much his intellect is impaired, and how many pitiful dollars and cents he wastes in the course of ninety-two years' indulgence in the fatal practice of smoking; and in the equally fatal practice of drinking coffee; and in playing billiards occasionally; and in taking a glass of wine at dinner, etc. etc. And you are always figuring out how many women have been burned to death because of the dangerous fashion of wearing expansive hoops, etc. etc. You never see more than one side of the question.

You are blind to the fact that most old men in America smoke and drink coffee, although, according to your theory, they ought to have died young; and that hearty old Englishmen drink wine and survive it, and portly old Dutchmen both drink and smoke freely, and yet grow older and fatter all the time. And you never try to find out how much solid comfort, relaxation, and enjoyment a man derives from smoking in the course of a lifetime (which is worth ten times the money he would save by letting it alone), nor the appalling aggregate of happiness lost in a lifetime by your kind of people from not smoking. Of course you can save money by denying yourself all those little vicious enjoyments for fifty years; but then what can you do with it? What use can you put it to? Money can't save your infinitesimal soul. All the use that money can be put to is to purchase comfort and enjoyment in this life; therefore, as you are an enemy to comfort and enjoyment where is the use of accumulating cash?

It won't do for you to say that you can use it to better purpose in furnishing a good table, and in charities, and in supporting tract societies, because you know yourself that you people who have no petty vices are never known to give away a cent, and that you stint yourselves so in the matter of food that you are always feeble and hungry. And you never dare to laugh in the daytime for fear some poor wretch, seeing you in a good humor, will try to borrow a dollar of you; and in church you are always down on your knees, with your ears buried in the cushion, when the contribution-box comes around; and you never give the revenue officers a full statement of your income.

Now you know all these things yourself, don't you? Very well, then, what is the use of your stringing out your miserable lives to a lean and withered old age? What is the use of your saving money that is so utterly worthless to you? In a word, why don't you go off somewhere and die, and not be always trying to seduce people into becoming as ornery and unlovable as you are yourselves, by your villainous "moral statistics"?

Now, I don't approve of dissipation, and I don't indulge in it either; but I haven't a particle of confidence in a man who has no redeeming petty vices. And so I don't want to hear from you any more. I think you are the very same man who read me a long lecture last week about the degrading vice of smoking cigars, and then came back, in my absence, with your reprehensible fire-proof gloves on, and carried off my beautiful parlor stove.

Kids fight & so do grown-ups

Fighting back

Fighting comes quite naturally to kids, although fighting well may take a little instruction.

My “old man” did a little boxing while serving with the North Nova Scotia Highlanders. He was normally an easy going type of guy, who could usually see the humour in situations that really weren’t all that funny.

Like the night I went with a couple of friends to a dance at the Odd Fellows Hall. Before heading out, we’d pooled our financial resources to invest in a bottle of port wine, 999 or some such, from the local bootleggers. Inexperienced drinkers, we consumed the contents of our acqiusition down by the towm dump. Quickly. I was still drunk when I got home.

With Dad sitting beside the front door, the mission was to get past him without staggering or giving him any indication that I’d been drinking. I was smiling as I walked into the kitchen, having said hello to my parents; pleased that I had made my way through the living room without giving them any hint that I was slightly inebriated.

That’s when I ran into the rinky-dink little refridgerator that had replaced our rinky-dink little ice box, and went ass over tea-kettle. I expected a somewhat more violent reaction than the suppressed giggles coming from the front room.

I should note that my father was not normally a violent person. Ma was the one who usually got upset when one or another of us came home with a black eye or a split lip. Dad was usually unperturbed by such things, as long as you were still mobile. That is to say, if you walked through the door under your own steam rather than having someone carry you in on a stretcher, he figured everything was alright.

He didn’t seem to care who had won or lost. He wanted to know if you were hurt (bloody noses, black eyes and bruises didn’t count), if you had stood your ground and whether or not you got a few licks in. Unfortunately, standing your ground often led to black eyes, bloody noses and a considerable amount of bruising.

My old man saw no percentage in talking to a bully’s parents and maybe getting into an altercation of his own. So he chose to handle matters more indirectly.

Like the time I came home with a black eye, a dented nose and no bruised knuckles. The old man came home from his job at the Naval Base, a few days later, with two pairs of boxing gloves. Not those compact little eight ounce jobs used by Marciano and Joe Louis. No. No. These were the big 16 ounce “training” models. Extra padding so you didn’t get hurt. Yeah. Like you could use a mattress to cushion the fall from a ten storey building.

But I learned to box a little, although it was a matter of survival just surviving the boxing lessons.

You’ve got to learn to defend yourself. Thump. Keep your hands up and your elbows tight to the chest. Thump. Da, I’m getting a headache. Thump. It’s for your own good. Thump. Thump. Hey Da, how about we skip the boxing lesson to-day and I go take on the grade seven class from the catholic school. Thump.

All kinds of bullies

The school yard isn’t the only place you’ll find bullies. Bullying is a fact of life; and you’ll have to be prepared to fight back. One of the new bullies on the block is the non-smokers rights groups and the tobacco prohibitionists. These clowns have declared open season on smokers.

They are not content, nor will they ever be, with simple public smoking bans. Recently, they have advocated firing smokers from their jobs, denying smokers rental accomodation, declaring smoking parents “child abusers”, and a host of other initiatives designed to force smokers to butt out and kiss their collective ass.

Learning to box won’t help you.

The way to fight back is to arm yourself with information. Challenge the bullies to prove their outrageous claims about secondhand smoke with honest scientific evidence. Don’t ignore the discrimination and intolerance directed at smokers. You might be the next target on the bullies list.

Check out my new blog: Fight Anti Smoker Tyranny

I came back

I’m still here
I suspect no one out there in cyber space has noticed, but I’ve been away for a while. Last month I broke a promise to myself and accepted a position on the Board of Directors at the co-op in which I live.

The last bunch apparently thought they were running a Sunday morning social club instead of a 21 million dollar corporation with a 2.5 million dollar annual budget. Anyway, it will be my responsibility, as Chairman of the Board, to help stop the financial bleeding and put things back on track. Hopefully, after a flurry of activity over the past month, I’ll be able to get back to writing my web log.

It’s my choice
I’m not much of a joiner, on the web or off, but I recently joined an on-line club called MyChoice. It points out that smoking, no matter how despicable you may find the habit, is a matter of choice. The anti-smoker crowd is whipping the public into a frenzy which is reaching near hysterical proportions. People are now permitted to discriminate against smokers in a way that would not be tolerated against any other minority. And, to do it, they are using bullshit, bafflegab and outright lies.

Enough already. It’s time to fight back

WHO study withheld
This article is based on a story printed in the London Telegraph, and other newspapers including the Ottawa Citizen, back in 1998. So why are anti-smoking groups and politicians permitted to claim that a link exists between lung cancer and secondhand smoke? The evidence points in the other direction. And why does the national press, in both Canada and the US, allow the deception to continue? What, or who, are they afraid of?

The World Health Organization apparently tried to withhold from publication a study which showed that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could even have a protective effect. The British press announced that the largest statistical study on Environmental Tobacco Smoke and lung cancer ever conducted did not generate the expected results. It was buried by WHO until a request for the study was made by the British press under freedom of information legislation.

The WHO was forced to make the report public, although some of their personnel at the time were denying the very existence of the study. The WHO study was published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute in l998.

The WHO and its supporters continue to insist that statistically insignificant relative risk factors were significant.

A complaint was filed with the U.K. Press Complaints Commission against the Telegraph (London), who broke the story, alleging it had misrepresented the results of the WHO study. The Telegraph stuck by its story and by October l998 the Commission found for the Telegraph and rejected the complaint vindicating the newspaper.

For a synopsis of this disturbing episode in the history of the WHO, and more information on the study, visit davehitt.com

It's about the oil . . dammit!

According to a January 3, 2008 article in the on-line edition of the Economist, oil is becoming more and more expensive, but not because the world is running out of oil reserves.

I suspect that most Canadians (or Americans) will not be surprised by this earth shattering little piece of news. Anyone who drives an automobile has likely noticed the impact on their wallet, or at least the contents thereof, every time they tell some gas jockey to “fill’er up”. I don’t believe the rumours that some people are taking out second mortgages on their homes or forcing their wives to stand on street corners just to keep their SUVs on the road. But, the cost of gasoline is definitely going up.

A layman like myself might be misled into believing it was the old economic theory of supply and demand that caused the price of oil to jump to $100.00 per barrel; a five-fold increase since 2002. As the economies of India and China grow and become more heavily industrialized, they place a greater demand on available supplies of the black gold. Not so says the Economist. Increased demand is only a small contributing factor.

Another underlying factor, apparently, is that back in the 1980’s and 1990’s, when the price of oil was very low, the big oil firms stopped investment in research, development and exploration, laying off people and shutting down operations to increase short term profit. And, now that they need increased production capacity they simply don’t have the staff and equipment they need to get the job done.

The Economist notes that “political tension” in the Middle East also creates uncertainty in the market causing oil prices to rise dramatically. Maybe they could talk their buddy, George Bush, into not bombing the shit out of everybody over there. Is it merely a coincidence that the skyrocketing price of oil coincided with Bush’s “pre-emptive strike” against Iraq? That the cost continues to rise while he rattles the saber at Iran?

No, the biggest impediment to stable oil prices, says the Economist, is political. Governments in almost all oil-rich countries, from Ecuador to Kazakhstan, “often deter private investment or exclude it altogether.” According to the Economist, “The world's oil supply would increase markedly if Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell had freer access to (the oil supplies of) Russia, Venezuela and Iran.” Of course, that would also deplete the worlds oil reserves that much quicker.

Note that they didn’t mention Iraq, with the second largest conventional oil reserves in the world after Saudi Arabia. Or even Saudi Arabia. Is it that both these countries are now firmly under control of the United States? But, they did mention Iran, the next target of America’s military juggernaut, if George Bush has his way; and the location of the third largest reserves of oil in the world.

But, if the Yanks want to secure the world’s oil reserves for American industry, why should we care? Canada is self-sufficient.

We should care because the article in the Economist also points out that the Alberta tar sands hold almost as much oil as Saudi Arabia. And, the tar sands are not included in the known reserves of conventional oil because of the high cost of extracting it. Otherwise, Canada would be ranked number two in the world instead of Iraq.

But, at $100.00 a barrel, the cost of extracting crude from the tar sands is no longer seen as an economic deterrence to exploitation of that resource. That’s a scary thought. Really. If the Yanks decide to invade Alberta, where will all the Newfies and Cape Bretoners find work?

Maybe Canadians should not leave the longest undefended border in the world undefended; at least as long as Mr. Bush is in charge.

Living in a fantasy world

In an earlier post, I noted that a year or so back, a painting by Jackson Pollack sold for 142.7 million dollars in a private sale. I thought the price was outrageous and that anybody who was willing to pay that price was likely some kind of lunatic.

Just for the hell of it, I thought it might be fun to compare the price paid for that painting with a few items of real value; just in case some long lost uncle should buy the biscuit and leave me $140 million or so.

Let’s see. I could buy a new house, like the little place in Toronto pictured above. It’s situated on over an acre of land overlooking the Rosedale Golf Club and features eight bedrooms, 11 baths, a pool, two entryways, and a formal ballroom. And, it’s available for a mere $19.5 million Canadian.

And I guess I should spend a few bucks on a couple of automobiles. I think I’ll pick up a Lamborghini and a Ferrari so that I’ve got something for family and friends to use when they come for an extended visit. And, since neither the wife nor I drive, I should have a Rolls so that the chauffer can get the wife back and forth to No Frills and the Dollar Store. I can get all three for roughly a million bucks.

And, I’ll have to fill the fridge with beer. Samuel Adams/Boston Beer Company’s Utopias is said to be the world’s strongest and most expensive beer and it goes for a mere $100 per bottle. And, since they only produced 8,000 bottles, I could probably get a discount for buying in bulk. The beer is brewed with a blend of high-quality hops and sold in an ornate copper-plated brew kettle. The world’s most expensive beer is non-carbonated and should be served at room temperature.

But, then again, the very thought of warm, non-carbonated beer is a little revolting. But you’ve got to have something to serve the guys when they come over to watch the football game on Sundays. So, I think I’ll just stick with my “Buy Canadian” policy when it comes to the beer. The chauffer can take my new Rolls down to the beer store once a week to keep the fridge full. Unless, of course, my brother Tom comes to visit; in which case, the chauffer will be making once a day visits to the beer store.

And a boat. I’ve always liked the water; I come from the east coast, after all. Maybe a little cabin cruiser will be just the ticket; something that can make the trip from Lake Ontario, down the Seaway and through the Gulf to Cape Breton. There’s a nice little 54 foot rig available for only $4.5 million.

Damn it! I’ve still got over $122 million dollars to spend. This is tougher than I thought. Maybe if the Donald isn’t too busy firing people, he can give me some advice on how to spend that kind of cash.

Now, what the hell did I do with his number?

Diary Of A Snow Shoveller

December 8: 6:00 PM. It started to snow. The first snow of the season and the wife and I took our cocktails and sat for hours by the window watching the huge soft flakes drift down from heaven. It looked like a Grandma Moses Print. So romantic we felt like newlyweds again. I love snow!

December 9: We woke to a beautiful blanket of crystal white snow covering every inch of the landscape. What a fantastic sight! Could there be a more lovely place in the whole world? Moving here was the best idea I've ever had. Shoveled for the first time in years; felt like a boy again. I did both our driveway and the sidewalks. This afternoon the snowplow came along and covered up the sidewalks and closed in the driveway, so I got to shovel again. What a perfect life.

December 12: The sun has melted all our lovely snow. What a disappointment. My neighbour tells me not to worry; we'll definitely have a white Christmas. No snow on Christmas would be awful! Bob says we'll have so much snow by the end of winter, that I'll never want to see snow again. I don't think that's possible. Bob is such a nice man, I'm glad he's our neighbour.

December 14: Snow, lovely snow; eight inches fell last night. The temperature dropped to -20. The cold makes everything sparkle so. The wind took my breath away, but I warmed up by shoveling the driveway and sidewalks. This is the life! The snowplow came back this afternoon and buried everything again. I didn't realize I would have to do quite this much shoveling, but I'll certainly get back in shape this way. I wish I wouldn't huff and puff so.

December 15: 20 inches forecast. Sold my van and bought a 4x4 Blazer. Bought snow tires for the wife's car and two extra shovels. Stocked the freezer. The wife wants a wood stove in case the electricity goes out. I think that's silly. We aren't in Alaska, after all.

December 16: Ice storm this morning. Fell on my ass on the ice in the driveway putting down salt. Hurt like hell. The wife laughed for an hour, which I think was very cruel.

December 17: Still way below freezing. Roads are too icy to go anywhere. Electricity was off for seven hours. I had to pile the blankets on to stay warm. There’s nothing to do but stare at the wife and try not to irritate her. Guess I should've bought a wood stove, but won't admit it to her. God I hate it when she's right. I can't believe I'm freezing to death in my own living room.

December 20: Electricity's back on, but had another 14" of the damn stuff last night. More shoveling. Took all day. Bloody snowplow came by twice. Tried to find a neighbour kid to shovel, but they said they're too busy playing hockey. I think they're lying. Called the only hardware store around to see about buying a snow blower, and they're out. Might have another shipment in March. I think they're lying. Bob says I have to shovel or the city will have it done and bill me. I think he's lying.

December 22: Bob was right about a white Christmas, because 13 more inches of the white crap fell today, and it's so cold it probably won't melt 'til August. Took me 45 minutes to get all dressed up to go out to shovel, and then I had to take a piss. By the time I got undressed, did my thing and dressed again, I was too tired to shovel! Tried to hire Bob (who has a plow on his truck) for the rest of the winter, but he says he's too busy. I think the bastard’s lying.

December 23: Only two inches of snow today, and it warmed up to "0". The wife wanted me to decorate the front of the house this morning. What, is she nuts!!! Why didn't she tell me to do that a month ago? She says she did, but I think she's lying.

December 24: 6". Snow packed so hard by snowplow, I broke the shovel. Thought I was having a heart attack. If I ever catch the stupid f**ker who drives that snowplow, I'll drag him through the snow and beat him to death with my broken shovel. I know he hides around the corner and waits for me to finish shoveling and then he comes down the street at 100 miles an hour and throws snow all over everywhere I've just been! Tonight the wife wanted me to sing Christmas carols with her and open our presents, but I was too busy watching for the f**king snowplow.

December 25: Merry f**cking Christmas. 20 more inches of the f**king slop tonight. Snowed in. The idea of shoveling makes my blood boil. God, I hate the snow! Then the snowplow driver came by asking for a donation and I hit him over the head with my shovel. The wife says I have a bad attitude. I think she's a f**king idiot. If I have to watch “It's a Wonderful Life” one more time, I'm going to stuff her into the microwave.

December 26: Still snowed in. Why the hell did I ever move here? It was all HER idea. She's really getting on my nerves.

December 27: Temperature dropped to -30, and the pipes froze. Plumber came after 14 hours of waiting for him. He only charged me $1,400 to replace all my pipes.

December 28: Warmed up to above -50. Still snowed in. The f**king wife is driving me crazy!!!!!

December 29: 10 more inches. Bob says I have to shovel the roof or it could cave in. That's the silliest thing I ever heard. How f**king dumb does he think I am?

December 30: Roof caved in. I beat up the snow plow driver. Now, he’s suing me for a million dollars. Not only for the beating I gave him, but also for trying to shove the broken snow shovel up his ass. The wife went home to her mother. Nine inches of snow predicted.

December 31: I set fire to what's left of the house. No more shoveling.

January 8: Feel so good. I just love those little white pills they keep giving me. But why am I tied to the f**king bed?

I lifted this bit from the web. For more Christmas humour, visit:
Joe-ks.com

The crazy calendar caper

For those of you who don’t know, I live in a housing co-op. It’s a little different than living in a “normal” apartment building, because you get to know a lot more of your neighbours through members meetings, social functions, etc. I’ve been living in here for the past fourteen years.

This year, the Board of Directors hired a consultant to review the operations of the co-op. His regular fee was $125.00 an hour, but the co-op got him for the bargain basement price of $75.00 an hour. People really should be more careful when buying discounted goods and/or services.

Now, this particular consultant had a thing about something called “risk management”. I know a little about risk management from my years with Goodyear Canada. Yes, there was a time in my life when I was gainfully employed. Risk management, in very simple terms, is assessing the risk associated with the actions you take or decisions you make.

For example, when you come to an icy patch on the sidewalk, you walk around it or run the risk of falling on your ass. Likewise, you don’t punch your neighbour in the nose because his dog dirtied your lawn or you run the risk of being dragged off to the lock-up by the local constabulary.

Our cleaner had a couple of calendars hanging in the garbage room which housed the garbage compactor. For several years, our coordinator (manager), a woman of roughly my age of sixty-something, had give the cleaner a calendar around Christmas. These were not nudies, but calendars similar to the ones illustrated at the top of this post. They were no more revealing than the photos of Sunshine Girls published regularly in the Toronto Sun.

But, the Board of Directors and their $75.00 an hour consultant deemed them a “risk” to the co-op and demanded that they be removed as part of their new “risk management” strategy. I’m not entirely sure of the nature of the risk: it might have been any of several bonafide risks to the assets of the co-op.

For instance, some old guy like myself might have wandered into the garbage room, spotted the pictures of scantily-clad young women and died on the spot from the excitement. Or, some kid could have wandered into the garbage room and tripped over a calendar while he was walking across the wall.

At the time the Board of Directors issued their “Cease and Desist” ultimatum, the members simply chuckled.

But, a few days ago, the cleaner received an early Christmas gift from a member with a sense of humour. He gave the cleaner a Sunshine Girl calendar, leaving the cleaner in a quandary. He can’t hang the calendar in the garbage room because the Board will simply demand that he remove it or, maybe fire him. He’s afraid to hang it in his garage lest his wife cut him . . er . . . cease to perform her wifely duties.

The Board and their overpaid consultant have got him so nervous he’s even afraid his own daughter, a law student, might sue him for sexism if he hangs it in his workshop.

The Board might have a suggestion as to what he could do with it, but I’m sure there’s a law against inserting a calendar in any body cavity under any circumstances. The cleaner has some ideas of his own as to what he might do with the calendar. But, as I’ve already noted, it’s probably against the law, even if the chosen cavity belongs to someone on the Board of Directors.

And, for this exercise in risk management, they paid the charlatan consultant $75.00 an hour. Go figure!

The blasphemous teddy bear

It seems every blogger on the net has had a few words to say about Gillian Gibbons and the blasphemous teddy bear. So why not me?

British elementary school teacher Gillian Gibbons was arrested in Sudan, on November 25, 2007, accused of insulting Islam's Prophet by letting her class of 7-year-olds name a teddy bear Mohammed. Ms. Gibbons teaches at Unity High School, one of a number of exclusive British-run schools in the Sudanese capital of Khartoum.

What was the nature of her crime? She asked her class of six and seven year olds to dress up and name a teddy bear, and keep a diary of his outings. Her young class was due to study the behavior and habitat of bears. The bear was to serve as a kind of “case study”. And it would have passed without incident, except for the name the children chose for their bear: Muhammad.

Following a quick trial, Gibbons was sentenced to 15 days in prison for insulting Islam. She could have faced a maximum of 40 lashes and/or a year in prison under Sudan's legal code, which is based on British law but modified to include Sharia punishments. Sharia (Sari-ah) is the body of Islamic religious law and deals with many aspects of day-to-day life, including politics, business, family, sexuality, hygiene, and social issues.

Demonstrators wielding ceremonial swords took to the streets in Sudan's desert capital to vent their anger at Gibbons. A crowd of about 1,000 young men streamed out of mosques to gather outside Khartoum's presidential palace, later marching to the British Embassy and burning newspapers bearing images of the 54 year old teacher. The crowd was demanding that the teacher be executed following her conviction on charges of blasphemy.

It is believed that the treatment of Gibbons was Sudan's way of censuring the British government for making a solution to the slaughter in Darfur a cornerstone of its foreign policy. Religion has often been used in Muslim countries for political ends.

CNN reported on Monday that Gibbons had been pardoned by the president of Sudan and released into the custody of the British Consulate. Saner heads prevail.

But, Muslims must be aware that such incidents can do much to harm the image of Islam. Angry young men marching through the streets, brandishing swords and demanding the death of this woman, perpetuate the image of Islam as a religion of fanatics. However, I suspect the Prophet would not be happy with the failure of these men to control their anger or to show forgiveness for a transgression committed with neither knowledge nor intent.

But, while Ms. Gibbons may have been unaware of the taboo against naming inanimate objects or animals Mohammed, the same cannot be said of the US company, which, within days of the incident in Sudan, had posted an ad on the web, selling stuffed teddy bears wearing a t-shirt proclaiming, “My name is Muhammed.”

The ad encourages people to show their support against hatred and intolerance by “buying and displaying the one Muhammed selling worldwide, Teddy Muhammed”. It’s an interesting concept; thumb your nose at the fanatics by intentionally insulting all Muslims, including those moderates who publicly denounced the events in the Sudan.

In small, greyed out print, there is the claim that, “This one Teddy Bear is capturing attention to important facts about how children and adults can’t even have a stuffed toy without fear of harm. Your purchase supports us in our fight to end intolerance.”

The episode didn’t happen because a child had a stuffed animal. It happened because the stuffed bear was given the name of Islam’s Prophet. The incident was blown out of all reasonable proportions by a group of fanatics intent on making a political statement. The matter was settled because men of reason stood their ground against the religious zealots and took appropriate action to right the wrong. Gillian Gibbons, by now, is likely home safe in England, which is as it should be.

But, those people selling Teddy Muhammed seem intent on fanning the flames of a fire that had been all but extinguished. And, they are doing so in pursuit of the almighty dollar. The “fight against hatred and intolerance” is just another sales pitch.

New word for the day - blas·phe·my (blăs'fə-mē) n

• A contemptuous or profane act, utterance, or writing concerning God or a sacred entity.
• The act of claiming for oneself the attributes and rights of God.
• An irreverent or impious act, attitude, or utterance in regard to something considered inviolable or sacrosanct.

Updates, odds and ends

Update – Poetry.com
Over the past couple of weeks, I have received different email from four different organizations, all telling me how wonderful my poetry is, and offering membership and all manner of plaques, pins, medallions, coffee mugs, etc, etc, etc. The last was from an outfit called Noble House with offices in London, Paris and New York. The problem, of course, is that Yahoo tells me the emails all originated from the same source in Maryland. Uh-huh.

Dear Matt,
Recently, I was discussing the appointment of this year's Poet Fellows with various editors, colleagues, and publishers. The Poet Fellowship is an elite group of international writers who share a common passion for writing. In recent years, the number of Poet Fellows has grown with members from all over the world. It started in London and then quickly spread to New York, Paris, and Venice . . . and now its members literally circle the globe. It is with great enthusiasm that I am officially inviting you to join this legendary group as a Poet Fellow.

In addition to the honor and prestige afforded by being a member of this organization, they are offering a Poet Fellow Pin and a limited edition medallion at a cost of only $74.95.

Apparently, this scam is one of the most persistent on the net. The reason they can get away with this stuff is that they maintain a façade of legitimacy by actually publishing books (anthologies) from time to time and even holding annual “conventions” with an attendance of up to 4,000 would be poets. But, the biggest reason they get away with it is that people, once they come to realize they’ve been scammed, are too embarrassed to admit it.

There are literally dozens of sites out there reporting on scams or suspicious activity. You can utilize these sites to gather information on any activity you may be thinking about getting involved in. I’ve found RipOffReports(.Com) particularly helpful.
Related Posts: I won! I won! Oh shit.

---

Free software links
In some of my posts, I’ve pointed out the benefits of freeware and free open source software. Freeware is fully functional software that is available without charge and with no strings attached. Open source software is essentially the same thing, except that there is an additional bonus in that you can also download and modify the source code if you wish.

In order to be considered free software, users must have the following four freedoms:

• The freedom to run the program, for any purpose.
• The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
• The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor.
• The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

For more information about free software, visit the Free Software Foundation.

I’ve added a new links category, “Five Star Freeware”. I’ll include the links to any freeware apps I review on this site, so that readers can navigate to these websites without difficulty.

---

The Music Player
You might have noticed that I’ve changed the MP3 player to something a little more elaborate. The player is provided free (for a little advertising and a link) by MyFlashFetish. I’ll be trying to update the play list over the next couple of weeks.

It’s annoying as hell to have the player start playback from the beginning every time you move from one post to another, but that’s the nature of the beast. One way to avoid this nuisance is to click on the month of the posts, rather that the post itself. By clicking on November, for example, all posts published in November will appear on a single page, allowing you to scroll from post to post and allowing the MP3 player to play continually.

Open source software

In the early days of computers, idealism was very much alive and well on the software development side of the equation. Software developers shared their knowledge, including computer code, with one another freely. By doing so they could tap into the collective knowledge of fellow professionals to solve any problems they might encounter. By allowing others to modify their code, they could develop software that was stable, user friendly and readily available to the end user at little or no charge.

These idealistic individuals actually believed that the benefits of personal computing should be available to everyone, not just the well off and wealthy.

And then came Microsoft.

To give Bill Gates and his buddy Steve their due, Microsoft has done a pretty good job of making computers user friendly and opening up the wonderful world of personal computing to the average man (or woman) on the street. The Windows environment is easy to work in and relatively stable for the average user. But . . .

I’ve been using Windows XP for several years. And, over those years, I’ve had to activate (or re-activate) the system four times. It’s not a lengthy process and some people may consider it a minor inconvenience. To me, however, it’s a major infringement on my privacy rights. And, I also object to the “guilty until proven innocent” attitude of Microsoft’s activation process.

Judges routinely order criminals to wear electronic monitoring devices, after a hearing or trial has confirmed their guilt. Microsoft demands that they be permitted to conduct electronic surveillance of my computer system, without the benefit of a hearing. After paying to use their damned operating system, they want me to prove that I’m innocent of piracy any time they decide it’s convenient for them. It would be unacceptable to most people if they were required to contact Ford or GM to get permission to re-start their automobile after changing the oil or installing new spark plugs. Why is it acceptable behaviour from Microsoft?

And Windows Vista is even more restrictive; you are simply not allowed to move the operating system to new hardware. As well, the Microsoft activation process is being applied to most, if not all, of the Microsoft product line.

Then, there’s the cost.

Fortunately, there are alternatives to Microsoft Windows. Most incarnations of Linux (Red Hat, Ubuntu, etc.) have a GUI (graphical user interface), an application task bar and an office document processing environment, thanks to open source software. And, since it’s free, it can be used on any system, with any hardware, on as many computers as you might choose to install it.

You can get (or make) “live” CDs that allow you to transport the operating system to any computer via a bootable disc. You choose as many applications as you need, all at little or no cost.

Microsoft is not happy with open source software.

While claiming it doesn’t want to litigate the issue, Microsoft is demanding that it be paid royalties on patents they “own”. I understand the concept of copyright, but I’m not exactly sure how anyone can patent software anymore than they can patent mathematics. You can copyright a song, but you can’t patent the idea of a song and then demand royalties from anyone who writes a song. But that’s what Microsoft is claiming; that they’re entitled to patent the idea behind a computer application.

The European Union has turned thumbs down on software patents. And rightly so. The United States has been allowing people to register patents, but some recent court cases suggest that any legal action for patent infringement will meet with limited success.

Microsoft wants nothing less than complete control over the computer operating system market. Their only competition is from Mac and Gnu/Linux.

It’s clear that Microsoft is afraid of the concept of open source software, otherwise they wouldn’t be turning their considerable legal and financial might against those who produce it.

Open source software is still a small market to be sure, but it’s here to stay; and, it’s gaining ground in the end user market; losing it’s “for geeks only” connotation. And, as the many manifestations of Linux become easier to use for the average Joe, it will continue to erode Microsoft’s current advantage in the market place.

And, you simply can’t beat the price. That’s making Microsoft very nervous.

Record companies & royalties

Found an interesting bit of trivia on the web just a few days ago while researching another article for this web log. On a web site called “How it works”, a brief article in the side bar claims that country super star, Merle Haggard, had never received a recording royalty cheque throughout his long career in country music, until he recently recorded an album for the indie punk-rock label Epitaph.

I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking, “The guy is a country music legend. He’s had thirty-seven top ten country singles, with twenty-three of them number one hits. There’s no way any artist can be that successful and never cash a royalty cheque.” But, you’re wrong. To fully understand how such a thing might happen, you’d have to read several lengthy articles on how recording contracts actually work. I’ll try and give the short lecture in this post.

Let’s say you’re an up and coming young country singer who has just signed his/her first recording contract with a major record label. You sign the standard industry contract stating your cut will be 10% of total album sales. The record company gives you an advance of $100,000.00 or so to tide you over until your album is released, and you’re happily drifting along on cloud nine. The dollar signs are dancing in your head, rendering the brain next to useless.

So let’s see if we can’t work this out together. If you sell a million records at $15.00 apiece, that’s 15 million dollars; and your take would be a cool 1.5 million, right? Well, no, not exactly. You royalties will be based on the wholesale price, not the retail price. But that’s fair. If your record wholesales for nine dollars, you still make $900,000.00. Unless your album is sold through a record or CD club, or some discount retail outlet like Costco who usually pay a lower wholesale price. But, it’s still a pretty good deal, right?

Well, maybe. But there are a few expenses to be deducted from your royalties. Many record companies charge an up front “packaging fee” of up to 25% of the artist’s royalties. Then, there’s the cost of recording the songs. These costs alone can easily run up to several hundreds of thousands of dollars. You might do your recording in a studio owned by the record company, but you won’t get the studio time for free. They’ll charge you for it, usually with a considerable mark up.

There’s production costs, costs for graphic design, royalties to the writers, advertising and promotion of the album and don’t forget your advance. Then there’s the free CDs distributed for promotional purposes and to radio stations. And, don’t forget the hold back for CDs and tapes that might be returned later by retailers.

And, few records are released these days without at least one video for television; no one wants to look at a picture of Toby Keith for three and a half minutes while listening to one of his songs on CMT. So add on a few more hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Once it’s all added up, you’ll be down on your knees praying for a gold or platinum album. Otherwise you could end up owing the record company. And consider this, the music industry publishes tens of thousands of new albums every year, and only a small percentage of them are going to go gold (500,000 records sold) or platinum (1,000,000 records sold). You have about a 1-in-20 chance of producing an album that's a major hit.

Singer Courtney Love had this to say in an open letter to recording artists: “How do record companies get away with a 95% failure rate that would be totally unacceptable in any other business? Record companies keep almost all the profits. Recording artists get paid a tiny fraction of the money earned by their music. That allows record executives to be incredibly sloppy in running their companies and still create enormous amounts of cash for the corporations that own them.”

“The royalty rates granted in every recording contract are very low to start with and then companies charge back every conceivable cost to an artist's royalty account. Artists pay for recording costs, video production costs, tour support, radio promotion, sales and marketing costs, packaging costs and any other cost the record company can subtract from their royalties. Record companies also reduce royalties by "forgetting" to report sales figures, miscalculating royalties and by preventing artists from auditing record company books.”

And this item, from her blog: Courtney Love wants to follow the example of rock band Radiohead, who has allowed fans to download their new album "In Rainbows" and pay whatever they wanted. She too will release her music, for free, online.

Go ahead. Ask me why I don’t feel at all guilty about visiting “Torrent Portal” or “Pirate Bay” from time to time.

Water, water, everywhere . . .

Right now, in my refrigerator, there are several bottles of bottled water. And under a desk in my bedroom, there is an unopened case of the same bottled water. It is the last of three cases of water bought by my wife who drinks a lot of bottled water. When my wife and youngest daughter were lugging the stuff into the apartment, I raised my eyebrows in a questioning manner. “It was on sale!” was the chorus.

Also, in the kitchen of my apartment, there is a contraption called a “sink”. In the sink there are taps which you turn to make water run into the sink. The tap marked with a “C” gives you clear, cold; government tested water, certified fit for human consumption. And, it’s free.

Now, cold running water, delivered directly to your house or apartment, has been around for many years. Even back in the fifties, living on Bog Row down in Cape Breton, we had cold running water. Of course, if you ventured out into the countryside to visit Aunt Daisy, things got a little more complicated. There you had to prime the pump, and then pump the pump handle to get the water running before you could get a cool, refreshing drink . . . of free water.

Now, don’t anyone get the wrong impression here. I don’t begrudge a case or two of bottled water to anyone, especially my wife of nigh on to forty years. But . . .

Let’s look at some facts.

Nestlé Waters Canada has applied to extend its permit to pump 3.6 million litres of water a day in Aberfoyle and 1.1 million litres a day in Hillsburg for the next five years. That application drew about 6,000 letters of objection into the office of Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment.

According to Council of Canadians national chairperson Maude Barlow, “local residents need to be aware that a water crisis happening around the world can also happen in Guelph. Droughts are not just happening in Third World countries but in northern China, the Middle East, Australia and parts of the United States. It's a myth (in Canada) that we have so much water that we can afford to take it away, sell it and it'll never run out."

That, in and of itself, should be enough to make proponents of bottled water sit up and take notice. But, there’s another concern being overlooked by the environmentalists which is all too obvious to dumb old country boys like myself. If Nestle is drawing water from the same source as the local tap water, just why in hell are people paying for their stuff.

Now, consider this little news item from Reuters (South Africa). “Manufacturers of bottled water have hit back at accusations that they may be ripping-off consumers by selling tap water. Nestlé South Africa says its Pure Life product is obtained from an internationally approved source (unidentified) that is tested every six months. It has refuted allegations that Nestlé uses tap water and markets it as spring water.”

And, Coke has also worked to block public knowledge of its water source. Just a short time ago, Consumers International gave a Bad Product award to Dasani (water bottled by Coke), stating the honor was due to "pushing marketing into the realms of the ridiculous" by packaging water that came from the same source as tap water.

But, there are others guilty of “pushing marketing into the realms of the ridiculous”.

Claridges in London, one of the best known hotels in the world boasts three restaurants. It is now offering a "water menu" featuring more than 30 worldwide varieties of bottled water; iceberg water from Newfoundland, OGO water from the Netherlands which contains 35 times more oxygen than usual, water from New Zealand's finest volcanic springs, Tasmanian Rain, etc, etc. The cost? Anywhere from seven to thirty dollars a bottle.

And consider this item from Reuters (London), which claims, “Restaurants are pushing customers into buying expensive bottled water instead of offering them tap water for free, the government's consumer watchdog said on Friday. A five-star hotel in London charges 50 pounds (roughly 75 dollars) a litre and even chain restaurants charge 3.80 pounds (five dollars) for bottled mineral water.”

The article goes on to claim that a recent survey found that nine out of every 10 restaurants (in London) were pushing consumers to buy bottled water and failed to offer them free tap water.

Maker of horror films, David Cronenberg, once said, “The secret to a good horror film is to take ordinary events and extend them to their ultimate conclusion.” How about this for a possible horror scenario?

Coke and Pepsi buy the Great Lakes. Manufacturing concerns are forced to pay such high prices for their water that they move out of the country leaving millions unemployed. The public is forced to pay through the nose for Dasani and Aquafina. There is rioting in the streets of Toronto and hordes of thirsty, unemployed easterners are prepared to invade Alberta and BC to wrest control of their water supply.

Yeah, I know. It’ll never happen. By the time we get around to it, the Yanks will have already invaded Alberta and BC and there’ll be no water left.