IS VIOLENCE AGAINST SMOKERS BEING CONDONED BY ANTI-SMOKING ORGANIZATIONS?

These are hard times surrounding the smoking issue and they seem to be getting more irrational. The anti-smoking organizations, groups and the new by-word name "coalitions" abound like rats at the garbage dump.

If the questionable tactics of these groups are not enough to make the public aware of the "corrupted science" they use to prove their claims, then the manner of how they go about fulfilling their agenda on eradicating tobacco use in this country should make the American public appalled.

Recently I noticed on a number of anti-smoking internet sites a book review, "GASP, A Novel of Revenge" by Frank Freudberg. The author of this book describes how a smoker, who has himself contracted lung cancer, goes about getting revenge on the tobacco companies by poisoning smokers' cigarettes and killing them.

The book is odious in its sardonic message of revenge. They continue, not just to review the book itself, but sensationalize on the fact that the author (short of actually killing smokers themselves), tells about how he was able to go about and do what his main character was able to do without any problem.

I for one have always been critical of the anti-smoking industry, all its organizations and coalitions, for the distortion of facts and figures that they spew forth with a regularity of Old Faithful. The critique of this book goes beyond rational distortions of sensibilities. The review seems to be nothing more than sensationalism of the anti-smoking position and agenda at its basest.

Freudberg, obviously cashing in on the tobacco frenzy, writes on a theme many novelists do with violence, killing and hate to sell a book. What is unforgiving of the anti-smoking organizations is the by-words that are used to describe the book and its main character. One group goes so far as to call the main character a "protagonist." To glorify any character that kills for revenge is questionable enough. To glorify such a character because he tries to bring down the tobacco companies, over the lives of smokers is immoral. What is the lives of a few smokers anyway? They might die from their habit, so let's speed it up--all for a good cause!

We must not forget that there are many "loose screws" out there and may be spurred on by such ideas of a "moral crusade." An incident happened, quite recently, when an anti-abortionist shot and killed an abortion doctor in Florida over his moral crusade, in what he felt was saving lives by stopping the killing of unborn fetuses. Only this was not fiction. Spurred on by radical anti-abortion rhetoric, he took action -- violent and lethal. There were a few radical anti-abortion groups that even praised his deadly action to stop abortions. If the idea of possibly getting lung cancer or other illnesses, after many decades of smoking will not make people quit, then push forward this quick elimination of smokers by poisoning to frighten them into quitting.

Have we forgotten the Tylenol scare not too long ago that changed our lives and shocked us out of complacency, or is that exactly what the anti-smokers who put this kind of thing online exactly intend to do?

We, the public, hold morally and hopefully legally responsible, anti-smoking organizations if a harmful action by any individual does take place because of them. They themselves hold smokers responsible for nonsmoking lives being threatened by secondhand smoke, then they themselves should be held accountable for any smoker's life that is taken away prematurely because of their irresponsibility.