Does Anyone Remember the Lessons of Black Americans?

Does anyone recall learning about the old days and of how people were put on the auction block and bid upon?

Part of the process of choosing a good slave was an examination of their body and teeth. A potential owner could touch and fondle any part of another person/slave.

Does anyone remember learning of how slaves weren't permitted to choose their occupation, their free time, or allowed to travel off the plantation without written permission of their master -- and even then, they were in danger?

Does anyone remember that slaves didn't often marry, but instead had several partners, and that they weren't allowed to stay home and raise their children, but had to leave them to the care of nature or someone that didn't love the child while the parent was at work for the master?

Does anyone remember that even after being granted so-called freedom many states and townships banned Black Americans from owning firearms?

Does anyone remember that it was forbidden to teach a slave to read or write, especially to write?

Does anyone remember that slaves were forbidden from gathering together in large groups to worship God?

Does anyone remember that in many parts of the country the slave population far outnumbered the non-slave population, yet they still submitted to being owned, rarely ever organizing effective revolts? It was nearly impossible for the slaves to organize and plan when they were banned from gathering together or having any free time or education.

Does anyone remember learning of Jim Crow and Separate But Equal laws? Does anyone remember how Black Americans were banned from certain businesses, universities, and neighborhoods for the "health" of the non-blacks?

Does anyone remember that the United States Constitution did not apply to Black Americans for many years, and that even after ratification of the 16th Amendment, the Constitutional rights of Black Americans were ignored?

Does anyone remember that the shoddy clothing, rations of poor quality food, and the paltry gifts given at Christmas were all provided by the "generosity" of the master?

Does anyone remember these lessons from our history books and can anyone make connections with our time? I guess, not, since these things aren't obvious. Even Black Americans can't see the connections, since they're not as black and white as they were in former days.

And does anyone recall how the slaves of America were set free? It wasn't they, but outside forces that fought and died. The help came from outside the slave community.

And then, does anyone remember how Black Americans won their rights as Americans? It took a long time, but they learned who they were and how to stand up for themselves and to defend their dignity and rights as humans.

And so, I wonder who will come in from outside to free the Americans? Who will fight and die for us? And how long will it take for us to learn to defend ourselves and move from superstition to educated and enlightened learning?

Americans are illiterate, uneducated and superstitious and believe in the Bogey Man. He's gonna get us. Boo!

We've wasted the lives of those lost during the American Civil War and we've wasted the lives of those who defended the rights of Black Americans in the following years. We've wasted their lives because now, we're all owned. At least, the slaves knew who their master was. We have no idea who has bought us or even that we've been sold.

image: The Problem We All Live With by Norman Rockwell. A painting and a title I find particularly revolting, racist.

TSA and Homeland Security Expose America's Biggest Threat

Why do Americans and others in the Western world feel so terrorized?

Earlier I watched a news clip in which travelers were asked their thoughts about the Naked-Body scanners and the Pat-Downs at the airports. Many people were very supportive of them, saying that if it saved their life from a terrorist it was worth it. Most people were very sincere and serious about their fears, really believing that the airplanes were dangerous and possibly full of terrorists, but never once mentioned fears of a plane crash, cancer caused by radiation, or of feeling insulted by a pat-down -- all of which are far more common and more likely to occur than terrorism.

It struck me as very interesting. It shows how much our fears are formed and caused by the media, rather than by logic.

It also shows how disgraced we are. We don't mind pointing fingers at others, other groups of people, singling them out and accusing them, blaming them, fearing them. We'd rather believe we are terrorized by a few people, than believe a machine causes cancer or that a plane could crash due to various factors. We love blaming people. We can't blame machines or planes crashing for feeling terrorized by our inability to control life and how it ends. We can't make naked body scanners or malfunctioning jet engines into scapegoats for our sins and fears -- but we can make people into scapegoats.

"I don't mind going through the body scanner or having a pat-down if it means keeping me safe from terrorists and saves my life."

And then, there are those who simply don't care. They don't care. They've never thought about it. It doesn't seem strange at all to remove their shoes and belongings, to pose in the scanner, or to be patted-down. It's only part of life, part of traveling, another process. They've become numb and hardened. These same people will strive to protect their family from unhealthy influences and foods, and will quickly accuse others of irresponsibility and sinfulness, but suddenly turn blind and dumb when they are accused of the same things.

And this may be why so many really aren't concerned about the body scanners and think that those who are must be paranoid. These people always laugh and say, "I don't have anything to hide. I'm innocent. Who cares." Most people really do believe they are innocent, or that their crimes are lesser than another's. They absolutely don't want to admit what the naked body scanner implies -- that they are guilty, that they are not innocent, that they are accused of a crime -- that they are a terrorist threat to the safety of others and to their friends, family, and country. It's too difficult to admit this.

We Americans will continue to feel terrorized and afraid of others until we admit we are guilty, imperfect, criminal, and stained. As long as those body scanners can only read the surface and those pat-downs only touch the surface, then we can also feel safe; for that scanner can't read our hearts and minds, and the pat-down can't grope our minds and find the weapons or evil intents we have hidden away. Go ahead, take my nail clippers, but don't you dare find the needles I use to prod my coworkers and family. Go, ahead, grope my groin, but don't reach into the cracks of my soul and pull out the hidden hate and excrement of my mind.

The real fear is not of foreign terrorists or men with dark skin. It is of ourselves. So, as long as it is easier for us to blame others and to point out those with superficial and skin-deep differences or obvious religious practices we will never have to look at that which lays beneath the skin and is not obvious. We will never have to look at ourselves.

We feel terrorized by our own self. This is why we feel terrorized and why we willingly submit to such things as the naked-body scanner. It takes a photo of our image, the false image we desire to project and to keep. It makes us feel as if we're doing something without actually doing anything. It allows us to continue lying to ourselves that we are not the terrorist and not a danger to our country or others.

A house divided against itself cannot stand. Abraham Lincoln made these words from the Bible famous and embedded them into the American mind.

America is united in believing that the way to defend against terrorism is to divide against itself. Rather than becoming stronger and steadfast we believe the best way to defend and protect ourselves is to accuse each other, ban each other, pat each other down and collect naked photos at the airports.

Somehow, it "protects" and keeps us "free" to avoid admitting our own sins and weaknesses while blaming others. Those damn tobacco smokers, those damn Muslims, those damn politicians, those damn Constitutionalists, those damn drunk drivers, those damn drug dealers, those damn bad parents, those damn this, those damn that. Keep pointing at others and wanting to get rid of them and we'll never ever have to point the finger at our own chest.

A house divided against itself cannot stand. Each of us is a house. How can we divide from our own self, disconnect our image from our soul? We are doing a good job of trying to divide ourselves. We don't want to admit how we have hurt ourselves and ignored our own basic freedoms in our individual lives. We have taken that New Age Christian teaching of "Dying To Self" and we have attempted to kill our self and negate it and tell it to stop nagging us. We have terrorized our own self.

In a strange way, Homeland Security and the TSA have tapped into the truth of America. We each stand accused of terrorism. We all have harmed America with our apathy, ignorance, hatred and fear, arrogance, and self-righteousness. There is no grace in America, only Law. And when there is only Law with no foundation of mercy supporting it, then there is no justice, and the U.S. Constitution dies.

The United States Constitution is a document firmly grounded on grace. That Bill of Rights is all about mercy and about refusing to divide against one's self or neighbors even when they are imperfect and stand accused. There is no such thing as free speech, freedom of the press, or freedom of religion without grace towards those we don't agree with or even think dangerous. But in America we no longer have grace. We believe attacking and accusing and banning the minority will save us and keep us alive.

And how odd that America was founded upon the rights of the minority rather than the majority, and yet we fear the minority. The power of the minority was well-known by our founders. They liked that minority. They were a minority that shaped the way the majority lived. But America wants to destroy that powerful minority. We think it smokes too much and will kill us all. It goes to the wrong churches or no church and will ruin our beliefs. It dresses strange and wants to blow up airplanes. It reads the wrong news. It eats the wrong food. Isn't it interesting how this minority holds so much power over our lives and minds? Our founders were right. The minority is important and strikes fear into us. It seems that all the majority can think about is the minority. Somehow, these minorities strike fear into us because they force us to be strong, merciful, graceful, educated, and to live in an imperfect world.

When we get rid of the minority we get rid of choice and the freedom required to make choices as a minority of one. America doesn't need the Bill of Rights anymore, because the minority is nearly illegal. If we all agree and do as we're told by the authorities, never questioning, never thinking for ourselves, then we no longer need the 1st Amendment or any other Amendment to protect us -- because none of us is a minority dissenter anymore, since those are illegal. There is absolutely no point in the Bill of Rights if we're all in the majority and agree on everything.

According to the 1st Amendment of the Constitution I have a right as a minority to express freedom of speech by buying tobacco, I have the freedom to express my religious beliefs by smoking tobacco, and the right to express these beliefs in printed format. But because I am a minority and don't have millions of dollars to pay off my state politicians and to fund "science" that supports my views (and the stock in my product), suddenly, the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to me; the minority it is designed to protect. Because I refuse to support my local state health department's sick sense of humor, which advocates through cartoons the killing of cigarette smokers, or their racist advertising which links tobacco users to those of middle eastern descent -- because I am a minority and love other minorities, even those I don't agree with; I am labelled a danger to society.

I am a danger. I am a minority. I am one little person with one little lit cigarette. My vote doesn't count, but my actions do. I am the part of the house that most of America is divided against. I am the one to fear most. A naked body scan and a pat-down will not detect me. A law, a ban, cannot change my mind or who I am. The Constitution can fade, but in my heart it is still written and cannot be erased. I am the United States Constitution. I am freedom and liberty and without me, without those like me there is no such nation as the United States of America. If you are not for me, then you are against me. If you are against me you are against the Constitution, against your own country, against your own house.

Yes, it's dangerous to travel these days. Terrorists are everywhere. Each person who submits unquestioningly to the naked body scan and/or pat-down has failed. They, we are the reason America's safety is threatened. We cannot defend even the smallest minority, our self. If we will not stand even for our self, then who will stand for us? No one. And so, the TSA is doing a very effective job of identifying exactly how dangerous it really is in this country. We are surrounded by a majority of people who will defend no one. It's incredibly dangerous, for one could be raped or mugged in an airport and not one person would come to our aid, nor apprehend the perpetrator of the crime. Those few people who defend themselves are the percentage of people left in this country who will also defend others. There aren't many left. A minority.

Why do Americans feel so terrorized? Because on a daily basis, we each live with the terrorist and cannot get away from them. They are everywhere we are because they are us. And the aptly named Department of Homeland Security along with the Transportation Security Administration are doing a most excellent and thorough job exposing exactly how dangerous America is and how many terrorists there are. Perhaps, we should be applauding them for showing us how disgraced and dangerous America has become. We're naked and can't see it, defiled and don't care.

American Travelers Uncovered At Their Own Expense

I'll be traveling soon and have been studying the TSA site in hopes of passing the security exams I will encounter along the way. And I wonder to myself, if it's really this dangerous to fly, then why isn't it banned altogether as so many other health risks are these days?

It's amazing how much fear our government is in when it comes to travelers. Every particle must be examined and X-rayed. And now, passengers must stand in a Stick 'Em Up pose and have naked photos taken. Why would someone willingly give their government which is supposed to protect them, not expose them, a naked photo of them self, but not dear Granny or their own child?

Granny would take better care of that naked body shot than anyone else and protect it from all other eyes because it embarrasses her to even have such a thing, and she's embarrassed for you. She'd probably tear it into a million pieces, then burn it to make sure no one ever saw it.

And most children would also be embarrassed to possess a nude photo of their parent, and would hide it from any friends that may see it. Any parent who gave their child a naked photo of themselves would be considered a pervert. Conversely, any parent that gave a stranger a photo of their child naked would be a pervert. Any parent so afraid of their own child that they forced them to strip down upon entering and leaving the house needs help. And any child old enough to stand up for them self should never allow this kind of abuse from a parent. If a child is this dangerous, then they should be confined behind barbed wire and constantly monitored by professional guards.

What if you were a woman and had been raped by a knife-wielding man and from that point on demanded that all men, including relatives, entering your house submit to a strip search to make sure they weren't carrying any weapons or other dangerous objects? People would pity this woman and think her paranoid and in need of psychological help in order to regain her confidence and ability to live in a world were most are harmless and only a few dangerous. Wouldn't it also help such a woman to own a gun and learn self-defense techniques? America is this woman and has been attacked, but she hasn't been given the tools and confidence to face the world again.

Why would we trust the government and an invisible viewer with an image of our naked body but not a close friend or relative? It seems that a relative or close friend would be a better guardian and more respectful of this image than a person or government that has no personal love or interest in us. Not all of us are Playboy Play Mates or gigolos and there's a reason for that.

We live in a society that is image-obsessed, thinking that image is everything, and tells us everything about a person. Yet, increasingly, we are afraid of human touch and contact. We are paranoid of physical touch, which is not a cold image.

I've observed this fear of human contact around my little town. I've seen girls snap at men for touching them in the smallest way or by accident when passing by. I've seen guys stand like statues, their arms crossed over their chests in large crowds, glaring at anyone who dares tap them on the shoulder.

I've overheard girls talking about "the circle," an invisible area that others should know better than to enter. Evidently, there is an unspoken rule these days that says "thou shalt not cross within a few inches of any other person at any time." These girls were agreeing with each other that it was very rude of others to get too near, even though they were in a crowd. And this wasn't even about being touched or bumped up against, this was about getting too near although never having made physical contact. Yet, these same girls will post their image and every detail of their lives online and dress attractively. If one really doesn't want to be touched or have anyone get near to them they should refrain from bathing several days before going into public, step in a fresh dog pile, dump an ashtray over their head, and spill a glass of whiskey and coke on their clothes, and write "leper" across their forehead.

If you wanted to keep me at a distance you'd put on too much perfume. It works every time. My eyes roll up into my head, I feel as if a plastic bag is being wrapped around my head, and I wish there was a tobacco smoker in the vicinity to hide the smell (incidentally, where I live the indoor tobacco ban supposedly includes perfume, incense, candles and other strong smells in the air. I doubt that anything other than the tobacco ban is enforced).

Anyway, I'm not so much offended by the radiation factor of the full-body scan in airports, as by our society's willingness to give a government such power and a nude photo, which they never paid for. I don't know about you, but giving away naked photos of myself wasn't what I paid for when I bought my airline ticket. It offends me and breaks my heart when I see people standing in a pose reminiscent of a crucifixion.

Once, a long time ago, a man was hung on a cross, judged between two criminals. His crime was that he was a king, a person with dignity and who desired all people be royalty and their nakedness covered. He was naked and the entire world saw him and became obsessed with the image of him naked and bleeding, prone, unable to cover himself from our gaping and disrespectful eyes. And now, we are all like him, naked, being judged with the terrorists although we are royalty.

Anyone who thinks a naked body scanner protects them from death is a hypocrite. That America is this weak, this afraid is sad. A naked body scanner cannot save us or protect us from evil. Uncovering people has never saved anyone from crime. Whenever people are uncovered, laid bare, and treated as criminals by their master or government it has been a time of great suffering and hatred.

Can a naked body scanner read a heart? If it could I'd put the things at the entrance of every state capitol building and in Washington, D.C., for this is where the most danger to American safety resides. These few men and women have images that appear clean and safe, but are their hearts free of terrorist threats, do they use their pens as weapons of defense against evil or to enact evil upon women and children by stealing freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and fought for by a few belligerent and brave souls during the Revolutionary War?

I'm not Jesus and I won't sacrifice my life for a government that is afraid of me. If I sacrifice my life and my dignity it will be for those I love and for freedom and those brave enough to love me.

What is America so afraid of, what is our government afraid of? Why do we believe it makes us safe to hand over our freedom and ease of travel to a government agency? When a government restricts and controls freedom of movement and travel, rather than increases it we should be very concerned. When a government accuses all citizen travelers of being potential threats, then we must wonder why. Has America grown so weak and prone, so exposed and defenseless that it fears everything and everyone? What happened to the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave? Where are those who remember these words and what they mean?

Free doesn't mean tobacco free, sugar free, or free from something. It means free to DO something. Freedom is an action, not something that is excluded from the mix. We've twisted the word free to mean something is missing and that somehow this is a good thing. We now identify ourselves as free from this or that, rather than free to do this or that. America is not free if it thinks it's terrorist free. America is free when it's free to do, to take action, to move about, to stand for freedom, to stand against evil -- because evil is everywhere and always will be.

The only way to fight evil is with freedom to do, not freedom from.

Note: I will be requesting a pat down in place of the full body scan wherever possible. I can see who is touching me and prefer this human touch, even if slightly invasive and humiliating. I'd rather not lie to myself that I am fully clothed by stepping into the full body scanner. I much prefer the truth and the truth is often quite unpleasant -- which is why so many silently step into the scanner.

image: Amelia Earhart

Tobacco Prohibition Increases Crime, Violence Against Women, and Even Ecological Disaster

"There's no doubt that there's a direct relationship between the increase in a state's tax and the increase in illegal trafficking"(John D'Angelo of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms qtd. in "Cigarette Smuggling," by Bruce Bartlett, National Center For Policy Analysis No.423, 30 Oct. 2002)

"Another problem is that cigarette distribution moves out of normal outlets and into criminal channels, controls on cigarette purchases by minors erode" (Bruce Bartlett).

Something that people rarely ever consider when prohibiting or overtaxing items such as tobacco, alcohol, firearms -- or tea is the increased leverage and power this hands to black market entrepreneurs. Usually, those willing to risk working in the black market are involved in violent crime and subjugation of those born into lives of poverty.

When my state tobacco prohibition went into effect nearly a year ago, the violent California gangs moved right on up and began recruiting on the Indian reservations. The reason for this is that Indian reservations, especially in border states, become very important areas for the transport and storage of the black market product due to the fact that they're somewhat independent of the rest of the state. Actually, a reservation is not so much free and independent, but neglected and not allowed to enforce justice as well as they might if the states actually allowed them independence.

Part of the beauty of an Indian reservation to crime syndicates is this condition of limbo many reservations are trapped in. On many reservations, the citizens are unable to get the criminals off the streets and out of their neighborhoods because they don't have the same type of court system we have. Criminal cases are supposed to be in the hands of the state, rather than in the local city and county courts. The state often ignores the pleas of the locals and won't prosecute a criminal or get around to trying the case. Many neighborhoods are held hostage by the local pedophile or violent gang member because the people cannot put them away and the state won't do anything. This causes a feeling of helplessness and despair amongst the people. I'm sure this is not the case on all reservations, but on many it is. It's the perfect environment for crime syndicates.

Earlier this year Obama signed the PACT Act ("Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking" Act), which prohibits the shipping of all tobacco products via the U.S. Postal Service. Oops, one, tobacco product was exempt from this law. Can you guess which one? It's the one that Bill Clinton couldn't figure out how to smoke, thinking it was a sex toy; it's the one they smoke at my state capital inspite of the ban on smoking, because politicians and their big fat cigars are above the law.

This act will dramatically increase the power of criminal elements in the U.S. Already, it is costing the USPS in lost shipping charges. Is it possible that the PACT Act is the reason the Post Office can no longer afford to operate and will have to stop shipping on Saturdays?

The PACT Act is a direct assault upon tobacco business and the U.S. Postal Service. This means more honest people out of work, higher shipping rates for everyone, less service, and increased crime.

The PACT Act dramatically effects international trade too. I'm seeing that products such as Swedish snus and certain types of pipe tobacco are nearly impossible to obtain in the U.S. Interestingly, this Act harms the most innocent and respectful groups amongst those who use tobacco: the poor, handicapped, and those with a heightened respect of tobacco--the pipe smoker.

Does anyone remember what happened during the Tobacco and Alcohol Prohibitions of the 1920s?

Before alcohol was prohibited a woman was rarely ever seen in a tavern drinking alongside the men.

We don't talk about it much, but preceding the Volstead Act, Tobacco Prohibition was rampant across the United States. Some states had bans against buying or selling it, while others had bans implemented by cities and counties. But by the 1920s something like 20 states had prohibited tobacco, especially cigarettes.

Why did women not belly up to the bar before Prohibition? And why was it only rebellious feminists openly smoked cigarettes before the 1920s? Well, for one, many laws were sexist and prohibited women from smoking, but beyond that there must have been another reason.

Hmm. Do drug dealers card their patrons to make sure they're of legal age? Do they look at the pretty young woman and say, "Sorry, hon, but you're too young and pretty. I just can't sell to you. I'm a good upstanding citizen with a reputation to keep and don't want to be responsible for your demise"?

Do drug dealers have shops with big windows and wide open doors where people can walk by and see inside?

Before Prohibition of Alcohol and Tobacco these consumer items were in the hands and control of honest citizens running honest and respectable businesses. It wasn't that men hated women, but that they respected them, that they didn't want them in the bar with them. Often, men were gathering in the bar after work and looked a bit rough and felt it too. They didn't want a woman having to look upon them in such a disgraceful state, before they'd cleaned up a bit. It was out of love for the woman that they wanted to protect them from a rough and dirty environment. It wasn't that women were too weak to handle the nitty gritty, every married man knows this, it was that they wanted to spare them added nitty gritty.

But along comes Prohibition, a favorite agenda of the feminists, and suddenly women were equal to men--equally low and drunk. When a crime lord runs the local speakeasy he doesn't give a damn who walks in the door as long as they've got money. In fact, having women there makes it easier for the men to spend more and get wasted. If the woman is right next to you getting tipsy, then the worry about drinking too much and having to face the wife is erased--or is it? Geez, who is this woman sitting on my lap? It sure isn't Ethel. She's younger and prettier than Ethel.

And so, a woman's life is ruined by Prohibition because now there are women in the bars with her husband. The Carry A. Nations got their way. They cast out one demon and replaced it with seven more.

Prohibition forces respectful and responsible citizens to quit consuming a product, thus eliminating them from society. When responsible and mature people are removed from the culture they no longer influence it or keep an eye on things, thus leaving only the disrespectful and irresponsible elements unmonitored and unchecked. This is what the local tobacco Prohibition has done in my local bars.

For some reason, the more mature and responsible people also smoked. Their calming and all-seeing presence kept the environment safe and enjoyable. Without them there is no one to show those new to drinking and tobacco that these are social aids meant to enable comfort and conversation and joy; not meant to be consumed as quickly and cheaply as possible and to such an excess that one doesn't remember socializing at all.

Without the responsible element there are no manners and the crowds have become more violent. It used to be that if a young man shoved a girl or was rude to her, another man would see this and step in and reprimand him and tell him he was too drunk. Now, there is no one to reprimand the drunk young men and no one to defend the girls. Usually, at live music shows the area near the stage is a wall of males who bar the females from seeing around them and won't let them near the front. This never used to be. It was an unspoken rule that the girls, especially if they were shorter than average got the area nearest the stage and the men gave way and stood back a couple rows. Since the Tobacco Prohibition this has all changed.

Violence increases dramatically with Prohibition. One reason for this is that if one is at a speakeasy, or involved in black market tobacco they cannot very easily report a crime because they will be fined or imprisoned if it is revealed that the violence occurred as a result of involvement with a prohibited item or establishment. If tobacco and alcohol are legal one is not afraid to report a violent crime because they will not be penalized or treated as less human. Crime syndicates have power over individuals when an item is illegal because they know law enforcement will not protect victims or their family. You suddenly become a citizen with fewer rights if you use a prohibited product.

Supposedly, Tobacco Prohibition protects the children from the effects of tobacco smoke. It is often claimed that increased tobacco taxes make it more difficult for minors to buy tobacco. It is also claimed that increased tobacco taxes offset health costs caused by tobacco use. In my state the state run children's health program is run on the backs of smokers. Every cigarette pays for another child's ADHD meds.

But does Tobacco Prohibition and increased taxes really protect the children from tobacco? No.

Tobacco Prohibitions actually make tobacco more harmful to young people. In Ireland and other European countries with strong tobacco prohibitions it is very common for minors, especially females to be the ones recruited to transport black market cigarettes into the country. These young women, mostly teens from poor neighborhoods are lured by spending money and plane tickets. They fill their suitcases with cigarettes and arrive in smaller airports. There are stories now, of entire planes full of these "Ants" each carrying small amounts of cigarettes, which alone don't mean much, but together equal millions and millions of dollars.

These young women may not be inhaling second hand smoke, but they're still exposed to tobacco. Now, instead of inhaling smoke, these women are exposed to the violence and abuse of their handlers. They are at risk of being beaten, raped, abandoned in foreign countries, and given jail sentences if caught. These young women put their relatives, friends, and neighborhoods at risk of violence and retribution should they offend their handlers. Is it really worth it to protect children from tobacco smoke when it increases violence against them?

With passage of the PACT Act we can see another problem with Prohibition. The PACT Act was supported by the anti smoking lobby and by the large tobacco companies. The reason the big tobacco companies support a prohibition upon U.S. Postal Service shipments of tobacco products is that many of these products are made by small companies and shops. People are dissatisfied with tobacco products manufactured by the well-known large tobacco companies. They don't like the price and they really don't like the quality.

In the past few years with the ease of online shopping people have been searching out better quality tobacco at discount prices, or even more expensive tobacco made by small businesses. People want tobacco, not chemicals and toxic and stinky additives. I myself can no longer stand the taste of big name cigarettes and haven't smoked them in years. It's not merely a habit, it really is like a good beer or coffee. Addicts don't care about taste or experience and want a fix, which is what the large tobacco companies and the Pharma Phascist NRT products supply.

All of this competition cuts into the monopoly of the large tobacco companies. They don't like those Indian brands, they don't like loose tobacco used for hand rolled cigarettes and pipes. They don't like foreign shops sending over specialty tobaccos.

Tobacco is like many other consumable items, or even like musical instruments, or like Colonel Sander's secret fried chicken recipe. A family or a geographic region may possess "secret" knowledge and produce a tobacco product that cannot be gotten from anyone else. These types of special tobaccos, many traditional, can only be bought and shipped through the U.S. Postal Service because they are unobtainable through any tobacco outlet in the country. The large tobacco companies don't like these products and would like to put them out of business.

Believe it or not Tobacco Prohibition increases the monopoly power of the few large tobacco companies and eradicates the small businesses and causes the loss of very old and proudly produced varieties of tobacco.

This happened during Alcohol Prohibition. Many of America's vineyards and special wine grapes were destroyed. A few of these rare grapes survived and are only now being rediscovered by the public who are again tasting wines that have not been experienced in nearly a hundred years. And who knows how many wonderful beers were lost to Prohibition?

The large tobacco companies thrive during periods of excessive taxation and prohibition because they are able to use black market channels to get their product into the region. I will not name names, but two of the large tobacco companies have been dealing with groups such as Hezbollah, TRIAD of Asia, the Irish Republican Army, U.S. Mafia, and Italian Mafia for years. These terrorist organizations traffic the black market tobacco, pass all tax barriers, and use the money to fund their political causes. And they shut down the small and better quality tobacco producers.

I have wondered if the Volstead Act was not in fact a monopoly takeover of the lucrative alcohol industry by the large producers. Before the Volstead, beer was a local product, produced by families.

Quite a few entrepreneurs knew that the Volstead Act was a government sanctioned monopoly takeover of the alcohol industry and bought up the bankrupt breweries and distilleries for pennies, holding them until the act was repealed, then got rich.

It's possible too, that Prohibition caused the Dust Bowl. It's only a speculation of mine and I'm no farmer, but I've listened to locals and others when they talk about farming and irrigation, and I've come to wonder if those giant dust clouds that blackened the sky during the 1930s were the result of Prohibition.

From what I've learned from listening, irrigation ditches are very important to the level of the water table. The irrigation ditch takes water from a large stream or river, which lowers it's volume, but at the same time this diverted water raises the underground water levels in the areas that it flows through. Irrigation ditches keep the surrounding land moist and make it easier to dig wells. The water is not wasted, only moved around from the river to the land. It doesn't deplete anything. In fact, it improves the ecosystem and protects it.

When irrigation stops because the land is no longer farmed the water table drops and things dry up rather quickly. When things are excessively dry they repel moisture, rather than retaining it. Grass and foliage begins to die. Summer heat worsens conditions and winter snows blow across the land, rather than settling down because there is nothing to hold it. The land and climate become desert. We can currently observe this desertification process taking place in formerly fertile valleys in California where irrigation has been banned to "protect" the environment. The orchards and farmland are parched and it's destroying the environment as well as essential foods depended upon by American children for good health.

When the Volstead Act went into effect it dramatically cut down on how much grain needed to be produced, for alcohol is a grain product. Many farmers held on, but it became more and more difficult since their crops were no longer in demand for alcohol production. Many farmers could not afford to plant their fields and left them to go fallow. No longer did they need as much irrigation.

The prairies began to dry up after the Volstead Act and the rains stopped coming after years of plentiful moisture. It's entirely possible that the irrigated land had actually attracted that rain and that after the Volstead, with less irrigation, the ecosystem was altered and no longer attracted the rains. The unworked fields along with less irrigation caused a drought. No longer was the soil held down by crops or moist soil, and by the 1930s large clouds of dust were rolling from the Western prairies all the way to the cities of the East Coast, blocking the sun, turning day to night.

But, of course, we read that the Dust Bowl was the fault of greedy and uneducated farmers that practiced negligent farming practices and depleted the soils. I doubt this. We always blame the individual and the victim in this country. I surmise that the poverty-stricken farmers could not afford to properly maintain the land as a result of the Volstead Act. But unless one has been very poor they will never understand this, and how impossible it is to maintain things and do things the right way without money to do it with.

And because of the Volstead Act and its destruction of the land and of farms, this lead to the government takeover during the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration, of many farms. Roosevelt doled out paltry sums of money to destitute farmers if they would give their lives and independence to farm as he instructed. Roosevelt implemented massive hog and cattle-killing programs in which farmers turned in their livestock in return for money to feed the kids. Then, the government killed these animals, wasting them like a giant sacrifice upon the land.

If we look back at a time in history that occurred not so long ago we can see that there is not one good or healthy aspect of Prohibition. It causes crime, monopoly, poverty, despair, immorality, and even ecological disaster. Prohibition harms most those it is said it will protect: Women and children.

image: Dust Storm, Stratford, TX, 18 April 1935, NOAA George E. Marsh Album

Mr. Nobody, Jaco Van Dormael's Sublime Universe

In the year 2092 Nemo Nobody is 118 years old and the last mortal human. A journalist asks Nemo what life was like back when humans were mortal and Nemo replies:

"There were cars that polluted. We smoked cigarettes. We ate meat. We did everything we can't do in this dump and it was wonderful."

I haven't enjoyed a movie as much as Jaco Van Dormael's Mr. Nobody in years. It's like Vladimir Nabokov on screen. Brilliant, provoking, intelligent, playful, beautiful, pitiful, awful and awesome -- Sublime.

Samuel James/Sugar Smallhouse and His Muses

I have a personal list of people I intend to meet. Samuel James is on that list.

Some people will travel to see the Pyramids of Egypt or the Grand Canyon, but these are nothing compared to the spirit of a person.

Obviously, Samuel James has happened across a spring and has had his head sprinkled with the water dripping from the fingertips of a muse or two or three (Rosa, Maeve and Noreen?).

We know that Samuel James has been to the spring and has taken a bottle of the spirit away because the top of his head glistens, and he leaves his heel marks dented upon the floors of our spirit and we don't want to sand them out. And we know he's sprinkled some of that spirit upon us because we want to move, rather than sit still.

Samuel James is not a product of "Creativity Class," science, technology, or pharmaceuticals and never could be. Creativity and Spirit cannot be synthesized or replicated. He is the product of that invisible and beautiful Muse at the Fountain.

Get thee a muse!

And notice that the back of a guitar serves as a handy surface for rolling tobacco into a cigarette. A synthetic factory creation, such as Jessica Simpson would have laid out pieces of synthetic coal tar "nicotine" gums and played tic-tac-toe on that guitar, desecrating it.

Get thee a muse and a fountain, music and spirit.

Graceful Choices and the Freedom to Make Them

"We cannot go back. That's why it's hard to choose. You have to make the right choice. As long as you don't choose, everything remains possible" (Nemo in the film Mr. Nobody)

I haven't had the opportunity to view Mr. Nobody, as it hasn't been released in my part of the world, but it seems to be about the many choices a person is faced with and the ramifications of those choices which in turn leads to the many possible lives a person can or could live.

It seems that this film has left some with the feeling that life is beautiful eye candy with no absolute meaning.

"As long as you don't choose, everything remains possible." If we don't choose, then another will choose for us, and often it is the opportunists and power-hungry that take advantage of our inability to make a choice. Not making a choice is a choice -- the choice to be powerless and allow others to make choices for us -- to remain a helpless and dependant child.

"As long as you don't choose, everything remains possible" for evil to succeed unhindered.

This is the problem with most societies and groups of people. They think that choosing a certain leader will be an easier choice than having to take personal responsibility for the choices they make. The leader will make the choices and pass the laws, which always end up limiting choice, even banning certain choices.

We see this with laws and with certain fundamentalist religions. The law gets carried away and says "Thou Shalt Not," rather than allowing a person the freedom to make a choice for themselves based upon the knowledge they possess and the risks they are willing to take.

And because we cannot go back in time and make the "right" choice it is very important that a society is free to make choices. A society where there is no freedom is one in which one is trapped in the choices they have made and cannot move forward or improve their situation with new choices. A free society must rely upon Grace as a crutch to hold it up when parts of it fail.

When there is no freedom to choose we see situations such as the recently publicised case in Iran in which a woman was sentenced to be stoned to death for having affairs with two men after her husband was murdered. In Iran this woman's choice leads to death. In a free society in which one is allowed the choice to make what may seem immoral decisions, this woman would be allowed the choice to mend her ways and get on with life and Grace would overlook her past mistakes if it saw that she was making healthier and wiser choices. If Grace couldn't cover her, she could make the choice to move to a place where no one knew of her past.

In societies where choice has been given over to a few elites there is no freedom to move about freely, travel where one chooses, move up in the world, leave bad relationships, eat what one chooses, work where one chooses, worship how one chooses, smoke where one chooses, wear what one chooses, etc., etc...

These are Disgraced societies.

In order for a movie such as Mr. Nobody to even come to fruition there must still be free choice alive and well in the world. This movie is about personal choice and love, but there is no personal choice or pursuit of true love unless one lives in a society in which the possibilities are endless.

My personal belief is that each of us has been chosen for the moment in time that we live in. If we don't make a choice to seize hold of the moment and the role we've been handed, another will step in and fill the role; but will another do it as well us us? The trick is taking that incredible role and doing the best with it that we possibly can. We've each been prepared for those great pivotal moments of choice and can bring unique passion and knowledge to the role we play.

We cannot go back, but we can move forward.

Russia Says Smoke More For Healthy Economy, While U.S. and E.U. Tell People To Chew Coal Tar Candy To Help Weaken Economy

That's it, I'm going to Russia.

Russia's finance minister, Alexei Kudrin is telling "people to smoke and drink more, explaining that higher consumption would help lift tax revenues for spending on social services" ("'People Should Smoke and Drink More,' Says Russian Finance Minister," Telegraph, 1 Sep 2010).

According to the Telegraph article Kudrin says, "People should understand: Those who drink, those who smoke are doing more to help the state."

Really? Tell that to Europe and the Unites States of America, land of pharmaceutical phascism.

Those dumb Russians. They must be stuck in the Stone Age. Don't they know that the Western world all chews or sucks scabs of coal tar now? Haven't they heard of Chantix, which boosts the health of society and the economy by turning sane people into suicidal maniacs and diabetics? Jeepers, where's Nikon and his anti-tobacco league of nose-slitters when you need them?

I hear that tobacco use is popular in China too. China's government grows the stuff since they don't like importing it or relying upon the U.S. for their supplies.

If Russia's finance minister says that buying tobacco and alcohol helps the economy and even "[upholds] birthrates" (Telegraph), then conversely not buying these must harm the state coffers and the economy.

Kudrin would say that a ban upon these items and others is harmful and unpatriotic.

Hypothetically speaking, if you wanted to undermine another country's morale, economy and peace what would you do? You'd send out the agents of dissent and fear to propagandize and create confusion and panic so as to immobilize, paralyze, and silence.

Hypothetically speaking, how would you invade another country and move in right under their noses and never let them know what was happening so that they would not retaliate against you because they had no idea that they were even under attack, instead pointing fingers at each other?

Instead of openly invading the enemy country, instead of sending hundreds of thousands of troops across the ocean to attempt a new Normandy invasion, instead of dropping bombs and other expensive and finite devices you would buy people. You'd pay out several million, or billion dollars to a few experts and highly respectable personalities and let them spread ideas and false beliefs. These false beliefs would spread across the land and many would fall in line spreading the lies and hate, never realizing that they were helping the enemy agenda, never getting paid for their work.

This has occurred before, especially within Communist movements. There are a few paid subversives and many unpaid and ignorant adherents that spread the ideas until they become mainstream and no longer recognizable as dangerous. This is why joining any mass movement, be it religious or political is highly dangerous, perhaps nearly suicidal.

What I am trying to get at is that hypothetically speaking, smoking bans may actually be propaganda campaigns planted by foreign states to undermine the strength and stability of Europe's and America's economies as well as unity of their peoples.

No smoking ban has ever benefited a city, state, or country. Billions of dollars in revenue and taxes have been lost, unemployment increased, guilt increased, and hatred of fellow citizens increased.

A tobacco or alcohol ban keeps the populace busy blaming each other, wasting millions of dollars in enforcement, and divides them against each other. A tobacco or alcohol ban causes large segments of society from gathering together, removes them from benefiting society with money, ideas, or courage. The enemy wants us afraid of each other, separated, hidden, and guilt-ridden.

If smoking tobacco is healthy for Russia, then why nowhere else?

Do Europe, the United States and Canada really believe that undermining their own morale and economies with tobacco and alcohol prohibitions is healthy or wise? Do we really believe that forcing at least 25% of the population into hiding is good for the economy and for health? Do we really believe that forcing 25% of the population onto toxic and foreign coal tar-derived gums, candies, and patches is good for society? Do we really believe the delusion that prescribing varenicline to war veterans with shell shock, making them into homicidal maniacs at home is better for health and family than using tobacco products?

We know that most Nicotine Replacement "Therapy" is produced in foreign countries. We know that states, such as Ohio are spending 3 million dollars to collect 1 million in fines. We know that the states are pushing million dollar add campaigns to force people onto toxic NRT products and drugs. We know that children are being recruited in schools to spread the campaign of hate and fear. We know that tobacco farmers are being reduced to poverty, and millions have lost their jobs due to the trickle-down affect of tobacco bans.

What we know is that to "save" lives and money lost to tobacco use, our states are spending even more on enforcement and dangerous NRT promotions. How many of our state and federal representatives are agents of foreign governments? Who is paying them? Where is the money coming from? It makes no sense to undermine E.U. or American stability unless one is working specifically to do so with the purposeful intention of destroying us. I.G. Farbenindustries worked to subvert American strength throughout the 1920s and 30s in preparation for war.

It will be shown in future years that the tobacco bans along with the pushing of dangerous NRT products was a deliberate attack upon America and Europe. It will be shown that these bans were enacted to waste our money, to stop the flow of money, and to divide the people. All tobacco and alcohol restrictions benefit the enemy, whoever they may be. All tobacco and other bans are deliberate distractions and propaganda campaigns.

There is only one way to protect one's self from being duped by any kind of propaganda campaign, be it foreign, religious, or political -- Grace.

Because one can never know what the truth is at any one time, because one can never have all the information or knowledge, there is only one way to prevent one's self from being used against their own country and friends. Grace.

When we stand back and look objectively at things we can see a larger picture and see that those who incite us to hate others or fear them are the true enemies. It is un American to live in fear of food, tobacco, alcohol and other common parts of life. If a society is paralyzed by fear of the common, noncriminal, the ordinary parts of life how will it ever stand against real enemies and evils?

If a cigarette makes a "strong" Christian quake, if a chubby child is repulsive to the First Lady, if a stumbling drunk has the power to endanger a town's safety then we must be the most spineless and softest people that has ever walked the face of the earth. I'm embarrassed.

I'll be visiting Russia before I visit California. If Russia's not afraid of me, then I'll be boosting their economy and sunbathing in Red Square on a beach of snow and slathered in a heavy coat and hat as I watch the waves of tanks roll past on their way out towards the sea of Western arrogance and atrophied muscle. C'mon America, spit out the coal tar candy. Man up and light up before it's too late.

Rosh Hashanah, A Great Time To Be A Graceful Smoker

The Jewish Holy day of Rosh Hashanah has passed this week, and although, I am only Jewish by blood and not practice (haven't been for centuries), I do like to keep informed on these things.

Rosh Hashanah is announced by the blowing of the shofar, a wonderful ram's horn trumpet which announces the beginning of the New Year, which begins upon the seventh month of the Hebrew calendar, Tishrei. Last year, even though I live many miles away from the synagogue, I could hear the shofar.

Rosh Hashanah is the beginning of a period of time in which God goes through His accounts and sets the records in order for the coming year. At this time, He takes on the role of Judge and House Keeper. He has three books up there, the most famous being the Book of Life. According to tradition, the days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are a time of reprieve in which one still has some leniency and can have their case expunged from the death roles and moved onto the roles in the Book of Life.

It's difficult to comprehend, but only the name and the good works of each individual are listed in the Book of Life. Before God even opens it up He dons his Heavenly Hazmat suit and collects all of the sins into a filthy volume which He refuses to open and is barely able to touch. This he tosses out before He opens the Book of Life. But being written in the Book of Life is not enough. Even without one imperfect or evil record listed under one's name it does not guarantee reprieve or that one's soul is saved from damnation.

Perfect isn't good enough for God. This means that no matter how much money one gives to charity, no matter how many old widows one helps across the street, how many awards for saving drowning children, or how many jungle people one has converted and brought Bibles to they still aren't safe from the fire and brimstone.

Why bother being good if this is the case? Personally, I believe it evens the playing field in a very graceful way. This means that a person that has lived in a vegetative state for the last 20 years and has not been able to save the world with their good-deed-doing has as much chance at eternal life as a genetics researcher that has spent their life trying to isolate and eradicate certain dangerous and unrighteous populations that carry restriction markers for tobacco and coffee use (usually, Abrahamic populations). This means that the guy smoking around the corner at your local Baptist church has as much or more of a chance of getting a good write up as the pastor preaching inside.

After getting rid of all the sins, the next step is getting rid of all the good records too. In the end, all that's left is names. One's name is all they'll need to get into those Pearly Gates.

During the season of Rosh Hashanah, each page in the Book of Life is opened and sprinkled with blood. When the blood lands upon the page it completely blots out every good deed and many of the names. Some names are brightened up and show clearer, but not one other piece of information shines through the blood. Then, the cleaned names are sealed with a beautiful blue star.

But what is it that causes some names to be blotted out while others are made to shine more brilliantly and be sealed?

It's called Grace and it can't be obtained by being perfect. Usually, one must be a sinner or a stumbling fool to receive Grace. You can stand by a stream and cast symbolic stones of sin into the current, or recite Torah, or build neighborhoods of white stucco to represent purity, or prostrate yourself five times a day towards the east and fast every day for a month; or do as Americans do and chew coal tar/ Nicotine Replacement gums and candy, volunteer, diet, donate, recycle, and look pretty -- but it's all Hevel, nothing without Grace.

It doesn't matter who controls the Temple Mount or Mecca if there is no Love or Grace. These are only names and geographic locations of historic significance. Grace is larger than them and goes where it will -- usually as far away as possible from the arrogant and self-righteous ones in control of these locations, and as close as possible to those who cannot afford the price of admittance charged to be a member of most religions. If one can't afford their synagogue fees, or zakat, or tithes; chances are that this is a good time of year for them and their name if they'll accept Grace rather than guilt.

If one has a difficult time accepting Grace, then it's a great time to take up smoking cigarettes or the pipe. Back in the old days it was a well known fact that smoke created a protective barrier between God and the sinner, shielding them from view and allowing them to enter into the Holy of Holies. And the ashes represent sin turned to nothing. And some may recall that God liked to travel around in a cloud of smoke and envelope entire mountain peaks in it, or that it exudes from His nostrils on occasion, or that the smell of it is pleasant in Heaven as it represents the prayers of the saints. That old time smoke represented Grace and the covering it provides.

So, instead of casting sins away, this season, perhaps, it would be nice to emulate God by extending Grace to sinners and idiots. There are all kinds of ways to extend Grace to others. One way would be to let someone know their fly is unzipped, or to drive defensively, or smile kindly at that miserable smoker that looks guilty as they sneak a puff outside (smokers, stop looking so guilty and nervous in public! SMILE when you're smoking, and look pleasant and relaxed, for you are an emissary for the rest of the grace-puffers), be less serious around your children, be patient when waiting upon others, and never expect to be noticed or thanked.


Note: Grace doesn't mean being a spineless pushover. It means overlooking, not ignoring. It means looking forward and up, not backwards and down.

Kid, Inc: Are We Raising Our Nation's Children Like Animals?

It's that time of year -- autumn. The birds have quit twittering and the children have stopped playing. The last couple of years I have noticed a strange thing which I never used to notice. Perhaps, my hearing is more astute, but this sound of absolute silence in the air the week that the kids are herded back into their holding pens and fattened up for slaughter after a few years of corporate corn and antibiotics is nearly like a death.

One doesn't notice the sounds of the children ringing in the air up and down the streets while the robins are training up their young ones until it's gone. I swear I could hear a pin drop from down the street this week. I don't see these children or know them, but somehow, their activity and sound fills the air.

And I wonder, how is it that the very air, nature itself seems to know the children are gone?

A few months ago, when watching Robert Kenner's documentary Food, Inc (http://www.foodincmovie.com/ ) I was struck by the similarities between the way we raise much of our food and the way we raise our children. If it's not humane or healthy to raise chickens in a windowless and crowded shed, then how is it acceptable to treat humans with souls this way?

Food, Inc shows one chicken grower that is broken in spirit because she has been forced out of tobacco farming due to our nation's biases and fears which are reminiscent of those that incited tobacco and alcohol prohibitions earlier in the last century. She now spends her days in the sheds clearing out the bodies of the chickens that die every day. Her sheds had windows in them at the time of filming, but the company she was contracted with was fighting her on this, wanting her to get rid of them. Without sunlight animals die -- so do children.

Where I live we have some formerly beautiful Art Deco schools built in the 1920s and 30s. Even back then, people were concerned about energy use and thus, these schools were specifically designed to absorb as much solar heat as possible and to allow the class rooms to be well-lit because, according to the research of the architects and school system, children learned better with more sunlight.

Not only did the architect want the children to absorb light while in their classrooms, but aesthetic beauty and grandness. The classrooms were designed with very high and beautiful ceilings and fine materials. Back in the old days we knew that Creativity Class is everywhere and in everything, and that inspiration is embedded even in the floors we walk upon and the windows we look out of.

But we have lowered the ceilings, placing false panels in. We have blocked up the grand and beautiful windows, leaving only a few small sections open. Our idea of energy use is one of not using any, rather than of absorbing and using more in wise ways. And as we have hidden the high ceilings that invite children's minds to soar, as we have blocked out the light coming in and the ability to see out, so we have also done to our children -- blocking the light of inspiration from getting in or the ability to see out.

Our children are like those chickens, no longer allowed to run loose in the sun. Those chickens die in the dark, are over crowded and diseased. Those chickens can't stand up on their own legs. They peck at each other and kill each other because they have nothing else to do. And those that raise them have no pride or dignity in what they do because they are told they must do this or loose their contract. How many teachers are in similar situations?

And then, there is a farmer interviewed in Food, Inc, that raises his animals in a more traditional and humane way. He has joy in his eyes even though he works hard and is not rich. His cows and pigs love him when he comes around and he loves them even though he will one day kill them. But think of it, wouldn't you rather the farmer loves his animal and the animal loves him, for when the day of slaughter comes, that farmer is going to make sure this animal is slaughtered as humanely and cleanly as possible, for he respects it and the life it provides for him.

Are we feeding our children the right "food" in school, or only a false and indigestible diet? Are we making them fat and weak, unable to stand with dignity and joy, by penning them in dark sheds and muddy pens? Are we injecting our children with pharmaceutical drugs and treatments because we've overcrowded them, rather than letting them loose on the range?

We don't want our food genetically engineered by giant foreign corporations, nor do we want our livestock and poultry treated inhumanely. So, why is it acceptable to treat our children this way? It's not.

[Note: It is stated in Food, Inc, several times that if Big Tobacco can be beat so can Big GMO companies. Obviously, there is an anti-tobacco bias and some ignorance in the documentary. Those same giant companies that have pushed genetically modified corn and soybeans upon us are the exact same companies that have fought to ban tobacco production and use. Were it not for our ignorance of how exactly important tobacco farmers and tobacco production are to the United States of America's dignity, health, and economic prosperity we would not be spiting the very hand that feeds us in favor of foreign nicotine replacement "therapy" and grains with terminator technology. Every single ban on tobacco adds money and dictatorial control of our country to a giant foreign interest or U.S. corporation with strong links to foreign interests. These foreign corporations have eaten up U.S. corporations and states, and think of U.S. citizens as swine, not as humans.

Most tobacco farmers are very conscious of the land and possess hundreds of years of farming knowledge, which has been erased by the hatred of their main money crop. As illustrated in Food, Inc, most tobacco farmers have been reduced to extreme debt and poverty and now raise animals in a way that turns their stomachs and is anti-American and immoral. Because we have fallen for the fear of propaganda we have gotten rid of one of America's most important crops and allowed foreign corporations to dictate to us and our politicians what we can and can't eat.

Not everyone has to smoke, but everyone has to eat, and banning tobacco is actually affecting the health of our children who are forced to eat the unhealthy crops and unhealthy animals that now replace tobacco. Bring back tobacco farming and we will weaken these giant foreign corporations and their power over our nation's leaders and food supply. Banning tobacco will actually increase cancers and autoimmune disorders in the coming years because the replacement crops are usually genetically engineered (with your tax dollars at the local university for a foreign pharmaceutical or agricultural corporation) with proteins foreign to the human body that cause inflammation of soft tissue (such as lung tissue) over time.]

"Creativity Class," A New Oxymoron?

A few weeks ago Newsweek printed an article entitled "The Creativity Crisis" by Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman, which detailed the decline of creativity in America. I laughed my way through the article because one of the ideas for fixing this problem was "creativity training" in the classroom--Creativity Class.

If ever there was an oxymoron Creativity Class is one. So is Creativity Training.

"[A]merican teachers warn there's no room in the day for creativity class" (Bronson and Merryman). Actually, there's no room in the classroom, a structured and controlled and biased environment for any creativity, unless you're one of the lucky little children with parents willing to fight the ADHD label and the pharmaceutical monopoly's terrorism on brains. Nancy Reagan's Just Say No campaign needs to make a come back, this time to save children from mind-altering and damaging pharma fascism.

According to James C. Kaufman, quoted in the Newsweek article, "Creativity can be taught" (Bronson and Merryman). By who?

If creativity can be taught and learned within a classroom setting then why hasn't the State school system used some creative thinking to come up with better ways of dealing with children, other than labelling and drugging them? Obviously, there is no creativity amongst those operating the State school system, and to deal with their inability and laziness they have turned to drugs, blaming the victim and their parents.

And then, to contradict the first article, the following article, "Forget Brainstorming," also by Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman tells the reader that "[P]eople generate more and better ideas separately than together," and "Don't tell someone to 'be creative,'" Hmm.

The closing paragraph of "The Creativity Crisis" shows how ignorant and unable to make sublime connections we have become with an insult upon the very thing that has inspired all great thinkers, inventors, artists, and scientists: the Muse at the well, sprinkling inspiration and love:

"Creativity has always been prized in American society, but it's never really been understood. While our creativity scores decline unchecked, the current national strategy for creativity consists of little more than praying to a Greek muse to drop by our houses. The problems we face now, and in the future, simply demand that we do more than just hope for inspiration to strike. Fortunately, the science can help: we know the steps to lead that elusive muse right to our doors."

And so, the great wells have been covered over while we continue un creatively to look to the gods in white lab coats to inject us with creativity, herd us into Creativity Class and subject us to yet another standardized assessment of who is creative and who is not.

Creativity is born of love, of freedom, and yearning. It cannot be synthesized by science, the State, or by pharmaceutical candies, pills, and patches.

"Now these two Kings and two Queens governed Narnia well, and long and happy was their reign. At first much of their time was spent in seeking out the remnants of the White Witch's army and destroying them, and indeed for a long time there would be news of evil things lurking in the wilder parts of the forest--a haunting here and a killing there, a glimpse of a werewolf one month and a rumor of a hag the next. But in the end all that foul brood was stamped out. And they made good laws and kept the peace and saved good trees from being unnecessarily cut down, and liberated young dwarfs and young satyrs from being sent to school, and generally stopped busybodies and interferers and encouraged ordinary people who wanted to live and let live" (C.S. Lewis, "The Hunting of the White Stag," The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, emphasis added).

Rangel's H.R. 5741 Universal National Servitude Act

On July 15, 2010 Charlie Rangel introduced in Congress the Universal National Slavery Act, or H.R. 5741 Universal National Service Act:

"To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes"

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-5741

H.R. 5741, The Universal National Slavery Act, will require every man and woman to give up all rights and freedoms for a bare minimum of two years and if they do not perform their services satisfactorily they will be penalized. Isn't being forced into servitude penalty enough? They'd have to come up with some kind of torture to penalize me, because I'd be pretty numb and unable to feel punished if I was a walking dead person anyway.

Supposedly, America needs more homeland security and reserve power for when we go to war. We've been at war since I was born. It's like Brave New World and I have grown almost apathetic towards it. We're always in some little podunk country, fighting drug cartels or religious extremists. Supposedly, they're always uncivilized and living in the Stone Age, yet seem to wreak havoc and put our technology and enlightenment to the test. And we always think we have a moral perrogative to discipline these dirty little children for fear of their Weapons of Mass Destruction and fundamentalist religions.

Are we officially the home of the New Nazi Germany? Who the heck are we planning on invading and going to war with in the near future that requires forced national servitude to Homeland Security and the Armed Forces? Why does America see a need for increased Homeland Security?

The fact is that the U.S. is slowly being turned into a giant continental prison. We are tracked, scanned, told what we can and can't ingest, and controlled for our own "protection," exactly the same way prison inmates are treated. Often, when a prisoner is let loose they don't know how to function in the free world and end up back in prison. Americans are inmates and have no idea how to function outside its dirty walls.

America doesn't need Universal National Slavery. We need people to have a country that makes them proud and protective and loving enough to volunteer of their own free will. We need hearts, not mere bodies in the Armed Forces. I want the best and the best comes from the heart and freedom, not from forced servitude. Slaves don't put pride into their work. Free people do.

image: Arch of Titus

The Cell Phone, A Mindless Drug Addiction

About those cell phones. I don't have one. I'm the last person alive that doesn't have one. I'm young and somehow survive without a phone pestering, festering, and twitching in my pocket, or glowing in dark places.

I've found it nice not having a cell phone because I don't have to politely record the numbers of everyone I meet in a database, and it is nice to see the repulsed reactions when others can't have my number. For some odd reason they no longer want my number when I tell them it's a land line and I can't drag it around with me everywhere I go, thus preventing people from "following" me like digital balls and chains as I travel along my daily path.

Anyway, about those cell phones. When I see how imprisoned, addicted, inconsiderate and impolite they make people I become even more staunchly anti-cell phone.

The other night, while out and about on the town, catching a couple of traveling bands I encountered another dazed and inconsiderate cell phone user. It was a fairly slow night, as the smoking ban has destroyed life and the ability to shake a leg. I was doing my best to show some appreciation, standing/dancing up near the front of the stage. I turned around and right behind me was the glow of an unhinged phone, mesmerizing its owner. I couldn't believe it. I was as shocked as a non smoker in a non-smoking venue would have been if someone had lit up a cigarette, disregarding everyone else and their health. I wanted to swat that phone to the ground and tell them to stare at their cell phone somewhere else where they didn't infringe on others.

One does NOT stand near the front of the stage when a band has traveled all day to play for them. The only time that cell phone should come out is to take pictures of the event. But no, this person was standing there staring at their phone while the band could see them. It was a blatant insult, as if to say to the band, "You're so boring and terrible that I'd rather stand here and stare at my phone right in front of your face." Truly, I couldn't believe how inconsiderate and unappreciative this behavior appeared.

If a call must be taken or made, one really needs to treat their cell phone the exact same way a tobacco user treats tobacco use in certain environments. One should remove themselves to a polite location and use their cell phone where it will not appear rude, demean others, ignore them, or infringe on them.

Truly, the cell phone has become a kind of harassment device and mini prison, and people seem to enjoy this. One person I know met a girl last week-end. They don't even know each other, having spent only one evening out with friends. The girl has called and texted every single day since this meeting even though a date is scheduled for this next week-end. I asked my friend if they actually like this and think it normal, and doesn't it appear a bit desperate on the girl's part?

It never occurred to my friend that this was abnormal since everyone does it. I can't imagine what kind of girl thinks it's normal to text and call a guy every day, especially when they've only just met and there's nothing to fear, since a date is already a sure thing. And who wants to be with someone that harasses them every day after having met once? What kind of relationship would that be? It would be more akin to ownership, or possession, having a person constantly reminding another that they're checking on them because they "care" and are so obsessed, insecure, and boring that they have nothing better to do.

The cell phone is basically a monitoring device, a palm prison. It's an insecurity device. People use to go smoke a cigarette when they got nervous and insecure thoughts about another person that they couldn't be with at the moment. Now, people text and call to remind everyone else that they exist and can't stop thinking about them. How nice. People call to remind others of their existence, and they check their phones to remind themselves that someone cared enough about them to harass them that day. How nice and kind.

Parents use the cell phone to keep tabs on their kids and to make themselves feel safer about their kids because the kids will have a list of numbers to call and harass for help all day. It's a digital umbilical cord. The kids won't cut it because they're addicted and don't know any better. Mom and Dad use the cell phone as a tool of punishment, taking it away when the kid has misused it or gotten into trouble. And the kid is an addict, goes through withdrawal, can't live without knowing who has thought of them that day, what mindless gossip they've been left out of, etc. and begs for its return so that they can get their fix.

The cell phone is like any other addictive thing and should be used responsibly, not as a crutch for insecurity or to bother others. It's not a brain, it's not a soul, although people treat it this way. When lighting up your cell phone, please be considerate of those around you, lest you contaminate the air around you, souring people on your social inability. If smoke-free air is a right, then so is cell-phone free air. Take it outside and pace.

There are non-cell phone users like me that would like to take your cell phone and break in half like a cigarette.

Oh, and by the by, while you're staring at the glow of your security crutch, not socializing with anyone near you, we tobacco smokers are out in the rain socializing and meeting real physical people that we can touch and see. You can have your virtual love, we've got the real thing--even in the rain or in 40 degrees below zero. You've got your phone on a cold night while the tobacco users have each other.

Pharmaceutical Nicotine and the State: Defining and Segregating Sacred

Only atheists, infidels, and barbarians chew Nicorette or suck synthetic coal tar derived nicotine replacement "therapies." Only unhealthy and injured people need therapy.

True believers, those that have seen beyond the veil inhale tobacco, a natural green plant that supplies nicotinic acid the natural way.

If the State Health Departments and the synthetic nicotine manufacturers are going to define tobacco as "sacred," for use only by native peoples, or rather, a few select Indians within each tribe who are deemed by the State as sacred enough to inhale for the rest of their nation; then why would anyone want anything other than the sacred stuff?

By defining tobacco as sacred, when up until recently it has been called "dirty" or the "devil's weed," or "the nation's number one health issue," the pharmaceutical industry, health departments, and religious groups that have fought so hard to make tobacco use illegal are actually saying that tobacco is holy, safe, and natural. How is it that these tobacco haters say tobacco is immoral, evil, and dangerous yet at the same time holy, sacred, and even spiritual?

In describing "sacred tobacco" these groups say it is non addictive, has no toxins, and no nicotine -- as long as it's used by a specific genetic, cultural, and religious group. How is it that tobacco smoke used by Indians, or rather a select government minority within the tribe suffers no addiction, health risk, and gets no nicotine?

And how is it sacred when used by one person or group but not another?

If tobacco is sacred and natural, then synthetic nicotine gums, candies, and patches are the dirty and sinful corruptions of greedy corporations. These products have had all the sacred sucked out of them and may need someone to light a bowl of sacred tobacco over them in order to enrich them with what they are lacking -- spirit.

By defining tobacco as sacred for the select, this confers a high status upon tobacco and implies that synthetic nicotine is for the unwashed masses, the lowly. Everyone wants to be part of the select rather than the secular and anti-people, anti-tobacco gum chewers and lozenge sucking children afraid of smoke signals rising to the heavens.

In saying that tobacco is sacred, this implies that the groups of people standing around with pipes, cigars, and cigarettes are actually initiates into a sacred group. This implies that these people are engaging in a religious gathering, communing with each other and with God. Banning these people from a daily ritual and claiming that only those with the correct genetic markers and cultural heritage may partake, may "pray" and gather peaceably is highly suspicious.

When does a company or the local state get to define which group may worship or gather, or participate in certain rituals? I suppose it does all the time. The U.S. government prohibits certain practices such as polygamy, which it doesn't need to in my opinion, as most men cringe in fear at the thought of more than one wife at a time, and most free women would rather not share their home and other resources with another woman or her children. Sarah sent Hagar out, and Rebekah and Leah weren't pleased with their arrangement either. It doesn't generally work unless a man is a king, and even then it can be a failure.

What if the government told us that only descendants of Brigham Young could practice polygamy because for them it was sacred and not harmful? Or what if the government told us that only genetic Jews or genetic Catholics could drink "sacred wine" at Passover or Easter because it is used differently than for non adherents and isn't harmful? What if bread were banned from the general population, reserved only for Baptists in their "sacred bread" ceremonies?

The pharmaceutical industry and its department of health will say that these are ridiculous examples. There is no second-hand or third-hand danger posed by wine or bread, or other cultural and religious practices such as kosher preparations or dietary restrictions. Everything has so-called second and third hand effects if we want to look hard enough, hate hard enough.

What happens if one day it is decided that corporate gasoline is deadly and the number one health issue in the country because, according to the ethanol industry and health departments funded by them, it causes all the cancer, high blood pressure, strokes, low birth weight babies, and decreases productivity due to drive time? Will the ethanol industry ban gasoline, make it prohibitively expensive, imprison people that use it, and then declare it "sacred gasoline" reserved only for the elect in Washington D.C.?

Either tobacco is sacred and doesn't have nicotine or it is evil and does have nicotine. Perhaps, the tobacco is only as sacred and non toxic as the person smoking it. What the pharmaceutical nicotine industry is saying is that it is the people it hates for not using its synthetic and empty trash. The tobacco user must be banned and hated into using a product so far inferior to tobacco that they never would have voluntarily switched over of their own free will.

This is what happened when Mohammad swept through to force conversion to his new religious product. Under ordinary conditions a people like to convert of their own free will and because they are moved by some unseen spiritual pull. People generally like things as natural and easy-going as they can get it. Ideally, people prefer religions that allow for celebrations, communion with each other such as at potlucks and thanksgivings. People like a perfect mix of tradition that doesn't overwhelm spontaneity and joy. Each of us has a preference in religion which we think superior to all others. Preference is fine, but forced conversion from one religion or product to another is an act of violence and subjugation. And the anti-tobacco movement uses nearly all of the same arguments and reasons as a forceful religious movement.

In Islam, the government does not operate separately from the religious leaders. Our pharmaceutical industry is behaving like an Islamic nation, as if it is the religious head with its scientific clerics declaring what the holy writs say and sending out its terrorist converts to spread hate and fear and hardline law upon the ignorant people and State. The anti-tobacco movement is one of the most religious movements I have ever seen, and may actually be more harmful to American security, sovereignty, and health than radical Islam. If we were to tally the souls harmed by Chantix, job loss and land loss, and loss of 1st Amendment rights, the cost to society and the "pursuit of happiness" would be exorbitant.

The fact that the health departments and pharmaceutical activists are saying tobacco is sacred, says very clearly that this is religious and that the desired goal is not all that different from what radical right Islam seeks: Complete subjugation and annihilation of all adherents to other religions and products.

And tobacco smoke doesn't have any nicotine in it. When tobacco is burned it converts the nicotine to harmless nicotinic acid. This is why sacred tobacco doesn't have nicotine and isn't addictive.

And as far as not inhaling the sacred tobacco is concerned, that is a bunch of State and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation myth and homogenizing of a practice that is unique to each individual and Indian nation. As some churches don't "inhale" the wine by serving up grape juice, some Indians don't inhale the tobacco. Some Indians inhale, some don't. Some Indians smoke outside of the ceremonial use and have for time immemorial. And as there are many Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish denominations and sects, so are there many unique religious practices amongst American Indians across the continent. If an Indian didn't inhale the sacred tobacco either directly from the pipe or in the air they wouldn't know of its smell which is sweet to the Creator.

If Indians are going to allow a few nosy women to line their pockets with so-called non-profit and state "health" department money while telling everyone else how and when to use tobacco, then they will further corrupt and cut the ties with their Father who gave the people tobacco along with other nicotine containing plants, namely potatoes, corn, beans, and tomatoes.

Over and over I see that the pharmaceutical industry claims it's against "corporate tobacco," not "sacred tobacco." They hide nearly nothing. Propaganda never lies, but frames the truth in such a way that it creates a response that is destructive of the audience's own best interests. What the pharmaceutical industry is engaging in is called a coercive monopoly, which is when it engages the government legal process in prohibiting competition from other sources through law. My state runs a "Quit Line" which is designed specifically to profit the pharmaceutical companies by doling out synthetic nicotine currently "marketed as" smoking cessation aids.

Already, Nicorette is changing the marketing of its products as "therapy." Yes, Nicorette wants tobacco users to quit, but it wants the tobacco user stuck on their expensive and empty product. Nicorette is spending $30 million this year, not counting the millions in advertising spent by our state anti-tobacco campaigns, to push its products, especially the new quick-dissolve mini candy lozenge (Laurie Burkitt, "Nicorette puffs $15 Million into Ad Blitz," Forbes.com, 7 Dec. 2009). I would guess that this new product is not the traditional slow-release nicotine, which many find unsatisfactory and sickening, but a rapid-release nicotine more akin to a cigarette. Are these products monitored and taxed the same way as cigarettes? They should be.

Another question I have not researched properly is how the nicotine in nicotine replacement therapies is converted to nicotinic acid, as it's not oxidized through burning. If nicotine is not oxidized or alkalized it can't be freed for use by the neuronal and muscular nicotinic receptors. If nicotine is not oxidised or alkalized it is toxic, which is why the anti-tobacco people can say it's a pesticide, which it is when in its pure nicotine form. All plants have varying degrees of built in pesticide management. According to the research I've seen so far, the nicotine used in nicotine replacement "therapy" is freebase derived from pyridine, an extract of coal tar.

The nicotine replacement companies and anti-smoking campaigns are in reality giant advertising arms of a pharmaceutical monopoly that sees people as money, and has lost nearly all sight of health or cures. Proof that this is not a health issue but a coercive monopoly issue is the outrage against such products as smokeless tobacco, and products such as Camel Dissolvables which are similar to pharmaceutical dissolvables currently "marketed as smoking cessation aids" (Bill Godshall, "Urge FDA to make NRT products more consumer friendly," SmokeFree.net, 15 Aug. 2008)). And that e-cigarette really annoys them because it looks like a cigarette, is inhaled and the vapors are harmless. If this were really a health issue the anti-smoking advocates would love such products and encourage them, rather than pushing their products as the only alternative. Even quitting smoking without using a pharmaceutical nicotine product is not encouraged by these groups.

If these fake pharmaceutical products worked, everyone and their mama would have switched years ago. If these products worked and supplied nicotinic acid in a form that doesn't cause ill side effects the pharmaceutical companies and their non-profit arms wouldn't need laws passed against their competitors. Obviously pharmaceutical nicotine is lacking and our bodies know it. If pharmaceutical nicotine were equivalent to tobacco it would have an effect upon the paranoia and hate within the anti-tobacco movement, reducing its fears of social gatherings and death.

When a person is deficient in nicotinic acid they are prone to dementia and display fear of persecution, and think in terms of apocalypse. Evidently, the nicotine gums these people are chewing aren't healing the deficiency and only causing constant head ache and tension from TMJ. These people are confused and uneducated. They simply can't comprehend anything sacred or unregulated by their monopoly as this quote from Linda Lee of the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services illustrates:

"'There is no real reason to use an unregulated product [e-cigarette] that could be dangerous'..[F]DA-approved products such as patches, gum and lozenges are already available, she said" ("Montana health officials discourage use of e-cigarettes to avoid Clean Indoor Air Act," Missoulian, 9 Jan. 2010).

These people don't understand. It's like telling people that there are all kinds of alternatives to good food such as pills and supplements which supply the necessities in food. Why on earth would anyone want to sit down with their friends and family for a good meal when they could swallow a pill, chew gum, or put on a patch? This is how it is with tobacco and the e-cigarette. People want the process, the tradition, the involvement, the experience, and the shared time together. This is why people try to use the e-cigarette, because they are trying to create the image of the original thing that they love.

Take the human desire for communion, thanksgiving, and remembrance away and there is nothing left. Take everything from wine, leaving only the alcohol and not many will want it. There's more to wine or beer and other creations of mankind than "addiction." What are all of the other ingredients to a fine wine that make it desirable? First, there is the love and labor of growing the plant, watching it grow in the sun, worrying about its exposure to bad weather and insects. Then, there is the process of fermentation which I know nothing about. Finally, there is the act of drinking it, which people do for the exact same reasons they smoke tobacco.

People drink wine at Easter, at Passover, at dinners, and other places where opening the channels of relaxation and socialization are desired. People relax alone with a glass of wine, with a book, or even to aid sleep. It is not the wine that makes one an addict. Addiction is something that cannot be defined because it lays in the spirit and soul of a person. Alcohol and other substances that people use are like guns -- benign and only servants of the person using them. If one wants to use a gun or alcohol to harm another they will. It is the person, not the object or substance that is dangerous. A gun can be a weapon used to harm others, or it can be used as a form of defense against evil or to provide food.

Who is behind the cigarette and what are they using it for? Is the tobacco user burning babies or killing people? Or is the tobacco user thinking of ways to make the world better? Who is behind the glass of wine, behind the wheel of a car, behind the science, behind the money, behind the philanthropy? Each of these things is nothing without the person behind them. Money is nothing until a person makes it work for good or for bad.

We each are a force and we each make the objects and foods we consume either holy or cursed. And what is coming out of the pharmaceutical cartels and health departments is cursed because the people behind these entities are like vampires in search of blood to feed upon. These people don't see anything other than money and numbers. They hate freedom, they hate people, they hate people not addicted to evil. These people think that health is a healthy monopoly over the lives of people.

Addiction sells its soul, it doesn't function and think. It sits alone and is dark. Addiction destroys lives. Tobacco users out on the job, in college, filing taxes, buying homes, having children, serving in the military are not addicts. These people are highly functioning individuals that contribute billions of dollars and other assets not counted in monetary terms.

It is the monopoly pharmaceutical industry that is unsacred and addicted. What they accuse the common person of is not something most of us suffer from. The pharmaceutical industry behaves as a deranged meth addict, destroying the lives of children and family. It robs and murders to get its fix. The largest health issue in America is not tobacco or food, but the giant corporations that create a society so prohibitive and stressful that people die of stress-related disease due to unhappiness. If there are gifts upon this earth that can ameliorate and offer small respites from the stress, sadness and ignorance left for us after the wolves have torn apart our feast, leaving a decrepit and decayed carcass, then these gifts should not be despised or feared.

All tobacco is sacred and traditional. All synthetic pharmaceutical nicotine gums, patches, and candies are freebase and devoid of tradition. These products are anti-American and have tossed out everything good, including joy and happiness; leaving nothing but fear, hatred, poverty, and subjugation.

image: August Macke, Franz Marc, 1910