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.

How To Deal With TSA: Bathrobes and Slippers, NOT Violence and Mobs

My solution to the TSA: Bathrobes and fuzzy slippers.

I used to work with a lady that would say, "Kill 'em with kindness, kill 'em with kindness, that's what I always say," then, she'd laugh and take a big drag off her cigarette and exhale it out the window.

I've often found that these words are true and work better than obvious anger. For some reason, turning the other cheek and giving tyrants what they want and more, but in a way they hadn't planned on and that is humorous confuses and enrages them.

If the TSA, under the auspices of our government wants us naked and wants to make sure we aren't carrying weapons or explosives upon our bodies why not make things easier and cheaper and save the environment while we're at it? Those Rapiscanners and the TSA cost the country billions of dollars and waste energy and space and time.

Wouldn't it be far cheaper and easier if travelers arrived at the airport in bathrobes and fuzzy slippers? This way, instead of passing through the Rapiscan or having to endure a pat-down, one could simply open their bathrobe and show themselves and it would accomplish the same thing as a scan and also cut down on time-consuming pat-downs.

If we gave them what they wanted and more and were jolly and made a holiday of it there would be no sense in the body scanners or in all of the TSA and we'd save billions of dollars and have fought back in a non-violent and humorous way. Also, sales of bathrobes and slippers would sky rocket, helping private businesses and the economy.

But no, Americans won't do this. It's too easy. Americans will continue to rant and rave about the abuse of the TSA and the stories of men, women, children, and handicapped being defiled will continue. And the TSA will continue laughing at us and telling us they're only going to get more invasive and thorough.

I've wanted to write in the subject of mass panic and lynch mobs for awhile and now, I may. What the TSA is doing seems deliberately designed to cause mass violence and terror.

In the early part of the 1900s there were numerous lynch mobs and riots across the nation. At that time they were white on black mobs, but now the color lines are a bit blurred which makes it harder to see the similarities. But there is one commonality to American lynch mobs. That commonality is the story of a woman or a child having been brutally raped by a member or members of a minority group which the majority feels threatened by.

The story of the woman being raped is often an exaggeration of a real event or never occurred. A few people spread the story around and incite the fear and hatred of the men who turn out to protect their women and avenge this heinous crime. In a short time there is violence and chaos in the streets. Entire neighborhoods are burned and looted, many are killed and injured, and the average person is turned into an angry animal. These lynch mobs are usually incited by manipulators in unions or governments who are trying to prove their power to another group in power who has not made concessions to their demands. But more on that later.

Anyway, the point I am making is that the TSA's arrogant attitude and Homeland Security's attitude, telling us that we haven't seen nothing yet and that the abuses will continue inspite of public outcry are obvious signs that they want the American people to form into a lynch mob and string up a few TSA workers. Each new article and YouTube image of men, women, and children being abused kindles the fire. Unlike the exaggerated stories of the past of the white woman being raped by the black man, these stories are true and have imagery to back them up.

I am not saying we should ignore the abuses of the TSA, but I am concerned about the mass reaction to them. It seems to me that someone higher up is trying to prove a point with someone else and will use the average blind citizen to carry out the force. It seems to me that somewhere someone desires to shut down all airline travel.

The attack on the World Trade Center in 2001 shut down travel and grounded flights. How much more devastating will a nationwide lynch mob in our airports be? This would stop all travel, cause fear, and perhaps even stop all automobile travel due to martial law in many states. Evidently, we are at war, and for some reason our government thinks it's an autoimmune disorder and wants to make us attack it so that it can attack us--funded entirely by our tax dollars and blindness.

The enemy is us. It's you and I. Our government is treating us this way and will incite us into making it a reality. If only we could kill 'em with kindness and show up in our bathrobes and slippers as a peaceful yet effective demonstration of our power and sense of humor. If only.

Samuel Wolanyk chose to strip down to his underwear in San Diego in order to comply with TSA's need to make sure he was safe and was recorded by a woman. For some reason Wolanyk's compliance wasn't acceptable procedure and TSA wanted him to put his clothes back on so that he could have a pat-down. He and the woman that taped him are under arrest. Huh? If I had to guess, Wolanyk's choice to comply in a non-aggressive, sexy, and creative manner which "turned the other cheek," frightens TSA and Homeland Security more than anything yet. Way to go Wolanyk and may God Bless and Protect you. "Passenger Chooses Strip-Down Over Pat-Down," R. Stickney, NBC San Diego, 22 Nov. 2010 http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local-beat/Passenger-Chooses-Strip-Down-Over-Pat-Down-109872589.html?dr

Why You Should Read Lolita Before Traveling In the U.S.A.: American Travelers Are Lolita, and The TSA Is Humbert Humbert

In 1955 Vladimir Nabokov, a Russian emigre to the United States, published Lolita, a tale of a linguistically and aesthetically talented pedophile who runs off with his 12 year old step daughter, "Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta" (first lines of Lolita).

Lolita was not published in the U.S. until 1958 due to its pornographic subject matter. Nabokov intensely hated cruelty to others and sexual deviants. So why did he write a book from the viewpoint of the pedophile, Humbert Humbert, who has conned several generations of readers and academics with the beautiful account of his love and "protection" of a 12 year old girl?

Nabokov hated evil. He had escaped the Bolsheviks in Russia, then later, escaped the Nazis with his wife of Jewish descent and their young son. They arrived in America and fell in love with it. Nabokov's wife, Vera, promptly purchased a gun to replace the one she had left behind in Europe, and learned to drive.

Nabokov, a seemingly absent-minded butterfly-chasing professor with an innocence about him that relied upon his wife's ferocity and protection liked to look at things from a very detailed and scientific perspective. He hated evil and studied it, dissected it, and understood its minutest detail. He climbed into the mind of evil when he wrote Lolita, shocking readers and enchanting millions with the beauty of his language.

Lolita was a triumph and proved how easily a population can be tricked into accepting evil, calling it beautiful, spending entire lifetimes studying its details without ever getting to its ultimate meaning. Anyone can tear apart an engine, or dissect a body and name the parts and figure out how they operate, but most cannot figure out the ultimate meaning -- why was this human body created, what is its purpose? How does one get into the mind of the creator via the act of dissection and cataloguing of the parts? It is impossible if one has no love or passion driving them. Creators and inventors generally have more love and passion which compels them to work harder and longer at something, creating a thing that changes the world for better.

Most inventions and creations were initially designed for the betterment of mankind or to add beauty or freedom. But many inventions are corrupted and used for evil purposes. The written word was made to better the world, but evil tries to corrupt it. The same goes for all art. We see technology abused, being used to make life harder rather than easier. Even Lolita, meant to show us evil from its own perspective, has been corrupted and adopted as a wonderful and dreamy tale by many gullible girls and joking young men, none of whom are aware that they have been artfully conned and that Nabokov proves his case of how evil survives and is accepted into the world.

Nabokov, the great enchanter and magician deceives many with his artistic slight of hand, keeping our focus upon the aesthetic, causing us to accept Humbert Humbert's defence because it is merely art and has no ultimate meaning or moral. If art is only aesthetic, then beauty has no meaning, thus what is the point of creating it?

Nabokov, a talented lepidopterist, studied butterflies and moths and was fascinated by their beauty. These creatures are patterned in ways that attract and enchant us, but also hide them from evil. Some butterflies blend in with their surroundings while others mimic dangerous animals to avoid being eaten. Nabokov learned that a butterfly's patterning is not merely aesthetic, but also enhances its survival. And this is what art's purpose is. Art is not merely aesthetic, but driven by truth and survival. If we cannot learn from art how to be wiser, better, kinder, and more graceful to others; to have pity, then art has no purpose, much as a shiny car has no meaning or purpose without an engine. A car is nice to look at, but without an engine it gets us nowhere.

The reason I expound upon Nabokov's Lolita and art is that more than ever America is deceived by the Humbert Humberts who claim they love us and want to protect us, while molesting us in various ways. We are made to pass through Naked Body Scanners, which undress us and expose us to dangerous mutagenic radiation. We are searched and groped by TSA officials as we travel the country, much as Lolita was groped by Humbert Humbert along the highways and byways of America. The stories now include "enhanced" searches that have left many feeling sexually violated after having had their penises, anuses, labia, and breasts felt by TSA screeners.

Now, does Humbert's love for Lolita feel nice and beautiful? Sure, he attacked the pornographic movie maker that ran off with Lolita, because that kind of art is immoral and degrading; but what of Humbert's protective and fatherly love for her? More than ever Nabokov's Lolita is important, for we all are her.

Was Lolita clean and innocent as the wind-driven snow? Was she faultless? No. But was that any excuse for Humbert Humbert to molest her? Was Lolita a kind and sweet child? No. She was obnoxious and sometimes crude. Was she more deserving of Humbert's sexual predation because of this? No. Americans are like this 12 year old girl and even though we are annoying and obnoxious and immoral it does not mean that we deserve to be treated by our states, by our fellows that work at TSA, as criminals in need of being stripped down or molested as we travel. Humbert Humbert protected Lolita as much as our airports are protecting us.

This is not beautiful, this is not America. This isn't even Nazi Germany. This is worse. This is worse for numerous reasons. Firstly, it's far worse and more abusive passing through United States airport security than in the rest of the world. America is supposed to be less abusive than the rest of the world. Second, the atrocities of the Nazis and American eugenicists and corporations in the first part of the 20th century are not so far removed from memory that we have forgotten them and what they looked like -- and what is going on in the United States right now resembles these past times.

The TSA's arrogance is only a small, yet extremely visible HINT as to what period of history we have regressed to. If a Naked Body Scanner, a long line in which one is divested of their possessions and shoes, hurried along, and subjected to physical searches which involve humble and silent endurance while one's anal and sexual reproduction areas are touched by uniformed employees of the government before being boarded upon crowded vehicles traveling somewhere doesn't wake us up and cause deja vu; then far worse than what happened in Nazi-controlled areas of Europe awaits us.

Rather than humbly lining up like the Jews, believing they'd eventually return home, we should stop cowering in embarrassment and start saying to hell with the "law," which breaks every law written into our soul. American travelers aren't terrorists and neither are visitors from other countries. The terrorists are the ones that apply for TSA jobs, and willingly carry out the orders of their superiors. If TSA employees were intelligent Americans they'd go on strike until they no longer were made to mistreat their fellow Americans. The terrorists are the ones groping for your wallet and now, your genitals. Soon, the women and children will be divided from the men, then the children from the women as enhanced airport security. It's already happening on an individual level. What next? Confiscation of Passport and Citizenship? Child sacrifice? When will their appetite be filled?

Wake up, America. Don't let the lives lost of the millions of Jews and others be for nothing. It's time to wake up out of our self-righteous and false morals. We are imperfect, we are obnoxious, we are all sinners, and we're not afraid of it. The Nazis were afraid of sin and imperfection and tried to hide it and eradicate it. We don't have to fall for that lie.

America wasn't founded as a utopia away from imperfection, but a place that would toughen up and accept it. That First Amendment isn't for the perfect or the safe people, but to protect the imperfect and those that speak unsafe things even if they are the truth and offend others. Our entire Constitution was designed to protect the so-called "impure," the "unsafe," the "sinful," the obnoxious, the rude, and the human. If the Constitution was only for the perfect and the moral, then our Founding Fathers would not have had any rights.

According, to Britain the American Revolutionaries were a bunch of terrorists, criminals, and tax evaders. And, according to our side of history they were brave, courageous, educated lovers of freedom. It all depends on who is writing history as to what the words "terrorist," "art," "pedophile," and "free" mean. We want to be on the right side of history. The trick is figuring out what the "right" side is. Usually, it's the side that is willing to break the law to show pity and hospitality to others when they are traveling in an inhospitable world.

America, this is not ancient Sodom where travelers were subjected to rape when visiting that town. Why are we forcing ourselves upon travelers? How does it protect us to treat citizens and visitors to this country this way? We are not Nazis, not Humbert Humbert, not Sodomites -- are we?

image: George Washington, Commander of the Terrorist Americans who threatened Britain's safety and health, also known as The Father Of Our Country, The United States Of America.

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

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.

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

One Life Saved From Nicotine Replacement "Therapy" and Misc. Other News

One life saved from Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT), many more to left to save.

I am pleased to announce that I have saved one soul from the curse of nicotine lozenges and their threat to the health of good people. A few days ago, I was greeted by an acquaintance, who lifted their cigarette towards me, gave me a hug and told me that they had taken my advice and quit sucking. Hallelujah!

This reformed NRT user informed me that they felt good about it and were glad they had quit sucking because the lozenges are very unconscious and habit-forming in comparison to cigarettes. I agreed. Anything that is kept in the mouth like a candy for long periods of time becomes thoughtless and unconscious. Smoking a cigarette is very conscious and not a habit.

A habit is something that one doesn't think about, isn't aware they are doing, but does with no pleasure. A habit is similar to knuckle-popping, nose-picking, hair-twisting, nail-biting, gum-chewing and other annoying habits people are prone to do. It's very difficult to quit a habit and retrain one's patterns. But a cigarette user cannot make an unconscious habit of smoking, thus if one chooses to quit they have more control over their ability to do so.

Over the week I have encountered a few interesting people. One, a Vietnam vet about to retire from the Postal Service in California. He looked clean cut and fatherly, but was a typical drug-infused, closed minded person of his generation. He lives on marijuana, mushrooms, and peyote (which he said cured him of his LSD use). He's had several heart surgeries, and along with the hallucinogenics takes what the doctor deals him too: statins and a host of others. He thinks tobacco is evil. Hmm. That drug regimen is quite effective.

The Postal Vietnam Vet informed me that he is moving from California upon retirement to get away from the airport because it gives him flashbacks (sounds like he's nicotinic acid deficient). He said California was the most open-minded state in the Union and where I live is infested with "Tea Baggers." Nice. I love it when I meet open-minded people trying to leave the places they've destroyed to come and destroy my state with their open-mindedness.

Why is it that people who call themselves "Open Minded" are always unhappy, angry, doped up on drugs and medications and judgemental hypocrites? And why is it that this man's generation, in their 60's got to party it up with the Grateful Dead and the Loving Spoonful, have "Free Love," tobacco, beer, and marijuana; but my generation is told these are all sins? Sounds like greed to me.

Many of the 60s generation are still drug addicts and still immature. They fried their brains on all of the acid and now, prescriptions; and are paranoid freaks. They pass many of the laws against freedom, calling it "protection," and think that driving hybrid cars saves the planet even though they had to rip apart the land in China to obtain the rare metals required in those land-raping hybrids so their exhaust won't stink in the U.S. Anyway, this guy made me angry with his arrogance. Maybe, if he stopped the hallucinogenics he'd stop having flashbacks.

Thankfully, my faith in the older generation was restored after a conversation later with another older man who was in a wheel chair because his leg was missing. I don't know if he was a Vietnam Vet too. He came rolling out onto the pavement after the kind bartenders helped him out the door so that he could have a cigarette break (tobacco bans are particularly discriminatory to those with handicaps). Here was a person with a physical handicap, yet far less handicapped than the Postal Californian.

The man in the wheel chair had no bitterness and seemed quite happy. He could carry on an intelligent conversation without being arrogant. I told him to read Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man, a fantastic feat of American literature about a character that most readers and academics are trained to believe is a Savior type. In my estimation Invisible Man is about ignorance and our blindness, even as readers, being deceived into believing that a great and ignorant orator is a savior, although he's the greatest evil on the street. The man in the wheel chair laughed when I described the book and the brilliance of Ellison's main character, saying, "So, the character's like Obama?"

And then, there is the "subversive" activity. I encountered a person that informed me that we have three years to get ready. Three years. He's building fuel cells in preparation. He told me that his uncle is working for the government at an abandoned asbestos mine, welding shackles into rail road cars. I don't know what to say about things like this. What am I supposed to believe?

I don't believe there were shackles in the cattle cars used to haul the Jews and Gypsies to the German chemical and pharmaceutical industry's camps. When people are packed in tightly there is no need for shackles, which offer far too much comfort and individual space, things antithetical to a Marxist or other fascist Utopia's mode of operation. I think someone's uncle was telling tall tales. I hope so.

And then, there is the Apocalypse, which is actually an eye-opening. I've had some plague activity here. I'm not sure which Bowl Judgement hailstones are. But I've had them. It looks like the heavenly host descended upon the land and whacked everything into shreds with baseball bats. There are more leaves and branches on the ground than on the trees and shrubs. My car got beaten, the trees have had their bark stripped, and several people lost windows in their homes. The gardens are decimated. And another Plague Storm game is scheduled for later in the day.

And I wonder, when these Acts of God, as Nature's violent tempers are called, strike a nation already bowed under the burdens of over taxation, joblessness, rules, and regulations; can it stand? Will the people groan, unable to make the State Pyramid Scheme Bricks without straw? How will we function when there are not enough hours in a day, and no money to pay our taxes with? How will those in their 60s afford their drugs if the young Israelites can't support them? Cattle cars? I hope not.

All of you older hippies, now turned yuppie, beware how much law you pass onto us younger ones, beware how much behavior modification, and regulation and unconstitutional fascism you lay upon our backs. When young people aren't free they feel burdened and bitter, and the elderly are among the first to disappear. Have mercy on us young ones and we'll have mercy on you.

Philip Morris' "Avalanche" Scenario Predicted Current Economic Woes In 1999

In the 1990s Philip Morris set up a very interesting program of forecasts called Project Sunrise. Contrary to the common media depiction, there is nothing evil or insidious about Project Sunrise. In fact, these forecasts of America's possible future 10 to 20 years out from the 1990s is fascinating. Project Sunrise set up four possible future scenarios for the United States, naming them "Mostly Sunny," "Avalanche," "New Game," and "Blade Runner."

I have one document with each of the four scenarios side by side. This one is interesting because it covers everything that is part of our daily life from economy, health, socialization, technology, politics, and even a pharmaceutical nicotine monopoly. From a literary standpoint it's fascinating to see how there are so many paths we can choose and the predictable results of them.

Avalanche is the worst possible scenario envisioned for the country with freedoms limited, privacy eroded, hatred high, and a national healthcare program. The only hope is the younger generation who may, with persistence and wisdom beyond our years, throw off the yoke of bondage placed upon us by the self-obsessed Baby Boomers, thieves of our livelihood and freedoms.

The following is from a presentation on the "Avalanche" scenario of the future by Tim Beane for Philip Morris in 1999. Of course, some of the predictions were off, such as predicting Al Gore would win the presidency after Clinton's time was up. But generally, speaking it is still fairly accurate:

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vex75c00/pdf

"It is now October 2006 and, in contrast to Mostly Sunny and New Game, these are the images which have shaped the world for smokers in the U.S. over the past ten years. In Avalanche, a victimization ethos and an increasingly polarized society have created an environment where smokers, smoking and tobacco companies experience losses on many fronts. Smoker discrimination, restrictive legislation, litigation setbacks, negative media coverage, powerful enemies [Big Pharmaceutical Nicotine, Johnson & Johnson, Robert Wood Johnson (Synthetic Toxic Nicotine)Foundation, Corrupt States] and ally erosion define our world.

"How did our environment deteriorate to this point? Well, in retrospect, the seeds of our current situation were sown in late 1996 when, following Clinton's re-election, the U.S. economy entered a deep and protracted recession. Unemployment grew rapidly, the budget deficit ballooned and the combination of a Democratic President and a Republican Congress was unable to deal with the economic situation.

"An angry national mood, fueled by the paralysis in Washington, led to a broad based desire for an interventionist government. In the 1998 mid-term elections, Democrats took control of the House and Senate. This resulted in a more liberal government and one which conveniently blamed smokers and tobacco companies for many of society's financial and health care problems.

"By playing on the prejudices of a public looking for scapegoats and easy answers, it soon became a relatively simple task for the newly empowered government to implement strong-arm social policies targeting smokers, smoking, and tobacco companies.

"The boomers populating the second Clinton administration, and later, Gore's first, eagerly did what they felt was best for society. A single payer healthcare system was established. New environmental, health and safety requirements were passed. A tougher FDA evolved, one with undisputed control over cigarettes.

"This environment resulted in an ever increasing erosion of smoker rights. The social acceptability of smokers and smoking reached new lows as the very act of smoking came to be seen by many as impinging on everyone else's privacy. Although the importance of privacy was highly valued, events occurred which in effect compromised individual privacy.

"For instance, in an effort to allocate societal costs on those who were deemed responsible, legislation passed which made selected information about a person's health and personal habits available to employers, landlords, and insurance companies. This information could be used in making employment decisions and in determining insurance premiums. As you might expect, smokers did not fare well in these situations.

"When and where a person could smoke became more and more constrained. The rights of non-smokers began taking legal precedence whenever smokers and non-smokers were together. Depending on who they were with, smokers could even be prevented from smoking in their own homes or cars.

"Even outdoors, smokers are now harassed and marginalized because society views smoking as a costly vice. Costly for the smoker yes, but more importantly, the prevailing attitude is that smoking is costly for society as a whole. Simply put, the attitude now is your smoking costs me money so stop doing it.

"The cumulative impact of all of this is that smoking has become almost devoid of pleasure. Almost everyone, including some smokers, views smoking as a dirty habit, one not worthy of a respectable person. Smoker's are angry at themselves, the government, the anti's and even the tobacco companies. They are also ashamed of themselves and of how they are now defined by this new society--'the nicotine dependant weaklings.'

"Tobacco companies are severely limited in their ability to improve the situation for smokers. The anti movement is strong, well-funded [by Big Pharma Nicotine companies and "philanthropies" such as Nicorette and Robert Wood Johnson (Synthetic Nicotine) Foundation] and emboldened by its successes...."

"This media frenzy is epitomized by Smoke Out, a popular new TV show which follows law enforcement officers as they conduct sting operations, intercept cigarette smugglers and track down smokers as they light up in restricted areas."

"Smokers were singled out to help ease the country's economic problems through large and repeated excise tax increases...."

"So in summary, what does our world look like in 2006 [or 2010]? We see angry and alienated smokers who are segregated and subjected to discrimination in very real ways. We see smoking as ever more restricted both legislatively and by an intolerant society. We see government controlled by people who think they know what's best for everyone and are given the mandate to act on this knowledge. We see tobacco companies without allies and who are hamstrung in their ability to defend themselves and to compete [against Big State & Pharma Nicotine]. In short, we see a set of individuals and an industry frozen in an onrushing avalanche[of Big Pharma Nicotine candy, gums; and suicide, cancer, and diabetes-inducing drugs marketed variously as Nicotine Replacement Therapy, Breathing Cessation, Life Replacement Therapy, or simply Uncle Sam Wants You(th Dead)].

"If there is hope, it is in the fact that young adults resent the controls of big government and the pious morality of the aging boomer generation [yes, we do!]. They believe strongly in personal choice and as their rebellion begins to translate into political and economic power [if the boomers don't suck out our life blood first], opportunities may occur to reshape the debate. The boomers will not go quietly [oh, they may, since they're addicted to toxic Big Pharma dope in their bottles] however and it may be a long time before the avalanche recedes and a more open society emerges" ("Avalanche" scenario, Tim Beane, Philip Morris Tobacco, 1999; emphasis and brackets, mine).

My Town Is Dying

My town is dying. It looks alive, but I can feel it, as if its spirit is drowsy, blurry, and apathetic. My town puts on more makeup and visits the plastic surgeon, but beneath the surface the bones are cracking.

The big houses are standing empty, and all of the big plans for eco friendly green show neighborhoods where everyone lives a sterile and clean life of health, vanity, micro fleece, shiny biking costumes with butt pads and Birkenstocks and beany caps are empty fields on the edge of town. A big scam. Someone sold the idea and got paid for it.

Hundreds of people were made to move from a very nice, green trailer court with mature pines and willows and large lots and good families. Now it's a haven for transients and needle pushers. Many of the mobile homes still remain with their doors and windows hanging loose, the stairs tilting off to the side, the grass tall. And next door is a neighborhood of palaces with moats and giant windows. They probably believed that they would soon be next door to one of the trendiest neighborhoods in the nation with shops, nature trails, and the old flour refinery turned into a microbrewery.

But no. The refinery is still a middle of the night haunt for kids with cans of spray paint and a knowledge of satanic symbolism. It still smells of skunks and the owls still fly out in the dark night. It's still as spooky and dark as when I was a kid.

I knew the eco dreams were false. How could forcing hundreds of people to leave a nice affordable and quiet trailer park work? I knew it was a scam because it was all about vanity and impressing the nation with a first of its kind facade. Really, do people live above their businesses anymore and hang tomatoes out to prove they're sustainable? People want that early 1900's dream, but without the reality and nitty gritty that goes with it. The real living was in the trailer court, but those people didn't matter. And I was right. Rather than making life; these fake, greedy, vain, and self-righteous people created a black hole -- death.

And others are complaining about the old brewery building with its chain link fence around it to protect from falling brick. Half the building is demolished. I used to spend quite a bit of time in that building, as several businesses I had contact with were located there. The neighborhood is upset that the building sits there rotting, neither being torn down or restored. They wish the city would force the owners to follow through with their plans of a big restaurant and new brewery. Hmm. Who would the customers be if it was finished? My town is dying, and a dead entity doesn't go out to sip foamy beers or eat fresh ravioli.

Main Street looks nice with its boutiques and hanging flower baskets. But it has a big hole blown in it where a gas explosion took out part of a block. The owner of one of the bars, now a black hole, was a prime supporter of the smoking ban. At the time he was taking his bar from a famous dive that was so packed patrons stood shoulder to shoulder; changing it into one of those granite-tiled artsy-fartsy places where the doctors and boring people go. He knew his new and trendy bar would not be able to compete any longer if it was the only non-smoking bar on the street. And it didn't. No one went after the remodel and the shiny granite bar with napkins was installed. He destroyed a landmark.

The same bar owner wanted the town to put up millions to build his kid a hockey rink too. This same bar owner has another bar across town where the older and wealthier gather to swing. It looks clean and "safe," but it's not. It's the only bar in town where I've seen a paid cameraman on a regular basis filming the girls. It's the only bar in town with wet t-shirt contests, foam baths, bikini contests with the bikinis supplied by the bar. Meanwhile that cameraman is rolling, and so is every football player's camera phone.

Has anyone ever asked if the bar owner is selling the images of those girls? And it's the only bar in town where it's common for married people to get with married people as if it's nothing. But it's clean and decent and serves pink drinks. All of this goes on below the surface and one has to watch very closely, but if one knows what to look for it's the most immoral place in town. I knew my town was dying when this became a popular location. A few years ago, people had to keep it secret that they went to a phony place. Now, that bar owner, a good upstanding citizen, wants the city to "loan" him money to rebuild his black hole on Main Street. He'll never pay it back.

My town is dying. It has a big new parking garage with business space attached. It was built with Hurricane Katrina relief money although we're nowhere near hurricane country. But it's empty and quiet.

My town is dying. The frat house, a former resident's mansion sits on an entire city block, looking pretty and wasting money since the city bought and refurbished it with tax payer money, rather than selling it to a law firm that would have made it into a property that benefited the community by paying taxes. This historic mansion eats up federal tax dollars. Somehow it managed to get tens of thousands of that Economic Stimulus money for an energy-saving remodel, which will save the taxpayer's on energy costs. Wouldn't it have saved the tax payers to have let a private business own and maintain it? How does it save money to spend taxpayer money? The government is the only entity that can say it's saving money by spending other people's money. When the rest of us spend other people's money we're called trust funders, irresponsible, greedy, and wasteful.

My town is dying. Last October the smoking ban went into effect. Now, on a Friday night the doors of the formerly crowded and bustling bars stand open and silently sad. The pool tables have sticks laying across them rather than in the hands of patrons. It used to be that one had to lay their quarters down and fight for a pool table. No longer. It use to be that one had to jostle and muscle their way to the front of the bar for a drink. It use to be loud and boisterous by 11 o'clock when the drinks began sinking in and the work week wore off. No longer. Now, there is a silent and wary group of tobacco smokers lurking outside the doors, wondering if they should even bother going back in.

Now, the bars are trying to lure people back in for a good time with live bands. But it's still dead most nights, with only a handful of people searching for other people. I use to think it was the music that drew the people, but now, I wonder if the music is the people. Without people there is no music, no laughing, no drunkenness, no joy, no sin, no money. Who do you play for when there is no audience or when the audience keeps walking out for a cigarette in the middle of the song?

My town is dying and people are looking for life. The people think they're going out for drinks and music, but really they are going out to be with others. Now, when a big band comes to town it sells out because everyone knows that everyone else will also be there. Now, the few people out all gather at one location, leaving every other establishment nearly empty. It didn't use to be this way, before the smoking ban. Even when a large event was occurring somewhere else, the crowd was evenly and generously distributed amongst the bars. People knew that even if they didn't go to the big show, they'd still have a good time in a large crowd somewhere else. In fact, it was even nice because certain crowds of people would clear out for the show, leaving an opportunity to meet an entirely new set of people.

I live in a college town famous for selling more beer than any other town west of the Mississippi. I wonder how that statistic is faring these days? Do dead people drink? My state lost about $40 million in tax revenues the first two months of the smoking ban. But of, course, it's saving lives to have a pharmaceutical Nicorette (sucks) monopoly. How is it that when the government says it's saving lives and money it's actually destroying lives and ability to make money? Is that how the rest of us save money, by finding ways of preventing our businesses from having customers and by preventing customers from patronizing favorite business. What an excellent way to cut costs -- get rid of customers and steady revenue. How novel. It's like Nazi eugenics applied to the economy. They saved a lot of money getting rid of millions of business owners and customers. They killed them. My town is dying.

The police force is doubled and the new Taj MaJail is nearly finished. Who will they lock up if the tobacco smokers aren't out drinking? Who will they lock up if no one has money to leave their homes? Someone has to pay the gigantic bill, and this town doesn't have enough crime to foot the bill. They will have to make criminals out of the tax payers and property owners one way or another. Maybe, all red cars will be targeted, or redheads, or people wearing red... Thank goodness, the legislature thought ahead last session and banned those red light cameras. My town had them everywhere and could hardly wait to start fining those sliding across the line on winter roads, or making right hand turns. They're still there, but illegal and can't be used until a special interest pays someone off to repeal the anti-red light camera law.

My town is dying. I can hear it. It's a silent sound and no one wants to hear it. The talk is how our local economy is impervious and strong. Whatever. How can one single town stand alone? It's like saying someone's hand is strong while the rest of the body is dying. Will the hand live without the body? A body can live without the hand, but not vice versa. My town is not the body. It is arrogant and blind. It is Californicated and a pretty little whore. It used to be a rather natural kind of girl with stray hair, cut-off shorts, a fun smile, and old cars; but somewhere she got the idea that guys like ultra-plucked eyebrows, big shiny dangles, and four-inch heels and a snotty attitude. It's not the free and easy place it was only a few years ago. My town is uptight and vain. It's dying and soon won't have a night spot to go to and be seen in. Nor will it have a day spot.

My town is dying. A town is the people. Why are the people so lethargic and unable to exercise their simple constitutional rights? Why are the parts of the body attacking, banning, and regulating the other parts? Isn't each part essential? Are we like a 90 year old body, slowly shutting down? Are we too old? My town is dying.

But somewhere in the night, in the corners are others like me, seeking out the flames, the lit matches, lighters, the spark of life and the scent of a familiar aroma--the sweet smell of recognition. Somewhere others seek communion with like-minded souls, and we will know each other when we meet as long lost family members. The reunion will bring joy and we will take each other's hand and rise above the old and dead parts, although mournful of a time and place now only a memory. My town may be dying, but I am not.

image: Rembrandt, Blinding of Samson