More Second Hand Smoke Scare Tactics....

[scandal 951]

Choosing FOR people and choosing one group of people over another is wrong. Let the market decide.

It gets pretty tedious hearing from you over and over and over again, in CAPITAL LETTERS AND EXCLAMATION MARKS !!! NO LESS how much you favor free choice in everything and anything. Except, of course, for the right of people to worship as they please and as protected by our Constitution. When it comes to religion, apparently the great Gary has deemed that no choice is needed and we should simply outlaw any expression of Faith.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/283661-when-does-a-religion-stop-being-evil/page__view__findpost__p__4301742

Never. All religion should just be banned. ALL. Problem solved.

hypocrite - a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives

Synonyms: dissembler, dissimulator, phoney, phony, pretender

[Danno 1,228]

Sounds like you're ok with me burning some toxic chemicals in the backyard next to your house while you barbeque. Why, that's very neighborly of you. If your testicles fall off you can marinade them on throw them on the barby. Who's gonna know, right?

Just so you know.... I burn all kinds of crazy stuff in my own back yard! (not 20 yards from the BBQ)

I use to recycle... till they got all NAZI with it, now just to spite em I burn all that Styrofoam and plastic.

I still recycle lots of work related Cardboard but I might stop that if they take the computer chip monitoring to the next level.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Just so you know.... I burn all kinds of crazy stuff in my own back yard! (not 20 yards from the BBQ)

I use to recycle... till they got all NAZI with it, now just to spite em I burn all that Styrofoam and plastic.

I still recycle lots of work related Cardboard but I might stop that if they take the computer chip monitoring to the next level.

You should burn your clothes. That'll surely win your neighbors over.

[scandal 951]

Just so you know.... I burn all kinds of crazy stuff in my own back yard! (not 20 yards from the BBQ)

I use to recycle... till they got all NAZI with it, now just to spite em I burn all that Styrofoam and plastic.

I still recycle lots of work related Cardboard but I might stop that if they take the computer chip monitoring to the next level.

Danno, who is the "they" in the above? Is there a specific person or persons you are upset with, or is this a vague "they are out to get me" rant? Shades of paranoia?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Danno, who is the "they" in the above? Is there a specific person or persons you are upset with, or is this a vague "they are out to get me" rant? Shades of paranoia?

His neighbors. They've got it in for him since the first time he had a plastic bonfire in the neighborhood and ruined their barbeque.

[scandal 951]

His neighbors. They've got it in for him since the first time he had a plastic bonfire in the neighborhood and ruined their barbeque.

His neighbors are Nazis who are embedding computer chips to monitor his recycling activities? Wow. That's quite some neighborhood.

[Danno 1,228]

Danno, who is the "they" in the above? Is there a specific person or persons you are upset with, or is this a vague "they are out to get me" rant? Shades of paranoia?

"They" are.... I guess, city council and "they" are not out to get me as much as they are out to monitor my recyclables.

Paranoia??? What do you really mean by that?

[Danno 1,228]

And for those who have not heard of the new-wave of trash control via Big Local Gov........

'Spy chips' in Charlotte's recycling bins

By Tara Servatius

There, at the end of your driveway it sits. A perfectly normal-looking, brand-new 96-gallon cart for recycling dropped off by the city. Yet, it is more than it seems.

Embedded inside is a chip that will help city government track recycling practices at your address and target those who fall short with recycling re-education. The chip will be coded to your address and to a serial number on your can. When read by an electronic reader, it will help the city keep track of which residences are recycling and which are not. The data on the recycling habits of individual residences will be stored by the city for three years, says City of Charlotte Special Projects Manager Brandi Williams, though no names will be attached to them.

"Participation data will allow city staff to focus educational initiatives in low-participating geographic areas," Williams wrote in a recent e-mail to me.

The new bins cost the city $12 million, the same amount the city says it will save by going to a new, more efficient system. City bureaucrats say that serial numbers on the old cans are currently manually recorded to addresses, and this will just make things easier. The program shouldn't be controversial.................

http://charlotte.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/_spy_chips_in_charlotte_s_recycling_bins/Content?oid=947507

[spookyturtle 9,466]

And for those who have not heard of the new-wave of trash control via Big Local Gov........

'Spy chips' in Charlotte's recycling bins

By Tara Servatius

There, at the end of your driveway it sits. A perfectly normal-looking, brand-new 96-gallon cart for recycling dropped off by the city. Yet, it is more than it seems.

Embedded inside is a chip that will help city government track recycling practices at your address and target those who fall short with recycling re-education. The chip will be coded to your address and to a serial number on your can. When read by an electronic reader, it will help the city keep track of which residences are recycling and which are not. The data on the recycling habits of individual residences will be stored by the city for three years, says City of Charlotte Special Projects Manager Brandi Williams, though no names will be attached to them.

"Participation data will allow city staff to focus educational initiatives in low-participating geographic areas," Williams wrote in a recent e-mail to me.

The new bins cost the city $12 million, the same amount the city says it will save by going to a new, more efficient system. City bureaucrats say that serial numbers on the old cans are currently manually recorded to addresses, and this will just make things easier. The program shouldn't be controversial.................

http://charlotte.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/_spy_chips_in_charlotte_s_recycling_bins/Content?oid=947507

You've got to be kidding. Big brother is watching........................your trash.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

You've got to be kidding. Big brother is watching........................your trash.

helping to fix the world. one condom wrapper at a time!

[Pooky 3,828]

And for those who have not heard of the new-wave of trash control via Big Local Gov........

'Spy chips' in Charlotte's recycling bins

By Tara Servatius

There, at the end of your driveway it sits. A perfectly normal-looking, brand-new 96-gallon cart for recycling dropped off by the city. Yet, it is more than it seems.

Embedded inside is a chip that will help city government track recycling practices at your address and target those who fall short with recycling re-education. The chip will be coded to your address and to a serial number on your can. When read by an electronic reader, it will help the city keep track of which residences are recycling and which are not. The data on the recycling habits of individual residences will be stored by the city for three years, says City of Charlotte Special Projects Manager Brandi Williams, though no names will be attached to them.

"Participation data will allow city staff to focus educational initiatives in low-participating geographic areas," Williams wrote in a recent e-mail to me.

The new bins cost the city $12 million, the same amount the city says it will save by going to a new, more efficient system. City bureaucrats say that serial numbers on the old cans are currently manually recorded to addresses, and this will just make things easier. The program shouldn't be controversial.................

http://charlotte.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/_spy_chips_in_charlotte_s_recycling_bins/Content?oid=947507

Seriously?

I rather thought you were paranoid. Guess not.

[Ban Hammer 13,512]

Seriously?

I rather thought you were paranoid. Guess not.

just because one is paranoid that doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

[Jenn! 918]

That's one good thing about living in an apartment - they can't tell who's not doing their recycling. Phew.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

It gets pretty tedious hearing from you over and over and over again, in CAPITAL LETTERS AND EXCLAMATION MARKS !!! NO LESS how much you favor free choice in everything and anything. Except, of course, for the right of people to worship as they please and as protected by our Constitution. When it comes to religion, apparently the great Gary has deemed that no choice is needed and we should simply outlaw any expression of Faith.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/283661-when-does-a-religion-stop-being-evil/page__view__findpost__p__4301742

hypocrite - a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives

Synonyms: dissembler, dissimulator, phoney, phony, pretender

Glad you read what I write, and apprently keep an archive of it. MUCH better than being IGNORED!!! Thanks.

I am speaking tongue in cheek about religion. It was a stupid question, I provided a ridiculous answer. You forgot to post the question I was responding to...also known as "taken out of context". I couldn't care less which fairy tale you worship. Simply keep any semblence of it from affecting my life and we will be fine. I am not an atheist (a religion in itself) and I make no attempt and support no attempt to infringe on your religion, whatever it is.

If you post what I write, seriously, you would post that I supported having a mosque built on private property in New York City for example. But such would not be conducive to your post which was intended only to bash me because you cannot agree with me even when you agree with me. Really, why post anything at all if you have to be so silly?

I will volunteer to defend your freedom of religion if you keep it to yourself.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Gary and Alla

[Danno 1,228]

More to the subject, remember when this report caused so much trouble?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Passive smoking doesn't cause cancer - official

By Victoria Macdonald, Health Correspondent

Action for Smoking and Health

Passive Smoking: History Repeats Itself [18 Oct '97] - British Medical Journal

THE world's leading health organisation has withheld from publication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could even have a protective effect.

The astounding results are set to throw wide open the debate on passive smoking health risks. The World Health Organisation, which commissioned the 12-centre, seven-country European study has failed to make the findings public, and has instead produced only a summary of the results in an internal report.

Despite repeated approaches, nobody at the WHO headquarters in Geneva would comment on the findings last week. At its International Agency for Research on Cancer in Lyon, France, which coordinated the study, a spokesman would say only that the full report had been submitted to a science journal and no publication date had been set.

The findings are certain to be an embarrassment to the WHO, which has spent years and vast sums on anti-smoking and anti-tobacco campaigns. The study is one of the largest ever to look at the link between passive smoking - or environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) - and lung cancer, and had been eagerly awaited by medical experts and campaigning groups.

Yet the scientists have found that there was no statistical evidence that passive smoking caused lung cancer. The research compared 650 lung cancer patients with 1,542 healthy people. It looked at people who were married to smokers, worked with smokers, both worked and were married to smokers, and those who grew up with smokers.

The results are consistent with their being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer. The summary, seen by The Telegraph, also states: "There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood."

A spokesman for Action on Smoking and Health said the findings "seem rather surprising given the evidence from other major reviews on the subject which have shown a clear association between passive smoking and a number of diseases." Roy Castle, the jazz musician and television presenter who died from lung cancer in 1994, claimed that he contracted the disease from years of inhaling smoke while performing in pubs and clubs.

A report published in the British Medical Journal last October was hailed by the anti-tobacco lobby as definitive proof when it claimed that non-smokers living with smokers had a 25 per cent risk of developing lung cancer. But yesterday, Dr Chris Proctor, head of science for BAT Industries, the tobacco group, said the findings had to be taken seriously. "If this study cannot find any statistically valid risk you have to ask if there can be any risk at all.

"It confirms what we and many other scientists have long believed, that while smoking in public may be annoying to some non-smokers, the science does not show that being around a smoker is a lung-cancer risk." The WHO study results come at a time when the British Government has made clear its intention to crack down on smoking in thousands of public places, including bars and restaurants.

The Government's own Scientific Committee on Smoking and Health is also expected to report shortly - possibly in time for this Wednesday's National No Smoking day - on the hazards of passive smoking.

http://web.archive.org/web/20021128202555/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1998/03/08/wtob08.html