No, wait, it's not a fact, it's a reductio ad absurdum ...
Whatever.
What is the reason given by the anti-smoking puritans for 'plain packaging' (which won't actually be plain, of course, but rather covered in anti-smoking graffiti)?
There seems to be two: firstly the one I comment on below - the hypnotic trance which comes upon anyone who sees a brand image of a tobacco product, over-riding their own free will and the influence of a decade of brain-washing in the schools, and turning the unsuspecting victim into a 'Manchurian Smoker'.
The other reason is; the tobacco companies don't want it. ... And? That's it. The tobacco companies don't want it, therefore WE, the puritan fanatics of the anti-smoking lobby, therefore conclude that WE do want it.
Hence we find over at their new propaganda site a page entitled 'Good Quotes on Plain (sic) Packaging', which is a list of comments from industry sources, showing their opposition to the plan. This is apparently enough to claim 'quod erat demonstrandum'.
But surely, if this is the argument, there are other things the tobacco companies will object to even more? Surely mandatory goat sodomisation at point of purchase as a condition of purchase would be even more objectionable? And if it saves one life ...
Public health measure, or pretext to amass a huge stash of goat porn? Anti-smoking groups: no commentI know what you're thinking, dear readers: Don't give 'em any ideas! For, as we know, yesterday's parody has a nasty habit of becoming tomorrow's reality, and if there is a bottom to the pit of their fanaticism, it has yet to be plumbed.
5 comments:
Good luck with that....
Is the smoker to be the active or passive agent in the devilishly clever scheme of ASH? And will the goat(s) have to be kept behind a screen in the shop?
PTB,
by the look of that goat, you might want to brace yourself!
That would cut both ways when this goat is in the shop.
Goat sodomization - are you sure it's male?
Post a Comment