Posted on 08/28/2009 8:16:44 AM PDT by swarthyguy
ITS the health and safety measure Iraqis have not been waiting for. The government in Baghdad last week banned smoking in public buildings. Anyone found lighting up will have to pay a fine equivalent to $4,300, enough to buy 17,200 packs of cigarettes at the local price of about 25 cents. Do the politicians have nothing better to do? asks Abu Yasser, as he takes a drag while filling up his car at a petrol station. My cousin was recently murdered by terrorists, my neighbour was tortured by the police, my electricity is cut for most of the day, the same is true in most hospitals in the city. And they are worried about smoking?
As soon as parliament ratifies the cabinet-imposed ban, Iraqi smokers will be forced to loiter on street corners exposed to car bombs and 45-degree heat in the summer. But according to a recent study, smoking kills an average of 55 Iraqis a day, compared to a current average of ten deaths daily from terrorist shootings or bombings. So the government argues that it is perfectly reasonable to outlaw smoking on public-health grounds.
Nonetheless, the ban has done nothing to improve the already low opinion many Iraqis have of their democratically elected government. Bring back Saddam, says a cigarette vendor. We were free to smoke anywhere then. Others link the ban to reports of torture in official detention. Prisons are public buildings, right? So will they now prevent guards from stubbing out cigarettes on the arms, legs and backs of inmates? asks one university student. With nerves jangled from years of upheaval, nicotine is often the first and only comfort. Stuck at checkpoints, Iraqis pass around cigarettes. Faced with recalcitrant bureaucrats, they do the same.
In parliament though, the ban is popular. Islamists want to get rid of tobacco outright. Of course, many ministers and MPs smoke too, often in their offices. But, given their elevated positions, few rules apply to them.
“Result is America is now more Sharia compliant than before the Attacks”.
Our government has stabbed our great troops in the back. Because if the political aspect of Islam is not addressed here at home, them fighting overseas will mean little in the end.
>> political aspect of Islam
We are building a tyranny in America based upon the primacy of an individual’s health as subordinate to general public health superseding all other concerns.
Next, as MADD proposes, virtually alcohol free public zones around the country.
Another tenet of Sharia imminent.
Wait until they see the carbon tax added to the registration fees at the department of camel vehicles.
True, but Camels got short tails so the license plate don’t hit ‘em in the head unless they’s asleep at the hump.
Thanks for the ping. I am speechless.
Saddam enjoyed a good cigar and Western movies. Apparently he was the only man who could run this country.
If he could have avoided the rape rooms and murder he would be on OK guy.
Yikes, not the best scenario in which to argue for smokers' freedom.
On the other hand, if he keeps doing that, it could make quitting smoking very quick and easy for him. :=)
LOL, ya think?
Are you saying a democratically elected government can't regulate cigarettes? Why is that?
You see that at gas stations all over the Middle East.
And when they come over to the USA and happen to be pump attendants (even in self serve areas) they sometimes forget the safety rules are different here. One such fool approached my car several years ago with the result that I bought only 27 cents worth of gas (I took the nozzle out and screwed the gas cap back on in a flash).
He needed his strongmen because no matter how nice a fellow is over there, someone is waiting to stab you in the back for some reason.
You hallucinating again? Where’d I say that.
There is no reason to fight Islamists and Jihadis, we have a lot in common, we can start with a common front against tabak and then move on to other things.
You have to admit that the tenets of Sharia have a lot to offer the USA.
:)Plus speed zones.
Are you saying a democratically elected government can't regulate abortions and the slaughter of unborn children? Why is that?
And the difference between Baghdad and Washington or any state capital when it comes to that is __________ (fill in the blank).....what exactly?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.