PDA

View Full Version : Against meat, but smoking?


MontanaCowgirl
07-22-2006, 03:51 PM
I'm currently reading Dirk's first book "Confessions..." and I have always been wondering, why Dirk says that meat and sugar can cause cancer (so far I understand), but why does he still continue smoking, which, in my opinion, can cause cancer (and other diseases) more quickly.

In the past nine months two of my uncles died of cancer, which I think was mainly caused by their smoking behaviour.

I would like to eat less meat and sugar, too. My sister only eats fish and chicken, so no red meat anymore. I always wanted to become vegetarian, because each time I look into a little cow's big black and sad eyes, I can't believe I eat those. It's like a vicious circle you can't get out of... but I know you can, somehow.

ostarella
07-22-2006, 04:03 PM
Well, I can't say I'd believe all these cancer/smoking links, especially that second-hand smoke BS. If you look at how these studies are conducted, as I have, well, let's just say the outcome wasn't much of a surprise.

My brother hadn't smoked for over a decade, and suddenly he developed cancer. My father quit smoking 47 years before he developed cancer. I've been smoking for 40 years (god, that sounds like forever) and my last chest xray was clear as a bell. Personally, I don't think one can point to a *single* cause of cancer - I think it's your overall lifestyle and what you do to your body as a *whole*. I mean, let's face it - every time you turn around, something *else* is going to cause cancer of some kind or another...

MontanaCowgirl
07-22-2006, 04:22 PM
My brother hadn't smoked for over a decade, and suddenly he developed cancer. My father quit smoking 47 years before he developed cancer. I've been smoking for 40 years (god, that sounds like forever) and my last chest xray was clear as a bell. Personally, I don't think one can point to a *single* cause of cancer - I think it's your overall lifestyle and what you do to your body as a *whole*. I mean, let's face it - every time you turn around, something *else* is going to cause cancer of some kind or another...

Nah, okay, it's hard to discuss this, because smokers always have another point of view.... uhm... I agree with the last one you said that always something else suddenly causes cancer. They said "gummy bears" can cause cancer or whatever.
I just think you shouldn't eat too much of that stuff and that's okay. I don't think it can cause cancer.

Maybe it's all just made up in our heads... maybe there isn't really anything that actually causes cancer. I mean, for example, if I'd go to the doctor tomorrow and he'd tell me I had cancer, then I would immediately feel sick, but if I live with it for years not knowing what's going on inside of me, I think then it might never break out and become so dangerous. Know what I mean?! Well, it's hard to say, sorry, maybe my English is blocking again... it's almost 12 am.

I think it's good not to listen to all the doctors and professors and researchers, because they always come up with new nonsense... suddenly something you did all your lifetime before can cause cancer. You get a bad feeling about what you did all the time and then you apprubtly stop doing it - whatever it is and you're feeling bad, because you did it and wonder if you have cancer or whatever it may cause... it's all nonsense!

My mother wants to take me to the doctor, because she suspects I have hypothyroidism since I'm very tired lately. I don't want to go, because I hate to go and I'm afraid what might turn out. I guess I should just change a little of my way of living... maybe the book will give me a kick to start change something.

Tracy
07-22-2006, 05:08 PM
IMHO it's all about balance. Yin and Yang. I am not "macrobiotic" ( I'm not anything ).
I don't wish to be "labeled" as anything.
I choose not to eat meat, sugar or dairy. I have been smoking for 20+ years and I haven't visited a Doctor in over 8 years.

If I feel sick, I let it run it's course. I haven't had anything worse than a head cold for years.
I take no medication. I rest, I eat and drink and I eventually get over it.

It isn't just about physical harmony. There is mental and spiritual harmony as well that make up the whole. The "Holy Trinity" of the human subject. If one of them is out of whack, the whole pyramid collapses.

I don't think there is anyting mystical about macrobiotics. It's common sense, balance, and using your own instinct. We live on instinct. And if we do not, then we are truly lost to the corporations that will choose for us.

Gummy Bears. If the Doctor doesn't get you on that one, the Dentist will. ;)

Lt. Templeton TLoS Peck
08-03-2006, 09:14 AM
There is certainly a link between smoking and cancer.

Ok, there are people who can smoke their whole live, and never get cancer. But their are also people who can eat all the food they want without getting cancer. Does this prove unhealthy eating habits never cause cancer as well ???

Over here in Belgium you had seperate cabines for smokers on trains. If you saw the condition of these cabines, nobody can convince me that smooking is good for your longs. After some time there's soot all over the place. One can imagine what might be the effect on your longs if you smoke whole the time ...

MontanaCowgirl
08-03-2006, 09:50 AM
There is certainly a link between smoking and cancer.

Ok, there are people who can smoke their whole live, and never get cancer. But their are also people who can eat all the food they want without getting cancer. Does this prove unhealthy eating habits never cause cancer as well ???

Over here in Belgium you had seperate cabines for smokers on trains. If you saw the condition of these cabines, nobody can convince me that smooking is good for your longs. After some time there's soot all over the place. One can imagine what might be the effect on your longs if you smoke whole the time ...

Right. I realize it almost everyday. My uncle died in June. He smoked a lot. Now my aunt lives here alone. Each time I sit on our balcony to relax and read a book I smell the smoke of her cigarettes crawling up our balcony. It hurts in my lungs. It's unbearable.

ostarella
08-03-2006, 09:57 AM
Over here in Belgium you had seperate cabines for smokers on trains. If you saw the condition of these cabines, nobody can convince me that smooking is good for your longs. After some time there's soot all over the place. One can imagine what might be the effect on your longs if you smoke whole the time ...

This is basically what these so-called studies did - put people in enclosed rooms, with poor ventilation, practically chain-smoking - conditions in the *extreme*, in other words - and then called it scientific evidence of the dangers of smoking. Not meaning to be argumentative, but really...And what's so funny (ie, ironic) are the people who holler about second-hand smoke, but walk around (rarely) with big guts or drive down the highways at break-neck speed or worse yet, drive after having more than a few drinks. It's really just a matter of choosing your poison.

I agree with Tracy - it's all balance. Anything done to excess is going to be harmful to you. Not listening to the signals your own body sends you will eventually destroy your health.

ostarella
08-03-2006, 10:10 AM
Over here in Belgium you had seperate cabines for smokers on trains. If you saw the condition of these cabines, nobody can convince me that smooking is good for your longs. After some time there's soot all over the place. One can imagine what might be the effect on your longs if you smoke whole the time ...

This is basically what these so-called studies did - put people in enclosed rooms, with poor ventilation, practically chain-smoking - conditions in the *extreme*, in other words - and then called it scientific evidence of the dangers of smoking. Not meaning to be argumentative, but really...And what's so funny (ie, ironic) are the people who holler about second-hand smoke, but walk around (rarely) with big guts or drive down the highways at break-neck speed or worse yet, drive after having more than a few drinks. It's really just a matter of choosing your poison.

I agree with Tracy - it's all balance. Anything done to excess is going to be harmful to you. Not listening to the signals your own body sends you will eventually destroy your health.

beejuled
08-04-2006, 01:46 AM
Just because Dirk smokes cigars, lets not decide that smoking is without risks. It's OK to think that he might just enjoy something that might be bad for people.

Even VETS are conducting studies because of increased instances of cancer in pets in family's that smoke.

Suggesting that moderate smoking in well ventilated areas is free of risk is irresponsible.

It is a free country and Dirk can smoke whatever he wants in my opinion (and I'll still think he's great) but please don't make insane and uneducated medical judgements about it.

I'm ready to be banned now or be told off because with the new moderators, I've seen what happens if you are perceived as anything less than a total hypnotized fan.

MrsSpooky
08-04-2006, 02:08 AM
Just because Dirk smokes cigars, lets not decide that smoking is without risks. It's OK to think that he might just enjoy something that might be bad for people.

Even VETS are conducting studies because of increased instances of cancer in pets in family's that smoke.

Suggesting that moderate smoking in well ventilated areas is free of risk is irresponsible.

It is a free country and Dirk can smoke whatever he wants in my opinion (and I'll still think he's great) but please don't make insane and uneducated medical judgements about it.

I'm ready to be banned now or be told off because with the new moderators, I've seen what happens if you are perceived as anything less than a total hypnotized fan.

Why would you be banned or told off because of this posting? I can't imagine what you would have seen with the new moderators, because it's been really quiet here. Something going on I don't know about? :lol:

I smoke, but I don't smoke in my house (hate the smell) and I definitely keep the smoke away from my pets. I know it's an obnoxious habit and that my right to smoke ends at someone else's nose.

That said, I'm no angel, nor am I a saint and I do have one or two habits that aren't good for me. Smoking being one of them.

As for Dirk - like someone else said: we choose our poison. I don't know how much he smokes, but it gives him pleasure and if he otherwise takes good care of himself, he should be ok.

MontanaCowgirl
08-04-2006, 02:37 AM
Just because Dirk smokes cigars, lets not decide that smoking is without risks.

It is a free country and Dirk can smoke whatever he wants in my opinion (and I'll still think he's great) but please don't make insane and uneducated medical judgements about it.


That's exactly what I meant. You really take the words out of my mouth. :wink:

ostarella
08-04-2006, 03:59 AM
Suggesting that moderate smoking in well ventilated areas is free of risk is irresponsible.

Free of risk? Who said that? I only pointed out that these studies were meant to do one thing and one thing only - "prove" that second-hand smoke causes cancer. And because of the way they were conducted, there could *only* be one result. In my opinion, those studies are meaningless simply because of the ridiculous way they were done. But as long as doctors keep screaming about it, they'll get the big bucks for their research to go on and on and on and on - talk about job security... ;-)

John Pickard
08-04-2006, 09:41 AM
Just because Dirk smokes cigars, lets not decide that smoking is without risks. It's OK to think that he might just enjoy something that might be bad for people.

Even VETS are conducting studies because of increased instances of cancer in pets in family's that smoke.

Suggesting that moderate smoking in well ventilated areas is free of risk is irresponsible.

It is a free country and Dirk can smoke whatever he wants in my opinion (and I'll still think he's great) but please don't make insane and uneducated medical judgements about it.

I'm ready to be banned now or be told off because with the new moderators, I've seen what happens if you are perceived as anything less than a total hypnotized fan.

So far, there's nothing you've said that puts you in the same ranks as the trolls we've dealt with in the past few weeks. So unless you're just here to cause trouble, beejuled, speak your mind.

I'm also of the belief that there is a definite link between tobacco smoke and cancer. If you acknowledge the link between smoking a cigarette and cancer, then you must also acknowledge the link between "second-hand" smoke and cancer - to do otherwise is less than intellectually honest. It's the same smoke, whether you draw it in through the filter or inhale it because your neighbor is smoking.

That said, I'm not going to get up on a soapbox and tell you smokers to quit. I think you should - I think you'll be happier in the long run if you do - but it's up to you. Just be sure to be healthy in whatever else you do - eat, exercise, etc - to minimize the risks to your future health.

I'd like to keep y'all around as friends, not just as memories.

I am
Dawg
8)

ostarella
08-04-2006, 10:30 AM
then you must also acknowledge the link between "second-hand" smoke and cancer - to do otherwise is less than intellectually honest.

My only point is that the degree of risk is greatly exaggerated. Second-hand smoke, unless one is exposed to it in an enclosed area for extended periods of time, is about as dangerous as walking out your front door. So obviously, living with a heavy smoker could be unhealthy. However, sitting in a restaurant for an hour or so with smokers segregated in a designated smoking area is not going to give you cancer. It may be annoying, but it's not going to kill you. I'd rather take my chances with that than with the guy who has a few drinks with that dinner and then gets behind the wheel of his car.

No disrespect, but to be intellectually honest, one must also be realistic and use a little common sense.

I think what burns me most (pardon the pun) are non-smokers who feel they have some kind of "right" to be rude and obnoxious toward smokers, using this "second-hand smoke" ruse as an excuse. I don't smoke in the homes (or even on the property) of my non-smoking friends, and I generally don't smoke when they're at my house; but if they come to my house and *demand* I don't smoke while they're there - well, they don't get invited back. Most smokers are considerate of non-smokers (unless they're just rude in general), but unfortunately, I haven't found the reverse to be true.

John Pickard
08-04-2006, 11:26 AM
There are a lot of other factors at work, though, when you're discussing second-hand smoke.

First, though - as I said, I think it less than honest if someone says that there is a link between tobacco smoke and cancer, then turns around and says that second-hand smoke doesn't pose the same risk. Granted, the concentration per inhalation is less, but that doesn't mean you aren't inhaling carcinogens.

The biggest issue with smoking is that there is choice involved. It's your choice to smoke - but don't I also have the choice - the right - to avoid tobacco smoke?

Your attitude is the right one, I think, ostarella - you respect the rights and choices of others and expect the same in return.

But I don't think the risks of second-hand smoke are greatly exaggerated. Occasional exposures are certainly less harmful than constant exposure. But even occasional exposures are harmful, and take time to recover from (I know this, being an occasional tavern patron myself). Remember, a cigarette smoker only inhales about 1/3 of each cigarette - and exhales part of that. And the "un-smoked" two-thirds just goes into the air. Unit per unit, that un-inhaled smoke is just as dangerous as the inhaled smoke.

If, that is, you acknowledge tobacco smoke as dangerous.

I am
Dawg
8)

ostarella
08-04-2006, 11:55 AM
Remember, a cigarette smoker only inhales about 1/3 of each cigarette - and exhales part of that. And the "un-smoked" two-thirds just goes into the air. Unit per unit, that un-inhaled smoke is just as dangerous as the inhaled smoke.


*If* you're sitting next to the smoker, I could concede the point. And it is one's choice to go into a tavern where it's almost assured the smoke will be heavy in the air :) But sitting across a restaurant, with adequate ventilation, the smoke dissipates to the point where it's about as dangerous as walking down the street with traffic fumes. But I don't see anyone banning cars ;-)

I've looked at the studies - I did a research paper on them in college, so I'm not speaking from an uneducated POV. The studies were flawed, and therefore I'm not willing to concede the high *degree* of danger. I just think it needs to be put in a more realistic perspective.

Life is full of dangers, and quite frankly, I think we try to legislate ourselves into a safety zone that is unrealistic. As with diet, we need to strike a balance. If second-hand smoke doesn't kill us, a drunk driver could. Or we could crash in a plane, or fall down the stairs and break our neck. Every day you get out of bed, you take the chance it might be your last. I'm all for laws to protect people, but not when it makes pariahs of law-abiding, decent people who happen to have a different vice than someone else. Just because one doesn't smoke doesn't make one a better person than someone who does.

Lt. Templeton TLoS Peck
08-09-2006, 04:23 AM
Over here in Belgium you had seperate cabines for smokers on trains. If you saw the condition of these cabines, nobody can convince me that smooking is good for your longs. After some time there's soot all over the place. One can imagine what might be the effect on your longs if you smoke whole the time ...

This is basically what these so-called studies did - put people in enclosed rooms, with poor ventilation, practically chain-smoking - conditions in the *extreme*, in other words - and then called it scientific evidence of the dangers of smoking. Not meaning to be argumentative, but really...And what's so funny (ie, ironic) are the people who holler about second-hand smoke, but walk around (rarely) with big guts or drive down the highways at break-neck speed or worse yet, drive after having more than a few drinks. It's really just a matter of choosing your poison.

I agree with Tracy - it's all balance. Anything done to excess is going to be harmful to you. Not listening to the signals your own body sends you will eventually destroy your health.

It's always a matter of balance, but the problem with smoking is that most people can't find a balance in doing it. It's not just smoking on special moments, but smoking every moment of the day. Some sigarettes contain products that make you addicted to smoking.

The problem with comparing smoking with driving too fast or drinking is: you choose to drive too fast or drink too much. But you can't always choose to be a victim of second-hand smoking or not. One can not justifie second-hand smoking arguing that the victim might have other unhealthy habits. What's important to me is the fact that you have a choice. If you want to drink to much, that's your dicision. If you want to eat your hamburger with chips every day, that's your choice.

This weekend I was visiting Normandy with my family, enjoying a good (and healthy) meal, when next to us three persons started smoking. The biggest problem is not the fact that this might be unhealthy for us (I don't think the risks are very high when you are sitting in the outside), but the fact that sigarettes simply stink when you're not a smoker.

Smookers oftenly complain non-smokers are intolerant, unsocial people, but there is nothing more unsocial than ruining someone's meal because he/she has to sit in someone's smooke.

I also believe these studies weren't made in conditions you can call extreme. If I visit a bar, an office, a train cabin, etc. where some people are heavily smoking, I can't wear the same clooths next day because of the smell.

If you have to work in an office with smookers, if you are a barkeeper, if you live in the same room with smookers, ... I believe these conditions can become easily realistic.

ostarella
08-09-2006, 08:12 AM
The problem with comparing smoking with driving too fast or drinking is: you choose to drive too fast or drink too much.

But driving too fast or drinking is *not* the choice for the person injured or killed by someone speeding or driving drunk. So I think the analogy stands.

As to the smell, that's not hazardous to your health; it's an annoyance. And one I can understand very well. It even irritates me if I'm not smoking. But that doesn't give me the right to be rude toward the smokers, and that seems to be a fairly common trait among non-smokers. In fact, rudeness is encouraged in the advertisements by various anti-smoking groups. Contrast that with the "friends don't let friends drive drunk" ads.

I'm not sure where you're from, but in most of the USA, smoking is banned in the workplace (or severely curtailed); the same for restaurants, trains, airplanes, etc. So most Americans would only be exposed to it at home, in a bar, or outdoors. One chooses to go into a bar where there will be smoking; outdoors, the air dispels the smoke; at home - that's between you and your family to work out ;-) And unless you were in such a smoke-filled, enclosed area for *very* long, continuous periods of time, it would not mimic the conditions under which these studies were made.

Again, I am *not* saying smoking or second-hand smoke is not hazardous to one's health. But I think it's blown way out of proportion by what has become an industry in itself (ie, cancer research). The more they holler about the effects, the more dangerous they make it seem, the more money in their pockets. Just like the doctor who tells you your illness might be this or that, so let's have this test and that, and take this pill and that one - and hand over the money 'cause it's gonna cost you. And in the end, they still can't cure you.

Nacky
08-09-2006, 08:08 PM
I'm ready to be banned now or be told off because with the new moderators, I've seen what happens if you are perceived as anything less than a total hypnotized fan.

http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/2337/awjeehk3.jpg

MrsSpooky
08-09-2006, 08:21 PM
I'm ready to be banned now or be told off because with the new moderators, I've seen what happens if you are perceived as anything less than a total hypnotized fan.

http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/2337/awjeehk3.jpg

ROFLMAO Nacky!!!!

OMG, that's too funny. :D

Nacky
08-09-2006, 08:36 PM
ROFLMAO Nacky!!!!

OMG, that's too funny. :D

Hee hee hee! I found that somewhere and saved it for such occassions. I guess I'm a "hypnotized fan" because I agree with Dirk on everything! Except for whatever it is that we may disagree about...so far...nope, not a thing!

Of course, now, "my" fans have also been called "hypnotized braindead monkeys" so I guess the more severe the following is, the deeper the jealousy, huh? LMAO! I believe that pic is actually of Ronald Reagan! It sure looks like him! :P

John Pickard
08-09-2006, 08:45 PM
It's not Reagan. I recognize him, but don't remember his name. From the same acting era, though.

I am
Dawg
8)

Nacky
08-09-2006, 08:49 PM
It's not Reagan. I recognize him, but don't remember his name. From the same acting era, though.

I am
Dawg
8)

Another funny thing about it is that it looks like it might even be (originally) an ad for aspirin or something. :wink:

MrsSpooky
08-09-2006, 09:28 PM
It's not Reagan. I recognize him, but don't remember his name. From the same acting era, though.

I am
Dawg
8)

I was thinking the same thing - It almost looks like Hugh Beaumont, the Beave's dad, but I doubt that's who it is.

What a riot.

MrsSpooky
08-09-2006, 10:14 PM
ROFLMAO Nacky!!!!

OMG, that's too funny. :D

Hee hee hee! I found that somewhere and saved it for such occassions. I guess I'm a "hypnotized fan" because I agree with Dirk on everything! Except for whatever it is that we may disagree about...so far...nope, not a thing!

Of course, now, "my" fans have also been called "hypnotized braindead monkeys" so I guess the more severe the following is, the deeper the jealousy, huh? LMAO! I believe that pic is actually of Ronald Reagan! It sure looks like him! :P

I don't know if I'd call myself a hypnotized fan, but like you, I've yet to hear him say something I disagree wtih. Well..... we do have differing ideas about religion, but that's about it. At least, it's not something I'd want to make any kind of a fuss about.

Lt. Templeton TLoS Peck
08-10-2006, 07:50 AM
The problem with comparing smoking with driving too fast or drinking is: you choose to drive too fast or drink too much.

But driving too fast or drinking is *not* the choice for the person injured or killed by someone speeding or driving drunk. So I think the analogy stands.

As to the smell, that's not hazardous to your health; it's an annoyance. And one I can understand very well. It even irritates me if I'm not smoking. But that doesn't give me the right to be rude toward the smokers, and that seems to be a fairly common trait among non-smokers. In fact, rudeness is encouraged in the advertisements by various anti-smoking groups. Contrast that with the "friends don't let friends drive drunk" ads.

I'm not sure where you're from, but in most of the USA, smoking is banned in the workplace (or severely curtailed); the same for restaurants, trains, airplanes, etc. So most Americans would only be exposed to it at home, in a bar, or outdoors. One chooses to go into a bar where there will be smoking; outdoors, the air dispels the smoke; at home - that's between you and your family to work out ;-) And unless you were in such a smoke-filled, enclosed area for *very* long, continuous periods of time, it would not mimic the conditions under which these studies were made.

Again, I am *not* saying smoking or second-hand smoke is not hazardous to one's health. But I think it's blown way out of proportion by what has become an industry in itself (ie, cancer research). The more they holler about the effects, the more dangerous they make it seem, the more money in their pockets. Just like the doctor who tells you your illness might be this or that, so let's have this test and that, and take this pill and that one - and hand over the money 'cause it's gonna cost you. And in the end, they still can't cure you.

* the analogy stands if you see it from that point of view. but i don't understand how you can see this as an argument in favor of smoking. i don't like people getting killed by second-hand smoking, and i don't like people getting killed by other people who drive too fast.

* the smell of smoke is annoying, but i also believ it shows how damaging this smoke can be for your longs. if i smell my shirt after visiting a bar, if i see the condition of a train cabin where people are smoking whole day long (soot everywhere), i can't believe smooking is without serious negative effects for your longs.

* i agree that medical research has become an industry. but on the other hand it would not be smart if macrobiotics would not evolve, and never take any medical research into account. otherwise i'm afraid macrobiotics will disappear because it becomes out of touch with reality.

and don't forget some people turned macrobiotics into an industry as well.
a source of inspiration may never turn into a guru. otherwise it becomes dangerous.

DonnaRedRockMom
08-10-2006, 08:49 AM
& now for something completly different.....

.....just thought I would let you know that when you stand side by side with Dirk you do not smell cigar smoke....he may smoke them but it apears that he does not do so while working at a convention....I am very sensative to smoke and he smelled great....just thought you would want to know

now carry on with this "debate"

Christy
08-10-2006, 03:56 PM
...uh Donna, did your husband know that you were sniffing...uummm, smelling...well, you know what I mean...Dirk? *chuckle* *chuckle* ...sorry, couldn't resist...*chuckling some more* Seriously though, I never thought of Dirk to be the type that would reek of cigar smoke (especially out in public)...I always *imagined* him to smell great!...I *imagined* correctly!!!...Thanks for the little tid-bit!!!

As for the debate........My father smoked (cigaretts) since he was 13 (he's 64 now) and in May of 2004 (he was up to 3 packs a day!) he had a heartattack which led to a heart by-pass (triple). Note: He hadn't been in a hospital since he was, I believe 10, to have his tonsils removed! Of course, he stopped smoking, but sadly, the damage has already been done. And my brother smoked (he's 2 years older than me)...even after seeing Dad go through what he did in 2004...It wasn't until 4-6 months later that he, too had started to have chest pains, breathing problems, and problems with his blood pressure staying high. He has been smoke free since...and he says he can tell a big difference since he stopped. And lastly, my sister smoked (she's 5 years younger than me). She stopped long before Dads heartattack. Again, she, too, was having the same problems...she too, is smoke free...and also says that she can tell a big difference.

I believe that it does have an affect on a person who smokes and also a person around the "second-hand" smoke too. Growing up, I did notice the "mess" it leaves on ceilings, walls, curtains, windows...etc. I helped Mom do the spring cleaning (and yes,in the fall too)...it wasn't pretty...just think/imagine what it would have been like if we hadn't cleaned everything!!!...But where it all starts (where everything starts) is with a CHOICE.....

One more note: When we were little (my sister, brothers and myself) had asked Dad to stop or at least cut down on his smoking...and the response to that...well lets just say...we never asked him again after that. Today...I can see it in his eyes (and it breaks my heart) that he regrets not stopping ALOT sooner....for you see, he absolutely adores his 3 grand-daughters........the 2 youngest of the 3, love to go for rides with their Pap on his Harley (Hog).........

Warmest Regards to All,
Christy

Lt. Templeton TLoS Peck
08-11-2006, 02:23 AM
& now for something completly different.....

.....just thought I would let you know that when you stand side by side with Dirk you do not smell cigar smoke....he may smoke them but it apears that he does not do so while working at a convention....I am very sensative to smoke and he smelled great....just thought you would want to know

now carry on with this "debate"

I suppose Dirk doesn't smoke whole day long, but only on some occassions ??? I think smoking occassionally isn't that dangerous. As long as you do not exagerate. Even if you are a die hard-smoker, problems normally start when you are older (cancer, hart-attacks, etc...). It probably sounds a little bit crue, but by the time occasional smoking can do real harm, you probably already died because of an other cause.

beejuled
08-14-2006, 12:48 AM
That picture is funny Nacky but it kinda makes me wonder.

What I was referring to was how handily people who didn't approve of the autograph policy were kicked to the curb so thanks for reinforcing my doubts about the clique here instead of dispelling it as Dawg attempted to do.

I stand by what I said.

MrsSpooky
08-14-2006, 04:04 AM
That picture is funny Nacky but it kinda makes me wonder.

What I was referring to was how handily people who didn't approve of the autograph policy were kicked to the curb so thanks for reinforcing my doubts about the clique here instead of dispelling it as Dawg attempted to do.

I stand by what I said.

bejuled, please allow me to express my perspective of this whole thing. What follows is my own opinion and is not meant to represent the opinions of Dirk, Tracy or anyone else in official capacity to speak on Dirk's behalf ('cause that's sure not me :) ).

I'm not aware if any specific event prompted the posting of 'The Policy' and I don't believe Dawg is either. That "Policy", in my line of work (customer service,) is known as "setting expectations." It sounds like Dirk is getting a lot of mail - a LOT of mail. He has a life that involves more than just answering mail. He has children who need him, a house to take care of and other obligations that a single parent needs to attend to.

Battlestar Galactica and The A Team being shown in reruns and now out on DVD are no doubt bringing him more attention than he's had in maybe more than a few years. I'm sure he doesn't want people writing to him expecting an autograph or written response within a few weeks. People who do expect that are likely to get their feelings hurt. He doesn't want that, so this Policy arose. It's unfortunate, but he's only one man with a man's obligations and he has countless fans who all would love to communicate with him. I was disappointed to hear this too, but I love the guy and I have compassion for him with respect to what all these people, myself included, may be expecting of him.

I doubt there was any expectation on Dirk's or Tracy's part that people would be thrilled with it, even if there was no intention to hurt feelings. It CAN be discussed, feelings expressed, but the line is drawn when postings turn into personal attacks against Dirk and/or Tracy. My feelings are that that the original thread was closed before it could disintegrate into personal attacks against Dirk. Sadly, there were a couple of items posted afterwards that proved the wisdom of closing the thread. They were personal attacks against Dirk and harassing the general board membership and thus were not allowed on this board.

And they shouldn't be. Posting attacks on Dirk here is akin to showing up at a party in someone's honor and insulting the guest of honor as well as the host. Anyone going into someone's home and attacking the host and their guest of honor should not be surprised to find themselves asked to leave. All that is requested of people here is that they behave in a civilised manner. That involves expressing their feelings in an adult manner, leaving out the name-calling and other derisive comments.

There ARE folks who have posted here expressing disappointment in "The Policy" and their unhappiness with it. Their posts are still here as are they. This is because they chose to respond as adults.

The people who frequent this message board are here to talk about Dirk Benedict, his work and the man (I include myself here). We love Dirk and don't mind discussing any controversial statements he may have made (or policies that have been expressed), but nobody here is interested in seeing him attacked or otherwise maligned.

Speaking strictly for myself, I'm quite protective of him and will defend him anywhere I see him being attacked. Since this is basically HIS message board, my expectations are that he will not need defending here.

Finally, let me say that it's sounding to me like you may be taking certain recent events personally. You needn't do that. :)

ostarella
08-14-2006, 06:15 AM
beejuled wrote:

I'm ready to be banned now or be told off because with the new moderators, I've seen what happens if you are perceived as anything less than a total hypnotized fan.

I agree w/Mrs Spooky - I've seen that people are definitely allowed to disagree with policies and statements here, as long as it's done politely and maturely. It seemed to me that you made your opinion known with a chip on your shoulder, and quite without merit. Most of us have seen that before, and therefore the photo. Just because people disagree with an expressed opinion doesn't mean they're trying to shut you down - look at the discussion on smoking right here. Although it came close a couple of times, there was no disrespect shown despite strong opinions. And that's how it should be.

I've seen some pretty snappy comments now and then, but we're all human. I have never seen anyone shut down just for expressing their opinion - unless it was disrespectful in its presentation. And anyone who is rude, here or *anywhere else*, deserves to be put in their place.

Just my opinion...

beejuled
08-15-2006, 12:53 AM
And anyone who is rude, here or *anywhere else*, deserves to be put in their place.

And the picture wasn't rude? But I don't see any condemnation for that.

Too much double standard.

Bye.

ostarella
08-15-2006, 09:19 AM
And the picture wasn't rude? But I don't see any condemnation for that.

Too much double standard.

Bye.

Well, you might consider what prompted the picture - your out-of-the-chute accusations that you'd be banned or told off, etc, for expressing your opinion. It wasn't your opinion that was being criticized - it was the little ol' chip on your shoulder. If you insult the moderators (and by proxy, members of the group) by declaring us all mindless fanatics who can't handle hearing different points of view, what do you expect? A thank you? Like I said, rudeness should be put in its place...

sheeee....

MrsSpooky
08-15-2006, 10:47 AM
Hi all,

Sorry about this, but it looks like the discussion has run its course and it's wandering into areas where it shouldn't.

Nobody is being banned or chastised, we're just trying to keep a friendly, open message board for us all to enjoy. :)

Thanks for understanding! I know I"m not alone in looking forward to the next topics that come up. We have an intelligent, thoughtful group here and I'm proud to be a part of it.

Deb