He's referring to this article on Conservative Home objecting to the damage plain packaging will undoubtedly cause, compared to the extremely marginal benefits that tobacco control have a hunch - if their bent studies and rigged focus groups can be believed - might come about.
Being the shallow type, he again moves directly to hyperbole and invokes the slave trade, a tactic he dismisses on the other side of the equation.
But since the grandfather of tobacco control has now confirmed substitution as an acceptable argument, let's re-visit the words of one his supporters just the other day with amendments made by fellow jewel thief Henry.
"We could always just change the law to allow people to legally shoot dead any black people outside the four walls of their home, as long as it's not a rented home or presently under mortgage, since it's not technically their home. If black people find a bullet through their head whenever they step outside, they'll not step outside. Simples. Probably won't happen. I can dream though. God, I'd have a field day if that ever came to pass..."What's changed eh, Simon? The hate God is all.
In fact, if we are now allowed to follow Chapman's lead as a valid debating tool, how about this from Deborah Arnott on Friday's BBC news (14:10 in)?
"Gays choose the rainbow colours because it says something about them, and they're proud to have their flags. With plan standardised flags, they'll no longer be proud to take that flag out of their backpack."Watch the anti-smokers in full flight. And that's without even mentioning the odious, bile-spewing Jane Deville-Almond.
How nice of him to legitimise so many easy hits with such a generous precedent. With enemies like this bumbling outdated Aussie, who needs friends?
