cannabisnews.com: Clearing The Smoke: The Truth About Marijuana










  Clearing The Smoke: The Truth About Marijuana

Posted by CN Staff on December 01, 2006 at 07:27:11 PT
By Rudolph Wood and Justin Huang 
Source: Student Life 

California -- At the beginning of this semester, there was some unrest among the student body regarding the allegedly stricter policies concerning alcohol and marijuana use on campus. To blame Pomona for enforcing the regulation of underage drinking and the use of illegal drugs is ridiculous. Pomona is obliged to follow the law, and our system is truly forgiving.As the November elections have recently passed, it is a good time to reflect on our current laws instead of just blindly accepting them. 
A question arises pertaining to the complaints of the aforementioned students: Why is marijuana illegal in the first place? One must examine the history of this infamous plant and its cousin hemp to discover the surprising reasons as to why it became one of the great “evils” of society today.Marijuana and its various uses in the United States date back to the mid-nineteenth century. By 1850, the United States’ had 8,327 cannabis plantations (imagine more than 17 million acres of pot!), something your high school U.S.-history textbook most likely failed to mention.So how did a plant that was declared by Founding Father Thomas Jefferson to be “of first necessity to the wealth and protection of the country” become one of the darkest taboos of society today? There are actually two reasons that may surprise you: racism and yellow journalism.At the turn of the twentieth century, there was a sudden influx of Mexican immigrants due to the Mexican Revolution of 1910. This increase of the population in the younger western states raised unemployment and reduced welfare. Racial tensions escalated as scapegoating the Mexican-Americans became common. It just so happened that Mexican-Americans popularized recreational marijuana in the States, and eventually this activity became synonymous with them. Much like recreational opium is seen as a Chinese drug (when, really, it was trafficked into China by Europe), cannabis became labeled as a Mexican drug, and anything Mexican was conceived negatively by mainstream Americans.In 1930, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) was created under the U.S. Treasury Department. Its first Commissioner was Harry Anslinger, a man who once testified before Congress: “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.” Around the same time, a Texas State Senator said about marijuana, “All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff is what makes them crazy.”In addition to these policy makers, the anti-marijuana movement had another backer: infamous journalist, William Randolph Hearst. You might remember Mr. Hearst as the man who fabricated stories in his nationally-successful newspaper empire, and conveniently, being openly racist toward Mexicans. Hearst had invested a huge amount into newsprint/print media and owned an overwhelming amount of timber acreage. When hemp-pulp manufacturing began to become more advanced, this posed an immediate threat to Hearst’s empire. Hemp, a cousin of marijuana, is often confused for the latter. Hemp-pulp paper not only cost less than half the amount of tree-pulp paper, but it was more environmentally friendly as well.Elsewhere, Lammont DuPont, head of the revolutionary chemical company DuPont (which has been accused of a number of scandals including price-fixing), became likewise threatened by the utility that hemp provided over the more expensive fibers put out by DuPont. Even worse for his business, hemp could be grown in anyone’s backyard, unlike the plastics and polymers DuPont was synthesizing. DuPont also processed paper. Conveniently, Hearst was doing business with DuPont, whose lawyer’s nephew just so happened to be the aforementioned Harry Anslinger. A few powerful white men manipulating the government . . . does this sound familiar?With Hearst’s sensationalist front-page editorials and his circulation of about twenty million in America’s biggest cities, marijuana, confused for hemp, soon became the scapegoat for the country’s problems, coinciding with the end of the alcohol prohibition.In 1937, the Marijuana Tax Act was passed by the Senate, thanks to the efforts of FBN Commissioner Anslinger and testimony from a doctor who claimed he had injected THC into the brains of three hundred dogs, and two had died (of course, THC wasn’t synthesized until after World War II, so this would be impossible). Around the same time, the FBN was funding “educational” films such as Reefer Madness, which are universally considered propaganda today.Less than half a century later, America had established the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), a modern-day successor to the FBN, to wage the War on Drugs. Critics point out that the very fact that drugs are illegal and uncontrolled creates the war in the first place. Yet even ignoring this plain and simple logic, it’s flat out inconsistent for the government to allow people the freedom to damage their bodies however they want with cigarettes and alcohol and yet demonize citizens who choose to use other substances.Anti-drug programs like Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) were highly popular in the ‘80s and ‘90s and still flourish today despite the fact that the U.S. Department of Education deemed them ineffective in 2003, and stopped all funding of the program. The National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Surgeon General’s office have both concluded that DARE is actually counterproductive sometimes, making kids more likely to try drugs. The simple fact is that programs like DARE tell blatant lies about drugs, particularly marijuana, in order to scare kids away from them. Ironically, this elevates weed to a taboo status, making it appealing to your average teenager.No one will argue that drugs like heroin and cocaine are very dangerous, but many modern scientists doubt that marijuana does any significant bodily damage other than to one’s lungs. The government at large and the DEA continue to deny that marijuana has any medicinal benefits, despite the fact that an ever-growing community of doctors is finding it more helpful than any other substance for pain relief.Yet the government continues to throw casual marijuana users in jail, which has contributed to an overcrowded prison system. Clearly, when marijuana users are taking up jail cells that now cannot hold all the perpetrators of violent crimes like assault and rape, the country needs to reassess its priorities. Do we really think that as the Land of the Free, we need to try so hard to keep people from lighting a plant on fire and inhaling it? Most rational people agree that police forces nationwide have better things to be concerned with. Grown adults who can buy guns, drink alcohol, and smoke cigarettes (all of which do far more damage to human life) are probably responsible enough to handle some dried leaves.So why is our government so intent on perpetuating the criminalization of this drug that is as innocuous (if not more so) than alcohol? It can be summed up in one word: fear. Fear is what makes our government go ’round. Its implementation as a tool to influence the people can be seen as recently as the failed guarantee of WMDs in Iraq by what is arguably the best intelligence in the world. And how about that color-coded terror alert system? I remember a time when rainbows were happy.The government’s attempts to regulate marijuana are collectively given the aforementioned impressive name: the War on Drugs. But this War on Drugs is being aggressively fought; I recall a TV ad campaign that aired when we first invaded Iraq. It basically stated that buying weed from dealers indirectly funds terrorism, which has got to be the ultimate buzzkill. But couldn’t the same be said of buying oil from the Middle East?The prohibition of marijuana is called a war because, quite frankly, the idea of war is like a train wreck: everyone gets morbidly fascinated and wants to see more. In actuality, this “war” is a set of unrealistic laws that were founded on outdated racist ideals and corrupt politics. For the government to legalize marijuana, yes, it would mean that it would have to admit it was wrong about the “dangers” of weed. But realize the fiscal benefits: the weed industry is a billion-dollar black market, so imagine how much money our government could make by taxing this product should it be legalized.Questioning and challenging our government is not just our right, it is also our obligation as citizens to understand that our laws and policies are not necessarily faultless. By no means is this article meant to rally the masses into publicly flaunting illegal activities. I mean to encourage the power of discourse and discussion in any given scenario, so instead of thoughtlessly swallowing whatever concoctions that institutions of power feed us, we can instead exercise our innate abilities of reasonable rationality, which inevitably advance our freedoms and liberties.Source: Student Life, The (CA Edu)Author: Rudolph Wood and Justin HuangPublished: December 1, 2006Copyright: 2006 Associated Students of Pomona CollegeContact: tsl pomona.eduWebsite: http://www.tsl.pomona.edu/CannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #51 posted by FoM on December 05, 2006 at 07:21:38 PT
museman
You have very talented children. You truly are a fortunate man. We go thru life and we hope we are doing the right thing but there is no school for parenting. We learn as we go. Enjoy them this holiday season and always. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #50 posted by museman on December 05, 2006 at 00:34:22 PT
FoM
The songs are hers. She wrote them I just recorded and did some post-mastering. I did play the keyoard on War.I've been thinking about that TSO contest, but we don't read tabulature, or score. We're 'folk' musicians that 
play by intuitive, or 'by ear' as they call it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #49 posted by FoM on December 04, 2006 at 09:20:41 PT
museman
I really like the music on your new song. Your daughter sounds much younger then 17 to me or maybe it's that I am much older! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #48 posted by whig on December 04, 2006 at 00:57:30 PT
thought to sleep on
I think I may start composing again.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #47 posted by whig on December 04, 2006 at 00:17:37 PT
museman
What's incredible to me is just now realizing I'm old enough to reasonably have a daughter that age.It's starting to effect my whole world-view, you know?Anyhow congratulations on the next generation of musicians, may she and your other children find all the success they desire in whatever they seek and may they never be soiled by the road.Blessings to you.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #46 posted by museman on December 03, 2006 at 23:11:45 PT
FoM
That particular daughter is 17.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #45 posted by FoM on December 03, 2006 at 16:10:06 PT
museman
We were thinking about going to see TSO but we decided not to go but I always enjoy their music so I went to their web site and they have a contest. I thought maybe you and your family might want to check this out. http://feature.atlrec.com/contests/tso/wizardsinwinter/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #44 posted by FoM on December 03, 2006 at 13:06:25 PT
museman
That was wonderful. How old is your daughter? You are a fortunate man.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #43 posted by museman on December 03, 2006 at 12:39:38 PT
a sharing
Introducing Ariella -These are my kids. I'm so proud of them.http://www.terryhubbard.com/FAM/Ariella/War_(live).mp3
Butterfly
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #42 posted by BGreen on December 03, 2006 at 12:23:43 PT
Well, cannabis IS limited to one thing
It's never directly killed anybody in ANY of the possible cannabinoid profiles, so I guess that puts it as being one of the safest substances known to man.Life ... what a wonderful side effect.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #41 posted by BGreen on December 03, 2006 at 12:16:41 PT
I don't have a degree, but
I have a hard time believing there is only one type of physical makeup that lends itself to cannabis.We know too much now about the endocannabinoid system and Dr. Russo's hypothesis about endocannabinoid deficiencies possibly being the missing link to a lot of (so far) incurable diseases.The number of different cannabinoids and terpinoids available combined with the limited number that can be contained in each chain provides such an astronomically large combination base that it would be impossible to point to cannabis as being limited specifically to ONE anything.The fact is that cannabis can be "best" for just about anybody as long as the cannabinoid profile best suits their particular endocannabinoid deficiency or illness.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #40 posted by whig on December 03, 2006 at 12:13:58 PT
alfablondy
I've yet to read anything (except what you say) to suggest cannabis has more benefit for those of one blood type than another. Can you provide some more information or support for your claim?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #39 posted by alfablondy on December 03, 2006 at 10:45:08 PT:
legalise it
 Marijuana, called canabis,also known as igbo,addressed as quay, etc.In fact this is the type ofa thin i like.Back to the subject of discussion. Marijuana is good for the following people in the health categories::::Blood group o+ combined with genotype AA, are the best people to smoke weed. I am by Gods grace a bsc degree holder in sociology and anthropology and was concernrd basically about drugs and its abuses with special references to marijuana. I became a successful sociologist through the technique of "participant observation" i enguaged during my project work.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #38 posted by afterburner on December 01, 2006 at 21:48:58 PT
Elder Abuse, Racist Roots & Standing w/ Persecuted
Not letting the elders have their pain medication is a form of elder abuse. Considering the inevitability of some pain as the body ages, denying pain medication is also a form of torture. This is no surprise considering that the Bush Administration approved torture, the U.S. Supreme Court put a stay on it pending Congressional approval and Congress rubber-stamped it. Let's hope the new Congress has the courage and wisdom to undo this travesty.Racism and ethnocentrism are based on fear of the other, a false sense of security and superiority, which are really a deep insecurity and feelings of inferiority.The beloved country singer Johnny Cash -- a personal friend of Neil Young -- was called the "Man in Black." Some people might think it was because he wore black all the time. Did you hear why he did? He did it to identify with the downtrodden.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #37 posted by Hope on December 01, 2006 at 18:17:49 PT
 Clearing The Smoke: The Truth About Marijuana
Rudolph Wood and Justin Huang , outstanding work!Thank you. Thank you, very much.The truth has a rumbly sound to it sometimes. Kind of like thunder.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #36 posted by whig on December 01, 2006 at 18:04:36 PT
Max
The reason I don't recount atrocities in detail is the same that I don't give coverage to suicides -- I don't want to give the very kind of attention that motivates others to commit similar acts.Circumstances may make the story important to cover anyhow, but as callous as it may seem, none of us can cover everything and we have to pick and choose by some criteria.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #35 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 17:09:17 PT
Hope 
No other side just simple ole me! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #34 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 17:07:32 PT
museman
I don't bother with skull and bones stuff because it wouldn't be a good way for me to make a point when talking to someone but the church and politics connection I do use and people seem to understand that. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #33 posted by Hope on December 01, 2006 at 17:03:53 PT
FoM comment 6
Whew! I was glad to see comment 8. I thought...is there a side to FoM that's never surfaced before?Lol!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 16:51:23 PT
cannabliss
Thanks for clarifying the JFK quote. I had never heard it before.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 16:40:31 PT
Max Flowers 
I just want to say that you really are a sweet person. You don't need to stop posting in my opinion. Being angry isn't an unusual emotion during the times we are living in. Anger is basically frustration because we want to fix something but we can't because it is out of our hands to fix.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by museman on December 01, 2006 at 16:36:48 PT
for clarification purposes..
"The control and manipulation in our government is a hell of a lot more related to WASPs than Jews."In my refried opinion, that is not an accusation, but a point of fact. The "blame" is shared by all of us.Labels are like semantics; some like them and use them, some abuse them, and some find them trite and assuming.
 
Every circumstance requires various sets of tools. Here the general sometimes serves as well or better than the specific to get an idea across.I found the label "Zionist scum" to be a sure flag on my 'be wary' list. The truth about marijuana, has more to do with republicans than democrats...a fact, not an accusation or blame. Those republicans all also happen to be White Anglo Saxon Protestants, they all belong to the same clubs, public and private, including such wonderful fraternities as the now well talked about 'skull and bones'. They also have names like Reagan, Bush, and Nixon - to name a few.If those people, as a group, and as individuals, actuallly actively created such things as marijuana prohibition, then I personally think it is right on the money to BLAME THEM because they did it! History is an important lesson in this as all other possible social/politcal reform.I happen to be a WAS. I left the P behind many years ago.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by cannabliss on December 01, 2006 at 16:36:06 PT
a couple thoughts
Like Patriotism, I think Zionism can mean love of the country (Israel or the US), but it can also mean blind support of murderous policies of the country, such as the "patriotic" support for the actions in Iraq (or Lebanon).Also, the Kennedy quote is claimed to be fake:http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Columbia+University+Speech.htmI know we're all the good kind of patriots here ;-)
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by Max Flowers on December 01, 2006 at 16:35:33 PT
Blah
Okay, yeah I probably went too far with that one. That sure is how it feels to me a lot of the time though. Why is it I don't hear people condemning the most horrible atrocities unless I go to really extreme-left websites? And I just resent so much the resources that the US habitually hemorrages to Israel and its bullet and bomb-driven policies when those resources could be used to benefit the US. We spend SO much money on death, and so little on life. I do however feel like I consistently speak out against everything I do not wish to be complicit in. To me, if you don't, you can be seen as part of it. Killing in the name of religion is definitely something I wish to dissociate myself from at all costs. Strikes me as being one of those things that you either are totally against, or not. Thing is, I go by body count these days and who's really rackin' em up. Boy, the US and Israel have been scoring big time points. They're not doing it with any of my help though, and I make sure everyone knows that.I better just stop posting for now, I'm not doing any good in this state of mind...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by whig on December 01, 2006 at 16:28:21 PT
FoM
Meeting went well, thank you. My wife and I have a project over her winter break now, that will give us a little bit of pocket money, which is nice for the holidays.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by whig on December 01, 2006 at 16:09:09 PT
laduncon
Thank you, I agree with #23.Still we try to figure things out as best we can when it helps us to do so, but realize that our figuring is limited and imprecise at best. I try to talk about what I think because it helps me to put it in writing, and exchange ideas with others to help one another understand and communicate what we think we know.I hope that makes sense to you.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by whig on December 01, 2006 at 16:04:06 PT
Max
"Any Jewish person not actively protesting and working against these Israeli policies, is complicit in them."Careful. We're all human, so you're complicit in everything that you do not protest and work against, by your own reason. As ye judge.When you point a figure one points back at you.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 15:30:44 PT
laduncon
You're welcome for the forum. Talking about religion and it's downfalls is a good thing. (Religion is created by people) The war we are in is a religious war for some and a war for oil and power for others. If we can't talk calmly about why we are in the mess we are in then what's the sense in even trying to put the puzzle together. If we can't work to put the puzzle together how can we see the picture and how can we fix it when it needs fixing?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by laduncon on December 01, 2006 at 15:13:09 PT
re: Max Flowers
Notice I said, 'not necessarily.' I think if you read my post carefully you will see I laid out the pitfalls of adhering to Zionist ideology as unquestionable fact. I also believe that adhering to anti-Zionist ideology will not get one at the truth, but rather further the goals of those who wish to divide and conquer. Where you see enemies, I see potential friends. One must not label and then throw away as though things cannot change in time, either our perception of the situation or the situation itself. I (hopefully) wouldn't castigate someone merely because of a label that seeks to limit their humanity and sever brotherhood. Evil is not condensed within one all-inclusive label that allows one to definitively sequester and eliminate it. That divisiveness is precisely what I was arguing against.I tend to stay away from people who believe they have it all figured out, but I suppose that is what allows such people to exist.Blessed are the Peace-makers.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by laduncon on December 01, 2006 at 15:00:15 PT
Thanks alot for this forum
I know that discussion of religious belief and practice can be very controversial and don't wish to portray myself as having it all figured out. That is just my two cents on the subject at this time.Coming to cannabisnews.com has become a daily ritual for me, among other things :), and I truly appreciate the informed, compassionate, inclusive discussions that occur here as a matter of course.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by Max Flowers on December 01, 2006 at 14:52:47 PT
Zionism: a sociopathic condition
Laduncon said: Calling someone, or actually being, a Zionist is not necessarily negative.Depends on your perspective. I think that the known history and well-established pattern of Zionists to kill (bomb, shoot), displace, and seize the property and land of people they perceive to be "in the way" and use their religion to justify these acts is plenty negative. Anyone choosing not to see that these things are being done to people daily and with the use of that justification and the justification of "national security" is choosing not to see the truth. Any Jewish person not actively protesting and working against these Israeli policies, is complicit in them.I'm not just talking about Israel either, the Bush cabal are Zionists too, meaning that they consistently put the geopolitical aims of Israel way above the lives and rights of Americans. 9/11, for example, was a Zionist false-flag operation all the way. It was done either by, with operatives of, or at the behest of, Israel, and the Bush administration was no doubt involved. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by laduncon on December 01, 2006 at 14:50:58 PT
FoM
"The minds of people who believe they are God's chosen can't be told otherwise."And that is a very disturbing thought, indeed. However, others must continue to assert otherwise, or at least question their belief and eventually have them question it as well. Most people with fundamentalist beliefs were likely indoctrinated into this unthinking/irrational position as children, and questioning it was not an option if one wished to survive in that environment. In other words, they were told they were God's chosen and weren't allowed to say otherwise, and now they inflict that same cycle of unthinking authority worship and project/inflict it upon others. You can't get them to change their minds because they weren't allowed to make up their own minds in the first place. Authority cannot survive questioning and so authority stifles questioning.If God created all humanity, what kind of God would choose a certain group of people over another? If any are God's chosen, then we are all God's chosen.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 14:14:15 PT
One More Thought
The minds of people who believe they are God's chosen can't be told otherwise. That's why this war is about that one little spot in Jerusalem. I have always believed the Dome of The Rock is the key to why they hate each other and why this war will be hard to stop. Fundamentalist Christians are happy this fighting is going on between the Jews and Muslims and that is wrong and so fatalistic because many times people in times gone by believed the end was near. Fear helps build churches. Churches expect people to give money (tithe) and there it is.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 14:06:29 PT
laduncon
I understand what you mean. This is a war about the Dome of the Rock and do Muslims or Jews own that spot on the earth. Both religions believe god gave it to them. How can anyone fight with that as the reason why? 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by laduncon on December 01, 2006 at 13:00:36 PT
A little background, according to wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Mount
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome_of_the_RockFor the record, I'm not sure blaming WASP's is any more productive than blaming 'Zionists'. However, ideas put into action do have consequences (see Alfred Hitchcock's movie "Rope") and labels can sometimes identify the purveyors of certain ideas. Calling someone, or actually being, a Zionist is not necessarily negative. But it does identify that person as believing in the God-sanctioned re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in Jerusalem (usually at the exclusion of any other faith). It is the effects of acting upon that belief, bringing about the building of the 'Third Temple' on the Temple Mount, that could be potentially devastating. This is precisely the spot where the Muslim Dome of the Rock stands and which Muslims believe Muhammad ascended to heaven. Jews believe Abraham fulfilled God's test to see if he would sacrifice his son Isaac there. If the Third Temple were built, Jews and many evangelical Christians believe that this precedes the coming of the Messiah, aka Armageddon. My take is it would mean further war with adherents to the Muslim faith, possibly ending in the complete destruction of our current sociopolitical/economic/cultural/etc. order and the birth of a seemingly new (not necessarily better) era.Sorry if I got somewhat off topic, but Messiahs and Armageddon can have that effect on me. I do not blame any group but the fact remains that many people believe and are content with the idea of the Messiah coming and Armageddon occurring in ther lifetime, i.e. any day now. In fact, many people wish this to occur and are actively working to bring this event about. It is important that we do not over-react and castigate those who draw attention to the intended effects/beliefs of certain groups, regardless of their labeled heading (Zionists, WASPs, Muslims, etc...). Honest discussion and the free flow of ideas are the only cold weapons that can possibly avert impending ideological wars which have played out repeadetly over the last several thousand years.All is one, and one is all. Why have some sought, and seek, to divide and conquer the ultimate reality for their own narrow benefit at the exclusion of all others?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 11:52:42 PT
Whig
You're welcome. I hope your meeting goes well.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by whig on December 01, 2006 at 11:43:11 PT
FoM
I have a meeting to get to this afternoon so I can't share too many thoughts about it right now, but thanks for raising the issue.I don't like a lot of what the state of Israel does, but every nation-state has a violent past and present. Let's try to make for a less violent future.End cannabis prohibition.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 11:32:54 PT
whig and museman
I was interested in the quote from JFK and how I feel that we are going down hill as a country but when I saw the Zionist Jew being mentioned I went what in the world does that mean. I could have removed the link but I thought we might talk about how prejudice can color otherwise good ideas. Isolation of a group of people made the Holocaust happen. They isolate us hippie types too. That is wrong.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by whig on December 01, 2006 at 11:22:32 PT
Andrew Sullivan
I'm glad to hear him on our side, but I don't want to have anything to do with the warmonger.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by museman on December 01, 2006 at 11:22:25 PT
Zionist...what? huh?
Wow, talk about confusing the issues. This person's personal prejudice has totally destroyed the credibility of his otherwise astute observations.As far as I know, the Bushes, the Reagans, the Nixons, and all their minions, and their silent, shadow backers, cowtow to Israel because of wealthy Jewish support in America, but only because they have to support the wealth, it's part of their creed. There is no 'Zionist' infiltration and control - other than capital interest putting political pressure on a corrupt system.The control and manipulation in our government is a hell of a lot more related to WASPs than Jews.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by whig on December 01, 2006 at 11:16:00 PT
FoM
We are still friends, even if the church and temple leaders have not always been so. This is how I hope we can reconcile, because we know our ancestors and relatives have made mistakes but we don't hold it against the living who treat one another with friendship and love. That's part of what Christianity means to me, not to persecute but to stand with those who are persecuted whatever their background.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 11:07:13 PT
whig
I know you are Jewish. I am Catholic even though I haven't been interested or involved in the Church since my mid 20s. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by whig on December 01, 2006 at 11:02:37 PT
FoM
My family is Jewish, and whatever differences of metaphor I might use, I am ethnically Jewish.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 10:46:47 PT
Just a Note
I just read thru the link I posted and it made sense but they were attacking the Jewish people and that didn't make sense to me. I agree that we are going down the tubes like the article says but I don't agree with the cornering of one group of people as the reason.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 10:39:56 PT
museman
When I look at how different people talk about marijuana I think that their approach is special to the person and to others of like mind. Cannabis is such a broad subject and every different facet brings more depth to the whole issue. It really is amazing.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 10:35:36 PT
OT: Interesting Article 
America - a Police StateBy Ed LewisDecember 1, 2006"The high office of President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the Americans' freedom, and before I leave office I must inform the citizens of his plight." President John F. Kennedy -President 1961-1963 Columbia University, ten days before his assassination.Complete Article: http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2006/12/01/america_a_police_state
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by museman on December 01, 2006 at 10:20:47 PT
FoM -the video
I have mixed feelings about some of the things that were said. There was some implied attitudes that I surely didn't like - cultural smugness, and 'look at me I'm part of the status quo, so my words have more validity' kind of thing.
Oh well, enemy of my enemy and all that.Over-all I think it was positive, and the point was made quite well. The logic defends itself, when one actually makes an effort to come to know the truth about marijuana.I am really sorry for Irvin, that in all these years of smoking, he never got the other benefits of the herb - probably because he has been smoking government pot...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by museman on December 01, 2006 at 10:13:09 PT
real reasons for prohibition
Stated quite clearly; "racism and yellow journalism"They left out a few important characters however, like Ronald Reagan, who was at the time president of the Motion Picture Corporation of America. The MCA was one of the backers, and funders of Anslinger. It seems that the MCA had a vested interest in banning black jazz musicians from the mainstream music business, and were actually hurting their profits (controlled by the mob).If I am not mistaken, Mr. G. Bush Sr. was also involved on some level with J.P. Lily drug co.In other words the web that they wove is attached to some pretty revealing places when you begin to get the picture.
[ Post Comment ]

 


Comment #3 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 09:46:22 PT

About The Video
If you can watch the video I highly recommend it. Irvin Rosenfeld was superb.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #2 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 09:30:16 PT

Andrew Sullivan: The Feds vs the Sick
 Nov. 30, 2006 People talk about the immorality of the government not funding experimental embryonic stem cell research to cure or treat certain diseases. And yet we already have a drug that requires no elaborate production, has no bad side-effects, that actually cures serious illness and helps the sick - and the federal government doesn't just not fund this; it bans anyone from using it, and throws sick people in jail for it. This policy is despicable; it's immoral; and it's a scandal that marijuana is not available for any sick person it could help. Here's riveting, intelligent first-person testimony from a medical marijuana user for 35 years. It saved his life. He testified in Michigan yesterday. How dare the government ban this substance? YouTube Video: http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/11/the_feds_vs_the.html
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by FoM on December 01, 2006 at 09:00:12 PT

This Makes Me Think of a Song
It goes like this. I'm an old hippie and I don't know what to do.Men At Assisted Living Center Cited For Marijuana Possessionhttp://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/10440589/detail.html
[ Post Comment ]





  Post Comment