Whats really happening . . .

<A HREF="http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index796.htm" target="_new"> whats really happening </A>

General Byrne has been very vocal about the mistakes of AMERICA - - A brillant strategist now being fired and made to seem like a sex pervert--all bogus..

-those of us in the know see the writing on the wall-

As the Pentagon planning suggests, the American working class faces the danger of some form of military-police dictatorship in the United States."

We’ve had a continuously growing “police state” for years now, no one seems to care.
And then there are some who don't even notice!

Huge News Man, those Neocons sure move quick. In less than 18 months, they've moved from eating Privates and Corporals at Abu Grahib, to eating Marine Lieutenants and Captains, and now they are up to Four Star Generals.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

Depends on how you define police state. If you define it as a state with police and laws controling behaviour, this country, and virtually all others are "police states" and more laws being added that are unenforceable, and getting worse... The term is really meaningless, Free State pretty much the same. No one is completely free, the most so being bums I guess "Freedoms just another word for, nothing left to lose"

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

As far as being free..we're free in sense we can do whatever to want.

Free to grow herbs for personal enjoyment and health benifits? This hurts no one else.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

Hello Rich

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

I think you're being a litle naive here. The role of the federal govenment is not to make decisions for us that may or may not harm the individual. They are not supposed to be parent figures to keep us from doing anything "bad". Alcohol is legal, but you can't legally drive a car, plane, operate machinery, etc. while drunk. You do have every right in the world to lock yourself in a room and drink wild turkey 'till you suffocate on your own vomit. The same goes for tobacco and a huge number of other products readily available out there that directly cause far more danger to the individual and more importantly the public at large who are in the vicinity of these people. Legalizing herb would in no way involve allowing your airline pilot, bus driver, or skill saw operator to be high while performing their job. This is just an illogical leap. These things have far more to do with financial issues and special interests than protecting the people from harming themselves.

As for how many people would vote on these things one way or the other? Most of the people who vote on these things have little or no real knowlege of the facts on both sides of the argument. They just know what they heard from mom and dad or the campaign ads run by the wealthy companies and industries who stand to benefit from keeping certain things legal and others legal. You and I do not need the federal govenment to tell us what we can or can't do regarding things that cause no federal issues. Our govenment thrives on the premise that there is still that huge mass of the population who think that we should give them the right to make our choices for us. And they are slowly but surely taking our choices away, and at our request. That is not freedom or democracy.

<font color=green> I doubt, therefore I might be. </font color=green>

Great post and I agree. The government made these laws not based on medical studies or facts. They made these laws in order to control a race of people coming to our country. Pot the Mexicans, Coke the Africans. These are racist laws, plain and simple.
Legalizing them does not mean everyone will be doing them, sure there might be a surge at first, but legal or not, alcohol use rose during prohibition, and dropped off when legal.
Statistically about 10% of the population have this chemical imbalance that drives the need to feel different from the humdrum life they lead. That number will remain, weather legal or not. This should not make them a criminal. A manic/depressive does not make you a criminal, cancer does not either. Addiction is a disease and does effect those individuals and their families. But then there are casual/social users. This is America, land of the free, the government has not right creating racist laws and not amending their abuse of authority.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

The criminalization of Marijuana is on the Discovery channel, and our great government refused doctors opinions that pot was safe, so created a series of ad campaigns to get their agenda across.
Just played one ad, where little billy made a mess in the kitchen, an momma came in to clean it up, but billy was stoned, while she cleaned it up, in a stupor, little billy beat her to death with a skillet. Dam, Pot is heavy!

<A HREF="http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html" target="_new"> History of Drug Laws </A>


<A HREF="http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/reinarman.dutch.html" target="_new"> liberal drug laws can be beneficial </A>
Liberal drug policy is a threat to drug warriors precisely because it has not led to what so many have so confidently called an "unmitigated disaster."

Prohibition does not work, beit alcohol or drugs, in fact it raises use of substances.


The obvious answer to the question about why presently controlled drugs aren't at least partially legalized is that of cultural attitude.

The commonest idea in the US has been that immoral behavior should be punished and abuse of drugs is, in the common conception, immoral, but only select ones.

The other common idea is that threat of punishment is the most effective deterrent to immorality. So, in spite of the demonstration that criminal penalties for drug abuse mainly just fill up prisons, here we are.


The war on drugs is a hoax. Like prohibition, it is an assault on liberty because you can't force people into a mold without a police state.

Wether it's neocons or the far left, both want a police state for their own reasons. They think their reasons are good, but their hypocrisy in the matter stinks to the pits of hell.


<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

Pot is safe, this is true as is alcohol it all depends how you look at it. Smoking tobacco is safe if you only light up once or twice a week.

How many times do we here salt is bad for you? well!! Salt is bad for you no doubt because we use way too much off the crapp. Dose this mean a bunch of idiot hippies should argue people need to eat more or less salt. The real issue is salt is not addictive. Pot like tobacco alcohol cocaine heroin is. Hippies could create a web page PROVING without salt ALL would die. SO WHAT! Yes without salt we would die. This is the argument you use in reverse. Pot won't kill you. prolly not but could make addictive people abuse it to death especially if legal as tobacco. not to mention others in cars driving when stoned. Yes yes one can get stoned in a closet and not bother a sole but in reality many many will abuse and die of whatever to an addictive drug. Not to mention killing others under the influence

IMHO we have enough useless addictive drugs.
The media does what sells newspapers tv commercials and what have you.

You never proved your previous prohibition theory in past post. I'd still like to see some proof, if that is ok? So don’t bring up prohibition unless you can back up that garbage you spewed originally.

Your links are retarded. first any hippy web site could post about how something is not bad,,,,,, as in SALT. (((with out salt we die.))) pot is no better for people than tobacco because it is addictive so if tobacco were illegal today why make it legal now?

Oh yeah do you really feel less people would use (maybe become addicted) if readily available and no punishment if caught using.

Think again. I dont agree.


If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

OK, now it makes sense . I Saw rain man and consider it one of my favorite movies ever . It just didn't click when I read it . You can see it sounds a little crazy if you don't consider the line in the movie .

And in so much as the discussion about the soft timber industry goes, I live in the southeastern united states and the pulp wood industry has always been a big part of our economy . It has almost disappeared since cheaper Canadian lumber became available to the United States .



<A HREF="http://OverVolt.com" target="_new">http://OverVolt.com</A>
!#&$ ---<font color=blue><i><b>There's the facts</font color=blue>....<font color=green>the twisted facts </font color=green>...the distorted facts</font color=blue>...Then There's</i><font color=red> Journalism!</font color=red></b>

Personally I have always been against NAFTA . Our manufacturing base has all but disappeared overseas. The biggest part of our economy is based on the service industry . All it is doing for the United States is weakening its ability for self dependence and making countries with cheap labor forces rich and powerful .



<A HREF="http://OverVolt.com" target="_new">http://OverVolt.com</A>
!#&$ ---<font color=blue><i><b>There's the facts</font color=blue>....<font color=green>the twisted facts </font color=green>...the distorted facts</font color=blue>...Then There's</i><font color=red> Journalism!</font color=red></b>

<<Tobacco and Alcohol are physically addicting, Pot is not.>>

Now that is a better argument. You have anything other than a hippy make all clothes from a hemp web site,, that shows pot is not addictive?

If you can show me pot is not addictive then you win and I have zero problem with that.

I know enough people to honestly say they seem hooked on pot but who knows. I smoked a lot of pot from 18-20 and never got hooked. cigs takes a while but all will get hooked eventually sooner rather than later. Alcohol on the other hand takes many many years too slowly become addictive. Crystal meth on the other hand is claimed to be totally addictive after 1 or 2 tries.

Are you really that much of an expert that you can solidly claim pot is not addictive?

or did you just guess at that?

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

<<Personally I have always been against NAFTA .>>

As were many many canadians. So don't like it vote for a leader that will get rid of it. This nafta thing was hotly debated back in 1988 or so. Fact is saying after the fact of years of negotiation that we really like this and this and this and this plus this and and this but you know what the guys down in the south east dont like this so its now out.

Well sorry but the deal was done. Please don't bitch now or its not free trade. When countries move into protection or isolation that country will suffer,,, time has proven this over and over.

So, I personaly believe free trade with countries that pay fair wages are enviromentaly friendly etc etc is a very good thing.

Think of it this way if washington state was now sudenly selling lumber cheap your state might not like it cause that is a major industry there. But then again you are building a new house do you really want to pay 30% more for wood to avoid buying from washington state? Well same with canada its called free trade.

You negotiated it as did we. Took years to do. Its now long done and over with. Part of how we trade. You cannot change it now so people in california have to pay 30% more for your wood over 30% less for canada wood.

Thats just wrong.

What america is doing is wrong. That is the way it is.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

None of this really matters anyway , I have already solved the entire world's problems .

It's all written down in my "peace on earth" thread .



<A HREF="http://OverVolt.com" target="_new">http://OverVolt.com</A>
!#&$ ---<font color=blue><i><b>There's the facts</font color=blue>....<font color=green>the twisted facts </font color=green>...the distorted facts</font color=blue>...Then There's</i><font color=red> Journalism!</font color=red></b>

Why do you say it's certainly psychologically addicting. Isn't that more government propaganda? Where would the CIA get it's funding if we legalize pot? Are there the same carcinogens in weed as in ciggys...aside from the additives,I mean? What if you eat it, or drink it in tea?

<font color=red>GO BUCKEYES!</font color=red>

I just had a quick bit on the "gateway drug" thing. This all came about by interviewing those harder drug users. (though not very fairly or large enough sampling to make it "scientific fact" ) The users then would tell the interviewer that weed was the first "drug" they tried. Based on that logic, ask any pot smoker or heroin addict if they tried alcohol before they got on pot or whatever. Usually yes. So, does that make alcohol a gateway drug too??? It should. The whole gateway drug issue is just nonsense.

<font color=green> I doubt, therefore I might be. </font color=green>

1. If our protection and welfare was the governments responsibility or priority, we would have a right to healthcare. We do not.

2. Your brother may be addicted to marijuana. That does not mean that all people who use it are addicted to it (just like alchohol or fatty foods). Now, would throwing your brother in jail make his life better? Do you think that you may actually be able to get him some help if marijuana was not overly hyped as being 'evil'? Do you think that it is justified to spend millions of dollars throwing people like your brother in jail for doing nothing other than trying something that is not good for them?

3. If I try marijauna am I going to try other drugs? No. If marijuana were not sold by the people who also push other illegal drugs, would the 'gateway theory' hold any water? No.

You have an inalienable right to privacy.... until you get on my network.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

six sick sheiks, had six sick sheep


<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

You know how the tell a male crab from a female crab?

Flip it over, and if you see the Captitol Building, it is female, if you see the Washington Monumennt, it is male.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

If it was intended for our government (the US) to provide healthcare to the people, it would have been written into our constitution way back when.

It's not the government's problem to provide healthcare to everyone. They do fairly well, regardless of hearing of free healthcare in Canada and such.

I've never seen someone turned away for healthcare problems if they went to the ER. My brother is a prime example. In debt, no job, nothing, went into the ER and they wrote off all his bills. He doesn't have anything or mediwhatever it is.

If you go to your regular doctor, they'll kick you out because they have paying customers, etc. They're not government.

Pot smoking? I don't really know a single pot smoke who is worthwhile in society. Those who smoke it regularly are fairly well screwed up. Those who smoke it once in a while tend to be fairly normal.

You know how you pick out a pot smoker? They all laugh the exact same way. Take a look at it.. they all inherit some screwed up, impish laugh.

You watch.. I grew up around a lot of them, different groups. They all laugh the same. Stupid as it sounds, it's true.

My brother is screwed up on that stuff.. he's tried other stuff because he was smoking it so often he wasn't getting the high off it.. so he moved to X.. then some people around him were doing cocaine, special K, etc. He didn't go that far because he couldn't afford it and thought those were bad drugs.

My brother is the biggest loser I know. No Motivation, etc. Don't even go into saying that it doesn't screw you up. I just need to show you my brother. The only difference between him, myself, and our other brother is that he smokes pot. We all had the same friends growing up, we all did all the same things.. but he started smoking that [-peep-], I didn't.

Don't be so arrogant to think things aren't bad because science really can't find a rock-solid problem with it.

You just made so many ignorant generaliztions, I have no idea how to begin so I'm not going to. You go ahead and feel smart because you have everything firgured out and no one can tell you differently. See how far that gets you. F(_)C|<I|\|G 4$$H47 7EE|\|4GER.


Edit: ok, I will say one thing in response to "I don't really know a single pot smoke who is worthwhile in society." Here's a list for you:
President Goerge Bush
Former President Bill Clinton
Mayor Michael Bloomberg
Sir Paul McCartney
Newt Gingrich
Al Gore
Pablo Picasso
John Lennon
John F Kennedy
Sir Mick Jagger
George Washington
Oliver Stone
Steven King
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Wesley Snipes
William Shakespeare
Keanu Reeves
Ross Rebagliati
Richard Feynman
Sinead O'Connor
Bill Murray
Francis Ford Coppola
Winston Churchill
Johnny Cash
Friedrich Nietzsche

I've got ALOT more if none of these people meet your stanard of being worthwhile to society.

You have an inalienable right to privacy.... until you get on my network.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by graphicguru on 08/16/05 01:42 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

William Shakespeare - no proof he smoked, or that he even truly existed. It was common to smoke substances back then, like opium too. Let's have an opium party.

Newt Gingrich - HR 41 bill. He's been quoted as saying people who deal drugs should be shot. when enough had been shot, it'll solve the problem. --- this is your pot smoking reference. He's pretty much against it now.. he's tried it, he's done with it.

Thomas Jefferson & George Washington grew hemp for industrial purposes, it was useful to them in their era.

Seriously, find someone that is known currently be a heavy pot smoking person that is a significant figure in life, aside from the entertainment business - music, acting, comedy.

Find me someone like the business owner of Sprint smokes pot on a daily basis..
Find me that.. don't give me examples of people who did, but quit, then became more successful.

They turned their life around.. they were down they were smoking it.

It must suck to be you.

I know a gay U.S. Postal Service postman, been one for almost 20 years, and believe it or not, he smokes pot all day long. I know no one that smokes as much, but no cigarettes or alcohol.
He also operates a landscaping company, a commercial smoked fish outfit and firewood company on the side for almost 30 years. These businesses are local and not large scale, but he has several employee fulltime.

I have know this fellow since high school, and his is not one you would even suspect of being gay or smoking pot.
I bump into him every few months, and bave smoked a joint with him that he offered as a social thing, no big deal, took a couple of tokes.

There are more than you know, they just have to keep a low profile, because of laws and employment reasons, I am sure you understand the last one, since it even caused youu to delete a post.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

Right.. I don't doubt that, but in my generalization, 60-75%, it hits on most.

I'm not saying that people won't be successful.. but one out of X amount being good odds.

There are people who put in a lot of work, then start smoking up.. but they already did the work and have the benefits.

Your friend is probably really motivated.. I can see a postman being stoned all day.. it's not exactly a skilled job though, if he's deliverying mail.
Landscaping, depending on what he does, yeah..

I guess I tend to look at people in skilled jobs.. I don't look at the person who is making pizzas, or working in a factory.

Don't get me wrong, you can get rich in a lot of different ways.

But honestly, do you see it being a trend that people who smoke up all the time are also becoming successful people in realizing their dreams?
I honestly don't see that.. I see one or two get by here and there.

I do see a hell of a lot of people who don't smoke up realizing their dreams though..

Just my take on things.. nothing is absolute.. but that all goes back to my generalization.. 60-75%..

Would you rather be on the 3 out of 4 fail, or the 1 out of 4 fail? (if you were to reserve the odds, saying 1 of 4 .. college educated people fail miserably in life).

Not a single person would chose the 3 out of 4 odds of failure over the 1 out of 4.

That's just a simple way of looking at it.. they're odds though. They can be beat..