It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The War on Drugs: What a Joke! (MUST-SEE VIDEO!!)

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 12:11 PM
my uncle introduced me to the herb about 20 years ago and i asked him why its illegal if it doesn't do any harm. he told me because it makes you think. and they dont want you thinking too much about the way the world works because you'll soon realise how much your being scammed everyday of your life. they just want you either getting your kicks off their drugs or alcohol because you'll be too out of your head too question anything and thats the way they like it.

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 12:20 PM
reply to post by 20 LAMBERTS

Thank you that is a very simle way of putting what I said about stimulating the pineal gland. It activates thought form a higher perspective, because humans are always thinking, that doesn't mean they are thinking with perspective.

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 12:28 PM

Originally posted by 27jd

Naturally, this alarmist rhetoric received wall-to-wall coverage by the mainstream press. Even more troubling, the supposed ‘pot-and-schizophrenia’ link was one of the primary reasons cited by British PM Gordon Brown, ex-Home Secretary Jacqui Smith and others as the impetus for reclassifying cannabis (from a verbal warning to a criminal offense punishable by up to five years in jail) in the United Kingdom.

Of course, there was a fatal flaw with The Lancet’s argument — one that, oddly enough, every single MSM outlet failed to mention. Empirical data did not support the investigators’ hypothesis that smoking marijuana was associated with increased rates of schizophrenia or other mental illnesses among the general public — a fact that even the authors begrudgingly admitted when they declared, “Projected trends for schizophrenia incidence have not paralleled trends in cannabis use over time.”

Unfortunately, the damage is done, the law is ramped up a notch, and once that is done no amount of correct information will reverse it (at least anytime soon, and not without a lot of work).
It's like flawed studies are released on purpose, a tool for politicians to increase drug penalties. It don't matter if they (the studies) are corrected later, the propaganda sticks.

[edit on 24-1-2010 by Toadmund]

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 01:19 PM
reply to post by Toadmund

We shouldn't be fighting the policies here we need to be fighting the politicians.

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 01:39 PM
reply to post by Gorman91

Who are you kidding?Care to explain alla beer cans along the road then?Must be people NOT named "Johnny"
BTW nice long post.Ya might turn the spell checker back on,it's kinda hard understanding when you use the wrong word.Thks.

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 01:47 PM

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by skunknuts

When I see a video with this.

There's no point in debating. If you think absorbing CO2 and toxic chemicals (which, btw, they use to make chemical weapons with) promotes brain cell growth.... well... Just enjoy your ignorance.

weed is like a virus. You get addicted to it and you make up reasons its good for you. The damage prevents you from seeing your own harm done, and you basically make your own little bunch of weed promoters.


[edit on 24-1-2010 by Gorman91]

All things in moderation.

Marijuana (Tetrahydrocannabinol) is not physically addictive, your body will not crave it to the point of withdraws... as with opiates or stimulants...

However, weed can be as mentally addictive as, for example, the internet, chocolate, sex, or shopping..

The WOD is a giant scam and a tool of control.

Proud member LEAP
Current and former members of law enforcement who support drug regulation rather than prohibition.

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 01:56 PM
War on drugs is a joke...funny you should say that. If you knew what the war was about you will know it wasn't a joke. This theory just hit me hard just when I was about to leave my house.

People say history repeats itself, if it did we would all be slaves to the aristocrats by now. The war on drugs was not to stop the flow of drugs, but to increase it's use nation wide.

Why? I am out of my mind!

The fact is people provide less resistance to the elite when your all hoped up on drugs. It makes taking over the political scene much easier. Not to mention how much money there is in drugs. Both sides made a killing, while leaving the middle class scrambling to help their sons and daughters. (Both sides are the drug cartel and the elite gang.)

Where is my proof?

It is actually in the thought form. The only way to solve problems is to ask questions.

How do you bring that much drugs in?
Who could actually afford to put that much drugs in the streets?
Who does it benefit?
Why will it benefit them?
How much resistance could a country provide if they had drug problems?

It all reeks of nothing more than rich play.

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 02:19 PM
reply to post by Imightknow

I would say if TV says eating crap is good for your skin , lots lots lots will try and say " IT WORKS IT WORKS... " lol

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 02:38 PM
reply to post by Sinter Klaas

I compleely agree Sinter!

And, I'll take it a couple of steps further and say drug offenses account for nearly 25% of the U.S. prison population, with the vast majority being low level, non-violent offenders.

Now I do not use drugs myself, with the exception of alcohol and tobacco, which are drugs and in fact are probably more dangerous than a number of illegal drugs, so my beliefs aren't about personal gain, but about us dealing with drug use and abuse the wrong way.

Most drug users started, or at least experimented with drugs when they were in their teens. Why, in large part because they were told not to and it was a way of rebelling. And of course there was also the peer pressure.

Decriminalize drug use and you take away at least a part of the rebellious aspect. Beyond that, if we spent 1/10 the money on education and rehabilitation that we spend on investigating, prosecuting and incarcerating drug users, the drug epidemic would probably be 1/10 of what it is today.

If you could walk into a drug store and buy crack coc aine over the counter for a quarter a hit, but it came with a warning that you WOULD become addicted and that in a very short time your life would deteriorate to a point that you didn't care about your family, friends, career or anything else that mattered, and your only concern would be getting another hit and staying high, how many people do you think would roll the dice?

Another benefit of decriminalization would be that the crime rate would drop exponentially, as would the cost to maintain our prison system.

The reason drugs are so expensive and so profitable is because they are illegal. Take the criminal aspect out of the equation and you take out the profit.

Pharmaceutical coc aine costs next to nothing, yet because it is illegal the street value is marked up hundreds of times. Here's a link to a 1985 article from the Milwaukee Sentinel stating that pharmaceutical coc aine sold for $50 an ounce at the time. On the street the estimated worth was placed at $2,500 an ounce. That a markup of 5000%, before a single cut. But, coc aine is probably cut at least 2 or 3 times before getting to the user, and it's probably cut by over 50%, making the profit rise to TEN THOUSAND PERCENT! That's more lucrative than anything else that I'm aware of. And we wonder why we have a drug problem!


And coc aine used to be legal as late as the early 1900's and was the ingredient in Coca Cola that gave it it's kick.

Now I'll go a step further and say that this war on drugs is responsible for thousands upon thousands of casualties.

Most first time users do NOT overdose, if anything they under-dose because they fear overdosing. Generally those that die from drug overdosing have been using for some time, and know their limits. They die because they got a hold of a bad batch, or more accurately, they got a hold of a batch that had not been cut as many times and was much more potent batch than what they were used to using, They used their usual amount, but because it hadn't been cut as much as what they were used to and was far more potent, it killed them. Or, someone in the distribution chain cut it with something else that killed them.

Remove the criminal aspect and even if drug use and abuse didn't decrease they would at least be clean, uncut and safer for those that did use, and the casualty rate would dramatically decrease.

Provide education and rehabilition instead of incarcaration, and we might even make it possible to more easily reintegrate abusers into society.

As it stands now, we lock them up and when they come out of prison not only have they been out of society for some time, but they also have a criminal record and are likely to find it rather difficult to find decent employment. As a result they may feel their only option is a life of crime.

And, they just graduated from where? Crime School!

Yeah, what we're doing ain't working!

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 02:50 PM

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by TheLoony


Case 1: ) Johny has pot. Johny keeps smoking because, as you said, you can't OD from it. Johny gets so high he's willing to do anything. Johny gets this sick idea. He thinks he can go around and be a dumb ass knocking over mailboxes from his car with a bat. ((snip))

That is one of the silliest things I have read about weed, ever. Look up symptoms of THC intoxication, you'll find slow slurred speech, slow and deliberate mannerisms, dry mouth, euphoria, and red & watery eyes.. hardly describes an energetic, hyper violent a mail-box whacker, eh?

In 10+ years pushing a Holstein sled (aka black & white) through los angeles, never once did I run into a scenario where someone, no matter how stupid stoned, found the motivation or energy to venture outside and randomly break things for kicks... I have more POST training certificates re: narcotics than 80% of officers on the streets today to go with 15 years experience & endless times on the stand as an expert witness.

What you are describing is far more likely as a result of alcohol / stimulant intoxication, and a definite mannerism of Phencyclidine.

If a stoner has the motivation to leave the confines of indoors, it's probably for food or more weed. As a matter of fact, THC produces one of the most peaceful non violent 'highs' of ANY drug... second only to opiate abusers who are 3/4 asleep "on the nod".

THC has a recognized effect with a moniker of "couch-lock", meaning one is literally so stoned & zoned, they are stuck to their seat... which can cause finger / hand injuries from excessive gaming NHL 09 on x-box..

If corporate america could patent Marijuana (THC), we'd be giving to hyper kids, people with arthritis, insomnia, headaches.. but as it stands today, big pharma doesn't want people growing their own analgesics / sleep aids for pennies on the dollar.

With weed collectives on every other block in los angeles and thousands upon thousands of medical card carriers smoking tons of weed... strangely enough the mail boxes have been spared the stoners wrath, and violent crime has dropped to its lowest level in half a century... with the murder rate mirroring 1967

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 05:36 PM
Gorman, you are the drone. I'm laughing my butt off at your story of only people who get high go out and do vandalism because the drunk people can't get up off their behinds. Like anyone here will fall for that line of bovine excrement.

You certainly are a propaganda sponge, aren't you? Soaking that crap up, and spitting it out again in a drone-like way. Alcohol has a safety mechanism, LOL...too funny!

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 05:37 PM
reply to post by skunknuts

I think drugs are a pathetic waste of time, real life is complex and beautiful already i don't need to add drugs on top of it lol. However i also recognise the hypocrisy of a society that sells alcohol, which causes death and disease in millions and yet bans drugs like marijuana which are statistically far safer. They can even have very helpful effects like pain control where others prescription drugs just don't work. It's all a joke because the tobacco companies can't control who grows the drugs they don't want anyone having them.

A government should have absolutely no right to dictate what someone can shove into their own body.

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 06:50 PM
reply to post by GovtFlu

Good post. You're the kind of police officer the public needs, one who obviously has a firm grasp on who is a danger to society and understands the propaganda used to incarcerate people not for being a danger to society, but to protect profit. Kudos, and i wish every police officer had your grip on reality.

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 06:56 PM
The judicial system doesn't care about crime, only $$ to feed its own systemic, putrid cycle of corruption...

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 07:51 PM
I don't know if anyone else has covered this on the thread yet, but I thought it should be discussed.

Drug usage is marketed to the public, even it is illegal with movies and the whole rock star party til you puke idealized lifestyle.

Hollywood learned long ago they could control their celebrities by getting them addicted to drugs, and this was applied to a whole rebellious generation in the sixties, and has been subtly been pushed ever since.

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 08:06 PM
Anyway... HAve we really gotten off topic.... It's about a conspiracy no?

posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 04:11 AM
reply to post by skunknuts

Uh oh.. One of ATS's sponsors takes a hit in the OP's youtube video.. "Partnership For a Drug Free America"..

Major supporters of said sponsor - THE ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO INDUSTRY!!

Is it any wonder that skeptic overlord (site owner) lists his likes and dislikes as various beers - (see below for proof).

From SkepticOverlord Member Page
Stuff I Like
Dark Belgian beer, amber Belgian beer, light Belgian beer. Okay, and maybe some English and Scottish beer... the darker the better.

Stuff I Don't Like
Weak American beers

Yet he equates drug users with child pornographers (see below for proof)

"We are a privately owned online social content community establishing our own standards of conduct that members agree to upon joining. We also make it clear through standards prohibit discussion of computer hacking and sex with minors... why has there never been any faux outrage about that? "

All this from a guy who wants us, his userbase, his bread and butter... to sign a petition supporting free speech online..

Free speech as long as its not "stoner speech"..


Also Check out this link ""

Here we have Springer (another site owner) smoking tobacco around a cancer patient..


There we have it, Alcohol and Tobacco use from the site owners who receive a paycheck from "Drug Free America" and who also equate drug use with child pornography..

Free speech my backside..pftttt, war on drugs... a joke indeed..

Edit to add - I'm not implying Bill and Mark are in on the conspiracy, that's not how a good conspiracy works.. A good conspiracy works when it is right out in the open. Think about it, here we have two guys that are obviously passionate about conspiracies, passionate enough to run the most successfull "Conspiracy Website" on the internet.. and... They can't see the hypocrisy of censoring the "Conspiracy" concerning the medicinal/spiritual and recreational benefits of natural drugs. That's called a perfectly executed "Conspiracy" and its how compartmentalization works. Bravo TPTB..!!

Drugs are bad.. m'kay...

[edit on 25-1-2010 by BurnBabyBurn]

[edit on 25-1-2010 by BurnBabyBurn]

[edit on 25-1-2010 by BurnBabyBurn]

posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 06:54 AM
Cannabis should be legalized in North America and sold and taxed by the government to help this stupid recession. I just cant wait for the day i can have 50 plants growing in my basement and not have to worry about being busted because of the smell. Just imagine how good the herb would be if it was legal.
All this talk about herbs got me jonzin for a doob i think ill go blaze one right now.

posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 07:10 AM
reply to post by TheUltimatum

Why would you need 50 plants?? There is no incentive to grow/sell weed if it were legalized...

That's part of the problem of legalization. All these years of ridiculous laws and blatant oppression would have to be rectified.. The way that would happen would be with the "50 plants in my basement" mindset.. People would just be going crazy initially because "were free to get as high as we want"..

That's just part of the balance, what goes up must come down. It would level itself out though, as we've seen with ample evidence in Amsterdams situation.

posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 07:48 AM
Wow, I am impressed this thread hasn't been closed yet....its imminent.

I am not a user of any drug but I know if there wasn't any money to be made in them we would not be discussing it as a conspiracy and there wouldn't be a problem talking about it on here either.

IMO the herb should be legalised so that everyone can see how much of a stage we live on, life is indeed an illusion.

[edit on 25-1-2010 by franspeakfree]

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in