Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Ten Years After Decriminalization, Drug Abuse Down by Half in Portugal
102 views
Skip to first unread message
Leroy N. Soetoro
Apr 21, 2012, 3:52:40 AM4/21/12
to
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-
decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/
Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to
legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have
a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent,
expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for
problem users and addicts.
Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
Health experts in Portugal said Friday that Portugal’s decision 10 years
ago to decriminalise drug use and treat addicts rather than punishing them
is an experiment that has worked.
“There is no doubt that the phenomenon of addiction is in decline in
Portugal,” said Joao Goulao, President of the Institute of Drugs and Drugs
Addiction, a press conference to mark the 10th anniversary of the law.
The number of addicts considered “problematic” — those who repeatedly use
“hard” drugs and intravenous users — had fallen by half since the early
1990s, when the figure was estimated at around 100,000 people, Goulao
said.
Other factors had also played their part however, Goulao, a medical doctor
added.
“This development can not only be attributed to decriminalisation but to a
confluence of treatment and risk reduction policies.”
Many of these innovative treatment procedures would not have emerged if
addicts had continued to be arrested and locked up rather than treated by
medical experts and psychologists. Currently 40,000 people in Portugal are
being treated for drug abuse. This is a far cheaper, far more humane way
to tackle the problem. Rather than locking up 100,000 criminals, the
Portuguese are working to cure 40,000 patients and fine-tuning a whole new
canon of drug treatment knowledge at the same time.
None of this is possible when waging a war.
--
Obama's black racist USAG appointee.
Eric Holder, racist black United States Attorney General drops voter
intimidation charges against the Black Panthers, "You are about to be
ruled by the black man, cracker!"
Eric Holder, prejudiced black United States Attorney General settles the
hate crime debate, "Whites Not Protected by Hate Crime Laws."
Nancy Pelosi, Democrat criminal, accessory before and after the fact, to
former House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel of New
York's million dollar tax evasion.
Barack Obama and Eric Holder, committed treason by knowingly and
deliberately arming enemies of the United States of America through
Operation Fast and Furious. Complicit in the murder of Federal employees
during the execution of their duties.
--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ne...@netfront.net ---
decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/
Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to
legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have
a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent,
expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for
problem users and addicts.
Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
Health experts in Portugal said Friday that Portugal’s decision 10 years
ago to decriminalise drug use and treat addicts rather than punishing them
is an experiment that has worked.
“There is no doubt that the phenomenon of addiction is in decline in
Portugal,” said Joao Goulao, President of the Institute of Drugs and Drugs
Addiction, a press conference to mark the 10th anniversary of the law.
The number of addicts considered “problematic” — those who repeatedly use
“hard” drugs and intravenous users — had fallen by half since the early
1990s, when the figure was estimated at around 100,000 people, Goulao
said.
Other factors had also played their part however, Goulao, a medical doctor
added.
“This development can not only be attributed to decriminalisation but to a
confluence of treatment and risk reduction policies.”
Many of these innovative treatment procedures would not have emerged if
addicts had continued to be arrested and locked up rather than treated by
medical experts and psychologists. Currently 40,000 people in Portugal are
being treated for drug abuse. This is a far cheaper, far more humane way
to tackle the problem. Rather than locking up 100,000 criminals, the
Portuguese are working to cure 40,000 patients and fine-tuning a whole new
canon of drug treatment knowledge at the same time.
None of this is possible when waging a war.
--
Obama's black racist USAG appointee.
Eric Holder, racist black United States Attorney General drops voter
intimidation charges against the Black Panthers, "You are about to be
ruled by the black man, cracker!"
Eric Holder, prejudiced black United States Attorney General settles the
hate crime debate, "Whites Not Protected by Hate Crime Laws."
Nancy Pelosi, Democrat criminal, accessory before and after the fact, to
former House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel of New
York's million dollar tax evasion.
Barack Obama and Eric Holder, committed treason by knowingly and
deliberately arming enemies of the United States of America through
Operation Fast and Furious. Complicit in the murder of Federal employees
during the execution of their duties.
--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ne...@netfront.net ---
emoneyjoe
Apr 21, 2012, 11:19:58 AM4/21/12
to
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 07:52:40 +0000 (UTC), "Leroy N. Soetoro"
<leroys...@usurper.org> wrote:
>http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-
>decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/
>
>Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to
>legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have
>a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent,
>expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for
>problem users and addicts.
>
>Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
>unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
This is the dumbest article you have posted.
<leroys...@usurper.org> wrote:
>http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-
>decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/
>
>Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to
>legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have
>a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent,
>expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for
>problem users and addicts.
>
>Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
>unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
George Plimpton
Apr 21, 2012, 11:55:44 AM4/21/12
to
surprises me, considering the normal politics of the poster.
Drugs should be decriminalized. Even if drug abuse rises slightly,
which the Portuguese - and others' - experience indicates probably would
*not* happen, most other social problems connected with drugs would be
greatly reduced. In particular, the criminal violence connected with
the distribution side of illegal drugs would end instantly.
Message has been deleted
DCI
Apr 21, 2012, 3:56:15 PM4/21/12
to
On Apr 21, 12:52 am, "Leroy N. Soetoro" <leroysoet...@usurper.org>
wrote:
Notice of drug abuse is down via a redefining "abuse."
DCI
wrote:
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-
> decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/
>
> Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to
> legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have
> a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent,
> expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for
> problem users and addicts.
>
> Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
> unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
Cut -
> decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/
>
> Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to
> legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have
> a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent,
> expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for
> problem users and addicts.
>
> Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
> unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
Notice of drug abuse is down via a redefining "abuse."
DCI
Gunner Asch
Apr 21, 2012, 5:54:15 PM4/21/12
to
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 11:19:58 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
wrote:
Why? It may or may not be applicable to the US..but it does tend to back
up what a large majority of people actually think and some historical
data.
Prohibition created more alkies than did open sources of booze. So its
a very close parallel to drugs
Gunner
>
>
>
>
>
--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".
wrote:
up what a large majority of people actually think and some historical
data.
Prohibition created more alkies than did open sources of booze. So its
a very close parallel to drugs
Gunner
>
>
>
>
>
--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 3:01:37 AM4/22/12
to
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 08:55:44 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:
The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
police action or difficult availability.
Even the most backward countries have seen
what just weed or hash-hish does to a normal
person and have more recently outlawed those.
The trend by those with less self control
toward stronger brain altering chemicals is
a problem that would only be made worse.
So what would be the means of obtaining
weed and cocaine if they were decriminalized,
the same as now, or would a prescription be
needed?
More people die from overdose than from
police action, and lives are ruined by very bad
decisions while under the influence.
Are you thinking people would be able to
get the drugs they want at prices they could
afford, even if there had to be free distribution?
Has any of the promoters of this insanity
like Ron Paul put forth what the conditions
of obtaining the drugs should be?
Don't some countries have a death
penalty for drug trafficking?
Is the desire to get high and escape
reality such a big part of society or the
workings of an economy?
wrote:
police action or difficult availability.
Even the most backward countries have seen
what just weed or hash-hish does to a normal
person and have more recently outlawed those.
The trend by those with less self control
toward stronger brain altering chemicals is
a problem that would only be made worse.
So what would be the means of obtaining
weed and cocaine if they were decriminalized,
the same as now, or would a prescription be
needed?
More people die from overdose than from
police action, and lives are ruined by very bad
decisions while under the influence.
Are you thinking people would be able to
get the drugs they want at prices they could
afford, even if there had to be free distribution?
Has any of the promoters of this insanity
like Ron Paul put forth what the conditions
of obtaining the drugs should be?
Don't some countries have a death
penalty for drug trafficking?
Is the desire to get high and escape
reality such a big part of society or the
workings of an economy?
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 3:02:31 AM4/22/12
to
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 12:30:33 -0400, Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net>
wrote:
>Well, that was a well thought out fact filled reply.
Have another joint then.
wrote:
Have another joint then.
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 3:26:46 AM4/22/12
to
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 14:54:15 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
conditions were changed to and what drugs were
the most involved?
>Prohibition created more alkies than did open sources of booze. So its
>a very close parallel to drugs
>
>Gunner
A lot of people thought getting moonshine
was "cute", and most did not overindulge or
overdose of alcohol poisoning.
Jokes about boozers are still funny to
most even though a big percentage of
fatal auto accidents involve DUI.
I may be biased because I have never
even seen anybody smoking weed, and
that seems to be the chemical most talk
about making legal.
Maybe making weed like whiskey,
where anybody can get a license to
make a certain amount for their own
use, but what is going on here, is
drug use really the big issue today?
Laws should be based on what is
right and wrong, not on how little or
how much the violators hurt themselves.
Let one of the political parties make
this a plank and see where that goes.
wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 11:19:58 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 07:52:40 +0000 (UTC), "Leroy N. Soetoro"
>><leroys...@usurper.org> wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-
>>>decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/
>>>
>>>Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to
>>>legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have
>>>a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent,
>>>expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for
>>>problem users and addicts.
>>>
>>>Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
>>>unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
>>
>>
>> This is the dumbest article you have posted.
>
>Why? It may or may not be applicable to the US..but it does tend to back
>up what a large majority of people actually think and some historical
>data.
Is there a better documentation of what the
>On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 11:19:58 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 07:52:40 +0000 (UTC), "Leroy N. Soetoro"
>><leroys...@usurper.org> wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-
>>>decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/
>>>
>>>Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to
>>>legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have
>>>a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent,
>>>expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for
>>>problem users and addicts.
>>>
>>>Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
>>>unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
>>
>>
>> This is the dumbest article you have posted.
>
>Why? It may or may not be applicable to the US..but it does tend to back
>up what a large majority of people actually think and some historical
>data.
conditions were changed to and what drugs were
the most involved?
>Prohibition created more alkies than did open sources of booze. So its
>a very close parallel to drugs
>
>Gunner
was "cute", and most did not overindulge or
overdose of alcohol poisoning.
Jokes about boozers are still funny to
most even though a big percentage of
fatal auto accidents involve DUI.
I may be biased because I have never
even seen anybody smoking weed, and
that seems to be the chemical most talk
about making legal.
Maybe making weed like whiskey,
where anybody can get a license to
make a certain amount for their own
use, but what is going on here, is
drug use really the big issue today?
Laws should be based on what is
right and wrong, not on how little or
how much the violators hurt themselves.
Let one of the political parties make
this a plank and see where that goes.
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 6:08:50 AM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
> police action or difficult availability.
Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
> police action or difficult availability.
organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
They have been caught time and time again hauling drugs, now with this
trial of a Mexician drug cartel official national security has been
invoked because it has came out in court documents that the US government
was shipping guns to them inexchange for drugs.
> Even the most backward countries have seen
> what just weed or hash-hish does to a normal person and have more
> recently outlawed those.
smoke shops in Holland as an example, it has never been legal in Holland.
> The trend by those with less self control
> toward stronger brain altering chemicals is a problem that would only be
> made worse.
cannabis, you have 2 entirely different things there.
Chemicals are drugs and comes from humans, Cannabis is a herb and comes
from the Creator, big difference there Sparky.
> So what would be the means of obtaining
> weed and cocaine if they were decriminalized, the same as now, or would
> a prescription be needed?
> More people die from overdose than from
> police action, and lives are ruined by very bad decisions while under
> the influence.
> Are you thinking people would be able to
> get the drugs they want at prices they could afford, even if there had
> to be free distribution?
> Has any of the promoters of this insanity
> like Ron Paul put forth what the conditions of obtaining the drugs
> should be?
believes the Federal government has no business regulating them on a
Federal level where the states are the ones to regulate it/them.
Gunner Asch
Apr 22, 2012, 7:53:10 AM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:26:46 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
wrote:
>
> I may be biased because I have never
>even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>that seems to be the chemical most talk
>about making legal.
Here in California..weed IS basicly legal. Most cops wont even bat an
eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with friends.
Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply given it
up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
Shrug
wrote:
>
> I may be biased because I have never
>even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>that seems to be the chemical most talk
>about making legal.
eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with friends.
Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply given it
up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
Shrug
Flint
Apr 22, 2012, 8:29:15 AM4/22/12
to
On 4/22/2012 6:08 AM, tomalock wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>> police action or difficult availability.
>
> Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
> organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
> They have been caught time and time again hauling drugs, now with this
> trial of a Mexician drug cartel official national security has been
> invoked because it has came out in court documents that the US government
> was shipping guns to them inexchange for drugs.
>
>> Even the most backward countries have seen
>> what just weed or hash-hish does to a normal person and have more
>> recently outlawed those.
>
> Prove it. Which ones might that be and don't use the recent raids on
> smoke shops in Holland as an example, it has never been legal in Holland.
>
>> The trend by those with less self control
>> toward stronger brain altering chemicals is a problem that would only be
>> made worse.
>
> Why are you confusing mind-altering chemicals in the same conversation as
> cannabis, you have 2 entirely different things there.
> Chemicals are drugs and comes from humans, Cannabis is a herb and comes
> from the Creator, big difference there Sparky.
Perhaps because he is not confusing anything. Cannabis does indeed
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>> police action or difficult availability.
>
> Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
> organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
> They have been caught time and time again hauling drugs, now with this
> trial of a Mexician drug cartel official national security has been
> invoked because it has came out in court documents that the US government
> was shipping guns to them inexchange for drugs.
>
>> Even the most backward countries have seen
>> what just weed or hash-hish does to a normal person and have more
>> recently outlawed those.
>
> Prove it. Which ones might that be and don't use the recent raids on
> smoke shops in Holland as an example, it has never been legal in Holland.
>
>> The trend by those with less self control
>> toward stronger brain altering chemicals is a problem that would only be
>> made worse.
>
> Why are you confusing mind-altering chemicals in the same conversation as
> cannabis, you have 2 entirely different things there.
> Chemicals are drugs and comes from humans, Cannabis is a herb and comes
> from the Creator, big difference there Sparky.
contain a mind altering chemical, and hence, qualifies as a drug. It
is naturally derived and can be a more organic, granted, but it is a
drug nonetheless.
Personally, I don't feel it should be outlawed either, but trying to
seperate it from synthetic drugs by claiming it is not a drug is
disingenuous at best, and tends to have those advocating its
decriminalization as shooting themselves in the foot.
If anything, you "GoP" folks need to focus your efforts on educating
people on the difference between synthetic and natural drugs, and
start pitching Cannabis as a 'homeopathic' medicine. You all need to
give it a bit more of a PR 'facelift' this way. Have you seen the
cable network series on growers/users of Cannabis, BTW? That's what
I'm talking about.
--
MFB
George Plimpton
Apr 22, 2012, 12:09:23 PM4/22/12
to
criminalization of recreational drugs. The first is the crime committed
by those in the drugs distribution business. The second is petty crime
committed by drug users to finance their drugs consumption.
The first kind - the distribution crime - disappears immediately if the
drugs are legalized and controlled. That is where nearly all of the
violent crime associated with drugs occurs. With legalization, the
extremely high profits disappear. Most of that profit is because of the
scarcity and the extremely high risk associated with being in the
business. When that risk disappears, so do the abnormal profits, and so
does the violence - Bayer and Merck are not engaging in shootouts in
order to get their pain-killer products on drugstore shelves.
The petty crime associated with drug users also is likely to decline.
As cheap as some drugs may appear to be be to users, they would be even
cheaper if legalized. Even if some drug user continues to fund his
habit by committing petty property crime, he won't have to commit as
much of it - a given amount of money he gets from stealing and selling,
say, a computer or TV will go farther, and he won't need to commit
another crime to obtain drug money as soon.
> Even the most backward countries have seen
> what just weed or hash-hish does to a normal
> person and have more recently outlawed those.
> The trend by those with less self control
> toward stronger brain altering chemicals is
> a problem that would only be made worse.
countries show. You are wrong. You are stating nothing but your
emotion-laden beliefs about drugs, not facts.
> So what would be the means of obtaining
> weed and cocaine if they were decriminalized,
> the same as now, or would a prescription be
> needed?
money, you go to a store and buy the stuff.
> More people die from overdose than from
> police action, and lives are ruined by very bad
> decisions while under the influence.
interdiction would more than pay for public health programs to help addicts.
> Are you thinking people would be able to
> get the drugs they want at prices they could
> afford, even if there had to be free distribution?
to commit crimes in order to go to Safeway to buy a box of Cheerios and
a package of aspirin, they also wouldn't need to commit crimes, or would
need to commit far fewer of them, in order to go buy a bag of weed.
> Has any of the promoters of this insanity
> like Ron Paul put forth what the conditions
> of obtaining the drugs should be?
It isn't insanity. It's sensible. Criminalizing the drugs is what is
insane. It hasn't worked, it's prohibitively expensive to try to make
it work, and it has resulted in more and worse crime.
> Don't some countries have a death
> penalty for drug trafficking?
that most Americans would find intolerable. Maybe not you, though.
> Is the desire to get high and escape
> reality such a big part of society or the
> workings of an economy?
George Plimpton
Apr 22, 2012, 12:10:07 PM4/22/12
to
George Plimpton
Apr 22, 2012, 12:12:18 PM4/22/12
to
On 4/22/2012 3:08 AM, tomalock wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>> police action or difficult availability.
>
> Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
> organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
That's bullshit. The CIA never said any such thing. Some stupid
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>> police action or difficult availability.
>
> Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
> organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
radicalized black politicians like Maxine Waters claimed the CIA was
behind the crack epidemic of the 1980s, but she and everyone else who
said it were completely full of shit.
pyotr filipivich
Apr 22, 2012, 1:03:49 PM4/22/12
to
Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Sun, 22 Apr 2012 04:53:10 -0700
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
famous Dutch "pot bars" are cannabis only. Anyone who brings in
harder stuff gets run out by the customers. (I don't know how they
feel about those who want to smoke tobacco, but ..)
My main issue with pot is that it is a gate way drug. According
to friends, if it hadn't been for pot, they never would have started
smoking tobacco.
--
pyotr filipivich
Old farts these days - not like when I was a boy! We used to
have us Real Geezers in those days! Now, they'll let anybody
with a little gray hair be an old fart!
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>
>>
>> I may be biased because I have never
>>even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>>that seems to be the chemical most talk
>>about making legal.
>
>Here in California..weed IS basicly legal. Most cops wont even bat an
>eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
>pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
>
>I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with friends.
>Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply given it
>up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
That is the "issue" - low keyed. My understanding is that the
>>
>> I may be biased because I have never
>>even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>>that seems to be the chemical most talk
>>about making legal.
>
>Here in California..weed IS basicly legal. Most cops wont even bat an
>eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
>pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
>
>I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with friends.
>Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply given it
>up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
famous Dutch "pot bars" are cannabis only. Anyone who brings in
harder stuff gets run out by the customers. (I don't know how they
feel about those who want to smoke tobacco, but ..)
My main issue with pot is that it is a gate way drug. According
to friends, if it hadn't been for pot, they never would have started
smoking tobacco.
--
pyotr filipivich
Old farts these days - not like when I was a boy! We used to
have us Real Geezers in those days! Now, they'll let anybody
with a little gray hair be an old fart!
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 1:46:22 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 05:08:50 -0500, tomalock <re...@dixie.org> wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>> police action or difficult availability.
>
>Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
>organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
>They have been caught time and time again hauling drugs, now with this
>trial of a Mexician drug cartel official national security has been
>invoked because it has came out in court documents that the US government
>was shipping guns to them inexchange for drugs.
Can you provide documentation of that 50 or 60
>On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>> police action or difficult availability.
>
>Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
>organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
>They have been caught time and time again hauling drugs, now with this
>trial of a Mexician drug cartel official national security has been
>invoked because it has came out in court documents that the US government
>was shipping guns to them inexchange for drugs.
years ago, wasn't it in the 1960s that LSD and cannabis
became a "fad"?
>> Even the most backward countries have seen
>> what just weed or hash-hish does to a normal person and have more
>> recently outlawed those.
red flag ads can't be good;
http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/20329
The "green left" is prostituting hemp to gain the
support they could not obtain on the basis of their
ideology.
>Prove it. Which ones might that be and don't use the recent raids on
>smoke shops in Holland as an example, it has never been legal in Holland.
the information, if I find it I will post it.
>> The trend by those with less self control
>> toward stronger brain altering chemicals is a problem that would only be
>> made worse.
>
>Why are you confusing mind-altering chemicals in the same conversation as
>cannabis, you have 2 entirely different things there.
>Chemicals are drugs and comes from humans, Cannabis is a herb and comes
>from the Creator, big difference there Sparky.
Arsenic is a natural mineral, don't eat it.
>> So what would be the means of obtaining
>> weed and cocaine if they were decriminalized, the same as now, or would
>> a prescription be needed?
>
>Grow your own.
you bell rung by a drug cartel thug?
>> More people die from overdose than from
>> police action, and lives are ruined by very bad decisions while under
>> the influence.
>
>It's a fact more people die from government's actions than ANYTHING ELSE!
>> Are you thinking people would be able to
>> get the drugs they want at prices they could afford, even if there had
>> to be free distribution?
>
>If you were allowed to grow your own there would be no need for such.
I have glaucoma with severe damage, but using
something that damages the lungs to maybe protect
the eyes doesn't seem to be a good idea.
>> Has any of the promoters of this insanity
>> like Ron Paul put forth what the conditions of obtaining the drugs
>> should be?
>
>You're a media-feed fool, Ron Paul does not support legal drugs, he only
>believes the Federal government has no business regulating them on a
>Federal level where the states are the ones to regulate it/them.
must be regulated by the federal government.
I see no way the drug cartels would allow any
individual or group to take away their business.
Why would anybody enjoy getting high, that
is my question, anything that does that to the
brain kills brain cells, I have seen it in alcoholics,
and suspected it in individuals.
You really don't want to discuss recreational
chemical destruction of brain cells with a person
that doesn't like to take pain medicine even when
hurting really bad.
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 1:59:18 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 04:53:10 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:26:46 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>> I may be biased because I have never
>>even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>>that seems to be the chemical most talk
>>about making legal.
>
>Here in California..weed IS basicly legal. Most cops wont even bat an
>eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
>pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
>
>I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with friends.
>Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply given it
>up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
>
>Shrug
>
>Gunner
I guess other things become more important,
the guys I suspected were pot smokers were
those that gleefully inferred they were as if it
were some kind of bad little boy thing they were
able to get away with.
I left California in 1965, but the only things
I miss are the latin music (mambo) and the
street vendor hot tamales in front of the
ballroom in East L A.
And the weather.
wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:26:46 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>> I may be biased because I have never
>>even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>>that seems to be the chemical most talk
>>about making legal.
>
>Here in California..weed IS basicly legal. Most cops wont even bat an
>eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
>pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
>
>I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with friends.
>Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply given it
>up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
>
>Shrug
>
>Gunner
the guys I suspected were pot smokers were
those that gleefully inferred they were as if it
were some kind of bad little boy thing they were
able to get away with.
I left California in 1965, but the only things
I miss are the latin music (mambo) and the
street vendor hot tamales in front of the
ballroom in East L A.
And the weather.
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 2:01:37 PM4/22/12
to
cannabis is the cause of the stigma against a real
useful crop.
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 2:13:42 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:09:23 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
I can only compare cannabis to alcohol,
which I have seen the extremes of, driving
a cab beginning 62 years ago, and knowing
men that exhibited alcoholic dementia can
only form an opinion, which is based on fact.
When the use of what you call "recreational"
drugs affects job performance, safety of self
and others, and destroys the better things
of life, what good can come of it?
which I have seen the extremes of, driving
a cab beginning 62 years ago, and knowing
men that exhibited alcoholic dementia can
only form an opinion, which is based on fact.
When the use of what you call "recreational"
drugs affects job performance, safety of self
and others, and destroys the better things
of life, what good can come of it?
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 2:15:12 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:10:07 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:
And yours are always argumentative with no
end, with only winning the object. :-)
I don't think you smoke weed, so why comment.
wrote:
end, with only winning the object. :-)
I don't think you smoke weed, so why comment.
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 2:22:27 PM4/22/12
to
Gunner Asch
Apr 22, 2012, 3:41:31 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 13:59:18 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
We still have all three. Though the ballroom may not be there any
longer.
As for pot smokers...personally..Id rather have contact with a bunch of
guys who have been smoking pot, than a bunch of guys who have been
drinking. Its far far safer to be around pot heads than drunks.
Potheads seldom decide they want to kick your ass or beat their ol
ladies or rob a liquor store. Which cant be said about boozers.
longer.
As for pot smokers...personally..Id rather have contact with a bunch of
guys who have been smoking pot, than a bunch of guys who have been
drinking. Its far far safer to be around pot heads than drunks.
Potheads seldom decide they want to kick your ass or beat their ol
ladies or rob a liquor store. Which cant be said about boozers.
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 4:54:59 PM4/22/12
to
George Plimpton
Apr 22, 2012, 5:55:57 PM4/22/12
to
state to prohibit people from doing things that might harm themselves,
particularly when plenty of other pursuits and pastimes aren't
prohibited. People who ride dirtbikes at breakneck speed over the
desert also risk their safety, and it's not outlawed. We don't want or
need a nanny state.
You keep offering ostensibly practical reasons for why drugs should be
outlawed, but they're all bogus, because plenty of people drink, gamble,
ride dirtbikes and take recreational drugs without harming themselves -
in fact, *most* people who do any of those don't harm themselves. What
really motivates you, quite obviously, is that you think there is a
moral failure in doing any of these things. You think there *should* be
a nanny state that tries to compel us to be good. That's an un-American
value.
George Plimpton
Apr 22, 2012, 6:00:16 PM4/22/12
to
under good and minimal governance.
>
> I don't think you smoke weed, so why comment.
It's true that I don't smoke weed (any longer); I never did much in the
first place. I think it ought to be legal. When I smoked just the
right amount back in the old days, it was pleasurable. It never
affected my job performance or other responsibilities (I only did it on
my own time), it never led to harder drugs, it never led to any sort of
dependency problem. It was something enjoyable to do in the company of
like-minded friends. I don't think it is or ought to be any of your
business, nor any of the business of anyone else.
George Plimpton
Apr 22, 2012, 6:01:16 PM4/22/12
to
On 4/22/2012 10:03 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> Gunner Asch<gunne...@gmail.com> on Sun, 22 Apr 2012 04:53:10 -0700
> typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>>
>>>
>>> I may be biased because I have never
>>> even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>>> that seems to be the chemical most talk
>>> about making legal.
>>
>> Here in California..weed IS basicly legal. Most cops wont even bat an
>> eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
>> pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
>>
>> I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with friends.
>> Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply given it
>> up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
>
> That is the "issue" - low keyed. My understanding is that the
> famous Dutch "pot bars" are cannabis only. Anyone who brings in
> harder stuff gets run out by the customers. (I don't know how they
> feel about those who want to smoke tobacco, but ..)
>
> My main issue with pot is that it is a gate way drug. According
> to friends, if it hadn't been for pot, they never would have started
> smoking tobacco.
Good line. In fact, pot has not been shown to be a gateway drug for
> Gunner Asch<gunne...@gmail.com> on Sun, 22 Apr 2012 04:53:10 -0700
> typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>>
>>>
>>> I may be biased because I have never
>>> even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>>> that seems to be the chemical most talk
>>> about making legal.
>>
>> Here in California..weed IS basicly legal. Most cops wont even bat an
>> eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
>> pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
>>
>> I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with friends.
>> Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply given it
>> up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
>
> That is the "issue" - low keyed. My understanding is that the
> famous Dutch "pot bars" are cannabis only. Anyone who brings in
> harder stuff gets run out by the customers. (I don't know how they
> feel about those who want to smoke tobacco, but ..)
>
> My main issue with pot is that it is a gate way drug. According
> to friends, if it hadn't been for pot, they never would have started
> smoking tobacco.
most pot users.
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 6:09:13 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 13:46:22 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
>>organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
>>They have been caught time and time again hauling drugs, now with this
>>trial of a Mexican drug cartel official national security has been
>>Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
>>organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
>>They have been caught time and time again hauling drugs, now with this
>>invoked because it has came out in court documents that the US
>>government was shipping guns to them in exchange for drugs.
>
> Can you provide documentation of that 50 or 60
> years ago, wasn't it in the 1960s that LSD and cannabis became a "fad"?
>
LSD-25 was considered a "fad" back in the 60s but cannabis has been in
> Can you provide documentation of that 50 or 60
> years ago, wasn't it in the 1960s that LSD and cannabis became a "fad"?
>
use for thousands of years, documentation is all over the planet just
pick a direction and look so to speak.
Tim O'Leary is given credit for "creating" LSD-25, but he wasn't the only
person to come up with a way to make LSD-25. Tim still has a friend
living in Medford, Or.
>
> Not to mention .au, any group that allows socialist
> red flag ads can't be good;
>
> http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/20329
>
> The "green left" is prostituting hemp to gain the
> support they could not obtain on the basis of their ideology.
>
still giving banned vaccines to babies there so what the hell do they
know?
The "Green" people are nothing but a bunch of pinko-commie fags that are
doing everything they can to screw things up. They don't give a rat's ass
about the planet, they are doing the best they can to kill off all plant
life on the planet. To them it's just another way to get money from the
dumb asses.
>
>>Prove it. Which ones might that be and don't use the recent raids on
>>smoke shops in Holland as an example, it has never been legal in
>>Holland.
>
> There are too many pot-head web sites to find
> the information, if I find it I will post it.
>
>
>>> The trend by those with less self control
>>> toward stronger brain altering chemicals is a problem that would only
>>> be made worse.
>>
>>Why are you confusing mind-altering chemicals in the same conversation
>>as cannabis, you have 2 entirely different things there. Chemicals are
>>drugs and comes from humans, Cannabis is a herb and comes from the
>>Creator, big difference there Sparky.
>
> Why are you confusing can ibis with sativa?
>
cannabis and all will get you high pick one. Same plant different
"traits", Sativa is used more so for Hemp fibers and some medications,
due to the effect Sativa strains give people (up/high effect) Indica is
used mostly for medications because of it's short stature unlike the
Sativas which grow tall and the "down/sedative effect of Indica.
The Ruderalis is mostly wild weed but has interesting traits such as
flower without light cycle time periods instead rely on age to reach
maturity, thus used more so for breeding purposes.
There is another sub-strain I don't really mention because it too is also
an Indica strain coming out of Afghanistan.
> And you would never try to sell it an get
> you bell rung by a drug cartel thug?
they were ran out of the county several years ago. They still come thru
and plant it everywhere but it doesn't amount to anything, they have
better luck out west in the National Parks.
They've already had 1 Cartel boss to come up missing in the next county
over from me, he had it in his mind he could push Southern Rednecks
around like he did his fellow Mexicans in Mexico.
His bosses dealt with him, he started to lose too much money and that
hurts business. I'll let you figure that puzzle out. <g>
>
>>> More people die from overdose than from
>>> police action, and lives are ruined by very bad decisions while under
>>> the influence.
>>
>>It's a fact more people die from government's actions than ANYTHING
>>ELSE!
>
> Prove that.
>
I'm marking this post to return to let you read the proof because this is
going to be the easiest thing I've ever proved.
They still complain about the 6 million Jews, boo-hoo how about the 25
million Chinese Mao wiped out during his rein?
Yet the globalist say his form of government is a example to modeled upon.
>
>>> Are you thinking people would be able to
>>> get the drugs they want at prices they could afford, even if there had
>>> to be free distribution?
>>
>>If you were allowed to grow your own there would be no need for such.
>
> Do you have glaucoma, or just want to get high?
>
2 of them before I go to work. I use it to replace the 80mg of methadone
they had me on for over 9 years for the nerve damage in my lower spine.
I don't get "high" like others do, it doesn't effect me like that unless
I consume too much and then I just go to sleep. I've been at this for
close to 40 years so I might know a trick or two.
If a person is allowed to grow there own they will not be buying it from
anyone, no need to buy it.
Simple supply and demand, if you have your complete supply then there is
no demand.
> I have glaucoma with severe damage, but using
> something that damages the lungs to maybe protect the eyes doesn't seem
> to be a good idea.
>
have to smoke it to consume it, I need your email address to address this
matter further. There is something called a vaporizer that limits the
alkaloids consumed by smoking and with the small amount you would consume
by smoking is not harmful with all the anti-cancer causing alkaloid
contained in the cannabis plant.
I'm more than willing to direct you to all the evidence you require to
make a better inform choice. Only as long as you look at it with an open
mind forgetting what the government has told you.
My condition has afforded me the opportunity to speak openly with VERY
good doctors about this and 99% agree with me.
My own local doctor will tell you if all his patients did what I did he
would be broke, I have prefect health except for the nerve damage. Far
different than when I visited doctors regularly as I grew up.
>
>>> Has any of the promoters of this insanity
>>> like Ron Paul put forth what the conditions of obtaining the drugs
>>> should be?
>>
>>You're a media-feed fool, Ron Paul does not support legal drugs, he only
>>believes the Federal government has no business regulating them on a
>>Federal level where the states are the ones to regulate it/them.
>
> Any item that is transported across state lines
> must be regulated by the federal government.
>
state and each state can work out the details of Interstate commence
and the Feds can look the contract over to approve it without further
intervention on there part.
> I see no way the drug cartels would allow any
> individual or group to take away their business.
>
local news they said the NY Times had an article about what the Mex. drug
cartel said about what people grow in the US, they called it the "Ma and
Pa operations".
We shut there asses down, they could not sell anything, I even personally
heard about 1 person that sold there stuff complain they could NOT give
it away. Rightly so they had trash, lazy bastards take no pride in there
work no wonder the Spanish conquered them so easily.
> Why would anybody enjoy getting high, that
> is my question, anything that does that to the brain kills brain cells,
> I have seen it in alcoholics, and suspected it in individuals.
circumstances are right.
> You really don't want to discuss recreational
> chemical destruction of brain cells with a person that doesn't like to
> take pain medicine even when hurting really bad.
doesn't stop, same as any cell in your body. They are created and die all
the time. In the thousands of years humans have consumed cannabis not 1
time has it ever killed or physical harmed to anyone.
Are you aware of all the per-Harrison Act medications that contained
cannabis because of the benefits it contained for a number of aliments?
It has even been proven to help in the deliver of babies.
Let me dig around I may have something for you concerning your eyesight.
1 thing to remember just because you consume cannabis that doesn't mean
you are going to feel any effect from consuming it as in getting "high".
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 6:10:24 PM4/22/12
to
Piss off.
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 6:13:02 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:12:18 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
effect we supply the drug cartel with guns and ammo and they ship in
cocaine. It's all in the court records of the Drug Cartel member they
have on trail.
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 6:14:25 PM4/22/12
to
in the home or in bed.
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 6:16:51 PM4/22/12
to
along and doesn't know that much about a subject he berats them for there
ignorance of a certain subject.
Little does he remember the time he was actually ignorant of life
itself.<g>
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 6:28:08 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 10:03:49 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> That is the "issue" - low keyed. My understanding is that the
> famous Dutch "pot bars" are cannabis only. Anyone who brings in harder
> stuff gets run out by the customers. (I don't know how they feel about
> those who want to smoke tobacco, but ..)
Someone in this group (alt.drugs.hard) can answer that better than anyone
> That is the "issue" - low keyed. My understanding is that the
> famous Dutch "pot bars" are cannabis only. Anyone who brings in harder
> stuff gets run out by the customers. (I don't know how they feel about
> those who want to smoke tobacco, but ..)
else, he actually lives in Holland.
> My main issue with pot is that it is a gate way drug. According
> to friends, if it hadn't been for pot, they never would have started
> smoking tobacco.
school, cannabis was unknown to me at that moment. But someone made the
mistake and shown me what it was and where it came from.
If you really want to learn the truth about cannabis go to Alt.Drugs.Pot
newsgroup and start to ask questions. You will have breeders/growers
give you more info than you desire, I imagine you will have a few
centuries actual living experience to gather info from. <g>
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 6:29:19 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 14:22:27 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 10:03:49 -0700, pyotr filipivich
> <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Sun, 22 Apr 2012 04:53:10 -0700
>>typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I may be biased because I have never
>>>>even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>>>>that seems to be the chemical most talk about making legal.
>>>
>>>Here in California..weed IS basicly legal. Most cops wont even bat an
>>>eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
>>>pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
>>>
>>>I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with
>>>friends. Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply
>>>given it up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
>>
>> That is the "issue" - low keyed. My understanding is that the
>>famous Dutch "pot bars" are cannabis only. Anyone who brings in harder
>>stuff gets run out by the customers. (I don't know how they feel about
>>those who want to smoke tobacco, but ..)
>>
>> My main issue with pot is that it is a gate way drug. According
>>to friends, if it hadn't been for pot, they never would have started
>>smoking tobacco.
>
>
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 10:03:49 -0700, pyotr filipivich
> <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Sun, 22 Apr 2012 04:53:10 -0700
>>typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I may be biased because I have never
>>>>even seen anybody smoking weed, and
>>>>that seems to be the chemical most talk about making legal.
>>>
>>>Here in California..weed IS basicly legal. Most cops wont even bat an
>>>eye if you have anything less than a "lid"..which is an ounce of
>>>pot..which is a pretty big bundle all things considered.
>>>
>>>I occasionaly see people out back of a bar smoking a joint with
>>>friends. Its very low key, and a number of pot smokers have simply
>>>given it up..as its not "forbidden fruit" anymore.
>>
>> That is the "issue" - low keyed. My understanding is that the
>>famous Dutch "pot bars" are cannabis only. Anyone who brings in harder
>>stuff gets run out by the customers. (I don't know how they feel about
>>those who want to smoke tobacco, but ..)
>>
>> My main issue with pot is that it is a gate way drug. According
>>to friends, if it hadn't been for pot, they never would have started
>>smoking tobacco.
>
>
> Did any of them really get brave and mix the two?
That's what these kids call "Blunts", pure trash.
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 6:33:53 PM4/22/12
to
and non-violent. It is a medical herb that allows ones' mind to calm
itself in this world we live in and to regain our place in the universe
to live in harmony with all things.
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 7:14:24 PM4/22/12
to
your eyes, and watch the pretty colors.
What a way to waste time.
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 7:15:26 PM4/22/12
to
know. What's un-American is your attiude toward someone asking questions.
Questions are NOT stupid, answers are stupid at times. American was
founded on people asking questions and refusing to go along with the
status-quo.
What are you some nazi-loving facist pig-fucker?
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 7:29:10 PM4/22/12
to
and couldn't afford to buy anything if it was free.
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 7:39:38 PM4/22/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 14:55:57 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
No, I don't, but I don't do a lot of things others do,
I only rode a 1936 Indian Chief once in a parking lot,
and then to try to keep the new Harley that a friend
left in Biloxi and then got so smashed in Gulfport
that I had to carry him into the Barracks, put his
wallet in my foot locker and walk into town to bring
his big bike back to the airfield.
Why didn't both companies put the throttle
on the same side, I passed to turn-off.
I don't fly even though I was an asst. crew chief
on a B-25, I don't go on boats, I don't smoke,
don't drink, don't fool around with women,
I am not having any fun at all.
I only rode a 1936 Indian Chief once in a parking lot,
and then to try to keep the new Harley that a friend
left in Biloxi and then got so smashed in Gulfport
that I had to carry him into the Barracks, put his
wallet in my foot locker and walk into town to bring
his big bike back to the airfield.
Why didn't both companies put the throttle
on the same side, I passed to turn-off.
I don't fly even though I was an asst. crew chief
on a B-25, I don't go on boats, I don't smoke,
don't drink, don't fool around with women,
I am not having any fun at all.
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 9:53:35 PM4/22/12
to
an old dog a new trick don't kid yourself. Best part is you can do it all
by yourself without any help from anyone.
Scared you might find out something new? We should be more afraid of lack
of knowledge.
tomalock
Apr 22, 2012, 10:07:09 PM4/22/12
to
trip. Do you actually see a problem with that? I do more than you actual
know of so there is no rolling of eyes around here or any "pretty
colors". You should forget all that. Only time wasted around here is done
in the winter.
George Plimpton
Apr 22, 2012, 10:14:59 PM4/22/12
to
which the CIA "admitted" to starting "the drug culture." You're full of
shit.
>
> Piss off.
Eat shit and bark at the moon.
George Plimpton
Apr 22, 2012, 10:15:40 PM4/22/12
to
On 4/22/2012 3:13 PM, tomalock wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:12:18 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>> On 4/22/2012 3:08 AM, tomalock wrote:
>>> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>>
>>>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>>>> police action or difficult availability.
>>>
>>> Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
>>> organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
>>
>> That's bullshit. The CIA never said any such thing. Some stupid
>> radicalized black politicians like Maxine Waters claimed the CIA was
>> behind the crack epidemic of the 1980s, but she and everyone else who
>> said it were completely full of shit.
>
> What's bullshit is the admittance in federal court documents to the
> effect we supply the drug cartel with guns and ammo and
Bullshit. No such "admittance" [sic]. Fuck off.
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:12:18 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>> On 4/22/2012 3:08 AM, tomalock wrote:
>>> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>>
>>>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>>>> police action or difficult availability.
>>>
>>> Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
>>> organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
>>
>> That's bullshit. The CIA never said any such thing. Some stupid
>> radicalized black politicians like Maxine Waters claimed the CIA was
>> behind the crack epidemic of the 1980s, but she and everyone else who
>> said it were completely full of shit.
>
> What's bullshit is the admittance in federal court documents to the
> effect we supply the drug cartel with guns and ammo and
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 10:56:28 PM4/22/12
to
prescribe it. My pressure is quite low now
with two different eyedrops, it was 11 and
12 last week.
emoneyjoe
Apr 22, 2012, 11:06:09 PM4/22/12
to
>I do more than you actual
>know of so there is no rolling of eyes around here or any "pretty
>colors". You should forget all that. Only time wasted around here is done
>in the winter.
Reese Cups, but to each his own.
I lay down a lot, even using the computer,
I have a 32 inch LCD TV for a monitor and a
keyboard mounted up so I can type with one
hand.
I did damage to my spine in 1967 riding in
a truck in a living room chair without any back
support, not much shows up on x-rays, and
I control the pain more by laying down than
with drugs.
I am just happy to be able to get by without
any help, I don't wash dishes, paper plates
are cheaper than a wife.
So I really don't have much need for pain
management, a little when I overdo something,
but complete rest does wonders for the spine.
Flint
Apr 22, 2012, 11:19:41 PM4/22/12
to
living under? Maybe you just arrived back on the planet, or something?
She's a piece of shit Black Caucus race baiting politician.
--
MFB
George Plimpton
Apr 23, 2012, 12:44:38 AM4/23/12
to
Gunner Asch
Apr 23, 2012, 4:30:29 AM4/23/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 16:54:59 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
The world is getting smaller and smaller...you may not have any choice
who you have contact with.
About 1/4 of the people I know are pot smokers, about 1/2 are drinkers
and the last 1/4 are like me..teetotalers
who you have contact with.
About 1/4 of the people I know are pot smokers, about 1/2 are drinkers
and the last 1/4 are like me..teetotalers
Gunner Asch
Apr 23, 2012, 4:31:27 AM4/23/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 19:14:24 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
Ayup. But..its not much different than getting drunk and puking.
Shrug
Shrug
Gunner Asch
Apr 23, 2012, 4:36:59 AM4/23/12
to
>I think they gave it a term called "Democide".
>
>I'm marking this post to return to let you read the proof because this is
>going to be the easiest thing I've ever proved.
>They still complain about the 6 million Jews, boo-hoo how about the 25
>million Chinese Mao wiped out during his rein?
a bit more than 25 million dead Chinese....
>
>I'm marking this post to return to let you read the proof because this is
>going to be the easiest thing I've ever proved.
>They still complain about the 6 million Jews, boo-hoo how about the 25
>million Chinese Mao wiped out during his rein?
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/MURDER.HTM
China from 1949-1987...76,702,000
Thats 76.7 MILLION dead chinese.....
Papa Smurf
Apr 23, 2012, 5:21:49 AM4/23/12
to
finish let me know. Better yet enter the term "CIA starts drug culture"
into any search engine and then your lazy ass can read all of it yourself.
It has been reported several times over the years (on TV no less) about
the times there planes crashed in the jungles and other places then later
on they find out the planes are registered to CIA front companies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXTZKlnL0U0
(Funny things is the Taliban all but wiped out opium production)
http://youtu.be/SBh_hzU-jdI
(Here we see a Congressman speaking about the CIA's invlovment.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChIF6yvTL6k
(Hey sound track is nice what can I say)
Plenty more out there for you to read, you silly motherfuckers don't know
shit.
tomalock
Apr 23, 2012, 5:42:31 AM4/23/12
to
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:13:02 -0500, tomalock wrote:
> What's bullshit is the admittance in federal court documents to the
> effect we supply the drug cartel with guns and ammo and they ship in
> cocaine. It's all in the court records of the Drug Cartel member they
> have on trail.
http://12160.info/forum/topics/insider-cia-orchestrated-operation-fast-and-furious-gov-allowed-m
> What's bullshit is the admittance in federal court documents to the
> effect we supply the drug cartel with guns and ammo and they ship in
> cocaine. It's all in the court records of the Drug Cartel member they
> have on trail.
Here is page 1 of said document:
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/userfiles/70/Zambada.Notice.Rule12.3.pdf
Here's another interesting article with links for your stupid lazy ass.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/131207_b_cocaine.htm
Here is the words from the government's invlovement:
http://news.investors.com/article/593422/201112011812/justice-department-fast-and-furious-scandal-grows.htm
tomalock
Apr 23, 2012, 5:45:48 AM4/23/12
to
about her.
tomalock
Apr 23, 2012, 5:49:30 AM4/23/12
to
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 01:36:59 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:09:13 -0500, tomalock <re...@dixie.org> wrote:
>
>>I think they gave it a term called "Democide".
>>
>>I'm marking this post to return to let you read the proof because this
>>is going to be the easiest thing I've ever proved. They still complain
>>about the 6 million Jews, boo-hoo how about the 25 million Chinese Mao
>>wiped out during his rein?
>
>
> a bit more than 25 million dead Chinese....
>
> http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/MURDER.HTM
>
>
> China from 1949-1987...76,702,000
> Thats 76.7 MILLION dead chinese.....
>
I don't doubt that, I was just referencing a different report that you
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:09:13 -0500, tomalock <re...@dixie.org> wrote:
>
>>I think they gave it a term called "Democide".
>>
>>I'm marking this post to return to let you read the proof because this
>>is going to be the easiest thing I've ever proved. They still complain
>>about the 6 million Jews, boo-hoo how about the 25 million Chinese Mao
>>wiped out during his rein?
>
>
> a bit more than 25 million dead Chinese....
>
> http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/MURDER.HTM
>
>
> China from 1949-1987...76,702,000
> Thats 76.7 MILLION dead chinese.....
>
did. The one I read was speaking of all governments' killing of people in
the 20th century.
That's for proving it for me. Many don't understand it is real easy to
find something, just enter the term into a search engine and hit enter.
tomalock
Apr 23, 2012, 5:53:58 AM4/23/12
to
or anything that has HFCS.
>
> I lay down a lot, even using the computer,
> I have a 32 inch LCD TV for a monitor and a keyboard mounted up so I can
> type with one hand.
>
> I did damage to my spine in 1967 riding in
> a truck in a living room chair without any back support, not much shows
> up on x-rays, and I control the pain more by laying down than with
> drugs.
>
>
> I am just happy to be able to get by without
> any help, I don't wash dishes, paper plates are cheaper than a wife.
> So I really don't have much need for pain
> management, a little when I overdo something, but complete rest does
> wonders for the spine.
emoneyjoe
Apr 23, 2012, 7:25:22 AM4/23/12
to
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 01:31:27 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
I did that one time, in 1946, 7 cans of beer in an hour.
Once was enough.
Once was enough.
cocoabud
Apr 23, 2012, 9:05:00 AM4/23/12
to
In article
<n82dncPqBOmosAnS...@giganews.com>,
geo...@si.not says...
be non-regulated distribution (criminal) of any drug
that was legalized and controlled.
<n82dncPqBOmosAnS...@giganews.com>,
geo...@si.not says...
> The first kind - the distribution crime - disappears immediately if the
> drugs are legalized and controlled.
>
i think this is false. i think there would continue to
> drugs are legalized and controlled.
>
be non-regulated distribution (criminal) of any drug
that was legalized and controlled.
cocoabud
Apr 23, 2012, 9:05:00 AM4/23/12
to
In article
<mbWdnbgG14cUHAnS...@neonova.net>,
re...@dixie.org says...
culture but in no way was involved in creating it.
dr albert hoffman gets that award.
<mbWdnbgG14cUHAnS...@neonova.net>,
re...@dixie.org says...
> Tim O'Leary is given credit for "creating" LSD-25, but he wasn't the only
> person to come up with a way to make LSD-25. Tim still has a friend
> living in Medford, Or.
>
>
>
o'leary helped make acid popular in the mainstream
> person to come up with a way to make LSD-25. Tim still has a friend
> living in Medford, Or.
>
>
>
culture but in no way was involved in creating it.
dr albert hoffman gets that award.
tomalock
Apr 23, 2012, 9:37:33 AM4/23/12
to
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:05:00 -0500, cocoabud wrote:
> o'leary helped make acid popular in the mainstream culture but in no way
> was involved in creating it. dr albert hoffman gets that award.
You're correct I was mistaken, that goes to show how much things like
> o'leary helped make acid popular in the mainstream culture but in no way
> was involved in creating it. dr albert hoffman gets that award.
that interest me.
tomalock
Apr 23, 2012, 9:39:53 AM4/23/12
to
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:05:00 -0500, cocoabud wrote:
that.
George Plimpton
Apr 23, 2012, 10:57:30 AM4/23/12
to
On 4/23/2012 2:42 AM, tomalock wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:13:02 -0500, tomalock wrote:
>
>> What's bullshit is the admittance in federal court documents to the
>> effect we supply the drug cartel with guns and ammo and they ship in
>> cocaine. It's all in the court records of the Drug Cartel member they
>> have on trail.
>
> http://12160.info/forum/topics/insider-cia-orchestrated-operation-fast-and-furious-gov-allowed-m
The "court testimony" doesn't say what you claim it does, cocksucker.
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:13:02 -0500, tomalock wrote:
>
>> What's bullshit is the admittance in federal court documents to the
>> effect we supply the drug cartel with guns and ammo and they ship in
>> cocaine. It's all in the court records of the Drug Cartel member they
>> have on trail.
>
> http://12160.info/forum/topics/insider-cia-orchestrated-operation-fast-and-furious-gov-allowed-m
tomalock
Apr 23, 2012, 11:54:04 AM4/23/12
to
emoneyjoe
Apr 23, 2012, 1:53:20 PM4/23/12
to
is there?
tomalock
Apr 23, 2012, 2:48:02 PM4/23/12
to
Gunner Asch
Apr 23, 2012, 4:09:32 PM4/23/12
to
250 million
And we have American Leftards who think they can do it differently the
next time around.
Gunner
Gunner Asch
Apr 23, 2012, 4:11:44 PM4/23/12
to
moonshine industry in the US, and plenty of people make beer and wine at
home. But..all in all..its a very very small percentage.
And a lot of the above are the results of "dry counties"...IE blue laws.
Flint
Apr 23, 2012, 6:45:30 PM4/23/12
to
bar owners do, or folks looking for cheaper cigarettes, a cottage
industry of folks transporting weed from a state with more favorable
taxation on pot to a more heavily taxed state would surface.
--
MFB
Flint
Apr 23, 2012, 6:47:37 PM4/23/12
to
On 4/23/2012 4:11 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:05:00 -0500, cocoabud<coco...@hush.ai> wrote:
>
>> In article
>> <n82dncPqBOmosAnS...@giganews.com>,
>> geo...@si.not says...
>>> The first kind - the distribution crime - disappears immediately if the
>>> drugs are legalized and controlled.
>>>
>>
>> i think this is false. i think there would continue to
>> be non-regulated distribution (criminal) of any drug
>> that was legalized and controlled.
>
> It really depends on the pricing. We still have a very much and alive
> moonshine industry in the US, and plenty of people make beer and wine at
> home. But..all in all..its a very very small percentage.
>
> And a lot of the above are the results of "dry counties"...IE blue laws.
Too bad about Popcorn Sutton, eh? I always liked/admired the ole'
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:05:00 -0500, cocoabud<coco...@hush.ai> wrote:
>
>> In article
>> <n82dncPqBOmosAnS...@giganews.com>,
>> geo...@si.not says...
>>> The first kind - the distribution crime - disappears immediately if the
>>> drugs are legalized and controlled.
>>>
>>
>> i think this is false. i think there would continue to
>> be non-regulated distribution (criminal) of any drug
>> that was legalized and controlled.
>
> It really depends on the pricing. We still have a very much and alive
> moonshine industry in the US, and plenty of people make beer and wine at
> home. But..all in all..its a very very small percentage.
>
> And a lot of the above are the results of "dry counties"...IE blue laws.
coot. He was a real good old boy.
--
MFB
tomalock
Apr 23, 2012, 8:42:32 PM4/23/12
to
sack hang it in a tree for 2 days, check it and if the kernels have
cracked and started to form a tiny baby plant approx 1/4-1/2 inch long
but still with kernel, take it down spread it out to dry, grind
everything up pour it in a barrel with sugar to work.
The tiny baby plant material that is ground up with the kernel help make
the part you drink taste smoother, or so I'm told.
I wouldn't know, I've never seen the stuff myself.
pyotr filipivich
Apr 24, 2012, 1:37:11 AM4/24/12
to
Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:11:44 -0700
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
in dry counties, one can purchase Spirituous Beverages on the Sabbath.
tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
Old farts these days - not like when I was a boy! We used to
have us Real Geezers in those days! Now, they'll let anybody
with a little gray hair be an old fart!
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:05:00 -0500, cocoabud <coco...@hush.ai> wrote:
>
>>In article
>><n82dncPqBOmosAnS...@giganews.com>,
>>geo...@si.not says...
>>> The first kind - the distribution crime - disappears immediately if the
>>> drugs are legalized and controlled.
>>i think this is false. i think there would continue to
>>be non-regulated distribution (criminal) of any drug
>>that was legalized and controlled.
>
>It really depends on the pricing. We still have a very much and alive
>moonshine industry in the US, and plenty of people make beer and wine at
>home. But..all in all..its a very very small percentage.
>
>And a lot of the above are the results of "dry counties"...IE blue laws.
In Oklahoma, it is "dry by county". The main difference is that
>
>>In article
>><n82dncPqBOmosAnS...@giganews.com>,
>>geo...@si.not says...
>>> The first kind - the distribution crime - disappears immediately if the
>>> drugs are legalized and controlled.
>>i think this is false. i think there would continue to
>>be non-regulated distribution (criminal) of any drug
>>that was legalized and controlled.
>
>It really depends on the pricing. We still have a very much and alive
>moonshine industry in the US, and plenty of people make beer and wine at
>home. But..all in all..its a very very small percentage.
>
>And a lot of the above are the results of "dry counties"...IE blue laws.
in dry counties, one can purchase Spirituous Beverages on the Sabbath.
tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
Old farts these days - not like when I was a boy! We used to
have us Real Geezers in those days! Now, they'll let anybody
with a little gray hair be an old fart!
pyotr filipivich
Apr 24, 2012, 12:54:24 PM4/24/12
to
Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:11:44 -0700
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:05:00 -0500, cocoabud <coco...@hush.ai> wrote:
>
>>In article
>><n82dncPqBOmosAnS...@giganews.com>,
>>geo...@si.not says...
>>> The first kind - the distribution crime - disappears immediately if the
>>> drugs are legalized and controlled.
>>>
>>
>>i think this is false. i think there would continue to
>>be non-regulated distribution (criminal) of any drug
>>that was legalized and controlled.
>
>It really depends on the pricing. We still have a very much and alive
>moonshine industry in the US, and plenty of people make beer and wine at
>home. But..all in all..its a very very small percentage.
Largely because there is a very large bureaucracy dedicated to
>
>>In article
>><n82dncPqBOmosAnS...@giganews.com>,
>>geo...@si.not says...
>>> The first kind - the distribution crime - disappears immediately if the
>>> drugs are legalized and controlled.
>>>
>>
>>i think this is false. i think there would continue to
>>be non-regulated distribution (criminal) of any drug
>>that was legalized and controlled.
>
>It really depends on the pricing. We still have a very much and alive
>moonshine industry in the US, and plenty of people make beer and wine at
>home. But..all in all..its a very very small percentage.
punishing people for the most trivial of inconsequential reasons of a
myriad of inane regulations.
Oh wait, that describes most of the Federal Government. I was
thinking primarily of one of the Department of the Treasury's TLA,
known variously as the BATFEMICKEYMOUSOB.
Dr de Bauche
Apr 26, 2012, 5:23:35 PM4/26/12
to
On 22/04/2012 17:12, George Plimpton wrote:
> On 4/22/2012 3:08 AM, tomalock wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>
>>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>>> police action or difficult availability.
>>
>> Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
>> organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
>
> That's bullshit. The CIA never said any such thing. Some stupid
> radicalized black politicians like Maxine Waters claimed the CIA was
> behind the crack epidemic of the 1980s, but she and everyone else who
> said it were completely full of shit.
The CIA were caught red-handed importing cocaine to support the Contras,
> On 4/22/2012 3:08 AM, tomalock wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 03:01:37 -0400, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>
>>> The criminal activity is not entirely the result of
>>> police action or difficult availability.
>>
>> Correct, it is due from the government's actions, the criminal
>> organization called the CIA has admitted to starting the drug culture.
>
> That's bullshit. The CIA never said any such thing. Some stupid
> radicalized black politicians like Maxine Waters claimed the CIA was
> behind the crack epidemic of the 1980s, but she and everyone else who
> said it were completely full of shit.
& Alfred McCoy's book The Politics of Heroin -[CIA Complicity in the
Global Drugs Trade], provides voluminous hard evidence as to how the CIA
have been running the heroin trade since the 1950's, and continue to do
so through their support of "friendly" Afghan warlords/traffickers. The
Russian government at ministerial level has officially accused the US &
British governments of conspiring with Afghan heroin traffickers to
protect their exports of heroin from Afghanistan in return for their
support in our futile and unwinnable war in that country.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8180
http://www.talkingdrugs.org/nato-and-russia-disagree-about-afghan-heroin
The most recent example of the CIA being caught trafficking drugs, was
the crash of a CIA owned jet, which was logged as part of their illegal
rendition procedure, on the Yucatan Peninsular in Mexico. When Mexican
soldiers arrived to secure the crash site, they found FOUR TONNES of
pure cocaine amongst the wreckage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oszATUJ4IRE
With DEA agents quitting in disgust at being told time and again not to
bust some major kingpin because they are a "CIA asset", only the truly
naive can still believe the CIA is anything other than Federal Judge
Robert Bonner called them: the Cocaine Importation Agency.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_UbAmRGSYw
You need to wake up & get your head out the sand. Realise the truth of
how corrupt the US Federal government has become & the role of organised
crime & foreign bankers in subverting the US Constitution. Drugs are a
major part of that. Their covert importation creates billions of dollars
beyond any oversight, and the phony drug war allows military
interventionist policies in foreign lands & the removal of civil
liberties, & the slow but sure creation of a paramilitary police state
at home.
emoneyjoe
Apr 26, 2012, 7:44:46 PM4/26/12
to
tomalock
Apr 27, 2012, 2:43:08 AM4/27/12
to
Winston_Smith
Apr 27, 2012, 10:32:28 AM4/27/12
to
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 07:52:40 +0000 (UTC), "Leroy N. Soetoro"
<leroys...@usurper.org> wrote:
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/>
>Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
>unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
EVERYTHING is down 50% in Portugal and all the other PIIGS countries
because they are in fiscal collapse.
<leroys...@usurper.org> wrote:
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/>
>Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this
>unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half:
EVERYTHING is down 50% in Portugal and all the other PIIGS countries
because they are in fiscal collapse.
emoneyjoe
Apr 27, 2012, 2:50:33 PM4/27/12
to
all they can do is beg for euros.
0 new messages