The following is an interesting video on Cannabis. Obviously the panel is composed of people who are all pro pot, so there is a bit of bias in their feelings on the issue. Still, they make some good points. For me there is no rational reason why we continue to criminalize cannabis. It consumes enormous police and judicial resources at a time when budgets are tight. I was watching one of those COPS shows and the police were spending the vast majority of their time busting non violent drug users and sellers. IT seems to me that the police should be focusing their resources on controlling crime, like muggings, burglaries, robberies, etc. Hard drugs combined with crime need to be controlled, but busting people for possessing marijuana is both heavy handed and a waste of police resources.
It seems to me that powerful forces want to keep the drug war going. Maybe it is Big Pharma which fears the therapeutic power of cannabis against its won patented and often ineffective medications. Maybe the DEA, the police, and the prison complex all want to keep the drug war going because it supports them. There maybe other forces as well.
What seems odd to me is how the Obama administration reversed course and is now using Federal power to go against the laws of California. The people of California have voted in a referendum to allow medical cannabis, and yet the Federal government insists on prosecuting it. Why is Obama doing this? I see little if any outcry, and even less so among Democrats, to pursue an aggressive anti-cannabis policy, especially when such a policy goes against the laws and wishes of a large state. Who is demanding that the Fed crack down on pot? Not a lot of people that I see. Obama himself admitted that he smoked cannabis several times, and it was not even an issue in the campaign. On the far more controversial issue of gay marriage and gays in the military Obama has sided with the pro gay stance, generally to his benefit, despite what conservatives think on the issue. So why is Obama using Federal power to go against the wishes of Californians?
The largest demographic in the US are the baby boomers, who generally are cool with marijuana. The youth are also the same. The only group that might be a bit against pot are those over the age of 65, but even in this segment of the population opines vary. And seniors have never been much of a base for Obama anyway. I cannot see that Obama is getting tough with medical cannabis in California, because the electorate is demanding that he do so. Quite the contrary. So why is Obama so anti-Marijuana? It makes me wonder if there are wealthy forces out there that have a stake in keeping cannabis illegal. The medical establishment? Or the police, judicial, and prison complex? This is something to think about. I am open to opinions.
By the way the war on drugs was begun because all the anti-prohibition agents needed a job in the 1930s, and Cannabis fit the bill. The government has spent decades developing an anti opiate drug which works really well at getting heroine addicts off of the stuff, but the DEA has imposed so many restrictions on is use, even making it hard to get as a prescription, that its usefulness is limited. I think that the DEA does not want to fix the drug problem, because the problem keeps them employed. This is a weakness of so many organizations set up to deal with a problem. Once they are established, they actually do not want to fix the problem, because the problem keeps them in hock. Thus we have the Cancer Industry, and the DEA both fighting ways to deal with the problems they were ostensibly set up to handle.
What has become apparent to me is that we need to start treating drug addiction more as a health issue than as a strict law enforcement issue.
Here is the panel discussion
Here is an example of how those involved in the whole business want to keep cannabis illegal and profitable for them.
NaturalNews has been a great source of information on what is going on. Here is their latest update in the GMO issue. It talks about the upcoming Proposition 37 to ban GMOs in California. It also mentions the top 10 breakfast cereals for GMOs (I especially like the “heart healthy” and “healthy grains” on the labels. I guess that breakfast cereals are now going into the comedy of the absurd business to give their customers a laugh.) Finally the NaturalNews article talks about the recent French long term study on the negative effects of GMOs. The findings are sending a shock wave around the world, and should make people wake up to the dangers. It is news like this that makes the powers at be want to censor the internet. A few years ago this type of information would not be getting out to the public, because the media would put a blanket on it and the vast majority of people would never find out.
The top 10 breakfast cereals most likely to contain Monsanto’s GMO corn
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
(NaturalNews) By now, nearly everyone interested in healthy living is aware of the recent research linking Monsanto’s GMO corn to cancer tumors and an increase risk of premature death in both men and women. News of the research is spreading like wildfire across the ‘net, and support for Proposition 37 — which seeks to label GMOs in foods — is growing by the day.
But the media has not yet reported on the everyday foods being sold in grocery stores right now and made with Monsanto’s genetically modified corn (GM corn). Which foods are most likely to contain Monsanto GM corn? To answer this question, I visited a local grocery store in Austin, Texas and purchased 10 breakfast cereals made with high levels of non-organic corn.
According to the Center for Food Safety, up to 85% of the corn grown in the United States is genetically modified. This means corn-based cereals that use non-organic corn have a very high likelihood of containing GM corn.
The following list presents the top 10 popular breakfast cereals most likely to contain Monsanto’s genetically modified corn. For the record, none of these cereals claim to be GMO-free, nor made with organic corn. The exact GMO content of these cereals remains a mystery precisely because manufacturers of these cereals refuse to label them with their GMO content. This lack of full disclosure by the food industry underscores the urgent need for a labeling law so that consumers can make an informed decision.
Legal note: In no way are we claiming these cereals will cause cancer tumors to grow in your body or that they pose an immediate risk to your health. Those studies have not yet been done on humans. GM corn is an experimental crop with unknown long-term effects of humans. Breakfast cereals made with GM corn may turn out to pose a significant long-term risk to human health, but that has not yet been determined. This article is presented in the public interest, reflecting reasonable caution over a common food ingredient which French scientists have now convincingly linked to cancer and premature death in studies conducted on rats.
The top 10 popular breakfast cereals most likely to contain Monsanto’s GM corn
Cocoa Puffs and Corn Chex
Frosted Flakes and Honey Graham Oh’s
Honey Nut Chex and Kashi Heart to Heart
Kellogg’s Corn Flakes and Kellogg’s Corn Pops
Kix and Barbara’s Bakery Puffins Peanut Butter
Which cereals contain no GMOs? Nature’s Path
There is only one brand of breakfast cereal I know of that’s 100% non-GMO and 100% organic across their entire product line. That company is Nature’s Path:
If you buy breakfast cereal, and you don’t want to eat Monsanto’s GM corn, always choose cereals from Nature’s Path. This is my No. 1 most highly trusted cereal company.
Many “natural” brands that appear to be healthful and natural are actually not organic or GMO-free. For example, “Barbara’s Bakery” cereals are not organic. Although they are positioned in store shelves alongside other organic cereals, they are actually made with conventional crops grown with pesticides which may include Monsanto’s Roundup.
You may also notice that most of the cereals most likely to contain GM corn are children’s cereals. It is the children in America who are being fed the most GMOs. This represents a highly unethical food experiment being conducted on an entire generation, and the long-term effects of human consumption of GMOs are simply not known.
What we do know is that rats fed this very same Monsanto GM corn developed shockingly large cancer tumors.
The photo released by the French research team, showing large cancer tumors growing at a strongly heightened risk in rats fed a “lifetime” of Monsanto’s GM corn, is shown below. According to that study, 70% of females died premature and showed significant damage to their liver, kidneys and other organs.
Pretty crazy, huh?