Cannabis News DrugSense
  This President’s Day Remember Washington Grew Hemp
Posted by CN Staff on January 29, 2009 at 10:34:20 PT
By Harvey Wasserman 
Source: Columbus Free Press 

hemp USA -- George Washington raised large quantities of hemp. So did Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and virtually every other 1700s American farmer. It is also highly likely at least some of them smoked its potent sibling, now known as marijuana.

Perhaps we should commemorate the upcoming President’s Day by honoring George Washington with a National Celebration to Re-Legalize Hemp and Marijuana.

Indeed, in the Age of Obama, this old news has a new meaning. It is time to end Hemp/Marijuana Prohibition. With Bush gone and a new generation taking charge, we may finally have a chance to do it. Our nation’s famous Founders are our key allies.

Since 1937 the US has suffered through a period of hemp persecution that all the Founders---from Washington to Franklin, from Adams to Madison---would have deemed absolutely insane.

In their honor, in renewed protest against this absurd Prohibition, PASSIONS OF THE PATRIOTS, by “Thomas Paine,” is now being published. As we approach President’s Day, this “based on true history” novel shows Washington and his cohorts in their natural state, growing and smoking what we now call “pot” in mass quantities.

In his farm journal of August 7, 1765, Washington notes that he “began to separate (sic) the male from the female hemp…rather too late.” An astute agronomist, Washington could only have been seeking a crop with stronger “medicinal” qualities. Founders who smoked bales of tobacco and consumed oceans of beer (Washington was young America’s leading brewer) could not have missed the recreational properties of a crop well known for five millennia.

As for industrial hemp, growing it has actually been mandatory at various times in our history. Most recently Kansas was virtually carpeted with it as part of the effort to win World War Two.

For more than 5,000 years, dating back at least to ancient China, hemp has been used for paper, rope, sails, cloth, clothing, fuel, food, and much more. Today the rich oil in hemp seeds should be a staple of our conversion to clean, green bio-diesel fuels. Its stems and leaves could be a core crop for making cellulosic ethanol. Re-legalized hemp cultivation could quickly become a multi-billion-dollar bonanza for American farmers, just as it was immensely profitable for George Washington and his cohorts.

Hemp is great for the environment because it is a hardy perennial. It needs no annual re-seeding, no plowing, no fertilizer, no pesticides, no herbicides. Its seeds are loved by birds of all varieties, and are so full of vitamins and protein they comprise a pure, clean supplement for the modern human diet.

An acre of hemp produces five times as much paper as an acre of trees. The product is more durable and easier to manufacture. At least one draft each of the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution were written on it.

Hemp growing is legal in Canada, Germany and China, among other places, where it is productive and profitable. Desperate for income, farmers in the Dakotas and elsewhere throughout the Great Plains have been organizing to get this time-honored plant re-legalized.

They have America’s Founders on their side. Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the entire early American farm community---about 90% of the populace back then---would be astonished to hear that industrial hemp or its smokable sister are illegal.

With the coming of a president who has admitted to smoking marijuana and liking it, it’s time to link Number 44 with Numbers one through four, and beyond.

With our economy on the ropes, there are billions of dollars to be made from growing industrial hemp, and from taxing legalized marijuana.

On this coming President’s Day, Barack Obama should take a hint from our First President by kicking off a national campaign to end Prohibition and re-legalize both hemp and marijuana. It’s time to honor our ancestors.

Harvey Wasserman’s History of The U.S. is at: http://www.harveywasserman.com along with Passions of the Patriots by “Thomas Paine.”

This article was originally published by: http://freepress.org

Complete Title: This President’s Day Remember That George Washington Raised Hemp and Probably Smoked It

Source: Columbus Free Press (OH)
Author: Harvey Wasserman
Published: January 29, 2009
Copyright: 2009 The Columbus Free Press
Contact: truth@freepress.org
Website: http://www.freepress.org/

CannabisNews Hemp Archives
http://cannabisnews.com/news/list/hemp.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #109 posted by museman on February 13, 2009 at 13:08:24 PT
commonsense -all
Just for 'the record,' my initial post on this thread had to do with this statement;

"One example of arguments I'm begging people not to make are these biblical arguments for legalizing marijuana, all that kannah bosum tree of life stuff. Please, please, please, don't go out and argue that God wants us to get high. Even if it's true it's an argument that will hurt us far more than it will ever help us."

Other than the fact that this is an opinion, and certainly debatable, the veiled insinuation that there is something wrong with spiritual consciousness, rather than left-brained, establishmentarian, status quo materialism, and that it will somehow 'hurt our cause' is, IN MY OPINION, a couched alliance with all the anti-spiritual conclave that has been trying to worm its way onto this space.

I even did some side enquiries in the suspicion of that. I was assured that this is not the case, so I continue...

While it is true that my opinion of everything establishment/status-quo orientation is as low as ones opinion can get, the following statement is totally false;

"Museman and I have a history. When I post here he likes to make these posts where he insults my profession and he throws in these little veiled jabs at me. He doesn't confront me directly, but it's clear that what he is trying to do is insult me."

I'm not 'trying' to do anything except communicate some very difficult-to-get-accross concepts and ideas. Knowledge that isn't part of the mainstream 'acceptability' that really amounts to stagnant non-growth, no matter how widely believed or accepted it is.

I, like My Father In Heaven, am no respector of persons. I do not even know you commonsense, and if there is any evidence of intelligence in my words, one might realize that that small-minded activity -of attacking individuals- is one that I only reluctantly respond to when I am personally attacked. I've stated this over, and over again.

Your assumption that I've somehow got it it in for you is totally false, and the last time we went down this road, the 'history' as you call it, I took great pains to explain it to you.

You say it is 'clear' to you that I am doing this. If that were truly the case, then you have made a lot of posts that I should have responded to, because I found them nauseous and upsetting to my own sensibilities, regardles of whether those sensibilities fall within your personal parameters of acceptability or not. Yet I did not, because though your personal ideology is one that I fervently reject, I can't with any integrity just attack everything that offends me, because there would be way too much collateral damage. I must be somewhat selective.

It is just not true commonsense, I have read many of your posts that, just by their perspective alone, and all the assumptions, and presumptions (in my opinion) that go along with those perspectives, or maybe its just one perspective, are very offensive to me. The essence of what I percieve to be kind of narrow minded, in my mind is at the root of why we have this damn prohibition in the first place. Most of my posts are directly linked to that observation-whether in response to an individual or not.

There is one other thing that is pertinent to this thread, and that is the concept of 'evidence.'

There is more than one form of evidence, and only one is 'acceptable in a court of law.' That evidence is called 'impirical' yet by the very definition of the term, the 'legal' definition is incomplete and lacking.

The Impirical evidence of the experience of one man, versus the assumption of even an entire world of those who did not have the experience, does not change the truth one iota. The fact that 'acceptable' evidence in the legal sense has become associated with 'statistical facts' that are so easily manipulated by those with resource, as to be rendered useless to the actual manifesting of the truth, does not alter the truth and conviction of that one man, or the truth that is denied based on assumption and denial of evidence (regardless of its 'acceptability'.)

Not in any of my posts have I insulted you personally. Your profession, as far as I am concerned, is the result of aeons of corrupt Dominion, its prime reason for being is to protect the status quo, and the power of the Ruling class. I was once drafted into the nuclear sub program of the Navy, and the things I learned while operating with a top-secret security clearance set me on an energetic path to get the hell out of there.

When I joined up I was under many illusions as to the sanctity of this government, its real agenda, and the 'way' of the American Status Quo. I could have swallowed the information that this government was as corrupt as any ever was, and gone on like a good little soldier to become a nuke tech, maintaining devices that could end all life on planet earth, and risen through the ranks, even pursued a 'civilian' career in it.

I could have been part of the orignal computer/digital revolution starting in 1971 -I was enrolled in it, but the course that carried me out of the military, carried me further than mediocrity had to offer. And I am very thankful of it.

I could have gone into Naval Intelligence, they tried to draft me for that, but the nukies blocked 'em.

In my numerous dealings with 'the court' over the years -and not all having to do with me, I've advocated for others, and interceded in some of the rotton crap the local 'authorities' like to pull on families with teenagers just to extort money from them. I've argued more cases than one in front of the judges. I'd like to point out that though I have been hassled, prosecuted, and jailed (briefly) not a few times for my terrible crime of cannabis, I am a free man.

Freedom won by defeating the false logic of 'the law' with the truth, and nothing but the truth. Such is my experience, and observation -two if the official (not necessarily of the 'justice system') requirements for the determination of 'impirical evidence.'

My declarations of my opinons about these things is no different than anyone elses expression of opinon. Or do some peoples opinions matter more because of their 'station' in life?

Personally I adamantly believe otherwise. I do not believe in the 'specialness' of anyone based on their status quo endorsements, and if there is anything I will react to, it is that assumption.

I do not wish to battle with you commonsense, and that was never my intention. You cannot change my opinion from the perspective you throw at me, only my own direct experience with something other than what I have seen can do that.

The fact that my opinions rankle you, is only half the story. Your opinions bother me as well. If you are entitled to state your opinons in ways that I find in error, and veiled insinuations towards other opinons than your own, then it is only fair that anyone else should be able to respond without a consistent expectation of paranoid presumptions of 'attack.'

As I stated to someone privately, I was surprised that someone who must maintain their composure in the face of all kinds of BS that walks into the courtroom, could react so violently emotional.

I hope I do not have to continually make these explanations. At least not over and over to the same individuals. If I have to explain myself to someone whom I have yet to meet, fine, I can handle that.

FREE CANNABIS FOR EVERYONE



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #108 posted by FoM on February 13, 2009 at 08:38:23 PT
Hope
I personally don't want any money from the stimulus package no matter how much it would be. If we got any money from the stimulus package I would save it. I don't need anything. I got my hd flat screen tv and that was the only thing I wanted. I think many people would just save it. My husband doesn't have work because he hauls steel. The steel industry is driven by cars and weapons. The prices of cars are way too high and I'd rather go broke then want a war to escalate. These will be soul searching times. If we really put the money into fixing our highways and schools people will have work. They will buy things then. We need jobs more then anything while the economy shifts into a new mode. This isn't new. I have lived thru very bad times in the 70s and I know how it was for my parents during the depression. We are a global economy so it will have a ripple effect all around the world which could make it worse then the depression. I heard a finance person say on the news that rich people have socialism and poor people have capitalism.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #107 posted by Hope on February 13, 2009 at 08:24:07 PT
When the "feet" are hurting
we have to limp. If they hurt worse, it's crutches and if that doesn't work, it may mean crawling.

The motivators, instigators, innovators, entrepreneurs, investors, fixers, and financiers better get the "feet" operational and up and supporting the body, or nothing can stand.

But crazily enough... the "deciders" seem, mostly, to forget the feet and worry about the CEO's and the "big shots"... the head. Pouring more cash onto a dysfunctional head won't help if the feet are paralyzed. Trickle down doesn't work when the feet are crippled. Strengthen from the feet up.

I read somewhere, I don't know if it's true, but that if the stimulus money was given back to the people, it would mean thirty eight thousand dollars a piece for every man, woman, and child. Imagine how matters could improve if we actually did that kind of stimulus.

Cars would be bought. Bills could be paid. Insurance or medical care could be had. Homes could be paid for. Local small businesses could be started. Educations could be paid for and taxes could be paid through legitimate and fair channels.

It's difficult to imagine, and yes some people would waste and totally blow their stimulus... but most people wouldn't, I think.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #106 posted by FoM on February 13, 2009 at 08:02:16 PT
Tough Times For Everyone
I know many people who are or will be in trouble. When the strength of the countries work force becomes broken the whole system will fail. The working people are like the feet of a person in my opinion. You can't do anything if the feet are crippled up.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #105 posted by Hope on February 12, 2009 at 22:00:47 PT
Of course not... There's no time to play.
I can understand that. This has never been about playing on the internet. You know that.

Discussing this and keeping up with the underground/grassroots resistance and keeping it alive and growing isn't playing. It's an obligation. You wouldn't have been checking in here for so long if you didn't feel that way, too. I think that's what's going on here, but I could be wrong.

You need to check in once in a while... even if it's rarely.

Times are rough and near future plans are looking very different than they did a couple of years ago for lots of folks. We'll all find a way to survive and keep doing what we have to do. We have to.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #104 posted by Commonsense on February 12, 2009 at 21:39:40 PT
I appreciate the kind words
I just really need to focus all my attention on work now. The economy is really hurting our law practice. People aren't paying us. Business is slow and we're having to take a lot of work we wouldn't have taken before, for less than we would normally charge, and let people pay us out just to have work. Then they don't pay. We're having to work hard just to pay the bills and it looks like it's just going to get worse as more and more local businesses fold or lay people off. I haven't been in private practice that long and now that measly public defender salary I used to get looks a lot better than it did before. I can't justify the time I spend playing on the Internet now. I need to be taking care of business. It's nothing personal.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #103 posted by Had Enough on February 12, 2009 at 17:20:57 PT
Pie = (E=mc2)

A little Humble Pie never hurt anybody…It’s good for the spirit at times…I’ve had my share in the past…as we all have…and will probably taste more…as we all will…

Hot 'n' Nasty - Humble Pie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWjiyRFtJlY

Lyrics found here…

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/h/humble+pie/hot+n+nasty_20220905.html

************

for inquiring minds only…

E=mc2 explained.

http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/emc2/emc2.html

***

Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Einstein's Theory of Relativity...but were afraid to ask!

“Strange things can happen when you move FAST...things you won't learn about in high school courses, and won't experience while driving down the road in your pick-up. But these things are still very real, and definitely WEIRD!”

more…http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/theoryof/relativity.html

***

bio about Albert Einstein…Uncle Albert???

http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/albert/einsteinbio.html



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #102 posted by Hope on February 12, 2009 at 16:03:51 PT
And about them forefathers...
You may have noticed, Commonsense, that no one is arguing with you.

Are they?

You know you could have just said, "I studied this deeply and intensely and researched this so thoroughly a few years ago and there's just no way they smoked it, in my opinion. "... I would have considered what you said, as I did, and considered that you may very well be right, as I did.

Did I forget to say?

Probably.

Sorry.

I could believe they didn't.

They may have had all sorts of reasons not to. Heck people were terrified of tomatoes at certain points in history.

Peanuts, as a matter of fact, are getting pretty terrifying right now. Well, they always have been for some people... but more and more so, for more people lately... apparently.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #101 posted by Hope on February 12, 2009 at 15:37:36 PT
Perhaps the most amazing misinformation
I ever heard in my life was, "They have to tell you the truth if you ask them if they are a narc."

Duh. They're narcs.

Commonsense said, "I just caution you to please keep in mind that there is a lot of misinformation, groundless speculation and pure nonsense about marijuana out there and it isn’t all coming from the other side."

Commonsense is something that has always meant a lot to us. It's always been a major plank in our "Platform". Like Truth. Logic. Reason. Common decency.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #100 posted by BGreen on February 12, 2009 at 15:14:14 PT
Interesting closing remarks, commonsense
You know you love us. :P

I don't know about being banned but the future CNews celebration band could use a good lawyer.

Just take a deep breath, hold it for a few seconds and then exhale. Repeat until relief is obtained.

The Reverend Bud Green

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #99 posted by Hope on February 12, 2009 at 14:32:49 PT
You get yourself in here, sir...
and relay some more to us of your ideas of "Commonsense" opinion in matters we discuss here.

Many of us, including me, appreciate your comments very much.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #98 posted by Hope on February 12, 2009 at 14:29:25 PT
Of course you want to visit
and speak to, and with people here. We share thoughts and ideas in, usually, a very friendly and tolerant atmosphere.

We have poets sometimes. We talk music, news, politics, government, and laws, and changing laws. We talk about many things under the sun.

:0)

It's the best coffee shop in town.

Just bring your own coffee. You can wear your jammies even, and not shave... we won't pay any attention.

But we are serious. Serious. Very serious. It's the foundation of it all without a doubt.

It's not about smoking legally or any of that crap they accuse us of. It's about stopping them from killing and persecuting without cause over this plant. It's very, very serious.

But it's still the best coffee shop in town.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #97 posted by Hope on February 12, 2009 at 14:21:15 PT
You've got to have a thick, thick skin
just being a lawyer.

You're the old man of the mountain... even to me.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #96 posted by Hope on February 12, 2009 at 14:19:52 PT
You can't leave.
You're a "Founding father".

:0)

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #95 posted by Hope on February 12, 2009 at 14:18:58 PT
You belong here, Commonsense.
You are one of the earliest "Settlers" of C-News. You belong here almost as much as FoM. If you don't belong here, no one does.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #94 posted by Commonsense on February 12, 2009 at 13:15:29 PT
Had Enough, All
Museman and I have a history. When I post here he likes to make these posts where he insults my profession and he throws in these little veiled jabs at me. He doesn't confront me directly, but it's clear that what he is trying to do is insult me. It pisses me off, but I don't generally say anything because I'm not looking for a fight. The anger builds up though and this time I had just had enough.

I shouldn’t have been so ugly though and I do apologize to FoM and everyone else here for that. I must admit that not only was I lashing out at Museman, who genuinely does piss me off, I was actually trying to get banned too because I don’t have time to post on a lot of marijuana enthusiast websites. This is a great site for marijuana related news and sometimes I can’t seem to resist the temptation to post when I come here to read the news. I guess I'm a little self-control challenged. The grown up thing for me to have done would have been to ignore Museman and just exercise self control to spend my time on more productive things.

On the issue of whether our forefathers were sitting around smoking weed while they devised our system, forgive me, but this is just not something I care about enough to expend a lot of time and effort on. I’m 99% certain it’s bullshit. I actually did many hours of research on this issue years ago to satisfy my own curiosity, and I don’t really have time to do it all again. I realize it is not fair for me to make claims and then not make every effort to back them up, but sometimes it’s just not worth it. People here are free to believe whatever they want to believe. I just caution you to please keep in mind that there is a lot of misinformation, groundless speculation and pure nonsense about marijuana out there and it isn’t all coming from the other side.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #93 posted by Had Enough on February 11, 2009 at 07:04:57 PT
lyricks

Creedence Clearwater Revival - Who'll Stop The Rain

***

Long as I remember the rain been comin down.

Clouds of mystry pourin confusion on the ground.

Good men through the ages, tryin to find the sun;

And I wonder, still I wonder, wholl stop the rain.

***

I went down virginia, seekin shelter from the storm.

Caught up in the fable, I watched the tower grow.

Five year plans and new deals, wrapped in golden chains.

And I wonder, still I wonder wholl stop the rain.

***

Heard the singers playin, how we cheered for more.

The crowd had rushed together, tryin to keep warm.

Still the rain kept pourin, fallin on my ears.

And I wonder, still I wonder wholl stop the rain.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #92 posted by Had Enough on February 11, 2009 at 07:04:50 PT
Its Still Raining...

What’s it all about…Commonsense???

Struck a chord with you…It looks like…

Why go off the deep end…

Your comment to museman speaks volumes about yourself.

You should apologize to FoM for that. I do see you made some feeble attempt, but using it for cover for attacking others just doesn’t seem to cut it. Wiping the mud off your feet before entering someone’s house is a common courtesy.

No need to apologize to museman, you can if you wish; he will graciously except it but will also tell you it is not necessary…he already knows. He has had many people wipe their stuff on him. He can wipe that mud off and continue his trek. He can see it for what it is. Kinda like ‘another brick in the wall’… another brick in the wall of life.

Musemans writings are not merely bitching and moaning as you put it. There is a lot of wisdom in his words to see, if you do not prop up a wall and obscure it with false beliefs/indoctrination.

In my life I’ve been fortunate to run across about 2 dozen musemen…Most don’t see even one in their entire life, even if they are standing right in front of them.

************

I too have been to these 'courts of law’ involving various issues…Haven’t been impressed at all with feeling the wrath of lawyers and judges, The justice system seems to only work well for the wealthy and the elite, with rare exception.

Comment 52: You wrote

”In fact, I spent a lot of time doing research to see if maybe they did do it because that would be helpful I think in arguing that marijuana needs to be legal.”

Well did you take 5 minutes to write a letter with your official law office letterhead, lick a stamp and send it off to the Smithsonian inquiring about Mr. Burke???

I really be interested in their response, others here would as well... I’m sure.

************

Commonsense, I ask you; Who’ll stop the rain…the rain on humanity???

Creedence Clearwater Revival - Who'll Stop The Rain

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1TMulrUYME

John Fogerty - Live at Vietnam Veterans-Who'll Stop The rain

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vh1BxjcmZQo

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #91 posted by Hope on February 07, 2009 at 16:42:00 PT
Comment 77 Commonsense... Ooops...
I think Had Enough made the comment you're referring to.

I don't really have anything to say about it all except that it's odd that it was made illegal at about the same time... not going to search down the exact dates... but 1937 and 1938 and I believe the Popular Mechanics article was in early 1938, which makes me think the people that wrote the article and were working on the new machinery didn't have a clue, apparently, at what was going on in congress at virtually the same time.

No C-Span then or e-mail updates to keep people abreast of what they were doing there in D.C.. The left hand...Popular Mechanics and the hemp industry... apparently didn't have a clue what the right hand, there in D. C. was doing.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #90 posted by museman on February 06, 2009 at 20:40:19 PT
commonsense
Yes, you are right, there was an error in my syntax. It should have been;

"In my fervent belief and experienced opinion; The 'profession' of law is in its inception a wrongful act against God and Creation."

Any other syntax corrections will just have to be taken up with the authorities. Some of us know who they are.

I appreciate your anger, perhaps even deserve it, but if it has caused you to break protocol in such a dynamic way as reducing you to name calling, then you have only began to appreciate the depth and breadth of my own.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #89 posted by FoM on February 06, 2009 at 19:49:15 PT
Commonsense
Why would I ban you? You are having a heated discussion. This is a heated time.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #88 posted by Commonsense on February 06, 2009 at 19:30:36 PT
Museman
"The 'profession' of law is in its inception a wrongful act against God and Creation"

Fuck you, you useless piece of shit. All you do is bitch and moan about how awful the world is and you don't do and damned thing to change it because you're too goddamned superior to get your hands dirty.

I'm sorry, FoM. Ban me or I'll end up coming back again sooner or later and things will devolve into something worse than this. I don't belong here and you don't need the conflict.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #87 posted by museman on February 06, 2009 at 13:01:57 PT
Swept under the rug
Jimi...

Janis...

Jim...

John...

All "J"s -the modern equivalent of "Y" or "IO"

Yashua names. Spirit Warrior names.

Swept under the rug by selective history as commissioned and esatablished by the powers behind the status quo. Buried under the various snafus like "The Manson Story" "Waco" "Oklahoma City Bombing" and the crown achievement of the presuming authority; 911.

Relegated to pages in a book that has about 10% facts (dates, places, and times) and about 90% propaganda to support the premises of the false authority that produced the false history. -thats the truth of 'history,' as an acceptable form of precedence in the corrupted practice of law.

Swept under the rug of TV, and the prime time 'truth sellers' who faun after the leavings of the 'upper crust' like dogs slavering for table scraps. Treated like embarrasing adolescent mistakes, when in reality these words and wisdoms of our true "fallen Heroes" are the meat and substance of revelation, and consiousness revolution. -just like the Spirit whose essence is emulated by their words - YASHUA (YSHWH).

Yet, instead of listening to, and finding application for the truth as delivered by my generation of "J"s we'll argue the fine points of the conquerors agenda? That agenda being the modern corruption known as "law."

Bah, and bah.

Freedom is not a commodity that can be regulated and controlled wihtout violence and destruction, because people naturally don't want to give their power and liberty to such groupings as the 'government' and its 'offices' such as 'the justice system.' Especially when they are so obviously in the wrong -even if one cannot come up with the appropriate 'language of the court' -(which is their little game of catch 22 -only the 'officially sanctioned' 'state approved' 'lawyers' who meet the standards of the status quo -meaning that their greed, selfishness, and desire for power over others triumphs over graciousness, charity, compassion, and understanding get to be recognized by the kangaroo court that has infested our constitutional intention of a people-run government.)

My government, its agencies, offices, and servants has betrayed me, just like anyone and everyone else who looked behind the pretense and saw the truth. My government, its agencies, offices, and officers, is an abomination, an affront to all that is Sacred and Holy.

PIGS are nothing but demon-spawn. I salute those few brave souls who have realized the error and left the 'fraternal brotherhood of hate.'

The 'profession' of law is in its inception a wrongful act against God and Creation, and in as much as the prohibitionist would attack innocense with lies and propaganda-that gives them the excuse to wreck human lives, and rape Creation, it is time to take off the gloves when it come to the compromisers and preachers of the status quo.

Your cash ain't nothin' but trash.

Your ways are the source of error on the earth and the source of perpetuation of all kinds of evil in the land.

Go ahead keep driving your SUVs, keep sucking and consuming, keep watching your TV as if it was your New Church, and the pulpit of lies an actual benefaction of truth. Keep justifying the arrogance and false power of the special few, by giving your time into their service. Kiss the ass of the status quo all you want. Its not going to last much longer. Those who are foolish enough to ignore the warnings that are everywhere, for the wasted defense of a fallen and falling system have only a short time to repent of their mistake. And when the music stops, they will find there aren't enough chairs for them to sit in - bye -bye.

FREE TREE OF LIFE FOR EVERYONE



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #86 posted by Had Enough on February 06, 2009 at 09:00:01 PT
The Wind Cries Mary

The Wind Cries Mary at Monterey 1967

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOrpuw1J9Og



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #85 posted by Had Enough on February 06, 2009 at 07:45:36 PT
Jimi

Castles Made of Sand

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YF4-r2MpRMs

************

Down the street you can hear her scream youre a disgrace

As she slams the door in his drunken face

And now he stands outside

And all the neighbours start to gossip and drool

He cries oh, girl you must be mad,

What happened to the sweet love you and me had?

Against the door he leans and starts a scene,

And his tears fall and burn the garden green

***

And so castles made of sand fall in the sea, eventually

***

A little indian brave who before he was ten,

Played wargames in the woods with his indian friends

And he built up a dream that when he grew up

He would be a fearless warrior indian cheif

Many moons past and more the dream grew strong until

Tomorrow he would sing his first warsong and fight his first battle

But something went wrong, surprise attack killed him in his sleep that night

***

And so castles made of sand melts into the sea, eventually

***

There was a young girl, whos heart was a frown

cause she was crippled for life,

And she couldnt speak a sound

And she wished and prayed she could stop living,

So she decided to die

She drew her wheelchair to the edge of the shore

And to her legs she smiled you wont hurt me no more

But then a sight shed never seen made her jump and say

Look a golden winged ship is passing my way

***

And it really didnt have to stop, it just kept on going...

***

And so castles made of sand slips into the sea, eventually

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/j/jimi+hendrix/castles+made+of+sand_20071547.html

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #84 posted by Had Enough on February 06, 2009 at 06:31:27 PT
If 6 was 9

museman – keeper of the muse…

Those words you write are the thoughts in my mind…

I just can’t seem to put them down in writings the way you can.

That kind of wealth can only be obtained from special places and experience. Thank you for sharing.

************

Easy Rider - Jimi Hendrix - If 6 Was 9

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xylaFXwoQS8

************

Lyrics…

(yeah, sing a song bro...)

If the sun refused to shine

I dont mind, I dont mind

(yeah)

If the mountains ah, fell in the sea

Let it be, it aint me.

(well, all right)

***

Got my own world to live through and uh, ha !

And I aint gonna copy you.

***

Yeah (sing the song brother...)

Now if uh, six uh, huh, turned out to be nine

Oh I dont mind, I dont mind uh ( well all right... )

If all the hippies cut off all their hair

Oh I dont care, oh I dont care.

Dig.

***

cause Ive got my own world to live through and uh, huh

And I aint gonna copy you.

***

White collar conservative flashin down the street

Pointin their plastic finger at me, ha !

Theyre hopin soon my kind will drop and die but uh

Im gonna wave my freak flag high, high !

Oww !

***

Wave on, wave on...

***

Ah, ha, ha

Fall mountains, just dont fall on me

Go ahead on mister business man, you cant dress like me

Yeah !

***

Dont nobody know what Im talkin about

Ive got my own life to live

Im the one thats gonna die when its time for me to die

So let me live my life the way I want to

Yeah, sing on brother, play on drummer

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/j/jimi+hendrix/if+6+was+9_20071549.html



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #83 posted by Had Enough on February 06, 2009 at 06:31:22 PT
The Mind…

Maybe the Smithsonian wouldn't just remember a "Dr. Burke" who had done some consultant work for them in the past.

Maybe, maybe not, or maybe they will just not divulge that information period…Send off a letter using your official letterhead from the law office. I’d be interested in the results, and I’m sure others would be interested too.

If you want to believe something, it's pretty easy to believe it with little or no evidence or only very weak evidence to back it up. You can even believe something that's probably not true if you want to believe it.

That is how the prohibitionists are getting away with arresting people, jailing them, in some cases even worse, draining every cent from them in the process.

It’s also what our Politicians/Kings/Queens and their nobles are continuously and has been doing.

The mind can be a terrible thing…

The courts ’won't allow you’ to argue for nullification except perhaps in a round about way. You have to be sneaky about it. You can't go off on some ’tangent’ about the history of our marijuana laws and why they are wrong. ’The judge will shut you down’. The jury is there to determine whether or not a person violated the law. ’They're going to get jury instructions’ that set out the elements of the crimes alleged in the indictment or the criminal information, and they have to determine whether the all of the elements of the crimes were proved by the government. If all of the elements of a particular crime are proved, ’they're supposed to find the defendant guilty. That's just the way it works.’

There’s not a lot of room left for truth and justice…

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #82 posted by FoM on February 06, 2009 at 06:18:23 PT
museman
Thank you. I walk to the beat of my heart and Spirit. I've never been a follower of any political ideology. Political arguments cause me to tune out. I didn't vote for our new President because he's a Democrat but a person who has inspired me.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #81 posted by museman on February 06, 2009 at 01:19:48 PT
greater things
There are greater things, greater powers, larger potentials, and certainly more hoped for and desired than those small and limited devised by the opionated scope of men, and a certain 'class' of men at that. The 'law' and the 'system' that it serves is one accepted, prominent avenue of supposed movement in the area of social/political reform, but to presuppose it as power as preimminent, or even MORE preimminent than 'God' is error that actual research discovers; the fact that all law rests firmly on the precedence of the 'belief substantial' in the existence of a 'Law Giver' whom in our historical 'biblical' and western historical slant is known and established as YHWH (God) with Moses as His 'Lawyer.'

Prohibition is because of fear and ignorance. Fear and ignorance in religion. Fear and ignorance in SOME PARTICULAR social circles. Fear and ignorance in just about every strata of human experience that it can worm its way into. Law is certainly no exception.

The law is supposed to serve all on equal terms. When those terms can so easily be bent, twisted, ignored, falsified, and rendered useless by the simple application of numeric collums in a digital bank account in Switzerland, then in my opinion the law is only worth the money that you can pay for it, which in my opinon can't compare to the things that I can have for the freedom of the life and Creation that the Creator -whichever way one chooses to name- gave me at the moment of my first breath.

God gave me this entire reality to grow, play and participate in. He gave me simple, logical, understandable rules that I should follow if I would have any chance at good run. Its only these pretensive men (and women) who go around with symbols of invented 'authority' pinned on their chests, and in their hearts and minds, that are making it hard for the rest of life on planet earth.

This twisted dedication of these unwanted, unasked for, and generally not needed interpreters of my reality that make lifestyles and job descriptions out of disrupting the natural flow of other peoples lives - calling it 'law and order' or 'justice. Just military power words for "I'm gonna shove my fear and ignorance down your throat. Here's my badge of authority, and you know what we do to those who defy that authority."

The histories of men are not all stored in the libraries in the town square. The knowledge that seems to have been forgotten by those who say they are looking for it, has been known before. The way we see it tommorrow may not be the same as yesterday, but it is still the same thing that we are looking at. There is greater INHERENT fact and intuitive knowlege in the unwritten histories, than in the narrowly conceptualized, but voluminous storage of law and precedence as some kind of 'reference to reality.'

To be forced into such a narrow scope as such as that is exactly the sting and persecution of prohibition itself, because the invention referred to as 'the law' underwrites, and insinuates itself into a preimminent state such as I only recognize as occupiable, and inhabitable by God, is therefore, no matter what the claimed and worded outcome, an unacceptable parameter where freedom is still denied by the law, its believers, accolytes, alter boys, priests, officers, guards, and all of its bonded servants, not delivered, improved, or having demonstrated, ever, more need for it to be, than the over whelming need for it not to be.

FREE KANEH BOSM FOREVER

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #80 posted by Commonsense on February 05, 2009 at 17:34:32 PT
Had Enough of the ‘The Law of the Land’
"I would think that if the juries can be convinced to nullify a certain offence, the judge is ‘bound by law’ to accept the terms of the jury’s decision."

The courts won't allow you to argue for nullification except perhaps in a round about way. You have to be sneaky about it. You can't go off on some tangent about the history of our marijuana laws and why they are wrong. The judge will shut you down. The jury is there to determine whether or not a person violated the law. They're going to get jury instructions that set out the elements of the crimes alleged in the indictment or the criminal information, and they have to determine whether the all of the elements of the crimes were proved by the government. If all of the elements of a particular crime are proved, they're supposed to find the defendant guilty. That's just the way it works.

This is really kind of a non issue in my area. Juries here are selected from registered voter pools. They tend to be all white and much older than the general populace, because that's who registers to vote and the older ones are less likely to move so much and not leave a forwarding address for jury notices. Our juries are very conservative, and loaded with Southern Baptists and evangelical Christians. They are very much anti-drugs. Our juries actually sit for the sentencing phase of trials and recommend the sentences and they are extremely tough on drug defendants. Two things you really don't want a jury setting your sentence on in my area are child sex cases and drug cases, especially meth cases. They don't follow any sentencing guidelines. They just give out whatever sentence they feel like giving within what are generally very broad ranges of punishment and on drug cases they'll often max people out or at least give a term of years right up there close to the maximum. They aren't quite as bad on pot cases as they are on meth or cocaine cases, but they sure as heck aren't going to let people off because they think marijuana ought to be legal. This ain't California.

We can't count on jury nullification, not here or anywhere else. It rarely happens. We've got to change the laws. We've got to do it the right way, the way our system was intended to work.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #79 posted by Commonsense on February 05, 2009 at 17:10:12 PT
Had Enough
Maybe the Smithsonian wouldn't just remember a "Dr. Burke" who had done some consultant work for them in the past. According to the cites we see on the Internet Dr. Burke was quoted in a 1975 article in Green Egg Magazine, a low circulation pagan magazine, not exactly a widely known or well respected publication. I'm not the first one who has questioned this account. Other's have questioned whether this fellow exists and that's what got me on it. You really can't find anything on the American Historical Reference Society except in where it is mentioned in this often quoted footnote.

The key question though is where is the proof that Washington and Jefferson were smoking pot, or that Washington ever said anything about packing a bowl of hemp leaf or anything like that. If this proof existed, we'd hear about it from other sources besides this questionable footnote we see on the Internet. Moreover, we'd have other evidence of people using hemp for its intoxicating properties in this country back in that time. There really isn't any evidence of this. All we have is "wishful speculation" based on a few little phrases pulled from period writings that could be read to mean a lot of different things. For instance, Washington wrote in a letter to some German doctor I believe saying something to the effect that he might be interested in learning more about some "artificial Silesian hemp preparation" the doctor had talked about and everyone assumes he must have been talking about hash when Silesia is an area mostly within the boundaries of Poland today where hemp seed food preparations were not uncommon but there was no history of hash making. They were probably talking about health food or something.

If use of marijuana for it's intoxicating properties was a common practice back than we'd have a whole lot more than what people are coming up with. And we wouldn't have these accounts written about this exotic intoxicant decades later from world travelers who experimented with hash in Egypt and other places where people really were getting high. Why would these detailed accounts of the effects of this exotic drug be so interesting to people who were smoking weed all time? These accounts were interesting to people reading them here in this country because this drug was foreign and unknown to them.

When cannabis medicines started coming into use in the 19th Century, it was all imported hash. That's what you'll see if you start looking at period advertisements where they describe their products. The same goes for the cannabis confections that were being sold toward the latter part of the 19th Century. American hemp probably wasn't great smoke back then. It was probably about as potent as the stuff you find growing in ditches in Kansas and wherever else hemp now grows in the wild. If anyone did smoke some of it trying to get high they would probably just get a massive headache long before they could ever smoke enough of it to a buzz.

There just really isn't any evidence that marijuana was commonly used for its intoxicating properties in this country in the late 1700s. In fact just looking at what evidence we do have about the history of the use of marijuana for medicinal and recreational purposes in this country it appears highly unlikely that it was commonly used for either purpose that early on in American history. It appears that some people were starting to use it for medicinal purposes toward the end of the first half of the 19th Century, that some people were using it for recreational use a little later than that and medical use picked up some as the century wore on, but it was never used recreationally in the 19th century on anywhere close to the scale it is being used today.

All of this really isn't worth the effort we are expending on it in this thread. I just took issue with the author of this article saying that the founding fathers probably smoked hemp. It would be really neat to learn that they did, but the evidence doesn't support it, and I would advise people against using this in arguments over whether marijuana should be legalized because you can't prove that this was going on and you won't really be able to make a good case that it was probably going on. It probably wasn't. What you are likely to do making this argument is just hurt your credibility.

If you want to believe something, it's pretty easy to believe it with little or no evidence or only very weak evidence to back it up. You can even believe something that's probably not true if you want to believe it. Our opponents don't want to believe us. They'll nitpick everything we say. They're looking to tear our arguments apart. I've had my ass handed to me many times in legalization debates because I wasn't careful in my fact checking. I see that happen to people all the time either on Internet forums or in person debates. Sometimes I see people making arguments that are so bad they're harmful to the cause. The Internet can be a wonderful thing, a tool we can use to change a lot of minds, but some people out there who mean well are actually hurting us. They're convincing no one to support legalization but they are turning a lot of people off even more to the idea. Collectively we need to try to discourage that. We need to win over as many people as we can, not strengthen their resolve against, not push people who are sitting on the fence over to the other side.

And this little thing about marijuana use in the late 1700s is not really the sort of thing that's going to make much of a difference. If you really believe these folks must have been smoking weed, make that argument. I think it's a weak argument that won't help you but it's not nearly as bad as some of the things people out there argue.

One example of arguments I'm begging people not to make are these biblical arguments for legalizing marijuana, all that kannah bosum tree of life stuff. Please, please, please, don't go out and argue that God wants us to get high. Even if it's true it's an argument that will hurt us far more than it will ever help us. Don't get into religion other than to say perhaps that we should have a Christian attitude toward people that smoke or even sell pot. Question people's core religious beliefs and you scare the hell out of them and turn them against us in the worst way. We need to get more deeply religious Christians on our side but you will never do it that way. There is some tiny chance that might convince a pot smoking Christian looking to reconcile his marijuana use with his religious convictions, but people like that are probably already for legalization anyway. The other 99.9% won't buy it. They'll think pot smokers are all in some kind evil cult with Satan at its head. I'm in the Bible Belt. I deal with these people all the time. A lot of them refuse to believe that Jesus ever drank fermented wine even though we know that without refrigeration grape juice will ferment and that it was common throughout ancient history to drink fermented beverages because they were safer to drink than the water. You will not convince these people that God wants us to smoke weed. You'll come off as some scary cult member trying to encourage drug use and you will do more harm than good to the cause by several orders of magnitude.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #78 posted by Had Enough on February 05, 2009 at 15:18:55 PT
‘The Law of the Land’
The law is the law. Courts aren't interesting in hearing why marijuana shouldn't be illegal because it really isn't relevent in a court proceeding involving someone charged with a marijuana crime. Legislators write the laws, courts enforce them. A judge may be for legailization but he is bound by the laws of his jurisdiction.

I would think that if the juries can be convinced to nullify a certain offence, the judge is ‘bound by law’ to accept the terms of the jury’s decision. Once that started happening many people would agree to the extreme waste of time and money this pot war is.

Also that statement to some can speak volumes about our system’s ‘The Law of the Land’.

In the meantime most criminal laws due more harm to the victims than it does to the offenders. Violent criminals end up with more civil rights than peaceful victims.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #77 posted by Commonsense on February 05, 2009 at 14:02:05 PT
Hope
"Now if you are looking for stuff to use to defend your clients in the courts, can you use stuff in things like the Shafer Commission’s Report or the La Guardia Committee Report? Can you use other stuff like the deadly lies and charades of Henry Anslinger & Co. and the same of our present day propagandists? Should it be pointed out how the ‘War on Pot’ has led to the deterioration of the basics of humanity and our Constitution? Could using such arguments lead to jury nullifications? If one would succeed could it set precedents of the future?"

The law is the law. Courts aren't interesting in hearing why marijuana shouldn't be illegal because it really isn't relevent in a court proceeding involving someone charged with a marijuana crime. Legislators write the laws, courts enforce them. A judge may be for legailization but he is bound by the laws of his jurisdiction. We have to get the lawmakers to write new laws. They won't do that generally unless the majority of the people they represent are for it.

So, what we have to do is get the majority of Americans to support marijuana legalization. When we do that sooner or later politicians will see a political advantage in pushing for legalization and we'll see the fight to legalize marijuana begin in earnest in our legislative bodies. To get the majority of the people to go along we need arguments with broad appeal. We need to consider the fact that most Americans do not smoke marijuana and there is a great deal of fear that legalization would result in a huge increase in use that brings with it a lot of problems. I think we need to assuage these fears as much as possible. We need to drive home the point that what we are doing is solving nothing and it is in fact causing more harm than good. We need to talk about the money we are wasting and revenues we could possibly bring in with a regulated system. We need to point out all of the problems our current system is causing, how it makes organized crime rich (especially Mexican organized crime because this drives conservatives in particular crazy). We need good solid arguments that will win as many people over as possible, whether they are conservatives or liberals, Democrats or Republicas, white, black, religious or not, etc. And, we should try to recognize arguments that might hurt us more than they help us and consider avoiding those.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #76 posted by Had Enough on February 05, 2009 at 12:03:54 PT
Historical Societies
Internet searching for ‘American Historical Reference Society and consultant for the Smithsonian, Dr. Burke’, turned up nothing tangible to prove he or it actually exists other than references to it from other websites as you point out.

However I will stop short of considering it ‘mythical fiction’. Is it possible that that society was blended into another society group? Is it possible that it being pre dated Internet Technology, it is not available? Is it possible that the tangible evidence is intentionally obscured? I’m reminded/thinkin’ of the successful but hidden research done in the 70’s treating cancer-infected rats with pot…

Maybe a letter to the Smithsonian Institute might shed some light on the subject. A letter from your law office using your official letterhead stationery as an attorney might get us a response.

But at any rate it makes perfect sense to me that people who grew pot certainly smoked it too.

Now if you are looking for stuff to use to defend your clients in the courts, can you use stuff in things like the Shafer Commission’s Report or the La Guardia Committee Report? Can you use other stuff like the deadly lies and charades of Henry Anslinger & Co. and the same of our present day propagandists? Should it be pointed out how the ‘War on Pot’ has led to the deterioration of the basics of humanity and our Constitution? Could using such arguments lead to jury nullifications? If one would succeed could it set precedents of the future?

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #75 posted by Commonsense on February 04, 2009 at 21:58:27 PT
Dr. Burke
"Did the Founding Fathers of the United States of America smoke cannabis? Some researchers think so. Dr. Burke, president of the American Historical Reference Society and a consultant for the Smithsonian Institute, counted seven early presidents as cannabis smokers: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, Zachary Taylor and Franklin Pierce. 41 "Early letters from our founding fathers refer to the pleasures of hemp smoking," said Burke. "

"Burke asserted that Washington & Jefferson were said to exchange smoking blends as personal gifts. Washington reportedly preferred a pipe full of "the leaves of hemp" to alcohol, & wrote in his diaries that he enjoyed the fragrance of hemp flowers. Madison once remarked that hemp gave him insight to create a new & democratic nation. Monroe, creator of the Monroe Doctrine, began smoking it as Ambassador to France & continued to the age of 73. Burke. "Pot & Presidents." in Green Egg. CA. June 21, 1975"

It would be wonderful if we could contact Dr. Burke to learn more about his research. Perhaps we could contact the American Historical Reference Society. It's a shame no such organization exists. Perhaps the Smithsonian Institute knows how to reach him, since he's one of their consultants. Nope, they've never heard of him. Well maybe we could find these letters he talks about where Washington and Jefferson were talking about smoking hemp. No luck there either, because these letters do not exist. These are letters are a fiction, from a fictional man who is president of a fictional organization. If anyone can prove otherwise, please do. I realize he's mentioned all over the Internet in connection with these letters and references to his work on pot smoking American presidents, but you will never find his work or these letters. I've tried. Please prove me wrong. I'd love to be wrong on this.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #74 posted by ekim on February 04, 2009 at 17:44:39 PT
little more info on hemp
http://www.ontariohempalliance.org/home/index.html

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v09/n031/a06.html?190 HEMP ALLIANCE GETS FUNDING FOR REVIEW

The Ontario Hemp Alliance is working to put together a review of Health Canada's regulations in three months.

The organization received $215,000 from the Advancing Canadian Agriculture and Agri-Food program ( ACAAF ) to carry out a complete regulatory review. It must be submitted by March 31, 2009.

http://www.hemp.org/industrial-hemp.php

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #73 posted by Had Enough on February 04, 2009 at 17:36:23 PT
Link in 70

I had the wrong link for Franklin Pierce on the post in 68.

Thanks for saving me again…:)

************

On another note…

I think there are more than enough references to our forefathers of America to know they liked to smoke herbs too.

************

Supertramp…Logical

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOwDXNJbZK0&feature=related

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #72 posted by FoM on February 04, 2009 at 17:15:22 PT
Had Enough
The link in #70 isn't too long.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #71 posted by FoM on February 04, 2009 at 16:57:03 PT
Had Enough All Fixed
Had Enough says: "Two of my favorite things are sitting on my front porch smoking a pipe of sweet hemp, and playing my Hohner harmonica." - Abraham Lincoln (from a letter written by Lincoln during his presidency to the head of the Hohner Harmonica Company in Germany)

************

Hemp: American History Revisited

By Robert Deitch

http://drugsense.org/url/7r6ibvi1

************

A History of Hemp

by

Robert A. Nelson

Chapter 2

Hemp in America

http://www.rexresearch.com/hhist/hhist2~1.htm

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #70 posted by Had Enough on February 04, 2009 at 16:55:34 PT
Another correction…

To add to the collection…

Franklin Pierce knew too…

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=1&ct=result&cd=1&q=franklin+pierce+hemp&spell=1

It's been a really long day for me today...



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #69 posted by Had Enough on February 04, 2009 at 16:49:44 PT
URL Thing
The URL Thing is too long

Can you fix that so it doesn’t mess up the page…

Thanks FoM…

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #67 posted by Commonsense on February 04, 2009 at 15:58:00 PT
World Hemp Production
Hemp should be legal in the US. American farmers could probably bring in several hundred dollars an acre from it, if we don’t flood the market too much. The market for it is not that great, and producing hemp fiber products is still very labor intensive despite advances in mechanization of the processes involved.

Hemp is grown in at least 30 countries now. It's difficult to find how many acres exactly are being grown, but I believe it is under a million worldwide. That's a very small amount compared to a crop like corn. Over 350 million acres of corn are harvested worldwide in a given year. The reason more hemp isn't grown is that there just really isn't the market for it. Yes, hemp can be used for a myriad of products, but in most every case it's cheaper to use something other than hemp. Hemp for most products requiring fiber costs several times what other fiber crops or waste products would cost, because it is so labor intensive and expensive to process.

Most of the hemp for textiles is produced in China where they have dirt cheap labor. Hemp is actually a subsidized crop in EU countries, but most hemp production there is for seed rather than fiber because it's just too expensive to process the stalks. Pretty much all commercial hemp production in Canada is geared toward seed crops. The stalks are just piling up because nobody will process them. They only do that in countries where labor is dirt cheap because it is so labor intensive.

Overall, there isn't that much hemp produced in the world because there isn't much of a market for it. It's mostly used for novelty products because there is almost always something cheaper to use to produce whatever it is an industry that might use hemp produces. If that wasn't so, hemp would be taking off in the many countries that produce it. We'd see millions and millions of acres of it being harvested instead of the small amount we see being harvested today. Instead hemp acreage has actually been dropping in a lot of countries that produce it.

I already know this post is going to tick some people off here and I want you to know why I'm making it. I just hate the argument that hemp is this wonderful plant that would save the world but the big evil corporations are stopping it. Aside from the fact that it is a nonsensical argument, not based in fact, it really hurts the general marijuana legalization cause. Stupid arguments destroy our credibility. Strong anti-corporation arguments aren't helping us a bit either. We're alienating too many Republicans and conservative types with these lame arguments.

"So what" you might say? "We hate those guys anyway." The fact is we need those guys, or as many of them we can get on board as possible. Around 40% of voting aged Americans are for legalization now. Look at the poll result breakdowns and you'd see that while still the majority of Democrats are against legalization of marijuana, the percentage of Democrats for legalization is almost twice the percentage of Republicans for it. If you look at those who identify themselves as liberals as opposed to conservatives, you would see that over half of all liberals are for legalization while less than a quarter of those who identify themselves as conservatives are for it. We don't need to worry about liberals. They're already on board, or at least a majority of them. We've got work on conservatives and we aren't going to win many of them over with arguments that are offensive to them. Anti-corporate bias is a liberal thing that works fine for liberals, but it turns conservatives off. We need to be formulating arguments to win as many of these guys over as possible, not arguments that just attack them and the things they believe in. That gets us nowhere.

Really the same thing applies to the argument that our founding fathers smoked weed so we should be able to do it too. There is no proof of that. In fact it's probably not true or we'd have writings from that time where they talk about the use of hemp for its medicinal and intoxicating properties. Instead the first writings we see were articles written toward the middle of the 19th Century where people were talking about their experiences with this exotic drug called hashish in places like Egypt. This was an exotic and unknown thing in this country until really the middle part of the 1800s when travelers were experimenting with it and writing about it. Later it was being imported but was still not something commonly in use as a recreational drug. If you argue that our founding fathers were smoking it so we should be able to do it too all you will do is destroy your credibility with those you are debating. Lame arguments do us more harm than good as advocates for marijuana legalization. Our opponents love it when make these lame arguments because then they can just tear them apart and write us off as know nothing nutbags.

If this post is offensive to anyone here I apologize for that in advance. I'm regretting making it already before I hit "post message" because I know what kind of responses I'm likely to get. I just really want to see marijuana legalized and I want to discourage people from making arguments that are going to hurt the cause more than they'll help it.

Here is a link to a 2005 Gallup poll that has a good breakdown of the demographics and political leanings of those for and against marijuana legalization: http://www.gallup.com/poll/19561/Who-Supports-Marijuana-Legalization.aspx

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #66 posted by Hope on February 04, 2009 at 12:21:57 PT
Bro. HadEnough
Thank you.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #65 posted by Hope on February 04, 2009 at 12:11:52 PT
"Prohibitive amount of human labor"
That's a very meaningful statement I've realized, more fully, lately.

Plus, the dates and the history, the very government records, make it pretty clear what was going on. Major plotting and skulduggery was going on in high places. High places, held by powerful, wealthy and well off, full of hate, cunning, greed, over competitiveness, arrogance, deceit, and probably other bad and horrible stuff that I haven't even imagined.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #64 posted by Hope on February 04, 2009 at 12:03:01 PT
That Popular Mechanics article.
I've always thought it odd that while those people the article in Popular Mechanics were about were working on and excited about that long sought industrialization prospect... someone had bought, and paid for, ignorant legislators, perhaps even some sorts of puppets, passing laws, virtually secretly and behind the backs of these hopeful and industrious Americans, to stop that industrialization in it's tracks. And they did it by creating and solving imaginary fears that they carefully instilled in the minds of the public.

They did it on purpose. They did it for racist reasons and so that some could hoard huge, huge wealth.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #63 posted by Had Enough on February 04, 2009 at 05:43:03 PT
Hope

Popular Mechanics - February 1938

AMERICAN farmers are promised a new cash crop with an annual value of several hundred million dollars, all because a machine has been invented which solves a problem more than 6,000 years old. It is hemp, a crop that will not compete with other American products.

Instead, it will displace imports of raw material and manufactured products produced by underpaid coolie and peasant labor and it will provide thousands of jobs for American workers throughout the land.

The machine which makes this possible is designed for removing the fiber-bearing cortex from the rest of the stalk, making hemp fiber available for use without a prohibitive amount of human labor. Hemp is the standard fiber of the world. It has great tensile strength and durability. It is used to produce more than 5,000 textile products, ranging from rope to fine laces, and the woody "hurds" remaining after the fiber has been removed contain more than seventy-seven per cent cellulose, and can be used to produce more than 25,000 products, ranging from dynamite to Cellophane.

Machines now in service in Texas, Illinois, Minnesota and other states are producing fiber at a manufacturing cost of half a cent a pound, and are finding a profitable market for the rest of the stalk. Machine operators are making a good profit in competition with coolie-produced foreign fiber while paying farmers fifteen dollars a ton for hemp as it comes from the field.

more…pictures and all

http://www.jackherer.com/popmech.html

************

Sister Hope, …Not sure if you knew about this, but here it is anyway.

I enjoyed reading about your research, I’m sure other have too. Keep it up…I just wish that more people would take the time to re-discover this amazing plant.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #62 posted by Hope on February 03, 2009 at 19:49:23 PT
It's time to lift the curse.
From what I understand now about the old hemp industry, I think the plant may have indeed, been literally cursed, and cursed often.

I think it would be good for the earth and the soil, and the hard, hard, back breaking work that some of our forefathers hated it for, can now be done with machinery that probably has frustrations of it's own... but nothing like what the early forced laborers on the plantations and farms had to go through.

It would mean production of farm equipment. Jobs. Work. Newer, better, safer, textiles. It would be good I think... and clean, and nourish nature, both the soil and the air, while it's at it.

The Hemp plant can be redeemed now. Surely.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #61 posted by ekim on February 03, 2009 at 19:18:49 PT
rural development -- Hemp For Victory
a big out cry should be heard from coast to coast as we spend billions outlawing Hemp.

Hemp for Victory could be played on tv and a debate on just what new products will be made from hemp, in turn giving thousands of new jobs across the country.

if we are going to spend over 8 hundred billion for projects it would be insane not to include growing Hemp to compete with the rest of the World.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #60 posted by Hope on February 03, 2009 at 00:46:13 PT
There are machines that can process hemp
now without people having to literally break their own backs to process it into strands and fibers.

I learned, to my dismay that the big time hemp farming areas, before emancipation, were very slave dependent. Big hemp production was more slave intensive than cotton. I didn't know that until yesterday. The areas where there was the most hemp production had the most slaves.

I learned that getting a "Hemp collar" was bad. It meant hanging. I learned that there was an expression about someone "sowing hemp seeds", that meant someone's bad behavior, was perhaps headed someday for the gallows. Hence... "Sowing hemp seeds".

I learned that mostly, in different eras, and countries, people thought that the people who enjoyed the intoxicating effects of the plant were usually the poor people... the masses. Wealthy people were thought to mostly drink alcohol. Sounds familiar somehow.

The ruling class felt often, of course, that it should be taxed heavily enough to discourage use and ultimately prohibited... because it wasn't "good" for the poor people. They felt it was best to prohibit the people from using it because they just thought they should... "Morals" and all ... even though saner and sounder minds often discouraged those prohibitions and the prohibitionists' fears and reasons for doing the prohibiting.

I learned that Turkish Delights like the White Witch used to tempt Edmund, I believe it was, in the Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe, were actually sweets imported from Turkey with hashish in them.

There were several popular "sweets", apparently legal imports of cannabis and hashish from Turkey to Britain, for a while.

One such delicacy was called "Crocodile Penises". It was a black crescent shaped sliver of gelatinous hashish coated in sugar. It was supposed to do something about virility. (Kind of like Bob on late night TV but he was smiling about the imported Turkish candies for his "male enhancement".)

It was research that at times was very distressing. At other times enlightening. And occasionally ... just funny.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #59 posted by ekim on February 02, 2009 at 18:15:42 PT
thanks Hope - wonder how big China hemp is
Chinese Hemp Industry has Boundless Potential Posted by FoM on November 05, 2001 at 09:01:46 PT Business News Source: People's Daily http://cannabisnews.com/news/11/thread11260.shtml As world fashion increasingly moves toward simplicity, comfort and health protection, experts point out that hemp, a major economic crop in China, could have great market prospects after the nation's entry into the World Trade Organization. Xia Jingyuan, a senior official with the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture in charge of the extension of agricultural technology, said that the annual output of Chinese linen is worth over 10 billion yuan (about 1.2 billion US dollars).

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #58 posted by Hope on February 01, 2009 at 22:05:09 PT
In some places in some times,
people got a long with hemp better and benefited from it.

Someone from England, or somewhere, in passing a "commoner's" house, I believe in Ireland, asked his host who lived there. They had such a fine, large, and impressive display of linens drying on the hedges that the visitor felt they must be people of some large station in life.

Everyone had their own hemp patches... sometimes surrounding their vegetable gardens to protect the vegetables from pests.

Everyone processed their own hemp on a level and pace that didn't nearly kill them. They took joy and happiness in their work and they made many and beautiful things. Hemp tea help with that? I think of Ireland as cool and damp, but it apparently did quite well there.

They made their own linens from their own gardens and the poorest people even, were like wealthy with them. Sheets. Curtains. Tablecloths. Covers for mattresses. Sacks. Pillowcases. All the things of a well appointed household, as well as clothing, ropes, strings, laces, and strong thread.

They had silly superstitions, rituals, celebrations, medicines, foods and desserts involving cannabis seeds and concoctions.

I guess some sort of prohibition, often starting with a tax, shut those down.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #57 posted by Hope on February 01, 2009 at 21:49:55 PT
Ekim
I found quite a lot of stuff. I feel like I've been working a hemp brake all day long.

Nah. Not really.

But I learned some things I did not know. Like hemp growing and processing was hard, hard, hard on people. They pretty much hated it. Backbreaking, exhausting, very poorly recompensed work.

People hated growing it so much they had to make laws to actually FORCE them to grow the stuff... they hated messing with it so badly.

Prisoners were sometimes punished by making them work hemp... the brake or braking, in particular, sometimes by just pounding the living daylights out of it for hours and hours a day. And hours.

And it stank, too. It had to be retted prior to being braked. Retted is rotted. It was a bad stinky. Probably like an old paper mill.

There's like a gazillion different kinds of hemp, too. Different strengths. Different strand lengths, etc.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #56 posted by Hope on February 01, 2009 at 21:37:30 PT
Just thought of another reason, perhaps,
for lack of written history.

:0)

Paranoia?

Also, maybe somebody, on some sorting through of papers, and I'm sure there were many, especially early on, burned things they didn't think of value for one reason or another.

Maybe even in being trashed by the writers themselves, in a paper or notebook cleaning episode.

One sad thing I've noticed during my perusing of a bit of history this afternoon, is that prohibitionists have been around a dang long time, too.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #55 posted by ekim on February 01, 2009 at 20:28:07 PT
seems history of cannabis has vanished
have long wondered where info about hemp clothing has gone.

just look for our hemp history here in the USA for the past 300 years --- all most nothing left.

now try to find hemp history in the middle east == should be a no brainer no well no history there too.

just like it was never grown or used for centuries--

with only the occasional mention like shama ice man or small cloth fragments -- no detail of how it was grown or how it was made into cloths or foods or meds. odd hey

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #54 posted by Hope on February 01, 2009 at 12:29:00 PT
Fimble?
When searching history don't forget there are other names for hemp.

CANNABIS SATIVA URTICACEAE, FIMBLE, GALLOW GRASS, INDIAN HEMP and more.

http://food.oregonstate.edu/glossary/c/cannabissa.html



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #53 posted by runruff on February 01, 2009 at 03:40:07 PT
Commonsense
For me this subject goes back about 16 years when I spent the summer with Jack Herer and Co traveling around the west coast taping and speaking at rallies. I personally did 27 radio interviews that summer speaking about hemp/cannabis. You can meet them all in my cheesy little documentary I produced for a nickel, ninety-eight [Let MY People Grow]

The letters and correspondences I refer to I looked up by accessing the Library of Congress online. I did post some links here on C/News about 7 or 10 years ago. A few posters here offered up a few links too. It has been a long time but I will see what I can do.

BTW My post was not really aimed at you personally but was honestly trying to show ,generally, what kinds of attitude and resistance I have encountered when offering up this info. I did have some of your remarks in mind though.

Later!

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #52 posted by Commonsense on January 31, 2009 at 20:29:04 PT
runruff
I don't look at it as a moral or immoral thing. I wouldn't be upset at all about George Washington and those folks smoking weed. In fact, I spent a lot of time doing research to see if maybe they did do it because that would be helpful I think in arguing that marijuana needs to be legal. What I found is that there really aren't any period writings about the founding fathers or really anyone else in this country back then smoking or eating marijuana.

The closest thing I found was some mention of writings from Washington where he said something to the effect that he liked to have a good pipe of hemp. This was even mentioned in the Shafer Report. The problem is it turned out to be a hoax, a reference from a study that didn't exist by an author that didn't exist from a publisher that didn't exist.

From my research I can only conclude that the founding fathers probably weren't using it for medicinal or recreational purposes back then. I think it would be cool if they were, but they probably weren't. Most people back then probably didn't know about its medicinal or intoxicating properties, and if they did hear about them and try smoking some of the hemp they were growing it probably would have just given them a headache because it was industrial type hemp they were growing for its fibers.

And again, if they were smoking it or eating it, we'd probably have some evidence of that. We'd see it in writings from that period. You can find all sorts of references about the tobacco they were growing, the beer and wine they were brewing, the spirits they were distilling. There are lots of old beer recipes floating around from that time, even from George Washington. If they were eating pot we'd have pot recipes from back then. If they were smoking it we'd see something written about it. Some people might have used to get high or as medicine or both, but it couldn't have been a common practice in this country around the time this country was founded or we'd have evidence of that.

You say there are references to smoking and eating cannabis in diaries and correspondence from our forefathers. I spent a good bit of time looking for just those types of things and found nothing. Maybe I missed something. Can you provide a link or direct me to some other source where I might find these documents you mentioned?

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #51 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 15:25:35 PT
Hope
My sister called me a rebel and I said yes I am proudly. She said that's fine with her. She knows my heart. When people think outside the box it scares other people and when people get spooky they can react way too fast and regret it later but they'll do that over and over again. What if rebels weren't ever part of society? Where would we be? Rebels, dreamers and those that question have made us the good part of what we are today.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #50 posted by Hope on January 31, 2009 at 15:13:51 PT
Rather looks like he's having a good time...
I agree.

And God help us, there's nothing wrong with having a good, peaceful, pleasant, or even, as it seems some would forbid, an appropriate, private, and mutual sexy time every now and then.

Yet there are those who would use it as another excuse to hate, accuse, and despise.

As we know all too well, some people make a religion out of restriction of natural personal liberty and freedom to an unnatural and persecuting degree.

Draconian restriction, punishing, sending threatening "messages", hating, accusing, and despising... all harsh and negative and cruel. Unreasonable restriction of liberty, hating, accusing, persecution, hurting, harming, and despising are the commandments of the anti-Christ type religions, I would think.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #49 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 14:27:04 PT
Hope
I thought his eyes were far from clear in that picture. LOL! He looked like he was having a good time.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #48 posted by Hope on January 31, 2009 at 13:55:44 PT
Obama's relative targeted
is probably what's going on. Targeted to make news and perhaps to hurt or distract the President in some way.

That's my first thought.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #47 posted by Hope on January 31, 2009 at 13:38:31 PT
It's certainly subtle...
but that's the best kind.

:0)

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #46 posted by Hope on January 31, 2009 at 13:36:29 PT
Lol! FoM.
That look?

That's a "sexy" look, looks to me like.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #45 posted by Hope on January 31, 2009 at 13:33:32 PT
Just thought of something that could well explain
the lack of written history from the seventeen hundreds.

Perhaps the medically very useful and spirit lifting substance, cannabis, when consumed, became to be considered a powerful aphrodisiac during that period. That would explain a lot of obliterated or secret history.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #44 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 11:06:43 PT
The GCW
You're welcome. I think people who have experienced marijuana have a look on their face that says I know something you don't know.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #43 posted by The GCW on January 31, 2009 at 10:40:58 PT
FoM,
Thanks for sharing the pic.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #42 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 09:49:55 PT
The GCW
Like this picture.

http://boingboing.net/2008/12/17/photo-of-young-obama.html

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #41 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 09:36:25 PT
The GCW
I can imagine being in a foreign country and meeting someone who didn't speak English and the person puts his or her thumb and index finger together and gets that quizzacal smile on their face and I would know what they meant.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #40 posted by The GCW on January 31, 2009 at 09:25:09 PT
FoM,
"If there is a common denominator in the world it is cannabis in my opinion."

-0-

I believe You are correct!

Cannabis and cannabis prohibition is relative to (I believe) everything in existance.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #39 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 09:00:39 PT
On Needle Exchange: Time Lag in Vienna?
January 30, 2009

Excerpt: Some members of Congress are rightly angry about the impasse in Vienna. On Wednesday, three members fired off a letter to Susan Rice, the new American ambassador to the United Nations, urging that the United States’ delegation in Vienna be given new marching orders on the harm-reduction language. If that doesn’t happen, the letter warns, “we risk crafting a U.N. declaration that is at odds with our own national policies and interests, even as we needlessly alienate our nation’s allies in Europe.”

URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/opinion/31sat4.html

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #38 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 07:16:54 PT
Just a Thought
If there is a common denominator in the world it is cannabis in my opinion.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #37 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 07:08:47 PT
Obama's Kenyan Relative Arrested on Drug Charge
Saturday, January 31, 2009

Nairobi, Kenya -- The half-brother of President Barack Obama was arrested for alleged possession of marijuana on Saturday near his home in a Nairobi shantytown, police said.

George Obama, who is in his 20s and barely knows the president, had one joint of marijuana on him, said Joshua Omokulongolo, the police chief in the area.

"He is not a drug peddler," Omokulongolo told The Associated Press. "But it's illegal, it's a banned substance."

URL: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/8336530

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #36 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 06:54:25 PT
Sinsemilla Jones
You're welcome. I am happy to see how strongly Obama is coming out on issues many of us care about. He's no wimp. If he isn't afraid of the roaring lions that gives me even more hope for some positive change in reform in general.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #35 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on January 31, 2009 at 06:35:37 PT
Thanks FoM!
I did manage to miss those posts.

I screwed up that CC thread link again, anyway, lol.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #34 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 06:27:16 PT
Sinsemilla Jones
I posted a link on this thread which is a very big thread and would be easy to miss. Here it is. It's on comment 153. I was happy to read that Obama replaced the person Bush put in place during the transition on the 16th on the 20th. He didn't waste anytime. He is going to fight against Bush's past policies like he is with needle exchange.

http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24440.shtml

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #33 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on January 31, 2009 at 06:26:48 PT
Obama Appoints Temporary Drug Czar
Amidst the inauguration fanfare, we failed to notice that Obama immediately appointed ONDCP’s general counsel Ed Jurith to serve as acting director, i.e. drug czar. You can read Jurith’s bio here and my thoughts on him here.

This is interesting because it’s a definite improvement over Bush’s last minute appointment of Patrick Ward, another ONDCP insider, to run the office upon John Walters’s departure. Jurith is hardly a friend of reform on any issue I’m aware of, but his background is in law, while Ward has been directly and heavily involved in interdiction programs.

With Jurith being the preferable choice, I’m wondering if Obama actually did this for the right reasons as he looks for a permanent candidate to fill the position. That’s impossible to say, but it’s a small step in the right direction. Let’s hope for a bigger one soon.

http://tinyurl.com/bvd97t

The tiny url for Cannabis Culture in my last post is screwed up, so I'll try the original in the Link URL box -

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #32 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on January 31, 2009 at 06:11:21 PT
We have a Czar, or someone who acts like one.
Did I miss this somehow, or is it a big secret?

Edward H. Jurith, Acting Director Office of National Drug Control Policy

He was appointed to serve as the Acting Director of ONDCP by President Obama on January 20, 2009.

http://www.ondcp.gov/about/jurith.html

In fact, we're technically two czars removed from Johnny Pee!

Just happened over to Cannabis Culture for the first time in a while and ran into the drug czar bizarre.

http://tinyurl.com/b7ux7d

Sorry, if someone has already posted this.

So, if Obama went to the trouble to appoint an acting drug czar to replace the acting drug czar Bush had barely appointed, wouldn't that be a sign that he wanted to make sure any new presidential directives to that office would be dutifully followed?

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #31 posted by FoM on January 31, 2009 at 05:22:04 PT
potpal
I just read that a few minutes ago. Marijuana is used everywhere. I bet some people will try to connect his half brother that he really only met Obama's book said with Obama. He didn't even come to the Inauguration. I'm glad I am not blamed for what distant relatives do but what I do. I wonder how the penalties are in Kenya?

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #30 posted by potpal on January 31, 2009 at 05:09:11 PT
fyi
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/01/31/george.obama.arrest/index.html

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #29 posted by runruff on January 31, 2009 at 00:32:17 PT
To get high is human.
We have references in the diaries and in the correspondences of the founding fathers, to smoking and eating cannabis. The seeds TJ smuggled out of China [cannabis Indica] were good for producing high quantities of THC and resin. These are short plants with large flowers. They are no good for commercial hemp.

The reason there is so little mention about the use of cannabis is, it was no big thing! Some things people did were not enough to talk about. Cannabis was never a big deal on the global moral standard, or any other stigma attached. It wasn't until cannabis became politicized that all the bugaboo started up about it.

Some people don't like to speculate that perhaps our founding fathers would do anything so stupid or reckless. These folk are projecting 20th century morals backward 225 years where they are completely out of context. Some people so much as say, I am successful and squeeky clean, an upright citizen and I don't smoke cannabis, ergo, The founding fathers must not have used it because they were so much like me. Egotistical poppycock!

Cannabis [for consumption] came to the shores of America on both sides continuously since the arrival of the first visitors who ever they were whether they were from China, Norway or Spain.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #28 posted by Hope on January 30, 2009 at 23:55:36 PT
Here's the url for the article
http://www.reason.com/news/show/130847.html

You Can Put Your Weed in There What to do after the last head shop closes

Jacob Sullum | February 2009 Print Edition

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #27 posted by Hope on January 30, 2009 at 23:53:33 PT
Great Jacob Sullum article.
You Can Put Your Weed in There

What to do after the last head shop closes

Jacob Sullum | February 2009 Print Edition

(And some of the comments just made me laugh at loud.)

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/131327.html#comments

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #26 posted by Hope on January 30, 2009 at 22:45:34 PT
Forefathers and mothers and hemp and cannabis.
I can't imagine those leaves and buds were ever wasted. Somebody made use of them. Probably first and foremost as medicine in one form or another.

Talked about or written about or not, they used that leaf and bud for something. They probably had more uses for it than we can possibly imagine. We know it was there and we know it meant a lot to them. God only knows why there isn't a large written history on the substance. There's more we don't know about in the past than we do know, I'm sure.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #25 posted by Hope on January 30, 2009 at 22:24:17 PT
Eric Daniel Hyde
It sounds like he got a chance to do some good while he was here and did the best he could, Mykey420. It's good to know people like that and it's hard to lose them, especially when they are so young.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #24 posted by tintala on January 30, 2009 at 20:52:37 PT:

RESPONSE TO # 23
I would speculate, that TJ and BF and all those guys knew how to farm hemp well, but I doubt they were smoking it. Cannabis in medicanal form was introduced by the chinese when they were building railroads. Hemp does grow crazy in Ks, I also have a farm there. I believe the old railroads, one still runs throught Dodge City , ks and the great plains. That hemp bales were lost and loaded and unloaded in towns during hemp taxation and civil war. there is definatly no shortage of the evidence in Kansas, it grows excellent, probable the best volunteer crop that I have seen "VOLUNTEER". Some patches are huge.Growing right there along the highway. But the SHERIFF puts up signs saying"DESTROY THESE PLANTS IMMEDIATELY"!. What a freakin indoctrinated country we have here.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #23 posted by Commonsense on January 30, 2009 at 20:26:11 PT
Smoking Hemp
It's an interesting thought that our founding fathers may have been smoking a little hemp, but there really is no evidence of it. In fact, there really aren't any references to people doing it here back in those days, especially the founding fathers. These people wrote all the time. You'd think they would have mentioned it in their writings if it was popular back then. There were apparently some establishments in France that served some foods with hashish in them that Ben Franklin may have visited, but there is no evidence that he ever did.

I'm curious as to why the author says our founding fathers were probably smoking hemp. The fact that Washington talked about removing male plants doesn't tell us much, like Sinsemilla Jones said. That's just what you would do if you were trying to breed new and improved varieties of hemp, something I have no doubt people were trying to do back then. Hemp was big business back then for making rope, sails, clothing, paper and so on. There are plenty of writings about that. I think if it was being used as an intoxicant much back then we'd see lots of evidence of that too. But we really don't see people writing about it being used for its medicinal or intoxicating properties until we get on up into the mid 1800s and beyond. Even then though it doesn't appear to have been wildly popular as an intoxicant, certainly not like it is today. That didn't really start to happen until the 1960s.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #22 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 19:03:40 PT
mykeyb420
I'll do that. He seems like a man who did it his way. Anyone that has ever cared and passes on should always be remembered.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #21 posted by mykeyb420 on January 30, 2009 at 18:42:02 PT
Eric Daniel Hyde R.I.P.
Fellow cannabis activst Eric D Hyde passed into the light last night from complications to Hep C. He helped in the early days of proposition 215 in SF CA. He was an HIV lobbyist in both Washington DC and Sacramento CA. After working with the SPCA for many years, he worked with HIV + youth at Larkin street youth center as a counselor for at risk youth of the streets of SF. He was only 33 years old.

Please keep him in your thoughts and prayers.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #20 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 09:42:33 PT
Hemp Turns White Wedding Green
http://www.tampabays10.com/news/mostpop/story.aspx?storyid=72421&provider=top

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #19 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 09:40:21 PT
The Same Article on The Huffington Post
I thought people might want to check out the comments.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-wasserman/this-presidents-day-remem_b_162088.html

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #18 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 08:12:54 PT
Potpal
They sure are having trouble out there. I've been posting the different articles on this article as links so people can read them if they are interested.

http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24441.shtml

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #17 posted by potpal on January 30, 2009 at 08:00:21 PT
medicial cannabis - fyi
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/61033.html

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #16 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 06:58:36 PT
runruff
You have such a cute sense of humor. LOL!

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #15 posted by runruff on January 30, 2009 at 06:52:30 PT
I lost connection once!
It is ok to lose power but never, never lose connection!-ha

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #14 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 06:28:07 PT
Just a Note
We are having another snow storm so if I miss a good article it would be because I lose power or lose my connection.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #13 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 06:26:13 PT
runruff
Looking back it does make me smile. Those days are long gone. Keeping my head screwed on straight takes a lot of time now that I am older. Neil Young said in an interview one time when asked if he still smoked marijuana he said that he does but not much since "I'm there" and don't need it as much.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #12 posted by runruff on January 30, 2009 at 06:14:56 PT
FoM & Stick!
Shrooms will make you smile and giggle and revel in spirit and see the other side of physical reality.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #11 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 05:56:43 PT
runruff
My husband said as much as what we saw on our Governor's chair looked like a mushroom it was wheat. We'll it made me smile.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #10 posted by runruff on January 30, 2009 at 05:00:52 PT
Once again....................
........George's chair!

http://www.pbase.com/ronhrl/image/36539572-Ta-da!

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #9 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 05:00:45 PT
runruff
I was watching the State of The State address by Governor Strickland. I said look to my husband there is a mushroom on a chair that looked like it had a face. I said that was really cool.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #8 posted by runruff on January 30, 2009 at 04:54:03 PT
Sunshine disinfectant!
George not only smoked herb, as did his soldiers, he talked about eating magic mushrooms with Native shaman. He even had the sun rising over a psilocybin mushroom carved on the back of his congressional seat.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #7 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on January 30, 2009 at 04:39:48 PT
There are several reasons to separate the sexes...
...that have nothing to do with sinsemilla, and everything to do with hemp.

For one thing, to control propagation for the purpose of selective breeding. It would be impossible to do any controlled pollination without separating males from females. (Thomas Jefferson was so interested in growing better hemp, he had hemp seeds smuggled out of China, which had made their exportation illegal to protect their superior cannabis genetics.)

Also, to grow hemp for fiber, a uniform crop of tall, thinly branched plants would be desired. So, only one sex, usually male or hermaphrodite, of the same strain would make a more uniform fiber crop that could be harvested at the same time.

And to grow hemp for seed, only females will be harvested. Since it takes several weeks for the seeds to mature, it makes sense to move the females to a field together, and allow other crops to be planted in the fields where the male hemp plants had already been harvested for fiber.

Of course, that doesn't mean they didn't grow a few for smoke. Or, that they didn't smoke some hash Ben Franklin brought back from Europe, or something.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #6 posted by Hope on January 29, 2009 at 22:58:28 PT
John Tyler
I was all into your comment about that statement by Costa.

You really caught me by surprise and made me laugh!



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #5 posted by John Tyler on January 29, 2009 at 20:52:00 PT
Off topic, but on the money
Druggies save the world banking system.

Vienna-based UNODC Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa said in an interview released by Austrian weekly Profil that drug money often became the only available capital when the crisis spiralled out of control last year.

Should'nt we be getting a free toaster or something for all of our hard work, you know, saving the world again? How many times do we have to do this before they realize that were are right?

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #4 posted by Hope on January 29, 2009 at 16:56:12 PT
Comment #1 posted by Josephlacerenza
Thank you!

And I will be so honored to say that I knew one of the guys, at least online, that made biofuels a reality for all of us.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #3 posted by OuttaLuck on January 29, 2009 at 14:27:38 PT:

Washington smoked
He does make a reference in his journal about seperating the male and female plants, you don't have to do that for hemp so... ;-)

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #2 posted by FoM on January 29, 2009 at 12:03:31 PT
josephlacerenza
Good luck to you. Working in biofuel development is a good profession to be involved in.

I was person involved with horses all my life and dust in bedding is very damaging to a horse's delicate lungs. The Queen of England beds her horses in hemp and as far as I know she grows it for bedding too.

http://www.livingwithhorses.com/Hemphorsebedding.html

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #1 posted by josephlacerenza on January 29, 2009 at 11:50:40 PT
Put that in your pipe and smoke it!!!
Washington probably did!!! I see the need for Hemp, being interested in biofuels (that is why I'm currently in college). I can't wait to walk through a field of Hemp I helped to grow!! And, to make fuel so you FoM, Hope, etc. can drive guilt free!!!!!

[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment
Name:        Password:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:


Return to Main Menu


So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on January 29, 2009 at 10:34:20