Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?

Author Topic: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?  (Read 8335 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 777number

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« on: May 20, 2013, 01:33:31 PM »
Why would Alex bash Mr. Soro's for being pro marijuana. I'm sure you can bash him for other things, but to bash him for being pro marijuana irked me.

I know many people in society that work in all parts of society that smoke marijuana. So what your saying is ludicrous.

Mr. Jones stated that marijuana legalization would promote a dumb society. Can you back this up?


Alex Jones also stated it would dumb down America.  LOL

Alex please correct yourself and deny ignorance.

Alex you should be a big marijuana guy, being a freedom fighter and all...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZNeDQsLoVAo#!

Offline donnay

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,547
  • Live Free Or Die Trying!
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2013, 02:46:00 PM »
Because Soros is no damn good.  He plays both sides against the middle.
"Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace." ~ Rod Serling
"Cops today are nothing but an armed tax collector" ~ Frank Serpico
"To be normal, to drink Coca-Cola and eat Kentucky Fried Chicken is to be in a conspiracy against yourself."
"People that don't want to make waves sit in stagnant waters."

Offline No2NWO

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • "It's Just A Ride" ~ BH
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2013, 02:50:04 PM »
I heard the comment of which you speak and believe AJ was making a comment more on Soro's past agenda and why HE always pushed for marijuana/drug reform and HIS reasoning on the subject. Alex has become more and more a proponent for medical uses and decriminalization of marijuana while holding firm on his views concerning it's recreational use.

In my view and past experiences, some people can smoke marijuana and some can't. Some people love the effects and some people become paranoid and mentally/phsically sluggish etc... and if you have ever seen one of those people you would't want them using pot. If you try marijuana once and dislike it's effects on you and you decide to never do it again then you will have a certain level of ignorance on the subject due to the fact that you are simply uninvolved in recreational use.

I personally see the link between the medical/recreation issue. Why should I be diagnosed with an illness before I can self medicate myself with a NATURAL HERB? I don't go to doctors. It's possible that my past recreational marijuana use has left me with no reason to see one of those butchers. But Soro's is evil and Alex doesn't smoke, let's let it be what it will be. That's my opinion which I am entitled to.  8)

Now what are your views on psychadelics?  :-X

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/kincaid/130430
"BEAT THEM BY NEVER JOINING THEM" ~ No2NWO
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,145
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2013, 03:07:16 PM »
I'm no fan of George Soros, but this issue has nothing to do with him anyway, as it was a source of dispute long before anyone knew who he was.

Nor is this issue even about whether one is pro-drug or anti-drug. It's about whether one is pro-property rights.

"Property rights" begin with the property each individual has in his or her own person, and logically extend from that to the fruits of his or her own labor:

    "Though the earth, and all inferior creatures be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person. This nobody has any right to but himself."

-- John Locke, 2nd Treatise of Government, Ch. 5


    "The property which every man has in his own labour, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable."

-- Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, Bk 1, Ch. 10, Pt 2


    "The property rights that each citizen has in himself are the foundation of a free society."

-- James Bovard, Freedom In Chains, p. 86


    "Libertarianism begins with self ownership."

-- David Bergland, Libertarianism In One Lesson, 7th ed., p. 35


    "There is only one fundamental right (all others are its consequences or corollaries): a man's right to his own life. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action; the right to life means the right to engage in self-sustaining and self-generated action--which means: the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the furtherance, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life…Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life."

-- Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, pp. 321-2


    "The right of life and liberty--that is to say, the right of the man to himself--is not really one right and the right of property another right. They are two aspects of the same perception--the right of property being but another side, a differently stated expression, of the right of man to himself. The right of life and liberty, and the right of the individual to himself, presupposes and involves the right of property, which is the exclusive right of the individual to the things his exertion has produced."

-- Henry George, A Perplexed Philosopher, p. 210


Thus, anyone who opposes the outright and long-overdue repeal of laws that criminalize the mere possession of a plant has absolutely no business saying he or she believes in "private property." Period. End of story.

------------------------------------

Vices Are Not Crimes

A Vindication Of Moral Liberty

by Lysander Spooner
1875

I.

Vices are those acts by which a man harms himself or his property.

Crimes are those acts by which one man harms the person or property of another.

Vices are simply the errors which a man makes in his search after his own happiness. Unlike crimes, they imply no malice toward others, and no interference with their persons or property.

In vices, the very essence of crime --- that is, the design to injure the person or property of another --- is wanting.

It is a maxim of the law that there can be no crime without a criminal intent; that is, without the intent to invade the person or property of another. But no one ever practises a vice with any such criminal intent. He practises his vice for his own happiness solely, and not from any malice toward others.

Unless this clear distinction between vices and crimes be made and recognized by the laws, there can be on earth no such thing as individual right, liberty, or property; no such things as the right of one man to the control of his own person and property, and the corresponding and coequal rights of another man to the control of his own person and property.

For a government to declare a vice to be a crime, and to punish it as such, is an attempt to falsify the very nature of things. It is as absurd as it would be to declare truth to be falsehood, or falsehood truth.

II.

Every voluntary act of a man’s life is either virtuous or vicious. That is to say, it is either in accordance, or in conflict, with those natural laws of matter and mind, on which his physical, mental, and emotional health and well-being depend. In other words, every act of his life tends, on the whole, either to his happiness, or to his unhappiness. No single act in his whole existence is indifferent.

Furthermore, each human being differs in his physical, mental, and emotional constitution, and also in the circumstances by which he is surrounded, from every other human being. Many acts, therefore, that are virtuous, and tend to happiness, in the case of one person, are vicious, and tend to unhappiness, in the case of another person.

Many acts, also, that are virtuous, and tend to happiness, in the case of one man, at one time, and under one set of circumstances, are vicious, and tend to unhappiness, in the case of the same man, at another time, and under other circumstances.

III.

To know what actions are virtuous, and what vicious --- in other words, to know what actions tend, on the whole, to happiness, and what to unhappiness --- in the case of each and every man, in each and all the conditions in which they may severally be placed, is the profoundest and most complex study to which the greatest human mind ever has been, or ever can be, directed. It is, nevertheless, the constant study to which each and every man --- the humblest in intellect as well as the greatest --- is necessarily driven by the desires and necessities of his own existence. It is also the study in which each and every person, from his cradle to his grave, must necessarily form his own conclusions; because no one else knows or feels, or can know or feel, as he knows and feels, the desires and necessities, the hopes, and fears, and impulses of his own nature, or the pressure of his own circumstances.

IV.

It is not often possible to say of those acts that are called vices, that they really are vices, except in degree. That is, it is difficult to say of any actions, or courses of action, that are called vices, that they really would have been vices, if they had stopped short of a certain point. The question of virtue or vice, therefore, in all such cases, is a question of quantity and degree, and not of the intrinsic character of any single act, by itself. This fact adds to the difficulty, not to say the impossibility, of any one’s --- except each individual for himself --- drawing any accurate line, or anything like any accurate line, between virtue and vice; that is, of telling where virtue ends, and vice begins. And this is another reason why this whole question of virtue and vice should be left for each person to settle for himself.

V.

Vices are usually pleasurable, at least for the time being, and often do not disclose themselves as vices, by their effects, until after they have been practised for many years; perhaps for a lifetime. To many, perhaps most, of those who practise them, they do not disclose themselves as vices at all during life. Virtues, on the other band, often appear so harsh and rugged, they require the sacrifice of so much present happiness, at least, and the results, which alone prove them to be virtues, are often so distant and obscure, in fact, so absolutely invisible to the minds of many, especially of the young, that, from the very nature of things, there can be no universal, or even general, knowledge that they are virtues. In truth, the studies of profound philosophers have been expended --- if not wholly in vain, certainly with very small results --- in efforts to draw the lines between the virtues and the vices.

If, then, it became so difficult, so nearly impossible, in most cases, to determine what is, and what is not, vice; and especially if it be so difficult, in nearly all cases, to determine where virtue ends, and vice begins; and if these questions, which no one can really and truly determine for anybody but himself, are not to be left free and open for experiment by all, each person is deprived of the highest of all his rights as a human being, to wit: his right to inquire, investigate, reason, try experiments, judge, and ascertain for himself, what is, to him, virtue, and what is, to him, vice; in other words: what, on the whole, conduces to his happiness, and what, on the whole, tends to his unhappiness. If this great right is not to be left free and open to all, then each man’s whole right, as a reasoning human being, to" liberty and the pursuit of happiness," is denied him.

VI.

We all come into the world in ignorance of ourselves, and of everything around us. By a fundamental law of our natures we are all constantly impelled by the desire of happiness, and the fear of pain. But we have everything to learn, as to what will give us happiness, and save us from pain. No two of us are wholly alike, either physically, mentally, or emotionally; or, consequently, in our physical, mental, or emotional requirements for the acquisition of happiness, and the avoidance of unhappiness. No one of us, therefore, can learn this indispensable lesson of happiness and unhappiness, of virtue and vice, for another. Each must learn it for himself. To learn it, he must be at liberty to try all experiments that commend themselves to his judgment. Some of his experiments succeed, and, because they succeed, are called virtues; others fail, and, because they fail, are called vices. He gathers wisdom as much from his failures as from his successes; from his so-called vices, as from his so-called virtues. Both are necessary to his acquisition of that knowledge --- of his own nature, and of the world around him, and of their adaptations or non-adaptations to each other --- which shall show him how happiness is acquired, and pain avoided. And, unless he can be permitted to try these experiments to his own satisfaction, he is restrained from the acquisition of knowledge, and, consequently, from pursuing the great purpose and duty of his life.

VII.

A man is under no obligation to take anybody’s word, or yield to anybody's authority, on a matter so vital to himself, and in regard to which no one else has, or can have, any such interest as he. He cannot, if he would, safely rely upon the opinions of other men, because be finds that the opinions of other men do not agree. Certain actions, or courses of action, have been practised by many millions of men, through successive generations, and have been held by them to be, on the whole, conducive to happiness, and therefore virtuous. Other men, in other ages or countries, or under other condition, have held, as the result of their experience and observation, that these actions tended, on the whole, to unhappiness, and were therefore vicious. The question of virtue or vice, as already remarked in a previous section, has also been, in most minds, a question of degree; that is, of the extent to which certain actions should be carried; and not of the intrinsic character of any single act, by itself. The questions of virtue and vice have therefore been as various, and, in fact, as infinite, as the varieties of mind, body, and condition of the different individuals inhabiting the globe. And the experience of ages has left an infinite number of these questions unsettled. In fact, it can scarcely be said to have settled any of them.

VIII.

In the midst of this endless variety of opinion, what man, or what body of men, has the right to say, in regard to any particular action, or course of action, "We have tried this experiment, and determined every question involved in it? We have determined it, not only for ourselves, but for all others? And, as to all those who are weaker than we, we will coerce them to act in obedience to our conclusion? We will suffer no further experiment or inquiry by any one, and, consequently, no further acquisition of knowledge by anybody?"

Who are the men who have the right to say this? Certainly there are none such. The men who really do say it, are either shameless impostors and tyrants, who would stop the progress of knowledge, and usurp absolute control over the minds and bodies of their fellow men; and are therefore to be resisted instantly, and to the last extent; or they are themselves too ignorant of their own weaknesses, and of their true relations to other men, to be entitled to any other consideration than sheer pity or contempt.

We know, however, that there are such men as these in the world. Some of them attempt to exercise their power only within a small sphere, to wit, upon their children, their neighbors, their townsmen, and their countrymen. Others attempt to exercise it on a larger scale. For example, an old man at Rome, aided by a few subordinates, attempts to decide all questions of virtue and vice; that is, of truth or falsehood, especially in matters of religion. He claims to know and teach what religious ideas and practices are conducive, or fatal, to a man’s happiness, not only in this world, but in that which is to come. He claims to be miraculously inspired for the performance of this work; thus virtually acknowledging, like a sensible man, that nothing short of miraculous inspiration would qualify him for it. This miraculous inspiration, however, has been ineffectual to enable him to settle more than a very few questions. The most important to which common mortals can attain, is an implicit belief in his (the pope’s) infallibility! and, secondly, that the blackest vices of which they can be guilty are to believe and declare that he is only a man like the rest of them!

It required some fifteen or eighteen hundred years to enable him to reach definite conclusions on these two vital points. Yet it would seem that the first of these must necessarily be preliminary to his settlement of any other questions; because, until his own infallibility is determined, he can authoritatively decide nothing else. He has, however, heretofore attempted or pretended to settle a few others. And he may, perhaps, attempt or pretend to settle a few more in the future, if he shall continue to find anybody to listen to him. But his success, thus far, certainly does not encourage the belief that he will be able to settle all questions of virtue and vice, even in his peculiar department of religion, in time to meet the necessities of mankind. He, or his successors, will undoubtedly be compelled, at no distant day, to acknowledge that he has undertaken a task to which all his miraculous inspiration was inadequate; and that, of necessity, each human being must be left to settle all questions of this kind for himself. And it is not unreasonable to expect that all other popes, in other and lesser spheres, will some time have cause to come to the same conclusion. No one, certainly, not claiming supernatural inspiration, should undertake a task to which obviously nothing less than such inspiration is adequate. And, clearly, no one should surrender his own judgment to the teachings of others, unless he be first convinced that these others have something more than ordinary human knowledge on this subject.

If those persons, who fancy themselves gifted with both the power and the right to define and punish other men’s vices, would but turn their thoughts inwardly, they would probably find that they have a great work to do at home; and that, when that shall have been completed, they will be little disposed to do more towards correcting the vices of others, than simply to give to others the results of their experience and observation. In this sphere their labors may possibly be useful; but, in the sphere of infallibility and coercion, they will probably, for well-known reasons, meet with even less success in the future than such men have met with in the past.

IX.

It is now obvious, from the reasons already given, that government would be utterly impracticable, if it were to take cognizance of vices, and punish them as crimes. Every human being has his or her vices. Nearly all men have a great many. And they are of all kinds; physiological, mental, emotional; religious, social, commercial, industrial, economical, etc., etc. If government is to take cognizance of any of these vices, and punish them as crimes, then, to be consistent, it must take cognizance of all, and punish all impartially. The consequence would be, that everybody would be in prison for his or her vices. There would be no one left outside to lock the doors upon those within. In fact, courts enough could not be found to try the offenders, nor prisons enough built to hold them. All human industry in the acquisition of knowledge, and even in acquiring the means of subsistence, would be arrested: for we should all be under constant trial or imprisonment for our vices. But even if it were possible to imprison all the vicious, our knowledge of human nature tells us that, as a general rule, they would be far more vicious in prison than they ever have been out of it.

X.

A government that shall punish all vices impartially is so obviously an impossibility, that nobody was ever found, or ever will be found, foolish enough to propose it. The most that any one proposes is, that government shall punish some one, or at most a few, of what he esteems the grossest of them. But this discrimination is an utterly absurd, illogical, and tyrannical one. What right has any body of men to say, "The vices of other men we will punish; but our own vices nobody shall punish? We will restrain other men from seeking their own happiness, according to their own notions of it; but nobody shall restrain us from seeking our own happiness, according to our own notions of it? We will restrain other men from acquiring any experimental knowledge of what is conducive or necessary to their own happiness; but nobody shall restrain us from acquiring an experimental knowledge of what is conducive or necessary to our own happiness?"

Nobody but knaves or blockheads ever thinks of making such absurd assumptions as these. And yet, evidently, it is only upon such assumptions that anybody can claim the right to punish the vices of others, and at the same time claim exemption from punishment for his own.

[Continued...]

------------------------------------
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,145
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2013, 03:14:14 PM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIL5454ltQ (Penn and Teller - War on Drugs)

"At what point does behavior become so unacceptable that we should tell our government to lock people up? The answer, as explored in this book: We lock people up only when they physically harm the person or property of a nonconsenting other.

"Contained in this answer is an important assumption: after a certain age, our persons and property belong to us.

"Yes, if we harm ourselves it may emotionally harm others. That's unfortunate, but not grounds for putting us in jail. If it were, every time we stopped dating person A in order to date person B, we would run the risk of going to jail for hurting person A.  If person B were hurt by our being put in jail, person A could be put in jail for hurting person B. This would, of course, hurt person A's mother, who would see to it that person B would go to jail. Eventually, we'd all be in jail.

"As silly as that situation sounds, it is precisely the logic used by some to protect the idea of consensual crimes."

-- Peter McWilliams, Ain't Nobody's If You Do, pp. 3-4


"Drug-war proponents like to say: 'Well, why not just legalize murder and theft too?'  They cannot (or will not) see the distinction between conduct that involves the initiation of force against another and conduct that does not. Murder, theft, rape, assault, and battery mean that one person is violently interfering with another person's right to live his life the way he chooses. But the use of drugs and the like are the essence of living one's life the way he chooses. That is, they are the essence of freedom . If a person is not free to live his life the way he chooses (so long as it's peaceful), then how in the world can he be considered free? If a person is truly free, then he is able to engage in irresponsible and unhealthy conduct (so long as it is peaceful), and the state, through its laws, protects the exercise of the choice."



"The best use that could be made of our great law libraries…would be to send them to the paper mills....At the same time our statute-books are full of enactments which could, with advantage, be swept away. It is not the business of government to make men virtuous or religious, or to preserve the fool from the consequences of his own folly. Government should be repressive no further than is necessary to secure liberty by protecting the equal rights of each from aggression on the part of others, and the moment governmental prohibitions extend beyond this line they are in danger of defeating the very ends they are intended to serve."

-- Henry George, Social Problems, p. 173
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Liberty4all

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
  • C.E.O. of Hell
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2013, 03:16:55 PM »
The so called "War on Drugs" is a great way to destroy the American Family and keep the Prisons Full.

PROHIBITION IS A CRIME
http://www.youtube.com/user/witness4justice



Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded.~Abraham Lincoln
 

*edited html

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,145
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #6 on: May 20, 2013, 03:34:08 PM »
By the way, if anyone thinks Rand Paul supports ending, once and for all, the Bill of Rights-shredding/police state-expanding drug war, then I'm afraid that person is either (a) blissfully unaware of Rand's clearly stated views on the matter, or (b) a personality cultist who, as such, is in willful denial as to what those views are:

     http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/10/on-drug-policy-rand-paul-is-not-a-libert
     http://reason.com/blog/2013/05/13/rand-paul-assures-evangelicals-that-he-d
     http://www.infowars.com/rand-paul-libertarians-advocate-everyone-go-out-run-around-with-no-clothes-on-and-smoke-pot/

As shocking as this may sound to certain politically ambitious "conservatives" trying to have their "Constitutional" cake and eat it too, just because someone doesn't want men with guns showing up to arrest peaceful adults whenever they're caught possessing a (gasp!) politically incorrect plant doesn't mean that someone advocates "running around naked" while smoking or ingesting that plant.

Isn't it enough that control-freak Democrats shamelessly appeal to emotion rather than reason? Must their "opponents" do so as well?  ::)
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,518
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2013, 04:13:19 PM »
Why would Alex bash Mr. Soro's for being pro marijuana. I'm sure you can bash him for other things, but to bash him for being pro marijuana irked me.

I know many people in society that work in all parts of society that smoke marijuana. So what your saying is ludicrous.

Mr. Jones stated that marijuana legalization would promote a dumb society. Can you back this up?


Alex Jones also stated it would dumb down America.  LOL

Alex please correct yourself and deny ignorance.

Alex you should be a big marijuana guy, being a freedom fighter and all...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZNeDQsLoVAo#!

It's because Soros sees "pot/marijuana/bud/smoke" like... "Soma for the Masses"... Brave New World kind of stuff, don't ya know... "Numb the rabble into submission."

All of it, all drugs and foods should be decriminalized...none of it should be used as an excuse for criminal behavior though... feeding people poison as food or poison as drugs should be criminalized however, on it's face that's criminal... Hear that FDA/Monsanto...?

Don't tell me you love ol' George now because he says he's pro legalization...?

JTCoyoté

"The beauty of the second amendment
is that it will not be needed until they try
to take it."
~Thomas Jefferson

Offline RollyPolly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2013, 04:39:47 PM »
Help me understand your point. If a globalist comes out in support of Marijuana we have suddenly forget everything he's done and blindly support him without question?

Offline 777number

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #9 on: May 21, 2013, 03:25:23 PM »
Help me understand your point. If a globalist comes out in support of Marijuana we have suddenly forget everything he's done and blindly support him without question?


Marijuana doesn't kill or hurt anyone, Prohibition does. In many way's I'd like to add.

That's why we should support this Soro's on his stance on marijuana, and not continue the lies that it would dumb down our society etc... reefer madness etc... Like Alex and other posters here were insisting.

It's just pure malarky.

Grow up and don't criticize people for using a non-toxic plant just because it's illegal.

Marijuana legalization would be a God send for the US of A. People are just to doped up on their pills and boozes to realize anything or do anything.

LOL at marijuana making us more passive then we already are. And that being a reason to keep it illegal. We already are like cattle being herded, on our way to the slaughter house.

God speed to us all.

Offline RollyPolly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #10 on: May 21, 2013, 03:52:25 PM »
That's why we should support this Soro's on his stance on marijuana, and not continue the lies that it would dumb down our society etc... reefer madness etc... Like Alex and other posters here were insisting.


Gee, I didn't know Soros was THE authority on Marijuana. I guess I should selectively forget what he's done and blindly support him after all.



Looks like the President is smoking weed here, I guess we should support him and forget about the NDAA, Drone strikes and expanded federal enforcement on pot possession. After all it's all about worshiping and following the person, not the ideals or stance.

ALL HAIL LORD SOROS!.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,145
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #11 on: May 21, 2013, 04:10:25 PM »
That's why we should support this Soro's on his stance on marijuana

Again, both left- and right-leaning libertarians were advocating the decriminalization of marijuana long before anyone even knew who Soros was, so why even bring his name into it in the first place?

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Yet only a fool would try to use that clock to accurately gauge the time. Same principle here.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline RollyPolly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #12 on: May 21, 2013, 04:35:36 PM »

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,518
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #13 on: May 21, 2013, 04:53:51 PM »
Marijuana doesn't kill or hurt anyone, Prohibition does. In many way's I'd like to add.

That's why we should support this Soro's on his stance on marijuana, and not continue the lies that it would dumb down our society etc... reefer madness etc... Like Alex and other posters here were insisting.

It's just pure malarky.

Grow up and don't criticize people for using a non-toxic plant just because it's illegal.

Marijuana legalization would be a God send for the US of A. People are just to doped up on their pills and boozes to realize anything or do anything.

LOL at marijuana making us more passive then we already are. And that being a reason to keep it illegal. We already are like cattle being herded, on our way to the slaughter house.

God speed to us all.


You shouldn't be in support of the Nazi war criminal Soros, on anything... You should support the Constitution on everything...

There is no constitutional justification for making any food or medication, be it plant, mineral, or animal derived, illegal... that isolates, regulates, and places market control of any commodity totally into the hands of the government or the highest bidder... which is absolutely unconstitutional.

Get your head out of Soros's butt and support your position on the herb from the stance of time tested lawful power and reason... become savvy and informed by reading and understanding the Charters of Freedom... and to hell with Soros...

Oldyoti

"The majority, oppressing an individual,
is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength,
and by acting on the law of the strongest
breaks up the foundations of society."

~Thomas Jefferson

Offline 777number

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #14 on: May 21, 2013, 05:19:15 PM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZNeDQsLoVAo#!
start at 0:20

He starts with saying only 6% of the population thinks that people should be put in jail for it. Then goes to.

Alex Jones - "Look I'm not a big marijuana guy, I know George Soros promotes it because he wants to dumb the public down."

you guys believe this? That George Soros promotes it to dumb the public down? Like the public isn't dumb enough with booze and pharmaceutical pills? Are you serious? Sorry for bashing one thought, but seriously.

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #15 on: May 21, 2013, 05:37:31 PM »
That's why we should support this Soro's on his stance on marijuana


Soros is a globalist scumbag whose wet dream is world government. Don't merrily jump on his bandwagon to legalize marijuana without researching his reason for wanting it legalized. His intentions are not the same as yours.

http://www.infowars.com/george-soros-legalize-marijuana/
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,654
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #16 on: May 21, 2013, 05:41:23 PM »
JT, Thats a bump:
There is no constitutional justification for making any food or medication, be it plant, mineral, or animal derived, illegal... that isolates, regulates and places market control of any commodity totally into the hands of the government or the highest bidder... Totally unconstitution.
 
If Soros beleives pot will dumb down citizens, he has it wrong to begin with.
A sargent Major, green beret made a remark I won't forget, someone was slaming  pot smokers, this Sgt. told him, we all smoked grass in Nam, and he put his finger to his ribs to indicate he did.
 Not to go off the map, just to say Soros must have a different angle going on, booze is taxed and socialy acceptable.$

wvinfowarrior

  • Guest
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #17 on: May 21, 2013, 06:06:09 PM »
Soros wants legalized marijuana as long as its GMO and comes from Soros/FDA-approved sources. Don't expect Soros to give you any support for growing your own organic weed. See, that would threaten the Soros/FDA stranglehold on the marijuana industry.

If it's GMO and benefits Big Pharma and the medical-industrial complex, Soros will be fine with it. But if it threatens the medical-industrial complex, Soros will send his attack dogs after you and have you put in a gulag.

wvinfowarrior

  • Guest
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #18 on: May 21, 2013, 06:09:58 PM »
Prop. 19, Monsanto, and GMO Terminator Cannabis
Conrad Justice Kiczenski
October 25, 2010

Cannabis prohibition has served to redirect human evolution from that of a decentralized agrarian lifestyle and natural economy, to a centralized petro-chemical military dictatorship controlled through the artificial economic will of private banks and other trans-national corporate interests. The next stage in continuing this control is in the regulation, licensing and taxation of Cannabis cultivation and use through the only practical means available to the corporate system, which is through genetic engineering and patenting of the Cannabis genome. Proposition 19: The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 lays the foundation, writes RJM.

An article by D.M. Murdock written in August 2010 and entitled “Why hemp could save the world” states:

“Hemps prohibition has led to untold suffering around the globe. If we—the global human population—had been able to grow the miracle plant hemp (Cannabis genus) locally and to use it for local industries and businesses, including and especially for fuel, we would never have needed to be addicted to oil, for one, an addiction that is at the root of much misery. We would never have allowed ourselves to be lorded over by international oil-mongers whose crimes against humanity have become legion, including wholesale invasion of other lands and slaughter of countless people.”

“None of this oil-related horror—along with the deplorable degradation of the environment globally—would have occurred if hemp had not been prohibited but had been used wisely and intelligently as a major foundation of human society. Indeed, hemp-based economies could still save the human world, while hemp planting could go a massively long way in rescuing the natural world as well.”

“It is said that hemp has up to 50,000 uses, from fiber to fuel to food, but I’ll just provide a taste here:”

“In modern times, hemp has been used for industrial purposes including paper, textiles, biodegradable plastics, construction, health food, fuel, and medical purposes.”

“Hemp is one of the faster growing biomasses known, producing up to 25 tons of dry matter per hectare per year, and one of the earliest domesticated plants known. “

“One highly important use of hemp has been in detoxifying nuclear waste, as demonstrated by experiments in the Ukraine, for example, on the site of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. Moreover, hemp fuel could actually replace the dangerous and costly nuclear power industry.”
SEE: http://www.examiner.com/freethought-in-national/why-hemp-could-save-the-world

The agenda of the government in its policies against Cannabis have always been to deprive the people access to the plant, while maintaining control over it for the government’s own self-interest. This self-interest extends to a multitude of industries including the prison and military industry, the petroleum, timber, cotton, and pharmaceutical industries, as well as the entirety of the banking and corporate establishment which has become empowered through disconnecting people from their one true source of independence and sustenance, the Earth. Cannabis prohibition has served to redirect human evolution from that of a decentralized agrarian lifestyle and natural economy, to a centralized petro-chemical military dictatorship controlled through the artificial economic will of private banks and other trans-national corporate interests.

The next stage in continuing this control, is in the regulation, licensing and taxation of Cannabis cultivation and use through the only practical means available to the corporate system, which is through genetic engineering and patenting of the Cannabis genome.

To achieve this end, the foundation is already being laid in the form of California’s upcoming initiative on the 2010 ballot. This initiative is called Proposition 19: The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010.

The leading advocate for Proposition 19 is the organization known as the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA). The DPA is the leading organization spearheading the reform of Cannabis policies in the United States, and has been made up of some of the most powerful and influential characters in today’s global petro-bio-chemical-military-banking-industrial complex.

Some of the Directors of DPA include the following:

Paul Adolph Volcker is an Honorary Director of the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) whose career is closely associated with that of the Federal Reserve Bank. He was president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York from 1975-1979, governing board member of the Federal Reserve in 1979, and was Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1979-1987.

Volcker is believed to be a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and served as Undersecretary of the Treasury from 1969-1974 before his time with the Federal Reserve. Volcker is chairman of Wolfensohn & Co. and has ties to Chase Manhattan Bank. He is also linked to the Brookings Institute, as well as being an Honorary Trustee at the Aspen Institute, chairman of the Group of 30, and on the board of the Institute for International Economics.

Frank Charles Carlucci III is an Honorary Director of the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) and has been a member of the Council on Foreign Relations since at least 1995. His government service included positions as Deputy Secretary of Defense from 1980-1982 and Deputy Director of the CIA from 1978-1980.

Carlucci is a director on United Defense Industries (the United States’ largest defense contractor), which is owned by the Carlyle Group, a merchant bank based in Washington, D.C., of which Carlucci is the chairman. Carlucci joined Carlyle in 1989.

Before returning to Government service, Carlucci was Chairman and CEO of Sears World Trade, a business he joined in 1983. He was President Ronald Reagan’s National Security Advisor in 1987 and Secretary of Defense from 1987 to 1988.

Nicholas Katzenbach is an Honorary Director of the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) and became General Counsel of the IBM Corporation from 1969 until 1986.

Mathilde Krim is a standing Director of the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) and was a Trustee for the Rockefeller Foundation in 1980.

George Soros is a standing Director of the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) and is Chairman of Soros Fund Management. Soros was among the highest paid hedge fund managers in 2009, taking home about $3.3 billion. At the end of 2009, he owned about $6.95 billion distributed among 697 stocks.

Soros’ top 5 investment shareholdings are in gold, Petrobras petroleum company, Hess Corp petroleum company, Monsanto corporation, Citigroup Inc., and Suncor Energy Inc.(petroleum company).

That’s right, George Soros, who is famous for being one of the most powerful and influential persons in world economics and whose speculations alone are said to have ‘broke the Bank of England‘, is one of the key directors for the organization that is leading the charge to regulate, control and tax Cannabis in California. All the while George Soros is one of the major shareholders in the worlds largest GM Seed bio-technology corporation known as Monsanto.

The Monsanto corporation brought you things like Agent Orange, Terminator Seeds, Monsantos Round-up ready Herbicide, and Genetically Modified and Patented Organisms made from Soybean, Corn, and Cotton to name a few. Genetically engineered crops entered the market in 1996 and to this day around 90% of all Soy, Corn, and Cotton grown in the U.S. have been Genetically Engineered and patented by a handful of bio-chemical corporations, with Monsanto owning 90% of all GMO patents.

The value of the Cannabis plant as an industry, without factoring in the value of Cannabis as a food or medicine, was estimated to be in the billions in 1938 by an article published by Popular Mechanics Magazine at that time, so its no wonder why one of Monsanto’s major shareholders would have in interest in advocating for one of the main tenants of prop 19, which is to “Make cannabis available for scientific, medical, industrial, and research purposes” and to “adopt a statewide regulatory system for a commercial cannabis industry”. Prop 19 is doing nothing less then opening the floodgates for Monsanto and other petro-chemical, GMO seed and pharmaceutical corporations to commercialize, regulate, control and tax Cannabis through genetic engineering, patenting and licensing.

Monsanto and the Drug Policy Alliance are not the only entities leading the charge to regulate Cannabis through genetic engineering. As published in the September 2009 issue of the Journal of Experimental Botany, Researchers from the College of Biological Science of the University of Minnesota have identified the genes in the Cannabis plant that produce tetra-hydro-cannabinol (THC), claiming in a press release that it is “a first step toward engineering a drug-free Cannabis plant”. George Weiblen, an associate professor of plant biology and a co-author of the study, said “Cannabis genetics can contribute to better agriculture, medicine, and drug enforcement”.

George Weiblen conducts his research under a permit granted by the DEA to import Cannabis from outside of the U.S. The two sources from which these imports come from are the Kenex corporation based in Ontario Canada and the HortaPharm corporation based in Amsterdam. These two corporations are two of the very few entities which have acquired a DEA permit to import Cannabis into the United States. The history and role of these corporations illustrate the potential of Genetic Engineering in the global Cannabis market.

Kenex corporation initiated its research program on industrial hemp in 1995 in cooperation with Ridgetown College of University of Guelph in Ontario. A research license was granted by Health Canada to proceed with the program. The scope of the project was expanded in 1996 making it the largest hemp research project in Canada.

It is interesting to note that Kenex’s research program on hemp was initiated at the University of Guelph, which is also home to 24 ag-biotech research facilities, and is heavily funded by the ag-biotech industry, including research funds from Monsanto corporation, Bayor Incorporated, Dupont, Syngenta and Dow Chemical corporation to name a few.

The University of Guelph Impact Study in 2007 states:

“Multi-national companies like Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayor Crop Science, and Semex have set up in Guelph because of the ability to closely interact with research and the ease of access to human, capital, and government resources, as well as the ability to attract investment.”

The University of Guelph has recently genetically engineered and patented the genome of a pig, which they have trademarked the EnviroPig. The University of Guelph has also recently partnered with the Monsanto corporation to genetically engineer a Glyphosate-resistant ragweed, and has contributed significant research and development into genetically engineering strains of Soybean crops. Some of the first Genetically Engineered Canadian bred Soybeans were developed at the University of Guelph, including the GMO Soybean strain called ’OAC Bayfield’. GE Soybean research at the University of Guelph has been vitally important to the growth of the GMO Soybean industry.

On January 2, 2003, the Guelph Mercury reported the following:

“Since the Canadian hemp ban was lifted in 1998, researcher Peter Dragla of the University of Guelph’s Ridgetown College has been selecting and breeding hemp plants to meet industry needs. Now, besides working on varieties with lower levels of tetra-hydro-cannabinol (THC)… he’s striving to develop hemp breeds with larger seeds.”

After Kenex corporations Hemp industry was born in a partnership with the Ridgetown college of the University of Guelph, Kenex became Canada’s largest Hemp producer and Supplies Hempseeds for food to companies like Nutiva, based in California.

One of the only other international companies which has acquired a permit to import Cannabis into the U.S. from the DEA is known as the HortaPharm R&D company based out of Amsterdam.

HortaPharm was founded in the late 1990’s by a man named David Watson.

David Watson is credited for developing some of the most widely used Cannabis strains in the world, including his famous strain called Skunk #1 which was imported and used in George Weiblens research to develop GE Cannabis strains at the University of Minnesota.

An article from: http://www.cannabisfarmer.com/web/node/39 reports the following on Mr. David Watson:

“Are your expensive Dutch female (Cannabis) seeds hard to clone, or when you try to breed them, all you get are hermaphrodites?”

“Thank Dr Frankenbeanstein, aka the Skunkman, whose real name is David Watson.”

“At a 1997 Vancouver Hemp conference, Watson spoke of his research. His main focus was to stop growers from cloning nor being able to create any seeds from strains being bred in Amsterdam. The funding for this research came partially from the Dutch Government, the rest from the DEA. Watson had been busted for growing in Santa Cruz California on March-20-1985 and resurfaced in Amsterdam to start his seed company Cultivator’s Choice. DEA supported the Watsons application for a license to grow for research in Holland, even though they should have been extraditing him back to Cali for his 1985 Santa Cruz grow bust! DEA endorsement was so strong that he was the first to be granted a permit in Holland when several universities and domestic research groups with PHD’s and legitimate reasons for research were denied! The Dutch government even supplied three greenhouses for Watson to do his heinous experiments, while normal Dutch growers lost all of their equipment and had to serve murder-like sentences at that time! Dutch seed companies have become the Monsanto of the cannabis seed industry, and hope to make us all seed junkies at $20 a seed.!”

“The license gave Watson control over what researchers are allowed access to pedigreed seeds of predictable quality! The object is to patent up every possible combination of cannabinoids with efficacy for every possible disease they can treat, and every possible genetic sequence! Once ready to make the move, they will shut down every medical cannabis grower for patent fraud”

“Monsanto terminator technology is being applied to Cannabis by (David Watson) at Hortapharm in Holland.”
SEE: http://www.cannabisfarmer.com/web/node/39

The following article published in the UK Independent on September 27, 1998, Interviewed Mr. Watson on the intent of his research in Cannabis with his company HortaPharm:

“It looks like dope, but really it’s hope,” explains David Watson. What he means is that many of these plants have been specifically bred not to produce an intoxicating resin or hashish. Indeed, HortaPharm hopes to thwart the aims of the average recreational user.”

The team is already close to finding their own commercial Holy Grail – seeds that will produce a one-off, female, seedless crop of plants with no psychotropic effects for the consumer. Why, you might ask, would they want to do that?

HortaPharm is only interested in developing female plants that are sterile, but this is not just to protect their genetic copyright. “If a plant is not kept busy producing seeds, all its energy can go into resin production,” says Watsons Dutch colleague and biochemist Etienne de Meijer.

Watson believes the bright future of (Cannabis) is contained in the greenhouses of HortaPharm and GW Pharmaceuticals.

At his Amsterdam glasshouses, he nods conspiratorially at the healthy- looking garden produce. “Don’t say anything yet, but we are also working on putting THC into tomatoes,” he confides. Then he cackles reassuringly: “Only kidding!”
SEE: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/cannabis-a-year-that-changed-minds-1200871.html

David Watson has stated “HortaPharm has built up over many years the most extensive ‘Living Library’ of Medicinal Cannabis varieties in the world”.

In July 1998, Speaking at the International Cannabinoid Research Society conference in Montpellier, Dr Geoffrey W Guy, Chairman of GW Pharmaceuticals, said that HortaPharm will provide GW with exclusive access to its entire range of cannabis varieties for the development of medicines. The worldwide rights acquired by GW for an undisclosed sum cover varieties grown to date with certain exceptions and all varieties to be bred in the future. Plant registrations arising from the Dutch breeding program will be owned by GW pharmaceutical.

Under the agreement GW Pharma will be responsible for the development of specific drug delivery technologies to administer the pharmaceutical grade medicinal cannabis. This work will include a vaporizer for which HortaPharm has a patent pending.

In addition GW Pharma will fund HortaPharm’s botanical research and HortaPharm scientists will
assist in the UK Glasshouse propagation, cloning and cultivation program.

David Watson, CEO of HortaPharm has stated “As soon as Dr Guy’s clinical research indicates the exact desired composition our scientists can breed and register new medicinal varieties”.

An article published by Cannabis Culture Magazine in May 2002, states:

“GW’s miracle pot may soon be among the first cannabis plants ever patented. Although some industrial hemp genetics have been copyrighted as intellectual property, Guy is seeking to register marijuana varietals distinguished by specific morphological characteristics, such as color, leaf size and shape, and smell.”

“According to preliminary information provided exclusively to Cannabis Culture, GW’s medical devices will revolutionize the way cannabis is ingested. Cannabis extracts blended in precise ratios will be packaged in a “canister” that joins to an electromechanical device that delivers controlled aerosolized doses of plant-derived cannabinoids without delivering harmful combustion by-products.”

“The canisters and delivery devices will be dispensed by pharmacists, and closely monitored by pharmacists, doctors, and GW itself.”

“”Pharmaceutical companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars researching and producing medicines, but as soon as those medicines are given to patients, they can be improperly used,” Guy explains. “Patients might use too much, too little, or they might divert their medications to other people. For medications like cannabis that are controlled substances, it’s essential that medical personnel be able to monitor dosage patterns. Our devices are like a digital camera that records details of time, date and other particulars every time it is used.”“

“”Physicians will be able to monitor patient usage remotely,” continued Guy. “People won’t be able to tamper with our devices, even though they are portable and easy to use. You’d need a metal saw or a blowtorch to get into one of them. These controls answer concerns of those who worry that our extracts will be used inappropriately. And, these devices can be adapted for other medicines, ensuring patient safety and medical efficacy.”“

“Dr Guy and his representatives have engaged in high level discussions with the DEA, FDA, the Office for National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA) and senior state officials in California and Maine.”

“”We’ve made some progress in the US,” Guy says. “We’ve commenced pre-clinical research in laboratories and other research in a university. This research is aimed at cell protection properties, general pharmacology, and the enhancement of effects afforded by beneficial synergy created when cannabinoids are blended together rather than isolated. The DEA has approved importation of our extracts into the US. They haven’t said no to us on anything we’ve asked so far. They are playing it by the book. We look forward to continued progress.”“

“”GW occupies a lead position world-wide,” concludes Guy. “We are uniquely placed to become the first company to achieve regulatory approval for prescription cannabis-based medicines.”“
SEE: http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/articles/2400.html

In an interview with Cannabis Culture Magazine, the Chairman of GW Pharma Dr. Geoffrey Guy said “We deserve to make a fair return on our investment, and that’s why we pursued patents for our plants, extracts, processes, and delivery devices.”

In 2009 in Canada, GW Pharma has succeeded in “artificially manipulating” and Patenting a “Novel Reference Cannabis Plant” with a “knock out gene” that uses “monogenic mutation” to “block the cannabinoid biosynthesis in Cannabis sativa”. This technology is being used to artificially engineer the levels of medicinal compounds in the plant.
SEE: http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20090035396

In May of 2003, GW Pharma and Bayer Incorporated had reached a Marketing Agreement on Pioneering a New cannabis-based medicinal extract product called Sativex.

Bayer reportedly paid $60 Million to GW Pharma to obtain exclusive rights to market Sativex in the UK, And reportedly paid $14 Million for the marketing rights in Canada.

“Bayer corporation is also one of the largest biotechnology and GM producers in the world and has brought to market genetically engineered strains of rice, corn, rapeseed, and canola. Bayer is the world’s leading pesticide manufacturer and the world’s seventh largest seed company. Bayer CropScience is responsible for the majority of GM field trials in European countries. Bayer’s GM crops are mostly “Liberty Link” – designed to be resistant to its “Liberty” herbicide. In 1925, Bayer was one of the chemical companies that merged to form the massive German conglomerate IG Farben, which was the largest single company in Germany and it became the single largest donor to Hitler’s election campaign. After Hitler came to power, IG Farben worked in close collaboration with the Nazis, becoming the largest profiteer from the Second World War.”
SEE: http://www.gmwatch.org/gm-firms/11153-bayer-a-history

“An examination of internal Bayer company documents by The New York Times reveals that the company was engaged in unsavory, probably criminal marketing practices. The documents reveal that Bayer continued to sell contaminated blood plasma causing thousands of hemophiliac patients to be infected with AIDS. The company continued to sell the contaminated blood in Asia for over a year when it had already introduced a safer, heated blood plasma version in the US and Europe in February 1984.”

“The documents examined by the Times provide evidence of unrestrained corrupt practices by a pharmaceutical industry giant. According to The Times, records suggest that the reason for continuing to sell an AIDS infected blood product, was to get rid of inventory and “the company hoped to preserve the profit margin from ‘several large fixed-price contracts.’“”
SEE: http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/0503/22.php

In 2007 Monsanto partnered with the patent holder of Sativex, Bayer, in a long-term agreement to cross-license their technologies.

“According to chairman of the Board of Management of Bayer CropScience Dr Friedrich Berschauer the agreements are an important step for Bayer as they could significantly broaden the availability of its LibertyLink technology outside its core cotton and canola seed business.”

“”At the same time, the agreements enable us to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technology solutions in the future,” he said.”
SEE: http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Financial-Industry/Monsanto-Bayer-team-up-on-herbicide-tolerance

While corporations like Bayer and GW Pharma are building patent monopolies over Cannabis strains, processes and medicinal compounds, an ongoing propaganda campaign in the U.S. continues to serve their Cannabis monopoly interests.

Before the reefer madness campaign of the 1930’s, relatively few peoples utilized the psychoactive properties of Cannabis through smoking in the U.S.. Hemp was outlawed in part because the white farmers of the 1930’s did not even know that the outlawing of the mysterious new menace called “Marijuana” was the same plant they were growing in their fields. Throughout history, this psychoactive knowledge of Cannabis has come and gone and those who have had a deep understanding of botany, especially of psychoactive plants were often accused of being either savages or witches. Reefer Madness not only created a hysteria against Cannabis, but it widely proliferated the knowledge of Cannabis’s psychoactive properties and attracted a new underground culture around the plant. This new culture has been heavily influenced by both the mainstream and the underground media.

For example, there are 60 different cannabinoids in the Cannabis plant. Many of which have been identified, genetically isolated and patented by both the U.S. government and other international companies for their medicinal properties. Though the underground and mainstream media in the U.S. around Cannabis tends to be exclusively focused on the psychoactive effect that is produced from the plants chemical compound known as THC. This has helped to create a culture of Cannabis plant breeders in the U.S. who produce strains with a very high yield of THC.

While THC has been conclusively shown by scientific studies done by the Medical College of Virginia, researchers from the University of Madrid, and researchers from the SETH group to contain definite cancer-destroying properties (SEE: http://www.globatron.org/contemporary-culture/thc-kills-brain-tumor-cells), the Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research in 2006 also states that “A high dose of delta9-THC, the main Cannabis component, induces anxiety and psychotic-like symptoms in healthy volunteers.”. That same journal also states that “These effects of Delta9-THC are significantly reduced by cannabidiol (CBD), a cannabis constituent which is devoid of the typical effects of the plant.” The conclusions of these studies show that cannabidiol (CBD) has anti-psychotic properties which naturally balance out and reduce the reported psychoactive and anxiety-like effects of high doses of THC.

Unfortunately, because of media-hype and plant breeding techniques used in the U.S., there is little knowledge of or desire to breed Cannabis strains that contain a more harmonious balance of CBD to THC levels. This has left the common population with strains devoid of CBD and with artificially high levels of THC. Studies have shown that breeding Cannabis with high levels of THC selectively reduces the amount of CBD over time. DEA eradication has has also created an environment devoid of natural Male Cannabis pollen in the air, which has forced the over-production of THC in today’s Cannabis strains, decreasing the amount of CBD in strains that are accessible in the underground market.

Cannabis underground cultural media sources like “High Times Magazine” have also helped to proliferate breeding techniques such as genetic cloning rather then harvesting and saving seed. This has left underground growers dependent on genetic clones from other sources and without a reliable seed supply. Some of the gods of this underground Cannabis culture are people such as the Skunkman aka David Watson, who is ironically also one of the only people to have acquired a DEA Cannabis import license. DEA is well aware of the influence that media sources like “High Times” plays in the underground culture. For example, In the late 1980’s the DEA targeted High Times Magazine in operation “Green Merchant” to compile lists of potential growers and make raids on their gardens.

This combination of DEA eradication and cultural media manipulation of breeding techniques has allowed corporations like Bayer and GW Pharma to attain a patent monopoly over Balanced THC to CBD Cannabis strains. GW Pharma is undertaking a major research program in the UK to develop, patent and market distinct cannabis-based prescription medicines with both High THC and High CBD compounds. GW Pharma is even patenting the CBD to THC “ratios” found in their plant varieties and other products. The cannabis for this program is grown in a secret location in the UK. As of at least 2003, GW Pharma has been granted an import license from the DEA and has imported its first cannabis extracts into the US.

The following report dated September 23, 2009, is an excerpted article from Cannabis Culture Magazine and chronicles some important history, background, and intentions of Bayer and GW pharmaceuticals in the cannabis industry:
SEE: http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/node/19879

“Patented Pot vs. the Herbal Gold Standard by David Malmo-Levine”

“How patented marijuana strains and medicines may threaten the re-legalization movement, curb information sharing, set up a monopoly for certain breeders and medicine producers and limit users to a more expensive and inferior product. Their economic value to the pharmaceutical houses which produce them will be directly proportional to the severity of the prohibition against the use of cannabis.”

“During the last decade a split has developed within the marijuana community. One group is comprised of those who believe that the community’s interests are best served by patenting marijuana strains and marijuana medicines in order to make them safer, more effective, more legitimate, more understood or, perhaps most importantly, more readily accessible since they will be legally available. The other group consists of those who believe natural cannabis medicine and strains are the “gold standard”; the safest, cheapest and, largely because of the ease with which it can be titrated, the most effective form cannabis medicine will take. This second group denies any real advantage of marijuana patents to the consumer, challenges any claim of exclusive rights of the first group to sell a particular strain and opposes the exploitation of a combination of patents and prohibition to force consumers to settle for an inferior product.”

“Within the first group we find those such as Britain’s GW Pharmaceutical, who (with the help of pharmaceutical-giant Bayer) is now selling their whole-plant cannabis spray Sativex. This group also includes the Toronto-based Cannasat Therapeutics, The Nevada-based Dynamic Alert Ltd and various other smaller operations. These companies are looking to patent cannabis medicines, strains of cannabis or both – if they haven’t already done so.”

“Even the US government has gotten in on the action. Patent #6,630,507 was awarded to the US Department of Health and Human Services in 2003, and states that cannabinoids are neuroprotectants and anti-inflammitory agents, useful in the prevention and treatment of stroke, trauma, auto-immune disorders, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and HIV dementia as well as many other diseases.”

“GW Pharmaceutical was granted a license to grow cannabis for medical research in 1998 and it’s partner Bayer was granted a patent for Sativex in 2006. Sativex comes in a 5.5 ml spray bottle for $102 U.S. Dollars, which supplies about 51 sprays – enough for an average ten day supply. It is now available in Canada for MS and cancer pain, and has most recently become available in Britain and parts of Spain for use in the treatment of some other symptoms and syndromes.”

“GW Pharmaceutical has even patented a strain of cannabis called “Grace” in Canada. It was patented in 2005 under the Plant Breeders’ Rights Act. Under this 1994 Act, all plant species (except algae, bacteria, and fungi) are eligible for “protection” (exclusive rights to sell) for 18 years. Medicine patents last between ten to twenty years depending on the country.”

“Proponents of plant and medicine patents contend that there’s no controversy, that patents encourage innovation as it covers the costs of research and development, that standardization and research are impossible without patents, that patents create products superior to traditional botanical medicines, that crude plant drugs are more dangerous and less effective than patented plant products and that patenting cannabis medicines will speed up their legalization – or at the very least expand the number of people who have access to cannabis medicine. The evidence proves otherwise.”

“Ethan Russo, an employee of GW Pharmaceuticals , writing for the on-line journal “Cannabinoids”, listed the benefits of pharmaceuticalized cannabis medicines in his article “Cannabinoid Medicine and the Need for the Scientific Method”. They are; 1) pharmaceuticalized cannabis products will gain widespread trust of physicians and medical consumers, 2) crude herbal materials can’t be standardized, 3) crude herbal materials are full of micro-organisms and 4) most of the non-GW Pharmaceuticals strains of cannabis have no CBD in them.”

“In our view none of Russo’s claims are accurate; 1) the pharmaceutical industry is currently losing the trust of consumers as herbal medicines make a comeback, 2) “crude herbal materials” can easily be standardized without patents if the herb is legal 3) properly grown organic cannabis is relatively free of microbes and metals, and 4) if cannabis were legal, those high CBD strains would be more easily attainable among all breeders.”

“Dr. Geoffrey Guy of GW Pharma stated in 2005:
“To protect our extensive investment, we have sought to identify and patent certain inventions throughout the growing, extraction and manufacturing process. My comments to Mr. Lucas were made as a friendly and, hopefully, helpful gesture as I did not wish him to invest a great amount of effort into obtaining approval for a product as a prescription medicine only to find that he did not have the freedom to operate in the first place.”“

“Even before GW and Bayer had secured their patent on Sativex, Dr. Guy was already threatening to sue Philippe Lucas of the Vancouver Island Compassion Society for infringing Sativex’s imminent patent with VICS’s “Canna-Mist” spray. Just type “Bayer” and “patent” into Google (over two million sites) if you want evidence of Bayer’s habit of suing at the drop of a hat for all sorts of patent-related matters.”

“Evidence of an attempted Canadian medical marijuana monopoly began back in 2000, with a leaked, unpublished document entitled “Draft Statement of Work for The Development of a Comprehensive Operation for the Cultivation and Fabrication of Marijuana in Canada”. The plan called for a seed monopoly – “a licit source” only – and the eventual phase-out of all but a pharmaceutical “inhaler” device. According to the anonymous source who leaked the document, the first version of the plan also called for cannabis strains to be patented “as if they had been genetically modified”. It appears that GW Pharmaceutical and Bayer have now done so with the Cannabis strain “Grace”.”

“There are many herbal medicines that have successfully fought off attempted patents and monopolies. The anti-bacterial neem tree and even the vision-producing ayahuasca have all been subjects of patent attempts. Neem tree activists have used defenses such as “traditional knowledge” and “prior art” and “community heritage” in order to legally protect their healing tree from monopoly. Unfortunately, the patent on a strain of ayahuasca remains in effect to this day.”

“Cannabis monopolies are nothing new. One can argue that the prohibition of Moses’s holy kanneh-bosm annointing oil – found in Exodus 30:32 – a prohibition for people other than priests and kings – was a type of cannabis monopoly. When botanical medicine became popular again in the fourteen hundreds, women healers were first called “unschooled” and later called “witches” to prevent them from competing with the newly emerging male pharmacists. The same thing happened in the mid eighteen hundreds, except this time instead of “witches”, these botanical healers were called “quacks”.”

“The modern version of this monopoly began in 1910 with the Flexner Report – a report that succeeded in closing down all the naturopathic and herbal medicine schools by the 1930′s. This report was partially engineered by the Rockefeller Foundation. The removal of these schools would assist the Rockefeller family in protecting their investments in pharmaceuticals from botanical competition. The Rockefeller Institute and Rockefeller Foundation were also key players in the development of the sciences of genetics and molecular biology – the fields in which the concepts of patenting of life-forms originated. Standard Oil – now Exxon/Mobil and a host of other oil companies – was the Rockefeller Foundation’s source of income. Interestingly, in 1927 Standard Oil became business partners with Bayer – the marketer and distributor of Sativex in Canada.”

“Bayer had much to do with the development of the Codex global anti-herbs and anti-vitamin regulations. This was instituted in 1961, coincidentally (or perhaps not) around the same time as the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs was instituted and the first Plant Patent Act was created.”

“What we know for certain is that nobody should have a monopoly on the emerging herbal health-care economy – especially corporations like Bayer and Exxon, who have had questions raised about the amount of influence they have welded in geopolitics, and what they’ve done with that influence.”

“When the modern patent was issued in the 1400′s in Italy, they were for “new and inventive devices”. This soon turned into a big money maker for kings and queens, who would issue patents for such things as salt. After a public outcry, James the first of England was forced to revoke all existing monopolies and declare that they were only to be used for ‘projects of new invention’. It can be argued that a similar reform is due again today.”

“Perhaps lessons can be learned from those within the medical profession who have tried to pass off discoveries as inventions, and those who have not. Jonas Salk, discoverer of the polio vaccine, famously rejected attempting a patent, explaining that it was like attempting to patent the sun. This is seen by some to be his most “winning story” – what he lost in potential revenue he gained in reputation and positive influence on the world.”

“Joseph Lister was an English professor of surgery who discovered – or popularized – “antiseptic” surgery. He invented a carbolic acid spray as a method of preventing infection, but considering the fact that he didn’t invent the spray bottle nor carbolic acid, he didn’t bother attempting to patent his spray. He alerted the world to his discovery in the British medical journal The Lancet in 1867, and was eventually made a Baron – the first doctor so honored. They even named the first mouthwash after him – Listerine.”

“William Thomas Green Morton was a dentist from Boston. He discovered – or popularized – the fact that ether was a good anesthetic. He was successful in patenting his technique – on November 12th, 1846 he was granted U.S. Patent No. 4848. But he could not collect any money as it was merely the use of an agent already well known. His apparatus was not essential to anesthesia – fabric soaked in ether was all that was necessary. He died broke and his reputation suffered for “nostrum mongering” – for being a huckster and an opportunist.”

“George Washington Carver refused to patent any of his discoveries, saying, “God gave them to me, how can I sell them to someone else?” Ten years after his death, the United States government acquired the Missouri farm which was Carver’s birthplace and dedicated it as a national shrine. The Carver epitaph reads: “He could have added fortune to fame, but, caring for neither, he found happiness and honor in being helpful to the world.”“

“Perhaps one day those who are currently attempting to patent cannabis medicines and cannabis strains will wake up to the fact that a good reputation is worth much more than a patent, and the gift of a new strain or new technique given to the world will return the most precious form of good karma upon the giver, while the person who attempts to “patent the sun” – patent a gift from nature or a traditional medicine bred and developed over thousands of years – will eventually suffer the worst forms of infamy. It is up to the entire cannabis community – especially the activist community, to see that sharing is rewarded and hoarding is punished.”

“GW adopts an aggressive approach to securing intellectual property rights to protect techniques and technologies involved in the development program. Protection is sought in the areas listed below:

• Plant variety rights
• Methods of extraction patents
• Drug delivery patents
• Patents on compositions of matter for delivery of cannabis
• Methods of use patents
• Design copyright on devices
• Trademarks”

“GW States on their website:
“In the last few years our intellectual property portfolio has developed considerably. The patent portfolio has more than doubled in size and comprises 42 patent families, within these families there are numerous granted patents both in the UK and in various territories around the world. GW has also developed a trademark portfolio of 21 UK registered trademarks with equivalent marks registered in many other territories around the world. GW also holds nine registered design rights and nine plant variety rights.””

“It appears that “Patents on compositions of matter for delivery of cannabis” means “Patents on cannabinoid ratios”.”

“Their ratio is 51% CBD and 49% THC:

Guy’s publicly-traded company has developed three types of medicine made from cannabis extracts: a high-THC extract called Tetranabinex, a mostly-CBD extract called Nabidiolex, and the 51-49% mixture of CBD and THC, called Sativex.

CBD began to be studied in the 1960′s. Research into it’s anti-psychotic (or anti-THC overdose) qualities go back to the 1980′s.”

“As stated in Neems court challenge data:

“The issuance of a patent is prohibited if the patent would have been ‘obvious’ in light of prior art. The standard for patentability requires that the differences between a patentable invention and its prior art must be great enough so that a person with ordinary skill in the art would not consider the invention to be obvious at the time of patenting. Neems Patent No. 5,124,349 was found to not meet this standard.”

“An Indian government challenge in the United States led to the revocation of a patent on another Indian plant, turmeric, whose medicinal qualities have been known for centuries. That challenge was accepted as a result of India showing that the knowledge had been found in the Indian pharmacopoeia.”

“In the United States, prior existing knowledge to deny a patent is accepted in terms of publication in any journal, but not of knowledge known and available in oral or folk traditions.”

“This narrow view of prior knowledge has been responsible for any number of patents for processes and products derived from biological material, or their synthesis into purer crystalline forms.”

“A Third World Network expert group recommended in 1998 that developing countries apply a broad concept of ‘prior art’ to ensure that patents are granted to actually ‘new’ inventions, and to stick to the need of novelty of the process itself as a condition of granting a patent. The developing countries were also advised to deny patents for new uses of a known product or process, including second use of a medicine or for incremental additions to get a new patent on a prior one.”

“The expert group advised developing countries to define and interpret ‘novelty’ according to generally accepted concepts, namely, any prior disclosure whether written or not destroys novelty. Knowledge like use of medicinal plants diffused within a local or indigenous community should also be deemed prior art and patent denied.”

“And writing such a rule into their legislation would prevent patenting of knowledge or materials developed by and diffused within local or indigenous communities.”

Due to the high proliferation of pollen inherent in growing industrial Hemp, possibly the greatest threat posed to natural Cannabis strains is in the commercialization of artificially engineered industrial Hemp strains. The following document from the University of Kentucky in 1998 reports that France already holds Patents to industrial Hemp genetics, and is importing Hemp strains into Canada.

SEE: INDUSTRIAL HEMP: GLOBAL OPERATIONS, LOCAL IMPLICATIONS
http://www.uky.edu/Ag/AgEcon/pubs/res_other/hemp98.pdf

One has to wonder, if Monsanto’s Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Proposition passes in California this November, where are the strains going to come from to provide for the “statewide regulatory and commercial industry” called for in the initiative? In the initiative, the only legal Cannabis strains protected by law, are those derived from licensed dealers. If this new industry is to be in accordance with federal law, the only legal seeds that can be attained are from corporations that hold DEA permits for Cannabis production and importation into the U.S.. These permits have been monopolized by Corporations like Kenex, HortaPharm, and GW Pharma, all of which appear to be heavily influenced by the bio-tech seed industry.

The only other legal source to obtain Cannabis seed is from within the United States, exclusively in the University of Mississippi’s Cannabis research program. The UM website describes it as follows:

“Since 1968, the University of Mississippi has maintained the nation’s only legal marijuana farm through a grant from the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). In that time, the project has provided marijuana and its compounds to researchers around the country conducting HHS-approved studies of the plant, its chemical components, and their potential beneficial and harmful effects.”

“Dr. Mahmoud ElSohly joined the project when he came to Ole Miss in 1976 and has been Marijuana Project director since 1980. In the ’80s and early ’90s, ElSohly’s work focused on analyzing marijuana samples seized by the DEA to develop a marijuana “fingerprinting” system that is still being used to trace crops to their sources globally. The responsibility of analyzing the material for the DEA also provided UM researchers the opportunity to study a wide variety of plants leading to a better understanding of the many chemicals found in Cannabis.”

“In recent years, with some support from NIH, ElSohly and other UM researchers have studied Cannabis to develop new medicines and new ways of delivering the chemical compounds in marijuana, particularly tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), to treat a range of chronic conditions—from nausea due to chemotherapy for cancer patients to neuropathic pain for multiple sclerosis patients.”

“UM has patented and licensed to a pharmaceutical company a THC suppository to deliver to cancer patients the potential medicinal benefits of marijuana without the undesirable side effects.”
SEE: http://www.research.olemiss.edu/ChangeAgents/2009/FindingCuresForKillers

El Sohly also has a contract with Mallinckrodt, a giant chemical and bio-tech company that plans to market a THC-extract pill as an alternative to Marinol.
SEE: http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/04/07-18
The Monsanto corporation merged with Mallinckrodt in the 1930′s.
SEE: http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~meg3c/TCC401/A_Case.pdf

The following is an article found in Cannabis Culture Magazine published in February 2000, entitled “Genetically Modified Medpot” and reports that UM’s cannabis genetics are allegedly derived from Monsanto.
SEE: http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/1322.html

“Pharmaceutical companies may seize control of Canada’s medical marijuana supply.”

“A source within the Ministry of Health, who wishes to remain anonymous, has provided documents and information to Cannabis Culture, describing how Canadian pot is to be grown for upcoming medical trials. The documents call for 185 kg (408 pounds) of pot to be grown in the first year, and double that amount for the second through fifth years.”
“The thirty-five page guideline document, with the weighty title, Draft Statement of Work for The Development of a Comprehensive Operation for the Cultivation and Fabrication of Marijuana in Canada, is still open to revisions. It includes proposals for how marijuana should be grown, processed and fabricated. Included in these guidelines is the potential to give a notorious pharmaceutical company exclusive rights for selling seeds to the budding medpot industry.”

“Mississippi schwag”

“According to the document, “the acquisition of seed will be performed by Health Canada during the project initiation stage. The prime contractor can choose to provide their own seed so long as it is from a licit source.”“

“Which presents a problem. How many licit seed sources exist? In North America the only licit source is the University of Mississippi. Concerns about the effectiveness of notoriously schwaggy U of M bud prompted Dr Kilby of the Community Research Initiative of Toronto to state that he would prefer clinical marijuana come from another source (see CC#22). It would seem that Health Canada recognized these concerns when it began looking for private contractors to do the job.”

“Yet will the bud really be any different than that produced by the University of Mississippi? Cannabis Culture’s anonymous source within the ministry gave us the scoop.
Advertisement”

“”Scheduled labs around the country which are already growing marijuana are using seeds from the University of Mississippi,” reported the official. “The genetics come from Monsanto.”“

“Health Canada spokesperson Jeff Pender knew of the recent guidelines document that had been released, but denied knowledge of where the seeds will come from.”

“”Where would a potential grower get the seeds from?,” repeated Pender when I asked him this question. “I’m not really sure. I guess? I could find out for you. I imagine growers could order seeds from the US.”“

“Pender eventually suggested that the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which also gets its cannabis from the University of Mississippi, might be a source for contracted growers looking to buy licit seeds. If the unnamed source at the Ministry of Health is correct, all of these seeds would originally have come from Monsanto.”

“Monsanto’s marijuana”

“The US-based Monsanto corporation became infamous last year when the public discovered that the huge pharmaceutical company was responsible for producing Agent Orange during the Vietnam war, for producing and selling Roundup to be sprayed on South American villages, for experimenting with dangerous genetically modified foods, and ? most recently ? for creating the dreaded “terminator” seed.”

“Terminator seeds are genetically engineered to produce a plant that will not produce viable seed, meaning that growers would be forced to go back to Monsanto each year to buy more seed stock to replant. Governments and public alike became wary of the concept when it was discovered that the terminator seed could possibly cross the species barrier, possibly spreading infertility among the plant kingdom like a disease.”

“Cannabis seeds from Monsanto are almost definitely genetically engineered. Genetically engineered plants can be patented, and it is in Monsanto’s best interest to hold a patent on any seed they sell. Seed patents ensure that companies like Monsanto can continue to profit from seeds from year to year, as farmers are legally bound to buy patented seeds from the patent holder rather than simply store them from the last year’s crop.”

“Pharmaceutical schwag”

“Interestingly, low-potency pot of the kind produced by Monsanto seeds at the University of Mississippi is exactly the kind of product the Ministry of Health is asking for from contractors. The guidelines ask specifically for “standardized marijuana cigarettes with THC content of between 4% and 6% and weighing [about] 850 mg.”“

“Which means the cigarettes to be used for clinical trials will be phatties containing over three-quarters of a gram of schwag bud each! These fat joints will deliver about twice the tar per dose as marijuana currently available from experienced growers, which reaches between 8-10% THC.”

“The Health Canada document seems concerned that smoking can cause harm, and promises to explore other methods soon after the initial trials are run. Yet the product they choose to use is guaranteed to maximize the risks and problems associated with smoking. Could it be that the Ministry of Health is creating its own excuse not to use smoking as a delivery method?”

“Our anonymous source within the ministry assures us that the government plans to eventually only allow the use of inhalers, similar to asthma inhalers.”

“”The inhaler gets rid of any small industry that might develop, by regulating the delivery system. The other idea that didn’t go through was to develop a seed system that would allow cultivars from across Canada which would then be grandfathered. What this means is that once the cultivated varieties were tested they would be introduced just the same as if they had been genetically modified.”“

“Patented seeds and dose delivery methods could mean complete pharmaceutical control of medicinal cannabis sometime in the near future.”

The Cannabis legalization movement is heavily influenced from major shareholders in the Monsanto GMO seed industry. Mr. George Soros is the prime example. Soros is not only a major financier of DPA as well as being on the Board of Directors of the Drug Policy Alliance, but has also financed many different Cannabis legalization organizations across the country including the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP). Soros is credited with putting financial muscle behind many of the state initiatives easing marijuana laws — beginning with a 1996 California ballot question to allow marijuana use for medical purposes. From 1996 to 2000, Soros backed medical marijuana questions there and in Alaska, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Nevada and Maine.

An associated press article dated August 27, 2008 reports that a measure that would ease Marijuana laws in 2008 was on the ballot in Massachusetts largely because of billionaire financier George Soros.

Keith Stroup, founder of NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws has even stated that “All of us owe George Soros a great deal of gratitude”.

If California’s Control Cannabis Proposition does not pass this November, Monsanto’s funding will undoubtedly legalize Cannabis for corporate exploitation sometime in the near future. This will Inundate the medicinal and industrial Cannabis market with artificially engineered and patented Cannabis strains from the only DEA permitted sources available: GW Pharma in partnership with Bayer Inc. and HortaPharm, Kenex corporation, and the University of Mississippi’s Marijuana program, all of which appear to be influenced heavily by the GMO seed industry.

Since the only licit sources of Cannabis are derived from interests in connection with the bio-tech industry, this will force anybody who wishes to grow natural non-patented and non-engineered Cannabis strains to attain their seeds from ‘illicit’ sources.

Other then exposing the imminent threat that Cannabis legalization organizations are posing to natural Cannabis strains in collusion with trans-national GMO seed companies, our responsibility towards this sacred plant compels us to attain natural variety Cannabis seeds and protect them from genetic contamination. Just like the Mayans have learned with Maize, artificial genetic contamination is causing the extinction of natural plant varieties around the planet:

FIGHTING GMO CONTAMINATION AROUND THE WORLD:
http://www.grain.org/seedling/?id=575

As we can learn from the Mayans in the foregoing article, the concept of saving seeds is sacred and central to their spiritual and physical way of life. The same is true for cultural and religious practices all around the world, whether you’re a Christian, Buddhists, Hindu, Muslim, Jew, or just a plain old Human Being, the concept of saving seed is as old as human society itself. If corporations like Monsanto, GW Pharma, Bayer and HortaPharm are allowed to carry out there interests, they will hold the genetic copyrights to all Cannabis strains on the planet. GW Pharma and HortaPharm have stated their intent to engineer Cannabis strains similar to Monsanto’s terminator seed technology. Their strains seem to be artificially manipulated to produce “one-off sterile females” which prevents reproduction of harvest-able seeds. These are the kinds of strains that are waiting to be controlled, regulated, licensed and taxed after the potential passage of proposition 19 in California and many similar initiatives across the United States being funded directly by Monsanto shareholders.

This investigated report was written and compiled by Conrad Justice Kiczenski. Conrad is 19 years old, lives in Lucerne, California, is an organic gardener, and is the host and producer of Guerrilla Radio on KPFZ 88.1 FM in Lake County.

For more information about Conrad and his radio show Guerrilla Radio, SEE:

www.ustream.tv/channel/guerrilla-tv
www.radicaljusticeman.podomatic.com
www.guerrillaradiokpfz.podomatic.com
www.community.kpfz.org/blog/15
www.konocti.org/cms/guerrillla-radio
www.myspace.com/radicaljusticeman

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,654
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #19 on: May 21, 2013, 09:13:03 PM »
Hi W.
           Thats one heck of a read!  Good on ya.
             It sums up their intent and methodry,
           

Offline 777number

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #20 on: May 23, 2013, 11:14:45 AM »
Thanks for sharing that nice read. I haven't read it yet, but I can tell it has a lot of good info. For all you people that don't know a lot about marijuana prohibition, it would be a good start to read above.

In closing Marijuana legalization would not dumb the public down, If anyone disagrees please feel free to chime in.




God Bless.

Offline Infoninja

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 553
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #21 on: May 23, 2013, 11:36:39 AM »
Here in Colorado we are making huge strides in the marijuana fight, and I'd say at least half of the folks I know and do activism with are big advocates.

I would like to know exactly how and through what agencies George Soros and his minions are helping to legalize marijuana. Sounds like a bad decision if you wanna keep 'em in the dark. Finding them, I will research and analyze
to glean his angle.

Any help?

 :)


Offline No2NWO

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • "It's Just A Ride" ~ BH
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #22 on: May 23, 2013, 06:50:50 PM »
Here in Colorado we are making huge strides in the marijuana fight, and I'd say at least half of the folks I know and do activism with are big advocates.

I would like to know exactly how and through what agencies George Soros and his minions are helping to legalize marijuana. Sounds like a bad decision if you wanna keep 'em in the dark. Finding them, I will research and analyze
to glean his angle.

Any help?

 :)



George Soros just gave $1 million to Cali's Proposition 19 initiative to legalize marijuana, according to MarketWatch.

The contribution was filed on the same day Soros' op-ed supporting pot legalization appeared in the Wall Street Journal.

The press is giving this story a lot of attention, as if these two events signify something new, but we thought we'd emphasize that none of this should come as a surprise since Soros has been a longtime supporter of the cause.

So don't think Soros just jumped on the bandwagon to be with the cool kids. He's been there for years.

He was one of the most visible and vigilant proponents of medical marijuana throughout the 1990s, is the main financier of the Drug Policy Alliance and many years ago also contributed to the Marijuana Policy Project.

http://www.drugpolicy.org/
http://www.mpp.org/


"Soros is no fool; he knows that if the pot industry gets decriminalized, the industry will be a goldmine."

10 Ways To Make Money From The Coming Legalization Of Pot
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/10-ways-to-play-the-coming-legalization-of-weed-2010-9?op=1#ixzz2U9ulcbtt


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/george-soros-weed-2010-10#ixzz2U9snWBhx
"BEAT THEM BY NEVER JOINING THEM" ~ No2NWO
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions.

wvinfowarrior

  • Guest
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2013, 10:54:34 PM »
Soros, Big Tobacco, Monsnto, and the government are just waiting for the perfect opportunity to seize control of the marijuana industry. Perhaps they're gonna outright outlaw tobacco, and Big Tobacco will shift its focus to marijuana cigarettes with the main ingredient being GMO cannabis - from Monsanto's GMO terminator seeds - with all the chemicals they currently add to tobacco cigs. It would be a double cancer whammy of GMOs and toxic chemicals. And sadly, the potheads and the hippies will not care that they're smoking GMO pot. All they will care about is that pot is legalized.

Offline No2NWO

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • "It's Just A Ride" ~ BH
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #24 on: May 23, 2013, 11:00:35 PM »
Soros, Big Tobacco, Monsnto, and the government are just waiting for the perfect opportunity to seize control of the marijuana industry. Perhaps they're gonna outright outlaw tobacco, and Big Tobacco will shift its focus to marijuana cigarettes with the main ingredient being GMO cannabis - from Monsanto's GMO terminator seeds - with all the chemicals they currently add to tobacco cigs. It would be a double cancer whammy of GMOs and toxic chemicals. And sadly, the potheads and the hippies will not care that they're smoking GMO pot. All they will care about is that pot is legalized.

...and convenient.
"BEAT THEM BY NEVER JOINING THEM" ~ No2NWO
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions.

Offline John_Back_From_The_Club_O

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,166
    • From Hell to Veins
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #25 on: May 24, 2013, 01:07:39 AM »
HEY MAN!!!

LAY OFF THE MAN!!

The Crowd Shouted... “Give us Barabbas!” ... and People, The NWO Gave Him To You.
http://www.dominicanajournal.org/give-us-barabbas/

https://www.greatagain.gov

Offline Al Bundy

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,568
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #26 on: September 05, 2015, 05:49:55 AM »

"Kanabis marsh" in Belgrade, Serbia : preparation for Gay Parade ? 

Offline larsonstdoc

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,341
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #27 on: September 05, 2015, 01:39:32 PM »
Because Soros is no damn good.  He plays both sides against the middle.

  QFT

  He turned on the Jews during WW2 even though he is a Hungarian Jew.

  He's turned on the Americans.  He is a puppet master of Obama.

  He's turned on most people of the world.

http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=201

  George Soros: An Evil Rothschild Agent

HIS LATEST SCHEME---HE IS HELPING FUND BLACK LIVES MATTER.
I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP.  MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.

EvadingGrid

  • Guest
Re: Why bash George Soros on being pro Marijuana?
« Reply #28 on: September 05, 2015, 01:44:04 PM »
You got his number LasonStDoc !