|
The fact that it has worked on people and saved their lives says wonders. Also take note of the statement "These compounds have been shown to induce apoptosis in glioma cells in culture and induce regression of glioma tumors in mice and rats." Apoptosis is cell death.
In fact, my beta fish, Hendrix, had swim bladder disease (he would sink to the bottom or float to the top) and so I sprinkled some kief (trichomes from cannabis) into his tank and he swam up to them and ate them, and not even an hour later, he was swimming back as his healthy self. This worked on two occasions.
|
|
|
|
|
Making a substance illegal only creates a black market for it, which allows a gap for violent cartels to thrive in.
What we really should be doing is educating people that alcohol is ethanol - what we use to fuel cars. It's near equivalent of huffing gasoline, imo.
We should end the misinfo propaganda on cannabis and inform the public that no one has ever died from cannabis and it cures many diseases, including cancer.
But wait - the government doesn't want us to be healthy, big pharma profits way too much off our suffering and demise, hence big tobacco. And oh yeah, they don't want us to think with open minds, they'd rather have us numb or brains with pharmaceuticals and alcohol. Cannabis (and psychedelics) would threat their very existence.
|
|
|
|
|
If you really want to help the Ukrainians, go over there and tell them about anarchy, for that is the true solution they are seeking.
|
|
|
|
|
Highest percentage of cocaine on bills (95%) was in Washington D.C.
Hmmm, go figure.
|
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvWHf9psnRcWhy is this relevant to politics and society? Simple, this compound has the capacity to revolutionize the entire structure of society. Watch the video for a more detailed explanation. This is a key to another dimension of infinite wisdom, love and peace. A dimension completely incomprehensible to what you once thought was possible. This is a key to the akashic records.
|
|
|
|
|
Would you also proclaim the citizens of the United States that believe in the constitution to be terrorists?
Or is it possible the terrorists are actually the people in the government?
|
|
|
|
Come to Kiev and see what people are fighting! In another you do not understand.
Anon has it right. The thing is, this has happened over and over throughout history. The reason it keeps happening over and over again is because whenever there is a revolution, a new set of rulers comes in only to become drunk with power, and the process repeats. If you guys stand up to fight for no government at all, then there will be nobody in that position to become a tyrant in the first place. The problem is well beyond your current government, it is all governments that oppress their people. The only way to be truly free is anarchy. Otherwise, you will still have a governing entity who continues to exert force through violence. |
|
|
|
The police act like its a video game.  if only these people were fighting for something instead of against something. this always leads to worse tyranny. this will be no exception.
They are. English Wikipedia article for EuromaidanThe Euromaidan (Ukrainian: Євромайдан, Yevromaidan, literally "Eurosquare")[nb 5] is a wave of ongoing demonstrations and civil unrest in Ukraine, which began on the night of 21 November 2013 with public protests demanding closer European integration. The scope of the protests has since evolved, with many calls for the resignation of President Viktor Yanukovych and his government.[67] Many protesters joined because of the violent dispersal of protesters on 30 November and "a will to change life in Ukraine".[5] By 25 January 2014, the protests had been fueled by the perception of widespread government corruption, abuse of power, and violation of human rights in Ukraine.[68] English Wikipedia article for February ongoing riotsOn 18 February 2014, 20,000 Euromaidan protesters in Kiev advanced on Ukraine's parliament in support of rolling back the Constitution of Ukraine to its pre-2004 form.But are they really fighting for something? Why do they want anything to do with the EU? Why do they want anything to do with other nations rather than their own? This protest ought to be for true freedom, anarchy. Otherwise, history will repeat over and over until the day they fight for true equality and peace through anarchy. This message should be known throughout the protesters. |
|
|
|
|
So this is beyond the reach of governments? Sounds great, they need to try and do it sooner though.
|
|
|
|
|
Noting the prefix uni (one) and the definition "totality of existence," can we also agree that the universe means everything?
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I've been trying to get you all to understand that statement for 14 pages and so I thought I'd mix it up with a therefor.
Now that we came to an agreement that everything is everything, I ask, you are part of everything, right?
|
|
|
|
No, the difference between Atheism and Agnostic is not your concern. It is a difference in interpretation of the question, not the outcome of answer.
Atheists think they are not convinced, Agnostics think the question is unanswerable (therefore are not convinced) and Anti-theists adamantly think there is no God as narcasistically and arrogantly as you think there is a god.
So any argument pertaining to the fact that Atheists are telling you that you are 'wrong' or that there 'is no god' is not exactly what Atheism is about. Sure I get frustrated when you knuckle draggers try to ruin the education system with your lack of evidence based drivel designed to dumb the gene pool. I might say you are a total fuck tard from time to time, and I might outright say that you are just wrong. The truth is, I am just not convinced, because nothing you say it in any way shape or form at the slightest compelling.
You are in fact, the most uninteresting, and uncompelling human being that I have had the dishonor of contacting.
The difference between the three doesn't really matter here. What I'm conveying is proof through simple logic that god exists. Nothing is nothing, therefor, everything is everything. Can we agree on that? |
|
|
|
Erm... they estimate you need 1 million bills to get a gram of cocaine. Seeing as you would need to absorb 100,000 bills to get high, I'm doubting it.
P.S. I'm doubting many people who like blow use $100 bills because they already used it to buy the blow.
They still have vibes around them. |
|
|
|
|
Cannabis cures cancer. It should have never been made illegal in the first place, in fact it was a common medicine until the 1930's, only to be demonized by a large push of emerging industries such as synthetic fiber companies like DuPont, timber industries and pharmaceutical companies, all of which cannabis had (and still has) the capacity to replace with safer, healthier, more sustainable solutions. You could be living in a hempcrete house at a fraction of the price and with increased structural integrity, driving a hemp biodiesel fueled car with a negative carbon footprint, and powering our entire country's electrical grid through renewable hemp oil grown on just 6% of continental land.
Really, all drugs should be legal. Making drugs illegal does not prevent people from using them, in fact less kids have been using drugs in Portugal since they were all decriminalized and made legal to purchase small amounts of a few years ago. Drug induced deaths cut nearly in half. Legalizing drugs removes dangers of overdosing due to potency fluctuations, allows people to seek treatment openly and eliminates huge black markets associated around illicit substances. More people have died in a single city in Mexico, due to drug trade related deaths, than Afghanistan, per year.
But the powers that be would never want this to happen. The private prison industry makes too much off incarceration of nonviolent drug users. The pharmaceutical industry makes too much off their poisonous concoctions. The very integrity of the government would shatter if psychedelics were made legal, as they open people's minds to the true state of reality. The would show people that a government is not necessary towards a positive impact on humanity at all, in fact it's counter efficient.
More people die from aspirin each year than ALL illegal drugs combined. Figure that one out. The motivation to keep drugs illegal is not about concern for your health, it's about control and profiting off the loss of freedom of others.
If we do not have the freedom to choose what goes in our own body, one may ask, are we free at all?
|
|
|
|
Please enlighten me as to who the illuminati were and why the people in charge are not them. Where are they now? I normally abstain from using the word illuminati, but when it's used, it's referring to the top of the power structure that entangles earth.
Can you use Wikipedia? I said, search the wiki for it. Maybe read some books (for entertainment, read Dan Brown's Angels and Demons. Although ficton it has a lot of Illuminati history in it too). But the Wiki entry is fairly quick. And history books do not validate truth, many rewrite history to fit the viewpoint of whoever created them.
I have firsthand knowledge that Freemasons pull most of the strings behind the curtain. I have firsthand experience that the government works with beings of a higher awareness.
Oh, well, in that case, I have firsthand knowledge that the Illuminati was a group that existed a long time ago, was formed to fight the church and the monarchy (kings/government), and were all destroyed or discredited (mainly with clams that they are satanists or shadow government) because they didn't stay anonymous. By the way, I know Freemasons. I have first knowledge of them too. They're not really all that powerful. Mostly a bunch of old men, afraid that their fraternity is disaearing because younger generations don't care to join. At this point they are basically lodges for guys to hang out and drink and stuff. I know you don't actually believe Obama is the head of the show, do you?
Of curse not. The president doesn't have all that much power. It's in the constitution, the laws, and everything else. All the president can do is propose ideas, talk in front of cameras, and sign bills given to him. It's Congress (House and Senate) that has all the power, and they are under obligations to corporate and special interest lobbyists. Call it illuminati, NWO, Builderburg group, Rothschilds family, what have you. There are some admittingly evil fuckers out there that wish to destroy our planet or completely enslave humanity at a minimum. Trying to defend the illuminati by saying they started as a group against tyranny is moot. The illuminati I am talking about, the illuminati the world is talking about, is the people that currently pull the strings. We live in a hierarchical type society, there are people at the top. Seriously, I have contemplated long and hard if the illuminati has good intentions for humanity. While I understand their enlightened nature, I like to think they do. But from what I see, what I feel, it's led by intelligences that haven't the slightest regard for our entire planet. I'm keeping an open mind, but I have yet to see any evidence of a secret society that is actually pushing for positive change that benefits more than their own people. Seems like I have to build that one myself. And I'm not the only one to have prophesied that. (You know that there are billions of stars in the universe)
But the star had quite a difficult time shining amongst all the other stars
The year was 1994 when the star began his decent
And continued falling..and falling
Landing in an unknown place the star creates followers from underground up
And the quest to shoot beyond the stars once again
The star begins in, Strangeland |
|
|
|
I didn't understand your question at first, I thought it had a typo. But if I'm reading it correctly, you're making more false presumptions about me by reinterpreting my words?
I believe in positives, a scientist can be an atheist, just as they (and many great ones have) can believe in god.
In this case I don't wish to offend, but are you being obtuse on purpose? This is what your line of argument logically leads to: 1. Atheists fear the unknown. 2. Fear of the unknown is not possible for most scientists. 3. Therefore, most scientists are not atheists. Discuss. Allow me to rephrase it more accurately. Atheists doubt what they don't understand. Doubt is a feeling derived from fear. Fear is ego, negativity. You're concluding with #3 yourself. Again, if you could answer these questions for me, you would prove my point: Do you believe in god? Do you believe you are god? Do you believe in eternal life? Do you believe I can fly as I have done so in dreams? |
|
|
|
|
I didn't understand your question at first, I thought it had a typo. But if I'm reading it correctly, you're making more false presumptions about me by reinterpreting my words?
I believe in positives, a scientist can be an atheist, just as they (and many great ones have) can believe in god.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't think of fear as being terrified. It simply means stemming from ego, negativity. Ego is fear. Doubt is ego.
If I told a large group of atheists I could fly, how many of them would agree? I think you'd find many of them would doubt it.
Doubt is ego. Ego is the force that prevents us from doing the impossible.
|
|
|
|
I can definitely see them pushing atheism onto the masses though. Why would they want to give a population they wish to enslave hope? Why would they want them to become fearless of death? Fear is what drives their power and fear, or negativity, is the basis of atheism (I don't think there's a god, I don't think that's possible, etc.)
You clearly say here that fear is the basis of atheism. Are you going to contradict yourself, or are you going to explain why you're stereotyping atheists as cowards who can't face the idea of god? See, you're still skewing my words around and it seems that you're doing it intentionally at this point. I never said atheists are cowards, you brought that idea upon yourself. I will say that atheists do not understand god though. For to be with god is to have understanding, unity. Fear is negativity, ego. Answer this: Do you believe in god? Do you believe in eternal life? Do you believe I can fly? Then let me make it clearer for you: You wrote: I can definitely see them pushing atheism onto the masses though. Why would they want to give a population they wish to enslave hope? Why would they want them to become fearless of death? Fear is what drives their power and fear, or negativity, is the basis of atheism (I don't think there's a god, I don't think that's possible, etc.)
Now, do you or do you not say that fear and negativity is the basis of atheism? I'm not skewing your words, I'm quoting you. Yes. That doesn't mean atheists are cowards. It means atheists fear (doubt) what they don't understand. It's the basis of ego, which is what atheism revolves around. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
