Skip to comments.Video Exposes Medical Marijuana as Hoax - (shows addicts LOL-ing about what a joke the law is!)
Posted on 06/30/2005 2:51:57 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Rhode Island Governor Donald L. Carcieri has vetoed a "medical marijuana" bill, saying it would encourage marijuana use and criminal activity. His veto comes as an anti-drug group has released dramatic video footage of a marijuana activist declaring that he uses dope for a health problem that he doesn't really have. The bottom line for this activist, Ed Rosenthal, is that "I like to get high. Marijuana is fun." The video has the potential of dealing a major blow to the "medical marijuana" movement, largely funded by billionaire George Soros.
The video footage, posted at the website http://www.sorosmonitor.com, gives the lie to the claim that we often see in the media that smoking marijuana is a legitimate medical treatment for people with diseases. Rosenthal, who was associated with High Times magazine for many years, is shown speaking to dozens of marijuana activists. "With all the talk about medical marijuana, I have to tell you that I also use marijuana medically (laughter)," he says. "I have a latent glaucoma, which has never been diagnosed (more laughter). And the reason why it has never been diagnosed is because I've been treating it (laughter) But there is a reason why I do use it. And that is because I like to get high. (cheers, applause). Marijuana is fun."
The video proves that "medical marijuana" is a joke to those on the inside of the pro-pot movement who realize that getting the public and the media to accept the notion that smoking marijuana alleviates health problems is a major step down the road to complete legalization of dope.
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
I am generally libertarian and consider the war on drugs a waste of my tax money.
That said, now that I know Soros is a force behind the legalization movement, I have to reconsider.
Anything he is for is typically hidden evil.
Dude, it's for my glaucoma!
Bump for later.
So one schmuck joking on video about how he thinks he's getting away with something holds more weight than the substantial research that supports marijuana use as medical treatment? That's not a very logical analysis.
So if I find a video of ONE racist republican, I guess that means they are ALL racist! What a joke.
Come to the cancer ward and spew this dogma. Your words are hollow here.
Apparently so, to the simple minds that take this thread at face value.
oh yeah, the High Times guy is speaking for all glaucoma patients...all cancer patients. If it helps those in pain, they should be able to use it. The WOD is a waste of money.
It seems to me that, if you have cancer, "getting high" is a side effect that beats "throwing up" every time.
It's just moronic. The right moralists like the drug war because it prevents people they don't like from having fun. Well, not really. But it makes it more of a hassle anyway. This is the same country that once banned alcohol, though, and those same busybody genes are still swimming around in the national gene pool.
It's just amazing to me that with all the efforts we put forward here to advance the cause of liberty, that a totalitarian effort like the War on Politically Incorrect Drugs would find any support here at all.
Conservatism means you can only take gubmint approved medications.
It's called prejudice. People go with their own personal prejudices most of the time, and this is one of them. For them, limiting free human beings to only gubmint approved medications makes sense.
If any freeper disagrees with me on this, I suggest they accompany a cancer patient to an infusion session and see what chemo does to people first hand. The IV bags in the infusion suite have big bio-hazard stickers on them. Chemo's a b!tch and if the patient thinks some pot will help them, I'll be first in line to light their joint.
I'm with you and I'd go further. Whatever will help people in pain should be given without reservation or fear of the law coming down on you. I don't care if it's pot, morphine, heroin or whatever. Give it to them.
haven't you heard? Conservatism means free people can only take medications that the BIG CENTRAL GOVERNMENT approves. Got that? That's called CONSERVATISM.
I thought it meant the BIG CENTRAL GOVERNMENT could seize your home and your car without ever charging you with a crime, or giving your stuff back.
This is pretty weak, even for Wo(s)D cheerleaders...
Are those FReepers?
Oh wait, I remember. It means the BIG CENTRAL GOVERNMENT will allow States, the 8th Amendment notwithstanding, to throw people in jail longer for possessing X ounces of a plant than they would serve for possessing X ounces of plutonium.
Republican presidential front-runner George W. Bush says he believes individual states should choose whether to ban the use of marijuana for medical purposes, but is stopping short of saying the District should enjoy that privilege. The Texas governor, who in recent weeks has distanced himself from several positions taken by conservative Republicans in Congress, said that when it came to congressional efforts to ban a medical marijuana law here, he was in Congress's corner.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush102299.htm
Campaigning in Seattle on Saturday, Bush answered questions about medical marijuana laws by saying, "I believe each state can choose that decision as they so choose."
Has anyone asked him why he...flip-flopped?
The one on the right is Lazamataz... I'd recognize him anywhere.
In tortured English, as usual.
I know he is a liar. I heard him swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.
Hrm, okay, who's the one in the middle? :-)
Nah, they're just two guys that turned up on good ol' Google image search.
Just checkin'. I appreciate it, BTW. :-)
That's not meant to be taken LITERALLY!
I just knew this thread was gonna be good. A Bush-bashing Pot party!!
And punishing you if you do not obey..
What a country..
Many recent studies find NO medicinal value from SMOKING dope. Even the active ingredients have been shown equivalent to placebo in pill form.
The studies are beside the point. The point is that if you can't determine what can and can't go into your own body, you are not a free man, you are a slave of the state which has made those decisions for you.
I am for leagalization of the idiotmakerweed, I don't use it, but have at it, just don't corrupt science to justify getting high.
Didn't seem to matter. I have never bought into the "medical marijuana" sham.
I'm not corrupting science. There's plenty of evidence of the medicinal value of pot. Studies that come from a pharmaceutical company whose profits would suffer from legalization, or are sponsored by a prohibitionist government agency, hold no weight with me.
You think anybody buys that "cancer ward" BS?
Just explain why hospital cancer wards need a "store" in dozens of neighborhoods (where other illegal activities take place routinely) in order to service their patients who are in so much pain they can barely move... ?
The advisor to the Drug Policy Foundation: "Once there's medical access, if we continue to do what we have to do, and we will, then we'll get full legalization"
Didn't you see the director of the Drug Policy Alliance of San Francisco recommending "positive role models" to kids who use drugs? Anyone in the role of advocating something bad for the brain or the country is not a positive role model.
This is not a small group of people guilty of racial ignorance, this is a large group of people with ignorance toward the reprecussions of what they support:
If I had a loved one in pain, I would find some myself.
I agree completely.
But this thread is transparently being hijacked indignantly (protesting waaaaay too much) and defended with pretend outrage by losers who just need to hide behind the suffering and the terminally for their recreational grass.
Sorry, where is the government authorized by our Constitution to carry on prohibition in the first place?
I didn't see this amount of impassioned outrage after the Eminent Domain" decision...
Ah yes. Proportionality.
My son has leukemia, and I would never get him a joint to smoke, much less light it!
When it authorized the representative system together with the general welfare clause.
Whether people want to smoke pot for recreation is no more of your business - or the government's - than whether you want to drink or smoke cigarettes for the same purpose.
Just like with the prohibition against drunk driving. Though I admit the degree of harm that one thing causes is greater than the other.