Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tsar admits: we've lost the war on drugs
The Scotsman ^ | Sun 18 Jun 2006 | MARCELLO MEGA AND KATE FOSTER

Posted on 06/18/2006 9:22:25 AM PDT by SittinYonder

SCOTLAND'S drugs tsar has sparked a furious row by openly declaring that the war on drugs is "long lost".

Tom Wood, a former deputy chief constable, is the first senior law enforcement figure publicly to admit drug traffickers will never be defeated.

Wood said no nation could ever eradicate illegal drugs and added that it was time for enforcement to lose its number one priority and be placed behind education and deterrence.

But his remarks have been condemned by Graeme Pearson, director of the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency (SCDEA), who said he "strongly disagreed" with Wood.

The row has erupted as concern mounts about the apparent inability of police, Customs and other agencies to stem the flow of illegal drugs. It was reported yesterday that an eight-year-old Scottish school pupil had received treatment for drug addiction.

And despite decades of drug enforcement costing millions of pounds, Scotland has one of the worst drug problems in Europe, with an estimated 50,000 addicts. At least half a million Scots are believed to have smoked cannabis and 200,000 are believed to have taken cocaine.

Wood holds the influential post of chairman of the Scottish Association of Alcohol and Drug Action Teams, a body which advises the Executive on future policy. The fact that Wood and Pearson are at loggerheads over the war on drugs is severely embarrassing for ministers.

Wood said: "I spent much of my police career fighting the drugs war and there was no one keener than me to fight it. But latterly I have become more and more convinced that it was never a war we could win.

"We can never as a nation be drug-free. No nation can, so we must accept that. So the message has to be more sophisticated than 'just say no' because that simple message doesn't work.

"For young people who have already said 'yes', who live in families and communities where everybody says 'yes', we have to recognise that the battle is long lost."

He added: "Throughout the last three decades, enforcement has been given top priority, followed by treatment and rehabilitation, with education and deterrence a distant third.

"In order to make a difference in the long term, education and deterrence have to go to the top of the pile. We have to have the courage and commitment to admit that we have not tackled the problem successfully in the past. We have to win the arguments and persuade young people that drugs are best avoided."

Wood said he "took his hat off" to the SCDEA and added that it was essential to carry on targeting dealers. He stressed he was not advocating the decriminalisation or legalisation of any drugs.

"It's about our priorities and our thinking," said Wood. "Clearly, at some stage, there could be resource implications, but the first thing we have to do is realise we can't win any battles by continuing to put enforcement first."

But Pearson, director of the SCDEA, said he "fundamentally disagreed" that the war on drugs was lost.

"I strongly disagree when he says that the war on drugs in Scotland is lost. The Scottish Executive Drug Action Plan acknowledged that tackling drug misuse is a complex problem, demanding many responses. It is explicit within the strategy that to effectively tackle drug misuse, the various pillars of the plan cannot operate in isolation."

Alistair Ramsay, former director of Scotland Against Drugs, said: "We must never lose sight of the fact that enforcement of drug law is a very powerful prevention for many people and, if anything, drug law should be made more robust.

"The current fixation with treatment and rehabilitation on behalf of the Executive has really got to stop."

And Scottish Conservative justice spokeswoman Margaret Mitchell said: "I accept Wood's sincerity, but this is a very dangerous message to go out. I would never say that we have lost the war on drugs. Things are dire, but we should never throw up the white flag."

But Wood's view was backed by David Liddell, director of the Scottish Drugs Forum, who said: "We have never used the term 'drugs war' and it's right to move away from that sort of approach. For every £1 spent on treatment, £9-£18 is saved, including in criminal justice. The balance has been skewed towards more punitive aspects."

And John Arthur, manager of the drugs advice organisation Crew 2000, said: "I think Tom Wood is right. This is something our organisation has been arguing for for a long time and it is good to see this is now coming into the mainstream."

Among the ideas now backed by Wood is less reliance on giving methadone as a substitute to heroin addicts.

He says other substitutes should be considered, as well as the possibility of prescribing heroin itself or abstinence programmes.

One new method being examined by experts is neuro-electric therapy, which sends electrical pulses through the brain. One addict with a five-year habit, Barry Philips, 24, from Kilmarnock, said the treatment enabled him to come off heroin in only five days.

Wood said: "We need to look at the other options. Other substitutes are used in other countries. They even prescribe heroin in Switzerland and there is a pilot in Germany, with pilots also mooted in England and, more recently, Scotland. We need to have a fully informed debate."

A Scottish Executive spokesman said: "We have a very clear policy on drugs, which is to balance the need to tackle supply and challenge demand. They have to go hand in hand and we make no apology for that."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: bringoutthenuts; drugskilledbelushi; drugtsar; knowyourleroy; leroyknowshisrights; mrleroybait; scotland; thatsmrleroytoyou; wod; wodlist; wosomed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-319 next last
We can never as a nation be drug-free. No nation can, so we must accept that. So the message has to be more sophisticated than 'just say no' because that simple message doesn't work.

And Scottish Conservative justice spokeswoman Margaret Mitchell said: "I accept Wood's sincerity, but this is a very dangerous message to go out. I would never say that we have lost the war on drugs. Things are dire, but we should never throw up the white flag."

1 posted on 06/18/2006 9:22:28 AM PDT by SittinYonder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: eyespysomething; freepatriot32; freedom44
I spent much of my police career fighting the drugs war and there was no one keener than me to fight it. But latterly I have become more and more convinced that it was never a war we could win.

FWIW ... Drug Tsar in Scotland says WOD there is lost.

2 posted on 06/18/2006 9:25:08 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen

Ping.


3 posted on 06/18/2006 9:25:36 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

Fortunately, in the US, we have a drug czar, not a drugs tsar.


4 posted on 06/18/2006 9:30:21 AM PDT by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

Why didn't Singapore lose its war on drugs?


5 posted on 06/18/2006 9:30:39 AM PDT by Joe Bfstplk (I am going to be assertive...If that is OK with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder
wrong war and the wrong time?

end the war on pot and ramp up the war on real drugs. then you might have a real war worth fighting.

6 posted on 06/18/2006 9:30:42 AM PDT by postaldave (McCain & Bush, you traitorous !#!$!!s. you two are no different then ted kennedy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proxy_user
Fortunately, in the US, we have a drug czar, not a drugs tsar.

Excellent point.

7 posted on 06/18/2006 9:31:07 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

We've lost it here too, just the big government crowd, and most conservatives can't let it go.


8 posted on 06/18/2006 9:32:24 AM PDT by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Bfstplk
Why didn't Singapore lose its war on drugs?

Because Singapore does it right. The only way we will win the war on drugs is if we make the punishment so harsh that no one will choose to use drugs.

I have long said that the only way we will win the war on drugs is if we impose the death penalty for possession. Others have suggested it is unreasonable and harsh, and maybe it is, but you can't win a war without piling up some bodies.

9 posted on 06/18/2006 9:33:41 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Joe Bfstplk

Because Singapore is very small, and is willing to sacrifice almost all freedoms we and the British hold dear for the sake of social order.

Stopping people from ruining their lives by screwing up their brain chemistry isn't worth the cost of living in a police state.


10 posted on 06/18/2006 9:34:42 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: KoRn
We've lost it here too

I would argue that we haven't started fighting it here. See my post #9. There is no real committment from the U.S. Government for winning the War on Drugs. If there was, it would have been over in 1992.

11 posted on 06/18/2006 9:34:54 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

We are such a bunch of sentimental wusses that is not going to happen.

Can you imagine executing a cute, upper-class college girl for giving out cocaine to all her friends?

It is not realistic in the type of society we have.


12 posted on 06/18/2006 9:35:50 AM PDT by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder
Things are dire, but we should never throw up the white flag."

Absolutely! Protect the money interest in the drug trade at all costs!

13 posted on 06/18/2006 9:36:55 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Genocide is the highest sacrament of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Bfstplk

Because Singapore already is the kind of police state that is utterly necessary to carry out such a policy effectively.


14 posted on 06/18/2006 9:39:02 AM PDT by thoughtomator (A thread without a comment on immigration is not complete)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: proxy_user
It is not realistic in the type of society we have.

Then we've lost the war on drugs here, too.

It has been demonstrated over and over again that people are willing to risk any level of punishment to take drugs. Even though everyone knows the risks of overdose (that could lead to death), people still choose to use drugs.

When you take into account what people are willing to risk, I think the only option for winning the war on drugs is to make death a certainty.

Execute a few of those cute, upper-class college girls for possession and pretty soon the WOD is won.

15 posted on 06/18/2006 9:39:29 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
Stopping people from ruining their lives by screwing up their brain chemistry isn't worth the cost of living in a police state.

Exactly.

16 posted on 06/18/2006 9:40:05 AM PDT by H. Paul Pressler IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder
I have long said that the only way we will win the war on drugs is if we impose the death penalty for possession. Others have suggested it is unreasonable and harsh, and maybe it is, but you can't win a war without piling up some bodies.

Are you willing to volunteer your services as executioner? Will you walk up a put a bullet in the first 14 year old kid we catch with a joint in his pocket?

17 posted on 06/18/2006 9:40:08 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

We haven't won the "war on drugs" because it isn't a "war." There is no end to it. There is no point at some future date that all drugs will vanish and all the users and dealers will surrender.

That does not mean that we should stop enforcing the laws. The "war" is actually an on-going struggle against one of society's worst sicknesses.


18 posted on 06/18/2006 9:40:30 AM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
Stopping people from ruining their lives by screwing up their brain chemistry isn't worth the cost of living in a police state.

Oh really? What about the absolutely enormous cost of continuing an ineffective policy? Either we ramp it up and stomp out drug use or we'll have to admit the same kind of defeat this drug tsar in Scotland is admitting.

19 posted on 06/18/2006 9:41:28 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder
" There is no real committment from the U.S. Government for winning the War on Drugs. If there was, it would have been over in 1992."

I don't disagree. The problem is, if people want to do something, they are going to do it. This applies to drugs. When there are people out there who want to use drugs, it creates demand, and we both know if there is demand there WILL be a willing supplier for that demand somewhere. There is no stopping it, the only thing the government can do is hope to slow it down and make it more difficult, but the end result will be the same.

20 posted on 06/18/2006 9:41:53 AM PDT by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes; SittinYonder

21 posted on 06/18/2006 9:42:34 AM PDT by Lady Jag (You can complain because roses have thorns, or you can rejoice because thorns have roses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Will you walk up a put a bullet in the first 14 year old kid we catch with a joint in his pocket?

No.

22 posted on 06/18/2006 9:42:38 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder
Then you must not be committed to the War.
23 posted on 06/18/2006 9:43:53 AM PDT by H. Paul Pressler IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: KoRn
Then you remove the demand by punishing those who demand it so severely that it's not worth it anymore.

We cannot maintain and continue the current state of affairs. The costs in terms of tax dollars and the eroding of our individual liberties are exorbitant.

24 posted on 06/18/2006 9:45:56 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: H. Paul Pressler IV
Then you must not be committed to the War.

Are you questioning my committment?

25 posted on 06/18/2006 9:46:50 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder
"I strongly disagree when he says that the war on drugs in Scotland is lost. The Scottish Executive Drug Action Plan acknowledged that tackling drug misuse is a complex problem, demanding many responses. It is explicit within the strategy that to effectively tackle drug misuse, the various pillars of the plan cannot operate in isolation."

To properly evaluate Mr. Pearson's statement, we must ask if Mr. Pearson would have a problem making his house payment, car payment, buying groceries and paying bills if the Scottish war on drugs vanished.

26 posted on 06/18/2006 9:46:59 AM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

But you believe someone else should do it for you?


27 posted on 06/18/2006 9:49:16 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

I believe you said something about piling up bodies = winning the War on Drugs.


However, no it seems you are not willing to do the dirty work of piling up the bodies of drug users.


28 posted on 06/18/2006 9:50:12 AM PDT by H. Paul Pressler IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Lady Jag

If the same ingenuity was applied to food production as cannabis production, we could feed a trillion.

Mrs VS


29 posted on 06/18/2006 9:51:10 AM PDT by VeritatisSplendor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: durasell
The "war" is actually an on-going struggle against one of society's worst sicknesses.

No, the "war" IS an expression of one of society's worst sicknesses - namely, the utopian desire to "improve" humanity.

To H*ll with it.

30 posted on 06/18/2006 9:53:31 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Genocide is the highest sacrament of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

Would you impose a death penalty for adultry and divorce?

Some would say those crimes of life do far more damage then anyone ever taking a hit of pot.


31 posted on 06/18/2006 9:56:16 AM PDT by Almondjoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: H. Paul Pressler IV; SittinYonder

I'd pile up bodies of terrorists. Seems SittinYonder knows somewhere deep down that the WoD is a fraud.


32 posted on 06/18/2006 9:58:04 AM PDT by thoughtomator (A thread without a comment on immigration is not complete)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: KoRn

My belief is that if we are going to have a war against illegal drugs, then we should also have a war against "legal" or prescribed drugs.

My ex-wife's quack doctor has her on an anti-depressant called Cymbalta. I believe that it has made her nuts. She will call me up one week saying she wants to get back together, then the next week she hates me again. And she forgets things and makes up crazy stories, which she did not do before she was put on this so-called anti-depressant. In a fallen world, everyone is going to depressed at some point in time, but instead of just accepting that and dealing with it we have instead bought into the lie that we need medication and therefore have made drug companies and doctors rich.


33 posted on 06/18/2006 9:59:14 AM PDT by texasmountainman (Remember the heroic men and women of Flight 93-go watch United 93.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes

Exactly. That's why lying and divorce and greed aren't illegal.

But somehow the drug war lives on. Even though probition didn't work somehow we are under the impression that eventually the drug war will.

You can't make people make the right choices for themselves.

You have to let people be self destructive.


34 posted on 06/18/2006 10:00:00 AM PDT by Almondjoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
But you believe someone else should do it for you?

I'm proposing what I believe is the only solution for winning the WOD. I'm not interested in executing people myself.

35 posted on 06/18/2006 10:00:15 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: H. Paul Pressler IV
However, no it seems you are not willing to do the dirty work of piling up the bodies of drug users

I also don't execute murderers.

36 posted on 06/18/2006 10:01:09 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder
Iran has the most drastic penalties for drug possession and use, death in nearly every case. They also are the most addicted nation, by far, almost 2.5%. They also have the largest drug trafficking activity, by far. Their problem has been ongoing for over 50 years and is getting worse every day.

They have also stopped drug executions because there would have to be so many, there would be a civil war.

After the massive earthquake in Bam, the UN and American relief agencies had to buy and distribute heroin to keep the 10,000+ junkies from dying of withdrawal, creating more casualties than the earthquake.

Penalties and punishment won't ever work by themselves. The main result of prohibition has been the enriching and empowering of the drug cartels.

The greatest fear of all drug users is getting caught. Until you can over-counter that with a more powerful alternative not to use, drug users will not quit.

Ask any drug addict how big their habit is and they will tell you that it solely depends on how much money they have.

That's the reality folks.

You don't declare war on your own people, families and friends.

Secure the borders, provide realistic and effective treatment, completely decriminalize marijuana, stop the farming of poppies and cocaine in foreigh countries anyway we have to. We have to get Congress to pull it's head out of where the sun don't shine, on this problem.

37 posted on 06/18/2006 10:04:45 AM PDT by gandalftb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Almondjoy
Would you impose a death penalty for adultry and divorce?

We don't have a national war on adultry and divorce. If we did, I suspect it would move along very much like the WOD does. And then I suppose that I would probably weigh the costs of that WoAaD and come to a similar conclusion.

Of course, that's a strawman, isn't it? The topic of discussion is the WOD, not the WoAaD.

38 posted on 06/18/2006 10:04:46 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: KoRn
Here is one conservative, and not a Libertine, that understands there is just as much money and interest in continuing the war on the "law" side as there is on the "lawless" side that have a vested interest in continuing "the was".

Very little at the state and especially Federal level these days is as simple as "right and wrong".

And very few, if any, politicians operate on pure principle, unless we are talking about financial principle, these days.

Hate being such a "wet blanket" on a holiday.

But em are the facts as I see them.

Of course I have been becoming more and more cynical with age. Perhaps that is it and we really do have a "righteous society representing our Republic".

39 posted on 06/18/2006 10:06:18 AM PDT by ImpBill ("America ... Where are you now?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

I think everyone above the age of 18 (who wants to do drugs) should be supplied with any / all free drugs that they can shove down their gullet.

The "drug problem" would be over in about 6 months. It's the easiest cheapest solution.


40 posted on 06/18/2006 10:07:02 AM PDT by taxed2death (A few billion here, a few trillion there...we're all friends right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Almondjoy
Even though probition didn't work

During prohibition they never executed people for possession. If we want to win the WOD, the most severe penalties will have to be imposed.

41 posted on 06/18/2006 10:08:13 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: taxed2death
The "drug problem" would be over in about 6 months.

What about when all the 16 year olds and 17 year old hit 18?

42 posted on 06/18/2006 10:09:14 AM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder
"I have long said that the only way we will win the war on drugs is if we impose the death penalty for possession. Others have suggested it is unreasonable and harsh, and maybe it is, but you can't win a war without piling up some bodies."?

I DO hope your joshing?

Cuz if you are serious, you have a real problem.

While I don't condone the use of drugs (and I support stiff penalties for "DEALERS") the thought of even considering such draconian penalties for simple possession, as you are, makes YOU a prime candidate for some of dat Jim Jones Koolaid!

Or better yet, perhaps you should consider emigrating to Singapore--where peoples rights' begin and end at the border.

43 posted on 06/18/2006 10:12:55 AM PDT by seasoned traditionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: texasmountainman
Sorry about your problem, our "family doctor" prescribed Pamelor for my wife. After two years of brain scrambling from misuse of that drug and others, mixed with alcohol, she was institutionalized. When I had the "doctor" prosecuted, he plead guilty, was only fined and got a year of "counseling" while his "patient" spent two years in therapy/detox.

Agreed, we can't even control "legal" drug use, where do we get our priorities?

44 posted on 06/18/2006 10:14:01 AM PDT by gandalftb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Joe Bfstplk
Why didn't Singapore lose its war on drugs?

Everything you think you know about Singapore is wrong. Illegal drugs are cheap and plentiful in Singapore. Killing drug users has not worked in Singapore, Indonesia, China or North Korea. You want to try here?
.
45 posted on 06/18/2006 10:16:25 AM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder


Welcome them to "The big league".

Let them see the effing morons flopping around like a carp on a dock, pissing and crapping their pants as they OD.

How's THAT for compassionate conservatism? LOL

Tell them..."This is your brain on drugs.....want some"? Sign up right here.

I don't think there would be too many takers.


46 posted on 06/18/2006 10:17:12 AM PDT by taxed2death (A few billion here, a few trillion there...we're all friends right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: texasmountainman

In a fallen world, everyone is going to depressed at some point in time...




Bingo!


47 posted on 06/18/2006 10:17:50 AM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

If your life is to any degree socialized more than a turnip, you will eventually have family and friends with a drug or alcohol problem. Would you tell us what you'd like to tell the court, that is about to sentence them to death, when your loved ones (assuming you have any) are up for final judgement?


48 posted on 06/18/2006 10:20:33 AM PDT by gandalftb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: VeritatisSplendor

Why doesn't government realize we could feed a trillion, or don't they want to?


49 posted on 06/18/2006 10:23:05 AM PDT by Lady Jag (You can complain because roses have thorns, or you can rejoice because thorns have roses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: texasmountainman
Cymbalta. I believe that it has made her nuts

It has...but it's legal don'tcha know.
.
50 posted on 06/18/2006 10:23:43 AM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-319 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson