Poll: Should We Legalize Marijiuna?

[HuntrRose]

Legalize for several reasons. The tax'ing economic bit the least one.
The usual argument used against marijuana is that it is a "gateway" drug. More or less true. The marijuana itself does not lead to other drugs, but the contact with criminal elements that also sells other drugs is.

So by moving the marijuana from the "street vendors" to the stores, under the same limitations as alcohol, would give people an alternative to getting shitfaced, would slow down funds to criminal elements and cut down on recruitment to heavier druguse.

And for the record, yes I've used it in the past, and yes I have an education and a job.

More addictive than alcohol.
More harmful than alcohol.

Here is REAL work and reaserch from the USA Office of National Drug Control Policy.
Your sooooo wrong dude [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]
Stop using lies and made up crap, the research done by real scientists proves your a complete and utter liar.
For those who are skimming along this thread trying to make up an opinon.
[HEADING=2]Click Here Before Posting[/HEADING] [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]

According to research by the British Government (been a few years since I read it so no direct quotes):
Cannabis, also known as marijuana, ganja, shit, etc. is not physically addictive. It may however, if used excessivly over a long period cause a phsycological dependency in the user.

Cannabis does the same permanent damage to your body as regular smoking, but it also leaves behind TLC in your body. TLC blocks signals between braincells, but this is NOT a permanent thing as it vanishes from the body altogether in about 30-40 days.

Excessive user will build a large amount of TLC wich will cause noticable impairment of cognitive function, but going without for a month or two clears the system of it, leaving the person back at normal.

In comparison, alcohol causes irrepairable damage to the brain and liver if used excessivly over a long period of time. Alcohol is also physicaly addictive.

So, next time you point us to someones research, make sure they are not biased and/or check it against other sources.

Send me a link.
I do trust US research over UK research.

To be honest I don't care where the research is from, but you're pointing to a source that is obviously pushing an agenda, making it biased, and not to be trusted.

I'll try and dig up a link somewhere btw.

edit: Found a link to a less biased site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)#Effects

I trust wikipedia like a shark.

That might be, but they do have that fancy source list at the bottom, you know the one that says where they got their information.

And you trust the US Governemts Office of National Drug Control Policy for non-biased facts about a substance they want to keep banned, when the US governments list of truths to the public is just a little longer than the list of French military victories.

Seriously, accept the fact that your source is guaranteed biased, and find some others supporting your view.

Admittedly they would be biased, but they are more trust able than you, show me your work team and scientists.
Where are your scientists?
I trust the US government over you, blaming me for that is really hard.
So yeah, I trust the Government over you.
I'm not the naive one here.

As I'm not putting my own research forward, and never said I did, you asking me to show my research team is just plain silly, and proves that you are an unthinking drone, mindwashed by the US government.

Now, since you are unwilling or unable to do a quick google about the medical effects, let me do it for you to get a few other sources on the table:

http://www.healthcentral.com/stop-smoking/question-answer-27453-63.html
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html

That's 2 american for you, and one from Europe coming right here:

http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/drug-profiles/cannabis

All of them say basically just what I said.

Now, you think it's about time to read up abit and start thinking for yourself instead of trusting a government that has some serious trust issues to fix?

I'm not brainwashed. I'm not a drone either, DUH.
I shall review them, but let it be known these are not as qualified.

You do know that Harvard is one of the top medical universities in the US? If they are not more qualified to present proper medical facts than a political office with an obvious agenda and bias in your eyes, then you have proven your obedience to the puppetmasters.

 

[HuntrRose]

Legalize for several reasons. The tax'ing economic bit the least one.
The usual argument used against marijuana is that it is a "gateway" drug. More or less true. The marijuana itself does not lead to other drugs, but the contact with criminal elements that also sells other drugs is.

So by moving the marijuana from the "street vendors" to the stores, under the same limitations as alcohol, would give people an alternative to getting shitfaced, would slow down funds to criminal elements and cut down on recruitment to heavier druguse.

And for the record, yes I've used it in the past, and yes I have an education and a job.

More addictive than alcohol.
More harmful than alcohol.

Here is REAL work and reaserch from the USA Office of National Drug Control Policy.
Your sooooo wrong dude [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]
Stop using lies and made up crap, the research done by real scientists proves your a complete and utter liar.
For those who are skimming along this thread trying to make up an opinon.
[HEADING=2]Click Here Before Posting[/HEADING] [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]

According to research by the British Government (been a few years since I read it so no direct quotes):
Cannabis, also known as marijuana, ganja, shit, etc. is not physically addictive. It may however, if used excessivly over a long period cause a phsycological dependency in the user.

Cannabis does the same permanent damage to your body as regular smoking, but it also leaves behind TLC in your body. TLC blocks signals between braincells, but this is NOT a permanent thing as it vanishes from the body altogether in about 30-40 days.

Excessive user will build a large amount of TLC wich will cause noticable impairment of cognitive function, but going without for a month or two clears the system of it, leaving the person back at normal.

In comparison, alcohol causes irrepairable damage to the brain and liver if used excessivly over a long period of time. Alcohol is also physicaly addictive.

So, next time you point us to someones research, make sure they are not biased and/or check it against other sources.

Send me a link.
I do trust US research over UK research.

To be honest I don't care where the research is from, but you're pointing to a source that is obviously pushing an agenda, making it biased, and not to be trusted.

I'll try and dig up a link somewhere btw.

edit: Found a link to a less biased site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)#Effects

I trust wikipedia like a shark.

That might be, but they do have that fancy source list at the bottom, you know the one that says where they got their information.

And you trust the US Governemts Office of National Drug Control Policy for non-biased facts about a substance they want to keep banned, when the US governments list of truths to the public is just a little longer than the list of French military victories.

Seriously, accept the fact that your source is guaranteed biased, and find some others supporting your view.

Admittedly they would be biased, but they are more trust able than you, show me your work team and scientists.
Where are your scientists?
I trust the US government over you, blaming me for that is really hard.
So yeah, I trust the Government over you.
I'm not the naive one here.

As I'm not putting my own research forward, and never said I did, you asking me to show my research team is just plain silly, and proves that you are an unthinking drone, mindwashed by the US government.

Now, since you are unwilling or unable to do a quick google about the medical effects, let me do it for you to get a few other sources on the table:

http://www.healthcentral.com/stop-smoking/question-answer-27453-63.html
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html

That's 2 american for you, and one from Europe coming right here:

http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/drug-profiles/cannabis

All of them say basically just what I said.

Now, you think it's about time to read up abit and start thinking for yourself instead of trusting a government that has some serious trust issues to fix?

I'm not brainwashed. I'm not a drone either, DUH.
I shall review them, but let it be known these are not as qualified.

You do know that Harvard is one of the top medical universities in the US? If they are not more qualified to present proper medical facts than a political office with an obvious agenda and bias in your eyes, then you have proven your obedience to the puppetmasters.

So these scientists never went to harvard?
Hah.
Stop thinking everyone is a slave to "the man". You want to try living with real corruption? Visit Zimbabwe.

I'm not saying they're not educated, and probably well. I'm saying they are pushing an agenda, and not just the objective facts. And that is why I do not trust it, but go to other places that do not push an agenda for my information.

P.S. Not sure how you'd bribe anyone in Zimbabwe with the current infaltion. A convoy of trucks loaded with bills? (Yes I know you could use foreign currency, but that don't make for funny mental pictures =P )

 

[zauxz]

Hmm. I guess this discussion made me some sort of a fanatic. Sorry if I insulted anyone, I didint mean it.

 

[HuntrRose]

Legalize for several reasons. The tax'ing economic bit the least one.
The usual argument used against marijuana is that it is a "gateway" drug. More or less true. The marijuana itself does not lead to other drugs, but the contact with criminal elements that also sells other drugs is.

So by moving the marijuana from the "street vendors" to the stores, under the same limitations as alcohol, would give people an alternative to getting shitfaced, would slow down funds to criminal elements and cut down on recruitment to heavier druguse.

And for the record, yes I've used it in the past, and yes I have an education and a job.

More addictive than alcohol.
More harmful than alcohol.

Here is REAL work and reaserch from the USA Office of National Drug Control Policy.
Your sooooo wrong dude [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]
Stop using lies and made up crap, the research done by real scientists proves your a complete and utter liar.
For those who are skimming along this thread trying to make up an opinon.
[HEADING=2]Click Here Before Posting[/HEADING] [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]

According to research by the British Government (been a few years since I read it so no direct quotes):
Cannabis, also known as marijuana, ganja, shit, etc. is not physically addictive. It may however, if used excessivly over a long period cause a phsycological dependency in the user.

Cannabis does the same permanent damage to your body as regular smoking, but it also leaves behind TLC in your body. TLC blocks signals between braincells, but this is NOT a permanent thing as it vanishes from the body altogether in about 30-40 days.

Excessive user will build a large amount of TLC wich will cause noticable impairment of cognitive function, but going without for a month or two clears the system of it, leaving the person back at normal.

In comparison, alcohol causes irrepairable damage to the brain and liver if used excessivly over a long period of time. Alcohol is also physicaly addictive.

So, next time you point us to someones research, make sure they are not biased and/or check it against other sources.

Send me a link.
I do trust US research over UK research.

To be honest I don't care where the research is from, but you're pointing to a source that is obviously pushing an agenda, making it biased, and not to be trusted.

I'll try and dig up a link somewhere btw.

edit: Found a link to a less biased site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)#Effects

I trust wikipedia like a shark.

That might be, but they do have that fancy source list at the bottom, you know the one that says where they got their information.

And you trust the US Governemts Office of National Drug Control Policy for non-biased facts about a substance they want to keep banned, when the US governments list of truths to the public is just a little longer than the list of French military victories.

Seriously, accept the fact that your source is guaranteed biased, and find some others supporting your view.

Admittedly they would be biased, but they are more trust able than you, show me your work team and scientists.
Where are your scientists?
I trust the US government over you, blaming me for that is really hard.
So yeah, I trust the Government over you.
I'm not the naive one here.

As I'm not putting my own research forward, and never said I did, you asking me to show my research team is just plain silly, and proves that you are an unthinking drone, mindwashed by the US government.

Now, since you are unwilling or unable to do a quick google about the medical effects, let me do it for you to get a few other sources on the table:

http://www.healthcentral.com/stop-smoking/question-answer-27453-63.html
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html

That's 2 american for you, and one from Europe coming right here:

http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/drug-profiles/cannabis

All of them say basically just what I said.

Now, you think it's about time to read up abit and start thinking for yourself instead of trusting a government that has some serious trust issues to fix?

I'm not brainwashed. I'm not a drone either, DUH.
I shall review them, but let it be known these are not as qualified.

You do know that Harvard is one of the top medical universities in the US? If they are not more qualified to present proper medical facts than a political office with an obvious agenda and bias in your eyes, then you have proven your obedience to the puppetmasters.

So these scientists never went to harvard?
Hah.
Stop thinking everyone is a slave to "the man". You want to try living with real corruption? Visit Zimbabwe.

I'm not saying they're not educated, and probably well. I'm saying they are pushing an agenda, and not just the objective facts. And that is why I do not trust it, but go to other places that do not push an agenda for my information.

P.S. Not sure how you'd bribe anyone in Zimbabwe with the current infaltion. A convoy of trucks loaded with bills? (Yes I know you could use foreign currency, but that don't make for funny mental pictures =P )

Okay, okay, I'm reading it...also, if ya wanna' bribe someone without using money, gold, silver or diamonds does the job.

Point on the diamonds and precious metals, but they stil don't make any funny pictures. Unless your bribe consists of knocking them over the head with said metal, and pushing diamonds down their throat...

 

[HuntrRose]

Legalize for several reasons. The tax'ing economic bit the least one.
The usual argument used against marijuana is that it is a "gateway" drug. More or less true. The marijuana itself does not lead to other drugs, but the contact with criminal elements that also sells other drugs is.

So by moving the marijuana from the "street vendors" to the stores, under the same limitations as alcohol, would give people an alternative to getting shitfaced, would slow down funds to criminal elements and cut down on recruitment to heavier druguse.

And for the record, yes I've used it in the past, and yes I have an education and a job.

More addictive than alcohol.
More harmful than alcohol.

Here is REAL work and reaserch from the USA Office of National Drug Control Policy.
Your sooooo wrong dude [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]
Stop using lies and made up crap, the research done by real scientists proves your a complete and utter liar.
For those who are skimming along this thread trying to make up an opinon.
[HEADING=2]Click Here Before Posting[/HEADING] [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]

According to research by the British Government (been a few years since I read it so no direct quotes):
Cannabis, also known as marijuana, ganja, shit, etc. is not physically addictive. It may however, if used excessivly over a long period cause a phsycological dependency in the user.

Cannabis does the same permanent damage to your body as regular smoking, but it also leaves behind TLC in your body. TLC blocks signals between braincells, but this is NOT a permanent thing as it vanishes from the body altogether in about 30-40 days.

Excessive user will build a large amount of TLC wich will cause noticable impairment of cognitive function, but going without for a month or two clears the system of it, leaving the person back at normal.

In comparison, alcohol causes irrepairable damage to the brain and liver if used excessivly over a long period of time. Alcohol is also physicaly addictive.

So, next time you point us to someones research, make sure they are not biased and/or check it against other sources.

Send me a link.
I do trust US research over UK research.

To be honest I don't care where the research is from, but you're pointing to a source that is obviously pushing an agenda, making it biased, and not to be trusted.

I'll try and dig up a link somewhere btw.

edit: Found a link to a less biased site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)#Effects

I trust wikipedia like a shark.

That might be, but they do have that fancy source list at the bottom, you know the one that says where they got their information.

And you trust the US Governemts Office of National Drug Control Policy for non-biased facts about a substance they want to keep banned, when the US governments list of truths to the public is just a little longer than the list of French military victories.

Seriously, accept the fact that your source is guaranteed biased, and find some others supporting your view.

Admittedly they would be biased, but they are more trust able than you, show me your work team and scientists.
Where are your scientists?
I trust the US government over you, blaming me for that is really hard.
So yeah, I trust the Government over you.
I'm not the naive one here.

As I'm not putting my own research forward, and never said I did, you asking me to show my research team is just plain silly, and proves that you are an unthinking drone, mindwashed by the US government.

Now, since you are unwilling or unable to do a quick google about the medical effects, let me do it for you to get a few other sources on the table:

http://www.healthcentral.com/stop-smoking/question-answer-27453-63.html
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html

That's 2 american for you, and one from Europe coming right here:

http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/drug-profiles/cannabis

All of them say basically just what I said.

Now, you think it's about time to read up abit and start thinking for yourself instead of trusting a government that has some serious trust issues to fix?

I'm not brainwashed. I'm not a drone either, DUH.
I shall review them, but let it be known these are not as qualified.

You do know that Harvard is one of the top medical universities in the US? If they are not more qualified to present proper medical facts than a political office with an obvious agenda and bias in your eyes, then you have proven your obedience to the puppetmasters.

So these scientists never went to harvard?
Hah.
Stop thinking everyone is a slave to "the man". You want to try living with real corruption? Visit Zimbabwe.

I'm not saying they're not educated, and probably well. I'm saying they are pushing an agenda, and not just the objective facts. And that is why I do not trust it, but go to other places that do not push an agenda for my information.

P.S. Not sure how you'd bribe anyone in Zimbabwe with the current infaltion. A convoy of trucks loaded with bills? (Yes I know you could use foreign currency, but that don't make for funny mental pictures =P )

Okay, okay, I'm reading it...also, if ya wanna' bribe someone without using money, gold, silver or diamonds does the job.

Point on the diamonds and precious metals, but they stil don't make any funny pictures. Unless your bribe consists of knocking them over the head with said metal, and pushing diamonds down their throat...

Hmmm, When I colonies the word you shall be my shady behind-the-scenes man..

Sounds like fun! When do we start?

 

[HuntrRose]

Legalize for several reasons. The tax'ing economic bit the least one.
The usual argument used against marijuana is that it is a "gateway" drug. More or less true. The marijuana itself does not lead to other drugs, but the contact with criminal elements that also sells other drugs is.

So by moving the marijuana from the "street vendors" to the stores, under the same limitations as alcohol, would give people an alternative to getting shitfaced, would slow down funds to criminal elements and cut down on recruitment to heavier druguse.

And for the record, yes I've used it in the past, and yes I have an education and a job.

More addictive than alcohol.
More harmful than alcohol.

Here is REAL work and reaserch from the USA Office of National Drug Control Policy.
Your sooooo wrong dude [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]
Stop using lies and made up crap, the research done by real scientists proves your a complete and utter liar.
For those who are skimming along this thread trying to make up an opinon.
[HEADING=2]Click Here Before Posting[/HEADING] [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]

According to research by the British Government (been a few years since I read it so no direct quotes):
Cannabis, also known as marijuana, ganja, shit, etc. is not physically addictive. It may however, if used excessivly over a long period cause a phsycological dependency in the user.

Cannabis does the same permanent damage to your body as regular smoking, but it also leaves behind TLC in your body. TLC blocks signals between braincells, but this is NOT a permanent thing as it vanishes from the body altogether in about 30-40 days.

Excessive user will build a large amount of TLC wich will cause noticable impairment of cognitive function, but going without for a month or two clears the system of it, leaving the person back at normal.

In comparison, alcohol causes irrepairable damage to the brain and liver if used excessivly over a long period of time. Alcohol is also physicaly addictive.

So, next time you point us to someones research, make sure they are not biased and/or check it against other sources.

Send me a link.
I do trust US research over UK research.

To be honest I don't care where the research is from, but you're pointing to a source that is obviously pushing an agenda, making it biased, and not to be trusted.

I'll try and dig up a link somewhere btw.

edit: Found a link to a less biased site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)#Effects

I trust wikipedia like a shark.

That might be, but they do have that fancy source list at the bottom, you know the one that says where they got their information.

And you trust the US Governemts Office of National Drug Control Policy for non-biased facts about a substance they want to keep banned, when the US governments list of truths to the public is just a little longer than the list of French military victories.

Seriously, accept the fact that your source is guaranteed biased, and find some others supporting your view.

Admittedly they would be biased, but they are more trust able than you, show me your work team and scientists.
Where are your scientists?
I trust the US government over you, blaming me for that is really hard.
So yeah, I trust the Government over you.
I'm not the naive one here.

As I'm not putting my own research forward, and never said I did, you asking me to show my research team is just plain silly, and proves that you are an unthinking drone, mindwashed by the US government.

Now, since you are unwilling or unable to do a quick google about the medical effects, let me do it for you to get a few other sources on the table:

http://www.healthcentral.com/stop-smoking/question-answer-27453-63.html
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html

That's 2 american for you, and one from Europe coming right here:

http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/drug-profiles/cannabis

All of them say basically just what I said.

Now, you think it's about time to read up abit and start thinking for yourself instead of trusting a government that has some serious trust issues to fix?

I'm not brainwashed. I'm not a drone either, DUH.
I shall review them, but let it be known these are not as qualified.

You do know that Harvard is one of the top medical universities in the US? If they are not more qualified to present proper medical facts than a political office with an obvious agenda and bias in your eyes, then you have proven your obedience to the puppetmasters.

So these scientists never went to harvard?
Hah.
Stop thinking everyone is a slave to "the man". You want to try living with real corruption? Visit Zimbabwe.

I'm not saying they're not educated, and probably well. I'm saying they are pushing an agenda, and not just the objective facts. And that is why I do not trust it, but go to other places that do not push an agenda for my information.

P.S. Not sure how you'd bribe anyone in Zimbabwe with the current infaltion. A convoy of trucks loaded with bills? (Yes I know you could use foreign currency, but that don't make for funny mental pictures =P )

Okay, okay, I'm reading it...also, if ya wanna' bribe someone without using money, gold, silver or diamonds does the job.

Point on the diamonds and precious metals, but they stil don't make any funny pictures. Unless your bribe consists of knocking them over the head with said metal, and pushing diamonds down their throat...

Hmmm, When I colonies the word you shall be my shady behind-the-scenes man..

Sounds like fun! When do we start?

It has already begun. Whilst America was celebrating Obama's victory I secretly kidnapped him and replaced him with roboma!
HehehehehehAHAHAHAHAHAHMUHAHAHAMUAHGAHAAHAHAMUAHBUAHMHAUAHUM

ooohh.. So that's why he's acting like republican light and not the new thing he said he was

 

[HuntrRose]

Legalize for several reasons. The tax'ing economic bit the least one.
The usual argument used against marijuana is that it is a "gateway" drug. More or less true. The marijuana itself does not lead to other drugs, but the contact with criminal elements that also sells other drugs is.

So by moving the marijuana from the "street vendors" to the stores, under the same limitations as alcohol, would give people an alternative to getting shitfaced, would slow down funds to criminal elements and cut down on recruitment to heavier druguse.

And for the record, yes I've used it in the past, and yes I have an education and a job.

More addictive than alcohol.
More harmful than alcohol.

Here is REAL work and reaserch from the USA Office of National Drug Control Policy.
Your sooooo wrong dude [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]
Stop using lies and made up crap, the research done by real scientists proves your a complete and utter liar.
For those who are skimming along this thread trying to make up an opinon.
[HEADING=2]Click Here Before Posting[/HEADING] [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/marijuana_myths_facts/]

According to research by the British Government (been a few years since I read it so no direct quotes):
Cannabis, also known as marijuana, ganja, shit, etc. is not physically addictive. It may however, if used excessivly over a long period cause a phsycological dependency in the user.

Cannabis does the same permanent damage to your body as regular smoking, but it also leaves behind TLC in your body. TLC blocks signals between braincells, but this is NOT a permanent thing as it vanishes from the body altogether in about 30-40 days.

Excessive user will build a large amount of TLC wich will cause noticable impairment of cognitive function, but going without for a month or two clears the system of it, leaving the person back at normal.

In comparison, alcohol causes irrepairable damage to the brain and liver if used excessivly over a long period of time. Alcohol is also physicaly addictive.

So, next time you point us to someones research, make sure they are not biased and/or check it against other sources.

Send me a link.
I do trust US research over UK research.

To be honest I don't care where the research is from, but you're pointing to a source that is obviously pushing an agenda, making it biased, and not to be trusted.

I'll try and dig up a link somewhere btw.

edit: Found a link to a less biased site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)#Effects

I trust wikipedia like a shark.

That might be, but they do have that fancy source list at the bottom, you know the one that says where they got their information.

And you trust the US Governemts Office of National Drug Control Policy for non-biased facts about a substance they want to keep banned, when the US governments list of truths to the public is just a little longer than the list of French military victories.

Seriously, accept the fact that your source is guaranteed biased, and find some others supporting your view.

Admittedly they would be biased, but they are more trust able than you, show me your work team and scientists.
Where are your scientists?
I trust the US government over you, blaming me for that is really hard.
So yeah, I trust the Government over you.
I'm not the naive one here.

As I'm not putting my own research forward, and never said I did, you asking me to show my research team is just plain silly, and proves that you are an unthinking drone, mindwashed by the US government.

Now, since you are unwilling or unable to do a quick google about the medical effects, let me do it for you to get a few other sources on the table:

http://www.healthcentral.com/stop-smoking/question-answer-27453-63.html
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html

That's 2 american for you, and one from Europe coming right here:

http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/drug-profiles/cannabis

All of them say basically just what I said.

Now, you think it's about time to read up abit and start thinking for yourself instead of trusting a government that has some serious trust issues to fix?

I'm not brainwashed. I'm not a drone either, DUH.
I shall review them, but let it be known these are not as qualified.

You do know that Harvard is one of the top medical universities in the US? If they are not more qualified to present proper medical facts than a political office with an obvious agenda and bias in your eyes, then you have proven your obedience to the puppetmasters.

So these scientists never went to harvard?
Hah.
Stop thinking everyone is a slave to "the man". You want to try living with real corruption? Visit Zimbabwe.

I'm not saying they're not educated, and probably well. I'm saying they are pushing an agenda, and not just the objective facts. And that is why I do not trust it, but go to other places that do not push an agenda for my information.

P.S. Not sure how you'd bribe anyone in Zimbabwe with the current infaltion. A convoy of trucks loaded with bills? (Yes I know you could use foreign currency, but that don't make for funny mental pictures =P )

Okay, okay, I'm reading it...also, if ya wanna' bribe someone without using money, gold, silver or diamonds does the job.

Point on the diamonds and precious metals, but they stil don't make any funny pictures. Unless your bribe consists of knocking them over the head with said metal, and pushing diamonds down their throat...

Hmmm, When I colonies the word you shall be my shady behind-the-scenes man..

Sounds like fun! When do we start?

It has already begun. Whilst America was celebrating Obama's victory I secretly kidnapped him and replaced him with roboma!
HehehehehehAHAHAHAHAHAHMUHAHAHAMUAHGAHAAHAHAMUAHBUAHMHAUAHUM

ooohh.. So that's why he's acting like republican light and not the new thing he said he was

Do you believe there is any other reason other than robot kidnapping and impersonations.
It's not like politics sometimes don't deliver what they promise.
That's crazy.

umm... you mean like ALL politicians say one thing and to something else entirely? Thought that was the norm...