A Congressional Cannabis Caucus Is Born | NORML Blog

With public support for reforming marijuana laws at an all time high, Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Jared Polis (D-CO), and Don Young (R-AK) have formed the first-ever Congressional Cannabis Caucus to promote sensible cannabis policy reform and to ease the tension between federal and state cannabis laws.

The official establishment of a Congressional Cannabis Caucus represents yet another step forward toward ultimately reforming cannabis policy at the federal level. The creation of this caucus is yet another manifestation that our political power is growing — even inside the beltway.

Click here to email your Congressional Representative and urge them to join the Cannabis Caucus today.

[…]

Entire post at the Source: A Congressional Cannabis Caucus Is Born

Marijuana industry, angered by White House reversal, speaks out “It just defies logic”

The cannabis industry was rattled Thursday after White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said he expects the Department of Justice to increase enforcement of federal laws prohibiting recreational pot, even in states where it’s already legal.

Along with the District of Columbia, eight states have legalized recreational use among adults, including California, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada just this past November. That means one in five American adults can smoke, vape, drink, or eat cannabis as they please under state law.

Meanwhile, over half of the nation’s states have legalized medical marijuana despite federal laws prohibiting its sale. The industry is estimated to be worth north of $6 billion and will hit $50 billion by 2026, according to Cowen & Co.

“Today’s news coming out of the administration regarding the adult use of cannabis is, of course, disappointing,” Derek Peterson, CEO of marijuana cultivator Terra Tech Corp., said Thursday in a statement. “We have hoped and still hope that the federal government will respect states’ rights in the same manner they have on several other issues.”

Spicer sought to distinguish the prospect of federal enforcement for medical, versus recreational, cannabis use, saying “there’s still a federal law that we need to abide by when it comes to recreational marijuana and other drugs of that nature.”

Spicer’s statements reanimated industry concern that first arose when Republican President Donald Trump’s short-list of potential attorney general nominees emerged. The final pick, former senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, a Republican, has long opposed cannabis use, but is a major proponent of state’s rights.

In his mid-January confirmation hearing, Sessions said he wouldn’t “commit to never enforcing federal law” but added that “absolutely it’s a problem of resources for the federal government.” He said that if Congress felt marijuana possession should no longer be illegal, it “should pass a law.” Trump has similarly gone back and forth on the issue of legalization.

Read the rest of the article at the Source:  Marijuana industry, angered by White House reversal, speaks out “It just defies logic”

New Hampshire the 12th State to Allow Constitutional Carry

Residents of New Hampshire are enjoying a long-awaited expansion of their Second Amendment rights with the signing into law on Wednesday of a bill allowing them to carry a firearm without first obtaining government permission. The third time “is a charm,” it is said, and this bill passed on the third attempt. The previous two attempts passed both state houses but were vetoed by previous Democrat governors. […]

via New Hampshire the 12th State to Allow Constitutional Carry — Reclaim Our Republic

Vermont Marijuana Legalization Bill to Receive Public Hearing on Thursday

A bill that would legalize marijuana for those 21 and older will receive a public hearing in Vermont’s House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, February 23rd.

Vermont Marijuana LegalizationThe committee will hold their public hearing on House Bill 170 at 1pm on Thursday. The measure would legalize the possession of up to two ounces of cannabis and the personal cultivation of up to two cannabis plants, as well as a regulated system of cannabis retail outlets.

Below is a list of speakers that have been invited by lawmakers to either support or oppose the measure:

  • Michele Childs, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Council
  • Matt Simon, Legislative Analyst, Marijuana Policy Project
  • Major Glenn Hall, Commander, Bureau of Criminal Investigations, Vermont State Police
  • Robert Sand, Vermont Law School
  • Greg Nagurney, Attorney, Department of State’s Attorneys & Sheriffs
  • Laura Subin, Director, Vermont Coalition to Regulate Marijuana
  • Tim Trevithick, Student Assistance Program, SAM-VT 
  • George Merkel, Chief of Police, Vermont Police Association
  • Cary Giguere, Agrichemical Program Manager, Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets
  • Robin Weber, Senior Research Associate, Crime Research Group
  • Jay Diaz, Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties Union – Vermont
  • David Cahill, State’s Attorney, Windsor County
  • Dr. Jill Rinehart, MD, FAAP, President, American Academy of Pediatrics, Vermont Chapter
  • Barbara Cimaglio, Deputy Commissioner, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Program,Vermont Department of Health
  • Shayla Livingston, Public Health Analyst, Department of Health
  • Marshall Pahl, Appellate and Juvenile Defender, Defender General’s Office
  • Monique McHenry, Executive Director, VT Patients Alliance

Legislation receiving a public hearing is a necessary step to it being passed out of committee; the vast majority of bills never receive a hearing.

Vermont is one of the five states we believe could legalize cannabis by next year.

Prospectors Fight for Rights in Black Hills

Forest Service cites fairy slipper orchid as reason to ban new mining claims

 

Prospectors fight for rights in Black Hills

By SARAH REIJONEN
For the GPAA

The U.S. Forest Service proposed nearly 18,000 acres of land in the Black Hills National Forest to be “withdrawn from mineral entry,” which means no new mining claims would be allowed.

 The proposal was recorded in the Federal Register on Sept. 24, 2015, but Sam Griner, a member of the Northern Hills Prospectors — a local chapter of the Gold Prospectors Association of America — said he wouldn’t have even known about the proposed withdrawal had he not scanned the Forest Service’s Schedule of Planned Action (SOPA) website.

 “They were surprised that anybody had caught it,” Griner said. “They expected it to just go through. The Travel Management Plan … just went through and nobody knew to comment on it. It went unchecked and nobody made any comments.”

 The Travel Management Plan that the Forest Service issued back in 2010 shut down roads, affecting area prospectors but primarily impacting hunters, Griner said.

After learning about the proposal to designate nearly 18,000 acres as new Research Natural Areas (RNA) and Botanical Areas (BA), Griner took action action, attending public meetings and sending letters of opposition to nearly every agency and public official he could think of. The public comment period for the proposed mineral withdrawal closed Dec. 23, 2015.

 Griner attended a National Forest Advisory Board Meeting on March 16 at the Mystic Ranger District to oppose the withdrawal. During the meeting, Deputy Forest Supervisor Jerry Krueger said that if approved, the mineral withdrawal would last for two decades. After 20 years, the Forest Service would have to reapply with the Bureau of Land Management for another withdrawal, according to the meeting minutes. Because BLM manages the minerals within the Black Hills National Forest, it — along with the Secretary of the Interior — must give approval for the withdrawal.

 In response to Griner’s land closure concerns, Former Black Hills National Forest Supervisor Craig Bobzien said, “What we are also doing is preserving. During the Forest Planning process in 2005, we found that a number of these areas should be preserved,” according to the meeting minutes. But, Krueger said the plan to withdraw the various sites from mineral entry goes back as far as the late ’90s.

 Northern Hills Prospectors President James Van Hout said the Forest Service’s response to the prospector’s concerns has been disingenuous, at best.

 “They just give us lip service, ‘Oh yeah, we’ll take your comments and concerns and we’ll discuss them,’ ” Van Hout said. “We know exactly where they went. They went into file 13 because they weren’t what they wanted to hear, and we know that. We’re not stupid.”

Van Hout said the Forest Service geologist treated prospectors with the same attitude during a meeting with the agency last October about the areas where mining would be banned.

 “Their geologist had the gall and thought we were just stupid. He made the statement that the U.S. Geological Survey says there’s no minable minerals,” Van Hout said. “I plainly asked him, ‘Have you tested it personally?’ He said, ‘No.’ I said, ‘Then how do you know there’s not?’ Boots on the ground is the only way you’re going to find out. Then, I asked him how old the report was. The ’50s? And, he didn’t deny it.”

Furthermore, the report related to commercial mining, not prospecting and small-scale mining, Van Hout said.

 “Basically, the report was saying there’s no commercially viable minerals there, meaning no large mining company is going to want to go in and mine it because it us such rough territory and terrain that it would be cost prohibitive for them to go in and mine,” Van Hout said. “But for the small miner, there’s lots of gold in there. Seventeen of 22 of the largest nuggets that came out the Black Hills came out of the major area they want to close.”

 At the same October meeting in Rapid City, Krueger said: “We need to take special measures to protect them [Black Hills] in terms of what can occur there, and so one of the concerns is commercial mineral withdrawal entry,” according to a news report by KEVN Black Hills FOX.

 Krueger later said that it was not the Forest Service’s intention to keep out the small-scale miner, but that because of the way the mining laws are written, there is no distinction between small-scale miners and commercial miners.

 “Initially, we thought that by doing the mineral withdrawal that it would not affect the recreational prospecting groups,” Krueger said. “When we pursued that —again through the public meetings — we were asked to take a look at that through legal channels. The mineral withdrawal covered any mineral withdrawal within these designated areas, and that included recreational prospecting.”

 Although prospectors may not feel like their voices are being heard, Krueger said they managed to get the withdrawal area down from nearly 18,000 acres to 11,000 acres by negotiating terms of the contract with BLM.

 “During the public meetings, which included members of your group, we received feedback that they would like us to pursue in terms of the legal description,” Krueger said. “We’re trying to capture a non-linear polygon with a square block legal description.”

Initially, BLM instructed the Forest Service to submit the proposed withdrawal using a minimum size of 40-acre blocks, so everywhere a 40-acre block touched the perimeter of the withdrawal, the Forest Service had to include that 40 acres. But, the Forest Service was able to negotiate the legal description down to 2.5-acre blocks, Krueger said.

 “It really helped us all out. We could much more accurately capture the research footprint of the Research Natural Area or Botanical Area using a much smaller legal description,” Krueger said.

 According to the Forest Service website, the RNA areas “were selected because of their relatively pristine nature and form part of a national network of ecological areas designated in perpetuity for non-manipulative research, education and biodiversity conservation. Botanical Areas were selected because of unique biological features and rare natural communities.”

 One of these “unique biological features” includes the calypso bulbosa, also known as the “fairy slipper orchid,” which has a G5 national rating and a S3 state rating, according to the South Dakota Game Fish and Parks website. The scale runs from 1 to 5 with 5 being the most plentiful and 1 being the scarcest. The flower has held a G5 ranking for more than a decade, according to the Forest Service website, which noted that the species is “secure, widespread and abundant” in the United States.

 Still, these Cinderella sounding flora are being used as a premise to ban new mining claims.

 “Among those are the lesser yellow lady slipper, which is one of my personal favorites,” Black Hills National Forest Botanist Chelsea Monks said in an interview with South Dakota Public Broadcast. “But, the neat thing about these areas is not just the species that are there, but the assemblage of species that are there, meaning there are species that are co-occurring that don’t normally occur together. So, that’s one of the values that we designated these areas to preserve.”

 Monks is responsible for taking public comments on the proposed withdrawal and oversees the Botanical Areas within the Black Hills National Forest. The orchids may not be endangered, but they are a favorite meal for deer, Van Hout said.

 “Deer love to eat [the fairy slipper] because of the vanilla aroma to it,” Van Hout said. “You can go down one draw, and there will be huge numbers of this flower. You can go over the next ridge into the next draw and you won’t find any or just a few, so they go into those and go, ‘Oh dear, this is a scarce flower.’ It’s ridiculous.”

 Krueger said there is no actual risk of endangerment for the plant life in these areas. Instead, the main purpose for withdrawal is scientific study and preservation.

 “So I guess, in the current management scheme there is no threat. All we’re looking to do with this is to remove the potential for development, which would disturb the sites,” Krueger said.

 The Forest Service currently has five Research Natural Areas and eight Botanical Areas in and around the Black Hills National Forest. Four of the five RNAs were designated in September 2011, including: Hay Creek in Crook County, Wyoming; Fanny/Boles in Custer County, South Dakota; and Canyon City and North Fork Castle Creek in Pennington County, South Dakota.

 Withdrawal means that no new mining claims can be staked, but creating RNAs and BAs have the added limitation of only allowing non-motorized transportation, meaning these areas can only be reached via horseback or on foot, according to the Black Hills National Forest’s online brochure titled “What are Research Natural Areas and Botanical Areas?” This problem with access also came up in 2010 when the Forest Service issued its new Travel Management Plan.

 “What really ticked me off is that they won’t allow disabled people to get to the claim. Everybody else can get to the claim, but it’s the disabled people who are a part of that club who can’t get to the claim, and the Forest Service isn’t doing anything about it,” Griner said. “That’s what really put me over the top and what really drove me.”

 However, Krueger said the proposed withdrawal to designate RNA and BA areas would not modify the existing Travel Management Plan.

 “I don’t have a map that overlays the current Travel Management Plan over the Botanical Areas or the Research Natural Areas, but I can tell you — knowing how many trails we have in the forest and how many roads we have — that I’m quite sure that there are existing trails or roads in those areas.”

 Griner has enlisted the help of the American Mining Rights Association to deal with this potential withdrawal. In fact, Griner was one of the first miners to call on AMRA for support three years ago when the Forest Service first started shutting down roads and access to mining claims in his area, said AMRA President Shannon Poe.

 “The Forest Service is trying to claim all these different flowers, and it’s all pushed by the environmental movement,” Poe said. “They just want to close all this land where these people have mining claims. They’ve been gating and locking and blocking. It’s the same story over and over again. It is frustrating, because he’s reached out to senators, representatives, and he’s not getting a lot of help or traction. Something we’re going to bring a lot more attention to moving forward is putting pressure on lawmakers to step up and help the people they’re supposed to represent.”

 Aside from getting AMRA involved, Van Hout said it is important to recruit fellow outdoor users.

 “We need to start getting the horseback riding groups and biking groups and hunters and fisherman involved,” Van Hout said. “Mining is the main target, but they’re a target, too. They started with the Travel Management Plan. The hunters used to be able to drive to their certain areas and then walk around and hunt, but now have to walk in two or three miles to get to their favorite hunting grounds. I don’t know if you’ve tried to drag a deer or elk three miles … They’ve hit the hunters a little bit, but they’ll hit everybody pretty soon.”

 According to the Forest Service’s Schedule of Planned Actions, a decision is to be made concerning the ban on new mining claims September next year.

 “September 2017 is two years from the date the Notice of Application for Withdrawal was published in the Federal Register and is the date by which the BLM should make a decision of whether or not to withdraw the areas,” Monks stated in an email correspondence with Griner on Aug. 25. “Right now the Forest Service interdisciplinary team is working on analysis for this project and does not yet have findings. Once we have completed our analysis, the Regional Forester will send a recommendation to the BLM and they will make the final decision.”

 The butting of heads with federal agencies has been rampant across the West in the past few years, but Van Hout said it has never been a problem in the Black Hills until now, and he definitely sees a shift in dynamics, he said.

 “We never had to deal with this … The Black Hills have always been pretty much conservative. You did what you want to do as long as you weren’t stepping on anybody’s toes or causing problems. They left everybody alone,” Van Hout said. “The new Forest Service — they’re starting to close us down now. They haven’t closed us yet, but they’re trying.”

 Griner said he feels stabbed in the back by an agency that is supposed to be representative of the people and working for the people.

 “With some people, you give them a bow and arrow for a present and they give you a T-shirt with a bulls-eye on it,” Griner said.

 Sarah Reijonen is a freelance writer based in California. She can be reached  at sarahreijonen@yahoo.com.

 BLACK HILLS NATIONAL FOREST

Rules & Restrictions

Activities allowed in Recreational National Areas (RNA):

• Dispersed Recreation: Non-motorized / Non-mechanized dispersed use including hunting and fishing is allowed without developments such as trails or signs

• Research: Research methods are non-destructive and non-manipulative.

• Education: Opportunities are available to learn about natural processes using methods that are non-destructive and non-manipulative.

• Transportation: Foot and horse travel only

• Vegetation Management: Vegetation management including livestock grazing is used only as needed to conserve the biological characteristics for which the RNA was established using methods with the least impact on desired RNA ecological processes. All lease applications will have “no surface occupancy” stipulation.

• No mineral material permits will be issued.

Activities allowed in Botanical Areas (BA):

• Non-motorized dispersed recreation

• On-road motorized vehicles use is authorized in some areas; however other areas are
designated Roadless Areas

• Minimal timber harvest only when necessary to maintain, restore or enhance ecological values

• Livestock grazing if it does not conflict with the ecological values

• No new mineral material permits

— Source: Black Hills National Forest website

Article as featured in the Pick & Shovel Gazette October-November 2016 edition 

Why the Trump Administration Will NOT Attack Legal Marijuana States

Despite well-founded fear in the cannabis culture about the nation’s new president, Donald Trump is unlikely to go after state-level cannabis laws.

Instead, we believe that the Trump Administration will take a hands-off, allow-the-states-to-decide approach that will allow things to continue, for the most part, as they have the past several years.

Here’s a few reasons why:

First off, politics

For whatever you may think of Donald Trump, he knows how to play politics. No one can win the presidency if they don’t.

With that in mind, he knows, without a doubt, that going after marijuana at this stage in the game would be a huge mistake. Cannabis legalization has quickly become a bipartisan issue, and it trends that way more and more each day. There’s no doubt, and no way to argue against the fact, that if Trump doesn’t respect state marijuana laws, he will lose support among many Republicans and Independents, as well as the few Democrats who may support him. If they didn’t stop supporting him entirely (this is a big issue for a lot of people), they would at least be upset (or even enraged) at him because of it, and would be less enthused about supporting him in 2019.

Trump simply doesn’t have enough to gain from going after state marijuana laws, and he knows it.

 

The FDA

Trump’s Administration has confirmed that two of the candidates they are considering to head the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are supportive of ending marijuana prohibition. One of them, Jim O’Neil, previously served as a board of directors member for a nonprofit organization that helped legalize cannabis in California.

If Trump does pick O’Neil, the implications are huge. For decades lawmakers have used the fact that the FDA doesn’t recognize cannabis’ medical value as a reason to retain its complete illegality, even for medical use. Having an FDA chief that is open to marijuana and its medical benefits could quickly revoke this argument. Most importantly, it would give Trump an excuse for not going after marijuana states to those conservative supporters of his who want him to do so (“well the FDA recognizes it as a medicine – what can I do?”).

Trump, of course, may pick someone else to lead the FDA, but the fact that he’s even considering someone like O’Neil can be seen as a positive sign – at least for us optimists.

 

Donald Trump Doesn’t Really Oppose Marijuana

Trump’s public history regarding marijuana simply hasn’t been one of opposition. In the 90s he said he believed that all drugs should be legalized (something he has since walked back – but it’s a position even Bernie Sanders walked back on during his campaign). In the past couple he’s said that he’s in “100% support” of medical cannabis, and believes that states have the right to decide their own marijuana law.

On the campaign he made some disparaging remarks about cannabis – not surprising as a Republican candidate – but stopped far short of saying he would enforce federal cannabis laws or attack those following state law.

He did, of course, pick prohibitionist Jeff Sessions as attorney general, but Trump has final say on what policies are enforced, and having a pro-marijuana FDA chief would also help combat this.

 

Trump is a Businessman

There’s no way that Trump, a lifelong man of business, doesn’t understand the value the legal cannabis industry brings to the states that have embraced it. It’s highly unlikely he would decided to attack such a burgeoning industry, especially considering the large amount of federal money it would cost to do so.

The only way he might consider doing so is if it brought him political gain, which it wouldn’t (at least not enough to offset the political loss).

 

In Conclusion

For these reasons, and others we won’t go into detail about, we are confident in saying that the legal cannabis industry – and legal consumers of cannabis – will be safe under the Trump Administration; or, at least as safe as they were under the Obama Administration.

If not, feel free to throw this article back in our faces.

The post Why the Trump Administration Will NOT Attack Legal Marijuana States appeared first on TheJointBlog.

I Am Legion …

“And He asked him, What is they name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion; for we are many.” Mark 5:9.
“We communists are like seeds and the people are the soil. Wherever we go, we must unite with the people, take root and blossom among them.” Mao Zedong

The environmentalist attack on suction dredging is merely a symptom of the much larger illness. The environmental elitists and the intelligentsia reap the rewards while the citizens foot the bill. The environmentalists have a dream of socialism in which they control the land and the means of production, but they are paid to protect it, rather than people being paid to produce with it.

The lucrative business of endangered species provides an endless flow of money to people who are willing to study the species, but no money goes to those who lost their jobs, their land or their means to earn a living. Money flows to people whose value in the free market is exactly zero, yet they have created an industry entirely funded by taxpayers whereby they earn princely sums of money like $750 an hour for lawyers to sue the government, and $200 an hour for frog researchers. In a free economy who would pay a frog researcher even minimum wage, let alone $200 an hour? A recent six page paper which found mercury moves with each major flood cost taxpayers $50,000 per page. Yet no one blinks an eye at this.

Only your government can afford to force the taxpayers to pay this. How much did you receive last year to study endangered species, to prepare six page research papers or to sue the government? If you’re like us, it was zero.

They’re All In It Together

The interconnected web amongst environmental groups, universities, corporations and the government runs deeper than we think, or would like to think. In July of 2015 the Western Mining Alliance published an article challenging the statements on mercury of a small environmental group with deep ties in the California legislature. In the article they quoted the California Office of Occupational Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) where the OEHHA web page stated no person in California had ever been sickened from mercury in sport fish. A statement which had been on their website for two years.

A mere two weeks later the website was changed. The statement was gone and it was replaced with dire warnings about the hazard of pregnant women eating mercury contaminated fish. This despite the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issuing new guidance on fish consumption which recommended eating more fish. Another recent study published in the January edition of the Journal of Epidemiology showed an increase in the IQ of children whose mothers ate large amounts of fish finding the benefits to the child outweighed any perceived risk of mercury. But, these studies are ignored by the environmentalists who reap millions from studying mercury. No dire threat – no cash.

Take for example a recent front page article in USA Today highlighting some third rate research from the University of California Sanata Barbara. The Sacramento Bee and the Huffington Post screamed headlines of “Toxic Legacy of the Gold Rush.”

Did anyone bother to actually ask if it was toxic? In over 150 years not a single person has been sickened by this mercury yet suddenly it’s “toxic?”

Only Environmentalists Hold the Truth

The Singer Study, which costs taxpayers $280,000 to tell us major floods move sediment and with that sediment the mercury travels down hill, is a study in bilking the taxpayers. Why did we need to spend $280,000 for a six page paper to tell us mercury travels downhills during major floods?

When the Western Mining Alliance made this exact same argument to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board they said we were wrong, afterall how could we know, we didn’t have PhDs. When a person gets paid over a quarter million dollars to tell them the same thing, but in less pages than we explained it, they wring their hands in worry over what will become of the valley with all this mercury.

How much mercury? About .001% moves each flood, or as the paper estimates it will take about 10,000 years for the Gold Rush era mercury to purge from the system. The leading mercury researcher in the country, Dr. Nicholas Ralston of the University of North Dakota states at those levels there is no concern, but that doesn’t make headlines nor does that position receive grant money.

The Truth is Flexible

Two weeks after the Western Mining Alliance released an article based on a California Water Board study which found all fish in gold mining areas were well below US EPA thresholds for mercury the Sacramento Bee ran a story with the headline “Study finds unsafe mercury levels in fish from Delta Watershed.” This report was actually good news, yet there is an amazing ability of the environmentalists to make lemons from lemonade. The Water Board study did find some fish in the Delta were unsafe to eat because mercury travels downhill, collects in low lying, warm areas and transforms into a harmful type of mercury which can be collected in the food chain. However, the good news was virtually all fish from areas where people fished, or swam, or boated had fish which were perfectly safe. Good news? Or the sky is falling?

Four billion dollars per year goes to environmental groups. That kind of money buys the headlines. Who decides at USA Today a six page paper from an obscue researcher is worthy of a headline? Who decides at the Sacramento Bee to report the dire warnings of unsafe fish in the Delta and ignore the vast majority of fish were perfectly safe? Four billion dollars buys a lot of propaganda. It’s clear the environmental groups aren’t doing a whole lot to save the environment such as planting trees or repairing eroding ditches, so where does the money go? It buys this kind of headlines which then prompts yet more grant money to “study the problem.”

While the leftists complain about a country run by capitalists, and the inequality of the free market, they are plotting for a system whereby they control the decision making and the power. It will be their doctrine and their ideology forced upon you. It’s a system of top down planning, sustainability and rationing where everyone is universally miserable. Well, everyone except for the planners. The lessons of the Soviet Union are completely lost on these people, they just think they can plan better.

Yet we have hope. We now know the name of our enemy and it is Legion. Like running into a nest of hornets you rarely know they’re there until you stir them up. This fight is about power, control and money – big money. This country was founded and built by people who asked only for the freedom to pursue their own lives yet now we are faced by those who wish to control your lives for you.

The environmentalists hide their money in the shadows. They twist the truth to ensure a continued stream of grant money to study problems which may not exist. It’s a racket, it’s an industry, it’s corruption and greed. It’s time to shine the light of day and watch them scurry.

Source:  Western Mining Alliance

Hell Froze Over!!! Maybe

I woke up yesterday morning the same as I do every day about 10 am and wandered out to the kitchen to fire up the coffee pot. As I was passing by the dining room table I glanced, as I do every morning, at the daily paper laying face up with the headlines easy to read. What caught my eye wasn’t the headline for the day but a teaser line at the top corner of the paper placed there to guide the reader to the story on a following page.

What I read on page two caused me to stop and consider if something I had heard and even said over the years had come true.

HELL HATH FROZEN OVER!!!

Yes for a moment or two I figured it to be true because the teaser headline read “Maryland Looks To Legalize POT”

I read the story and it turns out people really are waking up to the potential of legal cannabis. It’s pretty much the same as legalized gambling. It’s good for everybody on many different levels.

Maryland is in the process of setting up its medical cannabis program and it is happening at a snail’s pace. People like myself wait patiently while the lawmakers and politicians drag their feet taking years to set up what took Colorado weeks to figure out. How to create and market legal weed.

How much pain does one have to be in to be considered “chronic” pain and what exactly does that term mean ?

Let me take a few minutes to explain my version of “chronic” pain.

When I was eight years old I fell through the ice on a small stream and almost froze to death. That was my introduction to pain that is explained these days with numbers. You know… the 1 to 10 scale anyone with chronic pain can relate to. It was the first time a Dr. ask me to describe my pain with a number. After I thawed out my number was an 8 in most places and a 10 in my hands and feet.

My next major source of lifetime pain came from a fifty foot fall I took when I was twenty. I bounced 3 times on the way down from a perch on a carnival ride I was working on, breaking something else important every time I bounced. More on all of these stories coming soon in a book.

The last big event that left me with a lifetime of miserable nerve pain was the direct hit I took from a bolt of lightning in 2001 which left me smoking and dead for 10 minutes in the remote camp my wife and I were in. It is true each of these events is a huge story by its self but for now I am sharing them to give my readers an idea of the amount of pain I endure 24 hours a day, 365 days a year so far.

Chronic pain is only one of many medical reasons people use cannabis and THC in one form or another. I would type the meds off my fingers to make a full list and I’m not even sure anyone knows everything to make such a list. The point is it is huge and growing every day.

Maryland is joining a growing list of states that have wised up to the fact that the money available to be made in taxes, research, marketing, and consumption are enormous and it is about time the citizens of Maryland enjoy the benefits of all that money and the free use of cannabis like the other five or six states that have had the gumption to go full-blown legal.

In closing I think it is safe to say that Hell is still fairly warm and “FREED WEED” is about to be a reality in more places including the Free state of Maryland.

Here is the full story from the Washington Post.

debunked-myths-marijuana-4-proven-medical-benefits-330x220

Maryland Lawmakers Push For Recreational Pot

 

HIGH SOCIETY: 10 Myths About Marijuana That No-One Should Believe & Why – By Ryan Cristián

 

“…From the prison industry, to the pharmaceutical industry, to the timber industry, billions of dollars are being thrown at the failing marijuana war in an attempt to maintain the facade of a evil drug that will corrupt your children and ruin your life. This however is a remanent of a time before the internet; a time when the government could be caught in a lie and there was time to secretly hide the evidence. That time has come to an end”:

(10 Myths About Marijuana That No-One Should Believe & Why – By Ryan Cristián)

According to a recent report by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 80% of states have legalized some form of medical marijuana, and 23 have broadly legalized marijuana use for medical purposes. Four of those states, along with the District of Columbia, have also legalized marijuana for recreational use. This is the will of the people coming to fruition, despite the overwhelming obstacles set in place by the very government meant to fight for that will.

Children’s lives have been saved, cancers fought off, and more everyday are rescuing their lives from a debilitating illness due to the medical efficacy of cannabis. Yet, the opposition would have Americans see these grateful citizens as dangerous drug using criminals that are breaking the law. In the eyes of the anti-marijuana campaign, these stories of triumph over sickness are counted as a loss in the war on marijuana. There is no denying the influence this movement has had on the perception of cannabis and civil rights across the world. However, many still cling to lies that any rational minded person would have cast aside. The following are the top ten myths that a rational, open-minded and intelligent person should no longer believe; based on cold hard evidence and scientific discovery. 

MYTH #1 – MARIJUANA IS MORE HARMFUL THAN CIGARETTES, ALCOHOL AND PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

The most important thing to point out when discussing this topic is that anything is harmful in excess. If one chooses to eat a pound of salt they would die, which is actually true. That does not make salt itself dangerous, rather the danger lies in the excessive use. Cannabis consumed in excess will have its negative effects like anything else, however the fact remains that no one has ever died from cannabis use, ever. Some will continue to shrug that statement off as a fabrication, but these articles are for those who put their faith in facts, not in preconceived prejudice.

Cigarettes – It is hard to believe that anyone would argue that cigarettes are safer than cannabis yet many sites with obvious and specific agendas continue to lie to the public. Every year almost half a million people die due to cigarettes. According to the CDC, there is an estimated 5.5 million YPLL (years of potential life lost) every year in this country due to cigarettes, and this does not include second-hand smoke. If a rational mind was to make a judgement call based on the afore-mentioned science and indisputable facts, cigarettes are quite obviously more harmful than cannabis.

Alcohol – Alcohol has become so ingrained in everyday society that the public chooses not to see it as the dangerous drug that it truly is. Many scientists believe that alcohol is more dangerous than the entirety of the Schedule I listing. Professor David Nutt was fired for even speaking the words, despite the irrefutable results proving his theory correct. In the U.S. approximately 50,000 cases of alcohol poisoning are reported annually. One patient dies each week in the U.S. from said poisoning. When compared to the zero overall death toll attributed to marijuana, it is clear that alcohol is a far more dangerous substance.

“Alcohol is the drug that is involved in more murders than any other drug on planet earth.” – Howard Bloom, expert on mass behavior. 

Prescription Drugs – The most ridiculous hypocrisy is that of prescription drugs, which are resting comfortably in Schedules II, III and IV which allows them to be sold to the public by our very own government. According to the Journal of the American Medical Association, over 100,000 deaths are caused annually due to prescription drugs. The CDC states that prescription drugs are the fastest growing cause of death in this country, naming the issue an “Epidemic.” Two-hundred and ninety people in the United States are killed by prescription drugs every day. That’s one American death every 20 minutes and yet these drugs are actively given out to adults and youth alike. According to KVTX 19, In 2010 doctors prescribed enough painkillers to give a 45mg percocet and 24 5mg vicodins to every person in the United States. With such a rising death toll, one would think the FDA would reevaluate the dangers of overdose and addiction associated with these dangerous drugs, yet prescriptions continue to rise day-to-day.  

Related Reading: Avoiding A Cure: How Big Pharma And The DEA Collude To Control Your Health

The fact that most marijuana opposition campaigns are almost fully funded by pharmaceutical companies is a tightly guarded secret known only to those concerned enough to unearth the deeply rooted conflict of interest buried at its core. This fact is only just beginning to come into light for the masses.

One should ask themselves why these billion dollar companies would waste money to fund an anti-marijuana campaign. The answer is simple: Cannabis scares them. The sad fact is that there is no money in curing, only in treating. These companies fear a medicine that cures and can be grown in one’s back yard. According to the British Medical Journal, every 1 dollar that pharmaceutical companies spend on research and development, they spend 19 dollars on promotion and marketing of their drugs. Their focus is not on what is most helpful to the public, but rather what is the most profitable. These companies are legalized drug dealers, nothing more, and yet marijuana, which has never taken a life, is illegal. 

“The number of people killed each year by heroine and cocaine is tiny, TINY, just minuscule, microscopic, compared to the number killed each year by prescription drugs.” – Graham Hancock, Writer, Journalist

MYTH #2 – MARIJUANA IS HIGHLY ADDICTIVE

Marijuana On Legal Roll Worldwide – But Still Singing Reefer Blues

One of the longest standing myths about marijuana, that still continues to find its way into political debate, is the claim that the substance is highly addictive; thus explaining the Schedule I placement, or so the government would have the public believe. This is the most frequently cited perceived harm associated with marijuana today.

Can marijuana be addictive, yes, but in order to understand addiction in relation to marijuana, one must first have an understanding of the psychology behind addiction in the first place.

“People can have sex without being addicted to it, they can go shopping, but some people become seriously addicted to all these pursuits. Is a pack of cards addictive? Well no or yes depending on the individual. So it’s the same process no matter what the addiction. The only difference really is whether the substance addict is getting his dopamine from an outside substance or the behavior addict is having it triggered by outside behavior. The person that occasionally smokes marijuana, but generally has no negative consequences, it does not impair their health, it does not endanger their lives, it does not impair their personal relationship, you can’t call these people addicts and you can’t call those behaviors addictive.” – Dr. Gabor Maté, Addiction Specialist, “The Culture High” 

Marijuana can be addictive in the way that anything or any action can become an addiction, and that is psychologically. There have been some recent studies that show even that type of addiction is relatively rare, having a rate of only 9% of users who regularly use cannabis. This major distinction between a chemical and a psychological addiction is abused in a political fashion to manipulate the masses who do not understand the difference. One can become psychologically addicted to anything that is abused, but that does not make everything addictive, especially not enough to be added to the Controlled Substance Listing. 

A chemical addiction is one that produces the widely known physical effects of withdrawal. The body adapts to the drug, requiring more of it to achieve a certain effect (tolerance) and eliciting drug-specific physical symptoms if drug use is abruptly ceased. This is the form of addiction that the Controlled Substance List was created to impede. In comparison to physical addiction, psychological addiction occurs when a person does not have a physical need for a drug but rather a mental desire for it. There is a fundamental difference between the two that is widely disregarded when discussing the “addictive” properties of cannabis. In most cases one can be addicted to cannabis in the same fashion that one can be addicted to jogging. Obsession is not the same as addiction, especially when determining a possible restriction on that basis. The intention is not to diminish the very real effects of a psychological addiction, of which there are many, rather to demonstrate the game of misdirection used to maintain the placement of cannabis on a restrictive listing.

There have been recent studies that show some minor withdrawal symptoms associated with long-term, everyday cannabis consumers suggesting a very small percentage of chronic users do develop a chemical, albeit minor, addiction. These symptoms were relatively mild, elevated pulse, irritability and headaches, when compared to even the lowest level opiate (Schedule II). It is important to understand that these were the only negative withdrawal symptoms from a lifetime of cannabis use. One could hardly consider this withdrawal, being less intrusive than a caffeine addiction. An everyday, long-term opiate user would have an extreme and possibly deadly withdrawal.

To put that in perspective, cannabis is on the Schedule I Controlled Substance List, which is the home of the most highly “chemically addictive” drugs such as heroin, LSD and mescaline. Topping the Schedule II listing is Codeine, or opiates, which are indisputably the fastest rising addiction problem in the U.S. yet they are in a lower risk category than cannabis which has the lowest recorded addiction of all the drugs in any Schedule. One in four who use heroin will become chemically addicted. One in every three who smoke cigarettes will become chemically addicted, yet tobacco, which has a higher death and addiction rate than any of the controlled substance, is freely available. Even caffeine, one of the most commonly used drugs in this country, has a higher rate of addiction and withdrawal than that of the demonized enemy number one, marijuana.

new study suggests that one can feel serious withdrawal symptoms from abstaining from something as common place as junk food. According to a study published by Dr. Stephanie Fulton of the University of Montreal’s Faculty of Medicine a heavy consumer of fatty foods can feel symptoms like that of an addiction withdrawal, such as anxiety and depression, when beginning a diet. Based on the government’s usually broad understanding of addiction, and the logical association of the symptoms, junk food might be next in line to join the arbitrary Schedule I listing. Do not fret junk food lovers, there is far too high a profit and demand for this country’s beloved fast-food, for it to ever be restricted.

“I’ve got a friend whose aunt had to go to rehab for buying two boxes of Krispy Kreme every day and eating them in the woods so nobody found her, based on that anecdote we should make Krispy Kreme illegal, I will fight any man, by the way, that suggests that.” – Rufus Hound – Comedian/Actor

There are a multitude of reasons one can become psychologically addicted to a substance or an action, yet one can not definitively label these as addictive or dangerous for the majority. Especially in the case of cannabis which contains so many valuable uses and byproducts. Cannabis can certainly have adverse effects on a person choosing to use the substance in excess, especially as a child with a developing brain, however all the facts make it quite obviously mis-represented in the current Schedule I listing. Is it potentially harmful in excessive circumstances? Like most things, absolutely. Is it highly addictive, definitively not

Related reading: Prescription Painkillers: A Gateway Drug to Heroin Addiction

MYTH #3 – MARIJUANA CAUSES SCHIZOPHRENIA

debunked-myths-marijuana-3-schizophrenia-mental-illnessOne of the newest concerns about marijuana that has been gaining attention in the media recently is the worry that its consumption causes schizophrenia. This serious affliction is a mental disorder that makes it hard to differentiate between what’s real and what’s not, think clearly or have normal emotional responses. This has become one of  the last clinging defenses for marijuana prohibitionists, claiming that marijuana makes you literally go crazy. 

The idea that marijuana is the sole cause of this illness with no other factors involved is a claim made primarily by sensationalists and those who do not fully understand how the illness works. 

“My first seven years of research were devoted to schizophrenia and I can tell you that [the idea that marijuana can cause schizophrenia] is ridiculous.” Dr. Lester Grinspoon

Inheriting genes from both parents is a legacy of issues and benefits that none can avoid. Scientists have long known that schizophrenia is inherited genetically. The illness naturally occurs in a small percentage of the general population with a predisposition for the disease. It has a higher rate of 10 percent occurrence in those who have a first-degree family member with the ailment, such as a parent, brother or sister. The risk is highest for an identical twin of a person with schizophrenia. He or she has a 40 to 65 percent chance of developing the disorder. 

After reviewing this common scientific knowledge, the reality of the true cause is clearly shown. It is genetically impossible for marijuana use to cause schizophrenia in a person that did not already have the inherit genes necessary to trigger the ailment. Which means that marijuana can not be the cause in and of itself. This by itself debunks the continually stated misunderstood theory that cannabis use alone causes schizophrenia. That being said, the secondary theory is that marijuana is simply the catalyst, causing the illness to trigger in those already predisposed, which is a plausible if not reasonable assumption. 

“While cannabis may have an effect on the age of onset of schizophrenia it is unlikely to be the cause of illness,” said the researchers, who were led by Ashley C. Proal from Harvard Medical School. 

It is important to understand that there are many psychological and physical events that can trigger this disease. Being the catalyst or trigger of schizophrenia is not an implication of the dangers of that action or substance. This illness can be triggered by a serious car accident but that does not mean that driving should be made illegal. Heavy alcohol or tobacco use has been known to be a trigger as well as many others. Even serious emotional trauma can awaken the dormant gene. Whatever the catalyst, the gene itself is already present in a person who might one day suffer its effects and can not alone be attributed to any outside influence.

“We looked at the evidence, and I think we must have gone through about two thousand papers, and [marijuana] doesn’t cause schizophrenia, maybe there are some individuals with schizophrenia in which the illness is brought on perhaps a little earlier because they smoke cannabis.”  Prof. David Nutt – “The Culture High”

There is an undeniable correlation between those who use cannabis and those with schizophrenia, however, a Harvard Medical study as well as many others, show that those with the gene for schizophrenia have a genetic predisposition for drug use. Seeing as how marijuana is the most common drug of choice and roughly 60% of the U.S. has smoked marijuana at some point in their lives, it becomes an easy statistic to show that the vast majority of those with schizophrenia are also marijuana smokers. One could show a direct correlation between marijuana smokers and just about anything due to the rising percentage of those who have smoked marijuana in this country. Using that same logic, one could show a direct correlation between cannabis use and the flu. There would no doubt be a large percentage of people who had previously gotten the flu, and had also smoked marijuana, simply due to the prevalence of marijuana use today. This however, does not mean that marijuana use causes the flu. This is one way that polls and statistics can be quite misleading

The fact is that schizophrenia has a prevalence of about 1% the world around. If in fact cannabis was the direct cause or even the triggering component, there would be a corresponding rise in the occurrence of the illness along with the rise of cannabis use. Since the sixties, cannabis has rapidly increased in use and has seen a dramatic increase with the recently growing legalization movement. Yet the prevalence of the disease remains at 1%. This more so than any other graph, poll or statistic shows how the increase in marijuana use over the last fifty years has had literally zero effect on the country’s occurrence of schizophrenia. In other words, myth – debunked.

Related reading: The Fictions Surrounding the “Chemical Imbalance” Theory of Mental Illness

MYTH #4 – MARIJUANA HAS NO PROVEN MEDICAL BENEFITS

“We have been terribly and systematically misled for nearly 70 years in the United States… marijuana was a legitimate medication.” Dr. Sanjay Gupta

debunked-myths-marijuana-4-proven-medical-benefits

For more than 5000 years cannabis had been effectively used in Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). Cannabis is one of the 50 “fundamental” herbs of TCM, and is still prescribed today to treat a variety of symptoms. Up until the early 1900’s, cannabis and hemp were used in just about every aspect of American life, from fuel to rope, and most importantly, medicine. It was not until certain industries became threatened by cannabis that it was selfishly and unjustly branded as a dangerous substance.

Dr. Gupta noted that the infamous Reefer Madness documentary was entirely funded by DuPont Chemical, and DuPont was heavily invested in nylon. In the 1930s, nylon was a new synthetic fiber that would’ve seen hemp fiber as direct competition. As in most facets of this country, profit was deemed more important than the well-being of the people, and the world itself. It is astounding that such a short time ago, this nation used cannabis to such an extent that farmers were actually fined if they chose not to grow it. Yet today, children and adults alike are taught that its properties are not only harmful, but deadly. For the first time in over a hundred years, people are beginning to see through the cloud of lies that have surrounded this plant.

Related reading: Marijuana Movement on a Legal Roll Worldwide – But Still Singing The Reefer Blues

This is the most shockingly absurd, yet most commonly used myth stated by government officials when advocating marijuana’s prohibition. Despite the many compilations of valid studies conducted by respected institutions, that prove, not only the efficacy of medical marijuana but its ability to cure cancer, the government continues to look the other way. 

In 1999 The Food and Drug Administration stated that “no sound scientific studies” supported the medical use of marijuana, which contradicted the recent findings submitted by a panel of highly regarded scientists. Researchers have been attempting to speak out about this topic for over a decade yet the government simply chooses to ignore their findings. When citizens protest that cannabis should be allowed, at least in a medical capacity, the public is told that not enough research has been done. It is a game of misdirection that has been perfected by the government for over 70 years, however, the people are beginning to see through the facade, to the cover up behind it. 

After Nixon declared marijuana enemy number one in the early 1970’s there was a massive and discreet effort to erase all evidence of its value. In just a few decades, the U.S. government was able to wipe thousands of years of anecdotal as well as solid scientific evidence of the efficacy of cannabis in treating a wide range of ailments and diseases from our collective medical knowledge.

“There’s actual documentation that shows the United States Government under Nixon was actively writing to universities saying ‘pull your information of cannabis, hemp and marijuana out of your libraries, literally purge it.” Todd McCormick – Researcher, Editor of “The Emperor Wears No Cloths

Americans have been taught over the years that cancer has no cure. There have been studies that show a chemical that is in both celery and parley have the ability to effectively combat breast cancer. So why is this not public knowledge? Sadly, because there is no money in curing. Chemotherapy is the current go-to treatment of cancer despite the fact that is has a success rate of just under 3 percent. Chemotherapeutic drugs are the only classification of drug that allows the prescribing doctor to get a direct cut of the profit from their sale. The system is designed so that those in the position to change the system do not desire a change. There is just too much money being made. 

Related reading: The Truth About Chemotherapy – History, Effects and Natural Alternatives

With one in every four americans expected to die of cancer this year (the newest numbers are now closer to 1 in every 2), it is more important now than ever before, that the miraculous healing properties of cannabis be made available to the many in desperate need. Even if cannabis did not hold the answer to what a desperate father needs for a dying child, what right does anyone have to tell a man he cannot do whatever is within his power to attempt to save his children. It becomes obvious that there are hidden motives when the government holds a patent for use of the very medicine for which thousands have been incarcerated. Yet the government still openly denies that marijuana has any medical value. 

Avoiding a Cure: How Big Pharma and the D.E.A. Collude to Control Your Health

How can government officials have a patent for the medical use of cannabis, yet turn around and prosecute a mother like Angela Brown, who is using the plant in the manner in which the government patent acknowledges as legitimate? Her only crime was actually curing her son with a substance medically patented by her accusers. There are numerous accounts of American citizens publicly announcing that cannabis cured a family member of cancer, as well as many other ailments. 

Adam Koessler is currently facing criminal charges, and was denied visitation of his two-year old daughter, for using NON-psychoactive CBD oil in an attempt to cure her of cancer, after he was told modern medicine could do no more. The family saw immediate and dramatic improvements until the government stepped in and discontinued the treatment, charging the father with possession and administering a dangerous drug to a minor. Her cancer went into remission with the small amount of CBD that was used, and now, can’t be found anywhere else in her body. Imagine what could have been done with continued treatment. 

The shocking reality is that countless Americans are speaking out about the miraculous healing properties of cannabis, yet the Federal Government, knowing this to be true, blatantly denies it. Ask yourself why those with the ability to end so much suffering would choose not to. What industry stands to lose the most to a cure-all medicine that can be grown instead of prescribed? It is easy to cast aside information that contradicts what one has thought to be true since childhood. It takes courage to challenge one’s beliefs and open one’s mind to different ideas. Below are compilations of a combined 64 studies that prove cannabis is an effective treatment for cancer and in many cases, the cure. Those who aim to keep cannabis and its medical properties restricted will attempt to hinder the spread of facts such as these, but the secret is out, and the truth is spreading.  

Related reading: Over 100 Scientific Studies Agree: Cannabis Annihilates Cancer

MYTH #5 – MARIJUANA LEADS TO HARDER DRUGS – “GATEWAY THEORY” 

”While the gateway theory has enjoyed popular acceptance, scientists have always had their doubts. Our study shows that these doubts are justified.” – RAND’s Public Safety and Justice unit, 2002

debunked-myths-marijuana-5-gateway-theory

One of the longest standing marijuana myths is that of the “gateway theory.” This is the theory that marijuana is considered a “gateway drug” which means its use will lead users, unintentionally and irrevocably, into the clutches of harder drugs. The reality is that this theory has been, time and again, disproved by just about every legitimate study conducted on the topic. It would seem that this concept is only alive today, due to its relentless revitalization by those intent on continuing marijuana prohibition. Yet, many continue to be swayed by its proclaimer’s continued focus on the only valid point in the argument: the correlation between marijuana use and harder drug use later in life.

The problem with using this correlation as the sole foundation on the argument of the “gateway theory” is that correlation is not cause. A great example given in Time Magazine elaborates on that statement:

“Hell’s Angels motorcycle gang members are probably 104 times more likely (comparing to an earlier reference) to have ridden a bicycle as a kid than those who don’t become Hell’s Angels, but that doesn’t mean that riding a two-wheeler is a “gateway” to joining a motorcycle gang. It simply means that most people ride bikes and the kind of people who don’t are highly unlikely to ever ride a motorcycle.”

Marijuana is the most commonly used drug in the United States. The most recent poll showed that 108 million people in America have tried marijuana. With that fact in mind, consider for a moment how easy it would be to show a correlation between any common practice and marijuana use. Most illicit drug users will likely have used marijuana in the course of their abuse simply because of the prevalence of marijuana. However, a study by the National Household Survey indicated that 79% of regular marijuana users do not use any other illicit drug. Nearly 85% of everybody in this country that uses any form of illicit substance whatsoever, uses solely marijuana. According to The National Cannabis Coalition:

“There are about 16.1 million monthly users of marijuana and only 287,000 monthly users of heroin. Not only do most people who try marijuana never move on to heroin, the vast majority of them don’t even continue smoking marijuana.”

This is the same conclusion that every legitimate study comes to when evaluating the validity of the “gateway theory.” Despite the fact that most illicit drug users have smoked marijuana, the vast majority of marijuana users have never used another illicit substance. Scientists long ago abandoned the idea that marijuana causes users to try other drugs. In a report commissioned by Congress to investigate the possible dangers of medical marijuana, the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences wrote:

“Patterns in progression of drug use from adolescence to adulthood are strikingly regular. Because it is the most widely used illicit drug, marijuana is predictably the first illicit drug most people encounter. Not surprisingly, most users of other illicit drugs have used marijuana first. In fact, most drug users begin with alcohol and nicotine before marijuana — usually before they are of legal age.”

Research is beginning to suggest that focusing on marijuana as the key to preventing future drug abuse is like “closing the doors after the horses have already left the barn.” Marijuana use among adolescents appears to be a symptom of problem behavior, not a cause.

“There seems to be this idea that we can prevent later drug problems by making sure kids never smoke pot, but whether marijuana smokers go on to use other illicit drugs depends more on social factors like being exposed to stress and being unemployed – not so much whether they smoked a joint in the eighth grade.” -Dr. Karen Van Gundy, associate professor of sociology

People make their choices day-to-day based on a combination of reaction, desire and necessity. It is becoming clear that the usual precursor of potential drug use in adolescence is in fact instability, stress and violence in their life. These, along with alcohol and cigarettes, have been shown to be the true “gateway” into future illicit drug use. However, the idea that any one interaction can set a person on an irreversible path of drug abuse, may be possible, but a little far-fetched. It is interesting how the correlation between alcohol or cigarettes, and illicit drug use, is a much higher number than that of marijuana. Alcohol and cigarettes can cause much more damage to the body, yet it is marijuana that takes the focus, ask yourself why that is. Seventy one percent of illicit drug users smoke cigarettes and 17.6 million people, or one in every 12, suffer from alcohol abuse or dependence. Alcohol is the most commonly used addictive substance in the U.S.

The idea of a “gateway theory” in and of itself is a concept with little factual stability that refuses to die, lingering from the days of “Reefer Madness” and sensationalist claims when there was no internet to quickly dispel them. It is a way for people to place the blame of their poor decisions onto a substance that cannot answer back. To place the guilt on the evil plant that “made them do it.” Despite the years of factual evidence disproving the idea of this theory, government officials continue to make claims to the evils of the “gateway” drug, marijuana. These myths will only dissipate if the public educates themselves and chooses to speak out against the unfounded claims. One can hope, that as more studies draw attention to the archaic and misguided ideas once held about this plant, that the truth will find its way into the minds of even the most dedicated anti-marijuana crusaders. One more myth: debunked.

MYTH #6 – MARIJUANA CAUSES MEMORY LOSS AND A GENERAL REDUCTION IN LOGIC

debunked-myths-marijuana-6-memory-logic-brain

From the original Jeff Spicoli to everyone’s favorite burger seeking duo Harold and Kumar, the idea of the lazy and forgetful marijuana smoker is a stereotype that has been embraced by cannabis culture and prohibitionists alike. One would be hard pressed to find a recreational cannabis smoker that hadn’t experienced some level of forgetfulness associated with marijuana. That being said, it is important to understand the reality behind this comical image of absent-mindedness.

Of all the stigmas associated with cannabis consumption, the idea of memory loss has the least amount of long-term studies. On that basis alone one must consider the possibility that the entire discussion could change as future studies come into light. Until that time all one has to go on is the research that has been done to date. To fully understand the effects of any substance on one’s memory, it is important to understand how one’s memory works. 

Everyone has three different forms of memory, which are: long-term memory, short-term memory and working memory. This is quite an over simplification of the incredibly intricate workings of the human brain but works for the purposes of this discussion. Long-term memory is a vast store of knowledge and a record of prior events that each person builds throughout their lives. Short-term memory is the brain’s ability to recall ideas and information that pertain to a current situations that have yet to be formed into long-term memories. Working memory is not completely distinct from short-term. It is used to plan and carry out behavior. One relies on working memory to retain the partial results while solving an arithmetic problem without paper. 

The first and most important distinction to make when discussing marijuana’s effects on memory is the very big difference between the effectiveness of memory recall while under the influence of cannabis and while sober. Marijuana has been shown to affect short-term memory and one’s ability to form new memories while under the influence, however, has little to no effect on one’s ability to recall memories formed before or after. In other words marijuana does not harm one’s long-term memories but makes it more difficult to retain information while intoxicated. Many feel that alcohol causes much more impairment on short-term and long-term memory, and its effects are not limited to the time of impairment, but cause lasting detriment to the memory.

study following nearly 2000 young Australian adults for eight years found that marijuana has little long-term effect on learning and memory, and any cognitive damage that does occur as a result of cannabis use is reversible. Participants were aged 20-24 at the start of the study, which was part of a larger project on community health. Researchers categorized them as light, heavy, former or non-users of cannabis based on their answers to questions about marijuana habits.

“The adverse impacts of cannabis use on cognitive functions either appear to be related to pre-existing factors or are reversible in this community cohort even after potentially extended periods of use.” – Robert Tait at the Centre for Mental Health Research at Australian National University

As with any substance, using marijuana in excess can cause side effects. However minimal, one who chooses to be under the influence of marijuana twenty-four hours a day will experience some loss in cognitive function. Comparatively, one who chooses to be under the influence of alcohol twenty-four hours a day will most likely shorten their life substantially and have quite a bit more than a loss of brain function. A study conducted by Harvard Medical School shows that even this type of excessive marijuana use and consequent perceived harm is completely reversible. If and when one chooses to discontinue the excessive use, the brain function will return to normal. This in itself disproves years of marijuana propaganda. All one must do is take a break, and all negative memory associated effects are reversed, assuming there are any in the first place.

Published in a March issue of Addiction Biology, a team of Dutch scientists found no changes in the working memory abilities of heavy cannabis users who were monitored for three years. The study “adds to the literature showing that regular cannabis use may not necessarily impair brain functioning,” explains lead author Janna Cousijn, PhD, a researcher at the University of Amsterdam’s Department of Developmental Psychology. Working memory plays a key role in learning. Dr. Cousijn and her colleagues conducted the study on 49 young adults, 22 who were considered heavy cannabis users and consumed marijuana five days a week on average. This study shows that cannabis does not impair problem solving or deductive logic using working memory. However, recent articles have been circulating that claim contradictory findings.

There have been many articles recently released showing a new study proclaiming that marijuana causes irreversible damage to one’s memory and brain function. What is consistently skipped over in many of these articles is the fact that this study was conducted on adolescent use. Use of any substance, be it alcohol, tobacco, or even caffeine can have lasting effects on a developing brain, so it becomes quite irrelevant to make the focus on the effects of marijuana versus any other recreational substance. A vast majority of those shown to have negative effects attributed to long-term marijuana use, have a substantial correlation to those who started at a young age. Therefore the majority of those effects can be attributed to the use of a mind altering substance with a developing brain, whether it be cannabis or any other. 

The truth of this topic, clouded by years of misinformation, can be hard to decipher. Relying solely on science and the conclusive information that the studies conducted have produced, it becomes quite clear that the idea of the classic stoner that can barely function due to marijuana use, is vastly overstated. One’s short-term memory can be affected while under the influence, but no real lasting cognitive side-effects are associated with marijuana, outside the category of adolescent use of any impairing substance. It is becoming clear that many of the most ingrained stigmas associated with this plant are exaggerated, if not completely made up. This myth has elements of truth to it, but overall, the idea that marijuana will leave you a mindless and dysfunctional human being is busted

MYTH #7 – THERE ARE OVER 400 CHEMICALS IN MARIJUANA – TRUE!

debunked-myths-marijuana-7-chemicals-entourage-effect

It’s true, there are over 400 chemicals in marijuana. So let’s look a little deeper…

The perception of cannabis as an evil and utterly useless drug began, as most things do, because of money and a potential loss of profit. Since the moment hemp was seen as a threat to the wrong men’s pocket books, every American has had a fabricated perception of cannabis forced into their daily lives to insure industries like timber, oil, synthetic fabrics and pharmaceuticals never have to compete with a vastly superior product. The fantastically inaccurate slander campaign being waged on this plant has not only hurt the image of cannabis and its potential industry, but stopped the age of innovation this country had been riding and sent Americans into an age of complacency and self-delusion.

One of the many statements that are commonly used to continue this campaign of false information is that cannabis contains hundreds of chemicals, as if implying, or rather letting the public assume, that those chemicals are inherently unsafe. This is a tactic often used by those attempting to lead the public astray; it is designed to make the average citizen believe that any item with that many chemicals must be unsafe for human use, when the reality is that roasted coffee contains over 1500 chemicals. Only 21 of those chemicals have actually been tested on animals and 16 of these cause cancer in rodents. Yet, coffee remains legal and is generally considered safe. 

This is an outright dishonest attempt to confuse the public; to state a fact, knowing that Americans do not have all the information, that will lead the people to believe the only reason the government would give the information is because it is unsafe, when in fact many safe and commonly used items have just as many chemicals. This misleading statistic is often used to make marijuana look dangerous. Cigarettes contain over 4000 chemicals while rat poison contains only 30. One can easily see how this information can be misleading.

A recent study in the journal Scientific Reports showed that alcohol is an astounding 114 times more dangerous to consume than cannabis. When considering that an alcohol such as vodka has far less chemicals than cannabis, coffee or cigarettes, yet annually kills more than the first two combined, it becomes quite clear that alcohol is the most dangerous substance despite this country’s inability to acknowledge its detrimental effects. The researchers involved in the study commented: 

“The results confirm that the risk of cannabis may have been overestimated in the past. At least for the endpoint of mortality, the margin of exposure for THC/cannabis in both individual and population-based assessments would be above safety thresholds. In contrast, the risk of alcohol may have been commonly underestimated.”

The different chemicals in cannabis — many of them medicinal and nutritional — have been extensively researched yet continue to be unacknowledged so government officials can continue to claim that not enough research has been done. Many officials would have Americans believe that the supposed “unknown” effects of the many chemicals in cannabis make the substance unsafe, and use this as a selling point to plug the government’s own cannabis alternative Marinol (a product that is in direct contradiction with the government’s continued stance that cannabis has no medical value). Marinol is a prescription drug that contains pure synthetic THC. It was approved by the FDA in 1985 for treating the side effects of chemotherapy. However, many doctors and patients have come to find Marinol a poor substitute for cannabis. This is due in large part to what’s called marijuana’s “entourage effect”, as CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta explains:

“When the drug became available in the mid 1980s, scientists thought it would have the same effect as the whole cannabis plant. But it soon became clear that most patients preferred using the whole plant to taking Marinol. Researchers began to realize that other components, such as CBD, might have a larger role than previously realized.”

The “entourage effect” is the term for how the different chemicals in cannabis work together to create astounding healing and regenerative effects when taken unadulterated. The compounds have a very unique way of working in unison to aid the human body. When one individual chemical is taken out, as with Marinol, this “entourage effect” is lost. The human body is made with a naturally occurring endocannabinoid system that is designed to utilize the many different cannabinoids within cannabis collectively. This entourage effect and its multitude of healing possibilities has been stripped away from the public for so long that this country has seen the resulting digression of American’s overall health

Related reading: The Endocannabinoid System and How THC Kills Cancer

It is becoming painfully clear to most that this plant has been, and continues to be, the focus of a massive propaganda campaign. Yet there are many who still have yet to see the falsity of the anti-marijuana age, or hold on to the naive belief that the government has only the people’s best interest in mind. Either way, this myth is actually true, but is the product of manipulation and is being used to confuse the average citizen into believing that “evil chemicals” in this demonized plant will jump out of one’s closet at night and eat your children, or something just as ridiculously untrue. All one can do is stay vigilant and continue to spread the truth. This battle is being won, yet the war has only just begun. 

MYTH #8 – MARIJUANA HAS YET TO BE SUBJECTED TO ADEQUATE SCIENTIFIC STUDY

debunked-myths-marijuana-8-scientific-study

Of all the misinformation continuing to circulate around the issue of marijuana legalization, this myth is by far the most absurdly incorrect. The most unsettling aspect of these myths is not that they exist, rather that those still proclaiming them as truth are acutely aware of their falsity. This is also called blatantly lying. How can any American truly trust their elected officials after a campaign as massive, deceitful and all-encompassing as this country’s 80 year war on marijuana? When one who is meant to embody the essence of the democratic process claims that not enough studies have been done involving cannabis, yet the proof is easily accessible, what is one to think? Children are dying, cancer patients are withering away, and those charged with the people’s well being are lying about the cure to protect their profits.

It can be quite hard for many to accept the fact that they have been lied to by the very leaders in which Americans are meant to put their faith. These men may very well have had reasons they felt were justified, or acted out of some misguided intention of protection. One can understand that action if not condone it. However, in this stage of the debate, all the pertinent information is up front and center, and for anyone to claim that the data is not there, is outright laughable. 

Related reading: Cannabis as Medicine: How CBD (Cannabidiol) Benefits the Brain and Nervous System

Cannabis has had a longer history of safe and effective use as a therapeutic agent than virtually any comparable substance. Cannabis based textiles have been identified in northern China dating back to 7000 B.C and the recognition and use of the plant’s medicinal abilities date back almost as far. Cannabis has been used in this country as an all-purpose fabric, oil, paper and medicine until the early to mid nineteen hundreds when it began to compete with the leading industries that were primarily run by the country’s ruling families. The general acceptance and use of this plant in American history does not scientifically prove it to be safe, but does show that the continued use over the last 500 years hasn’t had the devastating effects that today’s government would have the people believe will break out across the country when the plant is legalized. The scientific studies came after the illegalization of the plant, and some of them date farther back than many realize. 

Despite the claims of politicians, marijuana is one of the most studied biologically active substances of modern times. A search on PubMed, the repository for all peer-reviewed scientific papers, using the term “marijuana” will produce nearly 20,000 scientific papers referencing the plant. Nearly half of these studies have been published just within the past decade. There can be no doubt that officials are aware of these studies, especially when marijuana has become such a politically charged issue. By comparison, a keyword search using the term “Tylenol” yields 17,370 published papers. A keyword search using the term “ibuprofen” yields 10,500 published paper. A keyword search using the term “Ritalin” yields 7,012 published papers, and a keyword search using the term “hydrocodone” yields only 630 published papers.

Some might also claim that there aren’t sufficient clinical trials, versus scientific studies, evaluating marijuana’s safety and efficacy as a medicine; which is also dramatically incorrect. More than 100 controlled trials, involving thousands of participants, have tested and evaluated the safety and efficacy of cannabis. Most recently, a review of FDA-approved cannabis trials conducted by various California Universities concluded, 

“Based on evidence currently available the Schedule I classification (for cannabis) is not tenable; it is not accurate that cannabis has no medical value, or that information on safety is lacking.”

This body of clinical evidence exceeds that of many FDA-approved prescription drugs. According to a 2014 review published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, of the 188 novel therapeutic agents approved by the FDA between the years 2005 to 2012, “The median number of pivotal trials per indication was two, and 74
indications (37%) were approved on the basis of a single trial.” Drugs that stand to increase profit for the pharmaceutical industry are fast-tracked into public use, apparently whether or not the drug is adequately tested, and even if it takes a few lives during the evaluation process.

The FDA recently approved a new super-Vicodin type drug called Zohydro. This drug contains up to five times the amount of hydrocodone and does not have time-release protection, so it can be easily crushed up and snorted or injected by those who would abuse it. This drug was approved after only one twelve-week trial in which five of the people involved died as a result. Yet cannabis, which has been widely used in all facets of American life for centuries (until the last hundred years) with zero deaths, is dangerous and unlawful in the eyes of the Feds. This is the very definition of hypocrisy. 

“When you talk to pain specialists in our field, they will all tell you one indisputable fact: opiates are lousy drugs to treat chronic pain” said one FDA committee member who voted against Zohydro approval

Numerous medical and health organizations – such as the American Nurses Association, the American Public Health Association, and the Epilepsy Foundation of America – support allowing qualified patients to legally access to cannabis therapy. According to survey data released this year by WebMD/Medscape, nearly 70 percent of doctors, including over 80 percent of oncologists and hematologists, acknowledge the therapeutic qualities of cannabis. More than 50 percent of doctors agree that it should be a legal option for patients and 76 percent of doctors would recommend cannabis to their patients despite it being Federally illegal.

There can be no doubt that this myth is indeed false. The question each American must ask themselves is why does the government continue to lie when the truth is so clearly documented? What do they stand to gain? What in American culture is so sought after that it would cause the leaders of this country to stand before the nation and intentionally dismantle the perception of the most versatile, medically and industrially useful plant the world has ever known? It’s the same answer to all the whys behind every political deception: Money. 

Related reading: Over 100 Scientific Studies Agree: Cannabis Annihilates Cancer

MYTH # 9 – THE MARIJUANA MOVEMENT IS JUST AN EXCUSE FOR PEOPLE TO GET HIGH

debunked-myths-marijuana-9-movement-high

At one very prosperous and advantageous point is this country’s history, hemp was beginning to be recognized as the future in textiles, food, medicine, fuel and just about every other important necessity of today. In 1916, the U.S. Government predicted that by the 1940s all paper would come from hemp and that no more trees would need to be cut down. Government studies report that 1 acre of hemp equals 4.1 acres of trees. In 1938, hemp was called the ‘Billion Dollar Crop.’ It was the first time a cash crop had a business potential to exceed a billion dollars. The simple profitability and versatility of this plant greatly threatened those who’s fortunes were tied to all that hemp stood to replace; primarily the Hearst family and Dupont Industries and their mutual investment in the prosperity of timber and synthetics, both of which were dramatically outmatched by what hemp was producing. Due to the fact that hemp was widely regarded as the plant of the future, those set on destroying hemp had to find a way to purposefully and discreetly mislead the public. Thus began the all-out war against hemp disguised as a war on the Mexican ‘marihuana.’

Americans pride themselves on the simple freedom of one’s right to choose. Yet in today’s America, this seems a slowly dissolving right as the government continues to increase the number of things they deem illegal; for one’s own safety of course. The Last American Vagabond wholeheartedly fights for the right of each individual to do whatever one deems necessary to one’s own body, whether that be smoking marijuana or drinking something proven as deadly as alcohol. However, that is only one small part of what defines the Marijuana Movement and its goals.

The movement was started as a public outcry against the government’s encroachment on all personal freedoms in this country, and centered around one issue in particular: marijuana legalization. This focus was chosen because, along with legalization, it ties all current constitutional issues together under a banner that ultimately represents the gravest issues facing this country today: loss of civil rights, government misconduct and misappropriations, and a century long conspiracy, of which is slowly becoming public knowledge; as well as uniting two vastly different generations under one flag.

The idea that plants as useful and medically valuable as hemp and marijuana are not only illegal but regarded as the most dangerous of all drugs, is laughably absurd. Americans are awakening to the sad truth that they have been intentionally lied to for a generation about a plant that could have saved the lives of many, in order to protect the investments of a few. A point has been reached in this country where it seems as if the will of the people is no longer what decides the course and creation of law, but rather the needs and desires of whatever cooperation spends the most money, which by definition would make the U.S. no longer a democracy.

Those behind the movement are using the platform of cannabis legalization to stage a national intervention in regards to the people’s rightful place as the governing body of this nation. If the leaders of this country can tell the American people that they know what is best, despite the overwhelming agreement on the issue of legalization, then this country has truly forgotten itself. Those in power want the public to believe that cannabis remains illegal not because it stands to replace the vast amount of the fuel and pharmaceutical industries, which a majority of the top one percent of this country are invested in, but because it’s dangerous, despite the overwhelming amount of evidence to the contrary.

The right of each individual to consume whatever substance they desire in the privacy of their own home is certainly a part of this debate. Yet the true fight is centered on whether the true governing body of this country remains a small percentage of wealthy men (ones that represent the smallest demographic of Americans) or We the People of the United States of America, the decision is yours.

Related reading: What’s Really Going On Under the Hood of the Cannabis Movement: “Big Marijuana”, GMOs and Hemp

MYTH #10 – OPPOSITION TO MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION IS DRIVEN ENTIRELY BY CAUTIOUS PRUDENCE

debunked-myths-marijuana-10-nixon-war-drugs

On an ominous June day in 1971, President Richard Nixon declared to the public that drug abuse was now “public enemy number one.” With this one statement he would irrevocably change the course of the nation by laying the foundation for a reign of unprecedented political misappropriation and corruption all in the name of the “War on Drugs” or more accurately the “War on Marijuana.”

The War on Drugs began as corrupt as it is currently today; a war with no possible end that promotes profiteering on the backs of those who desperately need the help of the very men profiting on their demise. This “war” was declared on all drugs, yet one in particular had caught the attention of some prominent American families and businessmen due to its ability to render their products obsolete. Marijuana’s versatility in the medical and industrial field played a major role in the creation of this policy. Whether or not the Nixon administration fully understood what they were creating with this declaration, there can be no doubt that the group had a clear understanding of the policy’s political and societal ramifications and what that would mean for current and future politicians in the United States. By effectively criminalizing addiction, addicts became potential profit in the eyes of the system.

“Attorney General Kleindienst for Nixon, was quoted after Nixon declared Drugs ‘public enemy number one’ as saying that they knew in the Nixon administration that drug treatment worked and incarceration did not, but the enormous political benefit by declaring a war on drugs, that can’t really fight back, he said they chose the incarceration route for political reasons, and then were absolutely overwhelmed by the positive political benefits that they received after the declaration.” -Judge Jim Gray – Former Orange County Supreme Court Judge

Once you make it profitable to incarcerate people; once you give people a profit motive to put others in prison, you change the fundamental process of the justice system into a process of profit and loss. These are people’s lives, and shouldn’t be a company’s bottom line. This dynamic incentivizes those in charge to incarcerate or maintain incarceration, whether or not it’s justified, solely to maintain profitability. These prisons have a contract to maintain 80% capacity at a minimum, crime could go down and it wouldn’t matter, their quota must be met. In California since 1980, 20 prisons were built, 14,000 prison guards were hired and 5000 teachers were fired.Prisons have become a billion dollar industry that are largely fueled by this nation’s fight against marijuana.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-secret-war-in-libya/5365906

” data-medium-file=”” data-large-file=”” class=”alignleft wp-image-2445 ” src=”https://i2.wp.com/www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/solved-murder-nixon.jpg?resize=229%2C300″ alt=”marijuana” srcset=”https://i2.wp.com/www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/solved-murder-nixon.jpg?resize=229%2C300&zoom=2 1.5x” scale=”1.5″ height=”262″ width=”200″>Over 2 million adults are currently incarcerated in the United States, that’s the highest incarceration rate in the world, and over 30% of that is for marijuana possession. In the 1.5 million arrests on drug related offenses in 2011, about 50% were for marijuana use. In 1965, police were solving about 90% of the murders in this country. Today that’s under 65%, and that’s considering all the tremendous advances in technology, DNA evidence, etc. The focus has clearly shifted. Without the ever-increasing conviction for petty marijuana related crimes, these prisons would fail to meet their quotas and their entire business model would collapse. For this reason amongst many, this industry is on the forefront of maintaining the war on marijuana.Related reading: The War On Drugs: How the “Land of the Free” Became the “Home of the Slaves” for 2.3 Million Americans

Americans have begun awakening to the massive collusion that surrounds the legality of this plant. This corruption has bled into every aspect of government that deals with marijuana for the sole purpose of maintaining its schedule I status, at all costs. The group that stands to perceivably lose the most with the legalization of marijuana would be the pharmaceutical industry. One would think that the discovery of a new ground-breaking medicine that heals just about everything would be exactly what those in the business of medicine would want. Unfortunately, Big Pharma got out of the curing business a long time ago. All of its efforts have gone into creating a perpetual cycle of treatment, because there is no money in curing.

Most of the major groups fighting to keep marijuana perceived as the most deadly drug known to man, just so happen to be funded by companies that stand to lose money with the rise of an all-natural medicine that can be grown in one’s back yard. These groups preach from on high about the moral and compassionate reasons for opposing legalization when in reality the greedy Big Pharma is pulling all the strings. The Community Anti-Drug Coalition of America (CADCA) and the other groups leading the fight against relaxing marijuana laws, including the Partnership for Drug-Free Kids (formerly the Partnership for a Drug-Free America), derive a significant portion of their budget from opioid manufacturers and other pharmaceutical companies.

The Nation obtained a confidential financial disclosure from the Partnership for Drug-Free Kids showing that the group’s largest donors include Purdue Pharma, the manufacturer of OxyContin, and Abbott Laboratories, maker of the opioid Vicodin. CADCA also counts Purdue Pharma as a major supporter, as well as Alkermes, the maker of a powerful and extremely controversial new painkiller called Zohydro. The drug, which was released to the public in March, has sparked a nationwide protest, since Zohydro is reportedly ten times stronger than OxyContin. Janssen Pharmaceutical, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary that produces the painkiller Nucynta, and Pfizer, which manufactures several opioid products, are also CADCA sponsors. With primary financial backing that stand to lose billions, it is clear where the motivation comes from.

Related reading: Big Pharma and Organized Crime — They Are More Similar Than You May Think

There are many who undoubtedly believe wholeheartedly that marijuana is the worst substance on the planet. This most definitely derives from the 70 year smear campaign designed to instill just that type of fear. It is unfortunate that many have yet to see the light in regards to marijuana’s curing properties; even more so unfortunate that those very same individuals are being manipulated into fighting a war for an elite group with no one’s interest in mind except their own.

From the prison industry, to the pharmaceutical industry, to the timber industry, billions of dollars are being thrown at the failing marijuana war in an attempt to maintain the facade of a evil drug that will corrupt your children and ruin your life. This however is a remanent of a time before the internet; a time when the government could be caught in a lie and there was time to secretly hide the evidence. That time has come to an end. When one hears, many hear. When one sees, we all see.

Follow the change. Be the change.

Also see: Still Believe Nature Got It Wrong? The Top 10 Health Benefits of Marijuana

About the author:

Driven by a desire for accuracy, chef and alternative news stalwart Ryan Cristián has a passion for the Truth. As founder and Editor-in-chief of The Last American Vagabond, he understands that Americans want their news to be transparent, devoid of the opulence frothed out by today’s Corporate Media. A cultured and insightful man with a worldly sense, Ryan’s unjaded approach offers common sense to the individual racked by the ambiguous news cycle – a vicious and manipulative merry-go-round that keeps trenchant minds at a manageable distance from the truth. Avid writer and editor by day, Truth seeker by night, Ryan’s reality defines what it means to be current.

“Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see.” – John Lennon

http://wakeup-world.com/2016/11/06/debunked-10-myths-about-arijuana-that-no-one-should-believe-and-why/

Source: HIGH SOCIETY: 10 Myths About Marijuana That No-One Should Believe & Why – By Ryan Cristián