Posts by dubla

56

Why Is Alcohol "Good" and Marijuana "Bad"?

by FMZ in

jw
friends

up until a short time ago (a couple of years maybe), insufficient research had been done on either of these drugs to say what the long term effects were.

only recently has it come out that certain kinds of alcohol (red wine etc) can reduce blood pressure.. so, with this in mind (the fact that they could actually be as bad or harmless as each other), why the heck is marijuana illegal and alcohol fine?.

fmz

dubla

good question......some responses about the difference (as in alcohol isnt as "bad" because...) dont really address the real question/issue, which is: why is getting drunk "acceptable" in the eyes of society, but getting high isnt? at least thats what i got from the title.....obviously you cant compare having one beer to smoking one joint, so really we are comparing drinking for effect and smoking pot. the fact that marijuana is viewed as "worse" really doesnt make sense, even when considering the physical aspects of the argument. yes smoking is bad for your lungs (there are however ways to use marijuana without all the physical consequences of the typical joint), but aside from that, is the following quote accurate?

MJ may help dull pain for many people, but to say "alcohol has more bad effects by far" seems a little off to me. Both drugs, abused, will burn brain cells.

it is my understanding (and the first place i heard this was from an addictions counselor) that the old "pot kills brain cells" theory is a complete myth. here are two studies to consider:

Q: Does marijuana kill brain cells? (Jason, Chicago, Illinois)
A: Probably not in humans. At least, marijuana does not kill neurons (nerve cells) in monkey brains, according to two studies.
By "brain cells," I assume you mean neurons and not other brain cells, such as, glial cells. These cells actually outnumber neurons ? yet only support brain structure, digest dead neurons, and insulate neurons.
One 1991 study, conducted by William Slikker, Jr. of the National Center for Toxicological Research in Arkansas examined 64 rhesus monkeys. Slikker exposed half of these monkeys to marijuana smoke daily or weekly for a year. The other (by Gordon T. Pryor and Charles Rebert at SRI International in Menlo Park, California) studied over 30 rhesus monkeys in 1992. Pryor subjected half his monkeys to marijuana smoke one to three times a day for 6 to 12 months.
A few months after the monkeys quit inhaling the drug, the experimenters examined the monkeys' brains. They found no evidence of structural or neurochemical changes in the brains.
Further reading:
? William Slikker, Jr. et al, "Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Rhesus Monkey," Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 17: 321-32 (1991)
? "Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Rhesus Monkey II: Effects on Progressive Ratio and Conditioned Position Responding", by Merle Paule, et al, Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, #260, 1992, pgs. 213-222.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/aprilholladay/2004-08-19-wonderquest-2_x.htm

contrary to marijuana, though, excessive use of alcohol is proven to kill. again, we are comparing drinking for effect with using marijuana...not just having one drink a day (which has health benefits).....and anything over four drinks in a sitting is considered to be "binge drinking", which is the threshold where bodily damage begins to take place.

heres an eye-opener: more people die from alcohol withdrawal than withdrawal from any other drug. as far as brain damage goes, id say alcohol has marijuana beat by any stretch of the imagination:

According to some estimates, said Collins, alcohol abuse in the United States is perhaps the third or fourth most common cause of brain damage, and may be even higher in other countries.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-04/ace-tbr040902.php

marijuana does cause temporary memory loss, but after a smoker quits using for a long period of time, the memory functions come back completely (anyone who has experienced this first hand or has been around a heavy smoker thats quit can attest to this), which imo is at least anecdotal evidence that marijuana doesnt actually kill brain cells. when you take into account the amount of alcohol related accidents (and deaths) every year on the road, i cant see how anyone would consider marijuana to be even close to as dangerous as alcohol......yet anyone 21 and over (in the u.s.) can walk into a liquor store and walk out with a keg of beer while one having one joint in your possession can send you to jail. um, huh?

aa

149

Tons Of Iraq Explosives Missing

by teejay in

tons of iraq explosives missing

material could be used as nuclear trigger .

cnn) -- some 380 tons of explosives powerful enough to detonate nuclear warheads are missing from a former iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under american control, the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog says.

dubla

h.s.-

It is a fact the the Bush and Blair administration's took the world to war on a premise based on misinformation. It is not of importance to me where this misinformation originated

fair enough.........the reason i challenged your orginal statement is that this notion of "bush convinced the world that saddam was a threat" is used repeatedly on this board, and i dont personally know anyone (who supported the war) that was convinced by bush......."saddam has wmds and is willing to use them" has been blasted all over the world way before bush ever ran for president. if it was a colossal deception, it sure wasnt bush that started it.

aa

149

Tons Of Iraq Explosives Missing

by teejay in

tons of iraq explosives missing

material could be used as nuclear trigger .

cnn) -- some 380 tons of explosives powerful enough to detonate nuclear warheads are missing from a former iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under american control, the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog says.

dubla

realist-

it is not surprising simon is loosing his temper.

consider some of simons past comments:

Unfortunately, it seems that people are unable or unwilling to debate or discuss the war and stay civil. People are accused of all sorts of extremes such as "advocating child torture and rape" if you are against the war or "being a mass murderer and war criminal" if you support it.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/22/48969/693459/post.ashx#693459

hmm...would labeling any war supporter a "neo-con", and then saying youd like to kill all neo-cons fall into this area of "extremes"? is calling someone an ignorant asshole because you dont like what they had to say being "civil"?

Also, there are far too many insults and personal attacks being made where people imply motives based solely on someones position.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/22/48969/693476/post.ashx#693476

People have proved that not everyone is capable of discussing rationally and civily

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/22/50039/712147/post.ashx#712147

I'm getting especially tired seeing some people making insulting and dismissive remarks

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/22/62193/948271/post.ashx#948271

If any posts are made that contain insults or name calling then they will be deleted.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/15/66356/1.ashx

bottom line is, i dont really care why simon is losing his temper.....if you cant avoid doing the things you are repeatedly accusing others of, what does that make you?

aa

149

Tons Of Iraq Explosives Missing

by teejay in

tons of iraq explosives missing

material could be used as nuclear trigger .

cnn) -- some 380 tons of explosives powerful enough to detonate nuclear warheads are missing from a former iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under american control, the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog says.

dubla

h.s.-

backtracking and twisting words is not your normal habit.

with all due respect, that isnt what you said. you said that the people believed saddam had wmds based on the evidence that the bush administration fed to them....
No, you are quite wrong. re-read my post. I said that people *agreed on the need for war* based on what the Bush administration fed them.

am i quite wrong? here are your exact words:

Now, it is true that based on the evidence that he and his advisers fed the world, many people believed that Iraq did indeed hold weapons of mass destruction

compare that with what i said and explain to me how they are different, if you would please:

you said that the people believed saddam had wmds based on the evidence that the bush administration fed to them....

you ALSO said:

and on that basis agreed with the invasion of Iraq.

they are two distinct statements in one sentence, are they not? ("and")

as far as it goes, in order for the second part of your sentence to be true (that they agreed on the war based on bush admin. evidence), the first part would almost certainly have to be true as well (that they came to these beliefs about wmds based on bush admin. evidence). again, use me as an example. if you look back over my posts that date back before the war, you will see that i never based my beliefs about iraq on evidence produced by this administration. so, if thats true, and i also agreed on the war, how could that support possibly be based on anything other than prior beliefs? lets face it, the statements clinton made about iraq and the statements bush made are virtually identical.

Seperate yourself from arguments based on party politics and look at the big picture. I have no emotions invested in either side of the the US presidential debacle and this allows for a viewpoint based on critical thinking, not on the desire to win partisan political points

if thats true than why in the world do you refuse to agree that the majority of the information weve been fed about saddams weapons came from clinton way before it came from bush? you arent partisan, so surely you can see this is a logical conclusion....unless of course you think bush conned clinton into bombing iraq.

This is not about whether there was a default benefit to invading Iraq.

in order for your analogy to work, there would have to be no benefit to invading iraq, thats all. you were making the case that the person at the top should resign...and this isnt true if half the population still believes it was right to oust saddam. you may want his head on a platter, and you have every right to feel that way.....and others have every right to disagree with you......which is why this is about voting, not required resignations.

aa

149

Tons Of Iraq Explosives Missing

by teejay in

tons of iraq explosives missing

material could be used as nuclear trigger .

cnn) -- some 380 tons of explosives powerful enough to detonate nuclear warheads are missing from a former iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under american control, the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog says.

dubla

satanus-

You give slick willie too much credit. Blaming him for bush's false beliefs? We know w is simple, but please.

does that mean it would be preposterous to blame kerrys false beliefs on bush? would that be giving bush too much credit and making kerry look like a complete fool? because that precisely what many of kerrys supporters on this board have done....blamed kerrys beliefs on bush. in fact, as evidenced by hillarys comment, the common argument now is that everyones beliefs about wmds stem from bush. this "idiot" single-handedly fooled quite a few people about saddam, didnt he? maybe he fooled clinton too?

aa

149

Tons Of Iraq Explosives Missing

by teejay in

tons of iraq explosives missing

material could be used as nuclear trigger .

cnn) -- some 380 tons of explosives powerful enough to detonate nuclear warheads are missing from a former iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under american control, the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog says.

dubla

h.s.-

In the framework of this discussion, it is what was done with this misinformation by the Bush administration that is the important thing.

with all due respect, that isnt what you said. you said that the people believed saddam had wmds based on the evidence that the bush administration fed to them....and, imo, that statement cant be farther from the truth. i would challenge you to find one person who didnt believe saddam had wmds during clintons administration and now does based on evidence provided by the bush administration. there might be examples out there, but i am quite sure they would be very few and far between. if your statement isnt really what you meant, fine, but i was only challenging your specific words.

lol...Resignation has nothing to do with elections.

first off, your analogy was poor for the simple fact that a lot of people still feel it was right to oust saddam...including every soldier ive spoken to (the soldiers that are supposed to be up in arms for fighting an unnecessary war). surely the design flaw in your example couldnt have brought any good to the car owners....only death...so that only works if your stance is that no good will ever come of saddam being taken out of power (some do contend that, so that very well might be your position). given your question about demanding a head on a platter, my reply was yes, any citizen that feels the war was a complete mistake and has only caused harm can certainly express that feeling by going to the polls and voting for kerry.

aa

149

Tons Of Iraq Explosives Missing

by teejay in

tons of iraq explosives missing

material could be used as nuclear trigger .

cnn) -- some 380 tons of explosives powerful enough to detonate nuclear warheads are missing from a former iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under american control, the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog says.

dubla

h.s.-

Now, it is true that based on the evidence that he and his advisers fed the world, many people believed that Iraq did indeed hold weapons of mass destruction

i came to that belief during the clinton administration....who fed me the wrong info?

What would you think of a corporation executive, say the head of the Ford Motor Company, who sanctioned the design of motor vehicle on the advice of his design team that went on to kill thousands of people? Surely the populace had a right to demand his head regardless of his beliefs or motives?

of course the populace has that right......what do you think november 2nd is all about?

aa

149

Tons Of Iraq Explosives Missing

by teejay in

tons of iraq explosives missing

material could be used as nuclear trigger .

cnn) -- some 380 tons of explosives powerful enough to detonate nuclear warheads are missing from a former iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under american control, the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog says.

dubla

recent simon comments:

YOU IGNORANT ASSHOLE

if someone said "here is a button, it will wipe out all neo-cons" I would happilly press it.

At least the dumb fuck....

It's your dumb attitude.

(go look in the mirror dick-head).

the guy who has so many times in the past posted worries about political threads getting out of hand cant seem to hold his tongue and is breaking the guidelines left and right (do as i say, not as i do simon?). maybe its time to lock a couple of these threads.?. its interesting to see where the hate speech comes from......some people just have a hard time debating the topics with civility.

aa

135

Cost of War

by teejay in

cost of war

dubla

abaddon-

why is it so hard to answer a simple question? would your honest answer jeopardize part of your stance? you really like to skirt around clinton every time he is brought up.

Again, what is your obsession with democrats?

again, i could care less about the democrats and their role in this conspiracy......i only point to the democrats because their own records shoot major holes in the theory (you dont seem to understand that theres a big difference between attacking the democrats and attacking your argument). imo, if this was a neo-con-spiracy, clinton would never be a part of it (and if he would be, then it wouldnt be a "republican baby" at all, it would be a joint effort)........so, to admit that clinton would had to have been pushing the agenda just as much as any republican would completely destroy your thesis. this is why, i assume, you refuse to address the question about clinton.

I have always, for the longest period, maintained that politicins lie, by definiton.

so have i, and if youve read any of my past posts (i know you have because youve responded to them), then you already know this. if you mean to say that kerry and bush both lied, i can surely admit thats a possibility (even if its not what i see as the logical conclusion).....if your opinion is that bush lied and kerry didnt (you havent come out and said that....youve actually avoided giving a concrete answer), then your opinion would hold absolutely no water with me, because it will be completely partisan and without logical backing.

if the choice is between a liar and the bigger and original liar, I know where I will/would vote.

again, bush isnt the "original liar" when it comes to iraq....clinton pushed the issue of wmds before bush ever got into office. it is in fact during clintons time in office that i personally came to believe saddam was a threat because of his stockpiles (not from clintons statements per se, but because of saddams own admissions and actions......for the purpose of this discussion, though, it was during the clinton era that "wmds" were shoved down all of our throats).......so who deceived me? taking your statement and applying it to my situation, i guess i have to choose between two sides......the original source of my misinformation (a democrat), and the the next guy who carried on with the exact same stance on saddam (a republican). that is fact no matter how you try to spin it....wolfowitz didnt convince me, and he didnt convince this nation........this nation was convinced during clintons time in office. your argument is that even if clinton is the one who spread the lies, so long as they were given to him by wolfowitz (or someone else in this "team" of conspirators) its the republicans we have to worry about....right? if true that makes clinton look like a bigger puppet than bush could ever be...so i really doubt thats your actual stance.....i could be wrong. why not put them all on the same side of the playing field because they all held the same stance on iraq? too easy? would it damage the idealized view of the left too much to do that?

aa

149

Tons Of Iraq Explosives Missing

by teejay in

tons of iraq explosives missing

material could be used as nuclear trigger .

cnn) -- some 380 tons of explosives powerful enough to detonate nuclear warheads are missing from a former iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under american control, the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog says.

dubla

french-

not wmds as french called them
I'm baddddddddddddd ...

nah, youre not bad....it was just a sneaky way to inflate the threat of the missing explosives.

its interesting to watch.......bush gets slammed for exaggerating the threat in iraq, but when it serves the purpose of criticizing bush, the same people will jump at the chance to use scare tactics about weapons falling into the wrong hands.

aa