Why the drug war is a legitimate war against terrorism

Post Reply New Topic

Marijuana is a proven effective medication and "legal" drug companies actively fund efforts to keep it criminalized for obvious reasons. It is easily growable by just about anyone and is relatively cheap. This means that since it is easily produced by just about anyone, legalizing it would make a major dent in the company profits. The governments need to stop running after the pot people and start taking down the cocaine and heroin which are the real dangers.

I don't have glaucoma and I don't like to get high, but the lows are heading for the single digits and I would like to be able to heat my house for less than $100 a month using renewable fuels and run my car on renewable fuels that are less polluting and cost less. Plus, the persons who like to bust our heads need to have to work for a living.

Joke or not, he has a line on the way that anti-drug people think. Watch for the people who have to talk around things to say what they want to say.

Amen to that. I like your TDTESS quote, too.

The wonderful professionals who testified before Congress were those Southern sheriff types who told our Congressmen that the "uppity n****rs" would rape white women if they were allowed to smoke marijuana or use cocaine. This really hasn't changed. They still use the racism, they just use more politically correct terminology.

The fact is that the possibility of "moral damage" was assessed by people who would happily lynch black men for having consensual relations with white women, and who would not even file charges against white men who forcibly raped black women. Whatever they had that passed for morals, morality didn't just need to be damaged, it needed to have its head cut off and a wooden stake driven through its heart.

SC wants this argument to go on and on with exchanges about "moral damage." It's a type of argument calculated to drive reasonable people mad. It doesn't give you anything to hold on to. Morals are looser than goose s**t. They can be anything that the moralizer wants them to be. They can be used to lord it over you no matter how much they change color and shape to confound whoever is arguing against them. It is just horribly amazing, but the people who use "moral" arguments can recycle the same garbage until infinity when dealing with honest people. Honest people can be convinced. "Moral" people cannot.

I dont think we need worry about sc anymore. His latest debating tactic is to suggest, quite bluntly that his opponent is an aficionado of anal sex. He then promptly vanishes from the debate

He won't be missed. Unfortunately, most of the drug bullies simply won't disappear so easily. That's all they are, is bullies with brains so small you don't know how they even manage to read or talk.

Anal sex aficionados?

That's a new one. He used to call people (who disagree with his rather unique opinions) Nazis and "Non-AS persons" and more recently, drug abusers and "Ying-Yongs", whatever that means in his own private little world.

An internet search of "Ying-Yongs" yielded only an offensive word on a "St*rmfr*nt" White Separatist website.

(Warning--These "St*rmfr*nt" people have some seriously warped and offensive views.)

{Edited to remove offensive name from accessibility for search engines}

Last edited by Aspen on 18 Feb 2006, 6:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

st*rmfront eh? - the boards i used to frequent suffered frequent invasions from st*rmfr*nt.

We had a rule never to spell out the name properly because they google the name to see whos talking about them. So instead, we call them sf for short, or stupid f**kers.

btw - im told theres no point trying to troll sf, apparantly any posts whatsoever the editor doesnt 100% agree with get quickly wiped off. Same goes for Reagun's (sp?) website.

Thanks for the information. I edited my post to disable search engines that search for the name.

I have read this thread and found one conclusion.
Post Hoc, ergo Propter Hoc
Causal Fallacy

If sc said that it is a legitimite war against criminals...
Then thats a good debate.
Criminals vs Terrorists, I think there is a difference.

That's their idea of a legitimate war. Decide that a group are criminals and/or terrorists, then declare war against them. I wish that was a joke.

"Criminals vs Terrorists, I think there is a difference."


Terrorist can indeed use drug money for terrorism.. Not all persons using or selling drugs are terrorists, that’s subjectivity as well as common sense.