| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Gaming | VB Image Host | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| Jr. Activist ![]() Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,084
Grams: 1,873.13 Groans: 0
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
| Reefer Madness 'Hemp for Farming' 10-27-06 l The Austin Chronicle News l Jordan Smith Despite California Gov. Terminator's decision to veto a bipartisan measure reauthorizing the cultivation of industrial hemp by the state's farmers, the broader movement to restore industrial cannabis farming to the American agricultural economy continues to barrel forward. Indeed, North Carolina legislators have passed a bill appropriating $30K to fund a statewide commission charged with studying the "economic opportunities industrial hemp provides to the state and to consider the desirability and feasibility of authorizing industrial hemp cultivation and production as a farm product in North Carolina," according to the Beneficial Uses of Industrial Hemp Act, which became law July 1. The commission -- made up of state agricultural and commerce officials and academics from several universities -- is expected to present its findings (including any legislative proposals) to the State Assembly by Dec. 1. According to a 2005 Congressional Research Service report, the U.S. is the only developed nation without an established hemp crop. Yet hemp farming was once a vital part of the American agricultural economy, and no one seemed prone to confusing nonnarcotic hemp with its illegal cousin, marijuana. By 1937, however, with the passage of the Marihuana Tax Act, Congress bent to reefer madness -- and to the will of the fledgling petrochemical industry -- making the language of the act's so-called hemp exception so vague as to render it meaningless and offering federal narcos a way to create a virtual ban on cultivation. Indeed, while industrial hemp products are technically exempt from federal control, the net effect of the language inserted into the 1937 law -- which was later taken whole and pasted into the 1970 Controlled Sub*stances Act, the playbook for the modern War on Drugs -- gives the U.S. Drug Enforcement Admini*stra*tion, and not the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the power to permit, or deny, farmers to sow industrial hemp. And the DEA -- which, as far as Weed Watch can discern, has absolutely no expertise in agricultural policy -- has been more than happy to routinely deny, or simply ignore, farmer requests for permission to cultivate the plant. Still, as interest in industrial hemp farming continues to gain steam -- at least 16 states have laws either authorizing its cultivation, or asking for further research into the potential benefits of its cultivation -- and both state officials and their constituents become better educated on the facts about hemp farming, the DEA will likely be forced to back down. After all, a lie only works so long as no one knows the truth. |
| | |
| Marijuana.com Sponsor | |
Advertisement | |
| | #2 |
| Blogger ![]() Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,088
Grams: 3,296.37 Groans: 0
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 16
Thanked 33 Times in 14 Posts
| Somebody in Austin gets it and it appears that some people in North Carolina get it. This writer points, as do I, to the whims of the "petrochemical industry" - Big Oil to you and me. DuPont is part of that. So, as I have also said for a couple years now, cannabis prohibition is NOT about "pot smoking" - it's about eliminating a significant source of competition to oil profiteering. You don't really think your politicians and law enforcement give a rat's ass about your HEALTH, do you? I mean, you don't still "believe" in that WMD bullshit - why should you believe reefer madness bullshit?
__________________ Alien Space Signal There's no money for your issue so long as we're squandering $50 billion a year on the DrugWar. Ben Masel Fear became the ultimate tool of this government - V. |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Jr. Member Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 187
Grams: 1,282.95 Groans: 0
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| Actually, the article is wrong. It is the textile industry and not the petrol chemical that is worried. Du pont's interest in petrol is pretty low as oil based plastics have been on the way out for years. Du ponts big worry is the impact legalized hemp would have on woven textiles (their biggest money maker). When your 3 biggest moneymakers are nylon, rayon, and polyester (all of which would be eliminated by hemp counterparts) you don't want hemp legalized. Legalized hemp would end the paper industry as we know it. It is also believed that the private prison and a newly formed private law enforcement industry (coming to a city near you, police forces by Wal Mart) would utterly collapse if if the cannabis family were legalized.
__________________ It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys attack! |
| | |
| | #4 | |
| Blogger ![]() Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,088
Grams: 3,296.37 Groans: 0
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 16
Thanked 33 Times in 14 Posts
| Quote:
First came petroleum technology, then came synthetic fibers, then the reefer madness. | |
| | |
| Marijuana.com Sponsor | |
Advertisement | |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
| |
| | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Some advice please | Drobleck | Urine Testing | 7 | 07-12-2007 07:38 PM |
| Can One Person End the Drug War? | TruthHeads | Politics | 17 | 03-07-2007 01:15 AM |
| Stoners VS Drunks | Barker | Cool Links | 6 | 06-27-2003 07:14 PM |
| Spliff Patrol | Freakish | Creative Writing | 3 | 05-22-2003 04:38 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |