Showing posts with label drugs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drugs. Show all posts
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Tuesday, July 16, 2013
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Friday, July 13, 2012
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Monday, January 30, 2012
Incarceration in America
Hello? America is not winning this drug war. The drugs are still around as much as ever, the only differences are now the prisons are extremely overcrowded, and thousands of people are being killed everyday just because of this war on drugs.
The graph above shows the total prison population. The graph below shows the prison population relative to our entire population as a whole, so it's a percentage.
Source for both graphs. (Click each to enlarge..)
Friday, December 23, 2011
Former Mexico President Fox Blames US for Drug War
by Jason Whitely at wfaa.com
FORT WORTH — Former Mexican President Vicente Fox told News 8 that Americans addicted to drugs are at the root of the border violence in his country.
Image Source
"This country has to think about legalization of drugs or make the decision to stop drug consumption," Fox explained. "If you don't consume drugs, our problem is solved. We're doing our part. We're paying with 50,000 dead now."
Violence along the international border — especially in Mexican cities that border Texas like Juarez, Piedras Negras, and Nuevo Laredo — has increased in the the last 24-months with beheadings, kidnappings, and even car bombs detonated as drug cartels battle each other and the federal police who were sent in to solve the problem.
The former president spoke at The Vicente Fox Forum of World Leaders at Texas Christian University on Wednesday.
But in a one-on-one interview, Fox told News 8 the drug war along the U.S.-Mexico border isn't his country's fault, but rather the United States' problem.
"We don't deserve to be where we are. It's not even our problem," Fox said. "Mexico does not consume drugs — not at the level of the drug consumption in the United States." (Source)
Continue reading.. (Link includes video interview)
FORT WORTH — Former Mexican President Vicente Fox told News 8 that Americans addicted to drugs are at the root of the border violence in his country.
Image Source
"This country has to think about legalization of drugs or make the decision to stop drug consumption," Fox explained. "If you don't consume drugs, our problem is solved. We're doing our part. We're paying with 50,000 dead now."
Violence along the international border — especially in Mexican cities that border Texas like Juarez, Piedras Negras, and Nuevo Laredo — has increased in the the last 24-months with beheadings, kidnappings, and even car bombs detonated as drug cartels battle each other and the federal police who were sent in to solve the problem.
The former president spoke at The Vicente Fox Forum of World Leaders at Texas Christian University on Wednesday.
But in a one-on-one interview, Fox told News 8 the drug war along the U.S.-Mexico border isn't his country's fault, but rather the United States' problem.
"We don't deserve to be where we are. It's not even our problem," Fox said. "Mexico does not consume drugs — not at the level of the drug consumption in the United States." (Source)
Continue reading.. (Link includes video interview)
Saturday, December 3, 2011
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Monday, October 10, 2011
Some Archaic Drugs
CTE!
Via - (NSFW)
Google some of these! I did. Here are some of the results:
For Tono Nervine..
For Aconite Root Tincture, and also here..
Friday, September 16, 2011
A Quick Look At The Patriot Act
The kitchen-sink approach to national security.
by Benjamin Wallace-Wells, New York Magazine
The authors of the Patriot Act always intended that its provisions would be permanent. The politically expedient thing to do would have been to include a sunset provision, to acknowledge a temporary moment of crisis that required special measures for prosecutors to pursue terrorists. But the lawyers wanted no sunsets; some of them had been working Al Qaeda cases since the first World Trade Center bombing and imagined a long-term struggle that could last a generation.
“I said, ‘Don’t think of this as an emergency measure,’ ” Viet Dinh recalled on July 20. At the time, Dinh was an assistant attorney general under John Ashcroft and was tasked on the morning of September 12 with writing a bill to fix whatever laws might impede investigation. The scholarship provided little guidance for how to make terror investigations easier, so Dinh sent an
Delayed-notice search warrants
issued under the expanded pow-
ers of the Patriot Act, 2006–2009.
e-mail to the nation’s U.S. attorneys and FBI agents, asking for ideas. G-men are not constitutional lawyers, and excesses were rife: Someone wanted to send neighborhood watches in search of sordid types. The attorneys at Justice made piles, winnowing as they went: Viet Dinh - The author of “Crazy Ideas,” “Quarter-Baked,” “Half-Baked.” America's new security state
In those patriotic weeks, partisan conflict dissipated easily. The Democratic Senate and the Republican House each had their own bills, and Ashcroft, smiling, said every idea in each of the drafts would be adopted unless it conflicted with another provision. Jim Sensenbrenner, the bombastic, rotund Wisconsin Republican, leaned back in his chair and said his bill was called the USA Patriot Act. There were no conflicts with that; the name was in.
“Patriot Act” was appropriately overt. Before 9/11, when politicians spoke of “patriots,” they usually meant soldiers. Now prosecutors and the FBI were reaching for the same vanity—that they were the hard tip of freedom—and the same license to pursue enemies without much oversight or meddling. When it was signed into law six weeks after the attacks, the act made it easier to wiretap American citizens suspected of cooperating with terrorism, to snoop through business records without notification, and to execute search warrants without immediately informing their targets (a so-called sneak-and-peek [P2]). Privileges once reserved for overseas intelligence work were extended to domestic criminal investigations. There was less judicial oversight and very little transparency. The bill’s symbolism mattered also, signaling that the moral deference previously given to the Special Forces would be broadened until it encompassed much of the apparatus of the American state. Local prosecutors, military policemen, CIA lawyers—these were indispensable patriots too.
The Patriot Act was mostly a Republican project at its origin, but it would have died long ago without the support of Democrats.. (Continue to the rest of the article..)
Source / Via
by Benjamin Wallace-Wells, New York Magazine
The authors of the Patriot Act always intended that its provisions would be permanent. The politically expedient thing to do would have been to include a sunset provision, to acknowledge a temporary moment of crisis that required special measures for prosecutors to pursue terrorists. But the lawyers wanted no sunsets; some of them had been working Al Qaeda cases since the first World Trade Center bombing and imagined a long-term struggle that could last a generation.
“I said, ‘Don’t think of this as an emergency measure,’ ” Viet Dinh recalled on July 20. At the time, Dinh was an assistant attorney general under John Ashcroft and was tasked on the morning of September 12 with writing a bill to fix whatever laws might impede investigation. The scholarship provided little guidance for how to make terror investigations easier, so Dinh sent an
Delayed-notice search warrants
issued under the expanded pow-
ers of the Patriot Act, 2006–2009.
e-mail to the nation’s U.S. attorneys and FBI agents, asking for ideas. G-men are not constitutional lawyers, and excesses were rife: Someone wanted to send neighborhood watches in search of sordid types. The attorneys at Justice made piles, winnowing as they went: Viet Dinh - The author of “Crazy Ideas,” “Quarter-Baked,” “Half-Baked.” America's new security state
In those patriotic weeks, partisan conflict dissipated easily. The Democratic Senate and the Republican House each had their own bills, and Ashcroft, smiling, said every idea in each of the drafts would be adopted unless it conflicted with another provision. Jim Sensenbrenner, the bombastic, rotund Wisconsin Republican, leaned back in his chair and said his bill was called the USA Patriot Act. There were no conflicts with that; the name was in.
“Patriot Act” was appropriately overt. Before 9/11, when politicians spoke of “patriots,” they usually meant soldiers. Now prosecutors and the FBI were reaching for the same vanity—that they were the hard tip of freedom—and the same license to pursue enemies without much oversight or meddling. When it was signed into law six weeks after the attacks, the act made it easier to wiretap American citizens suspected of cooperating with terrorism, to snoop through business records without notification, and to execute search warrants without immediately informing their targets (a so-called sneak-and-peek [P2]). Privileges once reserved for overseas intelligence work were extended to domestic criminal investigations. There was less judicial oversight and very little transparency. The bill’s symbolism mattered also, signaling that the moral deference previously given to the Special Forces would be broadened until it encompassed much of the apparatus of the American state. Local prosecutors, military policemen, CIA lawyers—these were indispensable patriots too.
The Patriot Act was mostly a Republican project at its origin, but it would have died long ago without the support of Democrats.. (Continue to the rest of the article..)
Source / Via
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Cool Bag
Via - (NSFW)
I wanna get one of these and go directly to the airport. Or would that be some kind of crime? I think it'd be funny - especially if you filled the bag with a bunch of kids' toys or something. Or a tiny silver gun pendant, a bomb-shaped pencil eraser, a cardboard knife, and 27 boxes of Ex-lax pills.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Prescriptions These Days
Via
This is about right. These days you can get a prescription for almost anything you need. We get what we need - We borrow what we can't get. Someone will surely fill it for someone we know, right?
The bullet is sweet symbolism for what might become of the prescription drug industry in America. Do I think it would happen? Of course not - But sometimes what is prescribed to one person is seriously dangerous to someone else who gets their hands on it.
Then again, anyone over 18 can go buy ammunition... Hmmm
Monday, May 3, 2010
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
