on 20-06-2014 09:49 AM
A huge plume of marijuana smoke is hovering over an Albanian town after a police crackdown on its notorious drug trade.
Heavily armed police were pelted with gunfire, grenades and even mortars as they tried to rid the town of Lazarat, Europe's biggest producer of marijuana, of its main crop, the Associated Press reports.
The hills of the village in the country's south yields around 900 tons of cannabis a year, worth close to $6.5 billion – or nearly half the small country's GDP.
The operation in the village, population 5000, is in its fifth day has seen the destruction of 80,000 plants and more than 12.8 tons of cannabis while 80 houses have been searched.
Residents have reportedly seen the events unfold on live television, burning their own crops as authorities close in.
"What did I do wrong? I just wanted five plants like everybody else," Lumturi Koli, a 42-year-old widower, told Reuters.
"I should have been first to plant them because I have to care for my children."
While thirteen people have been arrested for drug offences and firing on police, miraculously no-one has been killed despite long blasts of gunfire.
Four have been slightly wounded, including two shepherds who were hit by stray rounds.
The raids have been part of an overhaul push by Albania and its new Socialist government to gain entry into the European Union.
Read more Here
Heavily armed police were pelted with gunfire, grenades and even mortars
People living in small towns have guns, grenades and mortars? So they really are protecting their plantations!
"What did I do wrong? I just wanted five plants like everybody else," Lumturi Koli, a 42-year-old widower, told Reuters.
"I should have been first to plant them because I have to care for my children."
Sheesh, what happened to using land for growing food crops and keeping goats and chickens?
on 28-06-2014 12:09 PM
Hello, everyone. This thread is getting a little off-topic. and also a tad interpersonal.
Could we please bring the discussion back to the subject, and remember to treat the opinions of others as you would expect your own opinions to be treated.
Thanks!
on 28-06-2014 01:44 PM
@icyfroth wrote:
@reported-by-alarmists wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:
So, you are aware you are using one of the most harmful drugs in Australia (according to the Australian Government), purely for
"recreational purposes", yet you believe dying cancer patients, should be denied a therapeutic drug for relief.
1. Do you realise that is incredibly hypocritical?
2. Why do do believe cancer patients should suffer unnecessarily?
3. Why do you believe children who have serious epilepsy should suffer constant seizures, rather than enjoy a close to normal
childhood?
I have yet to see any doctor prescribing champagne to alleviate the suffering as listed by you in above post, siggie.
Answer the questions.
I have already done so in a few posts. Maybe not to your satisfaction, but your satisfaction is not my concern.
No, you haven't.
It is pretty clear why yoy haven't.
28-06-2014 01:55 PM - edited 28-06-2014 01:56 PM
@icyfroth wrote:
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
@durruticolumna wrote:
I've always found that term 'gateway' amusing.The people who use that term conveniently leave out the fact that most people start on alcohol and tobacco before they try grass,but they're never considered 'gateway' drugs. I wonder which of the vested interests came uo with that term.There's plenty of "vested interest", Durri, no argument there.
Tobacco Companies
Alcohol Companies
Drug Companies
Pharmaceutical Companies
Food Processing Companies
Governments.
All working hand in hand to get what they can out of Johnny Citizen's carcase.
That does't mean we have to legalise another addictive drug just because others already are.
In fact, if governments were serious about the health of their populace, they'd regulate the big 2 they're already making so much on in licensing fees.
Doctors prescribe addictive legal drugs everday............why?....
The word 'prescribe' should give you some idea, siggie.
Prescription means controlled amounts by health care professional and not available for recreational use as far as I know.
According to another post here, small amount of mj are already being used for medical purposes.
However, most mj plantations supply the illicit drug trade with it's inherent criminality.
That's probably why that planation in Algeria was destroyed by officials.
See what I did there? I brought the thread back to the original topic.
Do you believe that people only use their prescribed drugs according to directions.....lol...that's naive!
People will abuse any product they can get over the counter or by prescription....thankfully, it doesn't stop those drugs being
available
to those who still need it, and can use it responsibly..... Alcoholics reek havoc in society, yet alcohol is still available also.
Explain Icy, why terminally ill cancer patients should be denied access.....
on 28-06-2014 02:36 PM
The Epilepsy Foundation supports the rights of patients and families living with seizures and epilepsy to access physician directed
care, including medical marijuana. Nothing should stand in the way of patients gaining access to potentially life-saving treatment. If a
patient and their healthcare professionals feel that the potential benefits of medical marijuana for uncontrolled epilepsy outweigh the
risks, then families need to have that legal option now -- not in five years or ten years. For people living with severe uncontrolled
epilepsy, time is not on their side. This is a very important, difficult, and personal decision that should be made by a patient and family
working with their healthcare team.
on 28-06-2014 02:39 PM
on 28-06-2014 03:00 PM
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:The Epilepsy Foundation supports the rights of patients and families living with seizures and epilepsy to access physician directed
care, including medical marijuana. Nothing should stand in the way of patients gaining access to potentially life-saving treatment. If a
patient and their healthcare professionals feel that the potential benefits of medical marijuana for uncontrolled epilepsy outweigh the
risks, then families need to have that legal option now -- not in five years or ten years. For people living with severe uncontrolled
epilepsy, time is not on their side. This is a very important, difficult, and personal decision that should be made by a patient and family
working with their healthcare team.
Is there a source for that?
I checked the Epilepsy Foundation website and it says this,
Antiepileptic drugs with other drugs
In addition to being illegal, it is strongly recommended that people with epilepsy refrain from taking recreational drugs such as cocaine, ecstasy, heroin, amphetamines or marijuana because these drugs can provoke seizures. Even though marijuana has been shown to have anti-seizure properties suited to some forms of epilepsy, the risk of psychosis in young people, its irregular supply, imprecise dosage and varying side-effects – as well as the criminal penalties that apply in some parts of the world for using it – make it problematic. Should you be unable to continue to use such a drug to control your seizures, you are at a significantly increased risk of having breakthrough seizures.
on 28-06-2014 03:01 PM
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
@reported-by-alarmists wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:
So, you are aware you are using one of the most harmful drugs in Australia (according to the Australian Government), purely for
"recreational purposes", yet you believe dying cancer patients, should be denied a therapeutic drug for relief.
1. Do you realise that is incredibly hypocritical?
2. Why do do believe cancer patients should suffer unnecessarily?
3. Why do you believe children who have serious epilepsy should suffer constant seizures, rather than enjoy a close to normal
childhood?
I have yet to see any doctor prescribing champagne to alleviate the suffering as listed by you in above post, siggie.
Answer the questions.
I have already done so in a few posts. Maybe not to your satisfaction, but your satisfaction is not my concern.
No, you haven't.
It is pretty clear why yoy haven't.
Oh really? So pls clarify to me and anyone else that might be interested.
on 28-06-2014 03:24 PM
on 28-06-2014 03:27 PM
@icyfroth wrote:
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
@reported-by-alarmists wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:
So, you are aware you are using one of the most harmful drugs in Australia (according to the Australian Government), purely for
"recreational purposes", yet you believe dying cancer patients, should be denied a therapeutic drug for relief.
1. Do you realise that is incredibly hypocritical?
2. Why do do believe cancer patients should suffer unnecessarily?
3. Why do you believe children who have serious epilepsy should suffer constant seizures, rather than enjoy a close to normal
childhood?
I have yet to see any doctor prescribing champagne to alleviate the suffering as listed by you in above post, siggie.
Answer the questions.
I have already done so in a few posts. Maybe not to your satisfaction, but your satisfaction is not my concern.
No, you haven't.
It is pretty clear why yoy haven't.
Oh really? So pls clarify to me and anyone else that might be interested.
You haven't answered the questions..........that statement is pretty clear. Why haven't you? Or are you going to continue to deflect.
28-06-2014 08:55 PM - edited 28-06-2014 08:57 PM
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
@reported-by-alarmists wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:
So, you are aware you are using one of the most harmful drugs in Australia (according to the Australian Government), purely for
"recreational purposes", yet you believe dying cancer patients, should be denied a therapeutic drug for relief.
1. Do you realise that is incredibly hypocritical?
2. Why do do believe cancer patients should suffer unnecessarily?
3. Why do you believe children who have serious epilepsy should suffer constant seizures, rather than enjoy a close to normal childhood?
I have yet to see any doctor prescribing champagne to alleviate the suffering as listed by you in above post, siggie.
Answer the questions.
I have already done so in a few posts. Maybe not to your satisfaction, but your satisfaction is not my concern.
No, you haven't.
It is pretty clear why yoy haven't.
Oh really? So pls clarify to me and anyone else that might be interested.
You haven't answered the questions..........that statement is pretty clear. Why haven't you? Or are you going to continue to deflect.
No deflection. Here you go:
1. Do you realise that is incredibly hypocritical?
No. I don't think anyone should be denied champagne. Unless they are under 18. I don't believe in under age drinking. Although I believe it's prevalent.
2. Why do do believe cancer patients should suffer unnecessarily?
I don't believe cancer patients should suffer at all.
3. Why do you believe children who have serious epilepsy should suffer constant seizures, rather than enjoy a close to normal childhood?
I believe all children should enjoy a normal childhood. I realise, sadly, there are many individual cases where they don't.