Online: | |
Visits: | |
Stories: |
Story Views | |
Now: | |
Last Hour: | |
Last 24 Hours: | |
Total: |
Despite marijuana being legal at some level across much of the United States, the federal government is getting ready to drop a whopping $69 million this year to prevent all of us from smoking weed. This according to a recent Bloomberg financial analysis of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which indicates three out of every four dollars of their 2014 budget has been spent studying the perils of marijuana abuse and addiction, not the potential medicinal benefits.
The federal anti-drug agency, which just so happens to control the green light of all national cannabis research, claims that marijuana is in vogue: a hot commodity that “will peak like tobacco then people will see their error,” said NIDA director, Nora Volkow.
Yet, while the agency makes predictions about the future of a plant that has existed on this planet far longer than their biased opinions, they continue to sink a wealth of finances into researching it for its potential hazards, while keeping those interested in studying the plant for its positive benefits at bay. The agency is not “set up to study potential medical benefits, so it’s inappropriate for NIDA to have a monopoly on supply,” said Dan Riffle, with the national chapter of the Marijuana Policy Project.
During a recent interview with Rick Doblin, the executive director for the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), he said it took his organization three years before NIDA approved them for research to examine how marijuana can be used to treat Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in veterans. Now, the federal agency claims they will not have enough of the organization’s specified high CBD strain until 2015.
It’s for this very reason that organizations like MAPS and MPP are calling for the Drug Enforcement Administration to allow growers other than the University of Mississippi to cultivate research marijuana.
Read More HERE
just ask any prosecutor for irrefutable evidence that they have jurisdiction and that the constitution and statutes apply to you just because you are on the land!!
If they can’t prove the constitution applies to you, that negates their statutes! since the statutes only exist because of the constitution.
Are you a signatory to the constitution?? NOPE! Did you take an oath of office to be obligated to be bound by the constitutions and statutes?? most likely not if you’re not a government employee!!!