Archive for the ‘ Philosophical Anarchists ’ Category

William Randolph Hearst | Spanish-American War against Cuba | Yellow Journalism

William Randolph Hearst was a leading newspaperman whose influence on politics reached far and wide. In this video with Kenneth Whyte, author of The Uncrowned King: The Sensational Rise of William Randolph Hearst,http://www.WatchMojo.com learns more about his involvement and influence in leading the United States into war against Spain over Cuba in the Spanish-American war.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Top Comments

  • 100% Complete bullshit coming from the man and that woman, what a sycophant.

    jpstenino 1 year ago 3 

  • This guy is insulting the intelligence of the American public… He probably thinks that we went to Iraq spread democracy or fight terrorism instead of trying to get control of their Oil… or we had a war with Mexico to remember El Alamo instead of taking their lands all the way to California… or that we created the country of Panama to save them from being a province of Colombia instead or our interest of constructing a canal… sure… we are always the good guys…

    mar0113 1 year ago 2 

Video Responses

This video is a response to Yellow Journalism: Origins and Definition
All Comments (14)
MiamiRSVP

Respond to this video…
  • BULLSHYT, Research “Francisco Vicente Aguilera”…. USA took advantage and stole money and all sorts of bonds (CORPORATIONS< SUGAR PLANTATIONS, planned to be run by secret CIA operatives including but not limited to Castro and many other uneducated minions) and gold/jewels to pretend they were going to help! WOW FRAUD IN HISTORY… AMERICA SUCKS!!!! BORN AND RAISED IN DADE AND EVERYDAY MORE BULLSHYT FLOATS UP TO THE LIGHT!!!

    MiamiRSVP 1 second ago

  • Cuba would be a much better place if Spain had remained in control. USA also fucked up mexico with imperialist wars

    dmax631 2 months ago

  • @Choblik they believed that William Randolph Hearst was the starting point of the war, he used yellow journalism, or simply propaganda to bring in the citizens at that time. People then thought did the Spanish fleet actually destroy the USS Maine? then a group of scuba divers dived in to check on the ship and it turned out the thermodynamic engine exploded which maybe a cause of the explosion on the ship 😦

    SuperTrigga3 4 months ago

  • Didnt Hearst made up a war?  Why do people like Spain?  It’s seems to be troublesome for many like Israel.

    Choblik 6 months ago Continue reading

Medical marijuana monopoly

Currently, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) has a monopoly on the supply of research-grade marijuana, but no other Schedule I drug, that can be used in FDA-approved research. NIDA uses its monopoly power to obstruct research that conflicts with its vested interests. MAPS had two of its FDA-approved medical marijuana protocols rejected by NIDA, preventing the studies from taking place. MAPS has also been trying without success for almost four years to purchase 10 grams of marijuana from NIDA for research into the constituents of the vapor from marijuana vaporizers, a non-smoking drug delivery method that has already been used in one FDA-approved human study.

NIDA has a government granted monopoly on the production of medical marijuana for research purposes. In the past, the institute has refused to supply marijuana to researchers who had obtained all other necessary federal permits. Medical marijuana researchers and activists claim that NIDA, which is not supposed to be a regulatory organization, does not have the authority to effectively regulate who does and doesn’t get to do research with medical marijuana. Jag Davies of the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) writes in MAPS Bulletin:[27]

NIDA administers a contract with the University of Mississippi to grow the nation’s only legal cannabis crop for medical and research purposes,[28] including the Compassionate Investigational New Drug program. A Fast Company magazine article pointed out, “Based on the photographic evidence, NIDA’s concoction of seeds, stems, and leaves more closely resembles dried cat brier than cannabis”.[29] An article in Mother Jones magazine describes their crop as “brown, stems-and-seeds-laden, low-potency pot—what’s known on the streets as “schwag””aka “Bobby Brown”[30] United States federal law currently registers cannabis as a Schedule I drug. Medical marijuana researchers typically prefer to use high-potency marijuana, but NIDA’s National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse has been reluctant to provide cannabis with high THC levels, citing safety concerns:[28]

Most clinical studies have been conducted using cannabis cigarettes with a potency of 2-4% THC. However, it is anticipated that there will be requests for cannabis cigarettes with a higher potency or with other mixes of cannabinoids. For example, NIDA has received a request for cigarettes with an 8% potency. The subcommittee notes that very little is known about the clinical pharmacology of this higher potency. Thus, while NIDA research has provided a large body of literature related to the clinical pharmacology of cannabis, research is still needed to establish the safety of new dosage forms and new formulations.

Speaking before the National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse, Rob Kampia of the Marijuana Policy Project criticized NIDA for refusing to provide researcher Donald Abrams with marijuana for his studies, stating that “after nine months of delay, Dr. Leshner rejected Dr. Abrams’ request for marijuana, on what we believe are political grounds that the FDA-approved protocol is inadequate.”[31]

In May 2006, the Boston Globe reported that:[32]

Then again, it’s not in NIDA’s job description-or even, perhaps, in NIDA’s interests-to grow a world-class marijuana crop. The institute’s director, Nora Volkow, has stressed that it’s “not NIDA’s mission to study the medicinal use of marijuana or to advocate for the establishment of facilities to support this research.” Since NIDA’s stated mission “is to lead the Nation in bringing the power of science to bear on drug abuse and addiction,” federally supported marijuana research will logically tilt toward the potential harms, not benefits, of cannabis.

Ricaurte’s monkeys

For more details on this topic, see Retracted article on neurotoxicity of ecstasy.

NIDA has drawn criticism for continuing to provide funding to George Ricaurte, who in 2002 conducted a study that was widely touted as proving that MDMA causeddopaminergic neurotoxicity in monkeys.[33] His paper “Severe Dopaminergic Neurotoxicity in Primates After a Common Recreational Dose Regimen of MDMA (‘Ecstasy’)” inScience[34] was later retracted after it became clear that the monkeys had in fact been injected not with MDMA, but with extremely high doses of methamphetamine.[35] A FOIArequest was subsequently filed by MAPS to find out more about the research and NIDA’s involvement in it.[36][37]

Alan Leshner, publisher of Science and former director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), has come under fire for endorsing the botched study at its time of publication… Leshner did help NIDA bring home the bacon: NIDA’s budget for Ecstasy research has more than quadrupled over the past five years, from $3.4 million to $15.8 million; the agency funds 85 percent of the world’s drug-abuse research. In 2001, Leshner testified before a Senate subcommittee on “Ecstasy Abuse and Control”; critics say Leshner manipulated brain scans from a 2000 study by Dr. Linda Chang showing no difference between Ecstasy users and control subjects. But NIDA insists it’s independent from political pressures. “We don’t set policy; we don’t create laws,” says Beverly Jackson, the agency’s spokesperson.

Effectiveness of anti-marijuana ad campaigns

In February 2005, Westat, a research company hired by NIDA and funded by The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, reported on its five-year study of the government ad campaigns aimed at dissuading teens from using marijuana, campaigns that cost more than $1 billion between 1998 and 2004. The study found that the ads did not work: “greater exposure to the campaign was associated with weaker anti-drug norms and increases in the perceptions that others use marijuana.” NIDA leaders and the White House drug office did not release the Westat report for a year and a half. NIDA dated Westat’s report as “delivered” in June 2006. In fact, it was delivered in February 2005, according to the Government Accountability Office, the federal watchdog agency charged with reviewing the study.

Must-Watch: Marijuana Legalization Hearing in Washington State

 Marijuana activists, politicians, and former and current law enforcement officials spoke to the Washington State legislature in support (and against) of Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson’s House Bill 1550, which would legalize cannabis and make it available for retail purchase in State-run liquor stores.

Part 1

 Part 2

 Part 3

 Part 4

HELLO WORLD – WELCOME TO YOUR AWAKENING!

Esoteric Agenda: FULL LENGTH MOVIE. WELCOME TO YOUR AWAKENING!

Open Message to Police & Military Departments!

A victory on Keystone XL… and the fight continues. | CREDO

Take action!
Clicking here will automatically add your name to this petition to President Obama:
“Your rejection of Keystone XL was a victory for our country. The urgency of climate change demands more climate victories, very soon. Take the opportunity of the State of the Union Address to call for bold action to confront climate change.”
Automatically add your name:
Take action now!Learn more about this campaign

CREDO Action | more than a network, a movement.

A huge victory against Keystone XL… and the fight continues.

Dear Reader,

This is why activism matters.

Six months ago, the Obama Administration was set to approve one of the single most environmentally disastrous fossil fuel projects imaginable.

Today, it’s dead.

The Keystone XL pipeline — designed to bring filthy tar sands oil from Canada to refineries on the Gulf Coast of Texas so that oil companies can profit by selling the oil overseas — was dealt a severe setback yesterday when President Obama said no to an election year blackmail threat by the American Petroleum Institute and its lackeys in Congress.

But President Obama didn’t reject Keystone XL because he wanted to. Or because he thought it was the right thing to do. Or because he thought it would help his reelection campaign. He rejected it because you made him do it.

It’s a victory for activists. But because the President rejected the pipeline on a narrow technicality,1 in no way has he set down a clear marker against the pipeline or the carbon bomb that burning Canadian tar sands oil in China represents.

We want to thank the many groups and thousands of activists, who, following the inspiring call of Bill McKibben (Seems JIM is the man pulling this string?), joined us in putting massive public pressure on the President. In fact, CREDO waged the single largest activism campaign in our history.2

It was this pressure that forced President Obama to initially delay the decision in November. And it was this pressure, combined with the Republicans’ overzealous and irresponsible demand of a 60-day deadline that forced him yesterday to reject the pipeline permit.

Our pressure overcame the lies and propaganda of Republicans and oil giants, and their threats of “huge political consequences” if he didn’t approve it.

Rejecting this pipeline was the right thing to do. But by rejecting it purely on a technicality, there are many things President Obama did not do:

  • He did not close the door to this pipeline once and for all. In fact, he specifically opened the door to the southern portion of Keystone XL, which would allow this oil to be exported overseas — the real reason TransCanada wanted Keystone XL in the first place.
  • He did not explain the imperative of stopping not just this project, but others that will expedite disastrous warming. Just the opposite — he touted the need to expand oil and gas drilling and made no mention of clean energy.
  • He did not refute the lies of Republicans and polluters, whose biggest “jobs plan” is a foreign oil pipeline whose chief purpose is to export oil overseas.

The time to lead us away from dirty fuels and prevent escalating global catastrophes from climate change is here. And President Obama still can.

Tell President Obama: It’s time to lead on climate. Make the case in your State of the Union Address. Click here to automatically sign the petition.

Until President Obama makes a clear and compelling case to the American people for sweeping action to reduce our dependence on any and all fossil fuels, the pace of our transition will remain slower than what is required to stem the onrushing danger of climate pollution.

Until he refutes the false choice presented by Big Oil and Republicans — that we must choose between a clean energy future and a stable economy — he empowers and remains vulnerable to their attacks.

Until he shows his commitment to clean energy over dirty fossil fuels, the energy of progressive activists will be spent fighting individual bad decisions, instead of pushing to support needed progressive policies.

And ultimately, until President Obama takes the opportunity for a true moment of leadership that publicly raises the stakes on the fight to stabilize our climate, the State of our Union will remain deeply clouded.

Tell President Obama: It’s time to lead on climate. Make the case in your State of the Union Address.

Click below to automatically sign the petition:
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/keystone_sotu/o.pl?id=33678-3962516-Qib8Cmx&t=9

For now, it is clear that we must fight for every victory. It’s also clearer than ever that when we fight, we can win.

Let’s use this momentum to push for even broader victories to bring about the type of future that you and I know is still possible.

Thank you for being part of this historic victory.

Becky Bond, Political Director
CREDO Action from Working Assets Continue reading

%d bloggers like this: