«

[omg]

the consequence is the worlds hatred. it wont be felt for a while. but it will be felt. america fears a strong europe as the european single currency is a threat to the dollar. they have had a hand in gettring us to accept lots of other countries. they want it big and unweildy rather than small and tight.

How many countries are there in Europe again? That means twice as many Senators in Congress to try and prevent America from another goof-up like that again. The reason America went to war in Iraq again was because the Senate trusted Bush with making the right decision about how to handle Saddam--go to war only if there was no other alternative and only then if there was reasonable cause for it. In essence, the Senate gave Bush dictatorial power--something the Senate will probably not give again to a president for a long long time.

[xoopx]

if the uk goes ahead with a referendum (why bother??) i would vote no.
im not anti-europe or anti-EU but i dont want a federal europe superstate, with one big central government over so many different countries.
central government is never in the ordinary persons interests.
the elite of europe wanted this political union, but sadly for them they had to finally give the people their chance to have a say, and they said "no". they can just suck it up.. this is the 'democracy' that bush and his friends like to boast about.
the uk got an 'opt out' for the 48 hour week. again. so why should i want to be part of a more integrated EU when im not even going to get the same benefits as other citizens?

[omg]

you have a really good point. technically i am for europe. but as time goes on i find myself more and more against it. the uk opt out sucks. but then i know people who like being able to work more than 48 hours a week as it means they get more money, but it should be one rule for all. why should we in england work longer hours. why should the dutch be allowed to get mashed but if in england you get caught with more than a couple of plants you can go to prison. it should be one law for all, or none at all. im moving to holland.

What's so good about pot anyway? People don't need it to act retarded--they already do.

[omg]

i was just using it as an example. i named it ambiguosly 2. im not promoting it.

[xoopx]

Originally posted by Triton@Jun 4 2005, 12:41 AM
What's so good about pot anyway? People don't need it to act retarded--they already do.

weed is worse for you than people used to think. even the dutch are more wary of it now.
example; i knew a dutch girl who smoked it every day for years, but stopped because it started making her freaked out.
having said that, people are allowed to drink themselves sick with alcohol, smoke themselves to death with cigarettes..so it doesnt make sense to stop them smoking weed if they want to.. especially if they grew it themselves.
we're becoming super-nannied by governments.. you cant do this, dont do that, you need a licence for this, forms for that, etc. dont carry a screwdriver unless you have a good reason, etc.

In the States, pot has been considered a gateway drug because many people who try pot and get addicted have been known to try more powerful--and dangerous--drugs.

I don't understand your point about governments "nannying" their people so much. They usually make laws to protect people, not to nag them.

[BeefontheBone]

Actually you've got that all twisted - the "research" that propaganda has been based on was done in the late 60s and born out of McCarthyism and the American fear of Communism, and they haven't bothered to update their thinking since. What they found was that something like 90% of heroin users had used marijuana earlier in their lives, which is NOT in any way the same as saying 90% of dope smokers go on to use heroin. All that tells us is that people who uses heroin are generally predisposed to take drugs - that's not new information, I could've told them that. More recent studies have shown dope smokers are only slightly more likely to use other drugs than most, and that's probably because the group of people who use it includes (but is not exhausted by) those people who are generally predisposed to take harder drugs in the first place. You have to remember that the propaganda tends to ignore science and logic and prey on people's irrational fears.

Marijuana is legal and controlled in the Netherlands and the rate of use is actually lower than it is in many other countries, including the US and the UK, and the Dutch policies on harder drugs favouring treatment and rehabilitation over criminalisation and imprisonment have led to lower rates of drug addiction (marijuana is not physically addictive, we're talking cocaine and opiates here) and much lower rates of reoffending for people convicted of drugs-related crimes. The evidence is there if you care to pay attention to it.

I'd heartily recommend Eric Schlosser's (of Fast Food Nation fame) book Reefer Madness - it's a potted (hah!) history of marijuana in the US and it's fascinating.

At any rate, this is wandering off topic.

[Data]

It's indeed "funny" to see this topic go off topic twice.

Anyway. It seems europe has posponed it's reaction about the second no of a founding father.
They want first all referemdums and then decide.

I agree with some of the posts here that state the constitution will come as we can simply not without it. They politicians just have bad timing.
Too much (unwanted?) new members as the dutch are concerned. (the dutch pay most money per inhabitant (10 times as much as germany for example (if my memory serves me right)) )

I think the dutch want to be sure their money is well spend ....