The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Guest on 22.12.13 18:35

@Daisy wrote: Because guess what? Yes, a devastatingly huge amount of our best loved 'works' of any genre, any era, came from folk that had their minds opened by taking mind altering substances! It's true. And my, how dull life would be without all these differing visions.  big grin 

I just finished watching Disney's Alice In Wonderland (1951). Even taking into account the source material, well....




Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Daisy on 22.12.13 19:40

@Mirage wrote:
@Daisy wrote:I hear lots of people say they hate drugs. I say, I wish it was that black & white, that simple. Anyone that does protest against the use of drugs so vehemently should perhaps stand by their principles and chuck out all that music in their collections, all those books on the shelf, all that artwork hung on their walls (I could go on?). Because guess what? Yes, a devastatingly huge amount of our best loved 'works' of any genre, any era, came from folk that had their minds opened by taking mind altering substances! It's true. And my, how dull life would be without all these differing visions.  big grin 

I'm not up for an heavy debate on this issue, been there far too many times.  Just wanted to add a different perspective.
I haven't the time or inclination for heavy debate either, Daisy. But you have been rather condemnatory and then closed the door on the debate on your terms. My perspective is a little wider than the arts and hoped-for enhancements to sensory stimuli. Doubtless your more liberal approach to drug use would not be too censorious -  so, how would the idea of your brain surgeon snorting a line of cocaine before literally opening up your mind, sit with you?

IMO, drug-taking for opening the conduits of the mind is the lazy person's route to creative fulfilment. It is also a false path because of the uniquely seductive yet inherent powers of self-destruction contained in drug usage. Doubtless these artists and writers you speak of produced their works at the expense of loved ones who suffered the fall-out. No rose-tinted glasses for me, I'm afraid: damage is damage, and there is no life-enhancing advantage or detachment afforded to the victims of their excesses, either in this century or in centuries gone by. It is hopelessly romantic to think otherwise. On the contrary, the innocent bystander may have witnessed terrifying psychotic episodes and zombie states which, had they the time to record them, might have proved the real grand-oeuvres of their day.

 I don't intend to go through my well-loved music, literature collection and turf them out, as you suggest, in a pointless perestroika in order to "stand by my principles" as you so kindly put it. It serves no purpose. Better to keep them as a memento mori; a reminder of just how short and miserable some of their lives probably were in reality: and how limited the span of creative output for many of them before the inevitable spiralling into a downward trajectory. 

  There are ways of elevating the mind that cause no damage to anyone. It's just a higher gift available within all humans, but something that exacts effort and striving before the reward is given.
I have condemned no one, nor have I closed the door on the debate. I said - "I'm not up for heavy debate." Too right, straight away you misconstrue my words and judge me. What I said is true. It is fact It has nothing whatsoever to do with what I THINK about drug use.

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche

Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Daisy on 22.12.13 19:49

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
@Daisy wrote: Because guess what? Yes, a devastatingly huge amount of our best loved 'works' of any genre, any era, came from folk that had their minds opened by taking mind altering substances! It's true. And my, how dull life would be without all these differing visions.  big grin 

I just finished watching Disney's Alice In Wonderland (1951). Even taking into account the source material, well....



Thanks for understanding my simple point CR.

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche

Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Mirage on 22.12.13 20:12

@Daisy wrote:
@Mirage wrote:
@Daisy wrote:I hear lots of people say they hate drugs. I say, I wish it was that black & white, that simple. Anyone that does protest against the use of drugs so vehemently should perhaps stand by their principles and chuck out all that music in their collections, all those books on the shelf, all that artwork hung on their walls (I could go on?). Because guess what? Yes, a devastatingly huge amount of our best loved 'works' of any genre, any era, came from folk that had their minds opened by taking mind altering substances! It's true. And my, how dull life would be without all these differing visions.  big grin 

I'm not up for an heavy debate on this issue, been there far too many times.  Just wanted to add a different perspective.
I haven't the time or inclination for heavy debate either, Daisy. But you have been rather condemnatory and then closed the door on the debate on your terms. My perspective is a little wider than the arts and hoped-for enhancements to sensory stimuli. Doubtless your more liberal approach to drug use would not be too censorious -  so, how would the idea of your brain surgeon snorting a line of cocaine before literally opening up your mind, sit with you?

IMO, drug-taking for opening the conduits of the mind is the lazy person's route to creative fulfilment. It is also a false path because of the uniquely seductive yet inherent powers of self-destruction contained in drug usage. Doubtless these artists and writers you speak of produced their works at the expense of loved ones who suffered the fall-out. No rose-tinted glasses for me, I'm afraid: damage is damage, and there is no life-enhancing advantage or detachment afforded to the victims of their excesses, either in this century or in centuries gone by. It is hopelessly romantic to think otherwise. On the contrary, the innocent bystander may have witnessed terrifying psychotic episodes and zombie states which, had they the time to record them, might have proved the real grand-oeuvres of their day.

 I don't intend to go through my well-loved music, literature collection and turf them out, as you suggest, in a pointless perestroika in order to "stand by my principles" as you so kindly put it. It serves no purpose. Better to keep them as a memento mori; a reminder of just how short and miserable some of their lives probably were in reality: and how limited the span of creative output for many of them before the inevitable spiralling into a downward trajectory. 

  There are ways of elevating the mind that cause no damage to anyone. It's just a higher gift available within all humans, but something that exacts effort and striving before the reward is given.
I have condemned no one, nor have I closed the door on the debate. I said - "I'm not up for heavy debate." Too right, straight away you misconstrue my words and judge me. What I said is true. It is fact It has nothing whatsoever to do with what I THINK about drug use.
You said: "Because guess what? Yes, a devastatingly huge amount of our best loved 'works' of any genre, any era, came from folk that had their minds opened by taking mind altering substances! It's true. And my, how dull life would be without all these differing visions."

REPLY: That is a value judgement. You are taking a position, whether you deny it afterwards or not.

You said: "Anyone that does protest against the use of drugs so vehemently should perhaps stand by their principles and chuck out all that music in their collections, all those books on the shelf, all that artwork hung on their walls (I could go on?).

REPLY: What is that if not condemnatory?  You have not only taken a position and you are now re-inforcing it with the introduction of the word "principles". The implications are clear in your text and sub-text. Now you seek to retro-fit, deny and seek support from another poster without a single attempt to answer my query about whether you would go so far as to allowing a brain surgeon to open your mind after a snort of cocaine.
 
------------
A very disappointing response. And  an unwarranted rudeness too, as my OH said when I read it out. I was very surprised at you.

I see you haven't included the mild comment from me that provoked the above strong response from you in the first place which was this reply agreeing with Plebgate:

This is what I wrote so that people can see the proper context instead of your piecemeal approach:
"
IMO Nigella has minimised her drug use because she was painted into an impossible corner. I don't believe you sit down with a moribund patient on a number of occasions and take cocaine. I would have thought she would be more pre-occupied in keeping her wits about her in terms of nursing care. In any case, I would imagine the poor man was on morphine and other  prescribed drugs which would have rendered her useless in the administration of them.

Besides, the one glaring nonsense in her story is the idea that she can sporadically obtain this cocaine. Where on earth anyone who occasionally  felt under a bit of pressure and thought "I know, I'll snort a line tonight" would have the knowledge of where to obtain the stuff is beyond me. I know they sent out for their every need and whim -  but c'mon."

____________________
Kate McCann: "It's too 'ot. Give 'im a minute."

Mirage

Posts : 1664
Reputation : 382
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by plebgate on 22.12.13 23:21

I agree with your posts Mirage, points very well put I think. 

Drugs are very dangerous and if they are so great, why do so many want to go into rehab to get out of the destruction they bring?

I hate drugs and all the misery they bring to users and their families - I cannot believe that Nigella needed to use drugs to open up her mind to write some cookery books. 

Drugs become a dangerous habit and wreck any chance of a normal, happy life for many children and I do not care whether they make people creative or not, is it worth jeopardising family life.

One only needs to look at an episode of Jeremy Kyle to see what devastation drugs bring to familes, no creative mind opening for those people just misery piled on misery unfortunately.

It is getting to the point in this country I fear where taking Class A drugs seems to be becoming quite acceptable  and it is about time the police started prosecuting those who admit to having taken them and social services sent in to assess any harm to children in a household where drugs are being used.

All this liberal thinking nonsense since the 60's and psychadelic drug malarky has brought Britain almost to its knees imo and it's about time I think, that it all stopped and let's start with mandatory drug testing for all MPs and those in authority.

Grrrrrrrrr.

plebgate

Posts : 5440
Reputation : 1155
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by dromodaire on 23.12.13 8:24

I have to say that, as someone who is fortunate to be a creative type (after being, for a lot of my life, a non-creative type) the issue of drugs leading to creativity is probably a red herring.

I used to be addicted to coffee (a drug by any other name) but for various good (health) reasons gave up. However one of the things that scared me, when I reluctantly did give up coffee, was that I would lose my creative side; for in the past cofee had, so I thought, stimulated me to produce some great works.

However, this turned out to not only be wrong, but in fact the opposite was true. Drinking only water, I was able to produce the bulk of two lenghthy works, the first in 3 weeks, the second in 6. I was absolutely shocked by how intensely I could work, plus my stamina grew because there was no down side to coffee (namely the tiredness that it eventually brings). Plus my mind simply felt clear and ready and never sluggish. The fact was, was that the coffee had been needed in the past, not to arouse me to a higher state, but simply to put me in my normal state, that, without coffee, my coffee-dependent brain would not allow me to achieve.

I think probably creative types are attracted to drugs for a variety of reasons, from the fact that, as sensitive people, they get an unusually intense buzz out of these substances; to the fact that they are probably lonely and in need of something in their life; to the fact that they often have addictive personalities. But, at least in my experience, making a causal link between drugs and creativity, is probably not something I would personally do.

The only caveat I would say to that, is that my mind was formed on drugs (coffee etc) so maybe they did ultimately play a role. But my gut feeling is that they are a red herring.

dromodaire

Posts : 33
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by aiyoyo on 23.12.13 8:37

Coffee is bad for you is a myth.

Too much of anything is not good anyway.



aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Rasputin on 23.12.13 9:06

Anybody thinking the use of cocaine is glamorous should take more notice of the news bulletins we see from Mexico , the regular scenes of headless corpses being dumped roadside is the price people pay to ensure the end user enjoys the product of their choice , ...this is the business these people buy into and help sustain , they should be reminded of this frequently . imo

Rasputin

Posts : 269
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by dromodaire on 23.12.13 9:09

Unfortunately Aiyo I would have to disagree. I think for the majority of the human race, coffee must be bad, albeit some people can handle it better than others.

IF you believe in the theory of evolution, then, humans are optimally designed to live in their natural environment. This natural environment includes food and drink. Any food and drink which was not in this natural environment, must not only be unneccesary to the human organism, but, because of the principle of optimal design, it must also be a poison.

Since coffee has a very recent history (circa 500 years) there's no way one can claim it is part of the natural human environment (excepting possibly) some parts of Africa.

Anyway I've no desire to get into diet discussions with anyone, principally because it will leave other people unable to ever enjoy a cup of coffee again and me with no friends.  big grin 

However, the diet delusion is like the God delusion; and is another great example of willfull human blindedness in the face of the truth, because the emotional connotations of that truth are just too huge. I've always said, and I include myself in this, that people will only seek truth if it really serves their agenda. Otherwise they will ignore it.

dromodaire

Posts : 33
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Daisy on 23.12.13 20:54

@Mirage wrote:
@Daisy wrote:
@Mirage wrote:
@Daisy wrote:I hear lots of people say they hate drugs. I say, I wish it was that black & white, that simple. Anyone that does protest against the use of drugs so vehemently should perhaps stand by their principles and chuck out all that music in their collections, all those books on the shelf, all that artwork hung on their walls (I could go on?). Because guess what? Yes, a devastatingly huge amount of our best loved 'works' of any genre, any era, came from folk that had their minds opened by taking mind altering substances! It's true. And my, how dull life would be without all these differing visions.  big grin 

I'm not up for an heavy debate on this issue, been there far too many times.  Just wanted to add a different perspective.
I haven't the time or inclination for heavy debate either, Daisy. But you have been rather condemnatory and then closed the door on the debate on your terms. My perspective is a little wider than the arts and hoped-for enhancements to sensory stimuli. Doubtless your more liberal approach to drug use would not be too censorious -  so, how would the idea of your brain surgeon snorting a line of cocaine before literally opening up your mind, sit with you?

IMO, drug-taking for opening the conduits of the mind is the lazy person's route to creative fulfilment. It is also a false path because of the uniquely seductive yet inherent powers of self-destruction contained in drug usage. Doubtless these artists and writers you speak of produced their works at the expense of loved ones who suffered the fall-out. No rose-tinted glasses for me, I'm afraid: damage is damage, and there is no life-enhancing advantage or detachment afforded to the victims of their excesses, either in this century or in centuries gone by. It is hopelessly romantic to think otherwise. On the contrary, the innocent bystander may have witnessed terrifying psychotic episodes and zombie states which, had they the time to record them, might have proved the real grand-oeuvres of their day.

 I don't intend to go through my well-loved music, literature collection and turf them out, as you suggest, in a pointless perestroika in order to "stand by my principles" as you so kindly put it. It serves no purpose. Better to keep them as a memento mori; a reminder of just how short and miserable some of their lives probably were in reality: and how limited the span of creative output for many of them before the inevitable spiralling into a downward trajectory. 

  There are ways of elevating the mind that cause no damage to anyone. It's just a higher gift available within all humans, but something that exacts effort and striving before the reward is given.
I have condemned no one, nor have I closed the door on the debate. I said - "I'm not up for heavy debate." Too right, straight away you misconstrue my words and judge me. What I said is true. It is fact It has nothing whatsoever to do with what I THINK about drug use.
You said: "Because guess what? Yes, a devastatingly huge amount of our best loved 'works' of any genre, any era, came from folk that had their minds opened by taking mind altering substances! It's true. And my, how dull life would be without all these differing visions."

REPLY: That is a value judgement. You are taking a position, whether you deny it afterwards or not.

You said: "Anyone that does protest against the use of drugs so vehemently should perhaps stand by their principles and chuck out all that music in their collections, all those books on the shelf, all that artwork hung on their walls (I could go on?).

REPLY: What is that if not condemnatory?  You have not only taken a position and you are now re-inforcing it with the introduction of the word "principles". The implications are clear in your text and sub-text. Now you seek to retro-fit, deny and seek support from another poster without a single attempt to answer my query about whether you would go so far as to allowing a brain surgeon to open your mind after a snort of cocaine.
 
------------
A very disappointing response. And  an unwarranted rudeness too, as my OH said when I read it out. I was very surprised at you.

I see you haven't included the mild comment from me that provoked the above strong response from you in the first place which was this reply agreeing with Plebgate:

This is what I wrote so that people can see the proper context instead of your piecemeal approach:
"
IMO Nigella has minimised her drug use because she was painted into an impossible corner. I don't believe you sit down with a moribund patient on a number of occasions and take cocaine. I would have thought she would be more pre-occupied in keeping her wits about her in terms of nursing care. In any case, I would imagine the poor man was on morphine and other  prescribed drugs which would have rendered her useless in the administration of them.

Besides, the one glaring nonsense in her story is the idea that she can sporadically obtain this cocaine. Where on earth anyone who occasionally  felt under a bit of pressure and thought "I know, I'll snort a line tonight" would have the knowledge of where to obtain the stuff is beyond me. I know they sent out for their every need and whim -  but c'mon."
I'm disappointed that you're disappointed in me Mirage but I'm disappointed in you too. I find your tone quite aggressive and there's really no need. I wasn't trying to gain approval from CR, I replied because I thought he/she had understood my point

I didn't answer your questions because they didn't follow on from my post. (Non sequitur).
 
I don't  advocate the use of drugs. let's get that clear.  Without me going into personal stuff  I'll just say you're preaching your anti drug views to the wrong person. I've attended far too many funerals of folk  that abused drugs to  promote the use of them.

My point was (still is) it's not so simple as to say all drug use is bad. It's clearly not.   Many  people that 'illuminated' us most took drugs of some description to alter the state of their minds. Is that true or false?

 Thomas Edison for one .  Ligtbulb moment!

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche

Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Cristobell on 23.12.13 22:49

@plebgate wrote:I agree with your posts Mirage, points very well put I think. 

Drugs are very dangerous and if they are so great, why do so many want to go into rehab to get out of the destruction they bring?

Some people become hopelessly addicted to drugs in a similar way that some people become hopelessly addicted to alcohol, though far, far fewer.  I don't have the statistics to hand, but would ask  you to accept that alcohol addiction is far more prevalent than drug addiction, and kills far more.  A person who is pre-disposed to addiction will find one that suits.



I hate drugs and all the misery they bring to users and their families - I cannot believe that Nigella needed to use drugs to open up her mind to write some cookery books. 


I feel the same way about alcohol having witnessed the effects and having lost my lifelong best friend far too young.  I pity all those families where alcohol abuse wrecks the lives of all those around them.  These days I dare not go into town after dark for fear of drunken gangs of teenagers who haven't had a good time until they have thrown up and had a fight.  

Ask a policeman, rough areas where weed has taken over as the 'high' of choice, have seen noticeable drops in street fighting and anti social behaviour.  Drug dealers pass each other with a convivial 'hi how ya doing' and peace reigns. The abuse of alcohol is the war we should be fighting.


Drugs become a dangerous habit and wreck any chance of a normal, happy life for many children and I do not care whether they make people creative or not, is it worth jeopardising family life.

Thousands of perfectly respectable people smoke a spliff in the evenings when the kids are in bed, or in the garden where the kids are not breathing in the fumes.  I feel more sympathy for the kids of parents who drink regularly and traumatise their children with their appalling behaviour.

One only needs to look at an episode of Jeremy Kyle to see what devastation drugs bring to familes, no creative mind opening for those people just misery piled on misery unfortunately.

The participants on Jeremy Kyle are carefully selected.  Have you ever seen anyone educated, successful or even employed?  The present the working classes, the 'chavs' in a way that is demeaning and disrespectful, they have chosen the worst of society to represent the masses if you like.  The hopeless drug addicts that appear on Jeremy Kyle, are hopeless people, ergo their lives would not be very different if they were taking drugs or not - they would find some anti social past time to upset the rest of us.  These people need years of therapy, and I am certain 'our Graham' does enough to repair the damage of their public performances, I truly hope he does.  


It is getting to the point in this country I fear where taking Class A drugs seems to be becoming quite acceptable  and it is about time the police started prosecuting those who admit to having taken them and social services sent in to assess any harm to children in a household where drugs are being used.

There is far more damaging being perpetrated on the children of heavy drinkers and the problem is much more widespread.

All this liberal thinking nonsense since the 60's and psychadelic drug malarky has brought Britain almost to its knees imo and it's about time I think, that it all stopped and let's start with mandatory drug testing for all MPs and those in authority.

Greed has brought this country to its knees.


Grrrrrrrrr.

Back at ya  winkwink 

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by notlongnow on 23.12.13 23:33

@Cristobell wrote:
@plebgate wrote:I agree with your posts Mirage, points very well put I think. 

Drugs are very dangerous and if they are so great, why do so many want to go into rehab to get out of the destruction they bring?

Some people become hopelessly addicted to drugs in a similar way that some people become hopelessly addicted to alcohol, though far, far fewer.  I don't have the statistics to hand, but would ask  you to accept that alcohol addiction is far more prevalent than drug addiction, and kills far more.  A person who is pre-disposed to addiction will find one that suits.



I hate drugs and all the misery they bring to users and their families - I cannot believe that Nigella needed to use drugs to open up her mind to write some cookery books. 


I feel the same way about alcohol having witnessed the effects and having lost my lifelong best friend far too young.  I pity all those families where alcohol abuse wrecks the lives of all those around them.  These days I dare not go into town after dark for fear of drunken gangs of teenagers who haven't had a good time until they have thrown up and had a fight.  

Ask a policeman, rough areas where weed has taken over as the 'high' of choice, have seen noticeable drops in street fighting and anti social behaviour.  Drug dealers pass each other with a convivial 'hi how ya doing' and peace reigns. The abuse of alcohol is the war we should be fighting.


Drugs become a dangerous habit and wreck any chance of a normal, happy life for many children and I do not care whether they make people creative or not, is it worth jeopardising family life.

Thousands of perfectly respectable people smoke a spliff in the evenings when the kids are in bed, or in the garden where the kids are not breathing in the fumes.  I feel more sympathy for the kids of parents who drink regularly and traumatise their children with their appalling behaviour.

One only needs to look at an episode of Jeremy Kyle to see what devastation drugs bring to familes, no creative mind opening for those people just misery piled on misery unfortunately.

The participants on Jeremy Kyle are carefully selected.  Have you ever seen anyone educated, successful or even employed?  The present the working classes, the 'chavs' in a way that is demeaning and disrespectful, they have chosen the worst of society to represent the masses if you like.  The hopeless drug addicts that appear on Jeremy Kyle, are hopeless people, ergo their lives would not be very different if they were taking drugs or not - they would find some anti social past time to upset the rest of us.  These people need years of therapy, and I am certain 'our Graham' does enough to repair the damage of their public performances, I truly hope he does.  


It is getting to the point in this country I fear where taking Class A drugs seems to be becoming quite acceptable  and it is about time the police started prosecuting those who admit to having taken them and social services sent in to assess any harm to children in a household where drugs are being used.

There is far more damaging being perpetrated on the children of heavy drinkers and the problem is much more widespread.

All this liberal thinking nonsense since the 60's and psychadelic drug malarky has brought Britain almost to its knees imo and it's about time I think, that it all stopped and let's start with mandatory drug testing for all MPs and those in authority.

Greed has brought this country to its knees.


Grrrrrrrrr.

Back at ya  winkwink 
Very good post.
Having been a drug addict for 20 years addiction has been a close subject that caused much pain.

Should add have now been clean for over 15 years.

notlongnow

Posts : 481
Reputation : 45
Join date : 2013-10-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by plebgate on 23.12.13 23:37

Don't understand what back at ya means Cristobell.   I am fed up hearing the argument about alcohol versus drugs.   Mirage gave a very good post which I agree with about  the difference between alcohol and drugs earlier in the thread.

If you read all my posts Cristobell you will see I agreed that alcohol (asbuse of) is also very harmful.

If people want to smoke a spliff that's up to them but I do not have to agree with it.  Any drug is harmful and I don't need stats to tell that some are not.   I have seen with my own eyes what a spliff can lead to, so my advice is avoid all drugs even the so called harmless ones. 

Take a look at some of the people on Jeremy Kyle who "only" spend their benefits money on spliffs.    Spliffs not harmful, yeah right.

____________________
Judge Judy to shifty  witnesses   -    LOOK AT ME  -   Um is not an answer.

If I forget to add it to a post everything is In My Opinion and I don't know anything for sure.
Rolling Eyes

plebgate

Posts : 5440
Reputation : 1155
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Daisy on 24.12.13 0:16

Sorry, couldn't help it.  titter  Please delete admin.



____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche

Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by plebgate on 24.12.13 0:31

Reefer MADNESS.  Exactly.

plebgate

Posts : 5440
Reputation : 1155
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Daisy on 24.12.13 0:51

@plebgate wrote:Reefer MADNESS.  Exactly.
Yes exactly. Reefer Madness: American propaganda exploitation film

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche

Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by tigger on 24.12.13 6:34

Brilliant post Plebgate!  With so many well- informed people here a discussion would be interesting.

Btw the US economy depends on illegal drug use to keep ready money in circulation I've read. Which is why the poppy fields in Afghanistan  are off- limits.

Daisy posted on her being given statins - which have been proved not to work on women in official medical trials, the side effects are often serious. So on and so forth.

I  wonder what PeterMac thinks of your opinion, he has had  close experience of  the sink estates, drunks and so on.

Here the use of cannabis is legal, growing it isn't. If the police find someone growing the stuff and  if the guilty own the house, gas and electricity are  cut off for twenty years I believe, thus making it impossible either to sell or to live in.
A few houses along from me this was the case, it was used as storage for a builder who finally did it up last year and sold it.
Rather a good punishment I think.

As to alcoholism, countries have their own 'mores' - in Italy it is seen as an affront to 'la bella figura'  meaning looking as good as you can. In the UK and I must say here too, it is seen as amusing to be drunk in some circles.  

Apart from everything else, aren't drunks terribly boring!  Now where's that Chablis premier cru just to prove I drink for the sublime taste of good wine.... laughat

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by plebgate on 24.12.13 8:38

@Daisy wrote:
@plebgate wrote:Reefer MADNESS.  Exactly.
Yes exactly. Reefer Madness: American propaganda exploitation film
Exactly - reefers can lead to people being sectioned.   Carry on taking drugs those who want to possibly end up in psychiatric hospitals and face early ill -health/death .  Indefensible imo.

plebgate

Posts : 5440
Reputation : 1155
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Guest on 24.12.13 10:11

@plebgate wrote:
Exactly - reefers can lead to people being sectioned.   Carry on taking drugs those who want to possibly end up in psychiatric hospitals and face early ill -health/death .  Indefensible imo.

Has anybody here watched The Wire? It should be compulsory viewing for anybody who insists that only complete intolerance is the answer. I wouldn't argue that drugs should be freely supplied and used by anybody who wants them, but the "war on drugs" approach just leaves the Police and the lawmakers on a dangerous and costly hiding to nothing. Unless and until the ability to make money out of the supply of narcotics is completely undermined then any attempts to eradicate the problem will always, always be destined to failure.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by dromodaire on 24.12.13 10:58

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
@plebgate wrote:
Exactly - reefers can lead to people being sectioned.   Carry on taking drugs those who want to possibly end up in psychiatric hospitals and face early ill -health/death .  Indefensible imo.

Has anybody here watched The Wire? It should be compulsory viewing for anybody who insists that only complete intolerance is the answer. I wouldn't argue that drugs should be freely supplied and used by anybody who wants them, but the "war on drugs" approach just leaves the Police and the lawmakers on a dangerous and costly hiding to nothing. Unless and until the ability to make money out of the supply of narcotics is completely undermined then any attempts to eradicate the problem will always, always be destined to failure.
Though I've never seen the Wire, Clay, I did read David Simon's two books: Homicide: a Year on the Killing streets and The Corner (as well as watching the TV series Homicide), and you're right it's simply terrible over there by all acounts. The war on drugs is made to look like a joke in that context, though of course it's hugely exacerbated by underlying racial and poverty problems.

Incidentally I notice you come from the same part of the world as I do.

dromodaire

Posts : 33
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Guest on 24.12.13 11:52

@dromodaire wrote:


Incidentally I notice you come from the same part of the world as I do.

Where's that then? "Frozen North"? Switzerland? I'm actually in County Durham.  Think I have spotted a couple of other posters who are quite nearby too.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by dromodaire on 24.12.13 12:07

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
@dromodaire wrote:


Incidentally I notice you come from the same part of the world as I do.

Where's that then? "Frozen North"? Switzerland? I'm actually in County Durham.  Think I have spotted a couple of other posters who are quite nearby too.
Well actually I was originally from Whitley Bay. In fact the other day I was in Dunston (which is beginning to look like Beamish now!). I had presumed you were in North Shields you see, based on your references to the child from there who was taken by a stranger from her home.

dromodaire

Posts : 33
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Guest on 24.12.13 12:11

@dromodaire wrote:
Well actually I was originally from Whitley Bay. In fact the other day I was in Dunston (which is beginning to look like Beamish now!). I had presumed you were in North Shields you see, based on your references to the child from there who was taken by a stranger from her home.

Ah, I see. I'm actually in Darlington which I consider very much County Durham even though it is under increasing pressure to become part of Teesside/"Tees Valley". In one of my other posts I remember making reference to the (still unsolved) fatal hit and run of a three year old boy that we had here recently, so that one might have been a better clue to my whereabouts.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by dromodaire on 24.12.13 12:12

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
@dromodaire wrote:
Well actually I was originally from Whitley Bay. In fact the other day I was in Dunston (which is beginning to look like Beamish now!). I had presumed you were in North Shields you see, based on your references to the child from there who was taken by a stranger from her home.

Ah, I see. I'm actually in Darlington which I consider very much County Durham even though it is under increasing pressure to become part of Teesside/"Tees Valley". In one of my other posts I remember making reference to the (still unsolved) fatal hit and run of a three year old boy that we had here recently, so that one might have been a better clue to my whereabouts.
sloppy detective work on my part! big grin

dromodaire

Posts : 33
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nigella aides NOT GUILTY

Post by Guest on 24.12.13 12:24

[quote="dromodaire"][quote="Clay Regazzoni"]
@dromodaire wrote:

sloppy detective work on my part! big grin

You are Scotland Yard, and I claim my five million pounds.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum