Michael Wolsey Interviews Jon Gold

Click Here

Long time 9/11 Activist, Jon Gold joins Visibility 9-11 this week.  Jon was a member of the 911Truth.org Steering Committee.  He has confronted Rep. Curt Weldon about the inside job of 9/11.  Currently, he has extremely informational blogs available on 911Blogger.com as well as his own site, the YBBS.

Look, not everybody knows

Look, not everybody knows who Michael Wolsey is, and why this item is worth noting in your blog.

Care to give a few more details? A link? A sentence of background info?

Thanks.

Michael Wolsey

Has a podcast every week that's called Visibility 9-11. In the past, he's interviewed Dr. David Ray Griffin, Professor Steven E. Jones, Kevin Barrett, Kevin Ryan, Dave Slesinger, and several other prominent members of the movement.

Today's guest is a surprise.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Is it you perchance dude

Is it you perchance dude lol?

I dunno...

I can't say...
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

I asked for a link, did you

I asked for a link, did you overlook it?

I don't have...

A link yet... this thread is just here for safe keeping.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

The...

"long time 9/11 Truth activist" has finished his interview, but unfortunately, it's not going up until next week...

Sorry for the confusion.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Pssst...

This show will be up sometime tonight.

:)
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Bump...

Show's up. ;)
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

A BIG Thanks...

To Michael Wolsey for giving me the opportunity to speak my mind...
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

A Few Corrections...

I said Bush and Cheney contacted Tom Daschle in January 2001... it was 2002...

I also said the University of Medicine in Virginia... and it was the Medical College of Virginia.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

If you have the time...

Please read the "Emperor Wears No Clothes" by Jack Herer.

It's available for free online, but I highly recommend purchasing the book for the sourcing, and photos, etc...
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Thanks for the mention! It

Thanks for the mention! It was nice of you to do that interview.

You're quite welcome...

How could I mention PA 9/11 Visibility without mentioning Donny & Marie?
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Well worth a listen.

Jon's point about what 12 people (the Family Steering Commitee) when they're working toward a common goal is especially well taken.

I'm not a big fan of "leaders" but we're at a point here where if we can't find a way to work together and move forward, we might as well throw in the hat.

Thank you dear...

I'm glad you enjoyed it.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

The letter I mentioned...

This letter was sent to every elected official in the United States (that I could get an email address for)... It was written mostly by Uber Commandante, but the Cancer research was written by me... It's a very educational letter...

Dear Representative,

First of all, I would like to thank you for taking the time to read this rather lengthy email. I hope that it helps to educate, and motivate you to do what is right. Too many people are suffering when they don't have to, and the current administration is making every effort to arrest people that are just trying to get by.

My reasoning for this email stems from the fact that my grandfather, ***** ****, passed away 2 years ago from Pancreatic Cancer. Just recently, I found that In 1974 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice – lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia. In February 2000, researchers in Madrid reported in the March issue of "Nature Medicine" that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC. "All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation ... Cannabinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats." The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

Knowing this today, I'm infuriated by the fact that my grandfather had to suffer when the possibility existed that he didn't have to.

There are a couple of arguments that I think should be separated; most notably the distinction between industrial hemp and marijuana, which I will tackle first.

The DEA's current arguments for the continued prohibition of industrial hemp are 1) that it contains trace levels of THC, and 2) that it would be impossible to tell the difference between hemp farms and marijuana farms, and therefore, in order to continue the prohibition of marijuana, it is also necessary to outlaw hemp.

It is true that hemp and marijuana are both Cannabis sativa; however the important thing to acknowledge is that they are distinctly different cultivars. For the past 3000 years they have been bred for different purposes: Marijuana has been bred for large flowers, while hemp has been bread for long stalks. Marijuana cultivars need several feet of square feet per plant (when grown outdoors) to ensure enough sunlight for the flowers. Hemp on the other hand, is grown with dozens of plants per square foot. This intensive planting makes the individual plants grow tall and lanky, with few branches, in order to compete for sunlight. In addition, the flowers of a hemp cultivar are nearly non-existent; I have seen both types up close (hemp farm in Nova Scotia, Canada, and various indoor/outdoor marijuana plants), and one cannot mistake hemp for marijuana. This is analogous with saying that the DEA cannot distinguish between a Beagle and a Great Dane, which of course are both Canis familaris.

Another argument is that it would be easy to hide marijuana plants among hemp plants – again, because of the plant/square foot requirements this would not be as easy as it may sound. Indeed, you could grow a pot plant in a hemp field, but it would be drastically inferior due to constant struggle for sunlight, nutrients, and water. As it is, people are currently hiding pot plants in corn fields.

As to the THC argument, the weakest marijuana strain contains ~ 3% THC, while the average hemp plant contains ~.05% THC. Its true, hemp contains trace THC, but it is not true that you can get ‘high’ from it. There are inexpensive tests to ensure this.

What is VERY interesting, is the origin of hemp/marijuana prohibition. Prior to 1937 neither cultivar was illegal, but the marijuana tax act of 1937 made ALL variations of Cannabis Sativa to expensive to grow (though not technically illegal – that would follow later after an onslaught of racists newspaper reports, and outright lies perpetrated by lumber and newspaper baron William Randolph Hearst and the US Commissioner of Narcotics, Harry J. Anslinger).

Oddly enough, 1937 was also the year that George Schlichten patented his ‘decorticating machine’ which was the first machine to efficiently separate the hemp fiber from the stalk; an advance that prompted the February 1938 issue of ‘Popular Mechanics’ to declare hemp the ‘First Billion Dollar Industry, due to its ability to compete with the petrochemical and lumber industries for the manufacturing of textiles, fuel, and treeless paper. Ironically, although the issue was written prior to the act, it was not published until several months after the act was in place. I have attached a scan of the article, and in the web sites listed below you can read of many of the environmental aspects of this crop.

Personally speaking, given that alcohol and cigarettes are legal, I feel that this is the true reason for the prohibition of Cannabis Sativa. Unfortunately, I can’t say that I believe this was the first or last time industrial lobbyists have affected political change for their benefit.

As this letter is already more lengthy then I intended, I will try to keep my arguments for the legalization of marijuana short.

Suffice it to say that, medicinally, thousands of people around the world have offered experiential evidence that it works to alleviate their suffering. In fact, THC is proven to reduce swelling in glaucoma patients, reduce nausea in chemotherapy and AIDS patients allowing them to eat, and to decrease the chronic pain that many people suffer with daily for a number of reasons. I will not judge them. If it works for them, and it is not hurting anyone, then what is the harm? One of the most common arguments is as follows:

“Everyone knows that like cigarettes, combustion of the lungs, no matter what is being smoked, greatly increases the risk of lung cancer. Since marijuana smoke is thicker than cigarette smoke, the chances of getting lung cancer or brain damage is a serious risk, not to be taken lightly”.

This may be true, but it doesn’t acknowledge alternative ways of consuming marijuana via orally or through a device known as a ‘vaporizer’. A vaporizer will heat the plant material to 400 degrees Fahrenheit; not hot enough to combust the dried flower, but enough to turn the THC resin into a gas and then run through a cooling mechanism to be inhaled.

I am not an advocate of a national pot smoking orgy – but neither am I an advocate of legislation that depends on obfuscation and logical chicanery to make its arguments. In the trial of Ed Rosenthal, a man who was deputized and hired by the city of Oakland to grow medicinal marijuana, the judge refused to let the jury know that this was the case. They were only allowed to know that he was a man growing a lot of pot. That was it. He was convicted, and after the conviction when the jury was informed by the media of who he was, the jury came forward as a whole and publicly apologized to Rosenthal. Fortunately, a fair-minded California judge who criticized the federal government for interfering with a law that was passed with the majority of voters on a ballot initiative only sentenced Rosenthal to time served: one day. Enter Ed Rosenthal in any search engine for the full story.

These are the types of ‘strategies’, as well as the DEA hemp arguments above, that start the alarm bells ringing in one’s head. If the federal government’s stance was based on reason then the Truth could stand on its own. But since it is NOT based on reason, then they must use alternative means to twist the arguments.

The last point I would like to make is the notion that pot makes you lazy. I would like to remind you that we live in a nation where the average American watches 8 hours of television every day!! If sitting on a couch staring at a TV doesn’t make one lazy, then I don’t know what does. As well, I am familiar with many well-educated, motivated, intelligent, creative, and family-oriented individuals who make marijuana one aspect of their lives; Business owners, artists, salespeople, social workers, etc. They are not drop-outs, they are not 30 or 40 year olds with the brain of a 5 year old (despite sometimes decades of smoking) and they are definitely NOT lazy.

I have no doubt that there are people who abuse marijuana. But I cannot see that alone as a reason to prohibit it for all. If the abuse of something by some were the ONLY criteria for prohibition, there really would not be much out there that was legal.

If any of these arguments pique your interest in the topic, I have included a short resource list.

RESOURCE LIST:
"The Emperor Wears No Clothes" - Jack Herer. This is a fully documented book regarding the origins of marijuana/hemp illegality. It also takes the unusual step of adding photocopies of actual documents regarding this issue, so that you don't have to look elsewhere for the footnote sources (although you can if you like)

Web sites:

HEMP
http://www.hempcar.org
http://www.naihc.org/ (North American Industrial Hemp Council)

MEDICINAL MARIJUANA
http://www.mpp.org/medicine.html

GENERAL
www.mpp.org (marijuana policy project – where you can read White House commissioned reports recommending the decriminalization of marijuana)
www.norml.com
www.cannabisculture.com

I hope that these arguments shed some more light on a topic that has spent too many decades stuffed in a closet in order to line the pockets of the few.

"Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded."

President Abraham Lincoln (1809-65), U.S. President.
Speech, 18 Dec. 1840, to Illinois House of Representatives

"Penalties against possession of a drug should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself; and where they are, they should be changed. Nowhere is this more clear to me than in the laws against possession of marihuana in private for personal use. . . . Therefore, I support legislation amending Federal law to eliminate all Federal criminal penalties for the possession of up to one ounce of marihuana."

President Jimmy Carter
Speech delivered to Congress August 2nd, 1977

Sincerely,

Jonathan Gold
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

I was going to ask if you could post the letter, thanx.

"The last point I would like to make is the notion that pot makes you lazy. I would like to remind you that we live in a nation where the average American watches 8 hours of television every day!! If sitting on a couch staring at a TV doesn’t make one lazy, then I don’t know what does. As well, I am familiar with many well-educated, motivated, intelligent, creative, and family-oriented individuals who make marijuana one aspect of their lives; Business owners, artists, salespeople, social workers, etc. They are not drop-outs, they are not 30 or 40 year olds with the brain of a 5 year old (despite sometimes decades of smoking) and they are definitely NOT lazy."

After I work a hard 8 hours, or more, I like to come home relax, and smoke one. I don't drink, and I don't do any other drugs. So I don't see what the problem is.

I'm not lazy, because like I said... I work. And I'm not "dumb". Anybody who knows me personaly, knows that.

 

"Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." President Abraham Lincoln (1809-65), U.S. President. Speech, 18 Dec. 1840, to Illinois House of Representatives

I love President Lincoln

Thanks for the interview Jon.

It's sad to hear about your grandfather. But in a way, he kinda got you on the path for truth we all are traveling on today.

The beginning was all about you Tongue out. But it's all true. You do do wonderful things everyday, that help everyone in the movement. I know you've helped me out on several occasions without you even realizing it.

I think that your biggest contribution, and the main reason I follow you Jon..

It's not the YBBS, the thousands of articles, or the thousands of hours of work and "comunity service".

It's the way you talk to others. After I've sat here and watched the way you would talk with a newbie, or the way you handled a troll. I knew that you was someone to get behind and support. Then I would use the way you handled situations like that, and turn around and use them in my own life.

I agree with you about the rescue workers who are ill. I feel this is one issue, if brought out, would have everyone enraged. I don't see how people (like the media, S.O.B.'s) couldn't!

You got much love out here in Ohio! Keep your head up! Thanks!

 

 

MikeJr

Thank you...

That was very nice.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."