NationStates Jolt Archive

*finally the military does something right. Soldiers traumatized by the lies that sent them to the quagmire known as Iraq have a right to any substance which releives them of the knowledge that theyre lives are on the line defending the excesses of an odious scum like Bush


the Food and Drug Administration has given the go-ahead for soldiers traumatized by their time in Iraq and Afghanistan to be offered the party drug ecstasy to help free them of flashbacks and recurring nightmares. The soldiers would take the drug as part of an experiment to see if MDMA, the active ingredient in ecstasy, can treat post-traumatic stress disorder.
democracynow.org

I find that really quite amusing. Insurgents shouldn't have much trouble driving out the american infidel if he's tripped out on Eckies.

Given the source though, I highly doubt the validity of the story.

*finally the military does something right. Soldiers traumatized by the lies that sent them to the quagmire known as Iraq have a right to any substance which releives them of the knowledge that theyre lives are on the line defending the excesses of an odious scum like Bush


the Food and Drug Administration has given the go-ahead for soldiers traumatized by their time in Iraq and Afghanistan to be offered the party drug ecstasy to help free them of flashbacks and recurring nightmares. The soldiers would take the drug as part of an experiment to see if MDMA, the active ingredient in ecstasy, can treat post-traumatic stress disorder.
democracynow.org
I call bullshit. Ecstasy is one of the most dangerous drugs available.

I find that really quite amusing. Insurgents shouldn't have much trouble driving out the american infidel if he's tripped out on Eckies.

Given the source though, I highly doubt the validity of the story.
its a true story since the source I quoted never has ever lied once about a story being real. However having said that I think its better for soldiers to be tripping then to live their life in fear

No, it not true.

Maybe they'd give them Mary Jane, but certainly not extasy.

I call bullshit. Ecstasy is one of the most dangerous drugs available.
the FDA apparently doesnt agree..nor do I

No, it not true.

Maybe they'd give them Mary Jane, but certainly not extasy.
the FDA chose exstasy

the FDA apparently doesnt agree..nor do I
The FDA
1) Wouldn't make that decision
2) Has banned ecstasy
3) Wouldn't go against the reams of evidence presented by the AMA and APA just to make a stupidass story that only stupidasses going to stupidass websites would know about.

The FDA
1) Wouldn't make that decision
2) Has banned ecstasy
3) Wouldn't go against the reams of evidence presented by the AMA and APA just to make a stupidass story that only stupidasses going to stupidass websites would know about.
the FDA is charged with making these decisions. The FDA thinks exstasy works for post traumatic stress so they unbanned it for that. Most storys about the so-called "dangers" of exstasy are typical rightwing fearmongering and anti-drug bigotry or corporate propaganda by greedy drug companies and the doctors they own that want to take people off healthy recreational drugs and make them take toxic corporate drugs that lead to suicides and school shootings

the FDA is charged with making these decisions. The FDA thinks exstasy works for post traumatic stress so they unbanned it for that. Most storys about the so-called "dangers" of exstasy are typical rightwing fearmongering and anti-drug bigotry
The APA is rightwing? ROFLCOPTER!

Here, find this article on Reuters, CNN, FOX/ABC/NBC/NPR, etc., and I may consider not laughing at your foolishness.

You'd think that if they were legalizing an extremely illegal drug, for use in a extremely controversial matter, somebody at a legitimate news organization would care.

I'll wade in with my two cents: Ex is dangerous to some. I've taken an awful lot of drugs in my day, and I have nephews who rely on me for info on drugs the way I used to rely on the public library system, until they cleared out all the real books on drugs and replaced them with Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No!" series.

Ex is dangerous to adolescents. Why? It taxes a lot of different systems in your body. If you're not completely aware of your body, or if your body is in a state of flux/growth, you're likely not as aware of the limits your body can withstand. It's too easy to give yourself a larger dose than you can reasonably handle.

The advice I've given my nephews (which they went ahead and ignored, then later apologized for not having taken me at my word) is: Sure, ex is great fun. Just wait 'til you've stopped growing - wait for all your internal systems to catch up with that curious brain of yours. After that, well - Bob's your uncle.

I'm not Bob, btw. And 'uncle', well... best left unspoken.

The APA is rightwing? ROFLCOPTER!

Here, find this article on Reuters, CNN, FOX/ABC/NBC/NPR, etc., and I may consider not laughing at your foolishness.
I wont go near the subverted corporate whore media -I only trust news sources that speak for the people who matter

its a true story since the source I quoted never has ever lied once about a story being real. However having said that I think its better for soldiers to be tripping then to live their life in fear

Never never ever lied ever never you're taking the piss, aren't you?

You'd think that if they were legalizing an extremely illegal drug, for use in a extremely controversial matter, somebody at a legitimate news organization would care.
They do--thats why I quoted Democracynow

Never never ever lied ever never you're taking the piss, aren't you?
nope never. If God was a journalist he'd work for democracynow

I wont go near the subverted corporate whore media -I only trust news sources that speak for the people who matter

Ok - how about quoting ANY secondary source. Or is DemocracyNow.com the ONLY non-corporate-whore media association in existence?

Ok - how about quoting ANY secondary source. Or is DemocracyNow.com the ONLY non-corporate-whore media association in existence?
Im sure Janeane Garafalo will pick it up on AirAmerica. Ill tune into her tonite. Randi Rhodes wouldve mentioned it but they wont let her out of the hospital

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2005/02/18/2003223545

Taipei Times, anybody?

(though it looks to be taken from the Guardian, meh)

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2005/02/18/2003223545

Taipei Times, anybody?

(though it looks to be taken from the Guardian, meh)
when will people learn to stop doubting democracynow? :rolleyes:

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2005/02/18/2003223545

Taipei Times, anybody?

(though it looks to be taken from the Guardian, meh)

I stand corrected.

when will people learn to stop doubting democracynow? :rolleyes:

They won't. They'll just learn to keep their heads buried that much more firmly instead.

They won't. They'll just learn to keep their heads buried that much more firmly instead.
this is only the billionth time since Ive been on NS that a story in Democracynow has been vindicated. Meanwhile Foxnews is lying to people right now

I know, skape. I know. And it never makes one iota of difference to these people. They wouldn't believe in an emerging Police State even if they were rounded up and gassed.

I know, skape. I know. And it never makes one iota of difference to these people. They wouldn't believe in an emerging Police State even if they were rounded up and gassed.
when people wonder why the regular peopel acted the way they did in nazi Germany all they have to do is look at how the dumbed down in denial masses are acting in America today

when people wonder why the regular peopel acted the way they did in nazi Germany all they have to do is look at how the dumbed down in denial masses are acting in America today

I'm not American, and I'm certainly not blindly accepting or condemning any particular news source. It is important to be skeptical of any source which is not supported by other independant sources. This is why I suggested a second source, and also because Democracynow.com has a clear bias, just as Fox news has a clear bias.

I'm not American, and I'm certainly not blindly accepting or condemning any particular news source. It is important to be skeptical of any source which is not supported by other independant sources. This is why I suggested a second source, and also because Democracynow.com has a clear bias, just as Fox news has a clear bias.

Dogburg, please don't get the wrong idea - I'm certainly not saying you're like some of the blinkered Bush apologists who populate these threads - but understand, there are those (many) who wouldn't believe the earth was round unless you could provide them a link...and even then, if Anne Coulter ( http://www.whitehouse.org/initiatives/posters/ann_coulter_brownshirt.asp ) didn't utter it herself on FoxNews, it's just rumour and innuendo.

Psychiatrists successfully used ecstasy to treat patients prior to it becoming criminalised due to its popularity as a party drug.

I've heard that one of the most dangerous things about exstasy is the dosage. The dosage recommended by the original manufacturer was typically exceeded by rave attendeed etc. by three or four times.

This is based on old information, but it fits with a common pharmocological rule that dosage can often influence what a medication does.

I certainly don't want to eliminate the possibility of certain drugs being helpful simply because they are dangerous in excess. It wouldn't surprise me if the FDA saw the same logic.

I call bullshit. Ecstasy is one of the most dangerous drugs available.
No it's not. You die from it because of three reasons. Reason 1: You're allergic to it. This is a very, very small percentage of the population. Reason 2: You get a major overdose. This is not likely to occur in a controlled environment. Reason 3: You die of dehydration. Common in raves, people forget to drink water because of the high and so die from lack of water. Again, not a problem in a controlled environment. I assume they check to see that the participants are not allergic so there is very little danger.

when will people learn to stop doubting democracynow? :rolleyes:
When it reaches above 50% accuracy.

I'm not American, and I'm certainly not blindly accepting or condemning any particular news source. It is important to be skeptical of any source which is not supported by other independant sources. This is why I suggested a second source, and also because Democracynow.com has a clear bias, just as Fox news has a clear bias.
but unlike Foxnews-democracynow doesnt makeup fake news storys to push their agenda. democracynow has integrity which is something foxnews utterly lacks

but unlike Foxnews-democracynow doesnt makeup fake news storys to push their agenda. democracynow has integrity which is something foxnews utterly lacks

Do Fox news actually make up news stories? I would expect that neither democracynow or Fox news completely fabricate stories, but I expect they both twist them or present them in a certain way to reflect the bias that each obviously has.

*finally the military does something right. Soldiers traumatized by the lies that sent them to the quagmire known as Iraq have a right to any substance which releives them of the knowledge that theyre lives are on the line defending the excesses of an odious scum like Bush


the Food and Drug Administration has given the go-ahead for soldiers traumatized by their time in Iraq and Afghanistan to be offered the party drug ecstasy to help free them of flashbacks and recurring nightmares. The soldiers would take the drug as part of an experiment to see if MDMA, the active ingredient in ecstasy, can treat post-traumatic stress disorder.
democracynow.org

THE BASTARDS!!

I resisted when they offered scholarship money. I resisted when they offered job training. I even resisted when my highschool friends told me that they got to drink absinthe in Spanish bars and got very few venerial diseases from the many exotic hookers who stole their wallets. But how's a red blooded american youth supposed to resist the promise of free Ecstacy?

Do Fox news actually make up news stories? I would expect that neither democracynow or Fox news completely fabricate stories, but I expect they both twist them or present them in a certain way to reflect the bias that each obviously has.

In one argument over the validity of Fox News a conservative friend told me that they don't make up stories and that the many cases of their stories proving to be 180 degrees from the truth were merely errors in their fact checking.

I responded "well I can tell you that there's water on the moon, I haven't been to the moon, so by your logic I'm not lying because I don't know it isn't true."

Someone else at the table pointed out that there had recently been a story in the news about the discovery of ice in the bottom of a valley on the moon that never gets sunlight on it.

There you have it folks. Randomly made up crap more likely to be true than stuff you find on Fox News.

Giving soldiers ekkies is an utterly stupid idea for the downer a few days later alone.

Do Fox news actually make up news stories? I would expect that neither democracynow or Fox news completely fabricate stories, but I expect they both twist them or present them in a certain way to reflect the bias that each obviously has.

Brit Hume recently did a story about how "FDR wanted the social security system, which he designed, to be replaced by private accounts."

He then took selective quotes out of context to make it sound like FDR said he wanted to eventually do what Bush now wants to do now, but what he was in fact saying was that people who were retiring at the time should be given social security benifits as if they had paid in because the government had not yet gotten around to having people pay in.

Hume knew damn well that he was lying and taking bad evidence to support him. He wasn't even just presenting the quotes and letting the audience reach bad conclusions. What he did was like showing a photograph and then lying about what was happening in it.

So, ya. Fox News makes up stories.
I don't know about Democracy Now. I don't really read liberal press. I think anyone who's paid attention to any of my posts would agree that the last thing I need is a liberal brainwashing.

its a true story since the source I quoted never has ever lied once about a story being real. However having said that I think its better for soldiers to be tripping then to live their life in fear

Skapedroe, please answer this for me:

Is the Iraq vote a good thing?

Now answer this:

How did they come to have the ability to vote?

Thank you.

If this is seriously true, then the people who authorized this are either high or retarded.

Ecstasy causes brain damage in the area of the brain that regulates dopamine, a hormone that helps control motor function. When you amount of dopamine drops, it affects your ability to speak, pay attention, and control your movement. This is also called PARKINSONS DISEASE!!!!!! And ecstasy can do this in just one night of useage.

I really hope this is a joke, because if it isnt, then you will see a lot of people in 20 or so years going to their doctors and finding out that they have parkinsons disease from taking that crap.

Brit Hume recently did a story about how "FDR wanted the social security system, which he designed, to be replaced by private accounts."

He then took selective quotes out of context to make it sound like FDR said he wanted to eventually do what Bush now wants to do now, but what he was in fact saying was that people who were retiring at the time should be given social security benifits as if they had paid in because the government had not yet gotten around to having people pay in.

Hume knew damn well that he was lying and taking bad evidence to support him. He wasn't even just presenting the quotes and letting the audience reach bad conclusions. What he did was like showing a photograph and then lying about what was happening in it.

So, ya. Fox News makes up stories.
I don't know about Democracy Now. I don't really read liberal press. I think anyone who's paid attention to any of my posts would agree that the last thing I need is a liberal brainwashing.

Fair enough. I don't rely on either Fox or DemocracyNow for my news, so I'm no expert on them either. From what I hear though they seem both as biased as eachother.

Do Fox news actually make up news stories? I would expect that neither democracynow or Fox news completely fabricate stories, but I expect they both twist them or present them in a certain way to reflect the bias that each obviously has.
foxnews makes up storys and is an example of the lowest form of rightwing hate- propaganda whereas democracynow fights the power

THE BASTARDS!!

I resisted when they offered scholarship money. I resisted when they offered job training. I even resisted when my highschool friends told me that they got to drink absinthe in Spanish bars and got very few venerial diseases from the many exotic hookers who stole their wallets. But how's a red blooded american youth supposed to resist the promise of free Ecstacy?
:D :D :D

Skapedroe, please answer this for me:

Is the Iraq vote a good thing?

Ooh, Ooh, can I try? :)

It's an irrelevant thing because their government has no authority. It would be like the English suddenly getting to vote for their royalty.

Now answer this:

How did they come to have the ability to vote?
The Bush administration needed to boost their poll ratings when it was becoming obvious that they were making a mess of everything there. So they came up with the "transfer of sovreignty," scam to give them plausable deniability. That worked a treat so they figured that the "Iraq now gets to vote for their token non-sovreign state figurehead" angle would be ratings gold.

Thank you.
You're welcome.

Giving soldiers ekkies is an utterly stupid idea for the downer a few days later alone.
then dont let them come down

Skapedroe, please answer this for me:

Is the Iraq vote a good thing?

Now answer this:

How did they come to have the ability to vote?

Thank you.
yes its excellent that the iraqi voters rejected all of Bushs puppets.

They came to be able to vote cause Bush lied to invade loot and murder them while incidentally freeing them all at the same time

then dont let them come down

And how do you manage that? Give them a few ecstacy pills every day? If they don't neck themselves from the inevitable side effects, they'll be dead within a month.

the FDA apparently doesnt agree..nor do I

Street ecstasy is one of the most dangerous drugs out there as it is often made with dangerous and very low quality ingredients by people who don't know what they're doing. While I am sure if this was occuring, the FDA would ensure that the soldiers were receiving good quality, goverment laboratory made ecstasy, to say that ecstasy isn't dangerous is just stupid. Sorry but it is.

yes its excellent that the iraqi voters rejected all of Bushs puppets.

They came to be able to vote cause Bush lied to invade loot and murder them while incidentally freeing them all at the same time

If democracynow reporters are anything like you, then I guess it is a pretty heavily biased source.

Yes, Bush lied about WMD to invade. Did he go there with the express purpose of "loot and murder"? Come on.

Further, while American forces were responsible for a pile of civillian and military deaths, think how many more would be set to occur had Saddam remained in power. Saddam really was the kind of guy who got off on "loot and murder". Did Bush ever gas a huge load of his own people?

I have listened to Democracy now blatently lie on their radio program(I listen to it occasionaly to laugh at the communists). This is not terribly frequent, but when they are not lieing, they are usualy distorting the truth horendously, far more than I see from FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, BBC, or NPR, most of which can hardly be described as right-wing or pro-bush. Most of the Fox news articles are Associated press anyways, meaning that it is not Fox that is twisting those stories. Additionaly, I have yet to see these sources blatently lie, though they regularly bypass information or make mistakes, which is why I view as many sources as possible.

I will trust a lot of other sources, but I have heard to much with my own two ears to trust DemocracyNow without a second, reputable source. Many of their articles are legitament, but enough arent that I do not consider them a reasonable source on their own. Their communist(yes communist, which is a lable I do not oftent use, and is far byond your typical liberal) agenda is far too influenceing in their reporting.

That being said, it is correct that the FDA has the power to start such trials, and this apparently is a legitament story. However, it should be noted that these are only controled trials, and not general polocy yet. Studdies have shown tha use of Extacy acctualy lowers the IQ of users durring prolonged used, so i cannot foresee extacy being used as a longterm sollution, but rather as something to simulate the conversion from combat to civilian life.

Edit note: I haven ot yet been able to find any refference to this from the major news sources, but will continue digging.

I have listened to Democracy now blatently lie on their radio program...what what the big Lie, and when did this happen?

what what the big Lie, and when did this happen?
They claimed that Saddam's sons were captured and executed by US troops, which is ont true. They were killed in a firefight with US troops.

Just one example off the top of my head I don't give them too much credit.

And in reffernce to the brit Hume thing, that is not a made up storry. At worst is it an intentional miss representation of FDRs words, which occures very often. It is also compleatly possible that is is a fair interpretation or unintentional missinterpretation. Of all the claims that the quote was taken out of context, I have yet to hear what the actual context was.

They claimed that Saddam's sons were captured and executed by US troops, which is ont true. They were killed in a firefight with US troops. The US gov. said they were killed in a firefigth.

yet The Bush Gov has less credibility than AlJazeera.

And how do you manage that? Give them a few ecstacy pills every day? If they don't neck themselves from the inevitable side effects, they'll be dead within a month.
its better to die happy then to live in pain

Street ecstasy is one of the most dangerous drugs out there as it is often made with dangerous and very low quality ingredients by people who don't know what they're doing. While I am sure if this was occuring, the FDA would ensure that the soldiers were receiving good quality, goverment laboratory made ecstasy, to say that ecstasy isn't dangerous is just stupid. Sorry but it is.
I think its all a matter of dosage--eating Biggie sized McDonalds meals everyday is prly alot more deadly then using ekkies in moderation

The US gov. said they were killed in a firefigth.

yet The Bush Gov has less credibility than AlJazeera. Aljazeera would nut themselvs if we pulled out of Iraq and left it to the insurgents. They'd say anything if they thought it would help anti-american sentiment.

Hell, they egarly showed film of westerners being beheaded but claimed that a palistinian beheading was too graphic.

its better to die happy then to live in pain

The problem is, constantly taking them wont make you happy.

If democracynow reporters are anything like you, then I guess it is a pretty heavily biased source.

Yes, Bush lied about WMD to invade. Did he go there with the express purpose of "loot and murder"? Come on.

Further, while American forces were responsible for a pile of civillian and military deaths, think how many more would be set to occur had Saddam remained in power. Saddam really was the kind of guy who got off on "loot and murder". Did Bush ever gas a huge load of his own people?
the Bush family rewarded Saddam for gassing his own people--they love murderous dictators--they only turned against Saddam when he became an inconvienience

I have listened to Democracy now blatently lie on their radio program(I listen to it occasionaly to laugh at the communists). This is not terribly frequent, but when they are not lieing, they are usualy distorting the truth horendously, far more than I see from FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, BBC, or NPR, most of which can hardly be described as right-wing or pro-bush. Most of the Fox news articles are Associated press anyways, meaning that it is not Fox that is twisting those stories. Additionaly, I have yet to see these sources blatently lie, though they regularly bypass information or make mistakes, which is why I view as many sources as possible.

I will trust a lot of other sources, but I have heard to much with my own two ears to trust DemocracyNow without a second, reputable source. Many of their articles are legitament, but enough arent that I do not consider them a reasonable source on their own. Their communist(yes communist, which is a lable I do not oftent use, and is far byond your typical liberal) agenda is far too influenceing in their reporting.

That being said, it is correct that the FDA has the power to start such trials, and this apparently is a legitament story. However, it should be noted that these are only controled trials, and not general polocy yet. Studdies have shown tha use of Extacy acctualy lowers the IQ of users durring prolonged used, so i cannot foresee extacy being used as a longterm sollution, but rather as something to simulate the conversion from combat to civilian life.

Edit note: I haven ot yet been able to find any refference to this from the major news sources, but will continue digging.
your clearly brainwashed

They claimed that Saddam's sons were captured and executed by US troops, which is ont true. They were killed in a firefight with US troops.

Just one example off the top of my head I don't give them too much credit.

And in reffernce to the brit Hume thing, that is not a made up storry. At worst is it an intentional miss representation of FDRs words, which occures very often. It is also compleatly possible that is is a fair interpretation or unintentional missinterpretation. Of all the claims that the quote was taken out of context, I have yet to hear what the actual context was.
I listen to democracynow alla time I never heard them say that--however studies have proven that everyone with misconceptions about the Iraq war are all victims of foxnews propaganda

Aljazeera would nut themselvs if we pulled out of Iraq and left it to the insurgents. They'd say anything if they thought it would help anti-american sentiment.

Hell, they egarly showed film of westerners being beheaded but claimed that a palistinian beheading was too graphic.
and no lie is too big for Foxnews to spread for Bushs PNAC agenda--Foxnews is the al jazeera for the Bush family

The problem is, constantly taking them wont make you happy.
what if you supplement them with other drugs?

Okay, I looked up keywords "army" and "ecstacy" and got a bunch of porn sites.

Okay, I looked up keywords "army" and "ecstacy" and got a bunch of porn sites.
LOL

Everything you post is a lie.

Everything you post is a lie.
LOL

Well if you won't take Skapedroe and democracynow as a source, how about The Guardian (http://society.guardian.co.uk/drugsandalcohol/story/0,8150,1416150,00.html)?

Currently, it is a double-blind research study to see if MDMA helps someone suffering PTSD to undergo therapy. If the studies show a positive effect, then the DEA will be requested to reschedule MDMA from Schedule I (no medical use) to II (or possibly III), and the FDA will conduct safety studies.

I listen to democracynow alla time I never heard them say that--however studies have proven that everyone with misconceptions about the Iraq war are all victims of foxnews propaganda Thats a load of BS, most of the people in the army that get back to the states have a much more possitive view of Iraq than those relying on mass media for their appraisal of the situation.

what if you supplement them with other drugs? Do you realize how dangerous mixing drugs can be? a couple sedatives and a shot or 2 of whiskey can cause heat failure.

They do--thats why I quoted Democracynow
Keywords:legitimate news organization

Thats a load of BS, most of the people in the army that get back to the states have a much more possitive view of Iraq than those relying on mass media for their appraisal of the situation.
except for the ones who realized they lost their limbs for no reason

Do you realize how dangerous mixing drugs can be? a couple sedatives and a shot or 2 of whiskey can cause heat failure.
avoid deserts

Ecstasy causes brain damage in the area of the brain that regulates dopamine, a hormone that helps control motor function. When you amount of dopamine drops, it affects your ability to speak, pay attention, and control your movement. This is also called PARKINSONS DISEASE!!!!!! And ecstasy can do this in just one night of useage.

In high and repeated doses yes. One night of usage in this case is not talking a single dose. You're talking anywhere between 3-7 times the normal dosage, and that assumes they take a single pill. I've known people who take X. They tend to take at least two pills at raves.

except for the ones who realized they lost their limbs for no reason Realy? Like the guy who recently got cleared to return to combat with a prostetic foot, at his own request?

avoid deserts Deserts have nothing to do with it. Combining drugs carries inherent risks.

Realy? Like the guy who recently got cleared to return to combat with a prostetic foot, at his own request?
he prly wanted them to finish the job...
alot of soldiers are severely depressed when they return home--theyre permanently altared