Free search and download videos

Loading... IMPORTANT :: YOU MUST SAVE THE FILE AS ".FLV"
Change the file name from "get_video" to "video.flv"

1. LaKinzi Says:
   January 7th, 2009 at 19:17:34 chomsky implies there's no danger but there is. i've cited studies that show marijuana contains 2-3x more carcinogenic compounds than cig smoke-undisputed in the scientific literature, and the view that a little carcinogen can't cause cancer demonstrates non comprehension of "carcinogen". policy issues are never 'proven' my friend, they're compromises, but few here will admit what even CANORML does so where can I even start? i'm not here to antagonize so I'll desist. my best to those in pain~
2. PRIAPUS Says:
   January 7th, 2009 at 19:40:33 So then what is your point here tecr? As I said, nobody here is disputing the fact that any form of smoke(canna included)contains carcinogens and could POSSIBLY lead to complications. You said: "marijuana is three times as likely to cause cancer than cigarettes". Thats just not true. Theres no factual evidence pointing to the validity of that statement. My point here is that there is no good argument for the support of a policy that does more harm than good. I invite you to prove otherwise.
3. Says:
   January 7th, 2009 at 20:03:32 Oh! This is Noam Chomsky on MARIJUANA, not Noam Chomsky ON marijuana....I`d like to hear that one- "You see, the industrial/military complex is...is...does anyone have a Mars Bar?(snigger)"
4. Findabair Says:
   January 7th, 2009 at 20:26:31 That may be true, but the sheer volume of pot smoked vs. a common cig smoker is not on the same scale. NO ONE smokes 20-30 joints a day...sorry....
5. NANI Says:
   January 7th, 2009 at 20:49:30 ok lathzz regarding imprisonment, i'm responding to it's safety. let me be clear as my comments reg. ciggs were mistaken. cig's are dangerous, end of story. the definition of carcinogens is an agent that causes cancer, so your last statement is quite contradictory. there's plenty of link between benzene, napthalene, and tuolene and cancer and these are some of the primary carcinogens that vaporization is meant to target/remove. kwballz: where's our cancer coming from then? Ans: Carcinogens.
6. KYNTHELIG Says:
   January 7th, 2009 at 21:12:29 trecr: I havent seen anyone here claiming that smoking Cannabis is not potentially harmful. Of course it is. But thats not the point here. Point is that potential individual harm is not grounds for IMPRISONMENT. Its just not a sound argument. About ciggs; You are DEAD wrong on that. Do you realize the amounts and varieties of "additives" that are put in ciggs? Those additives are causing cancer in cigg smokers. Canna has carcinogens sure, but theres no link to cancer assoc. with it.
7. VALIANT Says:
   January 7th, 2009 at 21:35:28 that is simply misleading science our bodies have evolved to protect against cancer by cells simply dying instead of splitting (a form of sucide when the cells become to cancerous). the primary cause you cancer for tobacco is nicotine because one its qualities is that it prolongs cells life and it wont allow them to die so when the time comes for a cell to divide the cells ill spread the cancer instead of instead of just dying. not to mention that pot smokers do not use the same quantities
8. Maggie Says:
   January 7th, 2009 at 21:58:27 the figure in studies ranges to as high as 70%+ so 50% is conservative. your comment regarding vaporization really tells a lot. why vaporize it if it's safe? because cannabis tar/smoke (even that from waterpipes) is in fact carcinogenic, and the truth is that most pot smokers want to smoke, not use vaporizers. i will stipulate that current research indicates cannabis is about 95% LESS carcinogenic when vaporized. that still doesn't justify ingesting carcinogens.
9. WITHYPOLL Says:
   January 7th, 2009 at 22:21:26 50% got cut out when i backspaced. also, I have not expressed any position for or against the legalization of marijuana.
10. Una Says:
    January 7th, 2009 at 22:44:25 If you are a biology student, you have access to the research indicating that marijuana smoke has about percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke (ie Tashkin, 2005). You are referring to the fact that the link between marijuana and LUNG cancer has not been substantiated as of yet, but the fact is that ingesting carcinogens in general has. If you mean to tell the public, as a biology student, that ingesting carcinogens is 100% safe for them, then it is you who misuse science.
11. Tansy Says:
    January 7th, 2009 at 23:07:24 I am not a pot smoker. However, as a biology student, I'm appalled by your misuse of science to dismiss the intelligent arguments offered by Chomsky of others on the issue of legalization. Marijuana is not carcinogenic or otherwise harmful if vaporized any more than depression pills or sleeping pills are "harmful" by temporarily altering brain chemistry. If it were made legal, obviously users would vaporize it to avoid adverse effects.
12. Rob Says:
    January 7th, 2009 at 23:30:23 Where the heck did you read this?? And wtf was the point in your post when you said absolutely nothing to defend cigarretes, and don't get me started on the "nice" effects on them
13. PEISISTRATUS Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 23:53:22 marijuana is three times as likely to cause cancer than cigarettes. most of us consider cigarette smoking a dangerous practice yet pot smokers somehow believe taking this smoke into their lungs is completely innocuous or good for you? forget about the science, it's not even intuitively convincing!
14. GABI,GABRIEL Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 00:16:21 The only people who outlaw marijuana are those that are brainwashed to believe that association by default is right.
15. ANGLESEY Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 00:39:20 And even IF it was dangerous, people have the right to consume what they want, so long as they're not harming other people...
16. Nita Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 01:02:19 Marijuana is good for you.
17. Rinna Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 01:25:18 Drugs do the EXACT same things to your brain chemistry that religious experiences do. Why isn't Religion illegal? If Noam Chomsky's right, it, then Religion could be construed as a gateway drug. It's also very widely used by the lower class of Society, the poor and unintelligent. So, Can we FINALLY get this Crap off our streets? Terrorists Use drug money to fund their terrorism.. Which is SPURRED ON By their Religion. I'm not making this shit up as i go along. The U.S. Government has said this.
18. Cacamwri Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 01:48:17 yes
19. Jadaya Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 02:11:16 I recommend you to research the effects of cannabis and the effects of alcohol, long term effects to the body too. I smoke marijuana once a week and I dont do it for the "liking being stoned" kind of way, I do it for the experimental reason, I been drunk several times and I can tell you it destroys my ability to drive, to talk and some times to have a good sleep, hangovers are terrible with diarrhea, muscle pain and headaches, that doesnt happen with marijuana does it?
20. Barnet Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 02:34:15 I recommend you to research the effects of cannabis and the effects of alcohol, long term effects to the body too.
21. Cianni Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 02:57:14 What Fucks me up, is that there are propoganda organs and figures like Fox News and Bill O'Reilly that perpetuate the idiocy and uselessness of the criminalization of marijuana with fleeting generalizations and unfounded stererotypes - A place where facts, or reason has no place. Its so bullshit. I hate it. Decriminilize it now, I say - If a person ever smoked it in their lifetime (OReilly) - They arent allowed to say shit about it, fucking hypocrites.
22. Lundy Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 03:20:13 The wars on drugs is just a scam. Anyone who thinks drugs are illegal because the government is trying to keep us safe is a moron.
23. HAMIDAH Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 03:43:12 I agree, Tobacco and Alcohol can have way more serious long term effects on your body, and both can be addictive whereas Marijuana isn't. Legalizing it would clean up the prisons, not to mention the taxing from that and the hundreds of jobs that can be created in America alone.
24. KIOKO Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 04:06:11 Most of these comments are getting completely off track. The arguement is "Should people get prison sentences for using of pot?" I used pot when I was younger, and found I that it had less serious effects on my body, and it made me feel much better than alcohol ever did. But, I grew out of it. You can't grow out of a prison record. Legalize Pot NOw, and get all these millions of people out of prison, and erase their record.
25. SHELBY Says:
    January 8th, 2009 at 04:29:10 they already have

Leave a Reply