"Alternative Substances Forum" -- Conspiracy issues related to drugs, but NOT recreational/persona

Originally posted by PC equals Newspeak
Considering the scope of this forum, the censorship of topics on history, anthropology and narcotics is in contradiction with that scope.

That's twice now you've said that. What exactly is being "censored" about history and/or anthropology and what on earth does that have to do with this forum?

Also, it's pretty totalitarian.

So you allow people to come in your home and poo on your rug because they think it unjust of you to expect them to go to the bathroom? This is no different. This is not your home, nor is it mine. It is SO's and the other owner's home, and we are their guests. I would no sooner expect them to change the rules of their home to suit my wishes than I would change the rules of my own house to allow someone to poo on my rug.

reply to post by whatukno

Please, try not to ruin what can be a great discussion for everyone because you wish to post your own personal sorted tales of excess.

Please quote the part/s of anything I've posted which would indicate I wish to relate any personal tales of excess, be they "sorted", 'sordid', or otherwise. See, this is exactly the kind of assumption I mentioned in my 1st post herein; I am against prohibition per se, therefor I must be the diametric opposite, right?
WRONG!
If I did want to talk about such things, I could always go elsewhere, could I not? That is, assuming I had any such tales of course...
I suppose you just failed to notice that my request for clarification stems from my original point that there are reasons related to the discussion of conspiracy, in my case moral & philosophical, why a person may not wish to condemn recreational use, without advocating it either.
How sadly predictable

reply to post by PC equals Newspeak


You may find it extremely beneficial to read all 115 pages and nearly 2300 replies in this thread to have the full appreciation and understanding just exactly how hard of a fight it has been to have this forum to even remotely discuss the topic at hand.

I really do not understand why you feel especially offended or the heavy hand of true censorship in the regard of the ownership's desire not to express your drug experiences.

Suppose for a moment that it was allowed fully and card blanche was given and you talk explicatively of your experiences and revelations while in altered states. And rather than inspire expansion your accounts only inspire recreational use and abuse of your substance of choice. How does that make you feel that your actions only inspired irresponsible behavior in others? Could you honestly look in the eyes of another individual that did not comprehend your full intent and now has to face a lifetime of misery behind bars for a crime? Or forbid the thought that said person committed theft or murder to achieve what only amounted to a cheap high based on your recommendations?

Do you honestly think you could say "Sorry kid, that wasn't what I meant." as you looked in his eyes without having remorse over what resulted? Expand your mind on that for a moment and realize that there is more than one way to define what is a monster.

reply to post by Bunken Drum


Well, this post seemed to answer your original question pretty well.

But apparently that isn't good enough. I think I understand perfectly, you want to know exactly what is too far so that in most of your posts on this subject you can dance right on that line then complain when a post is removed for an infraction on the rules.

Instead of erring on the side of caution you want to dance as close to the fire as you possibly can. But now that you got called out on it, it's far too easy to play the dejected misunderstood game.

[edit on 11/30/2009 by whatukno]

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Our strict rules against the discussion of personal recreational use of drugs -- including naturally-occuring mind-altering substances -- is still in place. Any member discussing, promoting, or otherwise alluding to personal recreational use of drugs in this forum will be immediately banned from ATS without warning.

I would join in and speak of the manner the British Empire had manipulated Opium and Cannabis in India some century and a half ago more and less, Anslinger and the manner the League of Nations now the UN has saught to protect Alcohol and petrochemical, pharmaceutical industries.

Etc, Etc, Etc.

But i won't.

Given the paragraph quoted.

I'm out of this completely.

What about traditional uses across the world which are spiritual use, shamen and pagan creed?

Far too restrictive, that paragraph, so when i speak out on the subject, i will do so somewhere i don't get pre-empted with warnings of being banned.

Cheers anyway sysops but that paragraph means my knowledge on the subject based on 33 years experience 25 of those spiritual use as much as recreational, or unfortunately self destructive abuse of legal substances in my teens and adulthood until April 2000, since i was 9 years old, will not be forthcoming.

It would suit much better if one were to say elsewhere on ATS thee rules are as is, but for discussion purposes this thread/forum allows freer speech.

It isn't so i can't be bothered, when it's a subject i can greatly expand on.

I also fully concur with QtheQ.

I am not impressed ATS is happy to be so restrictive on a subject which is more and more important in the 21st century because treating such subjects as taboo is part of the problem, personal experiences/use etc, recreational or other enthogenic usage are all part of it, not something to be excluded imho.

I don't think people like Professor Nutt would find it acceptable either!

Pax.

[Edit: add "/forum"

[edit on 30-11-2009 by DeltaPan]

Originally posted by whatukno
As a private entity, ATS reserves the right to deny service for any reason whatsoever, they can limit what can and cannot be said on their servers. If you don't like that, you don't have to post. It's pretty simple.

True. However, ATS presents itself as a haven for people interested in alternative topics, yet by censoring various issues they force people to think within the box and thereby deceive the gullible masses.

Originally posted by whatukno
Most of us like it here, and like the way this place is a great place to post, there are however a few people that no matter what the administration does, finds some fault. Frankly it's the issue with the individual, not the site itself.

So censorship is not an issue of those applying the censorship but rather an issue of those being censored? How Orwellian of you...

Originally posted by whatukno
Again, you don't have to post here, if it's that totalitarian, then by all means post somewhere else, you aren't required to post here at all.

I agree, however I worry about all those impressionable young minds who visit this forum in a spirit of openmindedness and end up being indoctrinated by just a different set of beliefs.

Originally posted by whatukno
There are plenty of other sites on the internet, I am sure you can find one that suits your needs.

Actually, I haven't. The Internet offers numerous communities that claim to be openminded while at the same time censoring various opinions relevant to the scope of the forum. ATS is just one of the many and I've complained at other communities as well.

Originally posted by whatukno
If ATS isn't that place then maybe you would feel better somewhere else.

If only that would be true...

Originally posted by Jenna
That's twice now you've said that. What exactly is being "censored" about history and/or anthropology and what on earth does that have to do with this forum?

In the past, this forum has censored and banned numerous people for expressing rational arguments that dispute the official explanation of the disappearance of European Jewry during WW2 (an aspect of history) or rational arguments that prove a genetic factor in intelligence (a fact in evolutionary psychology with the anthropologic/sociologic implication that some races are on average more intelligent than others). In both cases, false accusations of "racism" or "antisemitism" were used as an excuse to silence the debate.

Originally posted by Jenna
So you allow people to come in your home and poo on your rug because they think it unjust of you to expect them to go to the bathroom? This is no different. This is not your home, nor is it mine.

This is a poor comparison. Free speech has nothing to do with disturbing another person's property. When I allow people in my home, I do not allow them to s*** on my carpet (this reminds me of "The Big Lebowski") but I do allow people to express their opinion freely and I expect the same from them. A truely civilised person allows the free expression of ideas.

Originally posted by Ahabstar
I really do not understand why you feel especially offended or the heavy hand of true censorship in the regard of the ownership's desire not to express your drug experiences.

I gained a significant amount of insight from my experiences with psychedelics and empathogenics. To me, it is important that other people are informed properly so they can decide for themselves if this is something that might be interesting for them. To be properly informed, they need to know both the pros and cons.

Originally posted by Ahabstar
Suppose for a moment that it was allowed fully and card blanche was given and you talk explicatively of your experiences and revelations while in altered states. And rather than inspire expansion your accounts only inspire recreational use and abuse of your substance of choice. How does that make you feel that your actions only inspired irresponsible behavior in others?

The price of freedom is responsibility. Freedom without responsibility is dangerous and responsibility without freedom is totalitarian. As someone who carries the US flag in his avatar, I find it strange you don't get that considering individual freedom mixed with individual responsibility are the foundation of your constitution.

[edit on 30/11/09 by PC equals Newspeak]

Originally posted by PC equals Newspeak
In the past, this forum has censored and banned numerous people for expressing rational arguments that dispute the official explanation of the disappearance of European Jewry during WW2 (an aspect of history) or rational arguments that prove a genetic factor in intelligence (a fact in evolutionary psychology with the anthropologic/sociologic implication that some races are on average more intelligent than others). In both cases, false accusations of "racism" or "antisemitism" were used as an excuse to silence the debate.

Or perhaps, and this is just a suggestion, the comments made truly were racist and/or anti-Semite in nature. Few things offend me, but that does not prevent me from recognizing something that could be found offensive by others. Perhaps you didn't see a comment as racist because you were not personally offended by it. Others, however, apparently were and as much as I hate this PC nonsense that runs rampant nowadays, it's not ultimately your decision whether someone is offended by something or not.

Evolutionary psychology itself would make an excellent thread topic from what I know of it. This, however, is neither the time nor the place to get into such a discussion.

This is a poor comparison. Free speech has nothing to do with disturbing another person's property. When I allow people in my home, I do not allow them to s*** on my carpet (this reminds me of "The Big Lebowski") but I do allow people to express their opinion freely and I expect the same from them. A truely civilised person allows the free expression of ideas.

Choose another analogy if you like, the result is the same. You would not allow someone to force you to change your house rules just for them simply because they thought them unjust, why expect someone else to change their house rules for you?

It's not like the ban on personal use stories is a new development. I've been here for several years (can't remember how many without looking) and not once in all this time have personal use stories been permitted. There are children on this website and part of being a responsible adult is not sharing things like that with someone else's children. Would you want some stranger on the internet telling your children how awesome their high was the other day and then proceeding to tell them what to get and how to use it?

Do what you like, I won't judge you for what you do in your spare time just as I would expect not to be judged for what I do in mine. There is no need to add yet another page, however, to the millions already available elsewhere on the internet about what to use and how to use it. I'm sure you're quite capable of discussing your revelations, as it were, without going into how you came about them. I've posted many a thought here on ATS without giving a replay of exactly what I was doing when I had that thought, and I'm quite sure you are capable of doing the same.

reply to post by whatukno Your link leads to a page, not a post. Which post?
As for the rest: more speculation based on assumption. As for whom has been called out, I notice you ignored my request that you substantiate your earlier assumptions about me.
This is not an assumption: you have added nothing but repetitive butt-snorkelling to this thread. Based on that evidence & your inappropriately aggressive tone, I hypothesise that in fact you are insincere & are only posting for the sake of having an argument, confident of your position since it supports the Site Owners'.
If you cannot understand how philosophy relates to development of conspiracy, then I suggest you do some further reading. There's some great stuff in that regard right here on ATS.

Originally posted by Jenna
Or perhaps, and this is just a suggestion, the comments made truly were racist and/or anti-Semite in nature.

No they were not. I happen to have encountered people who were banned for this reason and they were by no means antisemites. Accusing people of antisemitism is just a way to silence debate on certain topics without having to address the arguments of the other side.

Originally posted by Jenna
Perhaps you didn't see a comment as racist because you were not personally offended by it. Others, however, apparently were and as much as I hate this PC nonsense that runs rampant nowadays, it's not ultimately your decision whether someone is offended by something or not.

If one can offer a rational argument based on facts and evidence for a particular point of view, it should be irrelevant whether or not this viewpoint offends some people. No being able to mention proven facts because they offend some individuals or groups of people is reminiscent of the Spanish inquisition or Stalinist repression of dissidents.

Originally posted by Jenna
Evolutionary psychology itself would make an excellent thread topic from what I know of it. This, however, is neither the time nor the place to get into such a discussion.

I was merely referencing to the censorship applied by ATS regarding anthropological arguments which does seem relevant considering there's a pattern of censoring important controversial topics on ATS and that's relevant to this thread.

Originally posted by Jenna
Choose another analogy if you like, the result is the same. You would not allow someone to force you to change your house rules just for them simply because they thought them unjust, why expect someone else to change their house rules for you?

Censoring views you do not like is primitive and totalitarian. There is no place for it in any truely civilised community.

Originally posted by Jenna
It's not like the ban on personal use stories is a new development.

It's not just a ban on personal stories but a ban on any positive opinion about any drugs made illegal by our "leaders" as well as a few other interesting topics.

Originally posted by Jenna
I've been here for several years (can't remember how many without looking) and not once in all this time have personal use stories been permitted. There are children on this website and part of being a responsible adult is not sharing things like that with someone else's children. Would you want some stranger on the internet telling your children how awesome their high was the other day and then proceeding to tell them what to get and how to use it?

Yes I would. I believe it is important my children learn both the positive and negative effects of drugs so they can make an informed opinion about it. Not having access to this information is like not having access to information about reproduction and birth control. Your kids may eventually experiment without having a clue what they're up to, which is far more dangerous than them being informed of the risks and dangers in an OBJECTIVE way. If I were still a teenager, I would certainly pay more attention to someone saying "If you use drugs, watch out for..." than someone saying "Don't do drugs, period".

Excellent!

Thanks for finally recognising our status as adults and our right to free speech.

I have a question,

this is not going to work,

Do you think this post is really appropriate?

There are so many! They are slowly, but surely, being banned by the FDA in your country

some of the more 'harder' ones:
Salvia Divinorum
Datura Innoxia (be very very careful with this)
Nutmeg (be careful with this, as well)
Morning Glory (LSA - similar to '___' but only about 10% potency)

there are plenty of 'natural, herbal extasies' that are sometimes sold in 'occult' shops, or places where they sell things such as, marijuana seeds and the like... I find it is much more satisfying and rewarding to... grow your own, than to buy it (but that is just me)

some of the milder 'drugs':
Ginger root
Sage
Peppers (capsicum... might hurt coming out XD)
Dagga

there are so many! I can recommend you to a few sources... but here's a few interesting 'combinations'

there are things called MAOIs (be careful with the things you ingest under the influence of this - do not eat fish, or anything containing tyrosine... do your research PLEASE! i do not want any of this information to physically or mentally hurt anyone!) which, when mixed with plants/herbs/shrubs containing '___'...adds up to some very very powerful effects, often used in shamanic rituals.... these are often referred to as "Ayahuasca" beverages... here are some mixtures

Syrian Rue (MAOI) + Phalaris Grass --> both are perfectly legal, according to the FDA (but for how long??) however there are some complications with this process because of the 'kitchen chemistry' involved, really all you need is a wheatgrass juicer and an oven...


but, you know what - perhaps i have already given you too much information: do your own research - its a very interesting subject...

there's some very interesting and useful info on the net for you - not sure if i'm allowed to post links here or not, so U2U me if you want some 'starter' links

What are you guys thinking?

Well it has been interesting, I have been reading through the Alternative Substances topics all morning and it is mind altering to say the least.

From one who has been there, and seen the lives destroyed by drug abuse and alcohol abuse, I do believe this is an important topic to discuss,

But from what I have read so far, well, lets just say I hope this doesn't encourage kids reading the forum,

Great job ATS.

I hoped you guys would find a solution and allow the discussion of drugs and the conspiracies and health benefits relating to some of them.


Excellent.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

Our strict rules against the discussion of personal recreational use of drugs -- including naturally-occuring mind-altering substances -- is still in place. Any member discussing, promoting, or otherwise alluding to personal recreational use of drugs in this forum will be immediately banned from ATS without warning.

This, of course, makes it impossible to share any personal knowledge of these substances, even to warn others away from them.

Over the last five decades, recreational drug use has become a most serious issue and one that will only fester so long as we refuse to talk openly about both its causes and the effects of the same. And if there could ever be a doubt, the first, best source of information regarding both immediate and long term effects, will come from those who have first hand knowledge.

There are probably many, including myself, who could share this type of information in a completely dispassionate, non-promotive way.

But understanding that the website, bandwidth and cyber ink being used here is yours, I will of course comply.

Peace

Didn't take long for the druggies to find a comfortable place to roost in a new forum. Nice work ATS. Legitimate discussions?? Nice rationalization. The door is officially open.

reply to post by redoubt

This, of course, makes it impossible to share any personal knowledge of these substances, even to warn others away from them.

Well yes, I am all for this type of discussion,

But from what I have been reading, it looks like a lot of pro drug related post, They can try and mask it, but one can read in between the lines.

I understand mind altering substances and how they relate to shamanism, but drug and alcohol abuse or the glorification of drug use turns me off,

reply to post by Stormdancer777


A nod is as good as a wink to a blind horse... that was the name of an old music album but, I like the title.

The point was... and I promise to stop myself hereafter, there is a lot of worthy, first hand information that can't be shared under the current rules because it would, naturally, relate to the first hand experience of those who have, for one reason or the next, experimented with various substance over the years. Not to say that any of them would still be doing so. It's really quite all an avocation of youth... at least, from my personal observations.

This wasn't addressing any cult or religious use... though that does exist.

Now then, I must be on my way. This is dangerous ground for me.

Bonn Route

Edit: typos

[edit on 30-11-2009 by redoubt]

reply to post by Bunken Drum


The link I provided pointed to a post of mine where I quoted you saying:

post by Bunken Drum

I'm concerned about the vagueness of alluding to personal use & just what could be construed as advocating recreational use.

In which my reply was to suggest that you err on the side of caution.

Now in this post by SkepticOverlord
he states:

IMPORTANT!

Our strict rules against the discussion of personal recreational use of drugs -- including naturally-occuring mind-altering substances -- is still in place. Any member discussing, promoting, or otherwise alluding to personal recreational use of drugs in this forum will be immediately banned from ATS without warning.

Which seems to be quite self explanatory, basically he is telling the membership to please not post anything to the effect of "I use(d) X drug blah blah blah whatever."

Yes it might seem that I am siding with the site owners, and I am. The site owners have earned my respect. They have created a wonderful discussion board here that I find quite illuminating and if they have rules to follow I choose to follow those rules to the best of my ability, now I am not always successful. But I do my best to abide by the simple ground rules they do wish for us to abide by.

Now to some, this may seem like censorship, and in a way it is, but frankly this is not my site, I don't own this place and so I must abide by the rules set forth by the people who do own this place.

Now I could go on for days and days about my own personal experiences on this subject, and you would most likely laugh about the times I have had. But because the site owners have made it quite clear that this is not what they want, I must respect that, I respect them and the place they have created.

I do apologize if you feel that I was being argumentative about this, but I was trying to answer your question and point out the simple fact that the site owners have decided that you shouldn't tell us about your personal experiences with any illegal substance.

It boils down to liability, if you confess to a crime on this board, there is not a whole lot they can do to protect you, it also puts them in a bad spot as well. So they do have to protect their own interests first.

And believe it or not, things that you post here actually can be used against you in a court of law. So in a way, the site owners by telling you to please not post anything incriminating about yourself or your own experiences are trying to protect you as well.

That is why I initially suggested that perhaps you should err on the side of caution, if you have a question about a post you are about to make, U2U a moderator with the post to get their ok first.

reply to post by redoubt


To bad one cannot share their negative experiences, it seems people are sharing their love of the drugs around the forum, lol

So, we're going to try this again, huh?

Well, I for one, am glad to hear it. There needs to be a place where people can civilly discuss topics of importance on these subject matters. There are plenty of conspiracies and current news stories related to "Alternative Substances" that have a place here on ATS.

If someone wants to discuss their own experiences with certain substances, there are plenty of other web sites out there for them to frequent. But, I feel that we should be able to broach the subject here on ATS without fear of persecution. As long as we can keep the conversation from becoming juvenile.