Citrus Growers Manufacture Huge Amounts Of Scheduled 1 Drugs

[garyfisher]

http://www.mrnice.nl/forum/3-daily-news/12690-citrus-growers-manufacture-huge-amounts-dmt.html

Citrus Growers Manufacture Huge Amounts of DMT

By Morris Crowley on Friday, 13 June 2014

It may surprise you to learn that common citrus trees like oranges and lemons are actually Schedule I substances, in the same legal category as heroin. I know it sounds absurd, but it is absolutely true. Recent analysis published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry (Servillo et al. 2013) found that several citrus plants, including lemons and oranges, contain N,N-dimethyltryptamine (DMT) and 5-hydroxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine (bufotenine). Both of these compounds are powerful hallucinogens and are designated as Schedule I substances under the federal Controlled Substances Act in the United States. Under that same law, “any material” containing “any quantity” of a Schedule I drug is itself legally equivalent to that drug.

The upshot of this is that domestic citrus producers are in fact operating a massive drug manufacturing enterprise, legally speaking. And the scale of this manufacture is not trivial. Let's estimate 150 orange trees per acre, and conservatively suppose that each tree contains one kilogram of leaves. Then in the state of Florida alone, where approximately 550,000 acres are under cultivation, the crop would contain somewhere in the neighborhood of 80 kilograms of bufotenine -- roughly 5 million doses -- and 5 kilograms of DMT -- roughly 150,000 doses. But that's not all! Since the entire mass of any material containing these substances is legally equivalent to the pure substance, the entire biomass of the groves would be treated as pure DMT or pure bufotenine if the growers were charged with manufacturing a controlled substance.

You might wonder why I am characterizing an entire branch of agriculture as a massive drug manufacturing operation. That characterization, however, is not mine. Under federal law, they are a massive drug manufacturing operation. I am merely drawing attention to the issue.

Regardless of how you feel about the war on drugs, this issue should cause you serious concern. The Controlled Substances Act is written in a way that makes all sorts of mundane materials illegal. It’s not just orange trees; depending on where you live, there is a reasonable chance that the grass in your lawn contains Schedule I substances. In fact, so many materials contain detectable quantities of controlled substances that nearly everyone is breaking the law all the time.

Ironically, the best defense is to remain assiduously ignorant. The Controlled Substances Act defines crimes of intent. That means that as long as you are not aware that orange trees (or certain grasses, or many common pets) contain controlled substances, then you cannot be guilty of intending to possess, manufacture, or distribute those controlled substances. Once you take the effort to become informed about the ubiquity of controlled substances in the world around you, it becomes nearly impossible to avoid crossing the line into criminal behavior.

 

[trichcycler]

:POrange ya glad we can no longer claim ignorance on the matter.....

[AmishRnot4ganja]

OMG. We are all criminals now.

[trichcycler]

universal adversary

 

study funded by the Department of Homeland Security characterizes Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.

 

 

Entitled Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970-2008 (PDF), the study was produced by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland. The organization was launched with the aid of DHS funding to the tune of $12 million dollars.

 

While largely omitting Islamic terrorism - the report fails completely to mention the 1993 World Trade Center bombing – the study focuses on Americans who hold beliefs shared by the vast majority of conservatives and libertarians and puts them in the context of radical extremism.

 

 

 

 

The report takes its definitions from a 2011 study entitled Profiles of Perpetrators of Terrorism, produced by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, in which the following characteristics are used to identify terrorists.

 

- Americans who believe their “way of life” is under attack;

 

- Americans who are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”;

 

- People who consider themselves “anti-global” (presumably those who are wary of the loss of American sovereignty);

 

- Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”;

 

- Americans who are “reverent of individual liberty”;

 

- People who “believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty.”

 

The report also lists people opposed to abortion and “groups that seek to smite the purported enemies of God and other evildoers” as terrorists.

 

As we have exhaustively documented on numerous occasions, federal authorities and particularly the Department of Homeland Security have been involved in producing a deluge of literature which portrays liberty lovers and small government advocates as terrorists.

 

The most flagrant example was the infamous 2009 MIAC report, published by the Missouri Information Analysis Center and first revealed by Infowars, which framed Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag, as potential terrorists.

 

The rush to denounce legitimate political beliefs as thought crimes, or even mundane behaviors, by insinuating they are shared by terrorists, has accelerated in recent months.

 

Under the FBI’s Communities Against Terrorism program, the bulk purchase of food is labeled as a potential indication of terrorist activity, as is using cash to pay for a cup of coffee, and showing an interest in web privacy when using the Internet in a public place.

 

As we have documented on numerous occasions, the federal government routinely characterizes mundane behavior as extremist activity or a potential indicator of terrorist intent. As part of its ‘See Something, Say Something’ campaign, the Department of Homeland Security educates the public that generic activities performed by millions of people every day, including using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application,” are all potential signs of terrorist activity.

 

The DHS stoked controversy last year when it released a series of videos to promote the See Something, Say Something campaign in which almost all of the terrorists portrayed in the PSAs were white Americans.

 

be afraid

[Wild Bill]

I think these folks are still considered OK.

 

[MightyMightyMezz]

*begins planning citrus grove fall cleanup startup company*

[Chauncy Gardner]

universal adversary

 

study funded by the Department of Homeland Security characterizes Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.

 

 

Entitled Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970-2008 (PDF), the study was produced by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland. The organization was launched with the aid of DHS funding to the tune of $12 million dollars.

 

While largely omitting Islamic terrorism - the report fails completely to mention the 1993 World Trade Center bombing – the study focuses on Americans who hold beliefs shared by the vast majority of conservatives and libertarians and puts them in the context of radical extremism.

 

 

 

 

The report takes its definitions from a 2011 study entitled Profiles of Perpetrators of Terrorism, produced by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, in which the following characteristics are used to identify terrorists.

 

- Americans who believe their “way of life” is under attack;

 

- Americans who are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”;

 

- People who consider themselves “anti-global” (presumably those who are wary of the loss of American sovereignty);

 

- Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”;

 

- Americans who are “reverent of individual liberty”;

 

- People who “believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty.”

 

The report also lists people opposed to abortion and “groups that seek to smite the purported enemies of God and other evildoers” as terrorists.

 

As we have exhaustively documented on numerous occasions, federal authorities and particularly the Department of Homeland Security have been involved in producing a deluge of literature which portrays liberty lovers and small government advocates as terrorists.

 

The most flagrant example was the infamous 2009 MIAC report, published by the Missouri Information Analysis Center and first revealed by Infowars, which framed Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag, as potential terrorists.

 

The rush to denounce legitimate political beliefs as thought crimes, or even mundane behaviors, by insinuating they are shared by terrorists, has accelerated in recent months.

 

Under the FBI’s Communities Against Terrorism program, the bulk purchase of food is labeled as a potential indication of terrorist activity, as is using cash to pay for a cup of coffee, and showing an interest in web privacy when using the Internet in a public place.

 

As we have documented on numerous occasions, the federal government routinely characterizes mundane behavior as extremist activity or a potential indicator of terrorist intent. As part of its ‘See Something, Say Something’ campaign, the Department of Homeland Security educates the public that generic activities performed by millions of people every day, including using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application,” are all potential signs of terrorist activity.

 

The DHS stoked controversy last year when it released a series of videos to promote the See Something, Say Something campaign in which almost all of the terrorists portrayed in the PSAs were white Americans.

 

be afraid

There is nothing wrong with these people... until they start using violence against others who do not believe the same things that they do.

 

A good example of someone who turns to violence in the name of their cause is the individuals who bomb abortion clinics and shoot abortion doctors. Another example is the yahoos who brought their guns out to defend the "welfare cowboy" out west who refused to pay grazing fees. These people fit the criteria of "freedom loving Americans" who deserve to be locked up.

 

It is good to remember that one person's freedoms end where another person's freedoms begin. In other words, you can't shoot me just because you don't agree with the legal things I do.

[trichcycler]

they have used violence, treachery, starvation, war, genocide, poison already, look around right, for a long time now.