Thank you, Thor. My original message to HempCar that got this whole thing going is below. Please forgive me that it is a little harsh. The part of the HempCar website that I was upset about was the "Hemp Quick Facts" page. It does not directly preach legalizing marijuana, but its intentions are quite obvious.
It seems I've lost my posting rights on the biofuels-biz list, so you'll have to forward it for me if you see fit. Nathan -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Cheng [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 18:22 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: suggestion Hi, Here's a suggestion that might help your cause: I am very interested in biofuels as a way to become less dependent on foreign oil, be kinder to our planet, and help the economy of the US and its friends. However, I am vehemently opposed to the pro-drug subculture in this country, and there's nothing you could ever say/do to make me knowingly support/do something that would benefit the cause of that subculture. So here's my suggestion: Separate your cause for promoting the usage of biofuels from your cause for promoting the legalization of various types of mind-altering drugs. This separation of motives may not help with the latter cause, but it definitely will help with the former. By coupling the two, you lose support for both--from me and the tens of millions of people like me in this country. For example, reading your "Hemp Quick Facts", it's all fine and dandy until the Medicine section. Up to this point, you've got me all convinced that the French hemp you want to legalize is totally harmless and can in fact save the world from all its energy woes. And then--boom--MARIJUANA. Now I see what you guys are all about. Here I thought you were engaged in some noble activity to save the planet, when in fact you just want to take it for a ride... Nathan -----Original Message----- From: Thor Skov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 13:12 PM To: biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [biofuels-biz] Fwd: Re: [biofuel] Re: HempCar Rag... After looking through the HempCar website, I did not see anything that advocated the legalization of marijuana, or that linked hemp and marijuana, so I don't know what prompted Nathan's original concerns(for the record, I did not see Nathan's original post which started this whole line). Yet, as much as I agree with everything Todd says describing the benefits of industrial hemp, I think he misses the point of Nathan's post quoted below, and seems more than a bit rabid and harsh in his response. Hemp IS linked in the public's mind with smokeable cannabis, unfortunately, (that is how Hearst and the cotton, wood pulp, and chemical industries were able to destroy hemp growers after the war with propaganda like "Reefer Madness"). Todd writes, I assume correctly, that hemp is accepted by most informed consumers. But, most consumers are NOT informed, sad to say. Honestly, how many UNinformed consumers could tell you the difference between hemp and marijuana? Let's face it: legalizing hemp and legalizing smokeable marijuana are different issues, with different purposes, and different arguments. Why link them in the public's mind? Todd rants about stereotypes, yet what is a stereotype but the association of certain characteristics with something or someone, made in the absence of better (or any) information? Todd may be correct (I hope he is) that the majority of the population is able to "decipher reality from rabid paranoia and propaganda," although they were unable to in Hearst's day, and still seem unable to on certain issues today. But he offers no evidence for this while chastizing Nathan for similarly generalizing his opinion. As Nathan points out, marketing and advertising DO work -- that's why firms spend billions each year. Inform people and they may make more informed decisions. But people are also notoriously easy to confuse, and have a short attention span. Finally, despite the intuitive sense in Nathan's point, Todd offers no good arguments for linking industrial hemp and marijuana (although I'm not entirely clear that he is advocating this). It seems to me that those who tend to link the two tend not to be advocating primarily industrial hemp use, but rather the legalization of marijuana. In other words, the benefits of hemp add a powerful argument to the marijauna legalization position, but the reverse is less true. And, for the record, I believe both should be legalized. It would be interesting to see data on the number of americans who support legalizing hemp, those who support legalizing marijuana, and the overlap between them. regards, thor skov --- Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com > >From: Kris Book <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 08:03:47 -0800 (PST) > >Subject: Re: [biofuel] Re: HempCar Rag... > >Reply-To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com > > > >Todd, > > > >You make a very good point, there are more than a > thousand > >different ways that hemp can help mankind and only > one > >reason to ban it. If we used the same formula to > decide if > >any other plant has a place in society, this planet > would > >be mostly desert. Hemp can very likely change our > economy > >for the better, almost single handedly. Most folks > don't > >know that our ships were all lubricated with hemp > seed oil > >during WWII, because it is superior to petroleum > for all > >lubricating needs. > > > >kris > >--- Appal Energy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > No Mr. Cheng. > > > > > > Industrial hemp is already accepted in the > market by the > > > vast majority of informed consumers - so much so > that it > > > is one of the fastest growing green markets on > the planet > > > today. > > > > > > What you attempt to do is prey upon emotions and > impulse > > > in order to obtain un-informed support for your > > > unsubstantiated position. > > > > > > In fact, it is your tact and similar tact used > by others > > > who vehemently oppose smokeable cannabis for > non-descript > > > reason(s) that tends to alienate an enormous > proportion > > > of the marketplace. Most are discerning enough > as to be > > > able to decipher reality from rabid paranoia and > > > propaganda. > > > > > > As well, you erroneously and automatically > categorize and > > > stereotype anyone who is a proponent of > industrial hemp > > > as being a "crusade[r]" for smokeable cannabis. > Please > > > see your own words below. You take wrongful > liberty in > > > your errant expression of presumptions and > assumptions. > > > > > > One has to wonder exactly what other "guilt by > > > association" tags you use as you walk through > your > > > "stereotyped" world. > > > > > > Long hair = ? > > > No nukes bumpersticker = ? > > > Camouflage baseball cap = ? > > > Single parent = ? > > > Organic farmer = ? > > > Nose ring = ? > > > ROTC = ? > > > Black = ? > > > Muslim = ? > > > > > > What I suggest Mr. Cheng, is that you confront > your fears > > > head on, rather than hiding them behind tears > against > > > industrial hemp, or proponents of industrial > hemp who > > > happen to be proponents of smokeable cannabis as > well. > > > > > > At least HempCar has expressed themselves in an > open and > > > articulate manner, whereas you have failed to > offer > > > rationale or reason for your zealous blood > letting. > > > > > > Todd Swearingen > > > Appal Energy > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Nathan Cheng > > > To: 'Appal Energy' > > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 1:11 AM > > > Subject: RE: HempCar Rag... > > > > > > > > > I understand that industrial hemp is > wonderful, etc. > > > and should be legalized. I don't disagree with > that. My > > > point is that if you were really interested in > the issue > > > of getting industrial hemp accepted by the > public and on > > > the open market, you would put aside your > parallel > > > crusade to get marijuana legalized, because > _that_ > > > crusade is HURTING your _other_ crusade > (biofuels) > > > whether you like it or not. > > > > > > The fact is that most people are uninformed > and act on > > > impulsive feelings. That's why marketing is so > powerful. > > > > > > Nathan > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Appal Energy > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 21:16 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: HempCar Rag... > > > > > > > > > Nathan, > > > > > > Industrial cannabis is an oilseed, food, > fiber and > > > biomass crop - period. Industrial hemp is not > smokeable > > > cannabis (marihuana) and if regulated modestly > never can > > > be. As such, the marihuana argument generally > falls on > > > deaf ears, save for the rabidly inclined and > uninformed. > > > > > > Restriction of industrial hemp poses many > hazards to > > > farmers, as they are forced to plant less > economically > > > efficient and more agriculturally destructive > crops, such > > > as soy. Hemp yields considerably more > co-products in > > > comparison to other oil seeds with far fewer > energy and > > > capital inputs. > > > > > > As a crop with numerous co-products, it is > destined > > > as a market regulator, meeting market needs on > the one > > > hand and helping to keep feed meal supplies from > reaching > > > glut status, a condition that will occur very > early in > > > the bio-diesel market should the national > soybean > > > councils gain monopolistic control. > > > > > > Such an occurrence would be devastating to > farmers, a > > > setback for the environment in general, as well > as > > > consumer pocketbooks. > > > > > > As a biofuels manufacturer, Appal Energy > sees > > > enormous merit in the inclusion of industrial > hemp in the > > > biofuels feedstock inventory, for oil-derived > fuels, > > > alcohols, producer gases and bulk biomass for > process > > > heat and electricity generation. > > > > > > As well, we find that most of those who > attempt to > > > bandy the marihuana "red herring" issue wildly > are > > > usually the least informed of the agricultural, > economic > > > and environmental benefits of industrial hemp, > not to > > > mention smokeable cannabis issues, yet willing > to > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email! http://mail.yahoo.com/ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://www.webconx.com/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Stock for $4. No Minimums. FREE Money 2002. http://us.click.yahoo.com/BgmYkB/VovDAA/ySSFAA/9bTolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://www.webconx.com/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
