crobra

WOW - All these years later, what happened to this board!! LOL

??

I havent seen them together in a long time, but crobar should be tonight!!

I thought Sasha's and PVD's sets were great, both sets had a lot of energy. I around for three hours!!

I think some people are missing the point of the show. Tylenol has a warning on it that it can damage your kidneys if over used. The whole scare tactic used by the DEA since its inception, with bogus studies and films, is shown to be a complete failure in the case MDMA and overall on the war on drugs. Any drug not done in moderation can do damage to the body. leftymo - I know you are becoming a doctor, but the whole Parkinsonism disease theory is a load of shit. The fact is that there are already studies out complete disproving that theory. I think the whole point of the show was to state how government studies have been completely misleading and in certain cases - straight-out false. The fact is that there was wide spread abuse in Dallas Texas for numerous years, which was well over twenty years ago. People have are not suffering long-term side effects from that. Someone who mentioned kids doing; well that is just a ludicrous. Do you really want your kids doing any sort of drug daily or at any period of time? You don't want your kids taking Tylenol daily. Funny, because scientist can't really tell the effects Prozac has on the brain of children, yet it is prescribe to them. I don't think the show is about promoting MDMA and more about the misinformation by the government and how it has failed. If you do any drug daily, including alcohol or cigarettes, you will cause server damage to your body long-term.

I really enjoyed Charlies set, I thought it had a lot of energy and was on point. Kevin was great, much better than his set at Avalon a month ago.

Definitely going!!

I had a good time, music was great.

People do looked messed up, but it's a rave. So, I dont see why everyone is so disturbed about it. I'm sure if anyone went to the parties in NYC in the early to mid nineties, they should vaguely remember see some disturbing things.

:laugh: :laugh:

The government should just legalize and tax it!!

Happy Birthday Joe!!!

Criminal How much time are you allowed on the internet when you're behind bars? With those answers that is the only place you can be… You're a bad piece of work who must be doing some time at Her Majesty's pleasure. Either that or you're some kind of Harry Houdini when it comes to paying your debt to society. Based on your answers, we have calculated the maximum penalty for your crimes*: Years in prison: 108 Potential fine: £9500

For many many many years the Tobacco industry has claimed and pointed to studies stating that smoking doesn’t cause cancer and is not addictive. Then, in the 90's that report came that they themselves did research in the early sixties and knew of the ill effects of smoking. They covered it for 30 years with bogus studies which they funded and now they are doing the same with second hand smoke. I have more faith in the anit-smoking lobby than I do in the Tobacco lobby. We are talking about companies that drag their feet for decades to admit things like: Women should not smoke when pregnant. Nicotine is addictive. Smoking causes cancer. I have read these articles in the late 80's and early 90's claiming that the link to smoking and cancer is bogus, attacking the anit-smoking lobby the same way. But what do they say now? They will it say again about second hand smoke in 20years or so!!

Interesting perspective, but the logic is a bit flawed. The reference to the bouncer getting killed, first and foremost, if you want to blame the ban, then you are stating that nicotine addiction is so strong that it creates the situation that someone will murder to smoke. Therefore, smoking should be made illegal all together, because the drug addiction is strong people will kill for it. Then the whole statement about private businesses should not be enforcing laws or telling people not to smoke. That logic can be applied to any law, like drug use or assualt or whatever. Saying that private businesses should not have to enforce one law, states that they dont have to enforce any law. I also notice quotes from a medical journal where the word "passive smoking" is used to describe the effect it has on people. What exactly is meant by passive or what are the parameters of the testing. The quotes are just random and there are no links to the overall study. To state that everything stated by one organization or group is propaganda can be said for the other. There are random quotes to the article and no empirical data refuting any claims, the writer just statest its a lie and the compares it to facism. That sounds like a facist move itself, claim the opposition is lying and then point to something that generally scares most people (i.e. hilter or nazism). They have done this smoking ban in CA without invading Poland, so the basis of wide spread nazism is a bit misleading. Truth be told, smoking does effect the people around you. Does it cause cancer or any thing else? That can be debated. But the fact is that everytime you light up in a closed space, you are effecting the people around. I know when I used to leave a club my throat was always scratchy and had some congetsion from the smoke. What does that mean medically? I dont know, but I am sure it's not good for you.