That's not what I was saying but I'm used to being taken out of context, having words put in my mouth and the inaccurate assumptions. It's not possible to have a productive conversation on these topics when one side is overly defensive and extremely paranoid. Not everyone who questions or disagrees is part of a big conspiracy.
Thanks for sharing your experience. I have heard many experiences like yours but I have heard little on the other side. Seems like just a few people can handle the tudei or even like it.
Out of curiosity, who sold you the tudei and how was it labelled/marketed? What were the tudei effects you noticed from it?
But I quoted your words. Your exact words, as can be seen by anyone who scrolls up a few posts. If that's not what you were saying... if the words you used don't mean what they appear to mean, then by all means tell us what those words mean. Instead of pointing the finger back at me for being "overly defensive and extremely paranoid", why not explain the words you say I've "taken out of context" and "put in your mouth"?
I am glad you found out what was causing your problem and was able to fix it. Who would have thought, a multivitamin. Thanks also for your kava introductions in Arizona, it's good to spread the kava word. Aloha.
Yes, you quoted me but I wasn't suggesting anything like monopoly's in growing, buying, etc. Anyway, looking back at it, I was in a hurry and the post was poorly worded, so it's all good.
I spit my coffee on this one
I AM THE ONE WHO TESTS
Wow, didnt know that... he sure has been a busy evil doer.
I don't know much about politics; your point may be true. But I don't think that discussion was really about the power of the gov't to regulate. I think it was about whether regulation is good or bad for kava industry, from farmer to consumer.
Yeah, I know, and it is a derailing if the topic. I'm not meaning to start a discussion about Libertarianism; it's just that I like giving corrections to misconceptions. Actually, I can't say it's a correction, per se, because I may be wrong, and I don't think many people are ever completely right about something. I just like to present the facts (what is considered to be true; facts are not necessarily truths) from other perspectives and such.
Fair enough.
Yes, in a government run by Libertarian principles, there would be no bans. No need to worry about tudei causing problems for noble and anyone that wanted tudei could get it. Everyone can do as they please with their bodies, whether other people like it or not. I agree it doesn't make sense in this context but it was more of an attempt to discredit. Kinda like how the term conspiracy theorist is popular for that purpose.
Yeah, my stance, on conspiracy theorists and their theories themselves, is that they're definitely a little bit crazy and a little bit unsubstantiated, but I think it's wholly impossible to say that conspiracy theories are always wrong. Because, before the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment, MKUltra, and... Ahhh, I can't remember the third one; maybe the Bilderberg group? Although, it hasn't been confirmed that the Bilderberg group has nefarious plans and whatnot. All we know is that it exists and it's very secretive. Anyway, before those, there were conspiracy theories about the existence of those government experiments and Bilderberg. So, whoever came up with those theories was right. I don't think the government is above committing conspiracies of any kind. There's just so many terrible conspiracy theories that ruin the credibility of the relatively smart conspiracy theories, and the ones who came up with them. My creed has always been "innocent until proven guilty" when it comes to science and other people's theories. For instance, ghosts definitely haven't caused what most people call "paranormal phenomena" (it's been scientifically attributed to low noise frequencies causing a sense of fear and foreboding, and it's been attributed to some other natural phenomena as well.) Also, UFO sightings have been attributed to various atmospheric anomalies or simply the lights of far away cars driving down the highway. But, I'm not gonna say, outright, that the paranormal doesn't exist until there's absolute proof against their existence. "Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence." As someone I don't know has quoted.
