"Guru of Ganja" (Ed Rosenthal) convicted of marijuana cultivation

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 01/31/03 | DAVID KRAVETS

[MikalM]

A federal jury Friday found Ed Rosenthal, the author of how-to-grow books on marijuana and how to avoid the law, guilty of marijuana cultivation and conspiracy charges.

Deliberating for a day, the 12-member jury concluded that Rosenthal, the self described "Guru of Ganja," was growing more than 1,000 plants, conspiring to cultivate marijuana and maintaining a warehouse for a growing operation. He faces a maximum life term when sentenced June 4.

[unspun]

Right on.

[philman_36]

Yeah, I realize I screwed up. My apologies.

[philman_36]

I've already replied to you, you sick, putrid, rape supporting b^st^rd.

[Trailerpark Badass]

Protect our rights from what?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"

[philman_36]

Yeah, you're still avoiding answering. It must be a tough question. Would an answer show you as duplicitous?
Circumvention is your forte.

[philman_36]

If you have a specific action you would like to raise, please do.
I've no transcript so why bother? You've already stated that I've got to show you the transcript.
And you've so thoroughly avoided giving any answer. Good job! You should be so proud of yourself.

[ActionNewsBill]

...the basic purpose of government is to place constraints upon human behavior. ...

It amazes me after all these years that someone can be so ignorant about the purpose of government.

You're in the wrong country, if this is actually what you believe.

[ActionNewsBill]

Funny. I thought the purpose of our government was to protect our rights.

That has always been my belief as well.

I guess it's obvious that the WOD statists view the purpose of government as something else completely, as evidenced by unspun's statement.

[TigersEye]

Yeah, I realize I screwed up. My apologies.

Heh heh. Understood. Friendly fire, heat of the battle and all that. Carry on!

[unspun]

Name one law that does not in some way constrain human behavior (hopefully for a greater good).

[exnavy]

Because you wouldn't be having this dispute with me if you believe in God.

Because you would know that the bible is Gods word and that it(The Holy Bible) is good and true.

And than, if you read Hebrews 13:17 you would know that what you are professing is jeopardizing your soul and since you are the spiritual head of your family, so to the souls of all your family as well.

All for a buzz. Sure am glad I don't have that problem anymore. Have a nice afterlife.

[Roscoe]

I haven't written the first word about Mr. Rosenthal, nor his case.

"Guru of Ganja" (Ed Rosenthal) convicted of marijuana cultivation

You aren't very bright, are you?

Irony.

[Roscoe]

If you have a specific action you would like to raise, please do.

[Roscoe]

"Every society has a right to fix the fundamental principles of its association, and to say to all individuals, that if they contemplate pursuits beyond the limits of these principles and involving dangers which the society chooses to avoid, they must go somewhere else for their exercise; that we want no citizens, and still less ephemeral and pseudo-citizens, on such terms. We may exclude them from our territory, as we do persons infected with disease." -- Thomas Jefferson

[Arioch7]

Well, with the death penalty involved, how could it get more serious?

Perhaps you could torture drug users. Maybe kill thier families?

That taps my brain out for the "Worse then death penalty" ideas. Why dont you give it a shot?

[TigersEye]

Take the log from your own eye. Apparently you are assuming that I smoke pot. (Whether I do or not is irrelevant. You have assumed it.) You have also judged that my motivations expressed on this thread have something to do with my own vices or virtues and not my expressed concern for the loss of liberties the WOsD's is causing.

You have made it clear from your first post that you beleive in the letter of the law not the spirit of the law. I am happy to be free of that problem. I seem to recall a verse about being judged as you have judged. I'll let you look it up yourself.

You seem to think that there is some disconnect between the spiritual and secular worlds. That you can selectively apply Constitutional protections and secular laws in favor of those who suit your taste and against those who don't and that there will not only be no worldy consequences for that but no spiritual consequences either.

The unbeleivable arrogance of you to say that I don't beleive in God because I don't agree with your harsh and punitive view of the world. Perhaps we wouldn't be having this argument if you loved life and liberty as much as Christ Jesus did. Or at least as much as our Founding Fathers did.

But why hold such high standards as those up for you? You obviously care only for your own security and the liberty to condemn others. Scripture says that even Satan beleives in God. What have you proved by saying that you do? Your other words say other things.

[Trailerpark Badass]

Like I said, you're not very bright, are you? Or do you think I wrote the headline?

[philman_36]

You need a bath ...
You need your mind washed out with soap.