Loading

Get Your Own Piece of NORML History!

  • by Sabrina Fendrick May 13, 2011

    Spring Membership Drive

    Limited Edition NORML Collectibles

    NORML is proud to announce the 2011 Spring Membership Drive, which means that each week, we will be offering exclusive collectible items available for a limited time only.  Starting today, and for this week only, if you join NORML as a “Citizen Advocate” you can have your own limited edition t-shirt from the historic 40th Annual National Conference. Conference Shirt

    NORML memberships are the lifeblood of the organization.  If you enjoy reading NORML’s articles or listening to the podcast, if have received free legal or drug testing advice, then we urge you to become a contributing member of the organization.  This will allow us to continue to bring you the most comprehensive, up-to-date information on all things related to marijuana law reform across the country.

    There is a limited supply, and stock is running out fast!  For a special price you can get your t-shirt signed by NORML founder R. Keith Stroup!  Join NORML today and get your own piece of NORML history.

    20 Responses to “Get Your Own Piece of NORML History!”

    1. […] NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform Share and Enjoy: […]

    2. I would like to sign up as a citizen advocate.

    3. […] full post on NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform Share and […]

    4. […] NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform Share and Enjoy: […]

    5. NJ Leaper says:

      No 2 xls ?

    6. Agie says:

      I love the shirt – Ill buy it for the next MARCH!

      BTW when is the next MARCH going to be?

    7. Dibz says:

      Wanna do a membership drive? Put some norml stash jars up. I cant find them anywhere and know plenty of people that would pay to have them. If you threw a jar on with just a regular norml tshirt as an option for membership, i know a few people off the top of my head that would be more inclined to donating. (wish they’d donate anyway but some ppl need more motivation.)

      [Editor’s note: Stay tuned! Soon come…NORML glass jars.]

    8. Nic says:

      Subject: Spotting dis information { freeware}
      From: Nicodemus
      Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware

      SPOTTING DISINFORMATION

      This , is a handy reference tool for spotting trolls and other lower life
      forms. Given that independent open forums, are increasingly the targets
      of various members of the sell-out classes this is a nice reference for
      tuning up your BS detector .

      * 1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you
      know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news
      anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have
      to deal with the issues.

      * 2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and
      instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being
      critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known
      as the “How dare you!” gambit.

      * 3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all
      charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild
      accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work
      as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because
      the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such “arguable
      rumors”. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this
      fact to certify it a “wild rumor” which can have no basis in fact.

      * 4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your
      opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look
      good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely
      imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent
      arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges.
      Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to
      debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually
      avoiding discussion of the real issues.

      * 5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also
      known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods
      qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular
      titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”,
      “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”,
      “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others
      shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid
      dealing with issues.

      * 6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your
      opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer
      can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in
      Internet and letters-to -the-editor environments where a steady stream of
      new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism
      reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing
      issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would
      dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.

      * 7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken
      to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or
      other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the
      defensive.

      * 8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with
      authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae”
      to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without
      discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

      * 9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is
      offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility,
      make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic,
      or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

      * 10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the
      straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone
      will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt
      with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man
      issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency
      plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground
      uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and
      dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues
      — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the
      original source.

      * 11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter
      or element of the facts, take the “high road” and “confess” with candor
      that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents
      have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply
      greater criminalities which, “just isn’t so.” Others can reinforce this
      on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and
      respect for “coming clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without
      addressing more serious issues.

      * 12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of
      events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events,
      paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those
      otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly
      without having to address the actual issues.

      * 13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by
      reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that
      forbears any actual material fact.

      * 14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring
      opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best
      for items qualifying for rule 10.

      * 15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative
      thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in
      place. (Can you say Rush Limbaugh – sure you can – just don’t choke.)

      * 16. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other
      ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive
      or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more
      manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can
      “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in
      order to avoid discussing more key issues.

      * 17. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do
      anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into
      emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly
      motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent.
      Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but
      even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further
      avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to
      criticism”.

      * 18. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is
      perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material
      may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material
      irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come
      by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something
      which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder
      weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you
      to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources,
      deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by
      government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

      * 19. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues
      designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as
      useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This
      works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the
      purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

      * 20. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s),
      author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new
      ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony
      which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address
      issues, you can do so authoritatively.

      contribute to this article

    9. Nic says:

      This citizen further declares free cannabis

    Leave a Reply