🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <MPG.1785a097ae734f04989e2a@shawnews.vn.shawcable.net>, tnr says...
>
>In article <1103_1025243790@shawnews>, couchfulodogs*@hotmail.com 
>says...
>> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 03:01:34 GMT, tnr <tnr@nospam.org> wrote:
>> > In article <1103_1025223039@shawnews>, couchfulodogs*@hotmail.com 
>> > says...
>>> > During world war two some hemp farmers were not drafted as they were needed
>>for rope production, war runs on
>> > > rope.
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> > Gee the current wars seem to run on explosives and bullets.
>>And to get the bombs and bullets anywhere they were moved around with rope. In
>>WW11 there were not as many synthetics, and hemp rope was
>> valuable.
>> 
> 
>I have no roblem believing that rope was important in 1940.

Good.   It shouldn't be much of a stretch then, to believe that rope is still
just about as important.  We have lots of synthetics now, oil-based for the most
part, which can substitute for hemp (which is renewable,) as long as there's
access to oil (which is *not* renewable)...

... which makes oil all the more important, geopolitically speaking.   That was
a great part of the intent of the reasoning behind prohibitions on hemp.  Keep
the world utterly dependent on oil for as many things as possible, and oil
pretty much rules the world.

Prohibition of hemp as "marijuana" was merely a ruse to make overwhelming public
acceptance of the necessary legislation a fait accompli.

It was imposed a little early, is all.   By the time the Korean war was in full
swing, the petrocham industry had worked most of the bugs out of synthetic rope
production... but in WWII, hemp was still king, and US law had to be very
skillfully fudged in order to keep hemp rope production in full swing until
petrochem products caught up.
--
P