geb

The reality, SKELETRON, is that it’s your comments that are embarrassing.

I had never really paid attention to them, but I had heard good things about this first album. You’ve convinced me, I’ll download it and give it a listen.

He is truly terrible. I saw the video. Oh my gosh. May God, or Satan, or Bacchus, or Odin, help us.

@CARLOCIMMINO: far from me to think that legalizing drugs fights organized crime. Italy is not the Netherlands, that's true. However, it is a fact that there a significant portion of the revenues from the legal marijuana trade ends up in state coffers. Here it does not. I was only responding to the reviewer, who postulated an unlikely connection between proponents of decriminalization, drug lords, and phantom shell companies, as if it were a Ken Follett thriller. The idea that everyone is free to do whatever they want is a selfish nonsense that I too believed when I was 16 and reading Bakunin's writings.

I correct: "usual false moralistic conception." sorry

I worked for 5 years as an educator in a community for drug addicts, so I believe I can share my opinion. I quote: <there is - albeit arbitrarily, a distinction drawn between soft and hard drugs, on a qualitative basis, without considering how the environment and milieu in which soft drugs are consumed is the same as that in which hard drugs can also be consumed.> No, the environment and milieu are NOT the same. Hard drugs (I'm talking about heroin, crack, glue, and derivatives) are consumed in environments characterized by strong social deprivation. This does not apply to cocaine, but that's a more complex discussion. Then: <the economic interest behind anti-prohibitionism, namely that of the drug producers themselves, who, once the business is liberalized, could eventually re-emerge, through shell companies or subsidiaries, as producers of the same, which practically becomes a big favor for drug trafficking and its economy.> This frankly seems like a huge naivety to me. It doesn’t hold water. In Holland, it doesn't seem to me that there are "shell companies" controlled by the 'ndrangheta or other criminal organizations. The money from the legal sale of cannabis goes into the state coffers. Finally: <by liberalizing soft drugs, or only certain drugs, the sense of prohibition would therefore push young people to the immediate direct consumption of hard drugs and various devilry (glue, gasoline), moving the "sphere of the prohibited" much further away,> excuse me, I’ve been polite until now, but this is a huge bunch of nonsense. It's not the sense of prohibition that causes thousands of kids to die from heroin and similar substances. To assert this is immoral, as well as stupid. It’s the usual moralistic view I’ve been hearing for a lifetime, that is, the inevitable transition from joints to needles. Please, let’s stop.

I never told you about the diamonds in your eyes....

unlucky group, but in the 90s they really kicked ass... I also liked their early works influenced by hardcore a lot. Good recommendation

Dear Jurix, how well I understand you... the other evening my wife came back from work and caught me with the latest OM on full blast... she wanted to call the psychiatrist. I know these by name. I really like Nebula and Fu Manchu, so I’ll get them for myself. Well done.

MICHAEL JACKSON: before his death, a great dancer, a handful of decent pop songs, and a lot (too much) of craft. After his death, a finger up a sandy ass. Enough already. R.I.P.