DJ Hype on Rinse FM 2024-11-08
1 hour ago
Saturday, 16 July 2011
The CIA's Secret Sites in Somalia
Nestled in a back corner of Mogadishu’s Aden Adde International Airport is a sprawling walled compound run by the Central Intelligence Agency. Set on the coast of the Indian Ocean, the facility looks like a small gated community, with more than a dozen buildings behind large protective walls and secured by guard towers at each of its four corners. Adjacent to the compound are eight large metal hangars, and the CIA has its own aircraft at the airport. The site, which airport officials and Somali intelligence sources say was completed four months ago, is guarded by Somali soldiers, but the Americans control access. At the facility, the CIA runs a counterterrorism training program for Somali intelligence agents and operatives aimed at building an indigenous strike force capable of snatch operations and targeted “combat” operations against members of Al Shabab, an Islamic militant group with close ties to Al Qaeda.
As part of its expanding counterterrorism program in Somalia, the CIA also uses a secret prison buried in the basement of Somalia’s National Security Agency (NSA) headquarters, where prisoners suspected of being Shabab members or of having links to the group are held. Some of the prisoners have been snatched off the streets of Kenya and rendered by plane to Mogadishu. While the underground prison is officially run by the Somali NSA, US intelligence personnel pay the salaries of intelligence agents and also directly interrogate prisoners. The existence of both facilities and the CIA role was uncovered by The Nation during an extensive on-the-ground investigation in Mogadishu. Among the sources who provided information for this story are senior Somali intelligence officials; senior members of Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government (TFG); former prisoners held at the underground prison; and several well-connected Somali analysts and militia leaders, some of whom have worked with US agents, including those from the CIA. A US official, who confirmed the existence of both sites, told The Nation, “It makes complete sense to have a strong counterterrorism partnership” with the Somali government.
The CIA presence in Mogadishu is part of Washington’s intensifying counterterrorism focus on Somalia, which includes targeted strikes by US Special Operations forces, drone attacks and expanded surveillance operations. The US agents “are here full time,” a senior Somali intelligence official told me. At times, he said, there are as many as thirty of them in Mogadishu, but he stressed that those working with the Somali NSA do not conduct operations; rather, they advise and train Somali agents. “In this environment, it’s very tricky. They want to help us, but the situation is not allowing them to do [it] however they want. They are not in control of the politics, they are not in control of the security,” he adds. “They are not controlling the environment like Afghanistan and Iraq. In Somalia, the situation is fluid, the situation is changing, personalities changing.”
According to well-connected Somali sources, the CIA is reluctant to deal directly with Somali political leaders, who are regarded by US officials as corrupt and untrustworthy. Instead, the United States has Somali intelligence agents on its payroll. Somali sources with knowledge of the program described the agents as lining up to receive $200 monthly cash payments from Americans. “They support us in a big way financially,” says the senior Somali intelligence official. “They are the largest [funder] by far...”
As part of its expanding counterterrorism program in Somalia, the CIA also uses a secret prison buried in the basement of Somalia’s National Security Agency (NSA) headquarters, where prisoners suspected of being Shabab members or of having links to the group are held. Some of the prisoners have been snatched off the streets of Kenya and rendered by plane to Mogadishu. While the underground prison is officially run by the Somali NSA, US intelligence personnel pay the salaries of intelligence agents and also directly interrogate prisoners. The existence of both facilities and the CIA role was uncovered by The Nation during an extensive on-the-ground investigation in Mogadishu. Among the sources who provided information for this story are senior Somali intelligence officials; senior members of Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government (TFG); former prisoners held at the underground prison; and several well-connected Somali analysts and militia leaders, some of whom have worked with US agents, including those from the CIA. A US official, who confirmed the existence of both sites, told The Nation, “It makes complete sense to have a strong counterterrorism partnership” with the Somali government.
The CIA presence in Mogadishu is part of Washington’s intensifying counterterrorism focus on Somalia, which includes targeted strikes by US Special Operations forces, drone attacks and expanded surveillance operations. The US agents “are here full time,” a senior Somali intelligence official told me. At times, he said, there are as many as thirty of them in Mogadishu, but he stressed that those working with the Somali NSA do not conduct operations; rather, they advise and train Somali agents. “In this environment, it’s very tricky. They want to help us, but the situation is not allowing them to do [it] however they want. They are not in control of the politics, they are not in control of the security,” he adds. “They are not controlling the environment like Afghanistan and Iraq. In Somalia, the situation is fluid, the situation is changing, personalities changing.”
According to well-connected Somali sources, the CIA is reluctant to deal directly with Somali political leaders, who are regarded by US officials as corrupt and untrustworthy. Instead, the United States has Somali intelligence agents on its payroll. Somali sources with knowledge of the program described the agents as lining up to receive $200 monthly cash payments from Americans. “They support us in a big way financially,” says the senior Somali intelligence official. “They are the largest [funder] by far...”
Continue reading
Jeremy Scahill @'The Nation'
How the U.S. Government uses its media servants to attack real journalism
Friday, 15 July 2011
Damn!
There were fears earlier this year that Thatcher would go the same Saturday night as a big UK sports celeb. Of course its standard procedure for papers to have pre-made obits for major public figures.
Via
Rebekah Brooks: where it all went wrong
But later that day the corporate death knell was sounded for Brooks after the second largest shareholder in News Corporation gave an extraordinary interview to BBC's Newsnight (interview starts 26 minutes in) from his yacht in Cannes: "For sure she has to go, you bet she has to go," declared Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal Alsaud.
"Ethics to me are very important. I will not deal with a lady or a man that has any sliver of doubt on her or his integrity."
Worse, the friendship Brooks so carefully nurtured with Murdoch's second eldest daughter, Elisabeth, over the last 10 years appeared to have crumbled.
The Daily Telegraph reported that the 42-year-old TV executive had told friends that Brooks had "fucked the company".
And so, eight days after she announced the dramatic decision to close the News of the World, Brooks fell on her sword.
"I have given Rupert and James Murdoch my resignation ... this time my resignation has been accepted," she said in an email to staff just before 10am on Friday morning.
It was all so different last Thursday when Brooks told shocked News of the World staff that the paper was being shut down.
While they were losing their jobs, she was going to stay on despite the public revulsion over revelations days earlier that while she was editor of the paper murdered teenager Milly Dowler's phone had been hacked.
She said she need to stay at the helm to act as "lightning rod" for all the negativity raining down on the company, and explained to baffled and dispirited staff that in a year's time they would understand why she had stayed on.
Journalists within News International thought her decision to tough it out showed hubris in the extreme. "She was a timebomb strapped to Murdoch's leg," quipped one.
The tide began to turn on Brooks two weeks ago when the Guardian revealed that not only had messages been intercepted on Dowler's voicemail but they had been deleted to make way for new messages, giving her parents false hope that she was still alive.
Soon there were allegations that it had also snooped on 7/7 victims and Afghan soldiers' families and the question had become: Did the News of the World get any scoop without hacking into phones?
A scandal that had previously been confined to celebrities and politicians was now threatening to engulf the Murdochs' entire newspaper operation, with police confirming that there could be as many as 4,000 victims of the hacking.
The prime minister said he was "utterly appalled" by the Dowler revelations and said if Brooks had offered her resignation he would have accepted it.
It appeared that 30 years of resentment about the power Murdoch had exercised over a succession of prime ministers was coming together in a tsunami of political and commercial hostility against him.
By Wednesday 6 July the commercial future of News International was at stake, with advertisers announcing they would no longer take space in the News of the World.
Yet the Murdochs still stood firm behind Brooks, and after a series of transatlantic phone calls with his father, James announced the following day he was shutting the 168-year-old title down, a ruthlessly clever plan designed to draw a line under the affair.
In a series of interviews with TV stations, James Murdoch was unequivocal: "Fundamentally, I am satisfied that Rebekah, her leadership in this business and her standard of ethics and her standard of conduct throughout her career are very good."
Rupert Murdoch flew in to London on Sunday 10 July to take charge of the crisis that was by now threatening to scupper his takeover bid for BSkyB.
He made a point of dining out with James, Brooks and her husband Charlie in a Mayfair restaurant.
When asked what his top priority was he gestured to Brooks and said: "She is."
Their display of unity did not go down well with the Dowler family who the following day called on Brooks to do the honourable thing and resign.
News International's attempts to drive a wedge between the old News of the World regime and the new came further unstuck when an internal investigation revealed that the phone hacking was not confined to one "rogue reporter" as previously claimed by the company.
Sensational allegations of payments to police and allegations that the News of the World may even have hacked into the phones of 9/11 victims threatened to spread the contagion to the US where News Corp's real financial power lies.
By Wednesday 13 July Murdoch's bid for BSkyB was dead in the water and with it Brooks' future at the head of NI.
Lisa O'Carroll @'The Guardian'
Thurston Moore In Concert
Recorded live at The Queen in Wilmington, Del., Moore performs here as part of the 11th annual NON-COMMvention on May 19.
Rachel Smith @'npr'
Rebekah Brooks resigns over phone-hacking scandal
The reputation of the company we love so much, as well as the press freedoms we value so highly, are all at risk.
As Chief Executive of the company, I feel a deep sense of responsibility for the people we have hurt and I want to reiterate how sorry I am for what we now know to have taken place.
I have believed that the right and responsible action has been to lead us through the heat of the crisis. However my desire to remain on the bridge has made me a focal point of the debate.
This is now detracting attention from all our honest endeavours to fix the problems of the past.
Therefore I have given Rupert and James Murdoch my resignation. While it has been a subject of discussion, this time my resignation has been accepted.
Rupert's wisdom, kindness and incisive advice has guided me throughout my career and James is an inspirational leader who has shown me great loyalty and friendship.
I would like to thank them both for their support.
I have worked here for 22 years and I know it to be part of the finest media company in the world.
News International is full of talented, professional and honourable people. I am proud to have been part of the team and lucky to know so many brilliant journalists and media executives.
I leave with the happiest of memories and an abundance of friends.
As you can imagine recent times have been tough. I now need to concentrate on correcting the distortions and rebutting the allegations about my record as a journalist, an editor and executive.
My resignation makes it possible for me to have the freedom and the time to give my full cooperation to all the current and future inquiries, the police investigations and the CMS appearance.
I am so grateful for all the messages of support. I have nothing but overwhelming respect for you and our millions of readers.
I wish every one of you all the best.
Rebekah
Via
Deciphered - Rebekah Brooks's resignation message
Psst? Wanna buy a reckid? (1951)
Filmed in wonderful color, this special promotional film was made in 1951 , it is 35 minutes long & is of perfect quality! This lost gem was never shown to the public & was used for promotional use only among record executives! It hasn't been seen in over 55 years!! What's on it? well, we get to see lots of great color footage of Hollywood landmarks first up.
Mel plays a record dealer who is desperately trying to sell anyone a record at the corner of Sunset & Vine streets in Hollywood, California. While pestering several people, (including Yogi Yorgeson!!), Billy May approaches playing a regular guy walking down the street, Mel takes him into his record store, (Wallichs Music City) & proceeds to pitch everything in the store to him.
In the end Billy won't pay the 85 cents for a record & Mel decides to show him exactly how records are made! They go over to the Capitol Records recording studios on Melrose Avenue & meet with Alan Livingston who takes them on a tour, here is where they run into several famous folks while getting into a little bit of mischief along the way! We get to see rare footage of Dean Martin in the studio actually recording one of his hit records! they run into Les Paul and Mary Ford, a vocal group, a country & western singer (Merle Travis?), and even Bozo the clown!
Via
Mel plays a record dealer who is desperately trying to sell anyone a record at the corner of Sunset & Vine streets in Hollywood, California. While pestering several people, (including Yogi Yorgeson!!), Billy May approaches playing a regular guy walking down the street, Mel takes him into his record store, (Wallichs Music City) & proceeds to pitch everything in the store to him.
In the end Billy won't pay the 85 cents for a record & Mel decides to show him exactly how records are made! They go over to the Capitol Records recording studios on Melrose Avenue & meet with Alan Livingston who takes them on a tour, here is where they run into several famous folks while getting into a little bit of mischief along the way! We get to see rare footage of Dean Martin in the studio actually recording one of his hit records! they run into Les Paul and Mary Ford, a vocal group, a country & western singer (Merle Travis?), and even Bozo the clown!
Via
Cory Doctorow: The phone-hacking scandal must not be used to rein in the press
The News of the World scandal was a long time brewing. We've had, quite literally, years of mounting outrage as the facts about Rupert Murdoch's tabloid empire and its ruthlessness, corruption and howling moral void oozed out whenever some whistleblower leaked more of the story, or an unbent copper finally got round to investigating the claims. Count me firmly in the camp who, on the one hand, would like nothing better than far-ranging investigation of the full scope of this kind of lawlessness and vigorous prosecution of all those implicated.
Likewise, count me in with the cynical observers betting that the folding up of NoW will be swiftly followed by a Sunday edition of the Sun or a similar gambit – that the NewsCorp empire will suffer no more than a bloodied nose from the scandal unless lawmakers and police do something about it.
But it seems that whenever I turn on the radio or read the papers, I'm confronted with politicians who begin by criticising NoW and NewsCorp, move on to other tabloids and press outlets whose bad deeds might come to light in the weeks to come, and then finish up with a general condemnation of "the press" who are said to be "too powerful."
And this is where you can count me right out.
For me, the phrase "the press is too powerful" is as chilling as "these elections are too time-consuming" or "this secret ballot is just a farce" or "due process is too expensive; we know who's guilty and who isn't." It is a contradiction in terms: for while it's possible for a particular company or cartel to be too powerful, the idea that the institution of the press is too powerful is Orwellian. If a media company grows too powerful, that generally means the press is not powerful enough: an all-eclipsing media empire blots out press freedom by monopolising distribution channels, distorting discourse and allying itself with this party or that in exchange for favours and (of course) more power. A powerful press is one built on vigorous, pluralistic debate, one that allows new voices to emerge and new points of view to be heard. The more diverse the press is, the more powerful it becomes.
"The press is too powerful" should be read as nothing less than a prelude to a proposal to regulate the press, specifically to increase liability for investigative journalists. We've already seen how this plays out: harsh libel laws intended to curb the tabloid press became a mere cost of business for enormous media empires. These empires grew even larger as they occupied the niches formerly occupied by smaller, more diverse, less wealthy media outlets that shrivelled up the first time they offended someone with the power to use a libel suit to silence them.
Increased liability for expression always favors the rich and powerful.
They're the ones who can hire sophisticated experts to help them come right up to the law's edge without slipping over it. They're the ones who can take risks and paper over their failures with cash settlements.
They're the ones who own their own infrastructure and don't have to convince a risk-averse cheap web host or high-street printer to make their material available.
Britain's punishing libel laws only incidentally affected the online world, but any press regulation that was crafted today would put the web straight in its crosshairs. Following from the litigation pattern of recent years, it would take aim at anonymous commentary, seeking to hold publishers and online service providers to account for comments left by their users. It would look for the deepest pockets in the system – say, Google (YouTube, Blogger), Facebook or Twitter – and seek to put them in the position of pre-emptively filtering out potentially risky speech.
It will undoubtably serve as yet another excuse for expanding Britain's Great Firewall, currently under consideration by Ed Vaizey for use by entertainment barons to blacklist sites whose copyright stance annoys them.
These laws and systems are more likely to shut down UK Uncut's reports from the street, WikiLeaks's cable dumps, and children who complain about their head teachers, than they are to put a scratch on Rupert Murdoch and his family. After all, the former have no lobbyists in Whitehall to make sure that the "modest, sensible press regulation" doesn't shut down their free speech, while Murdoch's profitable speech will fund an army of gladhanders to ensure that any law that emerges is as favourable as possible to them. Whatever changes they can't secure in the legislation itself will nevertheless be easier for the rich and powerful to buy their way around than the lone blogger, the community watchdog at the council meeting, the kid in a police kettle tweeting from her phone.
I'd love to watch the Murdochs twist in the wind as much as anyone, and I hope they do. But whatever pleasure their comeuppance gives, it shouldn't be an excuse for an attack on the power of the press itself.
There is no law regarding the press or journalists that won't end up entangled in the affairs of everyday internet users who concern themselves with the world around them.
We don't need press regulation. We need vigorous enforcement of existing laws against phone hacking. We need thorough investigations into the machinations that caused Scotland Yard to declare the issue a non-issue and a closed case. We need rules about privacy invasion that are aimed not merely at "journalists" (whatever that means in this day and age) but at everyone who is collecting information on you, from the neighbour who installs a CCTV that captures your every coming and going, to the government itself — and the Murdochs and their private investigators, too.
@'The Guardian'
Likewise, count me in with the cynical observers betting that the folding up of NoW will be swiftly followed by a Sunday edition of the Sun or a similar gambit – that the NewsCorp empire will suffer no more than a bloodied nose from the scandal unless lawmakers and police do something about it.
But it seems that whenever I turn on the radio or read the papers, I'm confronted with politicians who begin by criticising NoW and NewsCorp, move on to other tabloids and press outlets whose bad deeds might come to light in the weeks to come, and then finish up with a general condemnation of "the press" who are said to be "too powerful."
And this is where you can count me right out.
For me, the phrase "the press is too powerful" is as chilling as "these elections are too time-consuming" or "this secret ballot is just a farce" or "due process is too expensive; we know who's guilty and who isn't." It is a contradiction in terms: for while it's possible for a particular company or cartel to be too powerful, the idea that the institution of the press is too powerful is Orwellian. If a media company grows too powerful, that generally means the press is not powerful enough: an all-eclipsing media empire blots out press freedom by monopolising distribution channels, distorting discourse and allying itself with this party or that in exchange for favours and (of course) more power. A powerful press is one built on vigorous, pluralistic debate, one that allows new voices to emerge and new points of view to be heard. The more diverse the press is, the more powerful it becomes.
"The press is too powerful" should be read as nothing less than a prelude to a proposal to regulate the press, specifically to increase liability for investigative journalists. We've already seen how this plays out: harsh libel laws intended to curb the tabloid press became a mere cost of business for enormous media empires. These empires grew even larger as they occupied the niches formerly occupied by smaller, more diverse, less wealthy media outlets that shrivelled up the first time they offended someone with the power to use a libel suit to silence them.
Increased liability for expression always favors the rich and powerful.
They're the ones who can hire sophisticated experts to help them come right up to the law's edge without slipping over it. They're the ones who can take risks and paper over their failures with cash settlements.
They're the ones who own their own infrastructure and don't have to convince a risk-averse cheap web host or high-street printer to make their material available.
Britain's punishing libel laws only incidentally affected the online world, but any press regulation that was crafted today would put the web straight in its crosshairs. Following from the litigation pattern of recent years, it would take aim at anonymous commentary, seeking to hold publishers and online service providers to account for comments left by their users. It would look for the deepest pockets in the system – say, Google (YouTube, Blogger), Facebook or Twitter – and seek to put them in the position of pre-emptively filtering out potentially risky speech.
It will undoubtably serve as yet another excuse for expanding Britain's Great Firewall, currently under consideration by Ed Vaizey for use by entertainment barons to blacklist sites whose copyright stance annoys them.
These laws and systems are more likely to shut down UK Uncut's reports from the street, WikiLeaks's cable dumps, and children who complain about their head teachers, than they are to put a scratch on Rupert Murdoch and his family. After all, the former have no lobbyists in Whitehall to make sure that the "modest, sensible press regulation" doesn't shut down their free speech, while Murdoch's profitable speech will fund an army of gladhanders to ensure that any law that emerges is as favourable as possible to them. Whatever changes they can't secure in the legislation itself will nevertheless be easier for the rich and powerful to buy their way around than the lone blogger, the community watchdog at the council meeting, the kid in a police kettle tweeting from her phone.
I'd love to watch the Murdochs twist in the wind as much as anyone, and I hope they do. But whatever pleasure their comeuppance gives, it shouldn't be an excuse for an attack on the power of the press itself.
There is no law regarding the press or journalists that won't end up entangled in the affairs of everyday internet users who concern themselves with the world around them.
We don't need press regulation. We need vigorous enforcement of existing laws against phone hacking. We need thorough investigations into the machinations that caused Scotland Yard to declare the issue a non-issue and a closed case. We need rules about privacy invasion that are aimed not merely at "journalists" (whatever that means in this day and age) but at everyone who is collecting information on you, from the neighbour who installs a CCTV that captures your every coming and going, to the government itself — and the Murdochs and their private investigators, too.
@'The Guardian'
Wake Up and Smell the Terpenes! How Cannabis Works
The chemical structure of tetrahyrdocannabinol (THC) was determined in 1964 by Raphael Mechoulam and Yechiel Gaoni. For more than three decades thereafter, its blatant psychoactivity induced scientists to define THC as the active ingredient in the plant.
Experienced marijuana smokers who tried the drug Marinol (pure, synthetic THC) when it became prescribable in the mid-1980s, reported that the effects were noticeably dissimilar. But it wasn’t until the late 1990s that the research establishment acknowledged that another compound, cannabidiol (CBD), was exerting significant effects, too.
In 1999 a British start-up, G.W. Pharmaceuticals, began clinical trials of a plant extract containing equal amounts of THC and CBD. Multiple Sclerosis patients found the combination more effective in reducing pain and spasticity than a THC extract, and less psychoactive. The THC-CBD combo, “Sativex,” has now been approved for use by MS patients in England, Canada, New Zealand, and a growing list of European countries.
Several of the so-called “minor cannabinoids” —notably tetrahydrocannabavarin (THCV), cannabigerol (CBG) and cannabichromene (CBC)— also show therapeutic promise, and plants with high levels of each have been grown out in G.W.’s glasshouses for research purposes.
Now scientists are formally acknowledging something else that Cannabis consumers have long taken for granted: aroma is associated with effect.
Plant cannabinoids —21-carbon molecules found only in Cannabis— are odorless. It’s the terpenoids —components of the plant’s “essential oils”— that create the fragrance. Terpenoids contain repeating units of a 5-carbon molecule called isoprene, and are prevalent in smelly herbs such as mints and sage, citrus peel, some flowers, aromatic barks and woods. The aroma of a given plant depends on which terpenoids predominate. They tend to be volatile molecules that readily evaporate, and they’re very potent —all it takes is a few reaching the nose to announce their presence. The cannabinoid content of a trichome might be 10 times heavier than the terpenoid content.
Evidence that “phytocannabinoid-terpenoid interactions” enhance the therapeutic effects of cannabis was presented by Ethan Russo, MD, at a conference in Israel last fall and is about to be published in the British Journal of Pharmacology. Russo, a neurologist and ethnobotanist,, is senior medical adviser at G.W. Pharmaceuticals.
Terpenoids and cannabinoids are both secreted inside the Cannabis plant’s glandular trichomes and they have a parent compound in common (geranyl pyrophosphate). More than 100 terpenoids have been identified in Cannabis. The most common and most studied include limonene, myrcene, alpha-pinene, linalool, beta-caryophyllene, caryophyllene oxide, nerolidol and phytol. Anecdotal evidence suggests that alpha-pinene is alerting, limonene is “sunshine-y,” and beta-myrcene is sedating...
Experienced marijuana smokers who tried the drug Marinol (pure, synthetic THC) when it became prescribable in the mid-1980s, reported that the effects were noticeably dissimilar. But it wasn’t until the late 1990s that the research establishment acknowledged that another compound, cannabidiol (CBD), was exerting significant effects, too.
In 1999 a British start-up, G.W. Pharmaceuticals, began clinical trials of a plant extract containing equal amounts of THC and CBD. Multiple Sclerosis patients found the combination more effective in reducing pain and spasticity than a THC extract, and less psychoactive. The THC-CBD combo, “Sativex,” has now been approved for use by MS patients in England, Canada, New Zealand, and a growing list of European countries.
Several of the so-called “minor cannabinoids” —notably tetrahydrocannabavarin (THCV), cannabigerol (CBG) and cannabichromene (CBC)— also show therapeutic promise, and plants with high levels of each have been grown out in G.W.’s glasshouses for research purposes.
Now scientists are formally acknowledging something else that Cannabis consumers have long taken for granted: aroma is associated with effect.
Plant cannabinoids —21-carbon molecules found only in Cannabis— are odorless. It’s the terpenoids —components of the plant’s “essential oils”— that create the fragrance. Terpenoids contain repeating units of a 5-carbon molecule called isoprene, and are prevalent in smelly herbs such as mints and sage, citrus peel, some flowers, aromatic barks and woods. The aroma of a given plant depends on which terpenoids predominate. They tend to be volatile molecules that readily evaporate, and they’re very potent —all it takes is a few reaching the nose to announce their presence. The cannabinoid content of a trichome might be 10 times heavier than the terpenoid content.
Evidence that “phytocannabinoid-terpenoid interactions” enhance the therapeutic effects of cannabis was presented by Ethan Russo, MD, at a conference in Israel last fall and is about to be published in the British Journal of Pharmacology. Russo, a neurologist and ethnobotanist,, is senior medical adviser at G.W. Pharmaceuticals.
Terpenoids and cannabinoids are both secreted inside the Cannabis plant’s glandular trichomes and they have a parent compound in common (geranyl pyrophosphate). More than 100 terpenoids have been identified in Cannabis. The most common and most studied include limonene, myrcene, alpha-pinene, linalool, beta-caryophyllene, caryophyllene oxide, nerolidol and phytol. Anecdotal evidence suggests that alpha-pinene is alerting, limonene is “sunshine-y,” and beta-myrcene is sedating...
Continue reading
Fred Gardner @'Counterpunch'
Thursday, 14 July 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
