[bongme]

Hi

'I asked the President for a spliff, but he didn't have any': What Sir Richard Branson claims he said at White House state dinner for Cameron

By SIMON TOMLINSON

16 March 2012

There are probably more appropriate times to try scoring drugs.
But as the great and the good gathered in their evening suits and ball gowns for the biggest-ever state dinner at the White House, Sir Richard Branson gave it a go anyway.
And whom should he ask? None other than the President of the United States himself.

'I asked him if I could have a spliff... but they didn't have any,' the Virgin tycoon told an audience at a drugs debate in Washington the following day.
As the crowd laughed heartily, he was quick to point out that he was joking, of course.

But Sir Richard's anecdote came during a serious Atlantic Exchange discussion called Benchmarching The War On Drugs in which he reiterated his call for cannabis to be decriminalised.
The billionaire, a member Global Commission on Drug Policy, has admitted smoking the drug and using cocaine and ecstasy in the past.


Earlier this year, he told the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee that addicts should be given treatment, not sent to jail.
'I would say 50 per cent of my generation had smoked cannabis,' he told MPs as he pressed his case in January.
'I would say 75 per cent of my children’s generation had smoked cannabis. There are between three and five million cannabis smokers in the UK.'
The glittering state banquet was hosted by Barack Obama and the First Lady on Wednesday to honour David Cameron's U.S. visit.
Among the 280 guests were celebrities, entrepreneurs and politicians, including Warren Buffett, George Clooney, Apple designer Sir Jonathan Ive and Foreign secretary William Hague.

AC

Bongme

[MekongBlues]

Gotta love Richard Branson. With his cash he doesn't even need to bother with this, but does anyway. In this celebrity obsessed day and age maybe a respected figure like him is needed to start to change things.

Oh, and I bet him and Obama did smoke a zoot together!

[sunshine band]

When it did change so that celebrities like Steve Coogan etc instead of joking get to talk a complete bag of shite in the public policy arena? I nearly threw up last night with Hugh Grant on Graham Norton - he said it twice, urgghhh "I am a big fan of Lord Justice Leveson" (the judge that has seemingly shut down all huamn rights for cannabis users in the UK and denied medical use could ever be necessary), and that he [Grant]had a deal with Cameron to stiffle the press with new powers (from misreporting on his sordid personal life). Branson is no better if he is looking for Virgin opportunities, in fact most of these bandwaggon reformists are looking for some way to feather their nests out of playing with the 'valve' of regulating freedom with cannabis. If he did ask for a spliff then fair do's, but its not a joke that Obama is running the drug war at all, he should be well in his face about this and not playing smug. Anyway, celebrities being the new power mongers? Who else has popped their empty heads up recently, Madonna, Angelina Jolie, Sean Penn, Bono (say no more).

This post has been edited by sunshine band: 17 March 2012 - 07:46 AM

[druidude]

Branson is a fool who seems to have little between his ears.

He is inarticulate and seems to have little intelligence or awareness of the facts when debating important issues like this......


The wrong person by a mile to be speaking on this issue give me Kofi Annan anyday

[Lake Palmer]

I don't see what the issue is with Branson? It might not be perfect but at least he is getting the debate going. So fucking what if he sees an opportunity for Virgin? Its his business, many businesses benefit and suffer from changes in legislation and if he thinks he can benefit, then good for him. I really cannot see a problem with what he is doing though I do think he needs a bit more guidance and I have heard a few 'Skunk' comments from him that don't make sense. Has anyone from these boards written a letter to him or tried to make contact with him to correct his erroneous comments? I think the country needs more people like Branson. He creates jobs and wealth and most of his companies provide a good service (Virgin Media isn't his).

[wildbill]

druidude, on 17 March 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

Branson is a fool who seems to have little between his ears.

He is inarticulate and seems to have little intelligence or awareness of the facts when debating important issues like this......


The wrong person by a mile to be speaking on this issue give me Kofi Annan anyday

I can't agree with any of this.

There are very few dumb self-made millionaires imo. I have seen Branson a few times, walking down the street alone & drinking in normal everyday pubs. He is the only millionaire celebrity I can think of that behaves in this way

I think he is pushing for cannabis in quite a shrewd way. Tackling it head on might well be less effective imo. There is a very heavy dose of politics involved in pushing for a change in the legal status of cannabis. Acting the buffoon is a common ploy in politics, presumably to deflect attacks.

As for Kofi Annan, he has had enough trouble already from his stance during Iraq war II . I doubt he would welcome more time in the line of fire.

This post has been edited by b.wild: 17 March 2012 - 09:13 AM

[lovemaryj71]

Respect Mr B at least he tries to help with prohibition!

A high profile attack on the status quo, fairplay a man in his position doesnt have too does he!

[L'Emmerdeur]

Lake Palmer, on 17 March 2012 - 09:07 AM, said:

So fucking what if he sees an opportunity for Virgin? Its his business, many businesses benefit and suffer from changes in legislation and if he thinks he can benefit, then good for him.

How's he any different to Vic and Pete and Jim Alekson in that case Lake? (Apart from the fact that Branson possibly has the ability to get done what they certainly don't).

Hmmm?

[Lake Palmer]

L, on 17 March 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

Lake Palmer, on 17 March 2012 - 09:07 AM, said:

So fucking what if he sees an opportunity for Virgin? Its his business, many businesses benefit and suffer from changes in legislation and if he thinks he can benefit, then good for him.

How's he any different to Vic and Pete and Jim Alekson in that case Lake? (Apart from the fact that Branson possibly has the ability to get done what they certainly don't).

Hmmm?

As far as I can see, the issue with Vic, Peter and Jim is not the fact that they want to benefit from a change in legislation, its the fact that at least one of them is a lying c*nt and possibly all 3 of them are as thick as bottled shit. I guess Branson would be going for some sort of coffee shop type affair as this would be in line with his 'Cool, Rock 'N' Roll' lifestyle brand. From what I can see, Branson would have purer motives than PR & Co. Peter has demonstrated on several occasions that he does not give a fuck about anything other than his end goal, everything else is a less important side issue.

I don't see what the problem is with commercial enterprise when it comes to cannabis. If people want to grow their own then they should be able to. If people want to sell it then they should pay tax and comply with standard laws which cover cottage industry products. If people want to sell it in retails outlets then they should have to pay tax and have some controls on the provenance and quality of their stock. I personally believe there is a way that everyone can get what they want. If people want to grow for themselves they should be able to do so, if people want to buy online or from a retail outlet then they should be able to do so and if people are caught selling it commercially then they should be subject to the laws which cover similar businesses, both big and small.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Lake Palmer, on 17 March 2012 - 09:22 AM, said:

I don't see what the problem is with commercial enterprise when it comes to cannabis.

Control.

Vic's initial plans revolved around his coffee shop ideas, it's what his election campaign in 2005 was built around. Same difference, apart from the fact, that as you mentioned, he is thick as bottled shit.

It's the fact that however Branson wants to dress his interests in change to legislation up, he's only in it for the money.

Change to legislation is not the end for people like that: it's the means to an end. Morally those two things are very different beasts, as far as I'm concerned.

Anyway, fuck them all; I'll do as I please regardless.

This post has been edited by L'Emmerdeur: 17 March 2012 - 09:37 AM

[Lake Palmer]

L, on 17 March 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

Anyway, fuck them all; I'll do as I please regardless.

Same here, its the best attitude.

L, on 17 March 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

It's the fact that however Branson wants to dress his interests in change to legislation up, he's only in it for the money.

I dunno, I think when you get to Bransons status you can say what you like and I personally think his motives are slightly more pure than others think. He speaks out about other things and I honestly do not think its all about the money. Its gone past that with him now, he isn't that money hungry, he really doesn't need to. Warren Buffett made lots of money but I believe he does certain things for the right reason, money plays no part in some of the things he stands up for, what I mean to say is that not everything he does has an end game of capital gain for himself or Berkshire Hathaway share holders.

[L S Diesel]

LSD

Attached thumbnail(s)

• 

[Underwater]

Well you can buy anything legal, packaged, wrapped in plastic for tens to thousands of times the amount you cn produce it yourself from a single tomato right through a field of wheat. You can brew your own beer for pence a bottled or opt for the commercially packaged stuff - you can also buy high and connosuer beers etc.

If these is conncesion given you can completely expect tesco pre rolled joints and all the other shit under the sun you can imagine.

I'd like to actually see Bransons plans and if he does have links to pharma I'd like to know what those are.

The answer is of course to grow your own - providing a certain sprem encrusted dressing gown wearing goon doesn't shut that avenue down entirely.