Although it's silly and pointless to censor cartoons -- especially cartoons that need so much explaining -- there are are no real tragic conequences to censoring a cartoon.

There are real tragic consequences, however, to the censorship of cannabis science.

Researchers at Hadassah University Hospital in Israel are now conducting clinical trials using cannabis to combat anorexia in women.

The results haven't been published but the word is they're getting results.

This is an example of censorship that actually impacts human life -- because anorexia kills women.

But I expect this to be censored by Broadsheet just like they censored the news that THC kills breast cancer cells.

Because Salon censors cannabis news. They won't even tell you where the candidates stand on medical use.

It's really making me laugh the way they're fussing over this Opus cartoon while their editorial policy is censor, censor, censor.

Anorexia and breast cancer should not be censored. Not even when the scary Democrat-dividing demon weed cannabis is involved.

I mean Jesus Christ -- anorexia, PTSD and breast cancer!!!

How much mileage does Salon get out of covering those topics?

They act like they care about the people afflicted with these illnesses.

They act like they care about censorship, too

But it doesn't add up, because if they really cared about censorship, and they really cared about anorexia, breast cancer and PTSD --

THEN THEY WOULDN'T CONSISTENTLY CENSOR THE DAMNED SCIENCE.

What can you say to people like this???

It's unbelievable.

Pot May Alleviate Anorexia, Study Says

September 5, 2007 - Sydney, Australia

Sydney, Australia: Cannabis may stimulate appetite in patients with anorexia, according to clinical trial data conducted by investigators at the Hadassah University Hospital in Israel.

But who really cares about anorexia anyway, right?

I'm sure Salon readers are much more interested in bathroom sex and burkinis than they are in sickly scraggly dying women.

I understand -- you have no choice but to censor even legitimate cannabis news from Salon, because cannabis is the one drug that could seriously divide the Democrats in 2008.

But you should at least admit that you do consciously practice cannabis censorship in Salon, and stop posing as some kind of enemy of all censorship.

You're not the enemy of all censorship, Joan. And you know that just as well as I do.

So stop being such a big posing phony and come out of the closet and admit that Salon censors cannabis news, even legitimate news that impacts the health and well being of your readers.

How many billions of dollars do we spend every year locking black people in cages to keep children safe from drugs?

And we can't fund a regulatory system to keep children safe from lead?

I think we live in the age where the old maxim has been reversed and now "Ignorance is Power."

I'm honestly growing doubtful of the basic ability of Americans to solve problems by using timely accurate information.

The country kinda feels doomed right now.

The country is hyperpoliticized, and politics can be an information destroyer.

Prince Bandar owned a huge home in Aspen at the time Farenheit 911 came out. He was on the board of the Aspen Institute, where he rubbed shoulders with people like Gray Davis, Walter Isaacson, Elaine Pagels and Madeleine Albright.

Jimmy Carter said on Jay Leno that he stays at Bandar's house whenever he takes his grandson skiing in Aspen.

Hunter Thompson's final book signing was held at the Aspen Institute in the conference room Bandar paid for that is still named after him.

Aspen has a big gay scene. Aspen is almost as left wing as San Francisco.

I've always wondered about why Bandar HAD to live in Aspen.

I mean, after all, Vail is the top Republican ski resort in Colorado. Vail is where the right wingers prefer to hang.

Why didn't he build his giant vacation home in Vail?

I admire Michael Moore, but I think he put one over on the public when he did that racist hatchet job on Bandar.

Bandar seems to be a much more complicated human being than the one people learned about in Moore's film.

I think it's a major breach of ethics for a documentarian to take a very complicated individual and make that person appear very simple and obvious on camera.

Someone who actually had to deal with Saudi Arabia might find it valuable to know that Jimmy Carter is good enough friends with Bandar that he can bring his grandson to stay at Bandar's when they go skiing in Aspen.

And they might find it valuable to know that Bandar was on the board of the Aspen Institute, and that he wanted to live in Aspen, despite the fact that Aspen is one of the most pro-gay, pro-feminist and anti-Bush cities in America.

That's valuable information.

But it didn't serve the politics in Moore's documentary to share any of that valuable information with his audience.

So the audience was treated to a racist stereotype of the swarthy Arab who was filmed through what looked like a camera embedded into his hairy nostrils.

Moore made him look like a really simple person. Bandar supports Bush, Bandar is connected to terrorists, therefore Bush is connected to terrorists.

The truth was not that simple. But where the hell would Americans get the whole truth, as opposed to that tiny sliver of the truth that served the politics at the time?

That's why I say that we've left the age of "Knowledge is Power" and we're now living in the age of "Ignorance is Power."

Part of the power of Farenheit 911 comes from the audience's ignorance of the many contradicting choices made by Prince Bandar.

That's not what a documentarian is supposed to do. They're supposed to spread knowledge, not take advantage of ignorance.