Lech buy cocaine

__________________________

📍 Verified store!

📍 Guarantees! Quality! Reviews!

__________________________

▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼

▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲

Lech buy cocaine

Registration's totally free, of course, and makes snowHeads easier to use and to understand, gives better searching, filtering etc. When you register, you get our free weekly -ish snow report by email. It's rather good and not made up by tourist offices or people that love the tourist office and want to marry it either We don't share your email address with anyone and we never send out any of those cheesy 'message from our partners' emails either. Anyway, snowHeads really is MUCH better when you're logged in - not least because you get to post your own messages complaining about things that annoy you like perhaps this banner which, incidentally, disappears when you log in Username:- Password:. Or: Register to be a proper snow-head, all official-like! Prev topic :: Next topic. Poster: A snowHead. My family and I are travelling to Europe from Australia in January and I am super excited about experiencing some European skiing for the first time! We have skied successfully as a group down many of the intermediate runs here in Australia and throughout Big White in Canada. I am looking to transition from snowboarding to skiing and am planning on getting some lessons prior to going in an indoor ski centre locally. I will also get some lessons on our holiday. If I find the transition difficult when I get to Europe, I may just revert to snowboarding and save the transition for another time. Europe for us is a long way to go and I want to make sure I get the most out of the trip. After discovering there are an overwhelming numbers of resorts throughout Europe especially compared to what we have here in Australia , I have narrowed it down to 2 - Lech and Zermatt. These both work well with our travel plans and I really don't want to throw any others into the mix. I did look at St. Anton's as well, however from what I have read it is more suited to intermediates to advanced. I understand this is also the case with Zermatt, however Zermatt seems to have other appeal in terms of character and overall experience. I have also watched some of the runs on YouTube and they look awesome for my level of snowboarding ability. This is what I understand from my research. While some nightlife is good, this is not critical as generally we are so exhausted from the day of skiing, we are happy to just relax in the hotel So my dilemma is which one? Logic says 'Lech' as I imagine we it would be more suited to our various abilities and being easier to get around for us, I imagine will give us more time on the snow. However being such a big trip and not being sure of the next time I will get back over there, I am also very intrigued by the magic of 'Zermatt'. Even though it may be more difficult to get around, have potentially harsher weather, there may be issues with altitude, and we may not get to fully explore it's skiing potential, it looks stunning and is still a place I would love to experience. Thanks to anyone for reading my rant and any thoughts would be much appreciated. Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person. As far as altitude and sun goes I would not worry about Zermatt, the resort is not particularly high and few people will get bothered by the altitude of the runs. The sun goes quickly from the valley as it would in Lech but the slopes that you are skiing on are open and will be fine for most of the skiing day. The night life is no slower in Lech than Zermatt. Both are wonderful places to ski and I have really enjoyed both areas. However in your situation my own preference would be Lech, particularly if booking well in advance. Lech has a superb record for snow whereas Zermatt can sometimes be a bit scratchy in early January. Lech also has somewhat better gentle slopes for the early intermediates without losing out on more expansive slopes for the better skier. If you liked the sound of St Anton it is included on the Lech lift pass and is a short free bus trip away. Both places have plenty to offer and given ggod snow I'm sure you would have a great trip to either, but my preference would be for Lech, it's a fabulous area. Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? Hi For me there is no contest. Zermatt has the magic in spades. Lech is a very good ski resort but Zermatt is magical. Just my opinion having been to both. You need to Login to know who's really who. IMO Zermatt is a disjointed ski area, and the town is dark and cold particularly mid January, skiing good and in particular Triftji? If you were looking for a really cool place to stay with excellent food, lunchstop off and top location genuine ski in and out look no further than Hotel Cresta in Oberlech. Or Zug just outside Lech on same liftpass , magical place. Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. I think your resort summaries are broadly correct other than the Zermatt altitude point. Some of Zermatt's skiing goes very high, but you'd be unlikely to spend much time right at the top. The resort itself is not particularly high. Lech would provide a more convenient skiing experience, and if you were based in Europe I'd recommend it; but for a special trip over from Australia you have to experience Zermatt. It's a special magical place with loads of memorable skiing, stunning scenery, fantastic mountain restaraunts, and an atmospheric town centre. In many ways it's as near as you can get to a 'perfect' alpine resort. Of course this comes at a price, its bloody expensive, but there again Lech is hardly a budget resort. You'll need to Register first of course. If your coming all this way why not do both over 2 weeks. Then you can post your own questions or snow reports After all it is free. Everyone above is right:- Lech is a great resort and will be easier for a group, better connected etc. Zermatt can indeed be described as magical. I don't know what it's like in mid Jan but had a good time skiing over from Cervinia in mid-Dec! Neither is cheap but I would expect Zermatt to be even more expensive. And of course you should do one week in each! For an alternative, what about the Dolomites? The mountain scenery is superb easily rivals Zermatt's, though not as high and the size and interconnectedness of the ski domain are second to none, particularly for intermediates. Also, won't break the bank. Snow record is somewhat worse but they have an excellent snowmaking system, probably the best in the world. I trust it - I'm going there at Christmas. EDIT: oops, sorry, I hadn't seen that you really didn't want other resorts thrown into the mix. You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. I vote for Lech. I wasn't too fussed with Zermatt; the ski area isn't a patch on the Arlberg. And, if you stay in Lech you can ski St Anton while you are there! Ski the Net with snowHeads. You'll have a great time in either resort, my instinct though is to say Lech, it is so lovely in every way I know as a Valaisanne I should say Zermatt, which is so great. Lech does everything a resort should do and is so pretty. Not the cheapest however. I agree that Lech would provide a more comfortable skiing experience for your family, but Zermatt is just gorgeous and should not be missed. The scenery is infinitely superior IMO , the village is charming, and you can easily make it to the Cervinia side at least on a couple of days, where there are plenty of long and wide intermediate runs. If you were coming to Europe to ski every winter, I'd say go for Lech, and maybe come back to Zermatt the next year. But since it doesn't sound like a likely scenario given the distance, I would most definitely pick Zermatt, which is by far the most magical and unforgettable place I have ever skied at. And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports. Have a look at Oberlech. Kids will love it as will you guys. Have not been to Zermatt but my mate who was with us at our 2 stays in Oberlech plus many trips to st Anton wasn't overly fussed about Zermatt. Felt as if you spent too much time on uplift but the runs back down were amazing. If you stay in Oberlech you'll have direct access to piste and you will all love the toboggan run back down to lech. So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much. For a weeks intermediate skiing there is so much to explore, more so when Cervinia is factored in. The area actually links very well now, much better than in the 80's when I was there The scenery is second to none how many resorts have a Matterhorn??? Er, 2 actually, but it's best viewed from the Swiss side The mountain restaurants are fabulous and there is a shed load of nightlife in town! You know it makes sense. Agree with Zermatt, but from a position of Lech ignorance. Back to Zermatt for the 4th time this year after 46 years of skiing. But as I have never been to Lech - do both! Zermatt is magical. Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:. As iconic resorts go, Zermatt wins. Have skied in both, though more in Zermatt, and just a day in Lech so got the lay of the land while I was in the Arlberg area St Anton, Lech, Zurs all on same lift pass. It's pretty, full of european aristos, and has heated chairlifts to warm your bottom! But Zermatt is just There is nothing like the view of the Matterhorn anywhere else. I think you will hit both resorts in low season I think it's the week after the Russians have gone home. Yes, Zermatt can be a tad inconvenient to get to the lifts, and for links between areas. Accommodation in and around the village centre and to the southern end tends to be no more than mins walk from a lift. Yes, it does get affected more by bad weather as your skiing goes way up to the glacier level. When the weather is OK however, Cervinia is not hard to get to and the intermediate runs on the other side are a blast! If this is your big european ski trip, and you may not come back for years, I'd go for Zermatt and bug the disadvantages! But then again, for your wife and children, maybe Lech would be a more relaxed experience The heart says Zermatt and the head says Lech, been to both but would not rush back to either, but if I was to choose it would be Lech. Zermatt in Jan was so picturesque, but so cold As has been said, both resorts are fantastic, and you will love it whatever choice you make. A full area pass for either resort will be more than enough to easily keep you all satisfied for the week. I think from your requirements that Lech will suit you more, easier to return to base to meet up, more suited to timid intermediates and those transitioning from boards to skis. Zermatt is described as a resort 'you must try before you die' for a reason. Sure it will put a dent in your wallet, but Lech is by no means cheap either. It has arguably the best mountain food in the alps. The village itself is picture box and car-free, in fact the train up to it makes it feel special before you even get there. I also loved the cog railway up the mountain, as is said it is slow but again there is something magical about winding up through the trees and stepping off the train onto the platform next to the piste. And it is all set against the backdrop of the Matterhorn. So it's a tough call, but both answers are winners. Thanks to everyone for the awesome responses and excellent information. I really like the suggestion of trying both, but the reality is we really only have a week. It sounds like I can't really go wrong either way, but after reading this and based on our mixed abilities, I think Lech wins this round very tough call though. My partner is from the UK originally, so I'm sure another trip to ski Europe won't be too many years away. Once we are all of a similar intermediate level we can then hopefully enjoy Zermatt for what it truly has to offer. Another trip to work towards down the track. JimboS , just curious why you would return to neither. What was your experience at both? Stay in Oberlech. No seriously the Burg hotel is perfectly located and only euros a day pp. Hi Spaceleggo, another Aussie here. I understand how hard it is to pick a European resort when you don't know when you'll make it back and need somewhere to tick as many boxes as possible. In my case I was lucky because I actually ended up going to 3 different resorts in 2 countries. In Frace I went to Meribel and Chamonix and while Chamonix certainly had the best scenery and town of the two I rate my week skiing in 3v as the best skiing week of my life. Just remember wherever you go in Europe will have gorgeous mountains and a big ski area compared to Australia so I'm sure you'll have great time. I enjoyed it so much I'm back for another round next year. My first ski trip only about 8 years ago was Lech and we have been back a few times. We now have a place just outside Zermatt and go there very regularly. In my not very experienced but very biased view I would say you have picked the two most wonderful resorts to choose from. Personally I would say that an intermediate skier would be better off going to Zermatt. I think it is better for snowboarders - although over the linked Zermatt border with Italy in Cervinia is good for boarders. I also think beginners or nervous intermediates would find Lech better on a first visit. However, and here is the good news, whichever you choose should you should really enjoy. As others have said, the Zermatt backdrop is stunning but the skiing layout is not that convenient, having also spent time in Wengen this year, we found that we preferred it overall compared to Zermatt. I am not sure why the Zermatt ski layout is considered inconvenient. It is hard for me to comment now as I have been quite a few times. However I can't remember thinking it was an issue on first visit. There are basically three major ski sections and one minor on the Swiss side and there is the Italian side which I would describe as one major and one minor section. The three major Swiss are in a line connected with the minor connected to 2 and 3. Then 3 is connected to the major Italian which is connected to the minor Italian one. You would never try to ski on all 6 areas in one day. But having started on one it is easy enough to ski down to a lift that takes you up to another area. But I can't think what is more difficult about linking sections in Zermatt than the others I have done. It is probably the one that takes longest to get up to a skiing area from wherever you are staying. JohnMo , I agree. I skied Zermatt while staying in Cervinia, which is a disadvantage as it take some time to get to Zermatt from the other side. But once you're there, I had no trouble covering the entire resort in two days. Obviously, we were not able to do every single run on the map, but we certainly explored every section of the resort. I did not find the layout inconvenient and encountered no connection problems whatsoever. If it's possible and easy to ski Zermatt from Cervinia, how can it be difficult while actually staying in Zermatt proper? Perhaps that would be different for a novice skier Thanks for the top tip Markymark29 , that place looks ace! The skiing layout in Zermatt does not flow for me. Sometimes we spent up to an hour from our chalet before getting to ski. Lech is right for this group. With the Matterhorn as a backdrop, Zermatt for sure wins on the scenery. Both areas are expensive when it comes to lodging. Food and drink will be less expensive overall in Austria. Accommodations in both places are top-notch. Staying in Oberlech will give you the car-free aspect which Zermatt has to offer. Tough to choose one over the other for sure. For a once-in-lifetime trip I'd go with Zermatt, but after having been to both I would return first to Lech. Back to Zermatt for a 4th time this year, and have never found the lift system inconvenient. You can ski thoughout the area without coming down the mountain, and return pretty much to the village, with a good bus system around town. Only negative surely is the high cost of a lift pass, - but what lifts! A train, a 45 degree train though a mountain, and a Gondola system up to the highest piste in Europe. If you do so long disctance, Zermatt would be best, specia, magical, and really good! But any way, both resorts are really good!!! Like many others, I've been to both Lech and Zermatt. If you are coming for an overall experience I'd plump for Zermatt. It's a truly spectacular place in all sorts of ways, from the train up the valley, to the electric buggies, the glamorous shops, the 'town' feel and the Matterhorn rising above it all. However it is a bit less connected in terms of getting around the various areas, but for me that adds further to the experience. Taking the Gornergrat railway up through the tree line and emerging onto the upper slopes is fantastic, whilst the Sunnegga underground funicular is also a pretty special way to get from the town to the slopes. Lech is beautiful and Oberlech is a delightful lunch stop. The skiing is more accessible and a bit more 'understandable' in terms of terrain and piste maps. It also has a 'wow' factor, and out of the dozen or so alpine resorts I've visited it's definitely top three, but it's some way short of Zermatt, which I will definitely return to after I have won the national lottery. I've never been to Zermatt but it is on my to do list. I have been put off by the reports of cold weather. I've been to Lech countless times and it has it's own special charm. It was always my favourite resort. But, I have found the Dolomites and we now go to Corvara. Anton and better scenery! Lech is super, and i think skiing is more relaxing Lech is also worth it Zermat for me, but haven't been to Lech to compare and of course Cervinia. Ahh looks good, can't wait! The down sides are, no drugs, rubbish clothing, uncomfortable boots, crap music. Hardly made up for by, easy on the flat, drags less stress, more girls, oh yes and old people don't hate you. Having been to both I would suggest lech - its a very pretty village and easily accessible - slopes are also accessible, and great snow this year. What i found in Zermatt was that it could take up to an hour to get to the the highest lift. Although this is Lech this year after a good 2 day dump of snow - Stunning: Zermatt is a great place to ski and i can tick it off the list but i wont be rushing back where I have just booked to go back to Lech. New Topic Post Reply. Snow Snow Snow! Solo Skiers v Groups - Orga Archives Lost and Found Ski Club of Great Britain To one side secret Mountain Hideout snowShops You cannot post to forums until you login You cannot read some forums until you login Read about snow conditions : snow conditions And leave your own snow report : snow report Find advice to help plan your ski holidays : ski holidays The snowHeads Ski Club : Ski Club 2. Terms and conditions Privacy Policy. Snow Reports. Zermatt or Lech?? Advice please! After all it is free After all it is free. So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much. Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:.

Episode 33: Drug Dealers in Ski Resorts, Mogul Technique, French Pyrénées & Skiing at 220 km/h

Lech buy cocaine

He died in at age 38 of years of drug abuse. Thunders was an influence on almost everyone who came after him, with his sense of style and always being close to the street. It was a twenty year rock and roll journey that had it's high and low moments and few survivors. AL: A few months ago in Toronto you showed a version of the film that was three hours. You had a bunch of footage to chose from. What was the original idea you want to convey in this documentary? LK: Making a documentary about Johnny Thunders seems like an easy thing to do. You can choose to easy or complex. When he died in , and I originally thought of making a documentary about him, I had already shot a bunch of footage of him in the early s. I had also shot a movie with him in it called 'Gringo. It's a very real film. Johnny was going to be in that film, but it didn't work out because he was hard to work with. The people who were financing the film were uptight about drugs. Not that they had a problem with drugs, but that Johnny was so consumed with cocaine, it was difficult to work with him. We shot a lot of footage at the Mudd Club. Then Johnny had to leave the country. At that point the shooting ended. I decided not to use that material in the film because we never finished it. We shot him doing forty songs over three sets at The Mudd Club. I shot most of it myself. AL: That was the stuff in color? LK: Yeah. I went off and did my other films and I didn't keep in touch with Johnny. I talked to him on the phone a few times. I was working on a film in called Rock Soup about the homeless scene in New York. I came out of a mix and bought a newspaper and saw that Johnny's picture was in there. He died in New Orleans. I immediately decided on the spot, the corner of Broadway and 49th, to make a movie about him. His death signified an end to an era. His death was both expected and unexpected. Finally it happened. You would hear that Johnny died over the years. When he died, it was shocking, because it finally happened. I make it sound very cold now, but it a moving moment because I was involved in the scene. AL: When did you start shooting actual footage of the family and places that Johnny went? This was when High-8 was just coming in. I had bought a new camera. That's how the whole thing started. I had footage, I knew about other footage that had existed in New York. I shot stuff in all formats and over the years I accumulated all this material. The concept kept changing and it was at first financial. I wanted to shoot everything in 35mm in the studio. The people who were financing the film in France were nervous about the cost. I modified my original idea because the stuff I shot in High-8 for mainly test shots was better. So I traveled around the world with a High-8 camera for years interviewing people and going to places were Johnny had played. I had five hundred hours of tape. I was thinking about how to structure the film. AL: What were some of the ideas about structure? LK: I had this plan to make this big fucking four hour movie. It was not going to be just about Johnny but the whole scene. Johnny would be the catalyst for it and the reference point. But I got tired of anecdotal stories. I wanted to make a different kind of film. I didn't want to make a 'looking back' film. I wanted to make you feel like you were there in a club. I didn't want a bunch of junkies reminiscing about the past and make it dated. It took a long time to find a structure. There was one version that was five hours long, and another that was three hours, and an entire different version that was structured around Dee Dee Ramone. AL: Do you change the film every time you screen it? To see what the audience reacts to? LK: I watch the rhythm of the film. What works or doesn't. By playing this film in different forms, it not like the film is crystallized in any specific way. Each version gets a strong reaction from people. This film is always changing. I've screen the film in Poland, Sweden, Toronto, Finland, New York, France, and England, and there's always been a strong reaction from people internationally. AL: I saw D. But it seems that in both movies there's no strong point of view, relying on talking heads to drive a point, or any moral perspective. You just show the subject and let the flaws show. You have to judge for yourself. LK: I don't like moralizing. It's a simple thing to do. Who's to say who's right or wrong? People see the film and say 'What a sad life Johnny had. It's too bad he died. It's too bad he took drugs. There's nothing sad about it, for me. If someone doesn't like it, or does like it, I have no feelings in that way. The power of what he did and how he lived is what I tried to interpret in the film, but I didn't want to say that this is bad or good. That stuff is boring. We have too much of that shit in our media anyway. That's not the point of the films I make. AL: Much of the film is about heroin use. You interview many of his friends and you see Johnny Thunders on stage especially in the later parts, and you see the gradual effect of what heroin does. Having all these people talk with slightly slurred speech and slow drugged out tones, makes you feel intoxicated on something. LK: I want to induce this state of what it would be like to be him. Johnny was high almost all the time. He lived this chemical existence like a lot of other musicians did who come from other musical traditions like Jazz. There's a history of musicians with talent who take up this drug thing. It goes back to the s and 50s, to up till now. It's a reality. AL: Taking drugs mixed with artistic expression always seemed to me a Romantic ideal. But when the ideal is not far away and it's in your face, when your whole life is fixated on drugs, it's very ugly and a bad idea at the end of the day. LK: What you saw in the film was twenty years of Johnny's life condensed in an hour and a half. You see his physical progression from being a young stud superstar, who believed in the rock and roll dream, to what he became in the end. That arc is pretty strong. You mentioned the structure of D. Both films were very hard to edit. But both structures are very strong, not that obvious to the eye, yet if start breaking it down you can see a certain progression. Filmmaking is divided into documentaries and then Hollywood fictions, the three-act play sort of thing. But there's also another category of film which is pure cinematic storytelling. That's a tour de force of what the medium can do which borrows from both documentary and fiction. That's what I try to do. I don't think of these films as just documentaries, but as pure filmmaking techniques that stand up on their own. It's like looking at a painting. A painting can be an action painting or a more realistic thing, but it's still a painting. The films I make are just films. AL: When you go down to New Orleans and talk to Willy DeVille and the people who saw Johnny in the last days, you raise a bunch of questions and create mysteries: Was he murdered? Did he die of AIDS? Was he just sick of all the drug use? LK: Johnny lives on in a state of a myth more now than when he was alive. There was always a myth floating around Johnny. To me that was the most important thing, not to answer any questions, but to help move that myth along. AL: Did you interview Johnny Thunders himself and why didn't you use any of that footage? LK: There's a lot of interviews with Johnny. I have a lot of stuff with him, but I didn't want to use any of it. I've done cuts where he speaks in the film. When Johnny spoke on camera, he was very literal. What he was saying was not that interesting. It didn't do justice to Johnny. When I put that material in the film, it made Johnny too realistic, and it didn't add anything to the flow. I said fuck it. I don't want to see Johnny talk about anything, because he talks to me with his music and that's enough. It's a film where you don't see Johnny speaking. The times where I liked Johnny speaking was in between songs. He would say a few words and that was his stand-up routine. That was a form of genius there. It was entirely non-intellectual. He was connected to the audience. He had a few things on his mind. The audience would feed him some energy and he would jump in there and say something and move on to the next song. He didn't have any intellectual pretensions. He needed a rhythmic thing to happen in between songs to keep a tension and keep the audience's attention, so he had a complete show. I ask because he wore the swastika. LK: Johnny had that insignia around him a lot. Bob Gruen has this great photo of Johnny standing in front of a bunch of Andy Warhol paintings of swastikas. It's a weird and powerful image. Did Johnny know the power it had? Subconsciously I think he did. But I'm not sure if he understood the history of Germany at that point or discuss it at all. I'm not sure what it meant to him. AL: Why does a movie about Johnny Thunders seem like an event, but any other rock and roll group would seem like a joke? LK: It's there for people to discover, and it's fresh, because very few people know about it. Johnny is a known source. Who cares about the fucking Rolling Stones? They have no relevance. Johnny has a relevance because of the way he lived and his myth never really coalesced historically. So it's all left open. Nobody wrote a definitive biography about him. There's no definitive album. No record company has exploited his myth and reality and put out a CD that sells millions, and therefore end the myth. Once something is pushed by the corporate system it's dead. At this point in history, people are sick and tired of packaging and selling. I don't want this film just to be a flavor of the month. The film has to have a sense of discovery, so they can enjoy it without the sense of it being forced down their throats by Miramax. Those companies are concerned with making money, so most of their films add nothing to the culture. Who cares about any film made three years ago or three months ago, because they are all boring. AL: Do you think that filmmaking is the only democratic artform? LK: Until you get to the point of financing. All these new DVD formats is interesting, but it's still expensive to transfer to film. The mini-DVD is a real great tool for filmmaking. I'm making a film in Poland right now about a bunch of underground guys who make handmade boots. I'm making it for French TV. I shot some stuff on High-8 to give it a certain texture to mix together. I like cutting films on the computer. People who are purists and want to shoot only film are silly. Film is really dirty ecologically and fucks up a lot of water. Unless you are a really good filmmaker and going to make a good film, why mess up so much water? Shoot on video. AL: Are there any directors that you like? LK: I just saw an interview with Polanski. He's been around for a long time, but for me, he's a real brilliant filmmaker. He's the elder statesman of a certain film heritage that's almost gone. He bridges different worlds and different time periods. I'm curious to see his new film. Wim Wenders I have a lot of appreciation for. I'm really not interested in filmmakers who want to travel around the world, looking for adventure, tapping into other cultures, using that to say something that is really irrelevant. They're tapping into exotic cultures because they're bored with reality. Wenders is guilty of this in the case of Cuban music, with The Buena Vista Social Club , but hopefully that music isn't destroyed because it has been packaged. You have to be careful of how you present a subject because filmmaking can be like pollution. There's too many cars in the world and that's destroying the world ecologically. Films have the same potential to destroy the world, not ecologically, but culturally. When you present things to the world, it becomes a product. I'm afraid of extinguishing anything that is vital. Post a Comment. Labels: alexander , announcements , film , info , interview , listen , music , tour , video , watch. No comments:. Newer Post Older Post Home. Subscribe to: Post Comments Atom.

Lech buy cocaine