--- Begin Message ---
restore Mon, 12 Nov 2001 Volume 1 : Number 129
In this issue:
CA: DEA Raids On Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Hurt Sick
People
US: Column: DEA Marijuana Madness
CA: States' Rights Under Fire
UK: Editorial: A Necessary Prescription
British Medical Journal : Cannabis The Wonder Drug?
News from France
THE NATION: Book Review: Hooked On Narcomyths
OR: Novelist, 60s Icon Ken Kesey Dies
KY: Growing Marijuana Won't Solve Woes, JP Tells Man
Canada: Docs leery of prescribing pot
Re: restore V1 #128
THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER WAY
DEISM - AMERICA'S FORGOTTEN RELIGION!
*
[EMAIL PROTECTED] daily digest web version: http://www.crrh.org/hempnews/viewrestore.asp
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 11:53:14 -0800
From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: CA: DEA Raids On Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Hurt Sick
People
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newshawk: openi420
Pubdate: Sun, 11 Nov 2001
Source: Ventura County Star (CA)
Copyright: 2001, Ventura County Star
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/479
Website: http://www.staronline.com/
Author: Lynn Osburn and Judy Osburn, guest columnists
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1882/a07.html
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?115 (Cannabis - California)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/ocbc.htm (Oakland Cannabis Court Case)
DEA RAIDS ON MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES HURT SICK PEOPLE
Re: the feds' crackdown on medical marijuana: We tended the marijuana garden
run by patients under the provisions of Proposition 215, located at our
Ventura County ranch, which was uprooted by the Drug Enforcement Agency.
We are sad to announce that we must suspend cultivation activities until
such time as the legal issues surrounding the Sept. 28 and Oct. 25 raids on
the Los Angeles Cannabis Resource Cooperative can be resolved.
After five years of safe and reliable access to medical marijuana, closure
of the LACRC Co-Op Dispensary is, as Los Angeles Sheriff's Capt. Lynda
Castro said, "a difficult pill to swallow."
The two DEA raids on the Ventura County patient-run garden and the West
Hollywood headquarters and subsequent suspension of cultivation and
disbursement activities is devastating LACRC's 1,000 members.
This was clearly evident at the candlelight vigil held Nov. 6, the fifth
anniversary of the passage of California's Compassionate Use Act of 1996. We
spoke with many AIDS patients who had already lost weight and could now
manage to take only half of their prescribed treatment medications, and were
now forced to double their pharmaceutical pain medications, making it nearly
impossible to maintain the same quality of life that cannabis made possible.
Cancer patients' faces appeared drawn from the stress of constant pain, and
some worried that under the federal crackdown their physicians might be too
scared to renew their recommendations for cannabis.
One elderly woman had heard rumors that drug dealers were in a parking lot
nearby. She worriedly asked if someone would please point them out to her,
as she was desperate to get the cannabis her doctor had recommended.
LACRC President Scott Imler announced with deep sadness that "we are not
prepared to distribute non-Co-Op products that we cannot vouch for the
safety of. That would be not only a disservice to our members, it would be
contrary to the understanding we have with doctors, law enforcement and
public officials who have worked with us and supported us."
The city of West Hollywood helped purchase the LACRC building in October of
last year. The city held a news conference at City Hall the day after the
Oct. 25 raid. Sheriff's Capt. Castro, along with every member of the West
Hollywood City Council, and representatives, from Rep. Henry Waxman, state
Sen. Sheila Kuehl and Assembly members Paul Koretz and Jackie Goldberg,
participated in the news conference expressing sadness at the damage done by
the DEA to the community. "Where's the sensitivity level here?" asked Capt.
Castro.
Elected city, state and federal officials again supported LACRC at the Nov.
6 candlelight vigil, where Capt. Castro reiterated that Los Angeles
sheriff's deputies are trained to make evaluations of legal use in the field
and to leave plants intended for medical use intact. She recommended that
members follow LACRC's patient guidelines for dealing with law enforcement.
Dozens of members are Ventura County residents. Keep your membership card
and doctor's letter with you at all times; show your membership card; show
your doctor's letter; tell the truth and be polite; and call LACRC
immediately.
The center will continue to take field calls from law enforcement and verify
patients' qualifications under state law. Since all patient records were
seized, along with all plants, equipment and medicine, it is important for
members to update their files at the center.
Congressman Henry Waxman sent a statement read at the vigil condemning the
raid by the DEA. Rep. Waxman said he is cosponsoring U.S. Reps. Barney
Frank, D-Mass., and Ron Paul's, R-Texas, House Resolution 2592, the States'
Rights to Medical Marijuana Act, which would move marijuana from schedule I
to schedule II of the Controlled Substance Act, thus enabling physicians to
legally prescribe marijuana to seriously ill patients where allowed by state
law.
We ask Venturans to contact their federal representatives to urge them to
support HR 2592. Time is of the essence as the number of patients
deteriorating is increasing.
Lynn and Judy Osburn, Lockwood Valley.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
---
MAP posted-by: Doc-Hawk
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 11:59:17 -0800
From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: US: Column: DEA Marijuana Madness
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newshawk: http://www.cannabisnews.com/
Pubdate: Sun, 11 Nov 2001
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Page: B07
Copyright: 2001 The Washington Post Company
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/491
Author: David S. Broder
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?194 (Hutchinson, Asa)
DEA MARIJUANA MADNESS
Asa Hutchinson, the former Republican representative from Arkansas now
serving as head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, has a reputation as
a straight shooter. When he was up for confirmation a few months ago, even
Democrats who had strongly opposed his views as a manager of the
impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton testified in support of his
nomination.
The other morning, Hutchinson was the guest at one of the breakfast
interviews arranged by Godfrey Sperling Jr. of the Christian Science
Monitor. Asked what the events of Sept. 11 had done to the war on drugs,
Hutchinson readily admitted that the diversion of government resources to
the anti-terrorism campaign had left his agency stretched thin.
A significant number of FBI agents who had been working drug cases have
been pulled off to assist in the dragnet for suspected terrorists, he said.
Coast Guard vessels that had been patrolling the Caribbean to intercept
drug smugglers are now protecting harbors. Customs agents are focusing on
bioterrorism.
Hutchinson assured reporters that he agreed with the new priorities, but
acknowledged that the DEA is struggling to "pick up the slack."
All of which makes it very strange, in my view, that on Oct. 25 about 30
DEA agents spent six hours in a raid on the Los Angeles Cannabis Resource
Center, a source of marijuana for patients with doctors' prescriptions for
its use as a painkiller.
There was nothing illegal about the raid. The agents had a search warrant
signed by a visiting federal judge from Florida. Scott Imler, the president
of the center, told me the agents "were very polite. They did not pull guns
or put anyone on the floor or handcuff anyone, or physically or verbally
abuse anyone. They just gathered us together and went about collecting stuff."
They took marijuana plants, processed marijuana, 3,000 medical records and
all the business documents on the site. The next day, Imler said, they
seized the organization's bank accounts, effectively shutting down its
normal operations.
In turn, Imler and his staff did not try to conceal anything; in fact, they
opened the safe and allowed the agents to take away the contents. This was
no clandestine operation.
Five years ago, when California voters overwhelmingly approved a medical
marijuana initiative financed by George Soros and two other
multimillionaires, the Los Angeles County sheriff, Sherman Block, and
officials of West Hollywood encouraged Imler and his associates to set up
operations, even finding them a building they could use.
John Duran, the center's attorney and a city councilman, said the
organization has worked hand-in-glove with local officials, acceding to
their requests that patients' status be verified every three months and
that they carry identity cards attesting to their eligibility for marijuana
possession.
"We've had nothing to hide for five years," Duran said. Indeed, DEA agents
visited the center on Sept. 17 and were given a tour of the premises and a
full explanation of its operations.
The authority for the raid rests on a Supreme Court decision last May that
the passage of medical marijuana initiatives in California and seven other
states does not override federal law classifying marijuana as an illegal drug.
The question raised by Imler, Duran, civil liberties attorneys and even
some conservative editorial pages is why such a raid would command the
resources of the DEA at a time when it is clearly being stretched to the
limits.
When I asked Hutchinson, he replied that carrying out the federal marijuana
ban "is our responsibility, but not a high priority." He acknowledged that
he prefers to work with elected officials and local law enforcement, rather
than opposing them, as in this case, but said that "when there is a gap"
between state and federal law, his job is to enforce the congressional
statutes.
That answer does not satisfy local officials. At the time of the raid, 960
people -- most of them with AIDS, the rest with cancer, Lou Gehrig's
disease and other serious illnesses -- were alleviating pain and nausea
with marijuana from Imler's center. No arrest warrants have been issued
since the raid, and a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office told me it
will be "some time" before any prosecutions are decided. But the center has
closed its dispensary because, as Imler said, "we do not want to distribute
black market products." Now, Duran added, "we have 960 patients out in the
parks, looking for drug dealers to get their marijuana, which is exactly
what the city didn't want."
No one has alleged -- let alone proved -- that anyone obtained marijuana
without a medical prescription. Why in the world is the Bush administration
fighting this battle, when there are so many more important wars to be won?
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
---
MAP posted-by: Beth
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:03:17 -0800
From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: CA: States' Rights Under Fire
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newshawk: Drug Policy Forum of Wisconsin www.drugsense.org/dpfwi/
Pubdate: Sun, 11 Nov 2001
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Page: A-15
Copyright: 2001 Hearst Communications Inc.
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/388
Author: Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?115 (Cannabis - California)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/ashcroft.htm (Ashcroft, John)
STATES' RIGHTS UNDER FIRE
Attorney General's Actions Show Shift In White House Policy
Attorney General John Ashcroft is an ardent advocate of states' rights, as
he demonstrated in 1998 when he praised a pro-Confederacy magazine for
defending "Southern patriots" like Jefferson Davis.
His boss, President Bush, told campaign audiences last year that the
federal government was too big and too active outside its proper sphere --
and even suggested that states should decide whether to legalize medical
marijuana.
But Ashcroft's actions toward doctors in Oregon and toward medical
marijuana suppliers and physicians in California have led some analysts to
question the administration's devotion to curbing the powers of the federal
government.
-- On Tuesday, Ashcroft ordered federal drug agents to crack down on
doctors who prescribe lethal medication to terminally ill adults under
Oregon's assisted-suicide law, twice approved by the state's voters. He
reversed a 1998 decision by Attorney General Janet Reno, who said the
practice of medicine was regulated by states, not the federal government.
On Thursday, a federal judge granted state officials' request for a
restraining order blocking Ashcroft's edict at least until Nov. 20.
-- The week before, federal agents under Ashcroft's authority raided and
shut down a Los Angeles medical marijuana clinic that was operating, with
local law enforcement approval, under the terms of an initiative approved
by California voters in 1996. Similar actions had been taken against
Northern California clinics by President Bill Clinton's administration.
-- Ashcroft's Justice Department has asked a federal appeals court to
overrule a San Francisco federal judge and let the government revoke the
drug prescription licenses of California doctors who recommend marijuana to
their patients, pursuing a case that began under Clinton.
"I think they care about states' rights when it serves their political ends
. . . but I think that's been true throughout American history," said
University of Southern California law professor Erwin Chemerinsky, a
liberal and frequent critic of the administration.
On the conservative side, Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal
Justice Legal Foundation in Sacramento, said Ashcroft's edict against
assisted suicide was harder to defend than the federal attack on state
medical marijuana laws.
"The issue of whether a drug (like marijuana) is safe and effective for
specific purposes was federalized long ago," Scheidegger said, referring to
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's approval authority. "The
right-to-die question is a question of basic criminal law, of what is
homicide. . . . What people can do to each other in noncommercial contexts
has traditionally been a state matter."
"Congress has let the states control the practice of medicine," said Marsha
Cohen, a professor at the University of California's Hastings College of
the Law in San Francisco and a former president of the state Board of
Pharmacy. "If Congress wished to take over this issue, it could pass a law."
The U.S. Supreme Court also appeared to endorse state prerogatives in 1997
when it allowed states to prosecute doctors who aid in suicides, but said
states are free to decide whether such assistance is a crime.
Ashcroft noted, however, that the federal government regulates prescription
drugs that are classified as "controlled substances" -- those that can be
abused -- including the barbiturates used in Oregon to help consenting
patients die.
Oregon Only State With This Law
Oregon is the only state with an assisted-suicide law. While states decide
whether a doctor is fit to practice, federal authorities can largely
curtail a medical practice by revoking the doctor's license to prescribe
federally controlled substances.
Administering drugs to assist in a suicide is not a "legitimate medical
purpose," Ashcroft declared Tuesday in a letter to the Drug Enforcement
Administration, part of the Justice Department.
The DEA took the same position three years ago and proposed to act against
Oregon physicians, but the agency was overruled by Reno. She said she found
no evidence that Congress, in restricting or banning certain drugs,
"intended to displace the states as the primary regulators of the medical
profession, or to override a state's determination as to what constitutes
legitimate medical practice."
On the other hand, Ashcroft argued Tuesday, if the federal government can
outlaw marijuana as a medicine in states that allow it -- a position backed
by the Supreme Court in a California case in May -- why can't it decide how
federally regulated medicines are used?
"You would think he would be sympathetic to a narrower reach of a federal
law," said Jesse Choper, a constitutional law professor at the University
of California at Berkeley.
But if Ashcroft sincerely believes federal law forbids the use of medicines
to assist in a suicide, his job is to enforce the law, Choper said.
Confirmation Grilling
"That was one of the things they grilled him about when he testified at his
confirmation hearing, whether he would enforce laws with which he
disagreed," Choper said.
The grilling, however, focused on Ashcroft's ability to act contrary to his
political views -- particularly his opposition to abortion -- and not his
zeal as a drug warrior. A lawyer for Oakland's now-closed medical marijuana
dispensary was neither surprised nor impressed by Ashcroft's latest action.
"Turning federal agents loose on (Oregon) physicians is consistent with the
approach they're taking to medical marijuana," said Santa Clara University
law professor Gerald Uelmen, who argued the marijuana case in the Supreme
Court. "We talk about states being laboratories, but when push comes to
shove, (federal officials) don't give much credence to that."
E-mail Bob Egelko at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
---
MAP posted-by: Jackl
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:02:22 -0800
From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: UK: Editorial: A Necessary Prescription
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newshawk: shug
Pubdate: Sun, 11 Nov 2001
Source: Guardian, The (UK)
Copyright: 2001 Guardian Newspapers Limited
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardian/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/175
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/heroin.htm (Heroin)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?131 (Heroin Maintenance)
A NECESSARY PRESCRIPTION
Time To Face Realities Over Heroin Use
Slowly we are moving towards a more rational drugs policy. The home
secretary has already signalled the downgrading of cannabis to a
minor, non-arrestable offence, and the approval of its use for
medical purposes draws closer. More importantly, he is now ready to
encourage a return to prescribing heroin, moving the addiction from a
criminal offence to medical help. This is a major step, as a report
released yesterday by the Centre for Reform reinforces. Written by
=46rancis Wilkinson, a former chief constable, the report suggests the
UK has "the most rampant heroin problem in the western world". The
number using the drug is doubling every four years. Mr Wilkinson
suggests the total number now is 270,000 - a more conservative figure
than some estimates - but still 540 times as large as the 500
registered in the benign prescribing days of the 1960s.
Like our investigatory reporter Nick Davies in a series earlier this
year, Mr Wilkinson notes that the black market creates many of the
problems generated by heroin: the shared needles; the contamination
which occurs when illegal dealers cut the drug with other substances
(sugar, starch, powders, sand) to increase their profits; not to
mention the criminal activities needed to fund a =A316,000-a-year
habit. He rightly points to European practice: "the only way to
reduce the problem - it will not eliminate it - is to supply heroin
to users." Ironically, Europe began adopting the old British approach
of prescription as the UK finally abandoned it in the 1990s.
The new leaders are Switzerland, the Netherlands and Germany, which
have all adopted prescription, while three more states have official
injection rooms. The home affairs select committee is maintaining
momentum by reviewing the effectiveness of current policy. Even the
deposed drugs tsar has conceded the old goal - a 50% reduction in
hard drug use by 2008 - was unrealistic and should be dropped. Not
before time.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
---
MAP posted-by: Josh
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:04:07 -0800
From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: British Medical Journal : Cannabis The Wonder Drug?
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pubdate: Sat, 10 Nov 2001
Source: British Medical Journal, The (UK)
Issue: BMJ 2001;323:1136 ( 10 November )
Section: Reviews, Press
Copyright: 2001 The BMJ
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.bmj.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/60
Author: Trevor Jackson
Cited: GW Pharmaceuticals
http://www.gwpharm.com/ http://www.mapinc.org/find?323 (GW Pharmaceuticals)
UK home secretary, David Blunkett http://www.mapinc.org/people/David+Blunkett
Professor Lester Grinspoon of Harvard Medical School
http://www.mapinc.org/people/Lester+Grinspoon http://www.rxmarihuana.com/
http://www.marijuana-uses.com/
Referenced: the Observer article
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1858/a01.html
BBC Transcript and video: Cannabis From The Chemist
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n1861.a06.html
CANNABIS THE WONDER DRUG?
At a secret location in the home counties of England, 15 000 cannabis
plants are being grown quite legally. They are being bred from strains
whose names -- Hindu Kush, Skunk, Northern Lights, Gloria -- are
redolent of the Amsterdam coffee house scene. Their psychoactive seed
heads, which stand over two metres high, are carefully studied -- but
never smoked. For these plants are being cultivated as part of the
world's first commercial trial of medicinal cannabis.
The company behind the trial, GW Pharmaceuticals, based at Porton Down
Science Park in Wiltshire, has had a rather good fortnight. Firstly,
the home secretary, David Blunkett, announced on 23 October that the
government would liberalise the law concerning possession and use of
cannabis. He also indicated that he would be ready to license cannabis
for medicinal use to treat multiple sclerosis and other conditions as
soon as research trials were completed. Most commentators (including,
albeit grudgingly, the Daily Mail leader writers) seemed to approve.
On 24 October shares in GW Pharmaceuticals jumped from 13p to 108p.
Secondly, the press this week hailed cannabis as a wonder drug and a
miracle cure. Under the headline "Cannabis proves a medical miracle,"
the Observer, a newspaper not normally known for its hype, reported on
4 November that the first clinical trials of cannabis were showing
that it was "capable of transforming the lives of very sick people."
After decades of cannabis being condemned as one of the scourges of
Western society, this all seemed a bit too good to be true. Were these
claims going too far? What sort of evidence was available?
The source of the Observer's story was the BBC 1 Panorama documentary
"Cannabis from the chemist," broadcast on 4 November. The programme
looked at two separate trials -- a pilot study (n#) in East Anglia
of the effects of cannabis on the pain caused by nerve damage, and the
early stages of a much larger trial in Oxford of the effects of
cannabis on people with multiple sclerosis. The programme did not make
clear the total number involved in the latter trial -- its medical
director said in passing that he had initially seen 20 patients -- and
based its conclusions on the experiences of Sandra, Tyrone, and Jo
(n=3).
GW Pharmaceuticals is the only company in the United Kingdom that has
been given a licence to grow cannabis for medicinal use. Panorama's
journalists were the only ones to have access to those taking part in
the company's trials. Alex, who had a spinal injury, and Sandra,
Tyrone, and Jo, who all had multiple sclerosis, received daily doses
of cannabis sprayed under the tongue. They all showed remarkable
progress. Although none of them had expected to be cured, they all
experienced relief from pain. Jo, the 58 year old wife of a school
chaplain, had struggled to lift her legs before the trial but
afterwards was able to lift them 25 times. She hailed the drug's
effects as "miraculous," and her husband said, "It's not a word that
either of us would use lightly."
Dr Willy Notcutt of the East Anglian pilot study said, "The results so
far have exceeded what I dared hope for . . . we are seeing 80% of our
patients getting good quality benefit from the cannabis." Some were
getting almost total pain relief, he said. "We have seen their pain
scores go down to zero."
More dramatic claims were made by Professor Lester Grinspoon of
Harvard Medical School, one of the world's leading proponents of
medicinal cannabis. Although not involved in the trials, Grinspoon
claimed that cannabis would "eventually be used by millions of people
around the planet." Just as penicillin "was considered the wonder drug
of the 1940s," he said, cannabis "will eventually be seen as the
wonder drug of the 21st century."
On Panorama's website ( www.bbc.co.uk/panorama ) the next day, Philip
Robson, medical director of the Oxford trials, expressed concern about
newspaper "wonder drug" headlines. He said: "We have to keep this in
perspective. This seems to be a medicine which is incredibly useful
for people who haven't had very much luck with the standard medicines,
and that is really good, but I think to talk about wonder drugs and
miracle cures is way over the top."
But newspaper headline writers can hardly be blamed for their "wonder
drug" approach to the story. Panorama had given them plenty to go on,
concluding: "We could see the drug in the chemist in just two years."
Admittedly, Grinspoon's wild optimism was balanced with words of
caution from, among others, Susan Greenfield, professor of
pharmacology at Oxford University, who said: "The very term wonder
drug is very frightening." And it would have been odd if Panorama had
not embraced the opportunity to follow this historic experiment. But
the result was rather like a commercial for GW Pharmaceuticals, even
though the company's name was never mentioned.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 17:09:12 +0100
From: "FARId" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tracy MMM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Boris MMM Montreal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Dana BEAL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: News from France
Message-ID: <000501c16adb$df6f9b20$3d1ae4d5@gfarid>
C'est un message de format MIME en plusieurs parties.
------=_NextPart_000_0099_01C16AD3.95E2D880
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
France is a very retrograd country regarding all other european =
countries Drug laws. As an exemple, Jean Pierre Galland Chairman of the =
CIRC (Information and Research Cannabis committee) will be send in jail =
on february 26th 2002 for an opinion break of law.
The Greens Party is the best defenders of all drug users, by asking the =
abrogation of the 1970 Drug law. Jean Pierre Galland could be a Green MP =
candidate in Paris for the next legislative election. Also, the =
presidential campaign will be the right time to push all candidates in =
favor of a new policy. As the french anti prohibitionnist movement is =
weak, we have to plan our strategy in regards with both of that =
important political times.
Also, in order to push further the worldwide movement in favor of drugs =
legalisation, France should be viewed as a main target. A big target =
because : France is an important country in Europe that give no sign of =
positive steps, and if EU can go further, first France has to move.=20
As MMM 2002 will be the day before the second round of the presidential =
election, WE NEED ALL KIND OF SUPPORT TO EMPOWER US.
Yesterday in Paris, one hundred peoples gathered to plan their =
activities :
- november 21st-22nd 2001 : During two evenings, several Bars will =
put their Alcohol licence behind a new one : Licence H. Promotion of =
Hemp products, growshops and autoproduction, those nights will sound as =
"Fete du Chanvre - Fa=EEtes des recoltes".
In January 2002, a nation wide petition will be sign up by hundred =
thousands peoples with the minimal doleance : "We're asking the =
abrogation of the 1970's drugs law. We want the legalisation of drugs". =
In the end of January, that will be followed by a big conference under =
the topic "What about a new french drugs policy ?"
In February, a second petition will be broadcast with a real message : =
"Jean Pierre Galland should not be injailed, free all the POW injailed =
in France, bring back to the country all french POW injailed worldwide - =
Stop drug users criminalisation."
In March, a mediatic happenning is planned, a kind of Cannabis cup, =
under the sloggan "Sortez du placard"=20
But the most important events will be May 4th, world wide liberation =
day. Til now a little have been planned : a big festival in Paris during =
three days (May 3rd, 4th,5th). We hope to plan more events in other =
places.
I'm still ready to give you details and hope that my poor english can be =
well understand.
Yours sincerely,
FARId GHEHIOUECHE
Drugs group Coordinator of the French GREENS Party
Member of the committee "Act for drugs legalisation"
------=_NextPart_000_0099_01C16AD3.95E2D880
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>France is a very retrograd country =
regarding all=20
other european countries Drug laws. As an exemple, Jean Pierre Galland =
Chairman=20
of the CIRC (Information and Research Cannabis committee) will be send =
in jail=20
on february 26th 2002 for an opinion break of law.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The Greens Party is the best defenders =
of all drug=20
users, by asking the abrogation of the 1970 Drug law. Jean Pierre =
Galland could=20
be a Green MP candidate in Paris for the next legislative election. =
Also, the=20
presidential campaign will be the right time to push all candidates in =
favor of=20
a new policy. </FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>As the french anti =
prohibitionnist=20
movement is weak, we have to plan our strategy in regards with both of =
that=20
important political times.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Also, in order to push further the =
worldwide=20
movement in favor of drugs legalisation, France should be viewed as =
a main=20
target. A big target because : France is an important country in Europe =
that=20
give no sign of positive steps, and if EU can go further, first France =
has to=20
move. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>As MMM 2002 will be the day before the =
second round=20
of the presidential election, WE NEED ALL KIND OF SUPPORT TO EMPOWER=20
US.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yesterday in Paris, one hundred peoples =
gathered to=20
plan their activities :</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> - november 21st-22nd =
2001=20
: During two evenings, several Bars will put their =
Alcohol=20
licence behind a new one : Licence H. Promotion of Hemp products, =
growshops=20
and autoproduction, those nights will sound as "Fete du Chanvre - =
Fa=EEtes=20
des recoltes".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In January 2002, a nation =
wide petition will=20
be sign up by hundred thousands peoples</FONT> <FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>with=20
the minimal doleance : "We're asking the abrogation of the 1970's drugs =
law. We=20
want the legalisation of drugs". In the end of January, t</FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>hat will be followed by a big conference under the topic "What =
about=20
a new french drugs policy ?"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In February, a second petition will be =
broadcast=20
with a real message : "Jean Pierre Galland should not be injailed, free =
all the=20
POW injailed in France, bring back to the country all french POW =
injailed=20
worldwide - Stop drug users criminalisation."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In March, a mediatic happenning is =
planned, a kind=20
of Cannabis cup, under the sloggan "Sortez du placard" </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>But the most important events will be =
May 4th,=20
world wide liberation day. Til now a little have been planned : a big =
festival=20
in Paris during three days (May 3rd, 4th,5th). We hope to plan more =
events in=20
other places.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm still ready to give you details and =
hope that=20
my poor english can be well understand.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yours sincerely,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>FARId GHEHIOUECHE</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Drugs group Coordinator of the French =
GREENS=20
Party</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Member of the committee "Act for drugs=20
legalisation"</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0099_01C16AD3.95E2D880--
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 11:55:58 -0800
From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: THE NATION: Book Review: Hooked On Narcomyths
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pubdate: Thu, 08 Nov 2001
Source: Nation, The (US)
Copyright: 2001 The Nation Company
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.thenation.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/285
Author: Peter Schrag
HOOKED ON NARCOMYTHS
America's longest-running metaphorical war, a campaign against a hidden and
even less well defined enemy than terrorism, is the war on drugs.
This one also has its insidious domestic threats, its overseas campaign of
interdiction and extermination, its potential to foster guerrilla wars and
destabilize governments. It too has been supported with little dissent from
a Congress where few dare to question the prevailing orthodoxy.
Of course the analogy is misleading. There are huge differences between the
threat of drugs and the threat of terrorism, whose very object is the
slaughter of innocents.
But to point out that obvious distinction is also to underline the excesses
of a campaign whose cost in lives, privacy, social damage and political
instability easily exceeds the more than $25 billion in tax money that the
nation now spends on it every year. More than half of all those sent to
federal prison are drug offenders.
Nonetheless, the most significant challenge to that orthodoxy so far--most
of it from intellectual and social elites--is a free-market libertarianism
that's as ideological and unrealistic, both as politics and policy, as the
case for an all-out war. So the issue tends to be vastly oversimplified:
the zero-tolerance absolutism of former US drug czar William Bennett versus
the libertarian, free-market absolutism of economist Milton Friedman;
prohibition with long prison terms even for simple possession versus
decriminalization, including, at the margins, regulated commercial sale.
Robert J. MacCoun, a professor of law and public policy at Berkeley, and
Peter Reuter, a professor of public policy at the University of Maryland,
are certain that there is a third, and better, set of alternatives--more
rational, based on experience, less sure of itself--that can thread its
way, almost on a case-by-case basis, between the ideological poles and out
of the morass in which US drug policy has been stuck.
In part that third way requires doing more--in needle exchanges, safe-use
campaigns targeted at addicts and a whole range of non-drug policy issues
like better welfare and healthcare. In part it means doing
less--particularly through selective, targeted enforcement of prohibitions,
shorter criminal sentences and fewer encroachments on civil liberties.
MacCoun and Reuter make a sharp distinction between decriminalization and
what they call depenalization, which differs from conventional prohibition
not in restricting access but in limiting the severity of the penalties,
particularly by replacing criminal with civil penalties. (In the case of
cocaine, which they regard as far too destructive, they don't favor
depenalization but only a reduction of the severe and unequal criminal
sentences the United States imposes even for possession.) Nor do they
support anything that would lead to commercialization even of soft drugs
like marijuana, which they feel would bring--and, in places like the
Netherlands, has brought--expanded use.
But their preference, often implicit, nonetheless follows a general
European model that seeks overall harm reduction rather than merely a
reduction in the prevalence of use, as US policy now does. They acknowledge
that total harm reduction--mitigating the overall social costs not only of
drug use but of prohibition and the criminal behavior associated with
it--is not always an easy calculation. Among other things, calculations
need to include measures of total consumption--reduction in heavy use--not
just in the number of users.
But it's certainly more realistic than measuring the success of policy
simply by how many fewer people regularly use some illegal substance.
The implicit, and occasionally explicit, policy preferences in Drug War
Heresies seem almost an afterthought next to the huge amount of data that
forms the core of this book and that sheds light on almost every aspect of
this issue.
MacCoun and Reuter have surveyed and analyzed hundreds of studies, past and
present, in this country, Europe and Australia, not just on drug policies
but on experience with a range of issues that have parallels to this
one--alcohol prohibition in the United States, tobacco regulation,
legalized gambling, the enforcement of laws against prostitution. The real
objective of the book is to document the complexity of drug policies, their
often unintended consequences and, more fundamental, the lack of scientific
foundation for so much of US policy. The analysis of these data,
dispassionately presented in all their complexity, makes this an enormously
important book. This is especially true because drug policy is a field
where tendentiousness prevails, with the exception of a very few other
works, like Mark Kleiman's Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (1992).
Needless to say, Drug War Heresies is hardly an easy read, much less an
easy book to summarize.
Nor will either side in this fight find it entirely to its liking.
It leaves the standard slogans and cliches--that better policy research on
things like marijuana, for example, would send the wrong message--lying in
the dust. Excepting only Sweden, most of Europe, as MacCoun and Reuter make
clear, is moving away from the punitive model, only rarely toward
legalization and more commonly toward a far more realistic, nuanced, "harm
reduction" approach not stuck in the puritanical mode that so much of US
policy finds itself in. (And even the Swedes, who reject methadone
maintenance and needle exchange, provide well-supported treatment and
social services to addicts.) That hardly means that policies in the
Netherlands, Britain, Spain and Italy, all of which they examine, are
beyond question.
All of them, as MacCoun said in a recent talk, are flawed in one way or
another.
But Europe is a rich source of lessons.
At the core of those lessons is the question of trade-offs: How much do the
substantial reductions in crime and criminal justice costs (including the
cost of police corruption) resulting from any loosening of criminal
penalties, plus the benefits of safe-use programs, offset the costs imposed
on families, individuals and neighborhoods from increased drug consumption?
And that, in turn, depends again and again on individual circumstances--on
the details of the policy and the surrounding culture.
The Dutch, for example, appear to have successfully depenalized marijuana
possession without terribly significant increases in use, thereby reducing
both the costs of incarcerating marijuana users and the associated human costs.
In the mid-1980s, when passive depenalization--essentially, nonenforcement
of laws against personal possession--became de facto decriminalization,
marijuana became commercially available in coffee shops and use did drift
up. But even that increase didn't drive up the use of hard drugs or
increase drug-related crime.
Other than producing an increase in patients seeking treatment for
marijuana-related problems and occasional complaints from neighboring
retailers about certain coffee shops, say MacCoun and Reuter, "we are
unable to document any significant social harms accompanying increased
cannabis use."
MacCoun and Reuter make clear that at times harm reduction can go badly
wrong. After years of chasing an active heroin scene around its
neighborhoods, Zurich established its so-called Needle Park (Platzspitz),
thereby concentrating heroin users in one park near the main railroad
station, in an effort to minimize petty crime and neighborhood nuisances,
and to create a central location for providing health services to addicts.
The experiment failed: It drew heroin users from far and wide, and turned
the place into a "Hieronymous Bosch vision of a drug hell," which in turn
was cited by prohibitionists everywhere as evidence that such ventures
never work. But there were also gains: from AIDS outreach, which appears to
have driven down HIV-positive rates, and from the efficient handling of
medical emergencies. And while there were some notorious gang-related
murders, crime rates were surprisingly low. Switzerland had a serious
heroin problem before Platzspitz was created, but there is no evidence that
overall use of heroin in the country increased as a result of it.
The book's general read of the overall European experience is that it has a
lot to tell us about what is feasible. "The Dutch have shown that harm
reduction can be used as a principle to guide decisions consistently; it
has some successes to show and no disasters to hide. Italy has removed
criminal sanctions for possession of small quantities of cocaine and heroin
without experiencing much greater problems than their neighbors." Swiss
trials (begun following the Platzspitz failure) "show that heroin
maintenance programs can operate in an orderly and systematic fashion for
the benefit of a substantial fraction of the clients." The authors also
point out that American experience with the enforcement of prostitution
laws indicates that the harms that theoretically follow from vice
prohibition can be mitigated--though not eliminated--by selective
enforcement. Indeed, despite America's moralistic views about prostitution
and adultery, policing of prostitution has much in common with the
discretionary policing of drug use in many European cities.
Conversely, however, MacCoun and Reuter also caution against excessive
enthusiasm for the contention that regulatory policies are inevitably an
improvement over outright prohibition. Recent US experiences with alcohol
and tobacco illustrate the power of commercial marketing and the difficulty
of maintaining or tightening regulatory controls in the face of that power.
The evidence for both of those licit substances shows quite clearly that
while "prohibition may cause considerable harm, eliminating prohibition
does not mean eliminating drug-related harm." Put briefly, they contend
that contrary to the libertarian enthusiasm for such a course, the alcohol
and tobacco model has to be approached with a lot of caution.
In the case of tobacco, for example, restrictions on promotion, product
regulation and taxation have all been greatly attenuated by the industry's
strategic use of political contributions and reframing of legal issues
(e.g., making promotion of a dangerous product a free-speech issue).
Despite the wealth of research available to help guide drug policy, the
tests and calculations--essentially on the harm-reduction
principle--MacCoun and Reuter are under no illusion that there's any
specific formula by which to evaluate reform proposals.
In the end, value judgments still have to be made, weights attached to each
element of harm. Politically, moreover, the burden of proof is still on
reformers to show why their proposals are preferable to the status quo, no
matter how dismal it is. And that's often complex.
Much easier, unfortunately, are the simplistic warnings put out by
government prohibitionists that any experiment--say, with safe-use programs
or even good medical studies on the safety and efficacy of marijuana in
reducing the nausea associated with chemotherapy or the loss of appetite of
AIDS patients--would "send the wrong signal."
MacCoun and Reuter may overestimate the political obstacles blocking the
kind of reform that they clearly seem to prefer.
A call for "nonzero tolerance," they write, is tantamount to treason in
some circles; but such a call might encourage more humane, less intrusive,
less damaging ways of coping with drugs and their harms.
They cite the passage of the first initiatives, in California and Arizona
in 1996, permitting the medical use of marijuana, which they call "at best
sloppy," because those ask doctors to make decisions without adequate
scientific evidence.
But their book apparently went to press before the wave of recent ballot
measures and state laws: medical marijuana initiatives in six or seven
other states, state laws liberalizing sterile syringe access and reducing
prison terms for drug possession, and California's Proposition 36, passed
in the fall of 2000, which requires all those convicted of simple drug
possession or drug use to be sent to treatment rather than prison.
All suggest that, at least before the terrorist attacks of September 11,
the public may have been in a far more tolerant and reformist mood than its
elected leaders.
Still, the authors are right that despite polls showing that Americans
believe the drug war has been a failure, it's a political standard, not a
philosophical or analytic one, that reformers have to meet. And that
standard is quite protective of the status quo. The combination of high
uncertainty about the outcome of any change; the partial irreversibility of
any bad outcomes; and a pervasive tendency for decision-makers to favor the
status quo pose steep barriers for reformers.
Despite the high number of Americans incarcerated for nothing more than
marijuana offenses--an affront to a liberal society's belief in the
benevolence of government--reactions to existing policies have not been
strong enough for politicians to risk any real reforms.
A punitive stasis prevails.
Yet even in the face of such passive resistance, Drug War Heresies should
pose a formidable challenge, not necessarily to cause pursuit of the
policies and trial programs that MacCoun and Reuter seem to
favor--maintenance, reducing the penalties for use of marijuana, more
judicious drug law enforcement--but to pay attention to the data, end the
misrepresentation of information where it exists and go after it where fear
has repressed even research, especially in assessing the consequences and
efficacy of existing policies.
More fundamentally, the book may also introduce policy-makers to the
relatively novel thought that prevalence reduction and use reduction are
not the same. While cocaine prevalence has gone down, they point out,
"total cocaine consumption and its related harms have remained relatively
stable." It may also make clearer that harm reduction is not simply a flag
flown by closet libertarians who are philosophically opposed to all
prohibitive drug laws.
At the same time, Drug War Heresies leaves no doubt about the limits of
policy--and on that score it's important for a lot of other fields.
It's doubtful, as the authors say, that a complete solution to the US drug
problem exists.
The major differences between the American and European illicit drug
situations, they suggest, may be rooted as much in broader societal
differences, in the peculiarities of geography or in other policies--in
lack of healthcare or unequal income distribution--as in drug law per se
and its enforcement. That's particularly true of treatment programs, which,
even under the best of circumstances, will only be partially successful.
But that hardly eliminates the need for reform, in reducing the severity of
sentences and the intrusiveness of drug law enforcement, and shifting to
more selective, targeted enforcement.
Such a course, MacCoun and Reuter acknowledge, reflects only their opinion.
But they leave little doubt that the evidence indicating a need for major
reform has both an empirical and an ethical basis. "To scorn discussion and
analysis of such major changes, in light of the extraordinary problems
associated with current policies, is frivolous and uncaring." For many
reasons this book isn't easy; but for anybody seriously and earnestly
concerned about drug policy, it is likely to become indispensable.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
---
MAP posted-by: Rebel
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 11:57:02 -0800
From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: OR: Novelist, 60s Icon Ken Kesey Dies
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newshawk: MCAGiraffe
Pubdate: Sat, 10 Nov 2001
Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Copyright: 2001 Associated Press
Author: Jeff Barnard (AP)
NOVELIST, 60'S ICON KEN KESEY DIES
GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) - Ken Kesey, whose LSD-fueled bus ride became a
symbol of the psychedelic 1960s after he won fame as a novelist with "One
Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," died Saturday morning. He was 66.
Kesey died two weeks after cancer surgery at Sacred Heart Medical Center to
remove 40 percent of his liver.
"We're all going to miss him," said Eileen Babbs, a family friend. "He's
gone too soon."
After studying writing at Stanford University, Kesey burst onto the
literary scene in 1962 with "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," followed
quickly with "Sometimes a Great Notion" in 1964, then went 28 years before
publishing his third major novel.
In 1964, he rode across the country in an old school bus named Furthur
driven by Neal Cassidy, hero of Jack Kerouac's beat generation classic, "On
The Road."
The bus was filled with pals who called themselves the Merry Pranksters and
sought enlightenment through the psychedelic drug LSD. The odyssey was
immortalized in Tom Wolfe's 1968 account, "The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test."
"Anyone trying to get a handle on our times had better read Kesey," Charles
Bowden wrote when the Los Angeles Times honored Kesey's lifetime of work
with the Robert Kirsh Award in 1991. "And unless we get lucky and things
change, they're going to have to read him a century from now too."
"Sometimes a Great Notion," widely considered Kesey's greatest book, told
the saga of the Stamper clan, rugged independent loggers carving a living
out of the Oregon woods under the motto, "Never Give A Inch." It was made
into a movie starring Henry Fonda and Paul Newman.
But "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" became much more widely known, thanks
to a movie that Kesey hated. It tells the story of R.P. McMurphy, who
feigned insanity to get off a prison farm, only to be lobotomized when he
threatened the authority of the mental hospital.
The 1974 movie swept the Academy Awards for best picture, best director,
best actor and best actress, but Kesey sued the producers because it took
the viewpoint away from the character of the schizophrenic Indian, Chief
Bromden.
Kesey based the story on experiences working at the Veterans Administration
hospital in Palo Alto, Calif., while attending Wallace Stegner's writing
seminar at Stanford. Kesey also volunteered for experiments with LSD.
While Kesey continued to write a variety of short autobiographical fiction,
magazine articles and children's books, he didn't produce another major
novel until "Sailor Song" in 1992, his long-awaited Alaska book, which he
described as a story of "love at the end of the world."
"This is a real old-fashioned form," he said of the novel. "But it is sort
of the Vatican of the art. Every once in a while you've got to go get a
blessing from the pope."
Kesey considered pranks part of his art, and in 1990 took a poke at the
Smithsonian Institution by announcing he would drive his old psychedelic
bus to Washington, D.C., to give it to the nation. The museum recognized
the bus as a new one, with no particular history, and rejected the gift.
In a 1990 interview with The Associated Press, Kesey said it had become
harder to write since he became famous.
"When I was working on 'Sometimes a Great Notion,' one of the reasons I
could do it was because I was unknown," he said. "I could get all those
balls in the air and keep them up there and nothing would come along and
distract me. Now there's a lot of stuff happens that happens because I'm
famous. And famous isn't good for a writer. You don't observe well when
you're being observed."
A graduate of the University of Oregon, Kesey returned to his alma mater in
1990 to teach novel writing. With each student assigned a character and
writing under the gun, the class produced "Caverns," under the pen name OU
Levon, or UO Novel spelled backward.
"The life of it comes from making people believe that these people are
drawing breath and standing up, casting shadows, and living lives and
feeling agonies," Kesey said then. "And that's a trick. It's a glorious
trick. And it's a trick that you can be taught. It's not something, just a
thing that comes from the muses."
Among his proudest achievements was seeing "Little Tricker the Squirrel
Meets Big Double the Bear," which he wrote from an Ozark mountains tale
told by his grandmother, included on the 1991 Library of Congress list of
suggested children's books.
"I'm up there with Dr. Seuss," he crowed.
Fond of performing, Kesey sometimes recited the piece in top hat and tails
accompanied by an orchestra, throwing a shawl over his head while assuming
the character of his grandmother reciting the nursery rhyme, "One Flew Over
the Cuckoo's Nest."
Other works include "Kesey's Garage Sale" and "Demon Box," collections of
essays and short stories, and "Further Inquiry," another look at the 1964
bus trip in which the soul of Cassidy is put on trial. "The Sea Lion" was
another children's book, telling the story of a crippled boy who saves his
Northwest Indian tribe from an evil spirit by invoking the gift-giving
ceremony of potlatch.
Born in La Junta, Colo., on Sept. 17, 1935, Kesey moved as a young boy in
1943 from the dry prairie to his grandparents' dairy farm in Oregon's lush
Willamette Valley. He earned a bachelor's degree in journalism from the
University of Oregon, where he also was a wrestler.
After serving four months in jail for a marijuana bust in California, he
set down roots in Pleasant Hill in 1965 with his high school sweetheart,
Faye, and reared four children. Their rambling red barn house with the big
Pennsylvania Dutch star on the side became a landmark of the psychedelic
era, attracting visits from myriad strangers in tie-dyed clothing seeking
enlightenment.
The bus Furthur rusted away in a boggy pasture while Kesey raised beef cattle.
Kesey was diagnosed with diabetes in 1992.
His son Jed, killed in a 1984 van wreck on a road trip with the University
of Oregon wrestling team, was buried in the back yard.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
---
MAP posted-by: Beth
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 11:58:02 -0800
From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: KY: Growing Marijuana Won't Solve Woes, JP Tells Man
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newshawk: Herb
Pubdate: Fri, 09 Nov 2001
Source: Whitehorse Star (CN YK)
Copyright: 2001 Whitehorse Star
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.whitehorsestar.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1493
Author: Sarah Elizabeth Brown
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Cannabis - Canada)
GROWING MARIJUANA WON'T SOLVE WOES, JP TELLS MAN
Growing marijuana doesn't solve economic difficulties, a justice of the
peace has told a man convicted of cultivating the plants in his home.
Justice of the Peace Dean Cameron handed 40-year-old Grover Taggart 45 days
in jail, to be served on weekends, in court Wednesday afternoon.
Last June 22, the RCMP drug squad searched Taggart's home and found 14
marijuana plants along with grow equipment, scales and bags in a rear
bedroom. They found 92.5 grams of cannabis in another room, 88 grams of
cannabis in a camper on the property and more marijuana plants in the garage.
Taggart pleaded guilty to one count of cultivation. A second cultivation
charge and a marijuana trafficking charge were stayed.
Taggart's lawyer, Jenny Reid, said the charges stem from economic difficulties.
She said Taggart hadn't worked full-time since 1991 because of a severe
diabetic condition and was living on $425 each month. He's worked in
diamond drilling part-time and hopes to get his diabetic condition under
control and be back at work, said Reid.
She noted that his last drug conviction, also for cultivation, was in 1995,
and that Taggart was willing to pay a fine and had lots of time to serve
community hours. Taggart's four prior drug convictions don't seem to have
deterred him, said Crown prosecutor Narissa Somji. She asked Cameron to
sentence Taggart to intermittent jail time and a $2,500-fine.
"It should be clear to you by now the drug thing is not going to do it for
you,"
Cameron told Taggart. "It's not going to solve your economic problems and
it's not going to solve any other problems you have.
"The way to drive that home to you is a custody sentence," said Cameron.
The justice of the peace said jail time was necessary because it's
Taggart's fifth drug conviction. The significant amount of drugs involved
is also a factor, said Cameron.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
---
MAP posted-by: Beth
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:00:19 -0800
From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Canada: Docs leery of prescribing pot
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newshawk: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Source: Edmonton Sun (CN AB)
Copyright: 2001, Canoe Limited Partnership.
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.fyiedmonton.com/htdocs/edmsun.shtml
Pubdate: Sun, 11 Nov 2001
Author: Paul Cowan
Docs leery of prescribing pot
The federal health minister is being told to count doctors out as pot
police.
The Canadian Medical Protective Association has written to Allan Rock
telling him the Marijuana Medicinal Access Regulations, introduced in
July, place an unfair responsibility on physicians.
Patients who want marijuana have to get a doctor to sign a
declaration approving the use of the drug and setting a dosage.
"The CMPA believes the medical declarations required under the
regulations place an unacceptable burden on member physicians to
inform themselves as to the effectiveness of medicinal marijuana in
each patient's case, as well as the relative risks and benefits of the
drug and what dosage would be appropriate," said Dr. John Gray, the
association's secretary treasurer in his letter to Rock.
"This information is simply not available.
"In medicine, knowledge is typically derived from clinical trials, of
which we understand there are very few for marijuana."
The association has sent its 60,000 members an information sheet
telling them what to do if a patient comes to them asking to be
prescribed marijuana for medicinal purposes.
"The CMPA's general advice is that any physician who does not feel
qualified to make any of the declarations required should not feel
compelled to do so," cautions the association advisory.
It warns doctors could find themselves in trouble with their
professional associations if they make statements beyond their area of
expertise on the forms.
The Alberta Medical Association has already warned its members to be
cautious about approving the use of pot.
"We are asking where is the evidence. There haven't been the
controlled studies on the side-effects," said AMA spokesman Ron
Kustra. "Doctors can't be sure what they are prescribing."
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 09:52:50 -0700
From: "Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: restore V1 #128
Message-ID: <003a01c16ad4$6bd644e0$14000014@router>
The repetitive false statements by unprofessionals in researching fact , law and
history refers to marijuana in Canada needing decriminalization. It has always been
lawful as it is God's gift Genesis1:29 no man can take it away unless you allow him
to. The Canadian British Columbia Supreme court was painted into a irreversible corner
in 1979 by a man named Hauser. The court admitted it was not a criminal event but
rather a civil one under the direction of the civil Health minister like a speeding
ticket.
This case has never been overturned and is the precedential proof it is not a
criminal violation for those that choose to use it in Canada.
The feds are aware of the decision but they ignore it hoping those charged will not
know about it as they the courts and lawyers charge three times the amount for a
criminal procedure as for a civil one. The motive to proceed as if it was a criminal
proceeding is obvious and corrupt. The continual referral to the decriminalization of
marijuana in Canada leaves those reading with the impression that it is criminal at
present. This is absolutely false and is poor reporting at best. Please research this
case before you allow anyone else to disseminate and promote false info on this
excellent forum of news.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 23:52:16 -0800
From: "Kay Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "DPFTexas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Restore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER WAY
Message-ID: <143701c16a85$cb20bec0$0100007f@idiom>
THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER WAY
I'm going to talk about Florida, but it is the same in all the states. What
I say here more than likely applies to whatever prisons you are supporting.
Florida has to cut its budget. Too much spending may be one reason, but
waste and corruption are probably bigger reasons. The area I know best, the
prisons, are down to bare bones and still they say you're paying over
$15,000 per prisoner to warehouse them. I suspect more of that is spent on
landscaping that on the prisoners. We can't keep cutting prison budgets
because "nobody cares about the inmates". You remember the statement, "you
can judge the civilization of a nation by looking at its prisoners"? Well,
the shame of it is, many of America's prisoners are living in squalor,
hungry, ill-clothed, medically neglected, and that says a whole lot more
about us than we care to listen to.
Disturbing stories are coming in about the diet in most Florida prisons. Of
course, we've contacted the DOC and they, as always, are quick to tell us
everything is okay, nobody's suffering. But, then they've lied to us
before.
The prisons of course are always the first to feel the budget crunch.
Michael Moore, DOC Secretary has said more than one time to his staff, "DO
MORE WITH LESS." They want to mass warehouse folks, but they don't want to
take care of them. Here's what I learned about "budget cuts" in the Florida
DOC.
You have to feed prisoners, but DOC will get away with the least they can.
To begin with, the portions are too small for an adult. Many families are
reporting weight loss in their prisoners. They are telling me that the
prisoners are always starving. The families spend all they can on food from
the vending machines trying to fill up their prisoners' bellies on visiting
day. I hear it in the prisoners' letters. They mention food probably more
than anything else but the beatings and pepperspray.
DOC says we are giving prisoners the minimum daily allowance to keep a human
being healthy (or maybe just alive). DOC refers to the Child Nutrition Act
and the National School Lunch Act as if they aren't dealing with grown men
and women. For instance, the menu says a cup of oatmeal, but they don't
discount for the watered down anemic portions that are actually served. Are
they getting the same nutrients from what the menu says and what they are
actually served? Absolutely not!
And if a prisoner has health problems or just can't eat any of his portion,
do you think he's getting the minimum requirements? And what about all the
geriatric prisoners at River Junction? They are fed mush and beans so often
that it is almost impossible to breathe at night in the closed air of the
dorms. I'm not trying to be crude, but these are old guys with digestion
problems and their beds are anchored 13" apart. How can you possibly call
mush and daily beans a geriatric diet?
And what about guards with the power to administer the dreaded and uneatable
"Management Loaf" for days on end. We know what the DOC official recipe
says, but you can't even smell the main ingredient, which is listed as
spinach. Whatever it is, if you can't eat it, you starve. I have an
envelope full of the "loaf". It stinks, it looks bad, it bloats your
stomach and gives you horrible gas and I can't say how often they do it, but
the guards are always threatening prisoners with, "You're gonna find me in
your food." Now how can you expect people to eat that? You couldn't. Are
they getting the minimum standard allowance, even for a child, when they are
on this overused starvation diet? Highly unlikely.
The guard's meals are not the meals the inmates eat, believe me. A nurse
with the DOC pointed out to me that many of the guards are big ol "healthy"
boys, and an ex-guard's daughter told me about the huge "company picnics"
where the feast is prepared from food that should have been fed to the
prisoners. That's why your prisoners are hungry!
Many prisoners say they have resorted to drinking lots of water before bed
so they won't go to sleep hungry. Sometimes a green bologna sandwich with
water is repeatedly served for lunch. What if you can't down the green
bologna or half rotted veggies or year-old oranges or cold half-raw chicken
or spoiled milk? Reckon you'd go to bed hungry, and loose weight? Think
you'd have enough to be healthy on?
Hamilton, Glades, Union, Hendry and probably more of the Florida facilities
have bad water that the guards won't even drink. The guards buy bottled
water that doesn't stink like bleach, but the prisoners don't have that
luxury.
And you have to clothe prisoners, right? Too many families are reporting
that when they visit the prison, the prisoners are wearing socks that are
worn out, falling down around their ankles, stained and tattered undershirts
full of holes with underwear to match, and torn up boots.
Many families and prisoners are reporting that the prisoners in some
institutions are doing without shoes altogether. They are coming out to see
their families with double socks on because there are not enough shoes to go
around. When they get shoes, they are usually ill fitting and when the
cheap things wear out it can sometimes take a long time to replace them.
Families report that some of the prisoners are wearing boots until they are
literally falling apart. I've had two prisoners walking around in holes for
a year trying to get a new pair of shoes. One prisoner finally got a pair
of work boots, but was told by the laundry room that if he wanted new socks,
he would have to pay for them. Of course, he can't pay for them because
nobody has a job.
It makes me remember the guards spotted at the Frontenec Flea Market selling
dozens of pairs of DOC issued prisoner footwear a couple of years back.
There's your money, folks - in crooked guard's pockets.
At least one prison is issuing filthy t-shirts and sheets to prisoners. And
what's worse, the Florida DOC won't allow the beleaguered families to send
in toiletries, socks, things that could reduce the basic cost to the state.
The "jackets" issued at Okaloosa wouldn't keep you warm even at 50 degrees
and we all know it gets colder than that in north Florida. At Hamilton,
they issued jackets and there weren't enough to go around. Only about half
the men got one. Families have visited with a prisoner and one of the
reports from Oct 28, 2001, stated that the prisoner had only a short sleeve
undershirt and the standard blue shirt. They ran out of jackets before they
got to him. .
Hendry says they've run out of Grievance Forms...
Despite what DOC says, there is a shortage of beds... And we can talk about
the tricks they pull to keep from reporting to the federal people that they
are this overcrowded if you want to talk about that! Like driving a busload
of Union CI inmates around the perimeter at count time so the count is short
(trouble is, meals are ordered on count, so the next day, they'd be without
the number of meals to match the uncounted prisoners.), so then someone
figured out that they could use the prisons with work camps to cover the
overage ... Report the number of beds of both the prison and the work camp
together and if you don't list the work camp inmates in the count, there
appears to be plenty of space. Check the DOC website and do the math
yourself.
The prisons cut the ventilation in the summer and the heat in the winter. It
is almost standard operating procedure. It may save on their electric bills,
but you will eventually pay one way or another for all the disease that is
spreading like wildfire throughout Florida's prisons. Respiratory
illnesses, Tuberculosis, Hepatitis, HIV are growing to epidemic proportions.
These are contagious diseases that come out of the prison with the
prisoners, because medical care, supplies and staffing have been cut to next
to nothing. Since most of you don't want to give them a job, you'll
probably end up paying for their medical care, and maybe catching TB in the
process. But, they're your prisoners.
And there's that crazy rule change about Toilet Paper... The "old toilet
paper rule" was one roll per inmate at a time. When your roll ran out, you
took your empty roll and got another. The rolls were 1000 sheets, two-ply.
Under the New Rule, the rolls are only 500 sheets, one-ply, and you get one
per week. You run out, you're out until the next week. Dirty bodies,
dirty clothes, you get a five minute shower when they say so. And then I
hear guards complaining about "stinking inmates" Says a lot about our
'civilization'.
One prisoner wrote, "There isn't much more they can cut from us. They have
to feed us something, they have to clothe us with something, they have to
transport us to court, and they need a certain number of guards. How much
less can they do?"
THEY ARE YOUR PRISONERS AND IT USED TO BE YOUR MONEY
It may suit your fancy to say, "prisoners deserve what they get", but you're
paying the bills. Here's an article about what could have been a better way
than mass incarceration. It could have kept some of the non-violent people,
which, by the way, is estimated to be as high as 60-65% of the total prison
population because of the drug war, from costing you so much.
The money was available for drug courts to offer treatment to addicts and
users at a far cheaper cost than incarceration, but our legislators decided
not to move on it. After all, it's not their money.. It used to be yours!
Kay Lee
1290 Overlook Terrace
Titusville, Florida 32780
321-383-3000
MAKING THE WALLS TRANSPARENT
http://www.angelfire.com/fl3/starke
*******************************************
A Times Editorial
Drug court loss
The progressive drug court, a successful alternative to jail for nonviolent
offenders, lost out on funding thanks to the Florida Legislature.
© St. Petersburg Times,
published November 10, 2001
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Pinellas County's drug court lost a badly needed $400,000 state grant that
would have provided treatment for nonviolent offenders who suffer from
mental illness and addiction. Who is to blame? Public Defender Bob Dillinger
says local court officials are at fault because they failed to claim the
money fast enough. But that deflects criticism from the real culprit: the
Florida Legislature.
Drug court began operations in January with a progressive approach for
addicts charged with minor crimes. The state attorney identifies those
defendants who pose little risk to the public and whose main problem is an
addiction to drugs or alcohol. Diverted to Circuit Judge Lauren Laughlin's
courtroom, those defendants are sentenced to drug treatment rather than to
prison.
The program appears to be a success. Laughlin has more than 700 defendants
under supervision, and only 10 percent of those passing through her court
have been arrested again. The program works for defendants by giving them a
chance to straighten out their lives without the stigma of a prison
sentence. It works for the community by providing a low-cost alternative to
prison, returning defendants to a productive life and keeping families
together.
But drug court needs a variety of community resources, including residential
facilities for the toughest cases and sophisticated treatment programs for
every defendant. With skimpy state funding, there are waiting lists for some
programs, which means some defendants either sit in jail or have to wait for
help. In particular, defendants with a "dual diagnosis" of mental illness
and addiction have few programs available.
Earlier this year, state Rep. Larry Crow, R-Dunedin, convinced his fellow
legislators to appropriate $400,000 to the drug court. The money was
supposed to be available after July 1, and Dillinger grew impatient when
court officials didn't quickly earmark the money for specific programs. So
he formed a committee that proposed using most of the money to increase
services for dual-diagnosis patients. Everyone agreed with that priority,
but by the time the local court sought the money in September, it wasn't
available.
Dillinger says local court officials should have shown more urgency, but
that isn't fair to Laughlin and Courts Administrator Bill Lockhart, who must
follow a detailed, bureaucratic process (including formal approval by the
Pinellas County Commission) to obtain the money. While that process might
have been speeded up by a week or so, it probably wouldn't have mattered.
Court officials weren't even aware that the money was threatened until it
was too late.
Here is how the money was lost: Facing a revenue shortfall, the Legislature
told the state Supreme Court to identify cuts that could be made in judicial
budgets throughout Florida. The job fell to the newly created Trial Court
Budget Commission -- 14 judges and seven court administrators from around
the state -- and they froze grants to drug courts and other local programs.
Because judicial positions and pay are set by state law, the court system
has little wiggle room in its budgets.
In a special session last month, the Legislature made harmful cuts to court
budgets (including Pinellas' $400,000). A drug-court supporter, Sen. Jack
Latvala, R-Palm Harbor, was able to get $200,000 reinstated. Because the
governor hasn't accepted the budget cuts, all of that could change in the
next special session later this month. In preparation, the court budget
commission once again put a freeze on the drug court money, and it is
presumably lost.
Dillinger admits his criticism of local officials was fueled by frustration.
"We have a drug court that works," he said. "It's keeping people out of the
criminal justice system, and it's cheaper. But I keep losing resources to
provide that service. It's extremely frustrating."
Local officials who support the drug court aren't the problem. That
distinction belongs to the Legislature's Republican leaders, who have taken
the coward's way out -- making budget cuts at the expense of the state's
most vulnerable citizens.
Drug court is a success. It is a bargain. All of those who believe in it
need to work together to convince the Legislature that an investment in
Pinellas County's drug court is both humane and responsible.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 19:26:04 -0800 (PST)
From: DdC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: MUTANEX **FutureWorks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Paul Standford **Restore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Hemp Talk" *3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Village Voice *press <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, RCNV *RCNV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Dana **Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
LTE's **MoJones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
**MollyIvins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mapinc *2/1MAP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: DEISM - AMERICA'S FORGOTTEN RELIGION!
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth
Extracted Textually from the Gospels
Compiled by Thomas Jefferson
http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/
Edited by Eyler Robert Coates, Sr.
. . . Thomas Jefferson believed that the ethical system of Jesus was
the finest the world has ever seen. In compiling what has come to be
called "The Jefferson Bible," he sought to separate those ethical
teachings from the religious dogma and other supernatural elements that
are intermixed in the account provided by the four Gospels. He
presented these teachings, along with the essential events of the life
of Jesus, in one continuous narrative.
This presentation of The Jefferson Bible offers the text as selected
and arranged by Jefferson in two separate editions: one edition uses a
revised King James Version of the biblical texts, corrected in
accordance with the findings of modern scholarship; the second edition
uses the original unrevised KJV. The actual verses of the Bible used
for both editions are those chosen by Jefferson. Visitors should find
the revised KJV text much easier to read and understand. Those seeking
the precise English version Mr. Jefferson used when making his
compilation can click on "Unrevised KJV text."
FREEDOM OF RELIGION DOCUMENTS
URL: http://w3.trib.com/FACT/1st.jeffers.html
Jefferson on Religion
http://www.columbia.edu/~pen3/aha/gl/tjlet.html
Jefferson: The Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom
http://www.tax-freedom.com/religion.htm
Six Historic Americans
Thomas Jeffersion
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/chapter_2.html
Had Jefferson's works been edited by some pious churchman who would
have expunged or modified his radical sentiments; or had his works been
suppressed after they were published, as some desired, the clergy might
with less fear of exposure claim that their author was a Christian. But
while his writings are accessible to the public, it adds nothing to
their reputation for candor to make the claims respecting his belief
which many of them do; for these writings clearly prove that he was not
a Christian, but a Freethinker.
The roots of church/state separation
http://www.berkshire.net/~ifas/fw/9611/roots.html
Summary: The roots ofchurch/state separation By Barbara A. Simon, Esq.
First coined by the 17th century Baptist leader Roger Williams who, in
1636, founded Rhode Island, the phrase "separation of church and state"
was used by both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison (the father of the
Constitution), to describe the meaning of the Constitution's religion
clauses.
The Separation of Church and State
http://www.angelfire.com/co/rainbowlady/churchst.html
Summary: "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole
American people which declared that their legislature should make no
law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free
exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and
state." ---Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Baptists of Danbury, CT,
1802
America's Real Religion
http://www.sunnetworks.net/~ggarman/index.html
The Beeline - References: Religion: WeB Pix
http://www.bton.com/refs/religion/picks.html
Summary: "I care not much for a man's religion whose dog and cat are
not better for it." -- Abraham Lincoln
UU Church of Nashua 100 Questions, Chapter 14
http://www.uunashua.org/100q/c14.html
Five United States presidents were Unitarians: John Adams, Thomas
Jefferson, John Quincy Adams, Millard Fillmore and William Taft. While
he did not specifically identify with any organized religion, Abraham
Lincoln had Universalist
People of all beliefs are welcome to our church -- Christian, atheist,
agnostic, and all other traditions. What binds us as a congregation is
mutual respect, acceptance of one another, and encouragement in
spiritual growth.
Thomas Jefferson
http://www.ipl.org/ref/POTUS/tjefferson.html
Religion: No formal affiliation
Deist
John Adams
Religion: Unitarian
Many of the greatest thinkers were atheists, agnostics or deists with
no respect for any church Thomas Jefferson (Deist) "History I believe
furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil
government.
WORLD UNION OF DEISTS
". . . the opinions and beliefs of men . . . follow involuntarily the
evidence proposed to their minds."
Thomas Jefferson
Deism vs. Atheism & Christianity
http://www.deism.com/deism_vs.htm
DEISM - AMERICA'S FORGOTTEN RELIGION!
http://www.deism.com/DeistAmerica.htm
DEISM
People like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and Benjamin Franklin
were avid readers of the great philosophers of the European
Enlightenment. They treasured the ideas found in the works of such
thinkers as Descartes, Voltaire, Bacon and Locke.
One of the cornerstone ideas of the Enlightenment was to give every
idea and assumption the test of reason. When they applied reason to
religion they found it necessary to strip it of revelation and they
ended up with Deism. Deism is belief in God based on reason and nature.
The differing alleged revelations of the various revealed religions are
conspicuously absent from Deism. It is a natural religion as opposed to
a revealed religion such as Christianity, Judaism, or Islam.
American Historical Notes
http://www.jackherer.com/book/ch01.html
In 1619, America's first marijuana law was enacted at Jamestown Colony,
Virginia, "ordering" all farmers to "make tryal of" (grow) Indian
hempseed. More mandatory (must-grow) hemp cultivation laws were enacted
in Massachusetts in 1631, in Connecticut in 1632 and in the Chesapeake
Colonies into the mid-1700s.
Even in England, the much-sought-after prize of full British
citizenship was bestowed by a decree of the crown on foreigners who
would grow cannabis, and fines were often levied against those who
refused.
Cannabis hemp was legal tender (money) in most of the Americas from
1631 until the early 1800s. Why? To encourage American farmers to grow
more.
You could pay your taxes with cannabis hemp throughout America for over
200 years.2
You could even be jailed in America for not growing cannabis during
several periods of shortage, e.g., in Virginia between 1763 and 1767.
(Herndon, G.M., Hemp in Colonial Virginia, 1963; The Chesapeake
Colonies, 1954; L.A.Times, August 12, 1981; et al.)
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew cannabis on their
plantations. Jefferson,3 while envoy to France, went to great expense -
and even considerable risk to himself and his secret agents - to
procure particularly good hempseeds smuggled illegally into Turkey from
China. The Chinese Mandarins (political rulers) so valued their
hempseed that they made its exportation a capital offense.
The United States Census of 1850 counted 8,327 hemp "plantations"*
(minimum 2,000-acre farm) growing cannabis hemp for cloth, canvas and
even the cordage used for baling cotton. Most of these plantations were
located in the South or in the border states, primarily because of the
cheap slave labor available prior to 1865 for the labor-intensive hemp
industry.
What's in a Name? (U.S. Geography)
HEMPstead, Long Island; HEMPstead County, Arkansas; HEMPstead, Texas;
HEMPhill, North Carolina; HEMPfield, Pennsylvania, among others, were
named after cannabis growing regions, or after family names derived
from hemp growing.
Then came the Christian Crusading D.E.A.th Worshiping Reefer Madhatters
addicting us to Fascist Fossil Fuels and Chemical Pharm aids.
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are
Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music,
jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes
white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any
others."
Harry Anslinger, U.S. Commissioner of Narcotics, testifying to Congress
on why marijuana should be made illegal, 1937.
(Marijuana Tax Act, signed Aug. 2, 1937; effective Oct. 1,
1937.)
PREJUDICE: MARIJUANA AND JIM CROW LAWS
http://www.jackherer.com/book/ch13.html
MORE THAN SIXTY YEARS OF SUPPRESSION
http://www.jackherer.com/book/ch14.html
=====
Safe Sacramental Cannabis Food Fuel Fiber FARM-aceuticals
Hardrug&Booze Alternative Eliminated from the Free Market
by Legislation and Administrated Education Depravation!
http://server5.ezboard.com/bendingcannabisprohibition.html
http://pub3.ezboard.com/bendingcannabisprohibition
Cybrary (links above)Why do you think they call it dope?
http://www.cannabis.com/ezine/just_say_know/2.shtml
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com
------------------------------
End of restore V1 #129
**********************
*
------
CRRH is working to regulate and tax the sale of cannabis to adults like alcohol, allow
doctors to recommend cannabis through pharmacies and restore the unregulated
production of industrial hemp.
------
To subscribe, unsubscribe or switch to immediate or digest mode, please send your
instructions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
------
*Campaign for the Restoration and Regulation of Hemp*
mail: CRRH ; P.O. Box 86741 ; Portland, OR 97286 USA
phone: (503) 235-4606
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: http://www.crrh.org/
--- End Message ---
