Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Government Shows No Compassion for Medical Pot Consumption

By Patrick McCartney and Martin A. Lee, AlterNet. Posted June 16, 2007.


More than ten years after California's Compassionate Use Act was passed by voters, state and local officials are still collaborating with federal law enforcement to undermine it.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss

DrugReporter:
Why Are We Locking Up Traumatized Veterans for Their Addictions Instead of Offering Them Treatment?
Penny Coleman

Environment:
IEA Whistleblowers Say World Oil Stats Deliberately Inflated to Avoid Financial Panic, Appease the US
Matthew McDermott

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
Immigrants and Health-Care: What Part of LEGAL Doesn't Washington Understand?
Marielena Hincapié

Media and Technology:
Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh Stoking GOP Civil War
Eric Boehlert

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Obama Is Up Against in His Own Branch of Government
Russ Baker

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
"Precious" Star Claims the Spotlight
Emily Wilson

Rights and Liberties:
Ugly Truth: Most U.S. Kids Sentenced to Die In Prison Are Black
Liliana Segura

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Radioactive Wastewater in New York Raises More Concerns About Oil Drilling
Abrahm Lustgarten

World:
Afghanistan Is Worse Off Than Ever, Thanks to the Sham Army We're Propping Up
Chris Hedges

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

On the morning of January 13, 2004, Tehama County prosecutor Lynn Strom unexpectedly announced that the state of California was dropping charges against Cynthia Blake and David Davidson for possessing and growing cannabis with the intent to distribute. While the two medical marijuana patients waited in the courtroom, Strom and the defense attorneys disappeared inside the judge's chambers to discuss the motion to dismiss. Moments later, more than a dozen sheriff's deputies pounced on the hapless couple, handcuffed them, and shoved them into an unmarked police car waiting outside the courthouse in the Sacramento Valley town of Corning. They were already en route to jail in Sacramento when Strom informed their lawyers that the state was bowing out because the Feds were taking over the case.

It was a devastating blow for Blake, a retired Federal Reserve employee, and her sweetheart, Davidson, a retail shop owner. Both in their early fifties, they were booked on federal drug charges and transferred to the jurisdiction of the Eastern District office of US Attorney McGregor Scott. If convicted, they each faced a mandatory minimum of ten years to life in prison for exercising a right they thought they had gained with the 1996 passage of Proposition 215, the California ballot measure that legalized cannabis for medical purposes.

Both had a physician's recommendation to ease their ailments with marijuana, and neither had a criminal history. They had been tending three dozen pot plants in a remote garden, which they shared with other patients; their attorneys insist that no money had exchanged hands for the herb. But none of this would matter in federal court, which treated all marijuana as equally illicit, making no exceptions even for the seriously ill.

The well-coordinated Blake-Davidson hand-off was not the first time local authorities in California had turned over a medical marijuana case to federal authorities. But it is perhaps the most dramatic example of ongoing, secret collusion between various levels of government to prevent the implementation of the Compassionate Use Act, as Proposition 215 was called on the ballot.

For the past ten years, state and local officials sworn to uphold the state ballot measure have instead proven to be willing -- sometimes eager -- accomplices in a concerted U.S. attack on a state law. Now, a half year past its tenth birthday, the landmark California law remains under siege.

Within days after Prop 215 was enacted in the fall of 1996, top California law enforcement officials huddled privately with America's drug war high command in Washington, DC, where they plotted to sabotage a voter initiative they were unable to defeat at the ballot box.

On Dec. 3, 1996, in Sacramento, 300 district attorneys, police chiefs, sheriffs, and narcotics officers attended an "Emergency All Zones Meeting," at which they were advised, basically, to continue arresting and prosecuting as before. Then-Attorney-General Dan Lungren and his deputies maintained that the new law did not shield marijuana suspects from arrest but merely provided them with an "affirmative defense" to invoke at a trial. Under Lungren's "narrow interpretation," local narcotics officers could exercise unilateral power in deciding if med-pot growers had more plants than they, the officers, believed justified by their medical condition.

Enforcement of the Compassionate Use Act varied dramatically across California's 58 counties. Where ballot support was strongest, especially in the San Francisco Bay Area, patients could obtain locally issued ID cards and purchase their medicine from storefront dispensaries that had begun opening even before Prop 215 passed. But beyond an hour or so drive from San Francisco, in the Other California -- Red-State California, as it were -- local police and prosecutors conducted a reign of terror against patients and caregivers that went largely unnoticed by the state's metropolitan press corps.

Operating with federal anti-marijuana grants that increased by 50 percent in the first five years after passage of Prop 215, a dozen regional task forces worked with DEA and IRS partners to target marijuana growers regardless of medical use. "Prop. 215 might fly in San Francisco, but not here," a Placer County deputy told the target of a 1998 arrest and prosecution.

Nowhere did local authorities repress medical users more than in the Eastern District, the sprawling federal court district spanning California's San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys and the Sierra Nevada, where Blake and Davidson faced charges.

Targetting the Pot Docs

Drug War strategists had pegged physicians as the weakest link in the med cannabis supply chain. Gen. Barry McCaffrey, Clinton's drug czar, took aim at the doctors first, threatening to revoke the licenses of those who approved cannabis use by patients. A group of physicians and patients, with help from the ACLU and the Drug Policy Alliance, promptly sued the U.S. government on free speech and privacy grounds. The suit, called Conant v. McCaffrey, resulted in a federal injunction issued on First Amendment grounds upholding the doctors' right to discuss cannabis as a treatment option.

So the Feds passed the baton to the California Attorney General's office, via its agents in the state medical board's enforcement division, to crack down on physicians specializing in cannabis consultations. Despite specific language in Proposition 215 exempting doctors from retaliation by state officials, the Medical Board launched legal proceedings against several physicians based on evidence gathered by local undercover narcs who feigned symptoms to obtain a medical recommendation.

Unable to gag the doctors, the Clinton administration paid for anti-marijuana advertising and filed federal civil actions against a half dozen cannabis dispensaries in Northern California. It was the opening salvo of a seesaw legal battle, which culminated in a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decision against the Oakland Cannabis Buyer's Cooperative (OCBC) in April 2001. As a result, some of the six clubs stopped selling medical marijuana, but others remained in business in open defiance of federal law.

The OCBC ruling gave the Bush administration its first chance to escalate the federal assault on California's fledgling medical marijuana infrastructure. Assisted by local narcotics units, the Ashcroft Justice Department went after dispensaries, medicinal grow-ops and high-profile activists up and down the state.

Federal agents may have overreached when they raided the Santa Cruz cannabis hospice led by Valerie and Mike Corral. Elderly disabled patients were handcuffed to their beds, while men in paramilitary gear tore apart their gardens and living quarters. Local officials rallied behind the patient collective, openly distributing marijuana on the steps of City Hall the day after the heavy-handed bust in September 2002. This was followed by another public-relations fiasco a few months later, when Americans for Safe Access, a newly formed grassroots organization, convinced Bay Area jurors to denounce their own guilty verdict in the federal trial of cannabis cultivation expert Ed Rosenthal, who ended up with a one-day sentence.

Suddenly, it seemed like the government's bare-knuckled crusade against medicinal cannabis was foundering. Optimism increased among California med-pot activists, who were buoyed by several federal and state court rulings in 2003. In December, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Appeals Court ruled in favor of Angel Raich and Diane Monson, two California women who had sued the Justice Department for the right to use medical marijuana.

But just as the momentum appeared to shift in favor of the med-pot cause, the federal government launched a concerted rollback effort. Leading the rollback has been McGregor Scott, who was appointed by President George W. Bush to head the U.S. Eastern District, one of four federal jurisdictions in California, in March 2003.

Scott was known to medical marijuana activists as the overzealous Shasta County DA who prosecuted Rick Levin, a disabled contractor who had been cultivating for personal medical use. (Levin prevailed.) But Scott's elevation to U.S. attorney was welcomed by California law enforcement officials. "It's going to be nice to have a U.S. attorney who has a local perspective," said Sacramento District Attorney Jan Scully.

Scott had been active in the California District Attorneys Association (CDAA). A board member for three years, he also chaired the CDAA small counties committee. When he assumed his new office, Scott appointed the CDAA's veteran executive director, Lawrence Brown, as his chief assistant. Brown, who hired his successor at the CDAA, would become Scott's point-man on medical marijuana.

Scott promptly met with the district attorneys of all 34 counties in the Eastern District to lay out the federal position on medical marijuana and other issues. He also sought to influence the state medical board. Joan Jerzak, the chief of the board's enforcement division, acknowledged at an August 2003 meeting that she had conferred with Scott regarding medical marijuana, and that he wanted a closer working relationship. "A management group will probably be the interface," Jerzak said as she asked the board not to reformulate its policy on medical marijuana until the Supreme Court ruled in the Raich case.

SB 420

A key development was the October 2003 enactment by California lawmakers -- after 11th hour concessions to the state Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement -- of Senate Bill 420. SB 420 was written to "clarify" Prop 215 and protect patients from law enforcement's arrest-first policies. Sponsored by Sen. John Vasconcellos, the bill set a statewide minimum number of permissible plants and ordered counties to issue ID cards to qualified patients to shield them from arrest. The new statute also created more protection for caregivers, allowing them reasonable compensation for their time and services, and gave groups of patients the right to grow and distribute as collectives or cooperatives.

Although the California District Attorneys Association made sure SB 420 prohibited anyone from making a profit from pot, entrepreneurs opened more than 100 new storefront dispensaries within a year, many in previously unthinkable locations. Medical cannabis users in many rural communities came out of the closet. They started new patient groups or allied with statewide groups, and spoke out on behalf of public access to cannabis at storefront dispensaries before city councils and boards of supervisors.

SB 420 set the stage for the current battle over the proliferation of patient-run dispensaries. For the first time, local elected officials in scores of cities and counties were forced to take a stand on the issue, as increasing numbers of activists applied for permits to open dispensaries and local law enforcement objected -- or lobbied for preemptive moratoria and prohibitions. More than 100 California jurisdictions have proceeded to ban dispensaries, but another three dozen have expressly allowed and regulated the storefront distribution of medical marijuana.

SB 420 was the ultimate product of a task force created by Vasconcellos and Attorney General Bill Lockyer, a Democrat elected in 1998 to succeed the unpopular Lungren (who got only 39 percent running for governor against Gray Davis). Although Lockyer said he had voted for Prop 215 -- and would submit an amicus brief supporting Raich -- he was unwilling to rein in hostile local officials. Responding to an August 2000 plea for uniform county standards by the North State Sheriffs Association ("...the law desperately needs clarification"), Lockyer declined to issue new plant and possession guidelines, washing his hands of how local jurisdictions should act.

California police and prosecutors opposed to medical marijuana turned away from the state's top lawyer for advice about medical marijuana and instead looked to the state's private law enforcement associations. If ordered by a court to return pot to a defendant, "I have the counsel for the California Sheriff's Association telling me I'm committing a felony," remarked El Dorado Sheriff Jeff Neves at a meeting with patient advocates. In 2002, Yuba Sheriff Virginia Black had the California State Sheriffs Association ask other sheriffs to write letters to Ashcroft and DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson asking them to "resolve" the conflict between state and federal law. ("I urge you to contact your local DEA office," Hutchinson replied.) The same year, Martin Mayer, general counsel of the California State Sheriffs Association, issued an alert following a California Supreme Court ruling that overturned the conviction of Myron Mower, a 31-year-old blind diabetic arrested in his hospital room. "Does this mean that law enforcement should no longer arrest one in possession of marijuana if, for example, he or she has a note, letter, or prescription from a doctor?" Mayer asked, before declaring: "Absolutely not!"

At its 2005 Summer Conference, the California District Attorneys Association secretly issued a new opinion about SB 420 in a closed executive session. While the CDAA had inserted language in SB 420 prohibiting cooperatives from making a profit, now the CDAA went a step further and told the state's district attorneys that no money could change hands when a cooperative distributed medicine to a patient.

A Pandora’s Box

If SB 420 had opened a Pandora's box of neighborhood marijuana dispensaries, the U.S. Supreme Court's June 2005 decision in Gonzales v. Raich gave federal authorities a powerful tool in their effort to close it. While the 6-3 decision against Angel Raich and Diane Monson -- whose medical cannabis had been grown and consumed within California -- did not overturn the law created by Prop 215, the justices reaffirmed the federal government's authority to enforce federal law.

On August 1, 2005, McGregor Scott sent a letter to all California's district attorneys, sheriffs and police chiefs interpreting the Supreme Court decision. Local law enforcement had asked the U.S. Attorney's office for "possible enforcement action against 'medical marijuana' dispensaries," Scott stated, before citing the CDAA summer conference opinion as proof that the dispensaries violate California as well as federal law. Scott encouraged local agencies to first consult with their own district attorney regarding the potential for local prosecution. He also attached a copy of an article about SB 420 that ran in the Prosecutor's Brief, a quarterly CDAA publication.

Scott's anti-cannabis campaign set the stage for increased cooperation with local prosecutors, who have transferred a number of difficult medical marijuana cases to federal authorities, especially in the Eastern District. Armed with Scott's letter and the secret CDAA opinion, law enforcement opposed the opening of new dispensaries and pushed city councils and county supervisors to enact moratorium ordinances. The California Police Chiefs Association lobbied officials with the League of California Cities, and on a few occasions DEA agents or a DEA counsel attended city council meetings at the invitation of local police.

Relocated to the foothills of El Dorado County, McGregor Scott took a personal interest in the public discussion of a marijuana dispensary ordinance in the gold-rush town of Placerville, the county seat. After watching public-access television coverage of a city council hearing, Scott phoned the town manager, John Driscoll, to commiserate. The U.S. attorney told him the advocates who spoke at the meeting were simply in it for the money, Driscoll reported to associates.

Showdown in Southern California

In 2005 San Diego county supervisors refused to authorize the patient ID program mandated by SB 420, and filed suit to overturn the law. In December '06, a San Diego Superior Court judge rejected this suit (which was joined by two other counties) and upheld California's law permitting the use of marijuana for medical purposes. San Diego Country officials have appealed the decision, and the case is pending.

Today there are 200,000 authorized medical marijuana users in California, which is the only state (among twelve that have legalized medical marijuana) with a significant aboveground pot business. Thirty-three of 58 counties have initiated ID card programs. But an ID card doesn't prevent searches of med-pot patients by local and state law enforcement officers, who still target medical marijuana providers and users in California, where doctors who recommend cannabis do so at their own risk.

Hardly a week goes by without another raid against med-pot dispensaries by the DEA in cahoots with unreconstructed drug warriors in one county or another. Southern California has been hit particularly hard in recent months with anti-med-pot sweeps in San Diego, the Los Angeles area, Bakersfield, Palm Springs, Morro Bay, Riverside and Orange County, and dozens of other cities.

Activists and patients hope the San Diego lawsuit and subsequent raids will be the last gasp of an ultimately futile effort to snuff out California's burgeoning medical marijuana scene, which continues to gain momentum. There are currently almost 400 med-pot storefronts and delivery services unevenly distributed throughout the state -- with 200 concentrated in the LA area. In North Hollywood alone, there are more pot clubs than Starbucks.

In April '07, the state Board of Equalization served notice that sellers of medical marijuana must pay state and local sales tax - a stipulation not applied to conventional pharmaceuticals. But the state has yet to meet its responsibilities by establishing commonsense rules and procedures to protect those involved in prescribing and distributing marijuana to the sick.

Thus far, there has been little decisive action from Attorney Gen. Jerry Brown and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who persist in deferring to recalcitrant state and local law enforcement, which have been adamantly opposed to any legal sale of marijuana, even nonprofit exchanges, since the passage of the Compassionate Use Act. Even today, the California Narcotics Officers Association features on its website a position paper asserting: "There is no justification for using marijuana as a medicine."

As the drug warriors wage their war of attrition against medical marijuana, the human toll continues to rise. Facing the prospects of a decade in federal prison, David Davidson left Cynthia Blake and is now a fugitive. She agreed to plead guilty to a single felony that carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in custody. Prosecutors offered leniency provided she testify against Davidson and reveal her erstwhile partner's whereabouts. In September, Blake was sentenced to 18 months in federal custody.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: california, pot, medical marijuana

A version of this article originally appeared in O'Shaughnessy's, the journal of the Society of Cannabis Clinicians.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
maybe a federation of States is better than United States.
Posted by: richholland on Jun 16, 2007 3:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The European people donot want an united Europe, although they are fans of a federalistic one.
In the Netherlands marihuana is legalised and the turnover of hard drugs dropped.

Since everybody has a basic health insurance the only problem is by refund of medical marihuana, nowadays the insurance company pays if you have a prescription from your doctor and you bought the stuff in a legal drugstore....

Of course there are annoying junkies who want extra money from the government to buy their bad habits.

The battle between statelaw and federal law is unknown to us,
it sames to me the organization wants turnover and money for their salaries .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This Battle Will Be Won- Post Nov 2008
Posted by: drricklippin on Jun 16, 2007 8:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is just a matter of time before this battle against insane drug policy will be won

In the meantime the right wing (wing-nuts) prevail with their insane totally irrational obessession with THC- medicinal or otherwise

Dr. Rick Lippin
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can't believe
Posted by: jroth420 on Jun 16, 2007 9:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that there are only two comments on this story! This is a story about the federal government overriding the rights of the states to create their own laws and enforce them. It is a blatant disregard for the will of the people in that state by the federal government. It sickens me!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I can't believe Posted by: somegirl
» RE: I can't believe Posted by: latteslave
make marijuana safe and legal
Posted by: vasumurti on Jun 16, 2007 10:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jeanne Besanceny of the San Francisco Vegetarian Society writes that beginning in childhood, most Americans are "hooked on sugar, caffeine, alcohol...cigarettes." Dr. John MacDougall advocates a strictly vegan diet with no oils, sugar, salt, caffeine, alcohol or tobacco in The MacDougall Plan (1983). I've been drug, alcohol, and caffeine free, except chocolate :-) for 15 years now.

But just as there are millions of Americans who don't drink, but who don't have a problem with other people drinking, or with alcohol being legal, so I also don't have a problem with people around me using mild forms of intoxication, such as alcohol, caffeine, tobacco and marijuana.

Over 400,000 marijuana arrests are made annually, costing the nation billions of dollars in police and court time and prison space. Richard Posner, Chicago's chief federal appeals judge, and one of the nation's leading legal scholars, says marijuana should be legalized as a way of reducing crime:

"It is nonsense that we should be devoting so many law enforcement resources to marijuana," said Posner. "I am skeptical that a society that is so tolerant of alcohol and cigarettes should come down so hard on marijuana use and send people to prison for life without parole...

"Only decriminalization is a sure route to a lower crime rate. It is sad that it appears so far below the horizon of political feasibility."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What public benefit is there?
Posted by: YogiBear on Jun 16, 2007 1:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of what public benefit do authorities, federal or otherwise, believe justifies going after marijuana growers? Sometimes I think law enforcement is filled with psychotics. They often seem to have no reason for their behavior.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I guess this is another fine example
Posted by: WhatNow? on Jun 16, 2007 1:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
of the shining light of democracy this country exhibits so well.

These government actions don't even reflect the ideas of a republic well either.

Very sad.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is nothing new. Our government is (still) working against us.
Posted by: LMNOP on Jun 16, 2007 2:13 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It shouldn't be necessary to cite additional examples of it for American citizens to recognize that their government exists not to promote their safety, general welfare, etc, but to promote its corporations and protect them from us as citizens and as employees. If you haven't figured that out yet, or if you're not sure, you're dangerously far behind in your reading, and you are delinquent in your responsibility to yourself and your family (forget your country; it's already too late for it).

I'm not sure why Americans still think that they will prevail against the corporations and their lapdog, the federal government. Whether it's legalizing Marijuana, demanding an Iraqi troop withdrawal, demanding paper trail balloting systems, or election finance or Medicare drug pricing reform.

We lose every time in every one of those areas. We are not represented. We are exploited. And it will be that way for the rest of most of our lives just like this War on Terr'

Recommendation: love it or leave it. No, not like that - not like the Nixon conservatives meant it. Accept that your country is a corrupt banana republic (sans the bananas).

That doesn't mean don't hang around and work for change. Just realize that you are unlikely to taste the fruits of those labors. That's a sacrifice, that, if not in vain, won't pay off before most of us are retired or dead.

That's not very appealing to me, especially since I feel estranged from about half of the country (Bush's approximate vote total in 2004, even without election fraud) and still don't forgive them for jeering at us at Toby Keith concerts. Instead of coming to our defense as concerned and talented citizens in good standing and trying to engage in democratic debate, they watched. They failed to object to our harassment and abuse, and for marginalizing us in "free-speech" zones while we were trying to protect them and us from the folly of invasion. I'm not able to forget that or trust such people again. Plus, I don't like them.

I've lost interest in most of these people and their government. I don't belong here any more. I don't want to help. I don't want to contribute to my neighborhood any more because it is 80% Republican. Love it? It disgusts me. It disgusts me to pay taxes that are used to make their lives better, too. No way.

Never, Bubba. You betrayed me and now you can take care of yourself without my help. I don't even want to see your Ranger bedecked in your mindless anti-abortion bumper stickers, Jesus fish, flags and ribbons. I don't love you or your country any more, and I'll be happy to leave you both (about two more years of saving money and liquidating assets is necessary first in my case, time permitting). You’re not my compatriot, and I don’t want you as my neighbor. Nor do I want to live in your shabby, value-free culture of rationalized greed and stunningly failed secular (i.e, greatest and freest and most just and envied by all) and divine mythologies and ethoses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I agree. Make MJ safe & legal. Well, make it
Posted by: SamFox on Jun 16, 2007 2:32 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
legal any way. It is already safe, as 1,000's of years of history tells us.

Any one on the fence should visit Jack Herer's site:
http://jackherer.com/

Here you can read the Emperor Wears No Clothes, a history of cannabis & hemp & why they were outlawed. Also watch the DVD Grass, narrated by Woody Harrilson.

At Law Enforcement Against Prohibition you can find out why we need to RE legalize cannabis & all other drugs. The drug war is so lost!
http://leap.cc/

Also look up NORML, Americans For Safe Access & Christians For Cannabis. Not all us Christians are in Bush's hip pocket. In spite of MSM BS, very few of us are.

The FDA is owned by the big synthetic pharma companies who give us drugs "whose side affects may include..." your death. Cannabis has been the direct cause of 000000 deaths in all of recorded history. The big pharma co's kill 1,000's every year. Even aspirin is more dangerous than cannabis!

It's not about protecting us. It's about protecting the huge profits of syn-pharma companies & the synthetic fabric industry, whose by products are very dangerous. Also the cotton industry. Cotton is very hard on the earth. Not so hemp. A lot of this is in Jack's book, linked above.

For the FDA to say cannabis has no medical value...how far beyond absurd can they get? Millions of us know better from personal use. If cannabis is so deadly, think Reefer Madness, where are the bodies???? We who are active in the RE legalization movement are not so stupid as to call for free cannabis use if it really is a truly dangerous substance, like heroin, crack X & so on. Even those should be legal & State dispensed. That would take the profit motive away & save a lot of lives. But I would not use them, only cannabis. Very few, if any, who think like me would use that junk either.
And no, there would not be a stampede to use all these drugs.

Here is a look at how smart many police agencies are:
“Woman’s door broken down in police goof”
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53105

Here’s another: “Police raid house for garden foliage”
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53105

Have you heard about the 92 year old lady the cops killed, then tried to cover up by planting bags of grass at her home?
http://www.mpp.org/site/apps/nl/
content2.asp?c=glKZLeMQIsG&b=1425757&ct=3290937
The above link is cut in half. Copy & paste it to search with no spaces.

At Marijuana Policy Project you can find a list of other victims of local cops, DEA, FDA ect as they fight their lost, destructive & VERY expensive war on freedom, AKA war on drugs.

If these & the 1,000's of other stories do not serve as a wake up call to end the deadly, citizen killing, life destroying war on drugs...

SamFox

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God's "Green Herb."
Posted by: lc on Jun 16, 2007 6:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The best way to put a “conservative” in his place is to use the Bible. In Genesis, God gave man the “green herb” three different days of creation. After the Flood, God gave Noah “the green herb.” The Bible is very implicit in the use of “the green herb” because it has value far beyond what most people realize. The DEA’s own Federal Law Administrator ruled marijuana to be the safest known medial pathway to the brain and recommended declassifying marijuana from Schedule I listing as the most dangerous of all drugs with no positive value of any kind to Schedule II for medical use. The DEA refused and cranked up the Drug War another level.
The Green Herb is the only plant that is an herb with herbal properties and also has a green flower. Everything about the Green Herb is green. It is the ONLY herb that is completely green from beginning to end including its flower. God gave US the “Green Herb” because it is a gateway to expanded consciousness infecting the user with rational thoughts against irrational laws and greed based cultural decisions. The Green Herb is a Gateway but not a Gateway Drug. It is the Herb and they fear it because they can not control a society that is conscious, aware, rational and concerned for their fellow man above money, ego and greed.
IM
Beltshazzar

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: God's "Green Herb." Posted by: aussidawg
if they woulnt listen!
Posted by: greggwyck on Jun 16, 2007 10:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
then we will have to take arms into the streets and over throw these assholes who have no compassion for cancer patients or people with blinding glacoma. lets give them all diseases that need canabis sative for a cure and force them to live in a place where it is illegal to consume weed. fuck'em all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ALL USE IS MEDICINAL USE. ALL USE IS SPIRITUAL USE.
Posted by: caru on Jun 17, 2007 4:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we need to push back against the whitestream that insists on OPENING THE DOOR and allowing men without educations to deterimine who is a patient and who is a criminal. how can any reasonable person allow these undereducated folks to make this determination. go to medical school YO MEN IN BLACK, and those in undercover too ... and if you refuse a western education, let the shaman educate you in the wisdom of MEDICINE AND SPIRITUALITY. the two are forever linked by the beauty of the creation of this planet. she created medicine and spiritual devices without greed or ignorance. the gardeners of the planet need to be left alone to create beauty. PUSH BACK together. ALL USE IS MEDICINAL USE. ALL USE IS SPIRITUAL USE. get an education. see a shaman.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Legalize pot NOW!
Posted by: HughScott on Jun 17, 2007 12:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Two months ago, I had a prostate cancer scare which happens a lot to men my age, 72.

After the initial shock wore off, the first thing I thought about was buying marijuana to offset nausea from the anticipated chemo. Fortunately, I'm okay -- for now.

If I do get cancer someday, I would like that option, numbing nausea with pot. But noooooooo! Big Brother says it would be bad for me -- as if getting stoned is worse than puking my guts out and losing 75 pounds like my father did before he died from lung cancer at age 83.

If President Bush ever got cancer, Air Force One would fly in Acapulco Gold (primo marijuana) from Mexico, assuming that hasn't happened already. It's all about manipulation -- power-tripping politicians controlling our bodies instead of us, the owners.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Legalize pot NOW! Posted by: aussidawg
Will taxing MJ improve chances of legalization?
Posted by: bobiam on Jun 17, 2007 10:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Mendocino County, CA board of supervisors voted 4 to 1 recently to send a letter to GW Bush recommending MJ be legalized and taxed. The letter also went to members of congress and CA politicians. This letter is coming from a county that has a bumper crop of MJ each year with price per pound ranging from $2,000 to $5,000, depending on quality.

The greed factor has long been in play in Mendocino county by pot growers that like to pretend they are supporting medical MJ. Healthy citizens are encouraged to get a medical 215 from a doctor that either recommends or supports the use of MJ for their "problem." Growers collect the 215 forms and grow an alloted amount for each person. This venture in no way (some exceptions) is for medical use but for greed use. Also there are a lot more growers that grow 1,000's of plants each year with no relation to a medical 215 scene.

I would like to see MJ as available as the far more dangerous drugs, alcohol and nicotine, The government, local, state, and federal, use enforcement of the MJ laws as another tool to keep society divided and conqured. Governments are afraid of the general population and need to continuously haress the people and keep them off balance. Why would they do this? At certain levels, as a poster said, they (law enforcement) are not educated and to them this is just a job. A good paying job, just ask prision guards. To the educated in government, they want to stay in power and do the bidding of corporations which in reality control the daily flow of life as we know it. Nothing is going to change in this country as far as MJ becoming legal or accepted as a medicine. Do you think a country that puts up with the likes of george bush and his cronies year-in and year-out has any chance of seeing positive changes for the general population?

It would help if the 72 million eligible but unregistered voters in this country registered and voted for a third (second?) Independent party to replace the democrat/republican party that represent the interests of corporations. In the mean-time nothing will change. Sad but true.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I SUGGEST YOU TAKE A LOOK AT RON PAUL'S STAND ON MEDICAL USE. SEE ronpaul2008.com N/M
Posted by: poppop_schell on Jun 18, 2007 10:29 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
N/C

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Drug War Facts
Posted by: fanny666 on Jun 18, 2007 4:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Drug War Facts

Call congress 202-224-3121

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

m. weiss
Posted by: martyweiss on Jun 21, 2007 8:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Simple explanation:
Not only big pharmaceutical companies are opposed to legalizing hemp, but more important, hemp cultivation would end the monopoly stranglehold petroleum has on fuel.
Big oil won't say so, but Exxon, Chevron, Shell and Texaco are keeping pot illegal.

Hemp oil is the fuel for which the diesel engine was designed. It grows without herbicides, fertilizer, or pesticide, and the by-product after oil is extracted would replace all the trees being cut for paper.
Hemp oil diesel is also non-toxic, unlike petro-diesel, which is a carcinogen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement