Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Drug Warrior's Shadow Looms Over California's Pot Clubs

By Steven Wishnia, AlterNet. Posted December 30, 2007.


Bush's pick for a CA prosecutor post of hardliner Joseph Russoniello signals a possible crack down on the state's multi-billion dollar pot industry.

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:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

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:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

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:
"Women Are Being Killed All Over the World": One Reporter's Fight Against So-Called "Honor Killings"
Robert S. Eshelman

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:
Egyptian Marine: Soldiers Often 'Racialize' the Enemy to Cope With Stress
Aaron Glantz

More stories by Steven Wishnia

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The man tapped by President Bush to be the top federal prosecutor for the San Francisco Bay Area was a hardline drug warrior during his tenure in the same post in the 1980s -- which could signal an escalation of the administration's crackdown on California's flourishing medical-marijuana clubs.

Bush named Joseph Russoniello, 66, on Nov. 15 to be U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California, which covers the state's coastal regions from Monterey to the Oregon line. If confirmed by the Senate, he would fill the position formerly held by Kevin Ryan, one of the eight federal prosecutors fired last December.

The Senate is expected to take up his nomination next month. No formal opposition has developed, but Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) -- who butted heads with Russoniello in the late '80s while investigating allegations about the Nicaraguan Contras' cocaine trafficking in California -- is "looking into this nomination very closely," according to a Senate aide.

The appointment has many in California's medical-marijuana community wondering if Russoniello would intensify the crackdown on the state's cannabis clinics. As federal prosecutor for the Northern District from 1982 to 1990, he was a cofounder of the CAMP (Campaign Against Marijuana Planting) program, an annual series of paramilitary federal-state raids on pot farmers and their neighbors. He also accompanied Nancy Reagan to the Oakland elementary school where she first intoned her anti-drug mantra, "Just say no," in 1984.

Russoniello fitted in well with the Reagan administration's crime policies, which switched enforcement priorities from white-collar crime to drug offenses. (In fact, Rudolph Giuliani, then the third-ranking Justice Department official, interviewed him for the job.) The Reagan "war on drugs" whacked marijuana farmers and small-time black crack dealers with five-year mandatory minimums and intensified forfeiture laws so that someone caught copping $50 worth of dope could have their car confiscated. In a 1994 interview with Smoke and Mirrors author Dan Baum, Russoniello recalled that he was happy that the department was going to get tough on drug users as well as on dealers; that he believed drug treatment was a government-sponsored crutch, that methadone maintenance merely prolonged addicts' dependence; and that the widespread pot farming in Northern California was like "an open wound on our prayer hand."

"We don't need another pot warrior trying to run roughshod over California's medical-marijuana law," California NORML head Dale Gieringer wrote to supporters, calling the nomination "an ominous development." The Bay Area is home to 36 of the state's more than 200 remedial-reefer dispensaries, including four licensed by the city of Oakland, and the Northern District also covers Mendocino County, which lets medical growers cultivate up to 25 plants per patient, and Humboldt County, which is to pot farming what Nashville is to country music.

Despite Proposition 215, the state's 1996 law legalizing the cultivation and distribution of medical cannabis, it remains inescapably illegal under federal law. The Supreme Court has twice, in 2001 and 2005, rejected Californians' attempts to win exceptions that would allow a legal supply.

On December 13, after six years of litigation stemming from the 2001 case, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a lower court's injunction barring three pot clinics -- including one licensed by Oakland -- from growing or distributing marijuana. In an unpublished opinion posted on the Internet by several legal sites, the Ninth Circuit held that it could not invalidate the federal prohibition of medical marijuana, because the ban had a rational basis and did not violate fundamental constitutional rights.

Meanwhile, DEA raids on California medical growers and dispensaries have increased dramatically this year. According to California medical-pot advocates, there have been at least 53 so far this year, up from 19 in 2005 and 20 in 2006. On Jan. 17, the DEA raided 11 ganja clinics in the Los Angeles area, including five in West Hollywood, without making any arrests. On July 16, it seized eight people at Nature's Medicinal outside Bakersfield, and the next day it popped clinic operators in Riverside County and San Luis Obispo. In September, a raid on the Oakland headquarters of Tainted, Inc. resulted in four arrests; the defendants were accused of manufacturing cannabis chocolate bars, packaging them in logo-parody wrappers like "Mr. Greenbud" and "420 Grand," and selling them to medical-pot clinics. In October, two brothers were indicted for running the Compassionate Collective of Alameda County in Hayward, which the Northern District prosecutor's press office referred to as "a large-scale marijuana distribution center."

Early this month, the DEA sent letters to the landlords of San Francisco pot clinics, warning them that they faced prosecution and forfeiture if they continued to permit drug sales on their property. It had sent similar letters to landlords in Los Angeles and Sacramento last summer. On Dec. 7, House Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) issued a statement that he was "deeply concerned" about the threats, but the committee has no definite plans to hold hearings on the issue, according to a House aide.

"Their aim is to shut down medical marijuana in California," says Kris Hermes of Americans for Safe Access, a medical-pot advocacy group based in Oakland. "The strategy is to undermine the state's medical-marijuana law."

Not all of the raids have resulted in indictments, however, and so far, the letters to landlords remain just threats. "I don't think pot is the major priority of the Department of Justice," Dale Gieringer speculates. Though he says that Russoniello "has always been our arch-enemy," he suspects that the DEA may be more zealous about eradicating medical marijuana than the Northern District's prosecutors are, citing comments Russoniello made to a local TV station earlier this year.

Hermes disagrees. For the DEA to make credible threats, he says, "there has to be a coordinated effort," and the indictments in the Tainted case are "a pretty strong indication that the strategy is coming from the top."

The U.S. Attorney's office in San Francisco did not respond to phone calls or e-mails, but of the 60 cases it considered worthy of a press release in the last three months, three involved marijuana, with the Hayward bust specifically medical. That was more than the number of cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine cases cited, but considerably less than the number of child-porn arrests, indictments, and convictions the office touted.

According to California NORML, federal prosecutors have been harshest on medical marijuana in the Eastern District-covering Sacramento, Bakersfield, and the rural northeast and Sierra Nevada areas -- where they often pick cases up from local law-enforcement officials, many of whom never accepted Proposition 215 as a legitimate state law. In federal pot prosecutions, defendants are not allowed to mention even the concept of medical marijuana.

Tough on pot growers, easy on Contra's coke

There was one case, however, in Joseph Russoniello's first tenure as a federal prosecutor where he was unusually lenient to drug dealers. In the "Frogman" cocaine-smuggling case-the touchstone of the late Gary Webb's investigative book, Dark Alliance, involving a network of Nicaraguan dealers who were donating profits to the Contras, the Reagan-backed terrorists who were trying to overthrow the country's leftist government -- his office returned $36,000 that had been seized from one of the defendants as "drug money."

In early 1983, Russoniello trumpeted the bust of 430 pounds of cocaine from a Colombian ship anchored at the San Francisco docks. When Julio Zavala, a mid-level dealer involved in the scheme, was arrested, police confiscated the $36,000 from his bedroom. Yet after two Contra officials sent letters saying that the cash was actually intended to aid them, Russoniello's office had the money given back.

Russoniello never followed the "Frogman" case up the ladder. He refused to prosecute Norwin Meneses, the top Contra-affiliated dealer in the Bay Area, even after Meneses' nephew informed on his uncle and two FBI agents urged the prosecutor to take the case.

Russoniello repeatedly insisted that there was no evidence the Contras were connected to the Meneses drug ring. He told Webb that he had returned Zavala's money because it would have cost too much to send someone to Costa Rica to question the Contra officials. But in 1998, CIA Inspector General Frederick P. Hitz told Congress that the agency's investigation had found a cable which "indicated the money was returned to Zavala at CIA's request." In Dark Alliance, Webb noted that a 1997 report by the Justice Department's inspector general concluded that the CIA had suggested that it would be bad publicity if a trial on the issue revealed the dealer's ties to the Contras, with cables describing the prosecutor as "most deferential to our interests."

According to the Justice Department report, the San Francisco federal prosecutor's office told the FBI in 1987 that it had decided not to go after Meneses -- who had returned to Central America in 1985 and ostensibly become a DEA informant -- because it didn't want to jeopardize the Los Angeles office's prosecution of Danilo Blandon, the prime Contra-affiliated cocaine dealer in Southern California. The letter the office sent said the decision had been made by Russoniello, the two FBI agents, and the assistant prosecutor on the case, and that the prosecutor handling the case against Blandon had told them Meneses had agreed to cooperate. But the Justice Department report said the L.A. federal prosecutor had "no recollection of the cooperation agreement to which this referred, or of meeting with anyone from San Francisco concerning the Blandon case," and its investigators "did not find any written agreement in U.S. Attorney's Office or FBI files."

Blandon was not charged until 1992. He became a DEA informant and set up his former top customer, L.A. crack magnate "Freeway Ricky" Ross, who got life without parole. Meneses was indicted in 1989. He was never arrested by U.S. law enforcement, but was nabbed with 725 kilos of cocaine in Nicaragua in 1991 and sentenced to 12 years.

"We had a terrible, terrible time getting information about Meneses from the fellow who was the U.S. attorney out there at the time, Russoniello, who was as rabid a right-wing true believer as ever came down the road and who was bound and determined to prevent anyone from learning anything about that case," Kerry Committee lawyer Jack Blum told Webb. "He and the Justice Department flipped out to prevent us from getting access to people, records, finding anything out about it. It was one of the most frustrating exercises I can ever recall."

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

See more stories tagged with: bush, san francisco, contras, drug war, joseph russionello, prosecutor

Steven Wishnia is the author of "Exit 25 Utopia," "The Cannabis Companion" and "Invincible Coney Island." He lives in New York.

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:
Mr. lovingood
Posted by: westdot on Dec 30, 2007 6:56 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I love all people, red & yellow. Black & White. My master has the whole world in his hands. and his name is not the Bin - Laden scum

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

Mr. lovingood
Posted by: westdot on Dec 30, 2007 7:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By the way, I am in support of a national referendum on legalizing Marijuana. It's better than a liver transplant.

If they can send a 18 year old to Iraq / Vietnam and they can drink all they want plus get all the drugs they want. America should be able to smoke pot.

I don't believe the crime was as bad when people were smoking pot and listening to the Eagles in contrast to current day. Smoke CRACK, SMOKE METH be crazy, cheat rob and steal, in the 70's that was not going on. Legalize pot & Acid on a limited basis. T.W

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

» RE: Mr. lovingood Posted by: formaryjane
» RE: Mr. lovingood Posted by: peacefullaim
Offended
Posted by: lynned2002 on Dec 30, 2007 7:48 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't believe that the term "club" is used in conjunction with medical marijuana. The people that use these clinics to get marijuana are seriously ill and this is the only thing that helps ease their pain. It is not Club Med and being sick is not partying. As someone who does not smoke marijuana I find this totally offensive as there are many sick people who benefit from it's use.

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

» RE: Offended Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Offended Posted by: richholland
» RE: Offended Posted by: formaryjane
CANNABIS is both UNIQUE and ESSENTIAL - THEREFORE, NOT TRULY ILLEGAL
Posted by: P.E.A.C.E. on Dec 30, 2007 8:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When did ANY government get the power to legally induce scarcity of unique essential food resources? Only by the government lying about the true value of Cannabis can prohibition continue. The lie is so big that even the United Nations Food & Agriculture Organization doesn't recognize Cannabis hemp seed, the world's most complete source of nutrition, as food for humans.

Cannabis is obviously beyond the rightful jurisdiction of the court, because it is nutritionally unique and essential. To learn more about why hemp seed is nutritionally essential and exceptional, see

Hemp Oil Nutrutional Profile, MaryBeth Augustine, RD,CDN
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jya6kcOEMUU&feature=related

See www.californiacannabisministry.blogspot.com to learn about reclaiming your Constitutionally-protected ARTICLE ONE, INDIVIDUAL "freedom of religion" and how Cannabis agriculture can help to mitigate global warming.

See

The REAL Question for Davos07
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=edZw3hXkGJo

to find out how & why.

Solutions are simple, it's the problems that are complicated.

PvH

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

Anecdotal Evidence
Posted by: jmmartin on Dec 30, 2007 8:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suppose I am sticking my neck out by posting this -- in the sense that, if there is no statute of limitations for prosecution of drug possession, I could be subject of a subpoena duces tecum to find out my identity, which would not be necessary, really, as I comment on this site under my legal name. This would make me easy to find.

If I sound overly paranoid, that is because the federal government in this supposedly democratic nation makes a habit of instilling fear into us all: fear of another 9/11, fear of running out of gasoline, fear of this, fear of that. The drug laws in this country are completely insane, but your update on federal judicial card-stacking in California is not the place to advance an argument for legalization. I wish only to make a confession.

Six years ago, I was diagnosed with leukemia. Thankfully, it was the chronic, rather than acute, kind. I was told I might live a long life, perhaps even die of natural causes unrelated, or only tangentially related, to leukemia.

But I would have to have chemotherapy.
I labored under the assumption that I would lose my hair, that I would lose my ability to concentrate, that I would suffer from violent nausea, &c.

It so happened that, at the time I was to undergo leukemia, I had been using Mexican "skunk," a type of marijuana that is quite common in the Southwestern U.S., especially in states close to the border. I had a nice habit -- about six or so joints a day. I was a "functioning" user: so far as I could tell, my cannabis use had no effect whatever on my daily routine. I suppose I am fortunate in that I am self-employed; had I worked for someone, the company might have required submission to occasional random testing to sus out users.

My employment involves writing. Discretion demands that I not reveal what type of writing I do, but for the sake of my thesis, let's pretend I write grants to get people or organizations money. Sometimes these grants are awarded; sometimes not. In the grant writing business, most grant proposal writers only get about 10-15%.

During the entire time that I was taking chemo as an outpatient in my oncologist's clinic, I used marijuana. I did not lose my hair, although I doubt the weed had anything to do with that. As will be seen, I did not develop any cognitive problems. And I did not get nauseated. Not once. (For the record, I did experience rather bad stomach cramps, but that was a small price to pay.)

My oncologist gave me a script for some heavy-weight anti-nausea medications, making sure that I could renew as necessary. I filled the script -- once -- and put the plastic container in the fridge, where I keep prescription drugs until needed. I think the little plastic phial is still there, and it's been half a decade. I never got nauseated is why.

Oh, I must also add that my grant writing could not have been impaired. I got my clients 75% of the grants I proposed. Both my zero nausea quotient and my grant writing record stand as testimonial to the medicinal value of marijuana.

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

People have no voice
Posted by: donl51 on Dec 30, 2007 11:30 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So why in California do they even vote on such matters,we have rights? no!! not at all,actually we're probably all too inexperienced in whats good or bad for us ,we need big brother to hold our hand,wouldn't it be neat if the folks of that state all voted to pull out of the union ,form its own country,of course that'll never happen but its been brought up by other states to split the state not suceed from the union,...rights!!! where??

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

» RE: People have no voice Posted by: Lauren
What a shame... fewer people will be dying from smoking caused disease
Posted by: xbj on Dec 30, 2007 11:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can't..... have.... that.....

Must.... depopulate.... the....... planet..... and..... make..... pufffing...... idiots..... pay..... for...... their..... own..... demise.....

Rumsfeld World Depopulation Group

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

What a drag
Posted by: 2dogarage on Dec 31, 2007 1:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just as it seems we are finally achieving hundredth-monkey saturation regarding the reality of the failed war on drugs up pops another surprise, ready to take American citizens with "inalienable rights" to jail for getting high on a plant that grows in the ground. In a state where the people voted to legalize it for medicinal purposes over ten years ago.

The war on drugs has been lost and we the people are clearly on the losing side. Prisons are big business and obviously a great way to control huge portions of the population. People are starting to talk about the possibility of a police state but it seems to me that it's been here for a long time, we're just now noticing. Which, unfortunately, puts us way behind the game.

Our biggest hope is that the next president will leave the states alone on this issue (no I'm not plugging Ron Paul!) and California can go back to adding millions to state coffers without the need to resort to annoying and dangerous stealth tactics.

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

» RE: What a surprise? Posted by: Lauren
» RE: What a surprise? Posted by: 2dogarage
The DEA's coverup of the Afghani heroin flood - sound familiar?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Dec 31, 2007 1:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See DEA covering up Afghan heroin tide, Dec 2006.

There are plenty of stories about this, but as usual the political interests trump so-called "law enforcement."

The complete story is at Afghan White Heroin Floods into California, LA Times.

Why is the DEA trying to keep quiet about this? Simple - because the U.S. got in bed with Afghan drug warlords as part of their 'anti-Taliban' effort - although now apparently the U.S. and Britain are trying to make friends with the "good Taliban." Taliban, Pakistan ISI, Saudi Royals, Bush Clan - what a connection.

How many of the C-130's fly back from Afghanistan have a few loads of heroin on board?

Afghan drug lords aren't the only opiate dealers the DEA has been covering for. See this NYT story about how Giuliani and the DEA ran interference for Purdue, manufacturers of the potent opiate Oxycontin: Under Attack, Drug Maker Turned to Giuliani for Help

"A former top federal prosecutor, Mr. Giuliani participated in two meetings between Purdue officials and the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, the agency investigating the company. Giuliani Partners took on the job of monitoring security improvements at company facilities making OxyContin, an issue of concern to the D.E.A. . . ."

". . .Asa Hutchinson, the director of the Drug Enforcement Administration in 2002, hardly needed an introduction to Mr. Giuliani. So it was perhaps not surprising that Purdue chose Mr. Giuliani as the person to meet with Mr. Hutchinson at a time when the drug maker was under intense scrutiny by the D.E.A.

“You need to have somebody who has clout to get in the door to legitimately make your presentation,” said Jay P. McCloskey, a former United States attorney in Maine who until recently worked for Purdue as a consultant.

By 2002, Mr. Giuliani was already helping to raise money for a D.E.A. museum, and his firm was part of a $1 million Justice Department consulting contract to advise it on reorganizing its major drug investigations."

. . ."D.E.A. officials say Mr. Giuliani ultimately did not affect the inquiry’s course. But Purdue Pharma did succeed in favorably resolving the matter. In 2004, it paid a $2 million fine to settle the D.E.A. record-keeping charges without admitting any wrongdoing. The sum was far smaller than the amount first recommended by Ms. Nagel, which one former D.E.A. official said was $20 million.

By the time of the 2004 settlement, it appeared that Purdue, with Mr. Giuliani’s help, had averted any significant damage. As the tide was turning, the drug maker’s top lawyer, Howard R. Udell, gave credit to Mr. Giuliani."


So, that's how the DEA operates. Cannabis is a potent pain medication, but gosh, it might cut into oxycontin sales, which bring Purdue about $1.5 billion gross a year - and they get a piddling $2 million fine. Just the cost of doing business.

How rotten can you get?

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

Expat
Posted by: davy on Dec 31, 2007 1:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another corporate shill for W. This ought to keep the drug barons happy. As an Expat who rarely has access to MJ and has a degenerative back problem I KNOW for sure it works. I will never take the pills the Doc offers cause I know the results. HOOKED. Funny isn't it. Kind of backwards huh? No pun intended. I love you America but I sure DON'T miss you.

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

Another Angle
Posted by: jim_altman on Dec 31, 2007 5:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not to pooh-pooh the paranoia of California pot smokers (Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that someone isn't out to get you.) but maybe we're overlooking the obvious here. The Bush Administration has used the Justice Department for seven years as a political hatchet; timely indictments to scuttle Democratic hopes. In the coming election cycle, key indictments of liberal Hollywood-types might effectively derail a good deal of California liberal momentum. Democratic candidates might be forced publicly to disown some of their key media-related backers, while right-wing bloviators would have a field day. It's just the sort of gutter sniping Karl Rove turned into a perverse art form.

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

» RE: Another Angle Posted by: Lauren
Convicted pot farmer
Posted by: Jim Swanson on Dec 31, 2007 6:01 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As someone who was convicted and sentenced to several years in Federal Prison by a Federal Court for growing marijuana although the State authorities dropped the case against me, I have spent much time considering our drug laws and the pot laws in particular. A careful reading of the legislation and history of enforcement finds something that is only briefly mentioned in the article. On the first page Northern California Federal Prosecutor nominee Joseph Russoniello is quoted as saying that widespread pot farming is like "an open wound on our prayer hand."
The War on Drugs is a religious war, like the War on Terrorism. A War based not on any real threat to the health and safety of Americans but a War on threats to American religiosity. Religions see drugs, correctly, as a threat to religious beliefs. Cognitive neuroscience finds similar brain activities during prayer and while enjoying drugs! Why accept all of the religious garbage and sacrifice when a relatively benign and safe plant can grant the same serenity?
The groups opposing this War must accept that the battle is a religious one and take on the preachers and churches who want to destroy life in the hope that they will thus attain eternal life--the ultimate form of selfishness. During Federal Bureau of Prisons mandated "drug treatment" we were told that it was better to KILL our children than to allow them to use marijuana. Why? So that their "souls" would not be lost and thus also endangering the "souls" of all. This view of a Manichean battle between "good and evil" is why so few Members of Congress, including one who received large amounts of what I grew for her staff, will not take a position opposing the insanity.
Religiosity and religions are the greatest threat to our safety and wellbeing and fill our prisons while leading us down the road to Fascism.
Celebrate reality and condemn ignorance, the persistent failure to recognize and accept reality. Souls, spirits, essences and gods do not exist. Marijuana does!!

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

» RE: Convicted pot farmer Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Convicted pot farmer Posted by: caru
» RE: Convicted pot farmer Posted by: caru
» RE: Convicted pot farmer Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Convicted pot farmer Posted by: rsteeb
» RE: Convicted pot farmer Posted by: rsteeb
» RE: Convicted pot farmer Posted by: doneman2000
» The roots of the problem Posted by: sofla100
» RE: The roots of the problem Posted by: gonzoskismet
» RE: stoned moron can't even read Posted by: LeaveMeAlone
The Beltway Mentality...
Posted by: picket on Dec 31, 2007 7:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do the elected or appointed "so-called" leaders listen to middle America?

Citizens from "The Greatest Generation" now in their 80's and 90's the youngest group being about 65 years old, in most polls vote overwhelmingly to legalize medical Cannabis. So for politicians who consider this group their voting base, why the disconnect?

It is that 30% of citizens mostly the "religious right" that support BushCo and his Rushdooney type of religious theology that are holding up progress in this costly "War on Citizens". This is the mentality that would look at a suffering humans and call them "potheads" and deny relief that The Creator has provided free of charge.

Politicians that hold their fingers in the air to test "which way the winds blow" will FAIL totally, for not connecting with millions of American Citizens. John Kerry made that mistake.

I hope CHANGE happens in this election cycle.

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

Environmental Harms Caused By Making Pot Illegal
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman on Dec 31, 2007 11:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Something that's never discussed is that because marijuana is illegal, it's being grown by Mexican gangs in our National Forests. These gangs illegally cut down trees and spray massive amounts of pesticides, then drain water from natural sources to grow their pot. All this is backed up with guns to the point that local or even state law enforcement won't challenge them. From an environmental perspective, this is by far the biggest reason to legalize marijuana.

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

Well, you'd expect a Democratic majority in the Senate to squash this motherfucker BUT
Posted by: maxpayne on Dec 31, 2007 1:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
get a load of the Democrats who are raking in loads of money from Big Oil, Pharma, Coal, Nuclear, Chemical, Cotton, Paper, Military, etc ... and you'll have to ask yourself this question "Gee, I took time from work to vote this party into office but all they do is create DUMBSHOWS and let the GEE OH PEE GROPE AND FUCK them to DEATH ?!?!?!?" Try getting any of your Democrats to SHUT DOWN THE WAR ON DRUGS and you'll be surprised.

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

The whole truth and our "Justice system"
Posted by: UnEasyOne on Dec 31, 2007 2:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When you testify in any court, you are forced to swear to tell "The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

Then come the legal procedures intended to force you to violate that oath.

When an individual who actually needs cannabis to survive is forbidden to mention that fact in his own defense, there is only form and the pretense of Justice.

I hope that none of you ever have to experience our justice system firsthand. If you do, you will find out that procedure is important - truth is not. You will find that it is much better to be guilty and rich than innocent and poor. You will find out that prosecutors care little for truth, they want the win. And you will find that we have the best justice system that money can buy.

Small bills please.

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

Medical Cannabis
Posted by: macdon1 on Dec 31, 2007 4:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People who grow medical cannabis are organic farmers.They raise rabbits and use their droppings to fertilize their gardens. Because this is MEDICATION FOR SICK PEOPLE no pesticides are used. In California we have voted TWICE to allow people to use this medication which gives great relief to a large number of people without many of the toxic side effects of pharmaceuticals.
The feds are bought and paid for by Big Pharma which doesn't want people getting relief from an herb they can grow at home. They would rather make oxycontin junkies of us all so they can keep making the big bucks.

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

» Medical Cannabis and Tomatoes. Posted by: undrgrndgirl
i'm surprised no one mentioned
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on Dec 31, 2007 5:27 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
dea administrative law judge young's 1997 ruling that medical cannabis should be made available immediately.

california should secede from the union, that'd teach 'em all!

otherwise:
VOTE DENNIS KUCINICH the sane alternative to Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton!

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

GET RID OF THE USA
Posted by: mn on Dec 31, 2007 6:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's done. Put a fork in it. Why do Californians continue to put up with this crap?? WASHINGTON D.C. DOESN'T EXIT ANYMORE--REPEAT THAT IN YOUR HEAD 11 BILLION TIMES UNTIL IT SINKS IN. You enable criminal orginazations like the US federal gov't by pretending that they still matter. We are drawing the line...literally. Go get a map, 117 degrees longitude, everything west is a new country. You folks east of 117 degrees will have to come up with your own plan. GOOD LUCK AND GOD SPEED.
mikea@nevadacityfreepress.com

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

» RE: GET RID OF THE USA Posted by: Lauren
easy solution from Europe
Posted by: richholland on Dec 31, 2007 7:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. the state produces medical marihuana.
2. every citizen is allowed to have 4 plants inside with lamps or 10 plants outside.
3. sale only on licensed shops
(forbiden to sell hard drugs(alcohol) to sell to minors.

to use drugs is no crime.

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

how come
Posted by: formaryjane on Dec 31, 2007 8:50 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
every time that someone needs a service providing something that expresses personal freedom such as abortions, smoking weed, even their sexual orientation the government steps in and lets the rest of the country decide whats best for that individual? notice anything funny in that sentence
"individual"
ever hear of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

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

» RE: how come Posted by: formaryjane
» RE: how come Posted by: LinearBob
» RE: how come Posted by: Lauren
» RE: how come Posted by: formaryjane
» RE: how come Posted by: formaryjane
» RE: how come Posted by: doneman2000
Off Base on CA Medical Pot Club Issue
Posted by: nuzzo on Jan 1, 2008 6:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are confusing the medical marijuana issue here in CA. Sure, pot is good. Smoke, get high, what the heck do I care. But get your facts straight. Here in the Bay Area medical marijuana is not for the sick and medically needy. Anyone with $50 or $100 bucks can go to one of numerous quack Pot Docs and obtain a medical marijuana card. Again, fine with me, but I live within a block of two such establishments and don't care for all the traffic coming and going as people score their dope in my neighborhood. You want a safe place to get high with your friends, drink and socialize, let me suggest you start your own business and open up a medical pot club down the street from your home. You can have one of mine. I hear the money's real good.

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

Time to Use Common Sense
Posted by: sofla100 on Jan 1, 2008 9:01 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course, so-called medical marijuana is a ruse. But, that is not the point. The point is that prohibition did not work for alcohol, and it won't work for marijuana either. Because it can be easily grown, it's not going to be eradicated. Enforcement will only drive up the price. If government were "smart" on this issue, they would tax and regulate on sales and distribution. This would bring probably billions into the coffers and for safety concerns, the same laws that govern things like driving while intoxicated or not selling to minors (on alcohol) could be used for marijuana. So, what is the problem? The substance is scientifically proven much safer than alcohol and tobacco. I suspect the real reason has to do with the roots of marijuana popularity in the counter-culture of the 1960-1970's and the defiance of authority the substance had once symbolized. But we have to get past that. Let's use common sense and quit wasting law enforcement resources on this nonsense.

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

They know the end is near.
Posted by: wishninja on Jan 2, 2008 7:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All the Drug war pushers know the end of the drug war is near. They will try to do everything they can to cause as much pain and destruction as they can before the end. I think the next president will likely deescalate the Drug War. They know the tide is turning.

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

Citizen
Posted by: detrasistrunk on Jan 18, 2008 10:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It doesn't matter whether a person is in office
or freelance, when one attempts to deny citizens their rights to free choice, they are
in violation of the Constitution. Citizens
need not worry about politicians who abuse
their office; our alien adversaries will
take care of that. What we have always needed are citizens of the planet who stand up for
their human rights. When Jesus said, "the poor (in spirit-void of understanding)will always be with you", he referred to those who will use any means to make a dollar, even if they go against every sound doctine that is written. If it is OK to smoke anything, its OK
to smoke everything. That's equal protection
of the law. To say it's not OK after having
made so much money selling tobacco is crazy;
especially when it is still being sold.

[« 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