Our blogs about
America's Wars
War on Iraq
War on Drugs
War on Afghanistan
War on Columbia
War on Philippines
War on Venezuela

More
Matrix Masters
Blogs
World Events
US News
Science & Health
Earth News
Free Speech
News from Africa
News from Palestine
Bill of Rights Under Attack

Matrix Masters'
SUPPORTERS

Lorenzo's
Random Musings
. . . about Chaos,
Reason, and Hope

 

Medical pot users, growers can sue over raids
(Bob Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle, July 2, 2009)
Officials in Butte County, where the case arose, argued that patients and suppliers can invoke the medical marijuana law only as a defense to criminal charges, not to sue for damages. The court's dissenting justice said no one is entitled to compensation for the destruction of a drug banned under federal law. . . . But the court's majority said a marijuana patient or member of a collective has the same right as anyone else to sue officers who violate the constitutional ban on illegal searches and seizures. . . . The plaintiff, David Williams, is relying on "the same constitutional guarantee of due process available to all individuals," Justice Vance Raye said. He said Williams is not required to go through "the expense and stress of criminal proceedings" to assert his rights. . . . Williams belonged to a seven-member collective near the town of Paradise. When a sheriff's deputy came to his door without a warrant in September 2005, Williams showed doctors' recommendations for all seven patients that allowed them to grow and use marijuana, he said. . . . He said the officer had questioned the legality of the collective and ordered him to destroy 29 of the 41 plants on his property or face arrest. He complied, then sued the officer and the county for damages. Wednesday's ruling upheld a Superior Court judge's refusal to dismiss the suit.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 12:33 PM

 

NORML Pro-Pot TV ad blankets US

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 11:33 AM

 

Marijuana Expo Draws 20,000 in Los Angeles

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 10:13 PM

 

Excrescences of the Mexican Drug War
"Drug prohibition is the golden goose of terrorism all around the world." -Judge James Grey

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 8:13 AM

 

THC initiates brain cancer cells to destroy themselves
(WorldHealth.Net, May 20, 2009)
THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, causes brain cancer cells to undergo a process called autophagy in which cells feed upon themselves, according to a study conducted by Guillermo Velasco and colleagues at Complutense University in Spain. Using mice designed to carry human brain cancer tumors, the researchers found that the growth of the tumors shrank when the animals received THC. The study also involved two patients with glioblastoma multiforme, a highly aggressive form of brain cancer. Both patients had been enrolled in a clinical trial designed to test THC's potential as a cancer therapy. The researchers used electron microscopes to analyze brain tissue taken before and after a 26- to 30-day THC treatment regimen. They found that THC eliminated the cancer cells while leaving healthy cells intact. In addition, in what they described as a "novel discovery," the specific signalling route by which the autophagy process unfolds was isolated. . . . "These results may help to design new cancer therapies based on the use of medicines containing the active principle of marijuana and/or in the activation of autophagy," says Velasco. The findings were published in the April 2009 issue of The Journal of Clinical Investigation. . . . According to Dr. John S. Yu, co-director of the Comprehensive Brain Tumor Program in the Maxine Dunitz Neurosurgical Institute at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, "The findings were not surprising. There have been previous reports to this effect as well. So this is yet another indication that THC has an anti-cancer effect, which means it's certainly worth further study." . . . Dr. Yu warns cancer patients that they should not consider marijuana a potential cure for cancer and urges that people "not start smoking pot right away as a means of curing their own cancer." However, Dr. Paul Graham Fisher, the Beirne Family director of Neuro-Oncology at Stanford University, says that's precisely what many brain cancer patients are doing. "In fact, 40 percent of brain tumor patients in the U.S. are already using alternative treatments, ranging from herbals to vitamins to marijuana," says Dr. Fisher. "But that actually points out a cautionary tale here, which is that many brain cancer patients are already rolling a joint to treat themselves, but we're not really seeing brain tumors suddenly going away as a result, which we clearly would have noticed if it had that effect."

News Release: Marijuana chemical may fight brain cancer www.webmd.com

News Release: Active ingredient in marijuana kills brain cancer cells www.forbes.com

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 7:32 PM

 

Who is the American Connection?

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 7:45 PM

 

FBI Admits "No one ever died from marijuana

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 5:28 PM

 

Supreme Court Hands Medical Marijuana Major Victory
(Huffington Post, May 18, 2009)
The U.S. Supreme Court handed medical marijuana patients and advocates a resounding victory on Monday, refusing to hear a case brought by San Diego County, which has long chafed at implementing statewide medical marijuana laws. . . . The state of California, in an effort to systematize the 1996 voter-approved initiative, required localities to implement identification card programs for patients with doctor approval in 2004. Such ID cards are required to enter medical marijuana shops in California and can be shown to police officers who find patients in possession of marijuana. . . . San Diego County, however, argued that the federal ban on marijuana trumps the state law, meaning they are not required to follow the state law. The county filed suit in 2006. Both the San Diego Superior Court and the Fourth District Court of Appeals rejected the argument, which was followed by the California Supreme Court's refusal to review the case in 2008. . . . The San Diego Board of Supervisors voted to appeal to the Supreme Court. . . . "The courts have made clear that federal law does not preempt California's medical marijuana law and that local officials must comply with that law," said Joe Elford, chief counsel with Americans for Safe Access (ASA), a national medical marijuana advocacy group with a large presence in California. "No longer will local officials be able to hide behind federal law and resist upholding California's medical marijuana law." . . . It is not the job, in other words, of local cops or municipalities to enforce federal laws. In fact, the federal government has never made such an argument. The California counties acted on their own. . . . The Supreme Court ruling, following the Obama administration's decision not to raid medical marijuana clubs acting in accordance with state law, removes one of the last barriers to full implementation of the state law. . . . ASA has now given notice to 10 conservative holdout counties (Colusa, Madera, Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, San Bernardino, San Diego, Solano, Stanislaus, and Sutter) of their legal obligation to implement the ID card program. . . . "The Supreme Court and the lower courts in California have blown away the myth that federal law somehow prevents states from legalizing medical marijuana," said Rob Kampia, executive director for the Marijuana Policy Project. . . . Thirteen states have laws that allow certain folks to use medical marijuana if their doctor recommends it. Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey and New York are currently considering medical marijuana bills in their state legislatures.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 5:45 PM

 

Kids, don't do drugs

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 11:29 PM

 

Legalization Finally Making the Mainstream Media

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 2:30 PM

 

Pot vs. Booze: A Former Police Chief's Take
(Norm Stamper, Huffington Post, April 22, 2009)
We at LEAP are current and former cops and other criminal justice practitioners who have witnessed firsthand the futility and manifold injustices of the drug war. Our professional experiences have led us to conclude that the more dangerous an illicit substance -- from crack to krank -- the greater the justification for its legalization, regulation, and control. It is the prohibition of drugs that leads inexorably to high rates of death, disease, crime, and addiction. . . . Back to booze vs. pot. How do the effects of these two drugs stack up against specific health and public safety factors? . . . Alcohol-related traffic accidents claim approximately 14,000 lives each year, down significantly from 20 or 30 years ago (attributed to improved education and enforcement). Figures for THC-related traffic fatalities are elusive, especially since alcohol is almost always present in the blood as well, and since the numbers of "marijuana-only" traffic fatalities are so small. But evidence from studies, including laboratory simulations, feeds the stereotype that those under the influence of canniboids tend to (1) be more aware of their impaired psychomotor skills, and (2) drive well below the speed limit. Those under the influence of alcohol are much more likely to be clueless or defiant about their condition, and to speed up and drive recklessly. . . . Hundreds of alcohol overdose deaths occur annually. There has never been a single recorded marijuana OD fatality. . . . According to the American Public Health Association, excessive alcohol consumption is the third leading cause of death in this country. APHA pegs the negative economic impact of extreme drinking at $150 billion a year. . . . There have been no documented cases of lung cancer in a marijuana-only smoker, nor has pot been scientifically linked to any type of cancer. . . . While a small quantity, taken daily, is being touted for its salutary health effects, alcohol is one of the worst drugs one can take for pain management, marijuana one of the best. . . . Alcohol contributes to acts of violence; marijuana reduces aggression. In approximately three million cases of reported violent crimes last year, the offender had been drinking. This is particularly true in cases of domestic violence, sexual assault, and date rape. Marijuana use, in and of itself, is absent from both crime reports and the scientific literature. There is simply no link to be made. . . . Over the past four years I've asked police officers throughout the U.S. (and in Canada) two questions. When's the last time you had to fight someone under the influence of marijuana? (I'm talking marijuana only, not pot plus a six-pack or a fifth of tequila.) My colleagues pause, they reflect. Their eyes widen as they realize that in their five or fifteen or thirty years on the job they have never had to fight a marijuana user. I then ask: When's the last time you had to fight a drunk? They look at their watches. . . . All of which begs the question. If one of these two drugs is implicated in dire health effects, high mortality rates, and physical violence -- and the other is not -- what are we to make of our nation's marijuana laws? Or alcohol laws, for that matter. . . . Anybody out there want to launch a campaign for the re-prohibition of alcohol? Didn't think so. The answer, of course, is responsible drinking. Marijuana smokers, for their part, have already shown (apart from that little matter known as the law) greater responsibility in their choice of drugs than those of us who choose alcohol.

Norm Stamper is former chief of the Seattle Police Department, and an advisory board member of NORML and Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP). He is the author of Breaking Rank: A Top Cop's Exposé of the Dark Side of American Policing (Nation Books, 2005).

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 8:53 PM

 

Former drug smuggler interviewed on CNN about legalization

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 10:51 AM

 

Legalization: Yes We Can

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 8:01 AM

 

Drew Carey Responds to Obama's Anti-Marijuana Speech

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 1:59 PM

 

Obama & Holder Lied To Us!
Drug Agents Raid SF Medical Marijuana Clinic
(CBS News, March 26, 2009)
One week after President Barack Obama's top law enforcement official seemed to indicate the feds would no longer raid pot clubs, DEA agents busted a medical marijuana facility in San Francisco Wednesday night. . . . As agents carried large plastic containers of marijuana plants out of Emmalyn's California Cannabis Clinic at 1597 Howard Street, a small crowd of protesters formed a gauntlet outside the door, booing the agents and chanting, "our medicine is marijuana ... listen to Obama!" ... [COMMENT by Lorenzo: Yeah, I've been listening to Obama, but all I'm hearing are lies.] ... DEA spokeswoman Casey McEnry told CBS 5 the documents regarding the raid are sealed, so the DEA was not able to give any details. . . . "Based on our investigation we believe there are not only violations of federal law, but state law as well," said DEA Special Agent in Charge Anthony D. Williams in a written statement. . . . Emmalyn's has a provisional permit from the city, according to Eileen Shields, spokesperson for the San Francisco Department of Public Health, which she said is an indication the club is in good standing with city laws. . . . Brendan Hallanin, the pot club's attorney, said Emmalyn's is in compliance with state and local laws. . . . "They are well-respected and have a good reputation in the medical marijuana community," said Hallanin, who added the business has never been raided in its five year existence. . . . Hallanin said the DEA would not tell him why the club was being busted. . . . "They're going to have a huge fight on their hands if they're arbitrarily busting clubs that are in compliance with state and local laws," said Hallanin. . . . Kris Hermes, spokesperson for Americans for Safe Access, a national advocacy group for medical marijuana issues, wants the attorney general to explain the DEA's actions. . . . "We're shocked that after the Attorney General has made repeated statements that raids on California medical cannibis dispensaries would be suspended that we are seeing a continuation of that policy," said Hermes.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 2:05 PM

 

Obama is a Hypocrite

I get a sick feeling in my stomach when I hear something like this:



He said the question about cannabis "ranked fairly high". The truth, which he doesn't seem to be able to handle, is that it was by far, by far the number one question asked. So right off the bat he is obscuring the real facts.

Had young Mr. Obama been arrested for marijuana possession when he was young (as happens to almost 2,000 people EVERY DAY), he wouldn't be living a glorious life in the White House right now. He would be in a prison cage like a million other Americans.

And to be so cavalier about it, making a joke about marijuana users, who just happen to include a significant part of his rapidly dwindling 'base', is disgusting. He obviously has been spending too much time pandering to the Wall Street bankers who all have their hands out, begging for more of our taxes for their personal use. How sad to see Obama become such a two-faced politician, just like the rest of them.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 11:01 AM

 

Marijuana & the Economy

Typical pro/con arguments giving "equal" time to ignorant people . . . but it's still better than no discussion at all. ... And I have to hand it to CNBC here for doing one of the better jobs at presenting this debate.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 8:41 AM

 

Santo Daime Church Wins Right to Use Sacramental Ayahuasca
(Mark Kleiman, The Reality-Based Community, March 18, 2009)
Another Federal district court has ruled in favor of another church that uses the DMT-bearing brew called ayahuasca. . . . This time the case is in Oregon and involves a branch of the Santo Daime, one of the two large religious organizations with Brazilian government permission to use the "tea." The previous case was in New Mexico, and involved a branch of the UdV, the other major Brazilian church that uses ayahuasca. . . . In the Oregon case, Judge Owen Panner has issued a permanent injunction, and a very clearly-reasoned opinion to go with it. (It's as good a statement of the facts as I've seen.) That doesn't quite end matters; the church and the DEA still have to work out a regulatory process to prevent diversion, and the Justice Department could still choose to appeal. . . . In the New Mexico case, the government appealed the preliminary injunction all the way up to the Supreme Court, which affirmed 8-0. But so far the government has insisted on its right to have a full-dress trial on a permanent injunction, even after the week-long hearing on the preliminary injunction and three rounds of appellate briefs and arguments (a three-judge panel of the 10th Circuit, an en banc, and then the Supreme Court). . . . In both cases, the government's arguments amounted to "OOOOGA BUGGA! DRUGS!!!!" Neither court was having any, thanks. Without evidence of either physical or psychological harm or of diversion to non-religious use, the judges refused to suppress religious exercise on the basis of merely speculative harm. These were not Constitutional cases under the Free Exercise clause, but statutory-interpretation cases under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. In the New Mexico case, but apparently not in the Oregon case, the Justice Department argued that the government was bound by treaty obligations to ban any non-medical use of DMT, the one hallucinogen known to be produced within the brain itself. . . . Now the new leadership at DoJ faces a question. The government can appeal the Oregon ruling and continue to fight the New Mexico case, and do the same with every religious body that comes forward to ask permission to used a controlled-substance sacrament. As a practical matter, that would mean that only well-financed churches had any chance of winning recognition; these are expensive cases, albeit the churches can recover their attorneys' fees at the end of they win. Or the Attorney General could tell the DEA Administrator to draft, and publish in the Federal Register, a set of procedures and criteria to deal with such cases in the future. (The Supreme Court ruling makes it clear that RFRA provides ample statutory authority for issuing such regulations.) It's an interesting test of Eric Holder's skill, and I'll be interested to see how he handles it.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 9:29 AM

 

Drug Control: National Policies
by
Dr. A.C. Germann, Professor Emeritus
Department of Criminal Justice
California State University, Long Beach

Marijuana is a Gateway
for Becoming President

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 9:22 PM

 

The Hypocracy of the war on drugs
This short video should be required viewing in every school in the land.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 8:43 PM

 

Stephen Baldwin exposes himself as an ignorant moron
... and anyone who pays to go to one of his films isn't much brighter.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 4:52 PM

 

How to stop the drug wars
(Mar 5th 2009, From The Economist print edition)
In 1998 the UN General Assembly committed member countries to achieving a "drug-free world" and to "eliminating or significantly reducing" the production of opium, cocaine and cannabis by 2008. . . . That is the kind of promise politicians love to make. It assuages the sense of moral panic that has been the handmaiden of prohibition for a century. It is intended to reassure the parents of teenagers across the world. Yet it is a hugely irresponsible promise, because it cannot be fulfilled. . . . Next week ministers from around the world gather in Vienna to set international drug policy for the next decade. . . . By any sensible measure, this 100-year struggle has been illiberal, murderous and pointless. That is why The Economist continues to believe that the least bad policy is to legalise drugs. . . . "Least bad" does not mean good. Legalisation, though clearly better for producer countries, would bring (different) risks to consumer countries. As we outline below, many vulnerable drug-takers would suffer. But in our view, more would gain. . . . The evidence of failure
Nowadays the UN Office on Drugs and Crime no longer talks about a drug-free world. Its boast is that the drug market has "stabilised", meaning that more than 200m people, or almost 5% of the world’s adult population, still take illegal drugs-roughly the same proportion as a decade ago. . . . This is not for want of effort. The United States alone spends some $40 billion each year on trying to eliminate the supply of drugs. It arrests 1.5m of its citizens each year for drug offences, locking up half a million of them; tougher drug laws are the main reason why one in five black American men spend some time behind bars. In the developing world blood is being shed at an astonishing rate. In Mexico more than 800 policemen and soldiers have been killed since December 2006 (and the annual overall death toll is running at over 6,000). This week yet another leader of a troubled drug-ridden country—Guinea Bissau—was assassinated. . . . Yet prohibition itself vitiates the efforts of the drug warriors. The price of an illegal substance is determined more by the cost of distribution than of production. . . . Indeed, far from reducing crime, prohibition has fostered gangsterism on a scale that the world has never seen before. . . . the current American president could easily have ended up in prison for his youthful experiments with "blow" . . . Legalisation would not only drive away the gangsters; it would transform drugs from a law-and-order problem into a public-health problem, which is how they ought to be treated. . . . There is no correlation between the harshness of drug laws and the incidence of drug-taking: citizens living under tough regimes (notably America but also Britain) take more drugs, not fewer. Embarrassed drug warriors blame this on alleged cultural differences, but even in fairly similar countries tough rules make little difference to the number of addicts: harsh Sweden and more liberal Norway have precisely the same addiction rates. . . . Although some illegal drugs are extremely dangerous to some people, most are not especially harmful. (Tobacco is more addictive than virtually all of them.) . . . Prohibition has failed to prevent the proliferation of designer drugs, dreamed up in laboratories. . . .

A calculated gamble, or another century of failure?
This newspaper [The Economist] first argued for legalisation 20 years ago (see article). Reviewing the evidence again (see article), prohibition seems even more harmful, especially for the poor and weak of the world. Legalisation would not drive gangsters completely out of drugs; as with alcohol and cigarettes, there would be taxes to avoid and rules to subvert. Nor would it automatically cure failed states like Afghanistan. Our solution is a messy one; but a century of manifest failure argues for trying it.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 9:44 PM

 

Ethan Nadelmann: "Marijuana is a gateway for becoming President"

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 11:28 AM

 

Role Models

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 1:02 PM

 

Michael Phelps: Bong Hit, Proper Response to Kellog

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 11:45 AM

 

Pot growers thrive in Northern California
(Trish Regan, CNBC, Jan. 22, 2009)
Cash crop now accounts for two-thirds of Mendocino County economy
Two hours from San Francisco, Northern California's Mendocino County is a world away from the urban bustle. At first glance, it's a picture postcard of the far West. But beneath its beauty lies a controversial, profitable and increasingly violent criminal enterprise. . . . The marijuana trade is an exploding underground industry. Marijuana is being grown in homes, backyards, even in our national parks. . . . Since the 1960s, the so-called Emerald Triangle — Northern California's Mendocino, Humboldt and Trinity counties — has increasingly become the haven for people looking to make a living growing marijuana. . . . "This is ground zero for marijuana. Nobody produces any better marijuana than we do right here," said Dan Offield, a helicopter pilot and agent with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, as he examines the area from a bird's-eye view. . . . Perhaps no one knows that better than Ukiah Morrison, a Mendocino pot grower. In most places, he would be considered an outlaw, but not in this neck of the woods. . . . "This is as natural as growing corn to me," he said. "This is the lifeblood of the county. And it has been for more than 30 years." . . . Morrison walks a fine line. He grows as much marijuana as he can without triggering a legal crackdown. He can do that because authorities here are overwhelmed by the sheer number of growers. They’re also hampered by conflicting state, federal and county laws governing marijuana. . . . Marijuana is the major cash crop here. A county-commissioned study reports pot accounts for up to two-thirds of the local economy. . . . "I don’t think there's anything more important in this economy. To take this out would be a major blow," said Morrison. . . . Though reliable numbers are hard to come by, marijuana growers in Mendocino County generate an estimated $1 billion a year. That makes the area home to a sizable chunk of a national market for marijuana believed to be in the tens of billions of dollars. . . . There's a reason California is experiencing such a marijuana boom. First, state law allows anyone to grow a limited amount of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Secondly, there's been an increase in border security since the 9/11 terror attacks, which has cut supplies from foreign sources. The result is an ever-increasing demand for Mendocino's finest. . . . While California state law permits residents to grow a small number of pot plants, federal law still bans pot growing. But growers like Sligh say marijuana has become more like any legitimate agricultural commodity like grapes, wheat, even coffee. . . . "There’s a very developed system of brokering marijuana that exists all throughout California; it's just like a commodities broker on Wall Street," he said. . . . The economics of this drug are simple and attractive. It costs an estimated $400 to grow a pound of pot. One pound sells for $2,500 to a middle man. It then yields $6,000 on the street. With low start-up and overhead costs, marijuana is the most profitable drug of all, according to local law enforcement officials. With that kind of profit margin, marijuana is increasingly filling the gap left by other failing industries like lumber and fishing. . . . "If we didn't have marijuana, what would this county be like?" said Sligh. "I think we'd all be selling Amway. I mean what else are we going to do?"

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 3:01 PM

 

American Drug War Economics - Volume 1
President Obama needs to listen to his own words in this clip and then do something about the problem he so clearly states.

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 11:34 AM

 

First Medical Marijuana Raid by DEA under Obama Administration
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) raided a medical marijuana dispensary today in South Lake Tahoe, California, in the first days of the new Obama Administration. Even though President Barack Obama had made repeated promises during his election campaign to end federal raids in medical marijuana states, many high-ranking Bush Administration officials have yet to leave office. For example, still at the helm of the DEA is acting Administrator Michele Leonhart, who has been responsible for numerous federal raids in California, following in the footsteps of her predecessor Karen Tandy. Neither Eric Holder, President Obama's pick for U.S. Attorney General, nor a new DEA Administrator, have taken office yet. . . . "Whether or not this unconscionable raid on a medical marijuana provider is the fault of federal officials from the previous administration, President Obama has an opportunity to change this harmful and outdated policy," said Caren Woodson, Director of Government Affairs for Americans for Safe Access (ASA). "We are hopeful that these are the last remnants of the Bush regime and that President Obama will quickly develop a more compassionate policy toward our most vulnerable citizens." . . . Medical marijuana and an unknown amount of cash was seized during the raid today from Holistic Solutions, but no arrests were made. This first DEA raid under the new Obama Administration is another example of more than 100 raids on medical marijuana providers that have occurred in California over the past two years. While the greatest federal enforcement has occurred in California, the DEA has been active in other states as well. Federal agents raided the Washington State offices of a medical marijuana advocacy group that was supplying starter plants to hundreds of authorized patients. In Oregon, a federal grand jury was used by the DEA to obtain the medical records of several patients, an effort that was later rejected by a federal court. The DEA also went as far as to threaten New Mexico officials for planning to implement that states medical marijuana distribution program. . . . "I would not have the Justice Department prosecuting and raiding medical marijuana users," Senator Obama said in an August 2007 statement. "It's not a good use of our resources," he continued. This statement was followed up by Obama in other public events in the run up to the election. "President Obama must rise to the occasion by quickly correcting this problem and by keeping the promise he made to the voters of this country," said Woodson. ASA has been working with the new Administration on changing federal law around medical marijuana, which has included providing a comprehensive set of policy recommendations.

Further information:
Comments by Obama on ending medical marijuana raids: http://granitestaters.com/candidates/barack_obama.html
ASA medical marijuana recommendations for incoming president Barack Obama: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/PresidentialRecommendations

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 7:41 PM

 

Sucessful Treatment of PTSD with MDMA
Friend of the Psychedelic Salon, Dr. Michael Mithoeffer, is featured in this news clip:

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 6:35 PM

 

IF Obama Is Honest, He'll End the Drug War
(Alexander Zaitchik, AlterNet, December 23, 2008)
Obama was frank about his own drug use, so why isn't he more honest about what a disaster war on drugs has been?

One of the many things that made Barack Obama such a refreshing candidate was his frank and unapologetic admission of drug use. True, Anderson Cooper extracted curt "yeses" from some 2004 Democratic candidates when he asked them point-blank if they had ever smoked pot. But Obama has written openly and without prompting about his experiences, not only with marijuana, but cocaine, a "hard" drug. On the campaign trail he even joked about inhaling deeply -- "that was the point," he said more than once. Unlike George W. Bush, Obama didn't hide behind evasive murmurs about "irresponsible behavior," or turn his drug experiences into a setup for some maudlin born-again conversion story. . . . Partly because Obama was so reasonable and matter-of-fact about his own All-American experiences getting high, drug-policy reformers were among those most excited by his candidacy. If any aspect of America needs change, it is the country's prohibitionist and punitive approach to drugs and drug use. Obama, it seemed, was the right politician to take an executive hammer to the cracked marble pillars of America's disastrous war on drugs. Throughout the primaries and general election, Obama gently encouraged these hopes by advocating commonsense drug-policy reforms. He criticized federal paramilitary raids on state-sanctioned greenhouses and called for ending racist discrepancies in cocaine sentencing laws. . . . Nobody expected Obama to tap Tommy Chong to run the Office of National Drug Control Policy. But maybe, just maybe, Obama would have the political courage to publicly acknowledge what an emerging majority of Americans now grasps: that the war on drugs is a failure, that it is unjust, and that it is an epic waste of law-enforcement time and resources. . . . Still a month before inauguration, the hopes of drug-policy-reform advocates have had their wings clipped several times, beginning with the announcement of the Democratic ticket. . . . "The pick of Joe Biden was my first sign of digestive tumult," "Rather than oppose the Reagan-inspired War on Some Drugs, Biden became an enthusiastic supporter and legislative booster. He was at the center of creating the ONDCP [in 1988], mandatory minimum sentencing, civil forfeiture laws, the Rave Act, funding for DARE in public schools and the ad campaigns for the Partnership for a Drug Free America." . . . NORML board member Dominic Holden says: "Biden is the drug war embodied." . . . The selection of the emblematic Democratic drug warrior of the 1980s was followed by the selection of his 1990s counterpart, Rahm Emanuel. As President Bill Clinton's liaison with the ONDCP, the incoming chief of staff advised on and defended that administration's tough-on-crime punitive approach to drugs and its cowardly opposition to medical-marijuana initiatives and needle-exchange programs. While Clinton has since expressed regret over some of these positions, the tightly wound Emanuel has not. . . . Obama's pick for attorney general, meanwhile, has a mixed record on drug policy reform that will hopefully be clarified during the expected Senate dogfight over his nomination. But the record is not encouraging. As D.C. attorney general in the 1990s, Eric Holder supported mandatory sentences of 18 months to six years for selling a range of drugs that included marijuana. He is also on record supporting the "broken windows" theory of neighborhood policing most closely associated with Mayor Rudy Giuliani's NYPD and the conservative Manhattan Institute. Holder's iron-fist drug politics find a public health counterpart in the confused mind of Obama's Transition Team point man on the ONDCP, Don Vereen, who as recently as November explained his opposition to medical marijuana by saying, "[It] sends the wrong message to children." . . . Regardless of where Obama's appointees stand and how much, if any, political capital he is willing to spend on drug-policy reform, the need to turn his campaign slogan into reality has never been greater. Last week, the Justice Department released numbers showing that 1 in every 100 Americans is now in prison, and 1 in every 31 is either behind bars, on parole or on probation. For this grotesquerie we can thank the war on drugs. More than half of federal prisoners (95,000 people) are behind bars for drug-law violations -- a record. Nationally, around half a million people are in prison on nonviolent drug charges. The Drug Policy Alliance estimates that this is a tenfold increase since 1980, totaling more than the entire prison population of Western Europe. . . . Another law that reform advocates hope will be ignored is the blanket federal prohibition of marijuana, which the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled trumps states' rights to legally grow and distribute marijuana for medical purposes. Obama has criticized federal raids on state-sanction dispensaries as a poor use of federal resources, a popular position. The electoral politics of medical marijuana also favor progress on this front. . . . "One in four Americans now lives in a medical marijuana state," Aaron Houston, director of government relations at the Marijuana Policy Project, explained to Reason magazine. "And medical marijuana outpolled Obama in Michigan by six points. Medical marijuana states, including Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada, were essential to Obama's victory, and continuing a federal war against a quarter of the country would make no sense." . . . Advocates may have their best ally not in the White House or in Congress, but in the economy. As state budgets shrink across the country, legislatures are often forced to choose between education and prison budgets. [with California choosing prisons over schools!] This phenomenon is most stark in California, where a budget shortfall and massive overcrowding has Gov.Arnold Schwarzenegger talking about letting people go and the legislature discussing sentencing reform. . . . "During the last recession, we saw an enormous number of states enact reform," says DPA's Piper. "This is the silver lining of an economic downturn. After the recession recedes, the reforms tend to stick, when the states realize they are saving money." . . . If the economy ends up being the prime mover behind drug reform under Obama and the incoming Congress, it will be better than nothing, but still a sad commentary on the Democratic Party and American democracy in general. Polls and state ballot initiatives continue to show the public widening its lead ahead of their elected leaders on drug policy, who more often than not remain stuck in the 1980s, if not the 1920s. While changing the law ultimately falls upon Congress, Obama could help take his party and the country into the new century by using the bully pulpit to question the premises and effects of the drug war. If he chooses to do so, he is certainly surrounded by enough veteran drug warriors to provide political cover. Who knows? If President Richard Nixon could go to China, maybe Joe Biden & Co. can help Obama make the shorter but equally historic trip down Main Street to the local head shop.

COMMENT by Lorenzo: I'm not counting on Obama for anything positive, particularly in the government's war on consciousness. He lied to us about FISA, he lied to us about supporting the LGBT community, in fact I can't think of a single primary campaign promise that he's kept. Could we have somehow elected a Black Bush?

. . . Read more!


posted by Lorenzo 12:32 PM