In 1927, the Weimar Republic - the democratically elected government of Germany passed mandatory unemployment benefits for the needy. That's rather progressive for the time. So, what happened in the following six years to turn it all around?
Well, there was a bit of a mistake in that first constitution, they corrected without doubt the second time. There was nothing that prevented laws to be passed that would allow the constitution to be ignored. So it was never officially dissolved, the (you know who) just wrote laws to make ignoring it allowed. The second time the wording states human rights can never be abolished by any future act of legislation.
In 1930, Jazz performance was banned and so was modern art. Three years after unemployment was introduced. Three years before the 'republic' was no longer the government.
Art, Music, and Culture are both an indicator of the level of sophistication of a society; and a warning sign that when such are censored, other rights are likely to follow.
Let's look at the US Constitution. The BIll of Rights was added as an afterthought, the Constitution was ratified by all parties and I'll quote
"The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added:" the Bill of Rights, Amendments I-X, an afterthought luckily we followed through and passed.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or or the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
That's powerful. The final check on government is the citizens watching for slips, expressing their observations, using the press to carry this information to everyone and organize and assemble to have the matter redressed. Toss the freedom of expression, speech, and the press - this becomes a lot more difficult to accomplish.
Art, Music, and Culture.
This is an interview with San Diego Assistant District Attorney, Steve Walter from the local Public Broadcasting Service's local station.
(A link to the original source, which includes an audio version can be found after the full text.)
MAUREEN CAVANAUGH (Host): Now what constitutes the difference between a drug dealer and a legitimate provider of medical marijuana?
WALTER: It’s a very difficult question. The law itself, when I say the law I’m talking about Prop 215, SB-420, and the AG’s guidelines, as well as the case law. In essence, you have to be either a user or a qualified patient or a caregiver for such a patient.
Wow. So according to the San Diego District Attorney's Office, "a user" is "a legitimate provider of medical marijuana." That's really disturbing as I have obtained/do obtain all of my medical cannabis from Medical Cannabis Caregivers/ Legal Patients. These are the ones that Walter himself oversaw the aggressive arrests of. I guess going on the above quote, he believes that any one ELSE, just so long as they 'use marijuana' is a responsible, law abiding, trustworthy source for the medication I use for my healthcare. Great.
This is the first time I've heard of a representative of the law enforcement agencies involved speaking publically on the matter (with exception to the San Diego District Attorney.) Once again I'm hearing the same lie that the City of San Diego is spreading to the citizens and performing horrific illegal acts based upon: District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis claims that the collectives, co-ops and other medical cannabis organizations are illegal, profiteering criminals and not legal medical cannabis patients nor are they caregivers to their fellow legal medical cannabis patients.
I am a legal, medical cannabis patient. As such, I am a member of a few collectives, but most active in one called the Beneficial Care Collective. I do not receive any pay for my work, my only reward is being able to share my feelings, thoughts, expierences and medical treatment stories with my fellow patients. The Beneficial Care Collective was raided and shut down by armed forces on 9/9/2009, a patient that I consider a friend and fellow caregiver was wrongly arrested and the medication was illegally stolen by the City of San Diego.
Here is another report/ piece of insight on the situation currently going on in San Diego, California:
Craig Beresh of S.Cal NORML reports that at least 14 San Diegodispensaries received "cease and desist" visits by the S.D. policeyesterday. They were told that a written notice would followshortly. Numerous other dispensaries remain closed in the wake ofthe recent raids. As the following report indicates, police arefalsely spreading the notion that collectives can't operate legallyunder state law. S. Cal NORML is contemplating legal action againstSan Diego. - Dale Gieringer, Cal NORML>From: "Southern California NORML" <craigberesh@normlsc.org>>To: <dale@canorml.org>>>The San Diego police will be visiting all collectives over the next>few weeks...>>At Pacific Beach town council meeting Wed 9/16>PBTC handed out fliers to everyone with every collective's name and>address. The inference is to call the police and complain, although>that is not written. The theme of the night was to call police and>complain about everything, including motorhomes, street repair,>floatillas on the bay, alcohol, smoke shops and medical marijuana.> Then Shelli Zimmerman spoke. She was just promoted to Asst. Chief of>Police from the Northern Division which includes PB:>"All collectives are for profit. There has been no change in the>law. Collectives are illegal. Props 215 and SB420 do not make>medical marijuana legal. It just gives people an 'affirmative'>defense. Growing for your own medical use is ok and the cops won't>bother you. They are only going after illegal collectives (which are>all of them) We are using the same strategy as in 2005 and 2006. We>worked with SDPD, sheriffs, DA, and DEA. Seized product, multiple>handguns, and hundreds of thousands in cash. We don't have enough>resources to shut them all down. We went after the ones with most>complaints. Community vocality helps. Especially all the noise,>vandalism, intimidation, threats and profit complaints. All the rest>of the collectives will be getting personal visits by the police>informing them they are breaking the law and to shut down over the>next few weeks. If they>don't, they will get cease and desist letters. If they stay open they>will be raided. Just like in 2005 & 2006, all the collectives got the>message. Another strategy may be going after the landlords.">>A few personal comments:>I'm not sure what affirmative defense means other than a legal defense>or medical defense...>It sounds like people are organized and complaining to police with>multiple, anonymous, and false reports of noise and vandalism, like>PB town council, <http://savepb.org>savepb.org, and><http://discoverpb.org>discoverpb.org Is>this legal?>This is from a person just promoted to Asst Chief of SDPD which should>worry the medical community in SD. How can she even say that ALL>collectives are for profit without investigating them first. Send in>state auditors not SWAT!> - Craig Beresh, S. Cal NORML Source Visit California NORML for more information
Craig Beresh of S.Cal NORML reports that at least 14 San Diegodispensaries received "cease and desist" visits by the S.D. policeyesterday. They were told that a written notice would followshortly. Numerous other dispensaries remain closed in the wake ofthe recent raids. As the following report indicates, police arefalsely spreading the notion that collectives can't operate legallyunder state law. S. Cal NORML is contemplating legal action againstSan Diego. - Dale Gieringer, Cal NORML>From: "Southern California NORML" <craigberesh@normlsc.org>>To: <dale@canorml.org>>>The San Diego police will be visiting all collectives over the next>few weeks...>>At Pacific Beach town council meeting Wed 9/16>PBTC handed out fliers to everyone with every collective's name and>address. The inference is to call the police and complain, although>that is not written. The theme of the night was to call police and>complain about everything, including motorhomes, street repair,>floatillas on the bay, alcohol, smoke shops and medical marijuana.> Then Shelli Zimmerman spoke. She was just promoted to Asst. Chief of>Police from the Northern Division which includes PB:>"All collectives are for profit. There has been no change in the>law. Collectives are illegal. Props 215 and SB420 do not make>medical marijuana legal. It just gives people an 'affirmative'>defense. Growing for your own medical use is ok and the cops won't>bother you. They are only going after illegal collectives (which are>all of them) We are using the same strategy as in 2005 and 2006. We>worked with SDPD, sheriffs, DA, and DEA. Seized product, multiple>handguns, and hundreds of thousands in cash. We don't have enough>resources to shut them all down. We went after the ones with most>complaints. Community vocality helps. Especially all the noise,>vandalism, intimidation, threats and profit complaints. All the rest>of the collectives will be getting personal visits by the police>informing them they are breaking the law and to shut down over the>next few weeks. If they>don't, they will get cease and desist letters. If they stay open they>will be raided. Just like in 2005 & 2006, all the collectives got the>message. Another strategy may be going after the landlords.">>A few personal comments:>I'm not sure what affirmative defense means other than a legal defense>or medical defense...>It sounds like people are organized and complaining to police with>multiple, anonymous, and false reports of noise and vandalism, like>PB town council, <http://savepb.org>savepb.org, and><http://discoverpb.org>discoverpb.org Is>this legal?>This is from a person just promoted to Asst Chief of SDPD which should>worry the medical community in SD. How can she even say that ALL>collectives are for profit without investigating them first. Send in>state auditors not SWAT!> - Craig Beresh, S. Cal NORML
Source
Visit California NORML for more information
Terrorist Attacks On Medical Cannabis Patients Continueby 921 » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:34 pm Unfortunately it appears that despite her claim to care about "Medical Marijuana Patients", San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis and her armed militia continue to wage war on San Diego's most defenseless...I received this report from an anonymous Medical Cannabis Patient/ Co-Op Member just today:A narcotics officer came in last night and demanded the administrators personal information. he would not leave until we gave it to him. he said he was getting all admins personal info for records and that the "task force" was going to be sending letters, that's why he needed it. I know he went to Mother Nurture and a couple others in SD. I feel it is a ploy to get their personal info so they can raid their houses along with their businesses. If you could post this all over for me, it would help others.I fear that those suspicions may be correct. In addition to above report and what I perceive are truly medical cannabis patients asking for help, I have noticed a whole new influx since 9/9/2009's raids. People I have never met or even "chatted with online" are emailing me asking where to get medical cannabis, asking where I live and telling me about buying marijuana off the street. People are posting "reviews" on the BCC section on WeedMaps insinuating that the Collective was anything but a legitimate Medical Collective. I post about BCC possibly opening back up and the suspicious emails increase instantly and the forum is hit with what I assume are links to possibly illegal, pornographic websites. And even though I've done countless hours of volunteer work to support local law enforcement families & officers and even though I may not live to see next year thanks to Cirrhosis (and other currently fatal health issues) - I am afraid that at any moment the door to the apartment I can't afford will be kicked in and I will be put in a jail cell even though I have not knowingly broken any California State Law.If this is how Bonnie Dumanis CARES for me and other Medical Cannabis Patients, I'd rather she ignore us, because she's far worse than any of the diseases that are killing me.~ "921"
Terrorist Attacks On Medical Cannabis Patients Continue
by 921 » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:34 pm
A narcotics officer came in last night and demanded the administrators personal information. he would not leave until we gave it to him. he said he was getting all admins personal info for records and that the "task force" was going to be sending letters, that's why he needed it. I know he went to Mother Nurture and a couple others in SD. I feel it is a ploy to get their personal info so they can raid their houses along with their businesses. If you could post this all over for me, it would help others.
http://www.sandiegobcc.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=50
Organizing for America,
While the President was expressing the need for our nation to reform its' inhumane Health Care system, some of San Diego, California's most vulnerable, suffering citizens were subjected to organized terrororism inflicted upon them by their own City and Federal Law Enforcement Agencies.
I am referring to San Diego District Attorney, Bonnie Dumanis' continued persecution (not a mis-spelling) of those who benefit from legal medical cannabis. Lies are being told about the Collectives operating for profit and not being caregivers to its' members.
Please Mr. Stewart and OFA, we're already victims of our ailments, diseases, handicaps and inflictions. Members of these particular Collectives, at least one that I know, is an amputee U.S. Soldier. Isn't the pain he brought back from the war enough punishment and sacrifice for his country? Does he really need to suffer through prescription opiates that are highly addictive and less effective than medical cannabis? These voices need to be heard. Please look into the facts of this. People's lives are at stake.
While serving as a US Federal employee, I was brutally beaten in my face, head, arms and legs in an Oklahoma jail cell on July 16th. I am a black woman under the age of 30 and a plain clothes policeman followed me after asking me inappropriate personal questions. I was booked at the jail for eluding the policeman at 30 mph below the speed limit and arrested me at gun point. After I was beaten, I was left for dead and placed into a suicide chair for hours until 8 AM the following morning. I was arraigned by a judge who increased my sentence from a misdemeanor to a felony and the District Attorney continues to refuse to drop the charges.
Hello Obama supporters,
My name is Sharisma K. Smith and I am the Creator and Designer of the first Civil Rights/Democratic FLAG to be displayed and/or archived in a public museum. The Troy University Rosa Parks Library and Museum is home to this one of a kind/Authentic/Exclusive flag. It can be viewed in the Children's Wing of the Museum.
I believe in Obama and his staff. His Presidency is ordained of God and is his Destiny being fulfilled as well as Prophesy being fulfilled-" The Last shall be first and the first shall be last". Obama is a wonderful President which is why I created the Flag, to honor him and the road traveled from 1955-2008(CIVIL-RIGHTS)&(EQUALITY) - is NOW! Change,is NOW!
Thanks President OBAMA & Michelle...God Bless America!
Sharisma K. Smith...royalty73@bellsouth.net
by Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com Editor March 31, 2009_pub = 'sertelt';
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The only two Democratic members of the U.S Senate who are not strong abortion advocates like the rest of their party's caucus have sent a letter to President Barack Obama asking him not to rescind the conscience protections on abortion that President Bush put in place.
Sens. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania sent Obama a letter last week telling him that the Provider Conscience Clause should remain.
That is the collection of new regulations the Bush administration put on the books to provide better enforcement of three federal laws making sure medical staff and facilities are not forced to participate in abortions.
The White House announced in February that Obama is starting the process of overturning the protections and he will make a final decision after the public comment period expires in April. Pro-life advocates have been actively responding to the proposal...more
VIEW RELATED BLOG: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=13358
I guess I could be wrong! I’ve always voted for candidates based on bills they have either authored or supported by their vote, and this, with me, has been true at the local state and federal levels of our government.
Now I see there are other things I should have considered besides the “Intent” of the bill introduced by the person I want in office or that person’s beliefs.
As I understand it, Lawmakers in at least eight U.S. states want recipients of food assistance, unemployment benefits or welfare to submit to random drug testing. For me this is a travesty of government, which could lead to serious repercussions. This effort comes as more Americans turn to these safety nets to ride out the recession. Poverty and civil liberties advocates fear the strategy could backfire, discouraging some people from seeking financial aid and making already desperate situations worse. Please consider reviewing this online news release by CBS News entitled: “States Consider Drug Tests For Needy”. Subtitled: “Recipients Of Food Stamps, Unemployment Benefits And Welfare Targeted By Plans In 8 States”.
We enact laws to “aid” and “protect” us for specifically defined reasons, when these laws are not used for this purpose, in my opinion we are violating the “Rule of Law”, which our country is based upon.
Suppose in my extreme example: a person is transporting a registered firearm “illegally” (in actuality basically a law bidding citizen with no criminal record) in there vehicle; and while transporting the firearm this person comes to the aid of rescuing another individual from a pending life or death situation, hence saving the person’s life! Should this “Good Samaritan” be charged with the crime of transporting a firearm illegally?
For me, to long, I have witnessed the miscarriage of justice within our country in regards to applying laws authored to service one purposed and used in another to establish the “Law of Rule” as opposed to the “Rule of Law”. Our former Bush administration is an additional example, with to many examples to site within one posting.
So, lets not deny those who need financial assistance at this troubling time in our economy when they need it the most. Especially when you consider we could be hurting innocent family members within a family more so than the person under question. Denying an individual these needed benefits could also lead this person to a more serious crime and with one in every one-hundred Americans serving prison time; our penal system is already heavily over crowded.
The following video is a prime example of the importance the Rule of Law as it applies to our American society and basically what separates our nation from developing and undeveloped nations.
Public Service, the Constitution, and the Rule of Law
Sen. Ted Kennedy delivers the keynote address at the 2006 Conference on Public Service & the Law at the University of Virginia Law School. Founded by law students seven years ago, the conference brings together students, citizens, and attorneys to discuss current public interest legal issues. A graduate UVA’s law school, Mr. Kennedy discusses ‘Public Service, the Constitution, and the Rule of Law’.
Additional postings regarding this topic and others may be found here:
"Sunday" 03/01/2009
"This is just my opinion!"
Now you may not like at all, what I have too say "Sir"
But I believe in "Telling it like it is".
It should not have taken a cartoon being displayed in "The Post" too do an investigation.
That's the problem with some of "Our Peoples" " we wait until something drastic occur then decide too take action. Racism has been around for a long time, it's, just that it's not publicize as much now a days.
Instead of going after those with money, why not do it the right way and get "Justice".
You have other people carring on in the most undecietful way towards the poor, low income, disabled and homeless ones, where is their reasurance. I don't see nothing being done about those matters. I my self is one that was sexually assulted by a maintenance man who continue working for New Community Corp. where I reside, picked on by a neighbor, schemeed on by this neighbor and her associate with management in trying too take me too "Court" based on a lie, injuried by a "Police officer a long with "Misconduct" " Oh! lets not forget about my son "Robert Swepson" being left for dead and having his civil rights being violated. I guess because,
by my son and I being poor, I guess what happen too use means nothing huh!
Please join me in taking action—attached is my letter to the Editor-in-Chief of the New York Post
D- Col Allen (Editor-in-Chief),
I would start this letter with the word “Dear”, as most common letters begin if I weren’t so disgusted by the despicable half witted excuse of an explanation your paper has “attempted” to make for the most recent cartoon posted on Page 12 of Wednesday’s edition. Specially when Page 11 had a photograph of President Obama signing the Economic Recovery Bill into law, and after traveling extensively to promote its expediency. Also ironic that President Obama often is compared to our dearly departed J.F. Kennedy who many suspect was not a victim of a single shooter but sadly blame/suspect one of our law enforcement agencies. You see we can all push the envelope and stretch our reasoning enough to link two “unrelated” stories: isn’t that what you’re claiming? To say I am nauseated is to simply downplay how many of us feel, distraught! I cannot believe that your paper intends to pass this off as a linking of two separate stories: How Naive do you really think we are?!?!? Seriously?!? This is offensive not only to African-Americans, but to many of us of the human race who are fighting to bring this long overdue gap between people to an end... when we are hoping that we cannot only rise above the tragic pieces of our history by uniting in the progressions we’ve made to overcome and continue to strive to overcome. When we celebrate/experience some progress, something like this only makes us realize how far we have yet to overcome. We grieve these events for the damage they do and the setback they cause and are reminded that even with how far we’ve come, some keep re-infecting the wound we so long to heal. I am sure the controversy makes your paper top the notoriety list and sells papers, however, by stirring up these kinds of controversies you continue to drive a deeper wedge between citizens of the USA (regardless of differences be they physical, philosophical, spiritual etc.) at a time when we cannot afford to be divided. Can’t you see the immense responsibility you as part of the media hold and how damaging misusing the spotlight you hold really is?!? I dare call your actions anti-patriotic, as I would anything that hurts the spirit of our country. And would replace the word “dear” with DISPICABLE, if it weren’t for the hope that you will come to your senses and not only apologize for this cartoon, but actively take measures to ensure this never happens again. I am not asking for censorship, as I do truly believe in freedom of speech and take pride that our constitution grants and protects that privilege; but as all privileges, this right must not be taken for granted and must be backed by good will, NOT greed, NOT a desire to make headlines and specially NOT to cause damage. Journalism is a calling, one that must be honest, factual and progressive. To call the posting of page 12 Regressive is to sugar coat and ignore the Elephant in the room. God bless our President and the United States of America; Let us all focus on the word UNITED.Sincerely,
Lily Estrada
Letter to the Editor: letters@nypost.com Page Six: rjohnson@nypost.comVoice your outrage: www. nypost. com
If you have a subscription and want to cancel it, please call 1-800-940-7678
My friend Ben Greenberg and I share activist fathers in civil rights during the 50s and early 60s. He sent me the following. Ben is actively pursing the murderers who are still alive, and is mentioned below. He has tremendous respect for Jerry Mitchell who wrote this column. I support Ben 100% in his work, and I will report on the results as they come in.
http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20090215/NEWS/902150356/1001/news#pluckcomments
This is important work and I am glad to know Ben.
Regards, David Fillingham
In 1933, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a man disabled with a peripheral neuropathic disorder that left him unable to walk rose to the highest office in our nation during the midst of the worst economic disaster in U.S. history. Five sentences into his inaugural address, FDR set the course of the nation for the next 36 years, declaring “there is nothing to fear but fear itself”. Those words became the anthem that echoed throughout our nation, instilling a sense of bravery and patriotism in all Americans, just as “Yes, We Can” rings out today. U.S. citizens had no jobs; no food, and yet, one of FDR’s first accomplishments was bringing beer and wine back into American communities, and by the end of that year, prohibition of all other alcoholic beverages had ended. Until recently, ratification of the Twenty-First Amendment has been consistently overlooked or criticized for it’s lack of importance. Today historians identify it as a strategically prudent maneuver of the only U.S. presidential administration maintaining overwhelming popularity across an unprecedented four terms despite the challenges in resolving the Great Depression. Repealing Prohibition was more than a gift of Pleasure; it was a gift of Responsibility. It brought Unity and Motivation to the backbone of the nation to support FDR throughout the largest war effort of all time, culminating in the only U.S. war victory of the 20th century through today and into the foreseeable future. We can wrap a circle around the years 1933 through 1968 and rightfully call this the Rooseveltian Era. It was a time of superman, super heroes, and binary super powers. It was a time when people remained loyal to “Truth, Justice, and the American way” simply because “fear” was not a barrier.
Psycho-active chemical substances were first introduced to the American people by the U.S. Government. Students today learn that Japanese and Nazi military used amphetamines which had an impact on our opponents losing the war. The truth is that amphetamines were regarded state-of-the-art military technology during WWII and those who had the most advanced technology were more likely to have a greater abundance of amphetamines. Since U.S. technology during the war was by far, the most advanced, it is rather obvious that we exceeded others in quantity.
The assassinations of three U.S. Civil Rights leaders during the 1960s rocked the Rooseveltian Era and brought psycho-active substances into the mainstream. The general public was in mourning; the drugs became a way to heal.
While the presidential administration of Richard M. Nixon is credited with ending segregation, landing an American on the moon, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), and the end of the draft and the Vietnam War, these events were either fueled by public protest or already set in motion prior to Nixon’s inauguration. The impetus of the Nixon administration lies in restoration of Fear, Ignorance, and Exclusion. Antithetical to FDR, Nixon befriended Fear and Ignorance with a chilling and ghostly pessimism that resounds not only through the tapes he left behind, but in his policies, namely, in the war on drugs (WOD). The Nixonian Era has enduring for 40 years now .
To understand why the WOD was never a logical move, consider two major issues impacting health and safety of the Boomer generation during their teen years, automobiles and drugs, and how each was handled by two distinctively different presidents, one during the Rooseveltian Era and the other in the Nixonian Era.
MOTOR VEHICLE LEGISLATION
In 1966, when automobile fatalities had topped 50,000 in one year, President Lyndon Johnson brought before Congress recommendations from a 1936 Select Committee of the United States Senate, the 1949 Hoover Commission Task Force on Transportation, President Eisenhower’s 1961 Budget Message, and a 1961 Special Study Group of the Senate Committee on Commerce in urging the US Congress to create Department of Transportation.[i] President Johnson facilitated an inclusive effort that reached out to automobile manufacturers, federal, state, and local government contractors engineering the design of roads and highways, motorists, and high schools in developing the foundation for policy that is still successful today.
DRUG WAR LEGISLATION
Exactly one month after the Stonewall Riots commenced on June 27, 1969 in Greenwich Village, Manhattan, triggering a positive turning point in the gay movement, the Nixon administration issued legislation for a comprehensive reform of federal drug enforcement laws. It was a response to constituents and others who believed that sexual perversity was caused by psycho-active substances. Until 1973, homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in the DSM, and the growth of the gay movement was incorrectly attributed to the use of illicit drugs. In Nixon’s May 13, 1971 taped conversation with John D. Ehrlichman, and H. R. Haldeman, Nixon himself states that “Homosexuality, dope, and immorality are the enemies of strong societies.”[ii] A month later, on June 17, 1971, just 10 days before the second annual Gay Pride Parade in New York City, Richard Nixon spoke before Congress with the opening words:
“In New York City more people between the ages of fifteen and thirty-five years die as a result of narcotics than from any other single cause.
"In 1960, less than 200 narcotic deaths were recorded in New York City. In 1970, the figure had risen to over 1,000…”[iii]
The mention of New York City, of course, was a blatant allusion to the gay population that stirred a rather fanatical nationwide appeal by the president in which he states:
“The magnitude and the severity of the present threat will no longer permit this piecemeal and bureaucratically-dispersed effort at drug control. If we cannot destroy the drug menace in America, then it will surely in time destroy us. I am not prepared to accept this alternative.”[iv]
There are two ironies here.
FIRST, “piecemeal…” describes the actions reformists are taking today in a leisurely attempt to undo the WOD. However, the magnitude and severity of the threat imposed by today’s drug laws has totally eclipsed all problems resulting from drugs.
SECOND, destroying the “drug menace in America” IS destroying us, since “US” defines the American people comprised of drug users / abusers.…
Unlike Johnson, who managed the implementation of formal recommendations from experts, commissions, and panels assembled specifically to study the problem of motor vehicle accidents, Nixon excluded the voice of experience, the general public, and even the recommendations from the National Committee on Marihuana and Drug Abuse led by Raymond Shafer, a committee that Nixon personally appointed which recommended the legalization of marijuana when it was released in March 1972. Richard Nixon and members of his administration also rejected input from Dr. Roger Egeburg, Assistant Secretary of Health that he personally appointed to study 1972 in shaping the WOD. In reviewing more than 100 transcribed documents produced by Nixon with specific regard to drug abuse during the first term of his administration, his concern about drug abuse that seems admirable at first glance is actually obsessive and disturbing. However, it is Nixon’s unrefined, personal, erratic, and dangerously presumptive level of understanding about psychoactive substances and drug abuse that are alarming and without foundation. As a result, his efforts threaten rather than inform; demand rather than request; broadly assume rather than specifically identify. Discrepancies in definable terminology with the medical community have been one significant factor steering the U.S. Government directly off course from the original objective.
With support for the drug war waning during the Ford and Carter administrations, Ronald Reagan’s adoption of the WOD was an expectation. During the 1980s, the WOD began expanding in scope with increased bipartisan support and a new focus on prescription drugs. One of the great blunders of the Democratic Party has been the failure to recognize drug use as a Civil Rights issue. Zero Tolerance policy with mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines was not a deterrent to drug use / abuse; it was an invitation to the drug community to engage in other forms of crime. For example, burglary can be reduced to a sentence of a few months; the minimum for possession is 10 years. In cases across the U.S. a defendant arrested for both burglary and drug possession the latter charge might be thrown out if the defendant pleads guilty to the charge of burglary. However, if the defendant was only charged with drug possession, judges have no recourse but to sentence the defendant for 10 years. Such laws are ridiculous because drug crimes offer no reason for incarceration whatsoever.
“Too little is known about drug abuse, especially the causes, ways to treat, and prevent drug abuse.” That humiliating, show-stopping statement came from members of the 109th US Congress in January 2006, 34 years and 7 months after President Nixon declared drugs to be “public enemy number 1”, launching an effort that has cost US taxpaying citizens 2 trillion USD, clogging our courts and increasing our prison population with non-violent drug law offenders sentenced 20-to-40 years or longer under zero tolerance guidelines for something that the US Government knows “too little” about. These mandatory sentences have routinely torn families apart for simple drug possession. As parents are arrested, children, adolescents, and teenagers are taken into custody and frequently scattered among family members whose lives are inconvenienced and these minors are often left on the streets to fend for themselves. They end up without education, a bitter hostility towards law enforcement, and a lifetime of criminal activity. Our lawmakers may know “too little about drug abuse”, but when it comes to spinning out criminals, no nation has mastered this craft better than the U.S.
At the end of the first decade in the 21st century, evidence strongly reveals that the harm resulting from U.S. drug policy is inescapable. Incidents might no longer be hidden but reported daily by the mainstream press with callous interest from the general public which has been led to believe that punishment and treatment are the only ways to stop drug abuse. This is false. These are invalid approaches. Inside the walls of correctional institutions of America, drugs still proliferate. Hundreds of reform organizations have sprouted up over the years and membership is growing steadily in number. While the U.S. Government is so consumed with achieving an impossible victory in the WOD, it has neglected to notice that the collateral damage of current drug policy, by far outweighs any benefit. In fact, it is virtually impossible to determine why nothing has been done to change the course of a war between the government and the people; a war that is destabilizing our nation leading to dangers that are far more imminent than those of global warming. Impacts of the WOD can be mapped across 12 categories:
1. Human Life
2. Civil Rights
3. Healthcare
4. Medical & Pharmacological Research
5. Education
6. Criminal Justice
7. Law Enforcement
8. Corporations & Businesses
9. Economics
10. Family & Society
11. Foreign Relations
12. Future Generations
Each of these is currently defined on my website at http://www.DrugUseEducation.org, I plan to write a blog summarizing each.
RESPONSIBLE DRUG USE IS NORMAL
My website at http://www.DrugUseEducation.org explains in great detail the residual effects our drug laws, but first, to couch my point, simply and succinctly: appropriately formulated drugs are not a threat to humanity. They never have been. Using drugs and chemical substances is normal human behavior.[v] Our culture has established this with regard to using drugs which have medicinal value, while ancient civilizations established the recreational value of drugs with countless generations ever since approving the use of alcohol. The Electro-Chemical Age[vi] coinciding with the Anthropocene[vii] Epoch in which we live today is the logical springboard for introducing safer alternatives to alcohol when correctly administered. These options also make it possible for individuals of different genetic types to enjoy pleasure and relaxation that is more suitable to their body chemistry than alcohol, which is considered to be one of the most lethal substances along with tobacco and gasoline used as pleasure drugs by Americans but are not controlled substances.
THE REAL THREAT IS THE LACK OF EDUCATION
The dangers associated with drugs are specifically linked to incorrect methods of drug administration, namely: drug abuse, dependence, addiction, and misuse. President Richard Nixon was aware of this. Throughout President Nixon’s address to U.S. Congress on June 17, 1971, he specifically mentions drug abuse and drug addiction as the two central “drug problems”. Furthermore, RN presents a proposal for rehabilitation and prevention efforts. Not once does RN mention a “war on drugs” before Congress. Not once does he make the remark that “America's public enemy number one in the United States is drug abuse”. Such comments were made during a news briefing several hours after RN addressed Congress.
ABSENSE OF STANDARDS & GUIDELINES
During the past 37 years, the WOD has evolved into an enigma of convoluted terminology, in which there are no standards and no guidelines to designate the acceptable use of recreational drugs, a pastime that has been growing among adults and will surely continue to grow well into the future with no end anticipated outside of the annihilation of the Earth before we have the opportunity to inhabit at least one other planet outside our solar system.
For that reason, I am appealing to the Obama administration and members of Congress to consider my proposal or any substitute action that will stop the condemnation of those with legitimate medical disorders using controlled substances and responsible recreational drug users and self-medicators who want -- and very well may have just cause -- to use drugs, while providing necessary education to everyone in society, especially those who are unaware how drugs should be used correctly, applying harm reduction, and providing treatment for drug abusers and those who have become chemically dependant. So far, the U.S. Government has repeatedly failed to show why anyone administering drugs one way or another -- whether they are prescribed or illicit controlled substances -- should be subjected to incarceration when they threaten no other members of society. By legalizing drugs and making them available at a fair price to individuals who have earned the privilege to use them, the unwanted illicit drug trade would diminish and cease to exist with the absence of any demand for illegal drugs.
I do not support an illicit drug trade, or the manufacturing, sale, distribution and use of impure homemade/homegrown substances that have not been FDA-approved, or the glamorization and commercial sale of drugs as has been the case with alcohol and tobacco. My philosophy is that all drugs whether they are used for medicinal, recreational, performance-enhancement or other purposes are a personal matter that requires education and qualified support by a legitimate pharmacist, physician, or perhaps some other trained and certified individual who is able work with the user to determine which drug is appropriate for them. While there is no way to assure that drugs won’t be abused, dosing restrictions provided with every drug, including alcohol and cigarettes would give the public the knowledge and the responsibility to maintain control.
In the 21st century, the problems associated with incorrect forms of drug administration are merely a cosmetic blemish compared to the life-threatening hemorrhage that defines our current drug policy. How can we even begin to estimate the number of individuals that are adversely impacted by our drug laws. There are reports on-line which suggest a lower end of 700,000 to an upper end of more than 200 million U.S. citizens that have in some way been adversely impacted by our society’s drug laws during the past two decades. Tragically, many of those directly in the line of fire have been innocent children.[viii] Even more tragically, down here in the trenches we are helplessly witnessing the self-destruction of America as faith in our democratic government wanes amidst a background of corruption, including drug laws that have created an environment far worse than the prohibition of alcohol from 1920 until 1933 since today we have included patients with legitimate medical disorders among those who use drugs for entertainment.
The longer it takes to reach a level of sane, acceptable, drug policy, the more certain we are that a far greater number of human lives will be challenged, if not lost, by hardships that result from the irrational control of psycho-active substances.
[i] Special Message to the Congress on Transportation. Lyndon B. Johnson March 2nd, 1966 http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=28114&st=automobile&st1=
[ii] http://www.gicomeng.com/histinsidenixon.htm Original Source: Harper’s Magazine.
[iii] http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=3048&st=&st1= Special Message to the Congress on Drug Abuse Prevention and Control, June 17, 1971.
[iv] Ibid
[v] See analysis at http://www.gicomeng.com/
[vi] Electro-Chemical Age (ECA) – The theoretical name that logically represents the tools of our time, which are electronic or chemical based. The ECA has its roots in the Age of Enlightenment (18the Century)that spawned the Industrial Revolution. Technically, the ECA succeeds the Industrial Revolution that took place during the early 19th century. The ceremonial start date of the ECA is May 1, 1851, the date that Queen Victoria and Prince Albert opened the Great Exhibition (aka Crystal Palace) in Hyde Park, London, England, where over 17,000 exhibitors from around the world gathered to demonstrate their inventions and trigger the start of an Age dominated by electrically-powered mechanics, and complex chemical technology.
[vii] Anthropocene is used by some scientists to describe the most recent period in the Earth's history. It has no precise start date, but may be considered to start in the late 18th century when the activities of the humans first began to have a significant global impact on the Earth's climate and ecosystems. This date coincides with James Watt's invention of the steam engine in 1784.[1] The term was coined in 2000 by the Nobel Prize winning atmospheric chemist Paul Crutzen, who regards the influence of human behavior on the Earth in recent centuries as so significant as to constitute a new geological era.
[viii]
All the people that likes the life can help on this way.
Please partecipate on this blog, organizing meeting and events, pushing Barak Obama to be really a new and honest President that respect the life of every man and every woman!
We cannot talk of America like a civil State until there is the death penalty!
Fight it!
Yes we can!
giosby
(Italian language)
This is my tribute to the process. America's greatest quality is that it can change. This tribute was brought to you by Eastside Columbus, Ohio artstist Yolanda Lisa, Livin' Proof, Michael Tavaras and myself...with love!
Copy and paste the below url in to your favorite browser.
Thanks,
Kenny
http://www.kennyruffin.com/KENNY_RUFFIN/Videos.html
