Cannabis News The November Coalition
  War on Drugs, War on Government
Posted by FoM on September 09, 2001 at 07:33:17 PT
Editorial 
Source: Kalamazoo Gazette 

cannabisnews.com Draconian laws do little to curb America's drug appetite. Did we learn nothing from Ruby Ridge and Waco? Will Rainbow Farm become the next byword for excessive government force against people who don't share our beliefs?

We hope not. But it is not hard to see that, in our zeal to eradicate drug use, we are abandoning some of the ideals of progressive democracy. Drugs are harmful to individuals and society. We do not support the legalization of either "soft" drugs like marijuana, or "hard" drugs like cocaine or heroin.

Snipped


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #11 posted by kelly on September 14, 2001 at 22:19:11 PT:

drug war/war war
First of all, cannibis is finally prescribed for medicinal purposes; but not in Texas, and so highly regulated.

I've had UK friends call, kids hysterical wondering if I died; so confused. Muslim friends can't go out for fear of their lives. Other confused friends, arguing with me (doh, I aint Pres. Bush), about how the United States is going to start WWIII. NYC best friend lost a shitload of firefighter friends.

My dad flew B17s in WWII, 35 missions, and he's upset too. We ALL are.

I'm hanging in there via music, basically. (PEACE SELLS...BUT WHO'S BUYING?)

My sympathies to Rainbow Farm:(

Cheers,
Kelly


[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #10 posted by slick on September 10, 2001 at 20:55:43 PT:

Kzoo Gazette
This is so typical Kalamazoo Gazette. Ride the fence all the way. Admit the War on Drugs isn't working and then turn right around and say they are not in favor of marijuana legalization. Not a whisper about the PRA campaign in Michigan which will decriminalize marijuana leaving the reader to wonder where the Gazette stands on that issue. Just the same warmed over apologies for the WOD--we admit it isn't working but are too timid to try anything else

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #9 posted by FoM on September 09, 2001 at 18:26:53 PT
pissedonandoff
Hi pissedonandoff,

Here is the one I found so far.

Johnson, DEA Head Debate Monday
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10869.shtml


[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #8 posted by pissedonandoff on September 09, 2001 at 18:24:33 PT:

Freedom says reform
Things are way bad when one million people are in jail over substance abuse and huge chemical companies were allowed to makde PCB's to be intentional introduced into the environment and now even threaten the entire spieces of orkas. What people once thougt of pristine Peuget Sound is contaminated by a concentration of PCB's that have now settled. I think Dupont is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up the PCB's in the Hudson rivers. I would like the government for cleaning up the environment.

Ok government, now that I have praised you, the war on peace has shown its folly. Property seisure laws only make our civil servants want our property for their own greed. It is a complete corruption of what is proper.

Can anyone please post about the debate tomorrow with Governor Johnson and Asa Hutchinson. Tomorrow is the beginning of an honest debate. Do you think the black market and imprisonment will win the debate?

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #7 posted by dddd on September 09, 2001 at 13:46:23 PT
E. Johnson
Thank you for the outstanding commentary...it's excellent.


..when you think about it,,,this shouldnt be that surprising,,after
all,,war was declared,,an "enemy" was conjured up,,,and the
enemy is eliminated.....it's just a shame that we couldnt find
room in the budget for the "War on Corruption" in the government.
...Tap Cheneys phone,and send in a SWAT team to surround the
Whitehouse,,,lob a few concussion grenades,and incendiary
devices through his window....make everyone come out with their
hands up........put all the crooks,including dubya,in the slammer.
..yup,,,they would be facing mandatory minimums under the new
corruption laws,,,with enhanced sentences due to the conspiracy
and racketeering laws.......and of course,,the whitehouse would
be forfieted,and returned to the people.....dddd


[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #6 posted by J.R. Bob Dobbs on September 09, 2001 at 13:05:31 PT
Inadmissible
>>In the end, it appears Crosslin chose to end his own life Monday by pointing a weapon at officers, certainly knowing officers would gun him down. Rohm chose the same fate for himself the next day.<<

Objection! Hearsay! Your honor, where is the proof? This version of events was manufactured by the same governmental agencies which pulled the trigger. Where is the proof? Where is the footage, the audiotapes, the bystander eyewitness, the... ANYthing??

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #5 posted by E. Johnson on September 09, 2001 at 10:54:14 PT
It's just like the witch hunts in Europe
The witch hunts in Europe were not what people think they were. It wasn't mob viooence fueled by ignroance and superstition. The War on Witches was a carefully creafted episode of social engineering designed to rid Europe of specific types of people and marginalize and spread suspicion on certain types of opinions and behaviors.

The European witch hunts was a social control movement supported by the most learned men in both the religious and secular legal and intellectual worlds.

In that case, the target was women. The first target of all women were the women who handled herbal medicine. The midwives who knew how women could control their fertility using herbs.

This was at the time when professional medicine was just beginning. That was part of why they hunted midwives as witches and called the agents of Satan. The Church had a monopoly power over universities back then, and anyone who wanted a medical degree had to be loyal to the Church.

Women were barred from univerities, and that reinforced the idea that midwives and herbalists represented unclean, unholy knowledge of medicine, whereas male doctors certified by the Church represntec knowledge that was safe and clean and certified by God.

The European witch hunts were not irrational, they fulfilled a rational plan of the ruling forces in society at the time to marginalize and disempower certain classes of people, mostly women. (abpout 85-90% of those executed were women.)

The standard of a socially ideal woman BEFORE the witch hunts was a lusty women who was large and gifted with many skills, who knew how to use herbs for healing the sick. Back in that period a large fraction of businesses were owned by women. Women were also taking up preaching.

In one English city they banned women from wearing men's clothing, because there was so much gender equality that women were just abandoning any pretense of obeying social restrictions on their clothing and behavior.

Tha standard of a socially ideal woman AFTER the witch hunts were over was a frail thin helpless creature who would faint at the mere mention of anything related to sexuality, who was driven to hysteria by any physical labor, who was Christian to the point of absolute sexlessness, who would never dream of donning male attire, had absolutely no knowledge of any herbal potions, and deferred completely to male doctors for everything concerning her body and mind.

The War on Dugs, it is not hard to see, has been largely a war against MEN. Black men, mainly, but also Hispanic men, and then in the hippie era, a war against white men who were seen as a threat to the traditional military power system.

Yes, those damned anti-war protestors.

Marijuana has been demonized beyond all reason, so in some way the war against pot seems irrational. But at a social and political level it is not irrational at all, not any more irrational than were the European witch hunts.

Look at a before and after picture and you can see the reason behind it. The Drug War has been a force running in the oppsoute direction from the Civil Rights movement. How many black men have lost the right to vote thanks to the crack laws?

And can anyone imagine asking workers in 1968 to pee in a cup when applying for a job?

There would have been urine riots if drug testing had been suggested back then.

I am smiling now at the thought of a urine riot. Wouldn't that be nice?

Why don't we all make a giant urine collection and mail it to Washington DC to Asa Hutchinson? The world's largest urine sample!

Before the Drug War, nobody peed for a job. Now we're all willing to pull our panties down and let Uncle Sam into our urethra.

It's a complete parallel to the intimidating, tranformative effect that the European witch hunts had on women.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #4 posted by Doug on September 09, 2001 at 09:47:31 PT
I suppose this is Progress
I'll be generous and consider this editorial a little more liberal than the usual treatment of the Drug War that we've seen for the last forty years. But still, they've got a long way to go.

Prominent in this editorial, and all the others I've seen here and on MAP is the "Blaming the Victim" syndrome. This is very common in American journalism, and almost always bad form. Not only that, but it is extremely disrespectful. It is a way of maintaining that all the rest of us are innocent and not responsible: Saying "You did it yourself, and you have no one else to blame" lets us off the collective hook. But until we as a public can take responsiblity for the Evil, and this act at Rainbow Farms was truly evil, things like this will continue to happen.


[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #3 posted by Robbie on September 09, 2001 at 09:09:23 PT
All must be allowed
A generation after Woodstock, when young people thought drugs were a harmless diversion and a youth culture glorified drug use, we are older and wiser now.

That's right. We know that drugs a harmless diversion and we're much less frightened by and controlled by the government. Except, of course, being shot and killed for disagreeing with the system.

We have no illusions about the toll drugs have taken on individuals, on neighborhoods and on society.

You mean drugs-WAR don't you? Get your approach straight before you try it out on the public. Drugs would not be the scourge that they are without the "ninny-nanny Puritannical hysterical War on the Drugs that you don't like and demonize." Remember, black markets come from ILLEGAL activities, not legal ones.

I love these people who hate and demonize drugs, yet continue to state "Why don't we just give up on this stupid war?" It's the former belief that fuels the intolerance.

LEGALIZE IT ALL. WE CAN DEAL WITH THE REPERCUSSIONS LATER!



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #2 posted by bruce42 on September 09, 2001 at 08:47:45 PT
kaptinemo
I never ever recall seeing an anti-drug campaign commercial about just drugs. ever. Every anti-drug propaganda I see or hear is about drug-users, junkies, or how your kids can turn into bloodthirsty/stupid/lazy/f'ed up druggies. Does anyone here recall ever seeing propaganda about just drugs, not the people involved?

Apparantly, giving the public an informed choice concerning the treatment of their own bodies and minds is un-American somehow.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #1 posted by kaptinemo on September 09, 2001 at 08:40:14 PT:

Wayl, Gollee-dayee!
'Scuze me while I shake the hayee-seeds outa my hahr.

...after watching events unfold at Rainbow Farm in Vandalia last week, in which two advocates of marijuana use are dead and the campground burned to the ground, we are beginning to wonder if this nation's War on Drugs is becoming a War on Drug Users.

Mighty slow on the uptake, to have to take this long to make that determination.

It has ever been so: The DrugWar has never been about inanimate objects but repressing, incarcerating, and murdering flesh-and-blood people. And these people are just tumbling to this, now, after 87 years?

Well, at least they're awake. Hopefully, they'll remain so.




[ Post Comment ]


  Post Comment
Name:        Password:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:


Return to Main Menu


So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on September 09, 2001 at 07:33:17