Cannabis News DrugSense
  Drug Drama: The Big Chill
Posted by FoM on February 20, 2002 at 21:04:30 PT
By Donna Osborn  
Source: Christian County Headliner  

justice Imagine yourself tucked away from the world, safe and sound in your home. You're far from the madding crowd. But in a few heart-stopping moments, your world is shattered. In an instant, you're shot dead in the middle of your American dream that turned, without warning, into a chilling nightmare. A nightmare where the good guys are the bad guys, and it is all very real.

Donald P. Scott, 61, was shot to death in his home on the 200-acre ranch he shared with his wife near Malibu, Calf.

Scott wasn't a fugitive when he was killed by a Los Angeles County deputy sheriff on Oct. 2, 1992. Scott wasn't breaking any laws. Scott reacted to his wife's screams when members of a multijurisdictional drug task force broke down his door and entered his home in a military-style raid.

By turning a corner and pointing a handgun, he faced his judge, jury and executioner-the U. S. Government.

That is how the country's war on drugs affected Donald Scott. Scott didn't have time to "just say no." Scott was an innocent man minding his business when the government, acting on an unsubstantiated tip, stormed his property looking for marijuana plants. That's what the drug officers wanted to find to justify seizing Scott's ranch under civil forfeiture statutes: 14 marijuana plants. They found nothing. But, Scott's death was ruled justifiable.

Dying with him were the rights guaranteed to every American under the U.S. Constitution.

According to information from Eric Blumenson and Eva Nilsen in "Policing for Profit: The Drug War's Hidden Economic Agenda" (University of Chicago Law Review, 1997), the Ventura County District Attorney reported the main purpose of the raid was to "garner the proceeds expected from forfeiture of the $5-million ranch."

Documents provided to officers before the raid included an appraisal and a parcel map of the ranch. A later investigation found the search warrant was issued on insufficient information. There was never any evidence supporting marijuana cultivation on Scott's ranch.

Donald Scott's case may be one of the more dramatic war stories, but his isn't isolated. This business of law enforcement seizing property to finance its war on drugs is flawed. The system is designed for abuse.

The Fourth, Fifth and Eighth Amendments protect citizens from unreasonable search and seizures, taking of private property without just compensation and unreasonable fines and punishment. However, civil forfeiture laws focus on property, and property does not have a Bill of Rights. Government is able to confiscate property suspected of use in a variety of criminal activities.

The federal statutes have been broadened to include more than drug-related crimes. State legislatures have raced to keep up with federal laws. Several years ago, the United States Supreme Court denied Tina Bennis's innocent owner defense and allowed law enforcement to take her car. Bennis had committed no crime. Her husband, John Bennis, was arrested after Detroit police officers watched him engage in sex with a prostitute in his car. The state sued the couple and declared the car a public nuisance. The state of Michigan took the car. The Supreme Court held that Tina Bennis's innocence was irrelevant.

Blumenson and Nilsen say "both crime prevention and due process goals of our criminal justice are compromised when salaries, continued tenure, equipment, modernization and budget depend on how much money can be generated by forfeiture."

In addition to the abuses of power that killed ordinary citizen Donald Scott, these statutes enable the real bad guys, the drug kingpins, to buy their freedom by simply relinquishing valuable assets. Information from Blumenson and Nilsen report that 80 percent of all seizures go without criminal prosecution. It is little wonder approximately 60 percent of the prison population are minor players in the drug drama.

The government has succeeded in undermining and circumventing the constitutional rights of its citizenship for profit in the name of protection. Opposition is unpopular. Sane critics many times are exiled into political "no-man's land" or at the very least called anti-law enforcement.

This is the wrong way to fund law enforcement.

Lord Chief Justice of England, Baron Lane, wrote at the end of the 20th Century: "Loss of freedom seldom happens overnight. Oppression doesn't stand on the doorstep with a toothbrush, moustache and swastika armband-it creeps up insidiously. . .step by step, and all of a sudden the unfortunate citizen realizes that it is gone."

After the events of Sept. 11, the nation is ripe for far-reaching abuse of civil rights.

While our citizenry has necessarily agreed to tougher scrutiny, we must remain vigilant in protecting what our government says its willing to fight for: freedom and the protections of those freedoms as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

Source: Christian County Headliner (MO)
Author: Donna Osborn
Published: February 20, 2002
Copyright: 2002 Christian County Headliner
Contact: donnao@cpimo.com
Website: http://www.zwire.com/site/News.cfm?brd=2209

Related Article:

A Special Report: Hooked on SWAT
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10651.shtml

CannabisNews Justice Archives
http://cannabisnews.com/news/list/justice.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #39 posted by Toker00 on February 22, 2002 at 11:40:11 PT
Thanks, Jose.
I appreciate your number checking. I agree with your reasoning about calling them. I don't intend to be annonomous in this WAR ON SOME DRUGS. I've even been letting my hair grow for the last year and a half, and have a decent ponytail, now. Our stance should be highly visible, vocal, educational, and documented. They forget the average American citizen isn't addicted to government money. They are no longer buying the lies and corruption that the politicians, prison system, and LEO's deam "worth it". Wait till they all start losing their jobs, as the voters start kicking them out.

They are right. The Drug War hasn't really been fought as a "war", yet. But it is about to be. They advocate war, we advocate peace. They advocate control, we advocate freedom. Whose side you on, fellow American? Korporatism MUST END, also.

Peace. Realize, then Legalize.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #38 posted by Tigress58 on February 22, 2002 at 10:42:05 PT
NOT JUSTIFIED HOMICIDE
There was a crime of MURDER committed, and no one will disagree that the Legal Outlaws Above and Beyond the Law have committed the act in cold blood. Someone needs to put the murderers on trial, and seek the death sentence for this Murderous Siege and act of terroism.

It is time to hold the government accountable for the violation of rights and open murder of our citizens. This was not a justified homicide! Our Federal Government is disgusting, psychotic, unethical, and ego-centric!

Sue, sue, sue those PIGS to suey!

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #37 posted by Mari on February 22, 2002 at 05:52:40 PT:

Meth= Profits
"..incredibly poor people with crappy cars and crappy houses and usually three times as many tatoos as they have teeth."

Ain't it the truth!! I have seen a lot of people around here making and selling meth and not a one of them has ANY real money. They tend to only sell enough of their product to raise the money for the next batch and resent having to do that. No matter how much meth they have it is never enough. I have lost several dear friends to the ravages of this drug. Death, jail, physical and mental rot has been the cause.

I remember when 'speed' was legally available by prescription and though there were some problems, all in all it was never the problem meth is. Making speed illegal gave rise to the 'moonshine' type makers and now there is no telling what you are getting. I know one bunch of people who cooked up a batch that gave them convulsions but they continued to use it till it was gone.Of all the 'illegal' drugs, meth comes closest to the old 'bathtub gin' that killed and blinded people during Prohibition I.

As to ole Buff.. Linden was a favorite place of his to harass kids. Once a group of us (teens) were driving down 65 Hwy. between Ozark and Springfield and Buff tried to pull us over. We all knew him too well so we made a run for the county line (about 2 miles). SOB shot at us and blew out a tail-light!! We got away but our only 'crime' was being teenagers in HIS county!

E-mail me sometime and maybe we can hook up next time you're in this neck of the woods.

(I heard on the news last night that Sigma house has lost it's funding. Wonder where the 'drug courts' are going to send people to now?)

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #36 posted by kaptinemo on February 22, 2002 at 05:16:54 PT:

Awwww, poor Joycie
When Joyce Nalepka decided, in her infinite wisdom, to back the jailing of responsible adult cannabis users by forming her organization, she made herself a fair target for criticism. By entering the political arena, and attempting to impose her sick and twisted views of morality upon those not so inclined to be so arrogant, she made herself doubly so. By taking the monies of suspect organizations that had ulterior motives (distributors of the products containing nicotine and alcohol) she made herself triply so.

But she does not have to fear arrest, incarceration, homosexual prison rape and AIDS for her activism. She does not have to fear her home being invaded by Nazi-esque police tripping on adrenaline and waving machine pistols in her face, barking orders and quite possibly shooting her dead for failure to comply fast enough.

A course of events that, in some cases, has actually begun when a lazy cop, too corpulent from way too many donuts and not up to the task of chasing down murderers, rapists and child molesters, reads an LTE critical of his meal ticket and decides to 'take action!'. Or worse, he gets a conveniently 'anonymous' tip that someone is growing or dealing...on property the cop wants for his department. Just as this article made plain. What then? Would Joycie be quite so supportive of her sweet little War on Some Drugs if the muzzle of a pistol were directed to her forcefully supine body as the cop puts a knee in her back and informs her that she has no rights?

Joycie lives like most antis - in the ideological ivory tower. Right up there with the late Marie Antoinette and all the other 'aristos' who thought they could ignore the mess boiling in the streets...until it was too late. Like Lenin's 'useful idiots', she has no idea of the evil that she supports and works so hard to sustain. She believes she is on the side of the angels...after all, they told her she was....while conveniently forgetting that there are indeed 'dark angels'...with a wholly unwholesome designs upon our lives and liberties.

Until the situation that they precipitated with their narrow-minded earnestness and certainty of moral rectitude comes calling upon them, they'll never know what they've done to this country. Her complaints are the human equivalent of crocodile tears. And they deserve as much sympathy.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #35 posted by Jose Melendez on February 22, 2002 at 04:55:33 PT:

mari
Meth lab proliferation is increased by the War on (some) drugs, like stills during Prohibition. As for Joyce Nalepka, she publicly posted her contact info at:
http://www.ourdrugfreekids.com/yes_fiber_hempcanhave.htm

On that page she has trouble with spelling, (as I do) and refuses to admit the truth about cannabis, which has been proven safe at all concentrations of THC, CBD, or terpenoids.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #34 posted by E_Johnson on February 22, 2002 at 03:38:20 PT
Luckily, having your science all wrong is legal
Even Joyce Nalepka complained to me that her name and address were published, but so many that complain about her posts used psuedonyms.

She can't be arrested for ignorantly misrepresenting cannabinoid science, so she can afford to be identified.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #33 posted by BGreen on February 22, 2002 at 00:53:51 PT:

Mari
I still have friends and family in your area, so I'm around quite a bit.

Have you noticed that the police talk about the tens of thousands of dollars the meth makers are making, but they're almost always incredibly poor people with crappy old cars and crappy houses, and usually three times as many tatoos as they have teeth?

I'm glad your husband escaped from the 'Buffster.' I was at a kegger at Linden on the Finley River when it got raided. I managed to elude them for a couple of hours by hiding in the woods, but got stopped on hwy 125 after I left. At least I had sobered up, and, after "consenting" to a complete search of my car, they threatened me in the usual cop-like fashion, and sent me home.

Buff got in trouble in the mid '70s for carrying the judge and prosecuting attorney in the back seat of his squad car on the weekends, holding court on the side of the road. To this day I have NO RESPECT for ANYBODY involved in law enforcement. I think they're just as sleazy as Buff, but sneakier than Osama.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #32 posted by Mari on February 21, 2002 at 19:59:35 PT
To JR Bob Dobbs
What does a meth lab smell like? If you have ever smelled one you wouldn't forget! It is an acrid chemical smell, very distinctive. I know there are methods of making meth that don't produce these odors but around here it's the method that stinks that is most often used. A lot of cookers do it in the woods; but there have been a fair amount found cooking in cars while the driving around.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #31 posted by FoM on February 21, 2002 at 18:26:44 PT
Jose
I just wanted to mention that at Joyce's request her information was removed. I wasn't sure if you saw that I did that or not.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #30 posted by Jose Melendez on February 21, 2002 at 18:12:46 PT:

phone number checks out
Toker00,
Sometimes emails are cut off by your own email program, check your preferences or options.

The phone number seems legit, I called it and the message says it is Ron Ross of Senator Hutchins office. Also, from:
http://www.dreamagic.com/congress/ar.html

Senator Tim Hutchinson (Rep.) Phone: (202) 224-2353

The number you gave (202) 224 - 0340 seems to be directly below the listed "official" number. While I cannot be sure about their motives, my feeling is they are for real.

Maybe if you just call and ask for a fax number you could print out your message and fax it so at least they would really read it.

I look at it like posting my real name here on cannabisnews.com; if only anonymous people are for safe, legal cannabis, it might remain illegal! Even Joyce Nalepka complained to me that her name and address were published, but so many that complain about her posts used psuedonyms.

Good luck!

Peace, Air Jose

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #29 posted by Toker00 on February 21, 2002 at 14:06:18 PT
E-mail sent to Hutchinson
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:58 PM > > To: srodgers@arkleg.state.ar.us > > Subject: > > > > December 10, 2001 > > > > The Honorable Sandra Rodgers > > State Capitol Building > > Room 350 > > Little Rock, AR 72201-2201 > > > > > > Dear Representative Rodgers: > > > > Would you please join me in opposing the DEA's attempt to ban many hemp > > products? Hemp is a valuable industrial crop that could strengthen our > > economy, while helping our environment. ("Hemp" refers to the plant fiber > > and sterile seeds of industrial varieties of the marijuana plant that do > > not contain psychoactive amounts of THC, the active component of > > marijuana.) > > > > The DEA's new rules have already been published in the Federal Register. > > There was no opportunity for public comment because the DEA issued an > > interpretive rule rather than a rule that would require formal rule-making > > procedures. There is strong reason to believe the DEA exceeded its > > authority by resorting to this tactic, and that it did so to avoid the > > public controversy and opposition that was certain to arise from its > > action of summarily destroying a large segment of the growing hemp > > products industry. Please act right away to oppose the DEA's actions. The > > DEA can be contacted at: > > > > Frank Sapienza, Chief of Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Drug > > Enforcement Administration, Washington, D.C. 20537, phone 202-307-7183, > > fax 202-307-8570 > > > > Hemp is grown for its fibers and seeds and can be used to make more than > > 25,000 different products, including textiles, paper, paint, fuel, > > particleboard, rope, cosmetics, and food. It has little to no > > tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive substance found in marijuana, > > which is related to the hemp plant. > > > > Hemp oil could replace petroleum as a source for alternative fuels and > > plastics, while hemp fiber could replace trees as the primary source of > > pulp for paper and timber for construction. Indeed, the diversity of the > > hemp plant is impressive, but perhaps most importantly, hemp can be grown > > without the use of chemical pesticides because of its natural resistance > > to pests. As a result, the use of hemp-based products can reduce soil, > > water, and air pollution. > > > > Clearly, the potential of hemp is great. Please tell the DEA that you > > oppose its new rules that outlaw many hemp products. > > > > I would appreciate it if you would let me know your position on this > > matter and how you will affect the decision-making process on the future > > of hemp. Thank you for your time and attention. > > > > Sincerely,

This particular e-mail was responded to by another Rep., Sandra Rogers. I did not include her response. Same e-mail was sent to Hutchinson. So e-mails get cut off?

So, no one else, besides GCW, has heard from any HEMP related e-mails to their reps?

Peace. Realize, then Legalize.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #28 posted by Toker00 on February 21, 2002 at 13:57:37 PT
Washington DC, I think.
Here is the number from the recording. Their request was for correspondence on e-mail about legalizing industrial HEMP.

202 - 224 - 0340

Let's see what's up.

Peace. Realize, then Legalize.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #27 posted by Toker00 on February 21, 2002 at 13:48:10 PT
Thanks for the excellent advice.
I am going to retrieve the e-mail I sent them, and send it again, with a personal note asking why I was called. Meanwhile, my house is sanitized.

I have mixed feellngs, though. I agree it could be viewed as an opportuity to stand up for the truth. And by e-mailing them again, I will be doing that. I won't call, but I will post their number. It's public knowledge,isn't it? If it indeed the Hutchinson office I am dealing with. Probably DEA poking.

Thanks again, folks, and I'll retrieve that number.

Peace. Realize, then Legalize.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #26 posted by Patrick on February 21, 2002 at 13:30:57 PT
p4me
They not only didn't forfeit their property nor is confiscated the right word. Personally, I think the operable word at least if I use the Constitution as my guidline is that their property was actually STOLEN!

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #25 posted by E_Johnson on February 21, 2002 at 13:14:53 PT
I think you should call them
You have to give them the chance to change.

The DEA ban is so ludicrous, it has really provoked some outrage and disbelief.

If you truly believe in democracy then you should act out of faith in democracy, and let the onus be on them to be the violators, if that's what happens.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #24 posted by shrox on February 21, 2002 at 12:45:23 PT
Thinking outside the box (better info)
Well, now I have an answer. I had heard about a device the Feds have that can "read your mind". It seems it is a chip that must be inserted into your laranx. When you think, you vocal cords make tiny movements that the chip can detect and transmit. Has anyone heard of this and could it be true?

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #23 posted by kaptinemo on February 21, 2002 at 11:27:10 PT:

Toker, I'd be cautious if I were you
These swine antis have used LTE's critical of the War on Some Drugs as sufficient grounds for a search warrant. This smells too much like a trap, to me.

Remember the Atlanta Olympics? Remember Richard Jewel? The security guard who found the backpack containing the bomb? They (the Feebs; a.k.a. the FBI) called him in to 'talk with him' about his expertise in being a security guard...and what he knew about bombs. The purpose was nothing other than to entrap him. he thought he was just beinga good patriotic American...until he called his lawyer and his lawyer told him to shut up, he was digging his own grave.

The Feebs were desperate to hang somebody, so they harrassed Jewel until they were made to stop. If you show up, bring a lawyer with you. Otherwise, clarify your statement in a letter. If they are so hot to talk with you, they'll make another effort. Otherwise, I wouldn't trust them. They've done nothing to justify that trust...and everything not to.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #22 posted by FoM on February 21, 2002 at 11:08:33 PT
Toker00
I'm with Lehder. I don't think you should. Just because our intentions are honorable we know theirs just aren't. I wish I could say yes but I just don't think it is wise. It would probably be best to keep the message private. Just my opinion.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #21 posted by shrox on February 21, 2002 at 11:02:26 PT:

Thinking outside the box
Before you laugh, are there any laws prohibiting "psychic" or "mental powers" being used, say to defend you life and/or property? What if a machine augmented the "mental powers" of a person? How could an authority really even prove what happened? I am going somewhere with this...

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #20 posted by The GCW on February 21, 2002 at 10:55:48 PT
Ultimately, you have to.
If you are prepared to speak, then you have an excelent oppertunity. If you not quite ready, pass. If you E-mailed him, would you have called instead, if you knew you could actually speak to him?

I had one call me on my cell phone when I sent a letter to him that pointed out he was harmfull to my family. It was a blessing that I mentioned it and the letter to an local editor and he printed the letter in his paper. It was about the medical use of cannabis.

He actually was uncomfortale with me referring to jail as "cage". That hit his button, but that is what it is. America wants to continue caging humans for using a plant, even nearly dead people.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #19 posted by Jose Melendez on February 21, 2002 at 10:54:08 PT:

should I?
Toker00:

Post the number here, maybe we can check it out.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #18 posted by Lehder on February 21, 2002 at 10:41:36 PT
Should I?
No.

Deal with the government only in writing.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #17 posted by Toker00 on February 21, 2002 at 09:57:15 PT
Heads up.
I came home today, and found a message from Sen. Tim Hutchinson (Arkansas) on my answering machine. They said I had e-mailed his office about the position of the DEA concerning HEMP, but that my e-mail had been cut-off. They were interested in talking to me about the e-mail, wanting to know what it had contained, so they could be clear on what I was saying about the DEA's position on HEMP.

I have sent numerous e-mails and faxes to his office, and never before recieved more than a form letter in return. I have no idea which specific e-mail he is refering to. They left a number and asked me to call.

Should I?

Anyone else been contacted by their Reps. about HEMP?

Peace. Realize, then Legalze.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #16 posted by The GCW on February 21, 2002 at 09:39:52 PT
E J
Love the link. There are so many headin' to crumble that wall.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #15 posted by E_Johnson on February 21, 2002 at 09:08:41 PT
Compare Pravda with CNN
The online Pravda of today seems to be better at covering the collapse of European marijuana prohibition than CNN is.

http://english.pravda.ru/fun/2002/01/23/25942.html



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #14 posted by E_Johnson on February 21, 2002 at 09:01:02 PT
If Marx, Inc had been a corporate consultancy
This is really weird to watch, the creeping Sovietization of American news media in the Drug War.

Maybe as media corporations merge and get bigger, that's just inevitable.

It looks like capitalism but it sounds increasingly like Pravda.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #13 posted by E_Johnson on February 21, 2002 at 08:43:30 PT
AskCNN about Bennett!
I just sent the following question to AskCNN:

Does your hiring of Bill Bennett as a correspondent mean you are officially abandoning any pretense of journalistic objectivity in the Drug War?

They ask you for an expert who could answer the question, so I wrote in Columbia Journalism Review.

I urge as many people as possible to ask them this question.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #12 posted by goneposthole on February 21, 2002 at 07:40:54 PT
mind numbing
Donald Scott, Tom Crosslin, Colombine, fast food restaurant mass murders in Texas and California, Justus County, rougue police, school shootings in Arkansas, California, Oregon, Georgia,...

Oklahoma City, The World Trade Center in New York

Terrorists are not the problem, they are worked into the equation.

With all of the screaming and hollering, reason takes flight.

Must it be what is desired by who knows what?



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #11 posted by Jose Melendez on February 21, 2002 at 06:21:18 PT:

Bob Barr: doofus?
from:
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n301/a03.html?397

CONGRESSMAN BOB BARR - THE FARMER'S ENEMY

Being an idiot is no bar to being a member of Congress, and as exhibit number one to prove this point, I offer the fatuous Bob Barr.

What a doofus.  This right-wing Georgia Republican's latest flight into extremist fantasyland comes in the form of a press release from his office declaring excitedly that Barr "is taking a strong, proactive stance against the spread and marketing of..." - of what? Something awful, right, like crack cocaine or land mines or child pornography? But, nooooo.

What has Bob's undies in a wad is the spread and marketing of hemp products.

Yes, such products as strong rope, fine writing paper, graceful clothing, nutritious foods, non-polluting fuels, and even earth- friendly plastics are made from the humble hemp plant - and Bob Barr doesn't like it one tiny bit!

Never mind that hemp has been used to make maritime, farm, industrial and household products for thousands of years.  Never mind that such American icons as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson cultivated hemp as a major cash crop.  Never mind that the Declaration of Independence itself was drafted on hemp paper.  Never mind that hemp would be a profitable, environmentally sound crop for family farmers today.  Never mind all this, says His Bobness, because "Hemp and marijuana both come from the same plant."

Hello...Bob.  Bread and beer both come from the same plant, and I don't hear you ranting about taking wheat products off the nation's shelves.

Yet that's exactly what he and our thuggish Drug Enforcement Agency ( DEA ), are calling for in regard to cosmetics and foods made of hemp - banning them from sale here in the Land of the Free.  Hey, knuckleheads, get a clue.

While hemp is a biological cousin of marijuana, it is NOT a drug or hallucinogen.  You couldn't get high on it if you ate an entire extra- large hemp sweatshirt or smoked a 30-foot hemp rope.

Barr and the DEA are examples of "drug war" idiocy in action. 


Note: Radio talk-show host and author Jim Hightower is a former agricultural commissioner of Texas. His latest book, "If The Gods Had Meant Us To Vote, They Would Have Given Us Candidates" (Harper- Collins), has just been released in a fully revised and updated paperback edition.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #10 posted by The GCW on February 21, 2002 at 06:14:35 PT
Truth is good, at the very minimum.
A deluding influence equates a plant given to us by our Father, as "drug". Throught prayer, the Holy Spirit of Truth can reveal what cannabis actually is: a plant, not a drug.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 7:29 AM Subject: Opening Session of Kansas

> Senate Prayer > > > > > > > > > > I thought you would find this article interesting. > This actually happened in Kansas at the opening session of their Senate. > It > seems prayer still upsets some people. > When Minister Joe Wright was asked to open the new session of the Kansas > Senate, everyone was expecting the usual generalities, but this is what > they > heard: > "Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask your forgiveness and > to seek your direction and guidance. > We know Your Word says, "Woe to those who call evil good," but that is > exactly what we have done. > We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and reversed our values. > We confess that. We have ridiculed the absolute truth of Your Word . . > .and > called it Pluralism. > We have exploited the poor . . . and called it the lottery. > We have rewarded laziness . . . and called it welfare. > We have killed our unborn . . . and called it choice. > We have shot abortionists . . . and called it justifiable. > We have neglected to discipline our children . . .and called it building > self-esteem. > We have abused power . . . and called it politics. > We have coveted our neighbor's possession . . .and called it ambition. > We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography . . . and called > it > freedom of expression. > We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers . . .and > called > it enlightenment. > Search us, Oh, God, and know our hearts today; cleanse us from every sin > and > set us free. > Guide and bless these men and women who have been sent: to direct us to > the > center of Your will and to openly ask these things in the name of Your > Son, > the living Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen!" > The response was immediate. > A number of legislators walked out during the prayer in protest. > In 6 short weeks, Central Christian Church, where Rev. Wright is pastor, > logged more than 5,000 phone calls with only 47 of those calls > responding negatively. The church is now receiving international > requests for copies > of this prayer from India, Africa, and Korea. > Commentator Paul Harvey aired this prayer on his radio program, "The > Rest of > the Story," and received a larger response to this program than any > other he > has ever aired. > With the Lord's help, may this prayer sweep over our nation and > wholeheartedly become our desire so that we again can be called "one > nation > under God." > If possible, please pass this prayer on to your friends. > "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for everything." > One could also add to this: In a society where anything goes, eventually > everything will. >



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #9 posted by Jose Melendez on February 21, 2002 at 06:11:33 PT:

thanks JR Bob Dobbs
sent to: am@cnn.com

Bill Bennett is a perfect choice to discuss drugs, addiction and campaign finance reform.

Especially since he is addicted to cigarettes, and habitually speaks out dishonestly against safe, legal marijuana.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #8 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on February 21, 2002 at 06:05:02 PT
So...
... I know what a cannabis farm smells like (and have occasionally wondered while driving, "Did somebody hit a skunk, or is that an indoor grow op I'm smellin'?")... but what does a meth lab smell like?

Also: Email for American Morning at CNN is am@cnn.com - be sure to let them know what you think about Bill Bennett. Encourage them to have drug-law reform activists on to give a balanced and fair debate on the issue!

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #7 posted by Mari on February 21, 2002 at 05:49:04 PT:

Buff Lamb
Hey BGREEN, how long since you were in Christian Co.? I've lived there for the past 11 years. I wouldn't set foot in that county as long as Buff was sheriff. Do you remember when Buff busted a beer party and the headlines read " 29 captured, 1 escaped "? My husband was the one that escaped!I remember, during the summer especially, Buff would go around and 'arrest' guys and then offer them the choice of working on his farm or staying in jail. After the 'prisoners' had finished whatever chores Buff needed done, he'd feed them and turn them loose. No charges, no judge. Every person I know from around here has a Buff Lamb horror story from their youth. That man HATED teenagers.By the way, he died a few weeks ago.

To be fair as to the new jail, the old one was a nightmare! Unsafe for prisoners, staff or visitors. Also, Maddax is talking ' tough on drugs ' but pot is NOT a high priority. ( I have a friend in a deputy there. No busts, just serves papers). Right now in Christian Co. any possession of 35gms or less is a ticket offence; $150.00 fine including court costs. Meth is the drug they focas on now. You can drive down almost any country road around here in the warm months and smell it cooking. About the only time a grow gets busted is when then accidently find it while looking for meth.

I am happy to see this editorial in our paper and I hope it sparks some lively and truthful debate.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #6 posted by freedom fighter on February 21, 2002 at 01:21:09 PT
Bennett??
Hmm,, in a way it is a good news.

We only have to remember what he said in past.

He actually thought it was a good idea to behead drug users.

I only hope that many will remember what he said back then.

ff

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #5 posted by BGreen on February 21, 2002 at 00:55:01 PT:

No Coincidence
Donna Osborn was the author of both pieces. The editorial above seems to be a response to the story about the sniveling whiners of the COMET drug task force.

It's usually the case that the editorial would have been used as a psuedo-sidebar to a story like this to heap praises on the prohibitionists, especially in such a small-town newspaper, so I see a HUGE slap in the face to Sheriff Matlock and all of the other terrorists mentioned.

I used to visit the county seat of Christian County when I was a teenager back in the 1970's. The sheriff at the time was a loser named Buff Lamb. Many of my friends met the flashlight wielding sheriff and his deputies, but the flashlights weren't turned on.

The square in the town of Ozark was the place that kids would go after smoking a joint, driving in circles checking out the opposite sex in some sort of innocent teenage mating ritual.

Buff Lamb, swearing all the worlds problems were because of the "dope smokers," made a big deal out of his busts. There was a lot of cannabis grown in the hills, so when they stumbled upon some, they'd put it on a trailer and display it on the courthouse lawn. The weekly issue of the county paper would show Buff and his loser deputies posing by the haul like they had just killed Bonnie and Clyde.

25 years later, same war, still losing, different media focus - meth, same real focus - cannabis. This editorial made me feel pretty good, knowing the history of the press in Christian County, Missouri.

By the way, Christian County just opened up a brand new jail to lock up all the cannabis smokers, so it's no wonder these evil people want to perpetuate this senseless war on the innocent, miraculous cannabis plant and it's partakers.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #4 posted by CorvallisEric on February 20, 2002 at 23:39:56 PT
coincidence?
In the same online issue of this newspaper (from the county south of Springfield MO) is an article:

Christian County Sheriff Joey Matlock, on the executive board of the Combined Ozarks Multijurisdictional Enforcement Team, said the organization is losing funds and people because of recent legislation passed in Missouri.......

State constitution requires forfeitures to go to education. New law prevents some shenanigans with Feds. Not a word of connection between the two stories. Look for COMET's funding unsure. "Drug Drama" can be found under News -- Editorial.


[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #3 posted by p4me on February 20, 2002 at 22:14:20 PT
out of control
I remember looking for the FBI crime statistics in the paper last year. I never did see in the paper the news of the 732,498 arrest for marijuana. I also have never seen anything on the situation with property forfeitures. Why isn't there some report that we can consult for last year's forfeitures. And do you not think that confiscation is a better word? These people did not forfeit there property. They had their property confiscated.

It is not right. Then again it is not right that we let heartless dumbasses that are our politicians deprive us of our freedom. The country is out of control and if people would quit subscribing to CNN and cable, Time and news magazines, and their local paper maybe the media companies would figure out they had better practice some real journalism.

If you buy journalism from the mainstream media, then you are a prohibitionist. That sounds a little harsh but it also has a ring of truth to it.

VAAI. When in doubt, votem out.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #2 posted by FoM on February 20, 2002 at 21:31:01 PT
Robbie
Paula Zahn and William Bennett talking about evil drugs. I can see it all now. Unbelievable. Drugs are bad. Yes, I know drugs are bad. Yes and evil too. Yes and evil too.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #1 posted by Robbie on February 20, 2002 at 21:07:34 PT
OT: CNN loses all hope of journalistic integrity
CNN self-destruction watch

CNN News Release 2/20/2002

William Bennett to join CNN as contributor Former secretary of education, drug czar to provide insight on social, cultural issues

William Bennett is joining CNN as a network contributor, it was announced today by Sid Bedingfield, newly promoted executive editor of the CNN News Group. Dr. Bennett, co-director of Empower America and former secretary of education and director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, will offer his commentary on social and cultural issues, primarily on American Morning with Paula Zahn. Starting Monday, March 4, Dr. Bennett will work out of CNN's Washington, D.C., bureau. He will also contribute to other CNN programming.

---------------------

*ahem* BLEEEEACCCCCH!!! Man, that's just sick.

[ 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 February 20, 2002 at 21:04:30