***

After decades of the "war on drugs," with its draconian criminal prohibitions and intensive law enforcement, drugs are more available than ever. This episode of The ACLU Freedom Files will focus on the war's unintended consequences—urban violence, the imprisonment of innocents, and families destroyed by irrational sentences—and show the suffering that has resulted from the suppression of valuable research.

Guilty for Being Black

In the town of Hearne, Texas, 15% of the young African American men were arrested on drug charges in 2000, based on the word of one unreliable informant. Many were intimidated into pleading guilty and are still in jail, despite the fact that the charges were dropped.

Science Stifled

A woman whose terrible seizures were helped by marijuana got a license from the state of California to grow it. Nevertheless, the federal government raided her farm and arrested her and her husband. Meanwhile, doctors who want to recommend cannabis to patients with terminal cancer and AIDS are forbidden from doing so, while scientists are prevented from studying the health benefits of drugs.

Our Newest Orphans

The Lomax sisters know firsthand the effects of mandatory minimum sentences. Their mother was sentenced to 27 years in prison for conspiracy to distribute cocaine, although no drugs were ever found on her. Left without a mother, these children are just three of the millions of orphans of the drug war.

Spread the Word

Become part of the movement to protect civil liberties! Join millions of viewers who are watching The ACLU Freedom Files. To help get the message out and receive a free DVD, join the Freedom Files Producers Club: All you have to do is organize a screening or spread the word about the programs via email or the Web.

Exposing the 9/11 inside job is the surest way to expose the criminals in both parties and bring about the rise of third parties, which are our only hope. Can we expose them before another "terror attack" dwarfs 9/11? That is the big question. It's do or die, for if there is another attack all freedom is lost.

The neo-cons are going for all the marbles and they must invade Iran or the whole PNAC agenda falls apart. The thing is, Bush has zero credibility and Americans aren't ready for another war. Besides that, we don't have the military to invade a mountainous country three times the size of Iraq whose military hasn't been decimated. How will the war mongers get both soldiers and support? The next attack will likely make 9/11 look like child's play. They will make everyone once again think, "Our government would never do that to it's own people."

They did it once, they can do it again.

The Republicans have been doing a heckuva job. They've got the power. That's all they've got. You would think they would have the brains to do things honestly, but they don't. They wouldn't have us in the pickle we're in if they did.

The one thing they can't do? Have a drug free America. They can't do it and they never will be able to do it.

It can't be done. Smoke some cannabis.

Belongs in the eternal Night sky,

OK, they've added 1980s to their claim, but the testing data they always cite is from the 1970s. Reliable data starts in 1980:

http://www.druglibrary.org/SCHAFFER/hemp/general/mjmyth/Exposing_02_1095.html

If marijuana today is 10 times more potent than in the 1980s, it contains 30% THC. Where can I get some?

"The bill says marijuana's psychoactive ingredient, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol or THC, is far more potent and dangerous today, especially for young people."

Can all these human beings on this planet agree that this is the place that mankind has wrought, is this what scholars in the future must understand?

I hope that everybody on this planet can inhale that balm for the 'mind, that blessed revelation, that sits in front of your eyes, as you wonder, about 'eternity, have a gentle hand, as you witness, this world, and the many 'worlds that have given birth to the eyes that behold the Light in this 'Night.

We all know what happened - bed ridden MS patients cuffed to their beds.

So I don't know what to think anymore.

Almost immdiately after that, the Kerry Website was bombarded with reformers offering their votes if the issue would finally be taken seriously for the incredibly important matter it was. The "Miscellaneous' section contained more postings than all the others, and those from reformers. The writing was on the wall in big block letters 5 stories high and in neon orange paint - if Dems supported reform, they'd win.

They didn't support reform. They dismissed the offers for help with chirpy vacuousness more suitable for patting 'developmentally challenged' children on the head, with a reminder to not forget 'to vote for Kerry!'.

I knew when Kucinich didn't get the nomination that we would be doomed to more Republican rule, for the Dems were simply too castrated to risk the controversy such a move would have created (Kucinich was the most vocal of all the contenders in favor of reform). They are so timid, so frightened of their own shadows, so craven, that they were afraid to extend an olive branch to those who would have seen to it they would have tasted sweet victory. Instead, they taste nothing but ashes.

The social effects of drug law reform are so incredibly wide reaching and deep that they affect every aspect of society. A return to the kind of freedoms our grandparents had with regards to drug law reform would have ramification far outside the immediate one of not being hounded/arrested/shot for engaging in behavior that harms no one, not even yourself. Such freedom is infectious, for it penetrates more than the moment, but echoes onwards.

But such freedom is anathema to the minions of The State, for it returns the power back where it belongs, and takes it from the hands of those whose agendas require it being wielded over your head like a club. I mean, what if the plebs (that's you and me, folks) might get it into their heads that they want other freedoms back...like determining how their tax dollars get spent!

The Republicans have pawned their ideological souls to the Devil. The Dems tried, but the Repubs offered ol' Lucifer a sweeter deal. Both parties deserve no further chances. It would take an iron clad contract of enormous punitive potential for breaking it on the part of the Dems to deal forthrightly with the drug law reform issue before I'd ever recommend supporting them again. By refusing to hear us out, they lived up to the reputation of their mascot, and I'm through dealing with asses.

(excerpted)

Key findings include:

-Of the 450,000 increase in drug arrests during the period 1990-2002, 82% of the growth was for marijuana, and 79% was for marijuana possession alone;

-Marijuana arrests now constitute nearly half (45%) of the 1.5 million drug arrests annually;

-Few marijuana arrests are for serious offending: of the 734,000 marijuana arrests in 2000, only 41,000 (6%) resulted in a felony conviction;

-Marijuana arrests increased by 113% between 1990 and 2002, while overall arrests decreased by 3%;

-New York City experienced an 882% growth in marijuana arrests, including an increase of 2,461% for possession offenses;

-African Americans are disproportionately affected by marijuana arrests, representing 14% of marijuana users in the general population, but 30% of arrests;

-One-third of persons convicted for a marijuana felony in state court are sentenced to prison;

-One in four persons in prison for a marijuana offense an estimated 6,600 persons can be classified as a low-level offender;

-An estimated $4 billion is spent annually on the arrest, prosecution and incarceration of marijuana offenders.

The findings in this report call for a national discussion regarding the zealous prosecution of marijuana use and its consequences for allocation of criminal justice resources and public safety. Law enforcement has focused disproportionately on low-level possession charges as a result of the nation's lack of a thoughtful strategy about how best to address the consequences of marijuana use. Consequently, police spend a significant amount of time arresting marijuana users, many of whom do not merit being charged in court. This diverts efforts away from more significant criminal activity while having no appreciable impact on marijuana cost, availability, or use. As state and federal resources become more limited, a rational consideration of the most efficient way to address marijuana use is critical; this discussion should take place outside the realm of political rhetoric. The findings in this study can inform that conversation with sound, empirical analysis of more than a decade's worth of data on the criminal justice system's treatment of marijuana offenders.

Most cities are massively liberal politically. New York state is Democratic overall, but not by much. Within New York city, registered Democrats outnumber Republicans 5 to 1! That says a lot.

It's hard to be hateful & fearful of other people when you're living right in with 10 million of them. Above you, below you, next to you, on the sidewalks, at work. Out in the suburbs, you don't see the other people. Suburbs breed intolerance. Everyone is off in their own little castle.

I think the move to suburbs by most people is driving intolerance. Nobody in NYC sues their neighbor's kid for bouncing a basketball too loudly.

My main beef is not with any party but with our election system. I don't know what it is, but it's not even close to fair representation. If 4% of the country votes for the Green Party, then 4% of the seats in Congress should go to the Green Party.

If a candidate doesn't win 50% of the vote, then run-off elections should continue, narrowing the field until someone gets 50%. In primaries and general elections.

It's very simple, this isn't rocket science, this is grade-school stuff. If the 2 changes above happened, we would find out very quickly that we are NOT a 2-party, red-blue country at all. We are a huge diversity of opinions and attitudes.

These changes are hardly radical, they're the norm in most other "Democratic" countries. Even in places like the Ukraine and Israel. Germany. the list goes on and on. But here we are with our oceans, and the masses glued to the TV and Walmart. Europe may not even exist as far as most Americans are concerned. United We Stand baby!

What's even more interesting is that most other countries routinely change the way elections & governments are formed. We seem to mired in status quo-ism. Nobody wants to reform anything, it's too easy to use your vast fortune to just buy what you want.

Ah yes, Reagan, the Republican who stuck to "weekend wars". I can't believe I actually miss anything from the Reagan years. But he did at least pick fights (Grenada, Panama, etc) that would be over in a couple of days.

I wish that some Alaskan would publicly challenge this rhetoric that pot is so much more potent than 30 years ago.

30 years ago or even two thousand years ago high THC hashish was readily available, so the idea that better breeding has made available a 'new' drug is simply political balderdash.

I had an interesting revelation recently. Someone was telling me not to expect a whole lot of drug policy progress in the next few years. Why? Because George Soros and other left-leaning donors are sending all money toward getting Bush out of the White House. i.e., donating toward Democratic campaigns instead of MPP, Drug Policy Alliance, etc.

So look at it from the DNC's point of view. Clinton is in office. George Soros gives big bucks to MPP and DPA, specifically to fight AGAINST Democratic drug policy.

Now, Bush is in office. Soros takes the money AWAY from MPP and DPA, and gives big bucks directly to the DNC for 8 years running, trying to get Bush out.

So, does the DNC really hate the fact that Bush is in the White House, or not? Do they really, really, want to take that White House back? Follow the money. A crazy right-wing president is the perfect foil for them. All they have to do is sit back & relax while all the liberals throw money at them.

Obviously no one knows for sure, I'm just trying to fit all the pieces together. Trying to guess why they picked Kerry, somone who is barely able to get elected in the most Democratic state in the US, when they had a bonified military General war hero to run against Bush & Cheney.

Someone wrote an essay yesterday which I think puts this in a context that might make my perspective more clear.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/callahan/callahan154.html

"Picture yourself wandering into a hall within which a large, all-male crowd has assembled, each man present anxious to argue his position on the subject of wife beating. Some attendees defend their right to beat their spouse whenever she has been annoying. Others regard that stance as too permissive, asserting that wives should only be assaulted over more important matters such as, for example, family finances. Yet a third faction holds that spousal abuse is only justified in the most vital cases and only if no less onerous means can guarantee the desirable outcome: for instance, when one’s wife will not contribute as much as one believes she ought to the family’s security."

Governor Murkowski et al just want to get their own way. It makes them mad when they can't. Give them all a rattle and a bottle of mother's milk.