cannabisnews.com: The Raw and Ugly Truth About The War on Drugs










  The Raw and Ugly Truth About The War on Drugs

Posted by CN Staff on August 17, 2005 at 06:01:01 PT
By Mike Adams, Health Ranger 
Source: NewsTarget Network 

USA -- Drugs are bad. Drugs destroy peoples' lives. Didn't you know that marijuana turns regular everyday people into zombie pot smokers? That's why we have a war on drugs in America: to protect our children from potheads. Drugs are bad. Especially marijuana. I learned this the other day when I visited an elementary school as a guest speaker. The schoolchildren were well trained in describing the dangers of drugs. On command, they would spout out any number of statements describing them.
But then a funny thing happened. I started asking how many of them were on drugs. You know, drugs their doctor prescribed. Drugs that alter brain chemistry to keep them docile, or free of pain, or to dilate their lungs so they could breathe easier. It turned out that 60% of these schoolchildren were either on drugs at that very moment, or had been on such drugs within the last twelve months. Two-thirds of the teachers were on drugs, too. And it's not at all a stretch to believe that 40% or more of all parents are on drugs. Mild-altering drugs like antidepressants, no less. A Nation of Drug AddictsFact is, we are a nation of drug addicts. We drug ourselves, our elderly and our children on a daily basis. We do it with prescription medications, over-the-counter pills, alcohol, caffeine, nicotine... and we say it's all fine because those drugs are legal. But wait a minute, you say. Those legal drugs are different from marijuana. They're FDA-approved drugs, prescribed by a doctor. They have a medical purpose. Oh really? Ritalin has a medical purpose? What medical symptoms does Ritalin treat, then? What measurable physiological state is addressed with Ritalin? There are none, of course. Ritalin is an authority drug. It keeps children in line. It makes teachers feel less stress and parents feel less guilt. Ritalin is a mind-altering narcotic, and yet millions of children are on it today. Its purpose is not to help children, but to make life more convenient for those who manage children. You think statin drugs have a medical purpose? Think again. In reality, they only have a profit purpose. These drugs were invented to sell pills that manage disease states in people, not that solve any real health problem. Don't believe me? Just stop taking your statin drugs, if you dare, and watch your cholesterol skyrocket. You'll find out you're a slave to the drug, and no healthier than before. What's The Difference Between Legal and Illegal Drugs?So what's the real difference between legal drugs and illegal drugs? Some people think that only illegal drugs are habit-forming. Yet legal drugs can be just as addictive as illegal drugs. Just ask anyone who has tried to quit smoking, go off caffeine, or kick to Oxycontin habit.So is there some other difference between illegal drugs and legal drugs? People argue that legal drugs are safe. They're FDA-approved! And yet they fail to recognize that prescription drugs kill more Americans each year than all the crack, meth, and heroin deaths combined. Okay, then, what about the argument that illegal drugs have no medicinal purpose, and legal drugs do have a medicinal purpose. What about that? Wrong again. Medical marijuana is a medically proven treatment for a variety of conditions, yet marijuana still remains illegal. Even MDMA (now called "Ecstasy" on the street) was long considered an effective "experiential drug" that helped severely traumatized adult patients overcome past pains through improved clarity. At the same time, tobacco smoke has no medical purpose whatsoever, yet cigarettes remain perfectly legal. No, the real difference between these two classes of drugs is not their medical merit, nor their safety. The real difference is something far more sinister. It gets right down to answering the question of why DEA agents will raid medical marijuana clinics, yet stand by doing nothing while Americans smoke themselves to death on tobacco. Want to know the real answer? I very much doubt you do. Because, like most Americans, you won't believe it. You've been blinded to the obvious truth for your whole life, manipulated by the media, and brainwashed by advertising that has turned you into a statistically-validated consumer. You'll think, no, this couldn't possibly be true. The world isn't that unjust, you think. But you're wrong. (Take the free Gullibility Factor test to find out if you're really a mind slave or not...) Here's the raw, blunt truth about the war on drugs. Drugs are declared legal or illegal based primarily on who benefits from their manufacture, distribution and sale. Corporate and Government Profits Determine The LegalityLet me put this another way. You know why cigarettes are still legal? Consider this: here's a product that admittedly kills people. It has no health benefit whatsoever. It is a threat to the public health. Yet why does it remain legal? Because states get a cut of cigarette sales thanks to the Big Tobacco settlement a few years back. Keeping cigarettes legal results in desperately-needed revenues for states... revenues that are almost never spent on anti-smoking campaigns, by the way. It's a classic racket: tobacco is allowed to remain legal because powerful institutions get a cut of the action. While people die from lung cancer, states get financial resuscitation by taking a cut of every sale. States are trading your health for their revenues. Think I'm being overly cynical? Let's take a look at gambling laws. Organized gambling is illegal at both the state and federal levels in this country. Except, of course, when government gets a cut. Casino-friendly states didn't just make casinos legal for the good of the public: they legalized gambling in exchange for a cut of the action. It's a classic, mob-style "protection fee." If you want to test this theory, launch your own online gambling website. You'll be shut down almost immediately and charged with serious crimes. Gambling and organized betting is illegal, didn't you know? That is, unless the state runs the show, as in state lotteries. It's right in your face, folks: gambling is legal when powerful corporations or institutions get a piece of the action. It's illegal when they don't. It has nothing at all to do with morality, or protecting people, or doing what's right. It's all about money, pure and simple. Just ask all the corrupt politicians in Missouri who legalized riverboat gambling a few years back. Getting back to drugs, why do you think alcohol remains a legal drug? Because states and cities tax it. State governments are addicted to alcoholics as a source of revenue to fund their voter entitlement programs that get politicians reelected. Alcohol is a cash machine for cities and states. With all that in mind, why do you think prescription drugs that kill people remain legal? Think carefully now... If you guessed, "Because powerful corporations generate billions in profits selling drugs, and governments get a cut of that via state sales taxes and corporate income taxes" then BINGO! You win a prize: a lifetime of free Prozac to keep you happy! Legal Drugs Generate Windfall Profits for Those in PowerThink about it: if prescription drugs were peddled by street dealers instead of doctors, and if all that revenue changed hands in a non-taxable, non-corporate structure (i.e. street cash), then you'd be seeing full-scale law enforcement action against the makers, distributors and sellers of those drugs. You'd also see endless headlines about how dangerous they were: "Street painkillers kill twelve in South Miami!" The sad truth of the matter, though, is that those very same painkilling drugs killed at least twelve people in South Miami this very day. But you'll never here about it in the media. Because the news networks are sponsored by drug companies, of course. (The news is not designed to inform you, it's designed to shape your reality, to turn you into a consumer of whatever products the corporations are peddling this year. Didn't you know?) Every drug that's legal is legal for one simple reason: somebody in a position of power is keeping it legal because they're getting a cut. Non-Patentable Drugs are Usually OutlawedThat's why medical marijuana is illegal: because government doesn't control its distribution, nor does government receive a financial cut. You can bet your life that if Big Pharma owned the patents on medical marijuana and could set monopolistic prices on it, pot would be perfectly legal to own and smoke. That is, as long as you got it from a pharmacy where prices and distribution could be controlled. Control is the key here. You think the FDA is discrediting drugs from Canada in order to protect your health? Get real. The FDA is simply protecting the monopoly drug market in this country. It's controlling distribution points in the U.S. in the same way that a crack dealer assassinates his street corner competition. Eliminate the competition, and you can set whatever price you want. That's why uninformed U.S. consumers pay 30,000% markup prices for drugs that can be acquired in Mexico or Canada for pennies on the dollar. It's Not About Your Health, It's About Their WealthYou see, corporate America doesn't really care what you put in your mouth, up your nose, through your lungs or into your veins, as long as they get a cut from it. That's the whole prescription drug racket in a nutshell: it's billions of dollars in annual profits generated from mind-altering (yet legal) drugs that flat-out kill people. Lots of people. Like 100,000 Americans a year (or a lot more if you believe more critical statistics). So if you've ever wondered why Ritalin -- which has no medical purpose whatsoever -- is perfectly legal, and yet medical marijuana -- which has a well-proven medical purpose -- is outlawed, now you know the answer: because Ritalin makes powerful people rich. And marijuana doesn't. Anybody can grow marijuana. Drug companies don't control the patents. Why I Teach People To Be 100% Drug FreeNow, just for the record, I do not personally use any drugs whatsoever (recreational, over-the-counter, prescription or otherwise), and in fact, I teach people to be 100% free of all drugs, including caffeine and alcohol. I bought into the "just say no to drugs" advice of Nancy Reagan, and I actually applied it to ALL drugs, not just selective drugs. And as far as I can tell, aside from the Mormons and the Amish, there are only a small percentage of truly drug-free people living in this country. Practically everybody I meet is addicted to at least one of the following: coffee, cigarettes, alcohol, pain meds, prescription drugs or sugar (which alters brain chemistry in drug-like fashion). At the same time, I'm not at all fooled by this silly "War on Drugs" charade, which is really nothing more than enforcement of corporate drug profits at gunpoint. If we had a genuine war on drugs in this country that really worked to protect the American people we'd send DEA agents into drug company offices and confiscate all the legalized but deadly medications being manufactured, distributed and deceptively sold to unwitting Americans today. Medical marijuana is a threat to both the profits and power of drug companies, not to mention the credibility of the DEA. Letting grannies smoke pot in California makes DEA agents look silly. If it were allowed, it would also undermine the billions of dollars already spent incarcerating people for "pot crimes." Basically, it would make the whole War on Drugs look stupid. Which it most assuredly is, at least when it comes to marijuana. I can understand taking a tough stance on hard drugs (crack, meth, heroin, etc.), but arresting cancer patients who smoke joints for pain control sounds a lot more like oppression than law enforcement to me. So what is the War on Drugs? It's an excuse to control you. It is a system that keeps the population in a state of constant fear so that heroic politicians can get elected on empty promises to "keep fighting the war on drugs!" The DEA is AWOL On Most Drug IssuesWhere is this War on Drugs when it comes to Grandma in the nursing home, who died of a stroke caused by Cox-2 inhibitor drugs? Where is the War on Drugs when little Johnny schoolboy picks up a rifle and blows away his classmates because he's on antidepressants and can't tell the difference between real life and a first-person-shooter video game? Where is the War on Drugs when 16,500 people each year die, shitting digested blood until they pass out and die because that daily dose of aspirin tore a gaping hole in their stomach? The War on Drugs, you see, turns a blind eye to the death and suffering caused by these drugs. The DEA pretends prescription drugs don't even exist. No prescription drug death has ever been prevented by the DEA as far as I know. Yet 100,000 Americans are killed each year by FDA-approved drugs. The DEA has no interest whatsoever in protecting Americans from these drugs. Ever wonder why? The DEA is properly named, by the way. It's the Drug Enforcement Agency. It's enforcing drugs. The right drugs. The legal drugs. The drugs that make money for drug companies, drug distributors, drug retailers, cities, states and countries. It's enforcement at gunpoint, and as long as the money keeps flowing, the drugs will stay perfectly legal, regardless of who dies. The entire distribution system is well in place: the false and misleading television advertising, the outright bribery of drug dealers (doctors), the street corner fulfillment centers (pharmacies), and the coordinating drug lord running the show (the Fraud and Drug Administration). It's a brilliant system for manufacturing, promoting, delivering and selling deadly, addictive drugs to children, adults and seniors while generating corporate profits and tax revenues for cities, states and nations. And that's the raw truth about the War on Drugs. You may not like it, but now, at least, you know why it exists. So I have a common sense question for all the people in this country. If you support the War on Drugs, then why are you taking so many drugs yourself? And why are you allowing your children to be drugged? Source: NewsTarget Network (Taiwan)Author: Mike Adams, Health Ranger Published: August 15, 2005Copyright: 2005 NewsTarget Network Website: http://www.newstarget.com/URL: http://www.newstarget.com/010944.htmlContact: http://www.newstarget.com/feedback.htmlCannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #35 posted by lawdog4jane on November 23, 2005 at 17:19:07 PT:
Sheep,
I see a problem with people being so brain washed in this country that no matter what, they support the war against drugs. To support law-enforcement isn't a bad thing. It's when these brain washed idiots hear of some guy in their neighborhood, that a Swat team busted down his door in the wee hours of the morning, and ended up shooting and killing all over a couple a joints, they rejoice. These people claim that justice has been served, and bake cookies for the officers. These people have forgotten that Nazis acted the same way! Beware people this country is become pre 1988 East Berlin! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #34 posted by bradbits on August 22, 2005 at 14:00:31 PT
Ode to Ganja
My friend Bud, your name is mud among the world elite;
who struggle for worldly power and forego the mercy seat.They call the shots for the haves and have-nots 
yet Bud is not their friend.
Like pearls before swine, or grapes of the vine, 
they'll crush you to the end.They tip their hand, showing their grandiose plan, 
to own our hearts and our minds.
Together they are Babylon the great.
She is a jealous kind.This whore is full of lies, and built on loads of crap.
But Bud shows us the truth, and warns us of their trap.
And lets us smell the stench of that evil whore.
Who would enslave the world, who just wants more and more.Bud shows us that their way is not the only one,
and that they just can't stand.
And so they war against the holy herb
with shows of power grand.But goodness prevails after all the travails,
and truth wins in the end.
After Babylon destroys itself and a third of the world,
Bud will have his rightful place when life begins again.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #33 posted by legalizeit on August 21, 2005 at 13:18:56 PT
Re: #29 and #19
I once read Alpert and Cohen's great book, "LSD," and they had laid out an entire framework for psychedelic "training." I don't remember the exact terminology or whether it was the same as Leary's idea, but I do recall the term "Internal Flights" being used and an analogy to licensing for piloting an airplane.In theory this is a great idea, but if the government were to manage a program like that it would be blown out of proportion like any other such program, and would be an exercise in insanity to conform to.I still think that a psychedelic renaissance is in our future. It may be decades away or maybe not, but a time will come when people en masse revisit these wonderful, unbelievably powerful, life-changing sacraments and use them for serious self-exploration and enlightenment. There is a reason for why they exist throughout nature and why they have the effects they do. We just haven't figured that out yet, and to blindly declare them "illegal" and discourage research and personal exploration across the board is the worst thing that we could have done.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by 420 on August 21, 2005 at 01:06:08 PT
Drugs in America or America on drugs?
Most drugs in america are bad F.D.A approved or not but one thing noticable is the death counts and facts that need to have a say in every discusion they have about what they think is right for us.I know that they think that the number of users on meth is less than 1/10 of the users on marijuana, yet they realize meth is out in three days compared to up to up to ninety days with marijuana.Do you think people on a survey would admit to doing meth? Since the urine tests come up clean for meth users they have job opportunities and a freedom from law that this government is creating.Meth has killed so many more people than marijuana it makes you wonder why they think Meth users are so few when its obvious they dont get caught.If one of us could get in their after a study on the facts we could have some words with the rule makers and change the World with Truth and expose they're misconstrued perseptions.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by john wayne on August 18, 2005 at 14:20:17 PT
no need to draw parallels between ritalin and meth
Because methamphetamine itself is prescribed to children.http://www.psyweb.com/Drughtm/desoxyn.htmlMethamphetamine ( Desoxyn )Methamphetamine ( Desoxyn ) an amphetamine used to treat narcolepsy and attention-deficit-disorder in children. In some cases but rare this drug is used to treat depression. This drug is from a family of drugs known as central nervous system stimulants.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by Nick Thimmesch on August 18, 2005 at 13:11:05 PT:
Hold the...
clenbuterol, lots of mustard & pickles on my Heroinburger, please:US heroin users exposed to dangerous additive -CDC
Aug 18 2:35 PM US/Eastern  
By Paul SimaoATLANTA (Reuters) - A drug that promotes lean muscle growth in cattle may be turning up in heroin on the U.S. East Coast, sickening users and stoking fears of a wave of such poisonings, U.S. health officials said on Thursday.Traces of clenbuterol were found in the urine of eight reported heroin users who became ill in New York and Connecticut in the first three months of 2005, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a weekly health report.Clenbuterol, which is legal in some countries but not in the United States, has also been linked to 18 other cases that surfaced in New York and four states along the Atlantic coast around the same time, according to the report.Many of those sickened developed dangerously rapid heart rates and palpitations, chest pain and hypotension. The majority said they had snorted rather than injected what they thought was heroin before becoming sick."The 26 cases described in this report likely represent a fraction of actual cases of clenbuterol poisoning," the CDC said in its report, the first published investigation into the problem.The Atlanta-based federal agency, however, said it was possible that those sickened earlier this year had taken pure clenbuterol that was sold to them as heroin.It urged health care providers, especially those working in emergency departments, and others dealing with heroin users to be aware of the typical symptoms associated with ingestion of clenbuterol.The warning came one week after six people died of apparent heroin overdoses in lower Manhattan.Heroin use in the United States exploded in the 1990s, in part due to the development of purer forms of the drug, which made it easier for users to get high by snorting the powder rather than by heating and injecting it.An estimated 3.7 million people in the United States reported having tried heroin and more than 119,000 of them had used the drug within the previous month, according to a 2003 survey by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/08/18/MTFH75112_2005-08-18_18-43-08_EIC867395
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by afterburner on August 18, 2005 at 09:22:04 PT
RE #19
"I was thinking that legal psychedelic use need be in the presence of one who is a licensed trip-sitter; i.e., they have taken a course on how to manage someone who is tripping, and have pledged to be that person's conscience while they may be in another dimension, or to call for restraint if the person becomes out of control. A sufficient trip sitter could also be a licensed psychiatrist, or an ordained church that practices psychedelic use."Timothy Leary proposed such a licensing program for responsible use of psychedelics back in the 1960's. It's about time people listened."Also, say you go to a bar where cannabis smoking is allowed. People have their roaches burning in ashtrays. As a result, the air is full of cannabis smoke. You went in to talk to some friends, but now you are intoxicated just from being in the area. Wouldn't it be a good idea to require businesses that permit cannabis smoking to have a warning sign present due to the possibility of involuntary intoxication?" The Up in Smoke Cafe, which is celebrating its First Anniversary this Saturday, 20.August.2005 in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, has had such a sign nearly the entire time it has been open: "Warning: This Store Contains Marijuana Smoke." The list of "hazards" is amusing."THE TWO COMMANDMENTS FOR THE MOLECULAR AGE"I. Thou shalt not alter the consciousness of thy fellow man."II. Thou shalt not prevent thy fellow man from altering his own consciousness." --p.81, The Politics of Ecstasy [the state of mind, not the club/therapeutic drug MMDA], by Timothy Leary, published by Paladin, London, Great Britain: 1970; copyright 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968 by the League for Spiritual Discovery, Inc. and 1966 by HMH Publishing Inc. (Playboy magazine) 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by Celaya on August 18, 2005 at 08:13:03 PT
Hope
Yep. I thought it was priceless. Even in the darkest times, some biting humor can light the way. Sometimes I think this fraudulent marijuana prohibition should just be ridiculed to death 8^)
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by FoM on August 18, 2005 at 08:01:14 PT
Portion of Globe and Mail Article
Trade and security are the No. 1 issues for the ambassador. Lately, Canada has been imploring him to do something about U.S. handguns heading north, but Mr. Wilkins says Canada has to curtail some of its own illicit goods. "The marijuana is going south to be traded for the guns coming back north," he said. "So the more that can be done to stop the flow of marijuana the better it will enhance the control of weapons coming into Canada." http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050818/WILKINS18/TPNational/TopStories
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by Hope on August 18, 2005 at 07:35:22 PT
Celaya, that was great! Thanks!
"When advised that U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was demanding immediate action, the judges, who emerged from their quarters wearing tie-dyed robes and looking clearly euphoric, issued a public statement suggesting that the attorney general "should chill out, put on a Grateful Dead LP, and fire up a fatty."You had me going. When I got to "tie-dyed robes"...I was stunned and had to re-read that a couple of times. I loved that image.Very good."Terrier-ism" ...."The ground opening up."...Great stuff.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by Celaya on August 18, 2005 at 07:08:24 PT
High Anxiety
The U.S. is growing increasingly frustrated with the Canadian judicial system over the delays in extraditing Mark Emery, who is accused of selling marijuana seeds over the internet. The Supreme Court of Canada have been behind closed doors for over two weeks while they intensely study the effects and legality of marijuana. When advised that U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was demanding immediate action, the judges, who emerged from their quarters wearing tie-dyed robes and looking clearly euphoric, issued a public statement suggesting that the attorney general "should chill out, put on a Grateful Dead LP, and fire up a fatty." In response, Gonzales flew up to Blaine Washington, and alongside 0 Avenue with Langley providing the backdrop, held a national press conference announcing a series of retaliatory measures. The first action was demanding the extradition of Langley businessman Hans Zoff, who operates a small mail order bakery. He is accused of exporting poppy seed bagels into the United States. Gonzales claimed, "Poppy seeds can be cultivated to grow poppy plants, which can produce opium, which is an illegal drug. Not only will this help us in our war against drugs, but with the added ban on Nova Scotia lox and Canadian bacon, it will also assist us in the war on obesity". The second announcement called for an immediate trade ban on all Canadian wood and pulp products. Gonzales justified this by claiming, "pulp is the primary ingredient in the production of rolling paper like Zig Zag, which is used by marijuana users." He cited the precedent setting case of Tommy Chong, who was convicted of selling bongs on line. "Not only does this help us fight the war on drugs", claimed the attorney general, "but it also helps us fight the evil WTO who keeps voting in favour of Canadian softwood manufacturers". The final surprising announcement was a trade sanction against specific dog breeders. Citing this as President Bush's personal project, the ban will be on all breeds of terriers. Quoting Bush, "This will help us fight the war against global terrier-ism". Unfortunately, immediately following that announcement, the ground opened up under the attorney general, and he tumbled into a previously-undiscovered tunnel. He was rushed to Langley Memorial Hospital, preferring to take his chances with Canada's socialized medical care rather than risk his life under America's notorious HMO system. Upon hearing that Gonzales was suffering great pain in a Canadian hospital, the Supreme Court of Canada sent him a "Get Well" basket of poppy seed bagels. 
Seeds Of DisSINsion
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by Celaya on August 18, 2005 at 07:00:17 PT
Great Article!
Also at the site and a don't miss:
The Gullibility Factor Test
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by OverwhelmSam on August 18, 2005 at 03:58:54 PT
I Think This Guy Is Right On Target
The concept of abstaining from or moderating use of prescription drugs would definately make drug companies go out of business or at least become a lot less powerful. This in turm would make the drug war go away.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by E_Johnson on August 17, 2005 at 17:19:48 PT
Max Flowers
"How then would you propose to sort out cases where Ritalin is being used compassionately and correctly, and where it is being used cynically (to simply control unruly kids)? Because I have no doubt that both types of use exist---who knows, maybe even in equal measure. I found it very interesting that while railing against Ritalin, he missed the chance to rub in the fact that it is basically pharmaceutical methamphetamine."To be honest, I don't think the goal of controlling unruly kids is completely cynical.People in the past have used measures far worse than Ritalin to accomplish this goal, so in comparison to that, Ritalin represents progress.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by global_warming on August 17, 2005 at 16:06:13 PT
re:6
"WE have a modern society that demands LITERACY from its citizens. The days are gone when an illiterate person can find a decent job and make a decent living in this qworld.Ritalin isn't just cynically about maintining the evil authority state of the parent-teacher dictatorship.IT's about making sure that kids who have problems focusing on reading and math don't end up being left on the bottom of society.If you can't focus your attention enough to learn to read, you WILL be left on the bottom of society when you grow up."Sometimes I wonder if all this academic capability is only designed so that one can read the Budwizer ads during half time, or that one might be better able to relate to their nads while deciding which sexy car to purchase..Certainly having a good job will enable one to survive and have a full plate, and largely all this ritalined behavior ensures that these rebellious children stay within that box  you have described.My problem is that staying inside that box is what is at issue, youthful rebellion insists on a larger playing field, a field that frightens people like you EJ, and myself.The chemical industry may seem like some modern day miracle towards a better world, a world that that is slowly realizing the Viox and other mistakes of human frailties.Science has not yet figured out how to patent intelligent design, and I suspect, this patent will eternally elude the best minds, especially, if they have been numbed down with ritalin.Peace,and for 19, I agree.gw
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by goneposthole on August 17, 2005 at 13:26:36 PT
It's Reefer Time
It's not good that people of all ages need all sorts of drugs. Not good at all.So, forget about all of those other drugs, and smoke the herb."It's so nice to get high..."It does wonders. All of those other drugs cause lots of problems. Keep It Simple.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by runderwo on August 17, 2005 at 13:23:05 PT
regulation of psychedelics
Psychedelics pose an interesting problem. The problem is that we need to hold people responsible for what they do when they are tripping. But on the other hand, almost by definition you don't know what you are doing when you are tripping, leading to pleas of temporary insanity. Only with experience is someone able to separate reality from the trip and thus gain the ability to employ reason while they are tripping. The problem I have with this is that if someone trips and harms someone else, I believe the tripper should be held responsible and not be able to escape via an insanity plea. After all, unless his drink was laced or something, he is making a conscious decision to trip and because of that should be accepting the repercussions of such.I'm not sure I would favor full-scale legalization of psychedelics unless a framework was in place for individuals to gain experience in responsible use. Otherwise people will drop when they want to "party", and be caught off guard by the life-changing effects. I was thinking that legal psychedelic use need be in the presence of one who is a licensed trip-sitter; i.e., they have taken a course on how to manage someone who is tripping, and have pledged to be that person's conscience while they may be in another dimension, or to call for restraint if the person becomes out of control. A sufficient trip sitter could also be a licensed psychiatrist, or an ordained church that practices psychedelic use.I mean really, this is the fear of most americans if drugs were legalized. Not that people will harm themselves, but that they will go crazy and harm others. The danger of "going crazy" is usually limited to someone having a bad trip on psychedelics. But on the other hand, there is so much to be gained from guided, responsible psychedelic use. Having a framework like this in place I think would go a long way towards alleviating the fears that continue to keep psychedelics under prohibition.I had several other thoughts along these lines. What happens if someone's drink is laced with something, and they go bonkers and kill someone? Who is responsible for the killing? Also, what about the cookies baked with hash that the student and parent were charged with "poisoning" for. Can it really be poisoning if all that happened was that the person became intoxicated when they did not want to be? After all, it is impossible to suffer permanent harm from an overdose of cannabis. It seems like there should be a completely separate charge for that, when you deliberately give someone drugs with their food and they get an undesired high but no other ill effects. Then there is the problem where people slip things like GHB with a clear intent to intoxicate the person and make them easier to persuade into something they would not have done otherwise. "Conspiracy to intoxicate" or something like that?Also, say you go to a bar where cannabis smoking is allowed. People have their roaches burning in ashtrays. As a result, the air is full of cannabis smoke. You went in to talk to some friends, but now you are intoxicated just from being in the area. Wouldn't it be a good idea to require businesses that permit cannabis smoking to have a warning sign present due to the possibility of involuntary intoxication? Also, if they permit cigarette smoking, they can be required to post a similar warning regarding the toxic nature of cigarette smoke.These were just several rambling thoughts I had that I'm sure someone will bring up later so maybe it is a good idea to have already prepared suggestions for appropriate policy.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by runruff on August 17, 2005 at 12:18:28 PT:
Jose
There it is!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by b4daylight on August 17, 2005 at 11:27:06 PT
article
I liked it. I am totally down with legalize everything or make everything illegal. Let educcation make their descions for them.ex. A person does not use caffine, tabbacoo, Alcohol, yet they perfer mushroom tea, and now they are subject to jail. You begin to put people into segergation much like the cass system. Based on your drug of choice. Drugs kill people or are addicting with no clear distinction between illegal or legal. As for the taxes and such.. Well that is everywhere he just choose to use drugs. Other examples 'transportation ex autombiles = gas taxIllegal Immergrants = cheap laborHomeland Security = cash cow in fear mongeringThe Miltatary = No control at all here have 400 billion dollarsI am sure we could name a few more areas whee the government lets certian conditions exsist for coperate america or themselves. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by jose melendez on August 17, 2005 at 10:08:43 PT
Ritalin is speed. You know, for kids.
Anecdote: My friend's 'baby momma' was threatened with having the child removed from the home if she did not keep him on pills. The kid killed himself shortly thereafter.My opinion:Pharmaceuticals pushed on preteens is a scam, promoted by the very same companies that give to drug war efforts that are advertised as keeping kids off drugs.Here's some evidence:http://www.drugfree.org/Portal/About/Partners/list.aspx
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by runderwo on August 17, 2005 at 09:38:30 PT
hey EJ
I had the same reaction as you. When used appropriately, chemicals can alter our lives for the better. But whether our life is altered for the better or not is up to each person to decide, not something which sweeping blanket statements can be made about.It is true that direct-to-consumer advertising and overprescription are rampant today. The advertising is responsible for a plague of hypochondria, where everyone who is off the mark from what they consider to be the norm assumes that something is wrong with them and demands treatment for it. But the solution to this is not to eschew drugs altogether, because that would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. One potential approach would be to outlaw direct-to-consumer advertising altogether. I would say to be consistent you would have to include alcohol and tobacco in that, but man will you have problems with sports supporters.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by Max Flowers on August 17, 2005 at 09:30:58 PT
E_Johnson
How then would you propose to sort out cases where Ritalin is being used compassionately and correctly, and where it is being used cynically (to simply control unruly kids)? Because I have no doubt that both types of use exist---who knows, maybe even in equal measure. I found it very interesting that while railing against Ritalin, he missed the chance to rub in the fact that it is basically pharmaceutical methamphetamine.My feeling about the article is that while he may be somewhat heavy-handed, 95% of those things needed to be said, and said plainly and forcefully as he did it. Maybe he should have left out the Ritalin part, or at least qualified what he meant with statistics about the rampant overprescribing of it.Personally, if forced to choose I would rather have 100,000 kids end up less than literate, but alive, than have even one more person shot and killed by SWAT teams, bloodthirsty cops or DEA gunslingers, so if that is the tradeoff, let's do it (of course, that will never be how it goes so that is a theoretical/rhetorical statement).
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by Sam adams on August 17, 2005 at 09:26:35 PT
NG article
here's an excerpt of the article I mentioned:http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0501/feature1/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by Sam Adams on August 17, 2005 at 09:24:25 PT
EJ, this article
You're right, the guy's a little nutty. Sure Ritalin benefits some kids. I don't think humans have ever been totally "drug free", we've probably been munching various herbs & other stuff for millenia. I don't think telling people they must be 100% drug free makes any sense.I just liked the guy because he's really angry about the hypocrisy of it all. I think that's always bothered me the most. There was an excellent article in National Geographic (and I think a TV version of it) on caffeine. The authors assert that the entire Industrial Age would have been impossible without caffeine. I agree! When I first joined the professional working world, I immediately noticed that I was in a caffeine-driven world. Not using caffeine puts you in a very small minority in most office - I'd say 80 or 90 percent of the people are professionally addicted to caffeine. It's not surprising, humans didn't evolve to sit in an office all day long.If you take away morning caffeine from some of my friends, they can easily sleep until noon. I don't use caffeine, and it's difficult for me to sleep in past 800 AM. Once you're on the coffee, you turn to a zombie when it's removed. That's why I quit drinking caffeine years ago.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by ekim on August 17, 2005 at 09:15:35 PT
Paw Paw MI
US MI: Ex-Cop Riding Across Nation to Stamp Out Drug LawsURL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v05/n1329/a14.html 
http://www.leap.cc/howard/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by PainWithNoInsurance on August 17, 2005 at 09:12:46 PT
THIS ARTICLE is the VERY BEST I have ever read
I loved this article so much, I thanked the author Mike Adams at Newstarget.com. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by runruff on August 17, 2005 at 09:05:22 PT:
Why a drug war?
I liked this guys article. 
I'm repeating myself here but I do it to remind myself as well as my friends.I once saw an interview with......gosh I can't think of his name right now. He was a presidential advisor to Nixon.
Haig? Alexander Haig I think. All of my files are stored in the gray locker. You know. The filous crainium. It has a few leaks here and there. But I digress.To the point. He said it was he who suggested a constitutional law placed in the commerce clause in our constitution. This being the easiest place in our contract
with the federal government to exploit or even corrupt.
From this they came up with the CSA, the controlled substance act. He said he told {I'm not a crook} Nixon that such a law would allow the Feds to place a federal law enforcement presence in every precinct across the country.
First let me point out the the constitution is a contract
between the people and the federal government limiting the feds power not the peoples. It has been said by the founding fathers that it is the very nature of governments to 
try to expand it's powers which is why every brick in the 
constitutional wall protecting the people from the abuse
of governmental powers is important. Nixon was able to obliterate a large portion of the wall with a single stroke
of his blood ink pen.NIxon claimed he was the crime fighting president. He was
well known for his frustration with local authorities who refused to implement his Draconian directives. He was determined to show who was boss.
Mr.Haig also said that he was sorry he ever suggested this 
to Nixon now that he has seen how the abuse of federal powers have flourished under it.Thanks alot Haig but to little to late. Hope you go down in history as one of the major corrupters ot he greatest document on earth.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by Jim Lunsford on August 17, 2005 at 08:59:45 PT
Ritalin
Ritalin is used to control the kids. Unruly kids are diagnosed by teachers who are "enlightened" about the dangers of ADD. In truth, the school lunch diets of soda and other junk foods is the culprit. Remember when Jack LaLane (sp?) used to rant against the dangers of white bread some thirty years ago? I don't remember the numbers, but it seemed an excessive amounts of kids die each year from using Ritalin in accordance with their prescription. I give this article a big thumbs up for stating the truth; that we are nothing but consumer zombies. Bred only to buy their deadly products. Thanks for the story! Rev Jim:Have you grown your vote today?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by E_Johnson on August 17, 2005 at 08:48:56 PT
Sam I have the opposite reaction
Seriously I think the guy is a complete moron.Oh well, he can get the authority-hating morons on our side.But I think we have more than enough of those on our side already.We need more caring, thoughtful people on our side, and a simplistic paranoid article like this isn't going to do it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by E_Johnson on August 17, 2005 at 08:45:41 PT
This facile cynical write off really makes mad
Wonderful article, right?Not to me, because this facile write off of Ritalin tells me that the writer is not really a thoughtful caring human being." Its purpose is not to help children, but to make life more convenient for those who manage children."That is so cynical and so insulting to parents and teachers.There are kids who lose self esteem and become self destructive because they cannot focus well enough to perfrom in the classroom.WE have a modern society that demands LITERACY from its citizens. The days are gone when an illiterate person can find a decent job and make a decent living in this qworld.Ritalin isn't just cynically about maintining the evil authority state of the parent-teacher dictatorship.IT's about making sure that kids who have problems focusing on reading and math don't end up being left on the bottom of society.If you can't focus your attention enough to learn to read, you WILL be left on the bottom of society when you grow up.I want honest caring people on our side, not cynical people with simplistic reactionary anti-authority complexes who write off the emotions and dream of the people they're writing about as if they do not matter in the least.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Sam Adams on August 17, 2005 at 08:07:56 PT
Cigs
Obviously this is a great article, I love this guy.I am a little unnerved by much of the nasty rhetoric directed at Big Tobacco these days, though. A couple of columnists in the local paper here write periodically on the subject, ranting about all the death & disease caused by tobacco, and then asking "how can we continue to legally sanction tobacco use" and that's when they scare the sh** out of me! Do you know why all the people get sick from lung problems? Because people enjoy smoking! We've done all the brainwashing & education we possibly can, and there's still about a quarter of the population that chooses to smoke cigarettes. Why is there an obesity crisis? Because people like eating, more than ever before! Sure, if something's legal, our system will result in some evil greedy bastards making as much money as they can off it. What do we expect? It's not up to us to "legally sanction" everything that our neighbors do. If we want to be free, there's going to be some pain & suffering & greed & exploitation along the way. Banning tobacco would make alcohol & drug prohibition look like elementary school recess play-time. Hard-core smokers would do ANYTHING to get their cigs. Banning tobacco could send the nation on a path of crime and degeneration and corruption to downright civil war. How can any serious liberal think that banning tobacco is a good idea!?!? Where is their common sense?I had 3 relatives die from lung cancer. I don't remember any of them or their families (including me) wishing that the politicians and cops had tried to protect them from cigs. We'd been trying to get the people to stop smoking for years, and we all knew it was their personal choice to continue. I don't remember wishing anyone else had stepped in to help.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by dongenero on August 17, 2005 at 07:55:31 PT
Strong article
This is by and large a great article. Talk about pulling the curtain back! Our societal view on drugs is kind of like a science fiction movie such as Invasion of the Body Snatchers. People are so brainwashed to the FDA, DEA system, with the exception of a minority of individuals (such as here at CNEWS), that they aren't even aware of what the game is about.I think Mike Adams is right on the mark with this assessment.
It is so obvious to anyone paying attention.Now, that said, I think he is wrong in stating that no one should take any drugs. It is true that people will tend to try to correct lifestyle health issues with drugs rather than make the necessary lifestyle change for their health. People always want the quick, easy fix, pop a pill ratehr than work out or cut out the fries. But, there are many people with illness and conditions for which drugs are lifesaving or life quality changing.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by ekim on August 17, 2005 at 07:19:30 PT
                   Support Leap
http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/
Drug WarRant
by Pete Guither 
More on Anthony Diotaiuto, drug war victimMichael Mayo has an excellent column in today's Sun-Sentinel:{Aug 16 2005}
An ounce of pot, 10 bullets and one failed drug war"What in the hell were they doing with a SWAT team?" asked Eleanor Shockett, a retired Miami-Dade circuit judge who advocates a sweeping overhaul of drug laws. "To break into someone's home at six in the morning, possibly awaken someone from a deep sleep, someone who has a concealed weapons permit? What did they expect to happen?" This is a tragedy that never should have happened. Even if Diotaiuto, 23, was a small-time pot dealer, which his friends and family deny, the methods used show the madness of our country's war on drugs. No discretion. No proportionality. No sense. "Using SWAT in this case is like using a sledgehammer on a fly," said Jack Cole, a former narcotics detective for the New Jersey State Police who heads Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), a drug-law reform group. "I'd much rather use a little bit of stealth." 
http://www.leap.cc/events/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by AgaetisByrjun on August 17, 2005 at 07:13:06 PT
I'm glad this guy's a wacko for the straight-edges
and not for us. If he actually needed any of the prescription drugs he blasts he'd be singing a far different tune.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Patrick on August 17, 2005 at 06:54:51 PT
My favorite tidbits from this article
...this silly "War on Drugs" charade, which is really nothing more than enforcement of corporate drug profits at gunpoint....arresting cancer patients who smoke joints for pain control sounds a lot more like oppression than law enforcement to me. So what is the War on Drugs? It's an excuse to control you.No prescription drug death has ever been prevented by the DEA as far as I know.
[ Post Comment ]




  Post Comment