cannabisnews.com: Staff Position on Pot Ignores Growing Costs
Staff Position on Pot Ignores Growing Costs
Posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 12:39:58 PT
By Kevin A. Sabet, Crimson Staff Writer
Source: Harvard Crimson
I’m not sure what the Harvard Crimson editorial staff has been smoking, but its recent piece in favor of marijuana legalization reflects by-gone science and druggie-drivel hardly worth so much space in a prestigious college paper. (Editorial, “Decriminalize Marijuana,” April 12). Playing into the hands of billionaire pro-legalization forces like George Soros, the Staff wrongly gives the impression that a quarter of a million harmless pot smokers were arrested and locked up in jail.
In fact, that number represents many different contexts: people who plead down from trafficking to possession; people with other more serious crimes which they have been arrested for, in addition to marijuana use; or those who are cited for smoking pot in a public place and are fined about $100, as with a parking ticket. As the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency reported, only 7,000 people are in federal and state jails combined where marijuana possession was their most serious offense. Our criminal justice system is not focused at all on pot smokers; indeed, 12 states have decriminalized marijuana since 1978. That isn’t to say our current policy is perfect, but it is this precise drug strategy that has led to a reduction, since 20 years ago, in regular drug users by almost half, a drop by adolescents of two-thirds and a cocaine rate plummeting more than 75 percent. I guess those statistics were too inconvenient to put in an article which sounds straight like it would come straight out of the mouths of Cheech and Chong. How inconvenient too was it to simply describe the Dutch pot experience yet forget to report the consequences: a 200 percent rise in adolescent marijuana use since the commercialization and legalization of the drug in that country and a transformation of the Netherlands to the ecstasy-producing capital of the world. Even President Jimmy Carter, whom you quote from 25 years ago, is now anti-marijuana. The 1972 commission report you cite is completely out of date since it relies on the scientific knowledge known only up to that date—no wonder only long-time drug legalization advocates seem to still mention it. It would be like touting cocaine as a safe drug now because in 1900 there was no scientific evidence yet to show its harms. In fact, marijuana use has now been shown to adversely affect those regions involved in coordinating and regulating body movements (including contributing to car crashes, second only to alcohol alone); those involved in learning, memory and stress response; those that integrate the cognitive functions; and the reward center of the brain. Moreover, one marijuana cigarette is akin to four tobacco cigarettes in terms of the amount of tar, five tobacco cigarettes in terms of the amount of carbon monoxide intake and ten tobacco cigarettes with respect to the amount of damage to the airways. It is no wonder that half of teens and adolescents in substance abuse treatment are there for marijuana only. The current scientific consensus is that marijuana is not a benign drug. Solid social and scientific research provides the basis for maintaining our current laws—even if they are as soft as parking tickets—so as to not make marijuana commercially available. Kevin A. Sabet is a Marshall Scholar at Oxford University where he is studying for a Ph.D. in drug policy issues. He is a former speech writer former Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey. Kevin A. Sabet Oxford, England April 14, 2002 Source: Harvard Crimson (MA Edu)Author: Kevin A. Sabet Published: Wednesday, April 17, 2002Copyright: 2002 The Harvard Crimson, Inc.Contact: letters thecrimson.comWebsite: http://www.thecrimson.harvard.edu/Related Article:Decriminalize Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12507.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #57 posted by Jose Melendez on April 20, 2002 at 08:00:35 PT:
sigh
What happened to onion-eater? I hoped you had some valuable input that could be channeled into a clearer, more accurate message...
Arrest Prohibition
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #56 posted by Jose Melendez on April 19, 2002 at 12:35:20 PT:
bad links on Oregon Public Health site
I should have checked out the links before posting. comment#55. Here are the correct URLs for copies of actual internal documents showing industry use of Polonium 210 in cigarettes since at least the 1960's.http://www.ohd.hr.state.or.us/tobacco/knowldg/polonm1.pdfhttp://www.ohd.hr.state.or.us/tobacco/knowldg/polonm2.pdf
Jose Melendez
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #55 posted by Jose Melendez on April 19, 2002 at 12:27:29 PT:
thanks, bgreen
Thanks, Bgreenfrom:http://www.ohd.hr.state.or.us/tobacco/knowldg/polonium.htm
Tobacco Industry's "Knowledge of Health Effects"
1966: Lorillard knows that cigarette smoke contains radioactive Polonium-210:
"...in the British journal 'Nature' ... concluded that cigarette filters were without effect on Polonium in cigarette smoke..."
Memo to President of Lorillard Tobacco
July 7, 1966
"...Polonium-210 is divided equally between sidestream and mainstream smoke..."
Thomas Kelley
Article accompanying memo
Tobacco Industry's Secret Documents
Get the documents:http://www.ohd.hr.state.or.us/tobacco/knowldg/polonm1See also:http://www.ohd.hr.state.or.us/tobacco/knowldg/polonm2
Drug War = CRIME
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #54 posted by BGreen on April 19, 2002 at 12:07:00 PT
Onion-Eater
I'm sorry you find my statements illogical, however, I'm sure if you took some cannabis and dumped hundreds of dangerous chemicals on it, as well as using radioactive phosphate fertilizers to grow it, then you can possibly find the logic in comparing it to tobacco.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #53 posted by Jose Melendez on April 19, 2002 at 08:56:25 PT:
I almost forgot.
File this one under: Asked and Answered....on one hand it would encourage use and might be more availible to people who wouldn't smoke it otherwise, like kids and people with psychiatric problems...The Dutch report a lower incidence of teen marijuana use:from:http://www.drugtext.org/articles/bmj1.htmlthe 1976 changes in the Netherlands seem to have been followed by a fall in use of cannabis: from 13 % of those aged 17-18 in 1976 to 6% in 1985. (note 11) Monthly prevalence of cannabis use among Dutch high school students is around 5.4% compared with 29% in the United States. (note 11) Forbidden fruit may, indeed, be sweetest.
As for psychiatric problems, people tend to self-medicate, whether Richard Nixon or Thomas Constantine or Joyce Nalepka want to admit it or not. Alcohol and cigarettes are used by people to "relax", poison is legal, why not pot?11. 11. Morgan JP, Riley D, Chesher GB. Cannabis: legal reform, medicinal use and harm reduction. In: Heather N, Wodak A, Nadelmann E, and O'Hare P, eds. Psychoactive drugs and harm reduction: from faith to science. London: Whurr, 1993
Drug War is TREASON
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #52 posted by Jose Melendez on April 19, 2002 at 08:38:57 PT:
corruption link
that last piece on tobacco executive perjury protected by corrupt lawmakers and prosecutors is on:http://www.time.com/time/magazine/1998/dom/980504/notebook.on_capitol_hill25.htmlOn Capitol Hill, They'll Drink To That
By MARGARET CARLSON
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #51 posted by Jose Melendez on April 19, 2002 at 08:36:14 PT:
subjunct? oh, well, here's more evidence:
Here is the FDA story on nicotine:http://my.marijuana.com/article.php?sid=3234and from:But it's the tobacco crowd that leads the way in audacity. For years the industry denied liability for the almost 400,000 annual smoking-related deaths because everyone knew smoking could kill you--everyone, that is, but tobacco executives themselves! In 1996 they raised their nicotine-stained right hands before Congress and pleaded ignorance, a perjury charge Ken Starr could get his teeth into, if only he were not already representing these guys. Talk about campaign finance reform. Drug war is treason!
Narcosoft.com - Arrest Prohibition
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #50 posted by Jose Melendez on April 19, 2002 at 08:26:19 PT:
yahoo!
Thanks, onion-eater for joining the debate. ...so if you want to talk about vaporisers, you can only compare it to tobacco if you vaporise that too.Often people suggest that apples cannot be compared to oranges, but that concept is demonstrably false. Apples are red or green, with a waxy skin. Oranges are rounder, and have a thicker peel. Oranges can also be green.Back to the subjuct at hand. Tobacco probably should be vaporized, at optimal temperatures it would eliminate the carbon monoxide, benzene, benzopyrene and toluene, the latter of which has been shown to work in the same exact areas of the brain as cocaine. See:http://www.health.org/research/res-brf/research2.asp?ID=640Toluene inhalation produces regionally specific changes in extracellular dopamine also, see:http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n737/a12.html?10871Wire: 'Huffed' Solvents Act Like Cocaine on Brain-Study
Does this make sense so far? Now, "legal" cigarette manufacturers whose executives perjured themselves under oath in Congressional testimony in 1996 after being advised by self-styled perjury prosecutor/attorney Ken Starr are allowed to add ammonia to cigarettes. This lowers the pH of the smoke, resulting in a freer form of nicotine. They also use filters and developed processing methods to keep the cigarette burning like incense, both of which sell more cigarettes. The former (filters) work to increase sales by reducing the amount of nicotine delivered, increasing the need for another cigarette but as a result requires ingestion of greater amounts of the above mentioned toxic substances necessarily created during the combustion phase(CO, etc.)The latter (cigarettes that do not go out) is [are?] responsible for increased cost to general society in the form of millions of fires, illnesses and dollars in maintenence (such as building interiors), all because it is legal to burn one type of weed that contains verifiable poisons and deliberately design defective delivery devices for that poisonous drug (nicotine, which if ingested to excess can indeed be fatal). The FDA recognizes this, and is cracking down on mom and pop pharmacies that make replacement therapy in the form of nicotine lollipops. Unsurprisingly, they are still not taking, say, nicorette or Skoals or Marlboros off the shelves, because Congress has specifically exempted the deadly products. Coincidentally, the industries that manufacture those deadly, defective and addictive devices and noxious gas emitting substances verifiably pay those same lawmakers their very highest campaign contributions.Now what we are fighting for here on cannabisnews.com and elsewhere is a parity in legislation and sentencing guidelines, so that the 50 year old lady that serves me breakfast won't go to jail for the gram of crippy I just gave her the day before yesterday to help her deal with her chemotherapy. She used to argue that I should be arrested for going around stoned all day, but then she got cancer, and when she told me she had changed her mind, with a tear in her eye she said she could not stand the chemo or the drugs given to her to ameliorate the side effects anymore, and asked for some ganja. Get this: she still smokes at least a pack a day (Marlboro lights, I think.) So, I told her to pat down the cigarettes, creating a space at the end, and to simply fill the end of the cigarette with the finely cut premium herb. My co-worker checked up on her later that day, and her huspand said she was sleeping. :) I have been careful to watch since, and there is a lighter air to her step, and she seems more relaxed, and smiles more...Anyway, others here have explained and refuted your other objections, how would you simplify what we have just told you into what you would consider to be a "valid" argument?Peace,
Jose Melendez
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #49 posted by Lehder on April 19, 2002 at 05:59:52 PT
onion-eater
welcome to cannabis news. you have not been here long or you would know that 1.scientifically conducted tests by the governments of the UK, Australia and Canada have shown that people who have smoked cannabis drive slightly more safely than drivers under no influence and a whole lot safer than drivers who have ingested alcohol within the legal limit.see observer's comment #3 for the links:http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/12/thread12299.shtmlAm I arguing that you should smoke a joint before driving? Of course not. I'm presenting you with the facts, and the fact that drivers who have smoked drive slightly more safely than those under no influence is not an argument for imprisoning those who smoke cannabis at home. 2. Far from causing cancer, cannabis prevents cancer. Scientific studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals indicate that cannabis kills brain cancers in mice and prevents the formation of lung cancers in human tobacco smokers. See the links in comments posted by observer and E_Johnson here:http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread11698.shtml#42Cannabis does not disable or intoxicate a person; it is nothing at all like alcohol. The government would have you believe that cannabis somehow debilitates a person and that its effects are somehow aking to alcohol but thousands of times worse. In fact, cannabis is a benign herb that offers many benefits. Read about how it has improved the lives of many people:http://www.marijuana-uses.com/examples/You seem to have an open mind, onion-eater, so I hope you'll stick around and get the facts. All the social and personal evils that the government attributes to cannabis are in fact the effects of prohibition. Blaming social ills on a class of people is called scapegoating and it appeals to the the basest of our human instincts. Hitler scapegoated Jews to destroy the German republic, and the so-called war on drugs scapegoats cannabis users and subverts the Constitution.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #48 posted by onion-eater on April 19, 2002 at 05:09:25 PT
marijuana
"Vaporization removes the tars, toxins, and carcinogens from the consumption of cannabis, which makes it by far the safest recreational drug or medicine known to man."My point is you should only compare like with like, so if you want to talk about vaporisers, you can only compare it to tobacco if you vaporise that too. I'm not trying to argue against legalisation, only some of the arguments that I've seen used that don't seem logical to me.I don't really have a problem with cannabis, I think it's probably pretty harmless and I'm definitely against putting people in jail for it. Whether it should be legalised outright like tobacco and alcohol I'm not sure about - on one hand it would encourage use and might be more availible to people who wouldn't smoke it otherwise, like kids and people with psychiatric problems and on the other, there's the whole thing about freedom and individual choice. That's what I haven't made up my mind about yet.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #47 posted by aocp on April 18, 2002 at 18:20:33 PT
onion-eater
...all it can be used for is to say that cigarettes should be criminalized, which I don't think is the goal...Actually, that would be just fine as a goal for me (aside from outright regulation of cannabis). First, nothing really gets done unless enough people become affected. Criminalize the smokers and dippers in this country and you'll see something happen with a quickness. Secondly, i'm sick and tired of all the blatant hypocrisy surrounding the regulation of booze and smokes. If we're serious about saving society from the evils of recreational drugs, let's go the full nine. None of this ridiculous "grandfathering" of certain substances that are glorified in advertisements while others get the heave-ho into ignorant prohibition. It's not credible nor honest and it doesn't give any creedance to prohibition as a policy as well as its supporters. Personally, i don't think that's too much to ask of our "leaders". They're the ones that are continuing to fight and incarcerate us, not the other way around.Oh, and welcome to cannabisnews. It truly is a wonderful thing.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #46 posted by BGreen on April 18, 2002 at 17:46:10 PT
onion-eater
Welcome to C-News.The answer to your query is quite simple.IF, and I mean only IF, there was any evidence of all the damage purportedly caused by cannabis, the government would be parading in front of us 24/7, but that won't happen because it doesn't exist.Most of us aren't new to cannabis or the lies of the government. We don't speak solely from reading books, but we speak from personal experience. That allows us to see through the smoke-screen that, apparently, blinds the masses into thinking that prison is better than someone "possibly" developing some serious affliction at some point in their lives.Vaporization removes the tars, toxins, and carcinogens from the consumption of cannabis, which makes it by far the safest recreational drug or medicine known to man.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #45 posted by onion-eater on April 18, 2002 at 14:56:50 PT
Tobacco Vs. Marijuana
Hi, I'm new to this site, which I think is a great source of information. (Sorry if this is 'off topic', but I don't really know where to post this - hope it's ok) I'm neither really a 'prohibitionist' or pro-legalisation, though I think it's a subject that needs to be talked about a lot more.Anyway, I keep noticing arguments that are used again and again by both sides, with an almost religious fervour while they accuse each other of lies and stupidity and being evil. There are a lot of examples of this, usually oversimplistic, unscientific propaghanda.One thing that stands out is the argument I've seen several times saying things like 'Marijuana never killed a single person in 5 thousand years, while tobacco kills 400k a day myth', which I've seen used to argue that marijuana should be made legal like cigarettes.eg. "you fail to miss the FACTS that while Cannabis impairs someones ability to drive (again not a part of the original article, but something I don't think anyone would doubt), in over five THOUSAND years, not one person has had the words "marijuana overdose" written on their death certificate. Lung cancer from tobacco use claimed over 400,000 American lives last year."The most obvious, is that just because marijuana is less harmful than tobacco does not logically mean that it is harmless. It's not an argument you can use for legalisation, all it can be used for is to say that cigarettes should be criminalized, which I don't think is the goal.Another argument could be: Can the harm caused by a drug really be measured solely by the number of deaths? You could have a drug like Crack doesn't cause many direct deaths, but completely ruins the lives of regular users. It seems to be a bit more complicated than that, if you really want to be scientific a lot more things should be taken into account, for example non-fatal health, social, psychological problems too.You say 400k people die of cigarettes a year through lung cancer, but that nobody dies of cannabis smoke, even though cannabis smoke is known to be carcinogenic (just like smoking any plant), probably more per gram, especially if you consider that cigarette smokers use filters. The whole argument isounds like bad science to me anyway - how can you say that the cause of somebody's lung cancer is solely tobacco smoke and nothing else contributed to it? Have any studies been made specifically to measure the number of lung cancer deaths caused by cannabis smoke, like they've done for tobacco?What you might be able to say is that there are no recorded DIRECT deaths from cannabis, but then the same is probably true of tobacco - I don't think nicotine overdose is a major risk of death. Talking Indirect deaths I'd say they're probably about the same, per gram smoked, maybe even higher for marijuana. This is misinformation and illogical argument, exactly the same as the prohibitionists use, and I think it detracts from your cause, especially after you've sneered at and ridiculised others for using your own methods.Anyway, that's it for now.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #44 posted by Jose Melendez on April 18, 2002 at 13:00:57 PT:
Did Sabet mention ecstasy?
From: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n749/a04.html?397ECSTASY LINK TO DAMAGE OF THE BRAIN 'MISLEADING' THE PUBLIC
Research claiming to prove that ecstasy damages the brain is fundamentally flawed and has misled politicians and the public, independent scientists say today.
An inquiry by New Scientist magazine concluded that many of the findings published in respected journals that purported to show long or short-term damage could not be trusted. It puts this down to two principal reasons: huge variations in experimental results and the fact that scientific journals are unwilling to publish "null" results in which research shows no difference between ecstasy users and non-users.
Ecstasy Link To Damage Of The Brain 'Misleading'
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #43 posted by Jose Melendez on April 18, 2002 at 12:49:27 PT:
The truth is coming out...
Clarence Page wrote an article in the Chicago Tribune that tends to confirm what we have been saying: that war on drugs is really war on potheads. Here are a couple of excerpts.
From:http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n748/a11.html?397...A lot of seemingly knowledgeable folks will tell you, "Oh, nobody gets busted for pot anymore." Not quite. Nationwide, the numbers of arrests and incarcerations have climbed from the hippie 1960s right through the Reagan ( "Just say no" ) era and that of Bill ( "I didn't inhale" ) Clinton.
In 1970, when the marijuana legalization issue was just taking hold, there were 188,903 arrests, according to FBI Uniform Crime Reports. In 2000, the number had climbed to a record 734,498, of which 88 percent were for simple possession, not sale or manufacture. The best part is here:...I'm not ready to join NORML in calling for elimination of laws regarding public marijuana smoking. There are many public places where it simply does not belong any more than drinking or tobacco smoking. But I am hardly alone among Americans who would like to see the debate opened up so that marijuana might be regulated like other legal drugs.
Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington have legalized possession of marijuana for medical purposes. But the Clinton and Bush administrations have overruled them. Voters in the District of Columbia overwhelmingly passed a similar measure, which was overruled by Congress.
Polls indicate that most Americans ( 73 percent in a 1999 Gallup Poll ) favor legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes. But Washington's political leaders insist that their consciences should be our guides. I wonder what they've been smoking.
Narcosoft.com - Arrest Prohibition
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #42 posted by Jose Melendez on April 18, 2002 at 12:07:11 PT:
correction
Comment #38 should read:Arrests for Drug Abuse Violations clearly shows that a mere 5.6 percent of drug arrests were for sale/manufacture of marijuana, while 38.4 percent were for posession
Narcosoft.com - help wanted - typist needed (grin)
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #40 posted by qqqq on April 18, 2002 at 08:54:12 PT
..peee aich dee....
...."Kevin A. Sabet is a Marshall Scholar at Oxford University where he is studying for a Ph.D. in drug policy issues. He is a
former speech writer former Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey."...
...now I aint got no Phd,,yet,,,butt,,eye am having uh hard time figgurin whut ya need 4 a duhgree in "drug policy"..?.....Would you be known as a "Doctor of Drug Policy Arts"??...perhaps he got a Pfizer/GlaxoWelcomb scholarship from Merck,,,awarded to him by that clown Ronald McPaxil"!!!,,and the Ritalin Blimp floats above the Welbutrin Bowl,,as Kevin is issued his diploma by Barry McCaffrey,,and the world becomes drug-free before the Apocalypse Millenium sends a Galactic Asteroid that destroys all the mean,,bad and evil people,,but the good folks are spared,,and they get to hang out on earth,,,and bury all them dead evil asteroid victims...... and then,,,; of course there will be the fortunate few who planned ahead,,,and heeded the warnings of the 4q!..
..come on down to LA,,and attend school!.....4q has a program that will give you a degree in "drug policy",, ,in fact,,4q is the DeVry,/ITT tech of these type schools,,,and financial aid may be availiable to those who qualify!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #39 posted by Jose Melendez on April 18, 2002 at 07:55:48 PT:
the rest of the story...
(... continued)
Not long after the Office of National Drug Control Policy refused stubbornly
to tell the truth about alcohol (the real gateway drug, second only to
nicotine in the form of cigarettes) Congress conveniently stepped in to
prohibit that agency from including anti-drinking messages in their ads,
which in conjunction with the Partnership for a Drug Free America tend to
demononize marijuana while ignoring the hazards of alcohol, tobacco and
pharmaceuticals. Coincidentally (sarcasm intended) board members of the PDFA
continue to receive large donations and payments from the pharmaceutical and
alcohol industries for speeches on drug abuse. The Partnership only recently
stopped accepting funds from Big Tobacco.
The complaint that marijuana use has been shown to "adversely affect brain
regions involved in learning, memory and stress response; those that
integrate the cognitive functions; and the reward center of the brain" is
dubious, especially considering that a recent study shows that a reduction
in intelligence quotient is minor even for heavy pot smokers, at about a 4
point loss immediately after use. This is more than compensated for by the
5.8 point I.Q. increase above the average after effects of marijuana had
subsided. Just as in golf, handicapping tends to improve skill and
performance.
Interestingly, and again conveniently, Mr. sabet ignores the conclusions of
the 1998 Institutes of Medicine report on the subject, which says:
From: http://books.nap.edu/html/marimed/ch4.html
"Until a nonsmoked rapid-onset cannabinoid drug delivery system becomes
available, we acknowledge that there is no clear alternative for people
suffering from chronic conditions that might be relieved by smoking
marijuana, such as pain or AIDS wasting. One possible approach is to treat
patients as n-of-1 clinical trials, in which patients are fully informed of
their status as experimental subjects using a harmful drug delivery system
and in which their condition is closely monitored and documented under
medical supervision, thereby increasing the knowledge base of the risks and
benefits of marijuana use under such conditions. We recommend these n-of-1
clinical trials using the same oversight mechanism as that proposed in the
above recommendations."By the way, that nonsmoked rapid-onset cannabinoid drug delivery system is
already available, the authors of the IOM report knew this to be the case,
yet neglected to include that fact.
Of course, there is ample documentation of the lengths to which heavily
funded prohibitionist beaurocracies such as the National Institutes on Drug
Abuse have gone to avoid participating in studies that might show that
cannabis is safe, effective and non-toxic. But that will be the subject of
another letter.
Suffice it to say that it is "high time" that marijuana prohibition is
exposed as fraud, since the very same people that disingenuously pretend
cannabis is dangerous actively ignore the relative (deadly) hazards
associated with the substances that would be forced to compete on an even
field with safe, legal marijuana. Interestingly, those same substances are
manufactured by companies that pay the very highest campaign contributions
to those lawmakers and officials that pretend they are being "tough on
drugs". What do they say while 6 million Americans die every ten years from
legal substances and over 7 million are jailed in that same time period for
marijuana? Tough.
Arrest Prohibition - Drug War is TREASON!
Jose Melendez founder, Narcosoft.com - technology with substance
email: jose narcosoft.com
Narcosoft.com - technology with substance
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #38 posted by Jose Melendez on April 18, 2002 at 07:53:07 PT:
What is Kevin A. Sabet on?
----------
From: Jose Melendez (airjos yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 10:32:27 -0400
To: (letters thecrimson.com)
Subject: Sabet's position exposed, corrected.
Editor:
As I prepared to expose and correct each and every false assertion by Kevin
Sabet in the op-ed entitled "Staff Position on Pot Ignores Growing Costs", I
had a chance to read the Crimson's requirements for letters and got to this
line:
3) Letters that point out factual misrepresentations or errors will not
appear as letters to the editors, but may be published as clarifications or
corrections in the news section of the daily paper.
It disappoints me that my letter might not be published simply because I
will be pointing out that Mr. Sabet's position is not based on the truth. In
fact, Sabet, a former speechwriter for Barry McCaffrey, takes liberties with
the truth with just as much skill as our nation's former drug czar.
From:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/Cius_97/97crime/97crime4.pdf
From Crime in the United States: 1997, FBI Division of Uniform Crime
Reports; Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1998;
pages 221-222:
Table 4.1 - Arrests for Drug Abuse Violations clearly shows that a mere 5.6
percent of arrests for marijuana were for sale/manufacture, while 38.4
percent were for posession of this, the most benign psychoactive substance
known to Man.
Table 4.1 on page 216 in the most recent report on this subject for the year
2000 also tends to dispute Sabet's position that marijuana users are not
being jailed. Interestingly, those numbers show that while drug warriors
have ratcheted up their witch hunt on marijuana users to 40.9 percent,
arrests for marijuana sale/manufacture dropped slightly across the board in
all states.
see: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_00/00crime4.pdf
The next false and misleading statement by Mr. Sabet complains sarcastically
that it must have been inconvenient to describe the "Dutch pot experience"
yet forget to report consequences, such as teen use and ecstasy
proliferation. The suggestion that teen marijuana use increased 200 percent
in the Netherlands also conveniently omits any references to the source of
such figures. However, from the document titled: Licit and illicit drug use
in Amsterdam III: Developments in drug use 1987 - 1997; at:
http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/abraham.prvasd97.pdf
Drug use is temporary for most users. 80 percent of all lifetime users of cannabis have quit after 10 years
since initial use.The age of first use is lowest for alcohol and tobacco. At the age of
sixteen 50 percent of all lifetime users has started using these substances.It seems that, at least in Amsterdam, the coffee shop does not offer
acquisition possibilities for non-cannabis.
Note also that Sabet's former boss also tended to release unsupported
statements as "facts" that implied for example that ""The murder rate in
Holland is double that in the United States.", and blamed those numbers on
drugs.
Unfortunately for that position, the Dutch Government spoke out against this
lie, and it was revealed that the murder rate for the US is actually over
FOUR AND A HALF TIMES that of the Netherlands. This is despite, and in my
opinion because of, the fact that sentencing for marijuana use in the U.S.
is very often higher than those for murder or other violent crimes.
The 1972 LeDain Commission report was most likely cited by the Crimson staff
report because the recently released audio tapes of President Richard Nixon
prove that any objections to the results of that study were based on
prejudice, not science. Nixon goes on in the tapes to claim and complain
that while people drink alcohol to socialize, that they only smoke marijuana
to get high.
The truth, of course, is that both drugs are used to self-medicate, in the
same way that pharmaceuticals such as the selective seratonin reuptake
inhibitors that are so casually pushed on television are used. If you drink
too much alcohol, you will certainly die from that poison if it is not
purged from your system via vomiting or a stomach pump. Cannabis is
chemically food, and abuse leads to sleep and/or the munchies. Yes, some
people smoke pot to socialize and feel better, but at least we stoners know
when to say when, and have been proven safer behind the wheel than not only
drunks and pill poppers, but also sober people.
That's right, a University of Toronto study reviewed the research done in
countries all around the world of driving performance using driving
simulators. That work shows conclusively that marijuana does not increase a
driver's risk of causing an accident.
See: http://www.varsity.utoronto.ca/archives/119/apr13/news/high.html
Research that shows the comparative safety and efficacy is consistently
ignored or suppressed by those that would maintain the status quo on
marijuana laws, which are clearly arbitrary, capricious and based on lies
and perjury. Official Congressional testimony in the 1930's against cannabis
includes one particular expert witness who claimed under oath that smoking a
joint turned him into a bat, enabling him to fly about the room.
Barry McCaffrey himself came under fire from the group Mothers Against Drunk
Driving when his office refused to include messages against teen drinking in
the anti-drug propaganda budget. The claim was made that including such
truthful information would "dilute" the message to kids that illicit drugs
are harmful. This despite the fact that alcohol is responsible for 100,000
annual U.S. deaths, while cannabis deaths from overdose are still zero after
over 5,000 years of historically demonstrable use. In fact almost every
single death involving marijuana use has been clearly and unquestionably
linked to the prohibition of that herb.(continued...)
Jose Melendez
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #37 posted by Dan B on April 18, 2002 at 04:21:18 PT:
Steve Kubby and Steve Tuck ARE IN DANGER!
I am reposting idbsne1's post on another thread here because it bears repeating. I hope idbsne1 is okay with this.
idbsne1:I just got off the phone with Lucy... Steve Tuck, which I mentioned had taken his morphine from the house, IS NOT BEING ALLOWED TO TAKE HIS MORPHINE!!!!!!!
He has been in withdrawal and is sick as hell....Lucy is sooo worried he will not make it....she just had gotten off the phone with Steve....he says they are treating them like shit....they are sicker than hell and they are sleeping on cold concrete floors.....he vomiting like crazy and they just stand there not giving them medicine.... STEVE HAS A PRESCRIPTION FROM A CANADIAN DOCTOR AND THEY ARE STILL DENYING HIM THE MORPHINE!!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?! Steve's doctor has said he will die without morphine and MJ, and the Canadian Immigration is denying him ANY medication!!!!!! SO now neither of them have any medicine of any kind!!!! THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!?!?!?!?!?!?! Lucy says that they want to ship him back to the US....where the US MArshall's will get the Humboldt Sheriff on the phone and Steve will die in jail...the Sheriff even said so.... I don't know what to do...can anyone and everyone PLEASE spread the word or anything... even if you have NOTHING to do with this... just if you are disgusted at inhumane treatment....unreal...... ANYONE IN VANCOUVER? Please make it to protest...please.... Lucy can be reached at 604-740-5755...Michelle's is on another post..... These guys are terminally ill....and they let them suffer. God, please help them.... idbsne1
Thanks, idbsne1. We needed to know that.Another round of phone calls, anyone?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #36 posted by Dan B on April 18, 2002 at 04:16:45 PT:
Flyer Update
To everyone who received and passed along my flyer: there is one error which I wouldlike to correct. The information about the arrest is quite obviously true, but I misspoke regarding the nature of Kubby's adrenal cancer. I have written a letter to the editor of the university newspaper to make this correction (they're usually glad to print whatever letters they can get), but I thought I would let you know so you can make the correction on your own copies if you want to.Kubby's danger is not that his adrenal glands will shut down, but (as stated by Renee Boje): "The cancer causes the adrenal gland tissue to quickly replicate, and creates adrenaline levels 10-20 times those of a healthy adult. Cannabis prevents the replication of the abnormal cells and stops the secretion of the deadly adrenaline."Sorry. In my haste to get the information about the arrests, I made errors as to the nature of his medical condition. By the way--the letter to the editor also has the phone number that Renee Boje gave in her email (sent to me by idbsne1--thanks!).Take care, everyone.Dan BP.S. I'm in this all the way now. Before, it was just letters to the editor and to congresspersons. I see now that I can reach more people by continuing that effort and talking to people face-to-face about it. The flyers were a wonderful opportunity to say, "I believe in this cause, and I'm not ashamed to tell you so." I will do everything in my power to turn this town around. I figure that the more I talk about it to strangers, the more comfortable I will be talking in front of larger groups about it (I have not yet had the opportunity outside the classroom), and it will escalate from there. That's how it worked for me with teaching; the best way to overcome fear is to defy it.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #35 posted by qqqq on April 18, 2002 at 02:48:13 PT
...The Cold War...
...I dont believe anyone "won" the Cold War.,,but I guess that all depends on how we interpret the terminology... I guess we could say that "communism" lost,,and "democracy" won...,, but I dont think "democracy",,is the same as what it used to be.... Like many other words,,it has been re-defined and its meanings confused.... For example; what is the opposite of a "communist"???,,a "capitalist"??............ What's the opposite of a "terrorist"??. One would think that there would be a term for non-terrorists.........?? ...it's kinda like trying to figure out the difference between a "suicide bomber",,and a pilot whos plane is shot down,and he dies while trying to bomb the enemy?... ....
..with this "for us,or against us" shit,,a terrorist can be ANYONE,who disaggrees with the ruling faction,,,,..It's absurd to realize how few people are alarmed by the "terrorist",McCarthyesque witch-hunt!. ...think about it.... Dont forget,,if you're not a terrorist,,,then you ARE a terrorist
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #34 posted by E_Johnson on April 18, 2002 at 01:08:08 PT
By the way is it a sin to be a billionaire now?
It's always so confusing when people like Sabet start accusing Geogre Soros of the sin of being a billionaire.It makes me wonder:
Who won the Cold War -- Communists or capitalists?
Who deserved to win the Cold War -- Communists or capitalists?
Which political party was supposed to be the most happy about that?
Where did Soros stand on Communism during the Cold War?
Soros is guilty of being our friend. He's guilty of being a high achiever. He's guilty of wanting more than cheap rent and lifetime job security in a country with no freedom.He's guilty of giving away enormous sums of money to help civil society develop in Russia and former eastern bloc countries so that Communists don't find their way back to power.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #33 posted by E_Johnson on April 18, 2002 at 00:41:40 PT
I told him off too
I let them know that even being drug free is no excuse for such incivility as labeling an editorial of his fellow Harvard colleagues as "druggie drivel".Since when does Harvard teach people to engage in public social discourse using rhetorical tactics such as that?It's shocking, and not what one would expect from a school that has graduated some of the greatest thinkers and diplomats and scientists of our age.But then they also produced Ted Kaczynski... Lowell House '62 right? so hey...
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #32 posted by SoberStoner on April 17, 2002 at 22:35:32 PT:
It's letter writing time again.
To the editors of the Crimson,I am shocked and disturbed by your 'article' written by Kevin Sabet against your recent 'Decriminalize Marijuana' piece.Not only has he exhibited extreme prejudice and hate towards anyone using Cannabis, he provides no evidence for his claims. Quote: "Playing into the hands of billionaire pro-legalization forces like George Soros, the Staff wrongly gives the impression that a quarter of a million harmless pot smokers were arrested and locked up in jail."
First of all Kevin, it wasnt a quarter million people arrested for Cannabis offenses, it was 735,000+..almost three quarters of a million American citizens, and that was just last year alone. Care to guess how many 'terrorists' were arrested last year?? Two..not two hundred, not two thousand, two. Cannabis users may be dangerous as you claim(they arent, but I'll let you live in your dream world for a little while longer), but I guarantee that none of the three quarters of a million citizens of the US arrested for cannabis were planning to fly planes into the World Trade Center. Those FACTS come from the national arrest statistics for 2001.Quote: "That isn’t to say our current policy is perfect, but it is this precise drug strategy that has led to a reduction, since 20 years ago, in regular drug users by almost half, a drop by adolescents of two-thirds and a cocaine rate plummeting more than 75 percent."
Hmm..so less people are admitting to a crime now than they were 20 years ago when Cannabis use wasnt subject to such severe penalties? I'm shocked, no really I am..I thought everyone would be volunteering for legal and social persecution for using a plant. Also...what does cocaine use have to do with this article?Quote: "Our criminal justice system is not focused at all on pot smokers; indeed, 12 states have decriminalized marijuana since 1978."
Name one state that has decriminalized marijuana, you can't because this is a blatant lie. California has come the closest, and Prop 215 only legalizes highly regulated Cannabis use for extremely deadly and painful medical conditions. Hardly legal, as witnessed by the DEA's actions on February 12. Why is that date important? On the date of the highest terrorist alert since September 11, Mr. Sabet's former employers decided that it would be a good time to waste resources shutting down a Los Angeles Cannabis Compassion Club that provides medicinal marijuana to those people who are following California State law. Ask Ed Rosenthal, one of the people arrested on that day, whether Cannabis is 'decriminalized'.Quote: "How inconvenient too was it to simply describe the Dutch pot experience yet forget to report the consequences: a 200 percent rise in adolescent marijuana use since the commercialization and legalization of the drug in that country and a transformation of the Netherlands to the ecstasy-producing capital of the world."
And how inconvenient that you forgot to mention where you obtained these statistics so someone could actually verify your lies. Oh wait, you cant verify something that doesnt exist. By the way, even if it HAS gone up by 200%(which we cant verify), the rate of usage by teens in the Netherlands compared to US teens the same age is HALF of what US kids claim. And lets not forget that even in the Netherlands Cannabis is not specifically legal, it is just 'tolerated' there. Once again, these FACTS are verifiable by looking at reports published by US and Netherlands authorities. And even then we are relying on teens in the United States telling adults the truth about whether they use a substance that could place them in jail, after all you even admitted people are in cages because of Cannabis, you severely misreported this number as has already been proven, but I'll take what truths I can from you, even if they are only half-truths. I would venture to say that as many as 3 times the number of teens in the US use cannabis due to the factor of it being illegal and 'dangerous', therefore making it more appealing to those who wish to rebel against authority as so many teens do. And WHY is ecstasy mentioned in an article rebutting CANNABIS legalization? I dont remember anyone saying ecstasy should be legalized?Quote: "The 1972 commission report you cite is completely out of date since it relies on the scientific knowledge known only up to that date—no wonder only long-time drug legalization advocates seem to still mention it. It would be like touting cocaine as a safe drug now because in 1900 there was no scientific evidence yet to show its harms."
Here are some more FACTS for you to avoid Kevin. Maybe the 1972 report is out of date, but the IOM report from a few years ago is not, as well as the findings of a DEA appointed judge's report that said cannabis should not be criminalized, but you and your Boss Barry McCaffrey chose to ignore that report. Also, I would be remiss in not mentioning any of the various studies by medical authorities in Great Britain and Canada claiming medical benefits for glaucoma, chemotherapy patients, and people with AIDS wasting syndrome, as well as Canada's decision last year to legalize Medicinal Marijuana. And again with a cocaine reference. There was no mention of cocaine in the original article, why do you choose to mention it here?Quote: "In fact, marijuana use has now been shown to adversely affect those regions involved in coordinating and regulating body movements (including contributing to car crashes, second only to alcohol alone); those involved in learning, memory and stress response; those that integrate the cognitive functions; and the reward center of the brain."
Thank you for at least recognizing that alcohol is the number one cause of automobile accidents, even though you again fail to document your source. And surely if a substance is so dangerous as to be the number one cause of accidents surely it would not be freely available at any corner store or advertised on television or in magazines right? Whoops..guess not. But again, you fail to miss the FACTS that while Cannabis impairs someones ability to drive (again not a part of the original article, but something I don't think anyone would doubt), in over five THOUSAND years, not one person has had the words "marijuana overdose" written on their death certificate. Lung cancer from tobacco use claimed over 400,000 American lives last year. Who knows how many lives were claimed from disease of the liver, alchohol poisoning, and drunk driving, all of which are directly attributable to alchohol useage? I'm sure I could find the numbers, but honestly, I dont think you care. Perhaps the students of Harvard would care to find this information on their own.Mr. Sabet's language betrays his feelings here. Not only has he ended up making himself look like a hate-filled propaganda machine, he has soiled the image of Harvard by spouting such ignorant and deceitful rubbish. I can only hope that the students and alumni and anyone else who reads this has the reason and intelligence to see through his flimsy, non-existant proof and can see that the War on (some) Drugs has failed. He and others like him speak of Cannabis users as if we are less than human. Yes, i said we because I used Cannabis. I almost hate to admit it, because I know as soon as prohibitionists see that, they will dismiss my response as "druggie-drivel", but I don't care. This message is not directed towards Kevin Sabet or anyone else who is close-minded, and will not listen to reason because their time has passed. This letter is directed to the students of Harvard to show what a mockery of the American justice system cannabis prohibition is. They tell people what they must believe. I tell people the truth, and ask them to verify my statements and question my statements. I am not afraid of the truth. And the truth is Kevin, you have most likely helped show more people how vile and narrow-minded the War on Drugs has become and have helped bring it a little closer to it's overdue end. Any for anyone who would care to debate this subject, I am always available to field questions or entertain discussion. You can reach me at Soberstoner hotmail.com
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #31 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 21:17:20 PT
BGreen
Yes I heard it too and I hope they see his rulings are wrong because they are.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #30 posted by BGreen on April 17, 2002 at 20:23:18 PT
Off topic
I heard on our local news that a judge in Oregon ruled against the Ashcroft attack on doctor assisted suicide. He took Ashcroft to task with strong words.Let's hope a judge rules the same way on cannabis.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #29 posted by Rainbow on April 17, 2002 at 20:19:45 PT
Crimson
I sent a lette to the Crimson stating my disappointment in harvard and Oxford for producing something like Sabet.I guess our school system is going to the dogs.Cheers
Tom
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #28 posted by el_toonces on April 17, 2002 at 18:06:45 PT:
Only one phone line:(
Even though the hotel was nice enough to upgrade to a suite so I could be sure to have a refrigerator for my insulin, I have only one phone line and when I go online, that means I have no real phone lines, just my cell phone.I will e-mail you with more info for folks to track me down here in San Fran.More importantly, congrats on the SAT hookup. I think you will love it.MOST IMPORTANTLY, how does one "listen" to the Conference? I know several folks that wanted to be here but could not arrange it. I would like to be able to advise them how to listen to it. Could you drop me a note at the el_toonces yahoo.com e-addy to let me know as I must get off line or miss dinner because I can't make phone calls:)Thanks,M/El
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #27 posted by el_toonces on April 17, 2002 at 18:06:44 PT:
Only one phone line:(
Even though the hotel was nice enough to upgrade to a suite so I could be sure to have a refrigerator for my insulin, I have only one phone line and when I go online, that means I have no real phone lines, just my cell phone.I will e-mail you with more info for folks to track me down here in San Fran.More importantly, congrats on the SAT hookup. I think you will love it.MOST I
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #26 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 17:59:14 PT
el_toonces
No problem with personal info. Seeing your Grandmother must have been real nice. I don't have a Fax and I got a printer but never hooked it up. I'm so used to putting everything I want to keep online I don't know how to do it any other way. Guess what? I bought a satellite today but it could take a month for an FCC Licensed Technican to get it hooked up but I'll be real ZIPPY then and be able to do so much more! I can't wait. I want to listen to the conference tomorrow but can't do anything else but listen or watch. I can't look for news while I'm listening but soon I will be able too! Can't wait to hear about WAMM.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #25 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 17:52:47 PT
el_toonces
I sent Mike an email. Hope you get to meet.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #24 posted by el_toonces on April 17, 2002 at 17:47:02 PT:
Kubby...
...also, heard that awful news. The only solace I can take is that he is in Canada and they don't seem as nuts as our country at the moment.Also, can I fax you the Esquire piece? {If so, just send me an e-mail to the yahoo addy with your fax number).I hope you and yours are doing well still?Peace,El
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #23 posted by el_toonces on April 17, 2002 at 17:44:38 PT:
FoM
Yes, I am here safe and sound. Much to tell you later about ideas my brother -- the writer and photojournalist -- came up with on WAMM. Please do whatever you can to facilitate any contacts here in San Fran. I know screen names, but real ones, and on faces....well, I am lost. The only e-mail account I can use while traveling, however, seems to be el_toonces yahoo.com. But, yes, please do whatever you can and dissiminate whatever information you think appropos to help me meet some folks here!Aplogizing in advance for discussing personal busniess here, I must note how nice it was to see family members I have not seen in months or years, especially my 85 year old grandmother who having a tough time with some cardiac problems and is being cared for by my aunt. It makes me wonder when and why we stop referring to advancing age as "growth" and substitute the term "growing old" and why we ship our older folks off to "retirement" or "convalescent" communitities when they can teach us and our children so much if they are cared for at home. At least folks that age remember (alcohol) Prohibitionand how harmful it was, and most don't mind telling the truth about it!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #22 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 17:11:02 PT
el_toonces
Did you know they arrested Steve Kubby and Steve Tuck yesterday? If not check out the articles if you have time but I know they will talk about it tomorrow. Hope they have a live audio or video link.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #21 posted by mayan on April 17, 2002 at 17:09:16 PT
Hate Ignorance
The late Peter McWilliams said, "I don't hate people - I hate ignorance."
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #20 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 17:07:47 PT
el_toonces
Glad you checked in! You made it ok! Good! I've received email from Mike (sledhead) that he arrived safe and sound but he didn't say where he is staying. Should I send him your email address so he can get in touch with you? I'll do that and it isn't a problem. Just say yes and I'll go do it right away!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #19 posted by Nuevo Mexican on April 17, 2002 at 17:06:19 PT
Thank you Dan!
And everyone one here for their passionate response! If we all do something along these lines, change will come even sooner. If this doesn't motivate us, nothing will, short of fear of prison, where we will learn to hate, as it is not a natural emotion. That's why we have the military. Love is all there is and ever will be, and when we understand that, we can give up on finding a meaning for our hate. A learned behavior. It is taught in prison, school, law enforcement academies, tv, Fox News is probably the most glamourized version, and it still is uuuugly! Anyway, Fear and hate are tools to control us. With LOve and Faith, fear and hate cannot exist. Read Greg Bradens' book, Walking Between the Worlds'. Science meets metaphysics and answers the question!
I believe Steve K and T will be out soon, (it's a Chavez/Venezuel thing) as long as we keep the pressure on! I called the Canadian numbers posted and was well recieved and treated with courtesy. Maybe we should call Canada more often, and keep them abreast of our countries evil designs?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #18 posted by el_toonces on April 17, 2002 at 16:55:13 PT:
Born or Made......?
Is this author a born or made liar? Who knows. But as the web of government misrepresentations (I am being very polite today, perhaps because I am happy here in my hotel room at the NORML Conference) becomes more and more intricate, it is not incredibly hard to believe a Ph.D. is awarded to anyone who can be as masterful as our government, legal and medical insitutions have been in hiding the truth. Hiding anything, especially the truth, from 250 millions Americans -- 40 plus miilion of whom know the truth first hand -- is not for the simple minded, B.A. level progandist!BTW, did anyone see the piece in the February 2002 issue of Esquire about "The Secret Lives of Suburban Pot Smokers"? I just read it this weekend, and it indicates to me that we will never be able to tell our kids the truth about cannabis until we sort out and face up to our own often conflicted thoughts and feelings about it. We must not let the Puritans shovel guilt upon us, yet as the Esquire piece indicates, even bright & highly educated folks are still behaving like a 14 year old caught with a joint by his parents, even when these folks KNOW they are doing nothing wrong! [I tried to find a link to the Esquire piece but could not, but is WORTH reading and I will try to have copies available at the conference for anyone interested -- and perhaps, if possible, will FAX a copy to the almighty FoM!].Also, anyone here at C-News who happens to be at the NORML conference, look me up and give me a ring if you fancy. I would enjoy putting some faces to the familiar names here:). Come to think of it, I am not registered under the name "el toonces", so just ask the desk at the site hotel for Mr. Segesta's room.Thanks. Be well.El (Mike Segesta)PS -- Am also wondering how many of us here at the conference got ALL of our luggage searched at the airport under the guise of 'enhanced security', especially if we booked our airfare via the web -- where the airlines or FAA or government could read all the cookies files on our computers, thus detecting our potential visits to reform sites the government monitors under the auspices of fighting "terrorism"?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #17 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 16:51:22 PT
Hate
I don't hate anyone. I do hate certain situations but not individuals. Just my 2 cents about hate.I have a saying I believe that was from a Jewish commercial years ago that was on TVIt said: Who does hate hurt?Hate hurts you.I always remembered that.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #16 posted by Jose Melendez on April 17, 2002 at 16:48:21 PT:
Right on Dan!
I've been thinking of handing out little bags of hemp fiber sprayed with cannabis essential oil and saying, "FREE LEGAL MARIJUANA!"..."free" is a also a verb, right? (feel free to tip me if you like :)
FREE LEGAL MARIJUANA - click here
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #15 posted by Dan B on April 17, 2002 at 16:30:22 PT:
Not Hating Back
I handed out 193 flyers today to college students, instructors and professors. That was the good part. The bad part was dealing with the snickers and outright laughter, people who would look me in the face and not respond to my simple question ("Can I interest you in a flyer related to medical marijuana?"), looks from those who seemed to think themselves better than me because they don't believe cannabis can be medicine, and one guy who just grunted, then came back to ask me if I smoke (when I seemed befuddled at the question--"smoke what? Not now. Not normally," he walked off with this arrogant look on his face) . . . (by the way, I don't smoke anything at the moment, haven't for sixteen months, so I should have gone with the best answer, "No, a$$#ole!"). In short, I had to deal with what any activist has to deal with every time s/he goes out to do some activatin'. Understand that I am not the outgoing, extraverted type, so going out to pass the word about Steve Kubby and Steve Tuck (or anyone/anything else for that matter) is not my idea of a good time. I did it because it needed to be done. The local chapter of NORML was not doing this (by all accounts, and there have been many, these guys are more interested in partying than actually doing anything to support the reform of cannabis laws--and this comes from supporters of cannabis law reform), so I did it by myself. When I first began, three Gideons (dressed in suits, all of a gray age and churchlike) were out there near me passing out New Testaments. One came over and asked me what it was I was handing out, so I told him and showed him the flyer. He read it and said "that's interesting . . ." and courteously handed it back. Five minutes later, another Gideon asks to see it, so I showed it to him and he read it, then passed it on to the third man, who read it and kept it. I have to say that at least these men had the decency to be courteous, for the most part.I say "for the most part" because as I was leaving one guy said, "Are you sure you don't want one of these?" (I had already told him that I had one as soon as I got there). "Actually, I have a New King James version of the entire Bible. And a new International Version, and a New American Standard, and others""You should crack one open sometime," he said."I just smiled and said, "I do.""I know, I was just kidding with you"Kidding, my a$$. What's my point? Hell, I don't know. It's been too long since I began this message--hold on, let me go back and read again.Oh yeah, so my point is that I did my best to be courteous despite the critical behavior. Why? Because I was the only person standing out there representing the voice of compassion, that's why. And in that scenario, it was best to say "thank you" to those who said "No, thank you." It was best to leave alone those who clearly wanted to be left alone. And it was best for me to smile at that man who assumed he knew more about God than me because he was handing out Bibles, while I was merely busy trying to follow Christ's admonition to set the captives free.And that's today's story.Dan B
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #14 posted by krutch on April 17, 2002 at 16:29:02 PT:
Sabet is not smart
Mr. Sabet has great interest in keeping pot illegal. He is drug war Nazi. He failed to cite his sources for the data he has revealed in this article, but even if we accept his statistics, the analysis he presents is flawed.He points out that the Netherlands ecstasy-producing capital of the world. How did the legalization of MJ cause this transformation? He never attempts to establish this. I guess we are just supposed to accept this as fact, just like all of the "facts" that Sabet and his ilk have revealed about MJ over the years. The lies these people peddle could fill several volumes.He also points out that MJ use among the youth of the Netherlands has risen. I believe that this rise could be an artifact of the SURVEYS used to gather the data on drug use. Foolish investigators often blindly accept the results of surveys at face value, but it is well known that people lie about illegal activity on surveys. Perhaps legalization caused the youth of the Netherlands to more honestly report their drug use on surveys.Mr. Sabet demonstrates his inablity to analyze statistics again when he talks about the results of the current US drug policy. He wants us to blindly accept that the drug war has reduced the number of illegal drug users in this country. The statistics he mentioned may be true, but I think the reduction is because the baby boomers are aging, and not partying as much as the did back in the early 1980's.The idea the MJ's reputation has not improved since 1972 is also nonsense. Many studies about MJ's negative effects that where "common knowlege" in the 1970's have be refuted by modern studies. The idea that MJ kills brain cells and that it causes men to grow breasts are cases in point.I find it frightening that a PHD candidate presents such a pathetic analysis. Sabet has alot of balls putting down Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong. Both of these guys are way smarter than him.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #13 posted by BGreen on April 17, 2002 at 15:39:35 PT
Sorry, E_Johnson, the gloves are off.
If you go to prison you'll know just what hatred is. You'll hate everyone and be hated by everyone.I shall destroy those bent on destroying me!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by E_Johnson on April 17, 2002 at 15:02:43 PT
It's a major challenge not to hate back
The most challenging aspect of the marijuana legalization movement is not the prospect of ending up in jail, it's the prospect of being seduced into hating the other side as much as they hate us.I'd rather be in prison than become a hater, though.There's no peace thought hatred.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by goneposthole on April 17, 2002 at 14:53:00 PT
cigarettes
have no thc. They've got nicotine. Nicotinamide is a very potent insecticide. Nicotine is the most addictive substance known to man. I don't care if he was taught by God himself, his words are idiotic. Can't really expect much more anymore or from this time forward. Just a lot of words. If tobacco or alcohol were illegal, he'd rail against that, too. Somebody ring a bell, he needs a drink of water.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by p4me on April 17, 2002 at 14:34:05 PT
Often wrong but never in doubt
This guy talks like he can debunk every reason for relegalization without even debunking one. But he does not get that America is about freedom and you need reason to make something illegal and not a reason to make something legal. Freedom is the concept that calls for making marijuana legal you dumass writer. This kind of stuff is meant for the right wingers I guess that can follow anything. The sheeple are pitiful citizens although the Chinese are glad they like to wave flags.If this guy were to try to talk to me in person with language like this I would call him an idiot to his face and tell him get the hell away from me you stupid dumbass.This is a blended concoction with ample Republican Venom.VAAI
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by lookinside on April 17, 2002 at 14:32:33 PT:
my lte...
Dear Editor,
Please accept my heartfelt thanks for Mr. Sabet's editorial. My Sabet's tirade is so filled with lies and innuendo as to be an asset to the Pro Legalization movement, of which I am a member. Please encourage Mr. Sabet to rejoin government service if he receives his doctorate.(Harvard should really reconsider whether they want a piece of parchment floating around with both Mr. Sabet's and the university's names on it.) It is obvious that he has no place in the private sector. His critical thinking skills are non-existent. Sincerely,
(me)
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by Sam Adams on April 17, 2002 at 14:14:56 PT
No kidding EJ
That was my thought as well - how sad that someone as smart as this guy is so vicious and full of hate. It doesn't really matter if you're on left or the right, can't we just agree that blatant lying with intent to hurt or punish someone is wrong? These guys know that much of the population is stupid and believes whatever they read - this is directly squarely at them.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by DdC on April 17, 2002 at 13:57:02 PT
2001: 735,000 cannabis arrests are a fact ass....
Regardless of plea bargains, that take the 5th amendment away of having a jury of ones peers. Bargaining a fine vs mandatory sentencing is no wonder why 95% take a plea bargain. But it changes nothing as far as total arrest for cannabis since Clinton is over 10 million otherwise noncriminals.99% of the cannabis is ditchweed hemp bringing larger budgets to cops the same as the larger numbers arrested. Stats not reality. Profits on Prohibition is fascism. Protecting alternative fossil fuels, Pharmaceuticals, booze and cottons 270,000 tons of chemicals not used on hemp. Or the Monsanto poisons sprayed on pheasant habitat perpetuating the stats and profits on the war, Prohibition Inc.. Poisoning people and their unborn children. In the name of profits.
pH Duh! That must be the logerithm representing alkalinity and acidic levels for his mind is definately afflicted with the goobers...Peace, Love and Liberty or D.E.A.th
DdCRelease Petition
http://hr95.org/geddes.petition.htm
Free James Geddes 90 years for 5 plants!
http://hr95.org/Geddes,J.htmlI LOST MY FREEDOM Linx
http://pub3.ezboard.com/fendingcannabisprohibitionlinx.showMessage?topicID=22.topicThe Real Price of Prisons
http://www.motherjones.com/prisonsDubya and Me: We've Got No Idea
http://www.motherjones.com/magazine/MJ01/dubya.htmlDefrauding America
http://www.defraudingamerica.com
Free the Prisoners of WoD
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by E_Johnson on April 17, 2002 at 13:47:49 PT
They can't survive without hate
Look at the hatred and the incivility of this editorial.If being drug free does this to people...why bother?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by Hope on April 17, 2002 at 13:37:31 PT
or perhaps.....
Not even a human at all. Just a government created android planted to spy and spout lies.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by Hope on April 17, 2002 at 13:34:46 PT
Hmmm....
wonder if he's a born or a trained liar
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by Dan B on April 17, 2002 at 13:32:13 PT:
Not only are none of these credible,
but none of these statements are true. This guy is a classic propagandizer: while attempting to appear superior to those he derides, he manages to make himself look like a buffoon (at best). If the best argument this guy has is that people in favor of legalization have old arguments, perhaps he needs to look into the reason why those arguments have withstood the test of time.I won't get bogged down with denouncing every facet of his rhetoric. Suffice to say that each of his claims is either hollow or outright fabricated. If this article typifies Harvard's elite, I see no reason why anyone should be impressed by a Harvard degree.Dan B
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by darwin on April 17, 2002 at 13:12:18 PT
LOL
Funny, this guy worked as a speech writer for Barry McCaffrey. He still does not answer why pot smokers should be locked up. "As the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency reported, only 7,000 people are in federal and state jails combined where marijuana possession was their most serious offense."When anti's use this argument, it makes me laugh. They personally think pot is soooo evil, but they try to soften the encarceration angle. So are they saying they agree
that pot smoking shouldn't warrant jail, or are they saying they only WISH they had room for that many potsmokers in jail?And what's this "Marshall Scholar" doing in Oxford, England anyways? Anyone who agrees that there is no medical benefit of pot is no scholar in my book. He is just a DEA brownnoser hoping that he still has a job fighting us "druggies" when he gets back from his silver spoon education.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by idbsne1 on April 17, 2002 at 13:03:29 PT
IDIOT.
Just goes to show you... a PhD... doesn't mean crap.... hey Kevin where did you get all your info on pot? NIDA, right? Brainwashed loser....hmmm....speech writer for Barry McCaffrey?...Oh, boy....All your credentials and degrees, etc, don't make you credible to me...you ARE part of the problem...let me guess, you're white? And fairly well off...or your parents are...got a few hookups didn't you, to get where you are?NONE OF THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PIECE ARE CREDIBLE. Just like always... THEY LIE WITH FERVOR. Funny thing is ALL the prohibitionists NEVER come up with evidence? Just LIES. Come on Homer, give me something NOT from NIDA?!?!? Can you do it? How about reading the IOM report? Did they teach you to read at Oxford? How about DO RESEARCH? Or did you forget how to do that and learn how to LIE at the ONDCP?I WANT TO KNOW WHERE YOU OBTAINED YOUR EVIDENCE?More propagandist drivel FROM THE DUDE WHO WROTE THEM!?!?!?!?!SCHMUCK.idbsne1
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment