The DEA has filed notice of intent to add Kratom to schedule 1

 

Mitragyna speciosa111.JPG

Various forms of kratom and teas made from the plant’s leaves are sold in cafes and on the internet. Their primary effect is to provide a short-lived peaceful and calm feeling that is described as pleasant. Consistent with this effect being opioid-like, anecdotal reports indicate that some users have used kratom to successfully recover from physical and psychological dependence on prescription opioids and heroin. Comments on my last report on kratom have also indicated the successful use of teas made from the plant in managing chronic pain without the side effects and addictive potential of prescription opioids like oxycodone, hydrocodone and morphine. LINK

Due to be published in the “Federal Register” on August 31st, 2016 is the DEA’s “Intent to reschedule” the opioids mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine  These are the “ingredients” of the plant Kratom and they are placing it into schedule I using the “temporary scheduling provisions” of the Controlled Substances Act.

Federal Register Kratom

The Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued this document:

DOJ Kratom

There is a petition at Whitehouse.Gov that is asking the Federal Government to not go thru with this decision. 

KRATOM PETITION

 

The “drug war” has taken enough of our plants and enough of our lives.  We cannot continue to let them regulate us out of every plant of food and medicine which were given to us as Our “inalienable rights” as Human Beings and laid out in Our Constitution as such, and regulate it out of our reach through the use of “Agenda 21” as laid out by the United Nations, in which the United States is one of only five “permanent members”!

First, PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION, and then make phone calls and write letters to your Representatives concerning this issue!

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

RELATED STORIES:

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.” HOW THE UNITED NATIONS IS STEALING OUR “UNALIENABLE RIGHTS” TO GROW FOOD AND MEDICINE THROUGH THE U.N. CONVENTION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS AND AGENDA 21. Sheree Krider

The FDA Just Outlawed Hemp Oil – Secrets of the Fed.Com

FORBES announced today:  The DEA Is Placing Kratom And Mitragynine On Schedule I

Take Back Kentucky Legislative Action Alert

(KY) Oppose: Senate Bill 136: Banning of the Kratom Herb 2/22/2016
Advertisements

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.” HOW THE UNITED NATIONS IS STEALING OUR “UNALIENABLE RIGHTS” TO GROW FOOD AND MEDICINE THROUGH THE U.N. CONVENTION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS AND AGENDA 21.

clip_image002

10/25/2015

Sheree Krider

Because of the nature of the Beasts which we are dealing with in regards to the “War on Drugs” in general, but additionally because the Beasts are taking control of plants, food, medications and plant medicines worldwide at will, I feel it is imperative that we confront this issue now.

WHILE READING THIS KEEP IN MIND THAT THE U.S. HAS HAD A PATENT ON MARIJUANA SINCE 2003: #6,630,507 October 7, 2003 Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants.

This control is being achieved thru the United Nations which officially began on October 24, 1945, with the victors of World War II — China, the U.S.S.R., France, United Kingdom, and the United States — ratified the U.N. charter, creating the U.N. Security Council and establishing themselves as its five permanent members with the unique ability to veto resolutions. This ability keeps them in control of the U.N.

To date More than six in ten Americans have a favorable opinion of the U.N. as reported on the “Better World Campaign” website which is the funding source for the U.N.

The U.N. 1961 convention on narcotic drugs essentially set into motion the drug war as we know it today.

The United Nations Conference to consider amendments to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, met at the United Nations Office at Geneva Switzerland from 6 to 24 March 1972. 97 States were represented.

On November 7, 1972 President Richard Nixon was re-elected to office. It was on his watch that the amendments to the U.N. were enacted with an establishment of a “United Nations Fund for Drug Abuse Control.”

They readily admit that many of the drugs included have a useful and legitimate medical purpose and are necessary to maintain the health and general welfare of the American people.

The term ”addict” means any individual who habitually uses any narcotic drug. Who will determine when a narcotic has become habitual? The “Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 .

The Parties, recognizing the competence of the United Nations with respect to the international control of drugs, agree to entrust to the Commission on Narcotic Drugs of the Economic and Social Council, and to the International Narcotics Control Board, the functions respectively assigned to them under this Convention.”

The “Parties shall maintain a Special administration for the purpose of applying the Provisions of this Convention.” in the U.S. this was the Drug Enforcement Administration or DEA.

Article 28 control of cannabis states that if a party permits cultivation that the system of control is the same as for opium poppy in article 23 which requires licensing by the “agency” which in the case of the U.S. would be the DEA. The number of acres planted and harvested must be recorded and “the agency must purchase and take physical possession of” it. The agency has exclusive rights to importing, exporting, and wholesale trading. It is also subject to limitations on production.

This is total control of the plant by the U.N. and effectively eliminates any chance of personal growing.

Natural growing plants which are included in Schedule 1 are marijuana, mescaline (peyote), psilocybin, and Khat. Other drugs are also included in this list.

More common opiates such as hydrocodone are included in Schedule II. These are regulated and handed out at the will of the government thru the medical industrial complex. How many people have been refused a prescription for Valium or Xanax in the past year because of a positive drug screening for Marijuana? How many people who do not consume Marijuana have been cut off as well because the DEA has, for all practical purposes, threatened the physician’s livelihood thru Statutes and “Bills” which have cut people off from their medications with no warning in the past year or two?

Title 21 states that the rules shall not apply to the cultivation of cannabis/hemp plant for industrial purposes only – however, it also does not say that hemp may be used for medicine without restriction.

Article 33 states that the parties shall not permit the possession of drugs without legal authority.

In the 1972 Protocol Amending The Single Convention On Narcotic Drugs 1961 Article 49 states that:

f) The use of Cannabis for other than medical and scientific purposes must be discontinued as soon as possible but in any case within twenty-five years from the coming into force of this Convention as provided in paragraph 1 of article 41.

1972 + 25 = 1997

Ironically enough the first medical cannabis law was enacted by California in 1996 – just in time to meet the 25 year deadline for ending all use of cannabis except for medical and scientific purposes…

Proposition 215, or the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, is a California law allowing the use of medical cannabis despite marijuana’s lack of the normal Food and Drug Administration testing for safety and efficacy. It was enacted, on November 5, 1996, by means of the initiative process, and passed with 5,382,915 (55.6%) votes in favor and 4,301,960 (44.4%) against.

As I stated previously, in the U.S. the governing agency would be the DEA and on July 1, 1973 this agency officially came into existence in accordance with the U.N. Treaties which the U.S. government created and implemented. THE DEA HAS AN Annual Budget of $2.4 billion.

THE DEA Controlled Substances Act, TITLE 21 – FOOD AND DRUGS, CHAPTER 13 – DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL EFFECTIVE Oct. 27, 1970, SUBCHAPTER I – CONTROL AND ENFORCEMENT,

States that:

“(1) If control is required by United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on October 27, 1970, the Attorney General shall issue an order controlling such drug under the schedule he deems most appropriate to carry out such obligations, without regard to the findings required by subsection (a) of this section or section 812(b) of this title and without regard to the procedures prescribed by subsections (a) and (b) of this section.”

Meaning, it does not matter what the U.S. Citizens (or any other country for that matter) has to say about Cannabis or any other drug or plant on the list of U.N. control we are bound by the U.N. Treaty first and foremost, which was set into place by our own government.

“In 1986, the Reagan Administration began recommending a drug testing program for employers as part of the War on Drugs program. In 1988, Drug Free Workplace regulations required that any company with a contract over $25,000 with the Federal government provide a Drug-Free Workplace. This program must include drug testing.”

Manfred Donike, in 1966, the German biochemist demonstrated that an Agilent (then Hewlett-Packard) gas chromatograph could be used to detect anabolic steroids and other prohibited substances in athletes’ urine samples. Donike began the first full-scale testing of athletes at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, using eight HP gas chromatographs linked to an HP computer.

YEP, HP IS HEWLETT PACKARD…His method reduced the screening process from 15 steps to three, and was considered so scientifically accurate that no outside challenges to his findings were allowed.

HP has laboratories around the globe in three major locations, one of which happens to be in Israel. Late Republican Senator Jesse Helms used to call Israel “America’s aircraft carrier in the Middle East”, when explaining why the United States viewed Israel as such a strategic ally, saying that the military foothold in the region offered by the Jewish State alone justified the military aid that the United States grants Israel every year.

Most everybody thinks that the Cannabis issue is a U.S. issue and an issue unto itself, not encompassed within the issue of control of the masses, and at least as far as our own laws/statutes are concerned. “ALL WE NEED TO DO IS GET OUR STATE TO LEGALIZE IT”. This couldn’t be farther from the truth.

We are all rolled up into the UN by virtue of our own Country which used this as a means to control worldwide, the people, without ever having to answer for or take responsibility for it again. Why? Because it is now a UN issue. And WE ARE BOUND by the UN treaties, as one of 5 founding members, who now rule the world.

Welcome to “THE NEW WORLD ORDER”. Yep, it’s been around a long time, we just didn’t notice it in time. Our men had just gone through a horrific war (WWII) and were too beat down and TOO sick to fight again and most likely didn’t even notice or worse yet thought the U.N. was a good thing that would prevent another WWII….. WELL, WELCOME TO WWIII AKA THE “DRUG WAR”.

I don’t care which State you reside in it is NOT legal to possess or use Marijuana in any form or fashion. You are living in an “Illusion.

As long as the U.N. has control over all narcotics in any form, we as a people will not legally be able to grow cannabis or any other plant that they categorize as narcotic.

What they will do for us is to use us like Guinea pigs in a testing environment to accumulate enough information whereby cannabis can be deemed a potentially useful drug from a pharmacological standpoint and then they can turn it over to the pharmaceutical companies to sell to us through commerce as a prescription. This is happening as we speak.

The drug war was created for us, and the prison industrial complex which they set up for control of us is the holding center for the Guinea pigs which are “us”.

They make sure enough of it gets out there that we can continue to use it illegally and they can study it at the same time they are locking us up for doing just that — using and studying marijuana. This in effect creates a double paycheck for them as they are keeping the prisons full and instituting private prisons for commerce and at the same time they are collecting information about the beneficial uses of cannabis thru drug testing patients. As well, those who seek employment or who are already employed with are targeted by random testing, and they collect our medical records for research at the same time the physicians are tagging us as cannabis abusers for reference via the ICD-10 codes used on medical claim forms submitted to the Insurance companies by our doctors’ offices. Essentially anyone who is a marijuana user is rounded up by the legal and medical system. If you use marijuana you cannot hide the fact unless you are part of the drug cartel itself and do not seek employment or medical care anywhere in the U.S. The marijuana cartel remains intact because they are “self-employed”.

Additionally, HIPPA states that In the course of conducting research, researchers may obtain, create, use, and/or disclose individually identifiable health information. Under the (HIPPA) Privacy Rule, covered entities are permitted to use and disclose protected health information for research with individual authorization, or without individual authorization under limited circumstances set forth in the Privacy Rule.

As far as Pharma Drugs are concerned, I must quote from Ms. Cris Ericson of the Vermont Marijuana Party, who stated, “People can no longer afford the pharmaceutical industry. The U.S. Congress votes to give research money to the pharmaceutical companies who invent new prescription drugs by synthesizing natural herbs, and then the pharmaceutical companies claim ownership of the new Rx patent, but it was the taxpayers who paid for the research. The taxpayers, under the patent law which states that “work made for hire, should own 50% of the patent” should rightfully be paid. The pharmaceutical companies not only profit wrongfully, by taking ownership of the patent that the taxpayers paid the research for, but then they take their huge profits and donate millions of dollars to PAC’s political action committees and Super PAC’s and then the PAC’s donate money to the U.S. Congress, so your taxpayer dollars have come full circle, and that looks just like money laundering, because millions of your taxpayer dollars end up in the campaign war chests of the elected officials.”

To that I must add that even if you obtain your medications for a $0 copay, you have paid for them already via taxation of the general public. Even those persons on disability or other government subsidy pay tax every time they make a purchase.

The U.N. Convention and the CSA both state that, “No prescriptions may be written for Schedule I substances, and they are not readily available for clinical use. NOTE: Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC, marijuana) is still considered a Schedule 1 drug by the DEA, even though some U.S. states have legalized marijuana for personal, recreational use or for medical use. May 4, 2014”

This issue gains even more momentum when you understand that it is not just about cannabis/hemp/marijuana. It also involves all food and plants which are coming under their jurisdiction.

It is entirely possible that just as they can use drug testing to determine what drugs you put into your body they could develop testing to determine what foods you are eating. Imagine being “food tested” to see if you ingested beef or broccoli that was illegal to be in possession of! It seems an exaggeration but entirely within the realm of possibility.

HENCEFORTH, AGENDA 21…

The national focal point in the United States is the Division Chief for Sustainable Development and Multilateral Affairs, Office of Environmental Policy, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of State.

A June 2012 poll of 1,300 United States voters by the American Planning Association found that 9% supported Agenda 21, 6% opposed it, and 85% thought they didn’t have enough information to form an opinion.

The United States is a signatory country to Agenda 21, but because Agenda 21 is a legally non-binding statement of intent and not a treaty, the United States Senate was not required to hold a formal debate or vote on it. It is therefore not considered to be law under Article Six of the United States Constitution. President George H. W. Bush was one of the 178 heads of government who signed the final text of the agreement at the Earth Summit in 1992, and in the same year Representatives Nancy Pelosi, Eliot Engel and William Broomfield spoke in support of United States House of Representatives Concurrent Resolution 353, supporting implementation of Agenda 21 in the United States. In the United States, over 528 cities are members of ICLEI, an international sustainability organization that helps to implement the Agenda 21 and Local Agenda 21 concepts across the world.

During the last decade, opposition to Agenda 21 has increased within the United States at the local, state, and federal levels. The Republican National Committee has adopted a resolution opposing Agenda 21, and the Republican Party platform stated that “We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty.” Several state and local governments have considered or passed motions and legislation opposing Agenda 21. Alabama became the first state to prohibit government participation in Agenda 21. Many other states, including Arizona, are drafting, and close to passing legislation to ban Agenda 21.

The Committee on World Food Security (CFS) was established in 1974 as an intergovernmental body to serve as a forum in the United Nations System for review and follow-up of policies concerning world food security including production and physical and economic access to food. The CFS Bureau and Advisory Group-The Bureau is the executive arm of the CFS . It is made up of a Chairperson and twelve member countries. The Advisory group is made up of representatives from the 5 different categories of CFS Participants. These are: 1 UN agencies and other UN bodies; 2 Civil society and non-governmental organizations particularly organizations representing smallholder family farmers, fisherfolks, herders, landless, urban poor, agricultural and food workers, women, youth, consumers and indigenous people; 3 International agricultural research institutions; 4 International and regional financial institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, regional development banks and the World Trade Organization; 5 Private sector associations and philanthropic foundations.

FREEDOM ADVOCATES OPPOSITION TO AGENDA 21:

“Even the term “sustainable” must be defined, since on the surface it appears to be inherently positive. In reality, Sustainable Development has become a “buzz” term that refers to a political agenda, rather than an objectively sustainable form of development. Specifically, it refers to an initiative of the United Nations (U.N.) called Sustainable Development Agenda 21. Sustainable Development Agenda 21 is a comprehensive statement of a political ideology that is being progressively infused into every level of government in America.”

Webster’s 1828 dictionary defines unalienable as “not alienable; that cannot be alienated; that may not be transferred; as in unalienable rights” and inalienable as “cannot be legally or justly alienated or transferred to another.”

The Declaration of Independence reads:

“That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…”

This means that human beings are imbued with unalienable rights which cannot be altered by law whereas inalienable rights are subject to remaking or revocation in accordance with man-made law. Inalienable rights are subject to changes in the law such as when property rights are given a back seat to emerging environmental law or free speech rights give way to political correctness. In these situations no violation has occurred by way of the application of inalienable rights – a mere change in the law changes the nature of the right. Whereas under the original doctrine of unalienable rights the right to the use and enjoyment of private property cannot be abridged (other than under the doctrine of “nuisance” including pollution of the public water or air or property of another). The policies behind Sustainable Development work to obliterate the recognition of unalienable rights. For instance, Article 29 subsection 3 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights applies the “inalienable rights” concept of human rights:

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

Read that phrase again, carefully! “Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

It suffices to say that the “war on drugs” is a war on us as a people. It is entwined with the United Nations and agenda 21. It is control of the masses through the illusion of a better world and offers peace and harmony to all people. It sounds really good on the surface until you start analyzing the issues at hand. The problem is that its intent is ultimately to control everything and everybody.

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the united nation”…there you have it in one sentence, straight out of the horse’s mouth. The new world order is now. If we continue down this path, sooner rather than later we will be told that we can no longer grow our own food, or meat, eggs, cheese, etc. It must be purchased through a reputable source – the grocery stores and the pharmacy so it can be “regulated”.

Our rights to the cannabis/marijuana plant has all but been lost at this point and if we do not do something immediately to regain it and continue passing illegal statutes (by virtue of the U.N.) state to state is not going to hold up in the long run because, first of all, federally it remains illegal and they can squash those legalization antics at any time, and most of all the U.N. owns it. And who owns the U.N.? The United States and five other countries which are china, Russia, France and the U.K.

It seems to me that the placing of these plants (including marijuana, and peyote) into a “U.N. Convention of Narcotic Drugs” was just the first step in their taking total control of all people throughout the world through their access to food and medication, and was and still is a test case to see if it would work in their favor. So far it seems it is working in their favor because we are losing the ability to fight back on a political basis and their guns are bigger than ours.

The fact that for years we have blamed the eradication of marijuana on Harry Anslinger even though the LaGuardia commission refuted his findings and Harry Anslinger himself later admitted his testimony wasn’t true and in fact marijuana was relatively harmless, only proves that the rhetoric remained in place for ulterior motives.

When the 1937 tax act was repealed in 1969 in Timothy Leary v. United States, the Controlled Substance Act of 1970 picked up and took over keeping the plant from us yet again. To this day it remains illegal although individual states within the U.S. are attempting to change that, the fact still remains that legally it is still a schedule 1 at the federal level and since federal law trumps state law we are getting next to nowhere.

The only thing that state legalization does do, is keep the state authorities from prosecuting except within the realm of the individual state statutes. At least we are fighting back and gaining momentum in that we are letting them know how we feel about it! Other than that at any time everything gained could be lost at the whim of the federal government.

If we do not focus on regaining the freedom of cannabis from the U.N. now, not only will it be forever lost to pharma, all of our food, medicines and plants are going right along with it and we will not ever be able to get them back. And if you think the prison industrial complex is a monstrosity now just wait till we are being locked up for growing a tomato or hiding a laying hen in our closet just to have access to an egg. Yes, I believe that it will get that bad in the not so far future.

So if you are not worried about it because you do not smoke marijuana, you might ought to worry about it because your grandkids will still need to eat whether or not they have cannabis as a medication through the pharmaceutical industrial complex. And to top it all off, what happens when you “break the law” by planting food and they find out and take away your right to obtain food much the same way they have taken away our rights to obtain scheduled medications because you tested positive for marijuana? (Don’t worry too much I am sure they will let you “something” to eat!)

We must have access to our own gardens and herbal plants because virtually every “drug” made comes from a plant and both prescription drugs and over the counter medications are at risk and could disappear rapidly. Remember over-the-counter pseudoephedrine? Every time they want to take something out of our hands they make it illegal and claim it is for the greater good. You may very well need to grow your own medicine too because if you do not meet their requirements they won’t let you have any of theirs.

It is a fact that cannabis/hemp is a food and a medicine. By withholding it from us they have effectively made many of us weaker through endocanabinoid deficiency and people are becoming sicker in general from the foods that we ingest as well as the ones that we do not have access to. Our ability to stand up to an enemy of any kind on a physical scale has been dramatically affected by both nutrition and the chemicals we are exposed to in our food and in our air and water as well as required inoculations against various diseases. Our children are having the worse reactions to all this which can be seen by the rise in not only autism but other birth defects as well.

The most important thing to note is that cannabis, food and medicine is something that everyone needs to have access to in various forms for various reasons. If it is only available thru a controlled environment then we will be subjected to probable malnutrition and genocide. Our health has become bad enough already due to corporate food and medicine. We certainly do not need it to get any worse. Is this going to be total population control via food and medicine? I am afraid so.

“People who don’t get enough food often experience and over the long term this can lead to malnutrition. But someone can become malnourished for reasons that have nothing to do with hunger. Even people who have plenty to eat may be malnourished if they don’t eat foods that provide the right nutrients, vitamins, and minerals.”

NOW THAT THE BEAST HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED, WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION TO TAKE?

Probably the best thing we can do right is to demand cannabis sativa and any naturally growing plant removed from United Nations control and the Controlled Substance Act in the U.S.

Additionally, Agenda 21 needs to be eliminated as it stands now. No entity should be allowed total control over plants and food, especially those grown in our own garden.

However, it is a fact that any type of food or medicine created and/or sold by a corporate entity has to be governed. Their entire purpose is to make money and they will do anything to accomplish that including selling us pink slime for meat. That is what should be governed.

It seems to me that the FDA is not doing its job correctly. Protect the people, not the corporations. The fact that a corporation has its own “personhood” is just totally ridiculous and must end.

The United Nations itself could be modified into an agency that protects the unalienable rights of the people throughout the world. It cannot police the world however. And it cannot rule the people as a government does. For this reason any policing agencies that are international such as Interpol must be eliminated. This would throw the policing back to the people’s own respective countries and the people of those countries will have to police their own governments to ensure that they keep the will of their people as top priority while governing.

Will this mean that war will continue to be a fixture in our world? Yes, of course it does. War always has been and always will be. It is the next closest thing to “God” that exists in that aspect. But if each country’s government has jurisdiction over its own people then the citizens can decide who will be ‘in charge’. If they need help during a crisis then other countries can step in to help where needed at the time and as they choose to do so. If the whole world comes under the rule of one governing body then we would have no control anymore at all. And this is what it seems to be leading up to – one governing body ruling virtually the entire planet with the ‘head’ of that governing body being the five original victors of WWII: the United States, Russia (U.S.S.R), France, China and the U.K.

World War II never really ended, it just changed it course. We have to put an end to this global war against all God’s people and the time is now! If you do not believe in god then you can say we have to put an end to the war against world humanity. It means basically the same thing – at least to me.

Just say no!

clip_image003

NOTES & REFERENCE LINKS:

Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6 (1969), is a U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with the constitutionality of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937. Timothy Leary, a professor and activist, was arrested for the possession of marijuana in violation of the Marihuana Tax Act. Leary challenged the act on the ground that the act required self-incrimination, which violated the Fifth Amendment. The unanimous opinion of the court was penned by Justice John Marshall Harlan II and declared the Marihuana Tax Act unconstitutional. Thus, Leary’s conviction was overturned. Congress responded shortly thereafter by repealing the Marihuana Tax Act and passing the Controlled Substances Act to continue the prohibition of certain drugs in the United States.

“By 2020, 30 billion connected devices will generate unprecedented amounts of data. The infrastructure required to collect, process, store, and analyze this data requires transformational changes in the foundations of computing. Bottom line: current systems can’t handle where we are headed and we need a new solution. HP has that solution in The Machine. ”

Ban Ki-moon (Hangul: ???; hanja: ???; born 13 June 1944) is a South Korean statesman and politician who is the eighth and current Secretary-General of the United Nations. Before becoming Secretary-General, Ban was a career diplomat in South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and in the United Nations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slime

http://kidshealth.org/parent/growth/feeding/hunger.html

http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/birthdefects/types.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/27/autism-rates-rise/6957815/

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/

http://www.nel.edu/pdf_/25_12/NEL251204R02_Russo_.pdf

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6630507.PN.&OS=PN/6630507&RS=PN/6630507

http://hemp.org/news/book/export/html/626

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/anslng1.htm

http://www.freedomadvocates.org/understanding-unalienable-rights-2/

http://www.freedomadvocates.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_World_Food_Security

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld

https://www.worldwewant2015.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93United_States_relations

http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/systems-research/themachine/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Labs#Labs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manfred_Donike

http://www.globalsources.com/manufacturers/Drug-Test-Kit.html?keywords=_inurl%3A%2Fmanufacturers%2F&matchtype=b&device=c&WT.mc_id=1001007&WT.srch=1&gclid=Cj0KEQjw2KyxBRCi2rK11NCDw6UBEiQAO-tljUJHHVLsYxnVYIjclmlCiwuLEH2akAa-iTolJ2zN6-8aAjtm8P8HAQ

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/cfr/2108cfrt.htm

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/cfr/1308/1308_11.htm

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title21/chapter13&edition=prelim

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title21/chapter13&edition=prelim

http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/legislation/ucm148726.htm#cntlsbc

http://www.medicinehunter.com/plant-medicines

http://www.unfoundation.org/what-we-do/issues/united-nations/advocating-us-funding-un.html

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/index.html

http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/cam/hp/cannabis-pdq

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=2767

Titles II and III Of The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act Of 1970 (Pub-Lic Law 91–513) https://legcounsel.house.gov/Comps/91-513.pdf

Let’s talk about DOJ enforcement of marijuana laws…(on Tribal Lands)

 

15890419-cannabis-leaf-isolated-on-white-background.jpg

 

 

December 12, 2014

 

Sheree Krider

 

In reference to the last post regarding the enforcement of marijuana laws on tribal lands:

Justice Department on Thursday will tell U.S. attorneys to not prevent tribes from growing or selling marijuana on the sovereign lands

Today, via this link, the Department of Justice, as reported by the LA Times has/will produce a “Memorandum” concerning the enforcement of marijuana laws on Tribal Lands which seems to say that they will not bother prosecuting Federal laws on marijuana anymore.

The Justice Department will generally not try to enforce federal marijuana laws on Native American reservations.

“The new guidance, released in a memorandum, will be implemented on a case-by-case basis and tribes must still follow federal guidelines, said Timothy Purdon, the U.S. attorney for North Dakota and the chairman of the Attorney General’s Subcommittee on Native American Issues.”

The policy comes on the heels of the 2013 Justice Department decision to stop most federal marijuana prosecutions in states that have legalized the possession or sale of pot.

I would caution everyone to be very slow to rush in and shout a victory has been won.

The Federal Government has a way of making you think you have won freedoms which in effect you have not as the regulations surrounding that freedom end up making you into a criminal over and over again. Kind of like the CBD bill in Kentucky which it turns out you can buy CBD (with no THC) online all day long and it is legal without a prescription!  So why did we fight for the CBD bill?  So that the Physicians, Pharmas, and other corporate and government entities can make money on the bandwagon to “legalize” on the backs of all of us.

This MEMORANDUM which personally I have not seen published yet, should be studied closely as to what it actually MEANS, not just what it seems to say.

First of all a memorandum from the Department of Justice does not mean they have REPEALED the statutes in existence at the federal level regarding marijuana.  They can and likely will continue to interfere with marijuana production and sales.

This has been proven over and over again in all “legalized” or “medical” states that the Feds can and do still come in to support the “regulating” of the marijuana statutes.

As well, the U.N. has NOT at this point “repealed” any treaty regarding the use of marijuana in any form.  They have “talked about” changing the way that the “drug problem” is handled.  That being said, marijuana is still illegal. See these links:

U.S. states’ pot legalization not in line with international law: U.N. agency

More Police or More Doctors? How to Best Tackle Illicit Drugs: November 6, 2014

So while the Reservations get ready for their “grand openings” at the cannabis casino that they have most likely already planned for, I hope that they realize that once again they may be giving away their sovereign rights via pending “legalization”…

It’s all in the semantics…

Read between the lines first…

smk

The White House: Release and pardon Marc Emery

 
 
Christopher Seekins

Granby, CT

Some stand for freedom, others oppose it. Each brings us in a different direction. For those of us who enjoy our freedom we thank people like Marc who has a global vision of standards. The United states constitution was founded on common law jurisdiction. This is essentially a contract of protection for the people. The states of America have adapted the Uniform Commercial Code which governs international contracts of protection. The Uniform Commercial Code or UCC particular to 1-103.6 indicates statutory jurisdiction in Admiralty Courts such as the US courts must have standards in accordance with common law jurisdiction reserving rights and remedy there of. The ability to extort a person into a plea bargain is not merit to cause injury to Marcs life or take away the freedom from others lives that he generates living freely. Marcs actions have not hurt any one and there is no justification to injure many lives in this case. Marc amongst other things is to thank for bringing freedom of the press to Canada with the opening of his book store and petitioning of the public as true democracy makes possible. Marc is a patriot of every country and should be treated as such. To do anything else is of a criminal nature.

Release and pardon Marc Emery

Marc Emery is a Canadian businessman and political activist who owned and operated Cannabis Culture Magazine, Pot-TV, the BC Marijuana Party, and Marc Emery’s Cannabis Culture Headquarters (previously the BCMP Bookstore, and HEMP BC before that.)
He was also the world’s most famous marijuana seed retailer and the biggest financial supporter of the marijuana movement world-wide until the US Drug Enforcement Administration and Canadian law enforcement arrested him in Canada and shut down Marc Emery Direct Seeds in July 2005.
Marc is currently imprisoned in Yazoo City medium-security prison in Yazoo City, Mississippi after being extradited on May 20th, 2010 by the Canadian government. He was sentenced on September 10th in Seattle federal court to 5 years in prison for “distribution of marijuana” seeds, though the US Drug Enforcement Administration admitted it was actually for his political activism and financing the marijuana movement (see below for that DEA document).

FACTS ABOUT MARC EMERY:

• Marc Emery is a Canadian citizen who never went to the USA as a seed seller.

• Marc Emery operated his seed business in Canada at all times, with no American branches or employees.

• Marc Emery declared his income from marijuana seed sales on his income tax, and paid over $580,000 to the Federal and Provincial governments from 1999 to 2005.

• Marc Emery is the leader of the British Columbia Marijuana Party, a registered political party that has regularly participated in elections.

• Marc Emery has never been arrested or convicted of manufacturing or distributing marijuana in Canada, as he only sold seeds.

• Marc Emery gave away all of the profits from his seed business to drug law reform lobbyists, political parties, global protests and rallies, court litigation, medical marijuana initiatives, drug rehabilitation clinics, and other legitimate legal activities and organizations.

• Marc Emery helped found the United States Marijuana Party, state-level political parties, and international political parties in countries such as Israel and New Zealand.

• Marc Emery has been known as a book seller and activist in Canada for 30 years, fighting against censorship laws and other social issues long before he became a drug law reform activist.

• Marc Emery has been a media figure for 20 years with regards to marijuana and drug law reform. He is very well-known to Canadian, American and international news media organizations.

• Marc Emery operated his business in full transparency and honesty since its inception in 1994, even sending his marijuana seed catalogue inside his magazine “Cannabis Culture” to each Member of Parliament in Canada every two months for years.

Marc openly ran “Marc Emery Direct Marijuana Seeds” from a store in downtown Vancouver and through mail-order from 1994 to 2005, with the goal to fund anti-prohibition and pro-marijuana activists and organizations across North America and the world.
Marc always paid all provincial and federal taxes on his income and made no secret to anyone of his seed-selling business. Marc was raided by police for selling seeds and bongs in 1996 and again in 1997 and 1998, but despite the seizure of his stock by police, the Canadian courts sentenced Emery only to fines and no jail time.
Canadian police then pressured the American Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to launch a cross-border attack against Marc. They arranged to have him charged under America’s much more severe laws against seeds.
Marc was arrested in Canada by American agents in 2005, and originally faced a minimum 30-year sentence in the US, with the possibility of life behind bars. After years of legal efforts, and ensuring his two co-accused received no prison time, Marc made a plea-bargain for a five-year sentence in the US. Marc had originally secured a deal with US officials to serve his five-year sentence in Canada, but the Conservative Government of Canada refused to allow this, and forced him to be extradited to the US.
The US Drug Enforcement Administration admitted on the day of Marc Emery’s arrest that his investigation and extradition were politically motivated, designed to target the marijuana legalization efforts and organizations that Emery spearheaded and financed for over a decade.

Here is the original text of DEA Administrator Karen Tandy’s statement released on July 29th, 2005 (also available in its original letterhead form by clicking here):

“Today’s DEA arrest of Marc Scott Emery, publisher of Cannabis Culture Magazine, and the founder of a marijuana legalization group — is a significant blow not only to the marijuana trafficking trade in the U.S. and Canada, but also to the marijuana legalization movement.

His marijuana trade and propagandist marijuana magazine have generated nearly $5 million a year in profits that bolstered his trafficking efforts, but those have gone up in smoke today.

Emery and his organization had been designated as one of the Attorney General’s most wanted international drug trafficking organizational targets — one of only 46 in the world and the only one from Canada.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars of Emery’s illicit profits are known to have been channeled to marijuana legalization groups active in the United States and Canada. Drug legalization lobbyists now have one less pot of money to rely on.”
On May 10th, 2010, Marc was ordered extradited by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson. He was taken to the USA on May 20th. Marc was forced to endure three weeks of complete solitary confinement for recording a “prison podcast” over the phone for release on the internet. You can listen to his 2009 “Prison Pot-casts” by clicking here.
Release and pardon Marc Emery

Kindest of regards
Christopher Seekins
www.gorillagrow.org
CEO Harmony World Wide

Petition Letter

USE THIS LINK TO SIGN PETITION!

OIG releases an audit of DEA adoptive seizure process and equitable sharing requests. On September 27, 2012, in Drug War, federal, states, by Scott Alexander Meiner

 

image

 

The Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) released an audit of Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) adoptive seizure process and equitable sharing requests. A couple of quick notes:

1.) Of instances involving federal adoption of assets seized, 65% of reported samples [41 of the 63 examined samples] required DEA headquarter approval to adopt the seizure because the instance lacked all of the following criteria:

  1. the seizure was based on a federal or state judicial seizure warrant;
  2. an arrest was made for a felony violation of the Controlled Substances Act or an equivalent state felony charge that would be a felony if pursued under federal law; and/or
  3. drugs or other contraband associated with a federal felony drug offense were also confiscated at the time of seizure.

2.) The OIG report notes “for the period of October 1, 2000, through September 30, 2011, the DEA and other federal agencies processed over 150,644 seized assets valued at about $9.2 billion of which $5.5 billion (60 percent) originated from seizures processed by the DEA and $3.7 billion (40 percent) originated from seizures processed by other federal agencies.” [Another $522 million in DEA seizured assets was noted but omitted from analysis for a lack of equitable sharing requests.]

3.) The OIG report features a disturbing trend line and reproduces a misguided–but revealing–definition of forfeiture:

The DOJ Criminal Division defines forfeiture as “the taking of property derived from a crime, involved in a crime, or that which makes a crime easier to commit or harder to detect without compensating the owner.”

THIS LINK TO PDF PUBLICATION

THIS LINK TO WEBSITE

Collective endurance: A decade later, lasting impacts from famed WAMM marijuana bust near Davenport

 

 

By JASON HOPPIN – Santa Cruz Sentinel

DAVENPORT – On Sept. 5, 2002, the country was debating whether to invade Iraq to rid the country of weapons of mass destruction, just as it was bracing for the first anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks. Stocks were still down, but the Oakland A’s had just notched their record 20th straight win.

Early that morning, 30 federal Drug Enforcement Agency-led law enforcement officers stormed the Wo/Men’s Medical Marijuana Alliance, a high-profile collective with a small pot farm outside Davenport, chopping down plants and setting off a furor with lasting impacts on the statewide medical marijuana debate that endures today.

“I just remember waking up at 6:45 a.m., because I heard vehicles in the driveway of the house I was in,” recalled WAMM’s Mike Corral recently, who looked out to see agents carrying a battering ram. “We always knew that there was this possibility of the feds doing something. [But] at the time, we were the darlings of the medical marijuana movement.”

Founders Mike and Valerie Corral were never charged, but the raid spurred a lengthy court case, contributed to local suspicions of federal law enforcement and beatified the Corrals as the spiritual center of the medical marijuana movement. Last week marked the 10th anniversary of the raid, and several key figures reflected on their roles.

“I think that event was one of the most important developments in the growth of understanding about medical marijuana in the country,” said local attorney Ben Rice, part of an all-star legal team that leaped to the Corrals’ defense.

But for a long time, prison was a real possibility. For Valerie Corral, the saga began when she heard boots crossing her porch. She knew who it was before she saw them, but said she was inoculated by calm.

GUN TO HER HEAD

“Something happened when they pushed me to the ground and put a gun to my head,” Corral recalled. “It’s hard to say exactly what it was. I wouldn’t say I felt safe with a gun to my head – I’m not trying to make light or change the image – but there was something that came together and strengthened inside of me.”

For the next several hours, Corral says she bent the ears of federal agents about the miracles of medical marijuana. The Corrals were taken to a holding facility in San Jose, while patients, some of whom needed help walking, gravitated toward the Corrals’ property and barricaded the police in.

Back in San Jose, agents asked the Corrals to help disperse the crowd, which they did.

“I didn’t want the energy to shift away,” Valerie Corral said. “I didn’t want it to become a screaming match.”

“I made this comment to an agent and said, ‘What do we have here, a hostage exchange situation?,'” Mike Corral said. “And he actually laughed a little bit.”

It turned out to be a wise move. Sympathetic to broad swaths of the community, the Corrals were embraced, with a medical marijuana giveaway even organized on the steps of Santa Cruz City Hall.

“I always said it was like representing Mother Teresa,” said Santa Clara University Law School professor Gerald Uelmen, of Valerie. “She is the most compassionate person I think I’ve ever encountered.”

By this point, the story of the raid had gone national. Many states were following in California’s Proposition 215’s footsteps, and the Bush Administration seemed to be drawing a line in the dirt. Hundreds of reporters were on hand for the pot giveaway and CNN carried the story live.

“Virtually every mayor in, at that time, the last 20 years was there,” Rice said.

Valerie Corral said she and Mike, now separated, spent the night in a hotel to avoid the risk of being taken back into custody before the big day.

MEMBERS CARRY ON

WAMM members kept the collective going by scrounging together marijuana and distributing it, and the DEA appeared unaware the Corrals had recently secured an industrial office on Santa Cruz’ Westside, which is still in use. But members said marijuana was in short supply, and that the raid contributed to the deaths of many.

“Sure, they were going to die anyway. It’s just that they died faster than they should have. And in pain that they shouldn’t have had, because they took the medicine away,” said longtime WAMM member Leona Powell, while rolling joints recently at WAMM’s Westside office.

The raid seemed divisive, not just among local police – who had long known the Corrals – but perhaps even among federal law enforcement.

Santa Cruz deputies did not participate, and then-San Jose Police Chief William Lansdowne later yanked his officers off a joint DEA marijuana task force that executed the raid.

Many WAMM members also believe the raid order came from Washington and surprised the local U.S. attorney’s office. Deborah SilverKnight, a patient then and now, said she even got a call from then-Sheriff Mark Tracy telling her what had happened. Rice was alerted by the county’s top jailer.

“It was very tragic. Surreal,” SilverKnight said.

The Corrals moved to suppress evidence from the raid before it even went to a grand jury, and it was clear fairly early that they wouldn’t be charged. (Within months, federal drug prosecutors would turn their attention to another co-op – a storefront called the Bay Area Laboratory Cooperative, or BALCO, signaling the federal effort to root illegal steroids from pro sports.)

VICTORY IN COURT

Nevertheless, WAMM members went on the offensive, suing the Justice Department. U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel eventually ordered that their farm be left alone, and the case stands as the only clear win for the medical marijuana movement in federal court.

WAMM struggles forward today. The collective was organized along Marxist principles – from each according to their abilities, to each according to their need – and has never been a cash register for its owners.

“We’re connected to the people that we serve, and each of us serves one another,” Corral said.

For all the well-placed criticism of the state’s medical marijuana industry, WAMM’s patients have always tended to be truly and severely ill. But it also acknowledges market realities, recently diversifying its product range and now offering cannabidiol-rich pot.

Richard Johnson, who has HIV, said many at WAMM mix marijuana with more traditional medicines. To control an illness, he added, one must be able to control their medicine.

“The beauty about this group is we have the support of people with very different illnesses coming here,” Johnson said. “We share information about what helps you heal, both mentally and physically.”

REMEMBERING FRIENDS

The collective has had thousands of members over the years, and 361 have died. WAMM is collecting pictures of the deceased, assembling them into a mural in their Almar Street office. Valerie Corral seems to hold each one especially close, having visited many deathbeds.

“You think you know something,” she said, “until you sit so close to something that you cannot imagine.”

Most see the raid as backfiring on the federal government. WAMM was a public relations nightmare, and partly because of that, arguably a bigger legal problem for the feds than the Corrals. Mike Corral believes a prosecution might have toppled federal drug laws.

Ten years later, the state is in the midst of another searching debate about medical marijuana and how much autonomy California should have regulating it, with many accusing President Obama’s administration of backtracking on a hands-off pledge.

Several dispensaries have been targeted for raids, with federal prosecutors saying they are targeting marijuana profiteers – something Corral (who believes the pharmaceutical industry is preparing to enter the business) has criticized. And in an uncertain legal environment, many have shut their doors.

“I think it really taught the feds a lesson that they took to heart,” said Uelmen, who brings his drug abuse law seminar students to WAMM. “I think it’s still being taken to heart. The fact that all these other dispensaries are being raided but WAMM is openly operating reflects that we taught the feds to make some distinctions that there are legitimate patients out there whose health depends on marijuana.”

‘WE WON THE WAR’

And when asked about the legacy of the raid, Mike Corral is clear: it led to the expansion of dispensaries throughout the state and the country.

“Medical marijuana is a done deal, in the United States and worldwide,” Corral said. “We won the war; it’s just ‘What are the terms of surrender going to be?'”

Valerie Corral said the raid also contributed to a personal evolution.

“It’s interesting how it moved us toward becoming the people that we really wanted to be,” she said. “To help us model ourselves after the many activists, civil rights activists that had gone before us and taught us, and taught the world to awaken. To recognize that we’re walking among need, and great suffering. To become what we wanted to be as human beings. To offer something that’s bigger than ourselves to other people.”

Follow Sentinel reporter Jason Hoppin on Twitter: @scnewsdude

CONTINUE READING

Absolute Asinine Laws

Life in Prison for Hemp

José Peña brought some roadside weeds home from Kansas. Cops decided it was reefer, and a Texas court sentenced him to life in prison – without the evidence. It took a decade for Peña to get back some of the pieces of his life.

By Jordan Smith, Fri., March 16, 2012

Life in Prison for Hemp

José Peña was tired as he drove south toward Houston on the morning of Sept. 27, 1998. Following a quick trip north to Kansas in a rented van – to pick up the brother of a distant cousin’s son – he was on his way home to Houston, where he lived with his wife and four children. It was the kind of favor Peña often did for friends and family, no matter how distant the relation – and the kind of favor that irritated his wife. “I was tired, and I was trying to get home,” the 50-year-old recently recalled. “My wife was mad at me for doing favors for other people” when he could instead be home.

That morning, just before 8am, Peña was cruising south down I-45, a little more than two hours from home. He was driving in the right-hand lane through Leon County when he passed a state trooper sitting in his car on the grass median. He thought nothing of it – just another Texas trooper on a long and nondescript stretch of highway – until he noticed the trooper pull out onto the road and follow him. The officer, Mike Asby, a veteran member of the Texas Department of Public Safety, drove in the left lane until his car was parallel with Peña’s. Peña looked over at Asby. “He pulled up next to me, and I looked at him because I wasn’t not going to make eye contact” with an officer whom Peña thought was definitely checking him out for whatever reason.

Although Peña steadfastly maintains that he wasn’t doing anything wrong or unusual, Asby would later testify that Peña caught his attention because he was driving more slowly than the rest of traffic in a van caked with mud; when the van “weaved across the center stripe and also across the solid yellow line on the shoulder,” Asby testified in January 2003, he had to take action. “You’re required to stay in a single lane of traffic,” he said. He activated his lights and pulled Peña over.

Within the hour, Peña would be in handcuffs in the back of the trooper’s car, headed to the county jail in Centerville on a charge of marijuana possession. Nearly five years later, Peña would be convicted and sentenced to life in prison for possession of what the state said turned out to be 23.46 pounds of freshly cut marijuana that Peña was transporting in the back of the muddy blue van. Although Asby testified that this was not a normal highway drug bust – “normally,” he testified, marijuana moves north from Houston, already “dried out, cured, and ready to be sold” – he was certain that what he found casually laid out in the back of the van was pot because it smelled like pot – and he knows pot when he smells it. “It’s something that you learned in [28] years of experience being on the road?” prosecutor Whitney Smith (now Leon Coun­ty’s elected D.A.) asked Asby.

“Yes, sir,” Asby replied.

Just Trust Us

There are at least two problems with the official story of Peña’s arrest and prosecution. First, Peña is adamant – and has been since 1998 – that what he was transporting was not marijuana, but actually hemp, pot’s non-narcotic cousin. Peña says he found the plants growing wild in Kansas and cut them down, thinking that he could use the stems and leaves in the various craft projects he made with leather and wood in his garage workshop; there was no doubt in Peña’s mind that what he was transporting was not marijuana. The second, and eventually more decisive problem with the official story of the Peña bust, is that prior to his trial, officials with the Department of Public Safety lab in Waco, where the plants were taken for testing, completely destroyed all of the case evidence – all 23.46 pounds of plant material – and then also lost the case file with all of the original documentation of the lab’s work on the case. By the time Peña was finally tried – more than four years later – there was absolutely no evidence to show the jury; instead, the state relied completely on the “experience” of Asby and of Waco lab supervisor Charles Mott (now retired) to persuade jurors that what they say they saw and tested was actually marijuana.

It worked.

That is, it worked until late last year, when Peña’s conviction was finally overturned by the Court of Criminal Appeals, the state’s highest criminal court, and Leon County subsequently dismissed the charges for good. In the intervening decade, however, Peña’s case became a political hot potato, catching the attention of judges and lawyers across the state who watched as the 10th Court of Appeals, based in Waco, played tug-of-war with the Austin-based CCA over the power of the Texas Constitution, and whether it affords citizens greater rights and protection against state power than does the U.S. Constitution.

It’s a conflict that has left the state of Texas divided and may mean – at least for the time being – that persons tried for crimes in one part of the state will be afforded greater protection from prosecutorial errors or malfeasance than are others. Frankly, says Keith Hampton, an Austin defense attorney who represented Peña just before his case was dismissed, you just “don’t see this happen very often.” Ulti­mate­ly, whether the protections gleaned from the Texas Constitution by the 10th Court will remain in force and be applied to all Texans is still to be determined.

Weeds, Not Weed

Peña had a knack for creating handcrafted leather and wood items that sold like hotcakes, he says, at flea markets in and around Houston. He made personalized shellacked plaques and leather key chains with popular first names spelled out in tiny beads, and at a dollar a key chain, they sold well. So when he first saw the hemp plants growing on the roadside near Manhattan, Kan., they gave him an idea. He would take the plants – which, to an untrained eye, look exactly like marijuana plants – press the leaves, and then use them on plaques or affixed to the small leather wallets that he also had become expert at making. He recognized these as “volunteer” hemp plants – they grow wild across the country, reminders of the days when hemp farming was commonplace and even, during World War II, encouraged by the feds as supporting the war effort. By the Kansas roadside, they were scraggly and abundant. When he pulled into the Tuttle Creek State Park outside Manhattan, and saw the plants growing everywhere, he “loaded … up.”

Indeed, Peña thought nothing of the fresh-cut plants that he’d laid out in the back of the blue van he was driving. He knew – partly from experience of having smoked pot when he was younger, and partly because he knew that hemp was once a major agricultural commodity – that the plants were nothing more than weeds that looked like weed.

However, that’s not how Asby saw it. To him, it was clear that one thing, and only one thing, was taking place. Peña was moving a large amount of marijuana to Houston – as unusual as that might be, Asby acknowledged.

Peña repeatedly told Asby that the plants were hemp, and his insistence clearly gave some pause to Asby and the two backup officers who soon joined him. The three men stood next to the van pondering the notion that a plant could look like, but not actually be, marijuana. “I … questioned them, I said, ‘Well, he says it’s not marijuana,'” Asby recalled in court. “I knew that there was a substance called hemp and I was asking them. … And I asked them, ‘You ever heard of something like marijuana, just hemp, that is legal to have?'” he continued. “I don’t know that there is a legal kind. That was the question I was asking the officers: ‘Have you ever heard of this … where marijuana was cut and it turns out to be legal?'”

In the end, Asby was unpersuaded. “I just know marijuana smells like marijuana,” he testified in 2003. “And I have never found anything that I thought was marijuana that wasn’t.” He cuffed Peña and hauled him off to jail.

Page:   1   |   2   |   3   |   All

Absolute Asinine Laws

 

Life in Prison for Hemp

José Peña brought some roadside weeds home from Kansas. Cops decided it was reefer, and a Texas court sentenced him to life in prison – without the evidence. It took a decade for Peña to get back some of the pieces of his life.

By Jordan Smith, Fri., March 16, 2012

Life in Prison for Hemp

José Peña was tired as he drove south toward Houston on the morning of Sept. 27, 1998. Following a quick trip north to Kansas in a rented van – to pick up the brother of a distant cousin’s son – he was on his way home to Houston, where he lived with his wife and four children. It was the kind of favor Peña often did for friends and family, no matter how distant the relation – and the kind of favor that irritated his wife. “I was tired, and I was trying to get home,” the 50-year-old recently recalled. “My wife was mad at me for doing favors for other people” when he could instead be home.

That morning, just before 8am, Peña was cruising south down I-45, a little more than two hours from home. He was driving in the right-hand lane through Leon County when he passed a state trooper sitting in his car on the grass median. He thought nothing of it – just another Texas trooper on a long and nondescript stretch of highway – until he noticed the trooper pull out onto the road and follow him. The officer, Mike Asby, a veteran member of the Texas Department of Public Safety, drove in the left lane until his car was parallel with Peña’s. Peña looked over at Asby. “He pulled up next to me, and I looked at him because I wasn’t not going to make eye contact” with an officer whom Peña thought was definitely checking him out for whatever reason.

Although Peña steadfastly maintains that he wasn’t doing anything wrong or unusual, Asby would later testify that Peña caught his attention because he was driving more slowly than the rest of traffic in a van caked with mud; when the van “weaved across the center stripe and also across the solid yellow line on the shoulder,” Asby testified in January 2003, he had to take action. “You’re required to stay in a single lane of traffic,” he said. He activated his lights and pulled Peña over.

Within the hour, Peña would be in handcuffs in the back of the trooper’s car, headed to the county jail in Centerville on a charge of marijuana possession. Nearly five years later, Peña would be convicted and sentenced to life in prison for possession of what the state said turned out to be 23.46 pounds of freshly cut marijuana that Peña was transporting in the back of the muddy blue van. Although Asby testified that this was not a normal highway drug bust – “normally,” he testified, marijuana moves north from Houston, already “dried out, cured, and ready to be sold” – he was certain that what he found casually laid out in the back of the van was pot because it smelled like pot – and he knows pot when he smells it. “It’s something that you learned in [28] years of experience being on the road?” prosecutor Whitney Smith (now Leon Coun­ty’s elected D.A.) asked Asby.

“Yes, sir,” Asby replied.

Just Trust Us

There are at least two problems with the official story of Peña’s arrest and prosecution. First, Peña is adamant – and has been since 1998 – that what he was transporting was not marijuana, but actually hemp, pot’s non-narcotic cousin. Peña says he found the plants growing wild in Kansas and cut them down, thinking that he could use the stems and leaves in the various craft projects he made with leather and wood in his garage workshop; there was no doubt in Peña’s mind that what he was transporting was not marijuana. The second, and eventually more decisive problem with the official story of the Peña bust, is that prior to his trial, officials with the Department of Public Safety lab in Waco, where the plants were taken for testing, completely destroyed all of the case evidence – all 23.46 pounds of plant material – and then also lost the case file with all of the original documentation of the lab’s work on the case. By the time Peña was finally tried – more than four years later – there was absolutely no evidence to show the jury; instead, the state relied completely on the “experience” of Asby and of Waco lab supervisor Charles Mott (now retired) to persuade jurors that what they say they saw and tested was actually marijuana.

It worked.

That is, it worked until late last year, when Peña’s conviction was finally overturned by the Court of Criminal Appeals, the state’s highest criminal court, and Leon County subsequently dismissed the charges for good. In the intervening decade, however, Peña’s case became a political hot potato, catching the attention of judges and lawyers across the state who watched as the 10th Court of Appeals, based in Waco, played tug-of-war with the Austin-based CCA over the power of the Texas Constitution, and whether it affords citizens greater rights and protection against state power than does the U.S. Constitution.

It’s a conflict that has left the state of Texas divided and may mean – at least for the time being – that persons tried for crimes in one part of the state will be afforded greater protection from prosecutorial errors or malfeasance than are others. Frankly, says Keith Hampton, an Austin defense attorney who represented Peña just before his case was dismissed, you just “don’t see this happen very often.” Ulti­mate­ly, whether the protections gleaned from the Texas Constitution by the 10th Court will remain in force and be applied to all Texans is still to be determined.

Weeds, Not Weed

Peña had a knack for creating handcrafted leather and wood items that sold like hotcakes, he says, at flea markets in and around Houston. He made personalized shellacked plaques and leather key chains with popular first names spelled out in tiny beads, and at a dollar a key chain, they sold well. So when he first saw the hemp plants growing on the roadside near Manhattan, Kan., they gave him an idea. He would take the plants – which, to an untrained eye, look exactly like marijuana plants – press the leaves, and then use them on plaques or affixed to the small leather wallets that he also had become expert at making. He recognized these as “volunteer” hemp plants – they grow wild across the country, reminders of the days when hemp farming was commonplace and even, during World War II, encouraged by the feds as supporting the war effort. By the Kansas roadside, they were scraggly and abundant. When he pulled into the Tuttle Creek State Park outside Manhattan, and saw the plants growing everywhere, he “loaded … up.”

Indeed, Peña thought nothing of the fresh-cut plants that he’d laid out in the back of the blue van he was driving. He knew – partly from experience of having smoked pot when he was younger, and partly because he knew that hemp was once a major agricultural commodity – that the plants were nothing more than weeds that looked like weed.

However, that’s not how Asby saw it. To him, it was clear that one thing, and only one thing, was taking place. Peña was moving a large amount of marijuana to Houston – as unusual as that might be, Asby acknowledged.

Peña repeatedly told Asby that the plants were hemp, and his insistence clearly gave some pause to Asby and the two backup officers who soon joined him. The three men stood next to the van pondering the notion that a plant could look like, but not actually be, marijuana. “I … questioned them, I said, ‘Well, he says it’s not marijuana,'” Asby recalled in court. “I knew that there was a substance called hemp and I was asking them. … And I asked them, ‘You ever heard of something like marijuana, just hemp, that is legal to have?'” he continued. “I don’t know that there is a legal kind. That was the question I was asking the officers: ‘Have you ever heard of this … where marijuana was cut and it turns out to be legal?'”

In the end, Asby was unpersuaded. “I just know marijuana smells like marijuana,” he testified in 2003. “And I have never found anything that I thought was marijuana that wasn’t.” He cuffed Peña and hauled him off to jail.

Page:   1   |   2   |   3   |   All

The Words of the Founding Fathers

Jurors should acquit, even against the judge’s instruction…
if exercising their judgement with discretion and honesty
they have a clear conviction the charge of the court is wrong.
— Alexander Hamilton, 1804

It is not only the juror’s right, but his duty to find the verdict according to his own best
understanding, judgement and conscience, though in direct opposition to the
instruction of the court.
–John Adams, 1771

I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man
by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.
— Thomas Jefferson,
1789

It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made
by men of their choice, if the laws are so voluminous that
they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood;
if  they… undergo such incessant changes that no man who knows
what the law is today can guess what it will be tomorrow
— James Madison

11/30/2010 SB510 Passes in Senate

 

Does Senate Bill 510 Put Raw Milk in Real Danger?

by A.K. Streeter, Portland, Oregon on 11.30.10

Food & Health

 

Today the U.S. Senate passed Senate Bill 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act. After the recent scandal with eggs, and all of the other food safety issues of recent years (meat, peanut butter, spinach), many people believe this is a positive step – and obviously Senate lawmakers, who voted 75 to 23 to pass SB 510, also think the bill is good. A segment of farm advocates have warned that SB 510 is a severe threat to small farms – and by extension, most raw milk producers – because of the sweeping powers it gives to the Federal Drug Administation (FDA) and the possibility for onerous paperwork and other regulations for farmers. But there’s some good news.

SB 510 will give the FDA broader jurisdiction, specifically in the wording of the bill that lets the FDA act on “reason to believe.” SB 510 would also allow the FDA to mandate that a company recall a food product it suspects is infected. Thus if the FDA has reason to believe – a very subjective measure – raw milk is harmful, it could attempt to shut down that producer – unless the farmer had gone through the necessary paperwork to get an exemption.

While SB 510 passed, the Tester/Hagen Amendment that was recently added to the bill excludes small farmers and farms making less than $500,000 annually, by allowing them to apply for exemption from FDA regulatory oversight. The inclusion of the amendment made the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition finally lend support for SB 510.

As Kari Marion spells out in her blog at JustMeans, the Centers for Disease Control have tallied the big costs of food safety breaches: they “cause approximately 75 million illnesses each year including approximately 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths.”

To put the dangers of raw milk in perspective in comparison with those annual figures, a CDC representative gave the following statistics in a recent Reuters story: from 1993 to 2006 outbreaks related to raw milk and cheese and yogurt made from it have been tied to 1571 illnesses, 202 hospitalizations and two deaths.

Even after the inclusion of the Tester-Hagan amendment, the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, another small farm advocacy group is still opposed. FTCLDF president Pete Kennedy told the Daily Caller:

“The Tester-Hagan amendment is an improvement on the bill, but I think it’s still fundamentally flawed,” Kennedy told TheDC. “I think over time the powers given by the bill could possibly whittle away at the protection provided by Tester-Hagan, they’ll have broad power, and unfortunately under their existing power, what we see right now they seem to have three particular targets, which are raw milk, raw cheese, and supplements.”

So while the Tester-Hagan amendment is good news for sustainable and local farm proponents, it seems the freedom to choose our food sources is not entirely out of the woods.

Read more about raw milk at TreeHugger:
If You Want Safe Food, Know Where It Comes From
The Raw Milk Revolution: Book Review
Raw Milk Risks and Benefits Explained
The Milk Police: Smuggling Raw Milk Across State Lines

Other Links:

http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2010/11/18/congress-giving-fda-power-over-our-food/

http://www.newsday.com/lifestyle/home-and-garden/garden-detective-1.812029/sb-510-food-safety-bill-passes-senate-1.2504410

SB.510 Food Safety bill passes Senate

11:47 AM By Jessica Damiano

The somewhat controversial (in some circles, anyway) Food Safety Modernization Act passed the Senate easily this morning, 73 to 25.

It’s had a long journey, and it isn’t done yet: The Senate version still has to be reconciled with the House’s 2009 version.

Whats the fuss? Read about the bill’s pros and cons.

Senate Bill sb 510 and your right to grow your own food

Hemp Legalization may Piggyback to Legality on Prop. 19

November 1, 2010 – David Bronner’s third-generation family business – Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps – imports 20 tons of hemp oil a year from Canada to make soaps, shampoos and skin lotions near San Diego.

 

 

Now Bronner hopes California’s Proposition 19 to legalize marijuana for recreational use can give impetus to legalizing cultivation of hemp – pot’s (non-psychoactive) cannabis cousin.

Proposition 19 proponents say the initiative’s language allowing local governments to permit cannabis cultivation – by definition – includes both marijuana and hemp.

But the measure variously inspires or infuriates hemp advocates, who are waging arguments over whether it will help or hinder efforts to lift a U.S. ban on hemp cultivation.

Some say Proposition 19 could invigorate a national hemp industry that already produces more than $350 million in annual sales of clothing, food, paper, carpet and other items – all from hemp grown in other countries.

Others contend the measure will further link hemp – a cannabis plant that can’t get you high – with marijuana and deal a public relations setback to the hemp movement. While it looks like marijuana, hemp contains only minute traces of pot’s psychoactive elements.

Hemp fibers, foods and oils are imported from more than 30 other countries, but the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration treats hemp cultivation as an illegal activity akin to narcotics production.

Erwin A. “Bud” Sholts, chairman of the North American Industrial Hemp Council, a Wisconsin group hoping to open up American farmland to hemp cultivation, wants nothing to do with California’s pot initiative.

“I don’t think we’re interested in legalizing the drug at all,” he said.

Sholts, a former economist for the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, said his hemp trade organization is working with major U.S. companies he won’t name to “develop a strategy” for legalizing U.S. production.

The last thing his partners need, Sholts said, is California’s Proposition 19. “They don’t want to appear to be pro-marijuana,” he said.

In its only direct reference to hemp, Proposition 19 says the Legislature may “authorize the production of hemp or non-active cannabis.”

That is pure political melody to Bronner, president of another pro-hemp group, the Hemp Industries Association.

“I think the initiative would be very helpful,” said Bronner, who said his business costs would drop by 25 percent if he could cultivate hemp in California.

Several states have passed legislation urging the federal government to legalize hemp and setting guidelines for a potential resurgence of cultivation.

In 2006, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 1147 by San Francisco Democrat Mark Leno and Irvine Republican Chuck DeVore to endorse hemp cultivation in California. The bill was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Leno, now a state senator, said he will introduce new hemp legislation if Proposition 19 passes.

His earlier bill argued that hemp should be defined differently than marijuana because it is a not a mind-altering substance. While marijuana may contain 5 percent to 20 percent of psychoactive tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), hemp has 0.3 percent or less.

“They are distant biological cousins,” Leno said. “The analogy is that hemp has as much THC as the poppy seeds on your bagel have opium.”

Nationally, growing hemp has essentially been illegal since marijuana was outlawed in 1937 – except for one notable period. In World War II, the U.S. Department of Agriculture produced a film – “Hemp for Victory” – that called on “patriotic farmers” to produce hemp for rope, fabrics and other “needs of our Army and Navy.”

U.S. drug agents have since regarded the plant as an unwanted relative of pot. Authorities contend its similar appearance can shield illegal marijuana cultivation – though pot growers say hemp can cross-pollinate marijuana, killing its potency.

Last year, Republican Rep. Ron Paul and Democratic Rep. Barney Frank introduced the Industrial Hemp Farming Act in Congress, seeking to give states the right to permit hemp growing.

In a joint letter, Paul and Frank argued that hemp’s inclusion with marijuana in the Federal Controlled Substances Act has prohibited American farmers from “competing in the booming industrial hemp market.”

That market is already booming for John Roulak. His Oxnard-based Nutiva food company – listed in Inc. magazine as one of America’s 5,000 fastest growing businesses – expects to earn $12 million this year on imports of hemp foods from “Hemp Ginger Salad Dressing” to hemp protein shakes and munchable hemp seeds.

Sales of hemp foods – said to be high in fiber, protein and Omega-3 and Omega-6 – took off after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2004 that the Drug Enforcement Administration couldn’t ban foods containing the plant products.

Roulak is torn over whether Proposition 19 and greater marijuana legalization will help with hemp.

“I’ve been in the middle of that debate for too long,” he said. “I’m a voice of stay away from the dope (pot), stay focused on the rope (hemp).”

Roulak said few people in California are willing to invest in growing acres of hemp – whose market value is far closer to corn than marijuana – for fear authorities will “have their fields cut down.”

But he said passage of Proposition 19 would give political cover for the next governor to sign a bill legalizing cultivation.

“We feel optimistic,” he said, “that a bill signed by the governor of California will give us more options legally than we have now.” By Peter Hecht. Source.

Prop 19 and Constitutional Law for Dummies (and DEA Administrators) by Dan Riffle October 13, 2010

There’s been a great deal of chatter recently about what the federal government can or will do if Californians wisely pass Proposition 19 in a few weeks (read up here and here for example). President Obama has several choices, but the one I want address here is the one recently urged by nine former DEA heads (pdf):  for the feds to sue California in an attempt to declare the law null and void under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution because it violates the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). I have yet to see a more than perfunctory analysis of such a scenario, so I thought I’d post a little introductory Constitutional Law lesson for our curious readers.

Article VI, Section 1, clause 2 of the Constitution says “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme Law of the Land; … Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” In short, if state law conflicts with a constitutionally valid federal law, the state law is void. Now for starters, not even Supreme Court justices will agree on what the CSA can constitutionally prohibit. At least one justice will tell you a law prohibiting the intrastate cultivation and consumption of marijuana (at least for medical use) isn’t constitutional in the first place. But since a majority on the Court has already said Congress has authority to regulate even intrastate marijuana cultivation, does that mean Prop 19 would be void? Hardly.

The legal term for this analysis is “preemption” – does federal law preempt state law? There are two ways this can happen, express or implied. Express preemption is when federal law expressly says that it preempts state law (example) – the CSA does not. The second is implied preemption, and there are multiple versions of implied preemption. First is when federal laws and regulations are so comprehensive that they intend to “occupy the field” and leave no room for the states to regulate. The second is when there is a direct conflict between state and federal law, so that one law forbids something the other requires, or visa versa. Fortunately, section 903 of the CSA speaks directly to this question:

No provision of this subchapter shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of the Congress to occupy the field in which that provision operates, including criminal penalties, to the exclusion of any State law on the same subject matter which would otherwise be within the authority of the State, unless there is a positive conflict between that provision of this subchapter and that State law so that the two cannot consistently stand together.

As you can see, the CSA itself says explicitly that it doesn’t “occupy the field.” That’s why in addition to federal laws on marijuana possession, every state in the country has its own laws, most of which differ from one another and federal law. So the question is whether there’s a “positive conflict” between federal law and Prop 19 — does the proposition require something that the CSA forbids? Late night punchlines notwithstanding, smoking marijuana will not be mandatory in California if Prop 19 passes. And Prop 19 doesn’t forbid anything the CSA requires.

There’s one final wrinkle though. A state law can conflict with federal law if it creates an obstacle to accomplishing the goals behind federal law. There’s some question as to whether this form of preemption even applies since one could argue the language of section 903 limits the analysis to direct, positive conflicts (and at least one court agrees with this interpretation). But let’s assume for argument’s sake that it does apply. Some will argue that a state making marijuana legal under its own laws frustrates Congress’ intent to control (by prohibiting) marijuana possession and use. Does that mean California has to keep marijuana illegal? No. A separate line of cases says the feds cannot “commandeer” state governments by telling them what they can and cannot do. In other words, the federal government cannot force California to keep marijuana illegal under state law or enforce federal law.

So what does all this mean? Without question, California can simply remove its criminal laws concerning the possession, cultivation, and use of marijuana, which Prop 19 would do. Then, cities and the state would be free to decide whether to tax and regulate marijuana distribution. Whether and how states or municipalities can enact regulations concerning sales and use of marijuana is another question, but the court decisions on similar issues are encouraging. Decisions in two California cases have found that federal law doesn’t prevent cities and counties from licensing medical marijuana dispensaries and that federal law doesn’t preempt the issuance of patients’ and caregivers’ ID cards. But suffice it to say, anyone claiming Prop 19 will just be void anyway because it conflicts with federal law is, at best, grossly oversimplifying matters. More likely, they’re just flat out wrong, and running scared now that it’s becoming clear what a failure marijuana prohibition has been.

The bottom line is this: California voters have a very real opportunity on November 2 to finally start unwinding marijuana prohibition, and nothing in the Constitution says otherwise.

(Thanks to Karen O’Keefe, MPP’s director of state policies, for her assistance.)

Bad Drug War Bill Wrongfully Fast-Tracked for Vote TOMORROW

by Drug Policy Alliance on Tuesday, September 21, 2010 at 3:17pm

House Democrats have scheduled a horrible drug war bill for a vote tomorrow (Wednesday). The Drug Trafficking Safe Harbor Elimination Act of 2010 (H.R. 5231), written by Rep. Lamar Smith (a Republican drug war extremist), would expand problematic drug conspiracy laws, apply mandatory minimum drug sentences to more people, increase racial disparities, and subject Americans to incarceration for drug offenses and public health interventions that are legal in the foreign country in which they’re committed. It expands the drug war at a time that most Americans want major drug policy reform.

PLEASE:

  1. Call Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi at 202-225-0100.  When the receptionist answers, say something like:  "I’m calling to urge Speaker Pelosi to cancel the vote on the Drug Trafficking Safe Harbor Elimination Act that is scheduled for tomorrow.  It is shameful that Democrats are considering expanding the war on drugs, a war that is being waged primarily on young people and communities of color. I can’t believe Democrats are doing this."
  2. Please “Share” this Note with your Newsfeed so your friends and family can take action.

Further Talking Points / More Information:

  • The Drug Trafficking Safe Harbor Elimination Act of 2010 (H.R. 5231), introduced by Rep. Lamar Smith (the only House member to speak against reforming the racist crack/powder disparity), seeks to authorize U.S. criminal prosecution of anyone in the U.S. suspected of conspiring with one or more persons, or aiding or abetting one or more persons, to commit at any place outside the United States an act that would constitute a violation of the U.S. Controlled Substances Act if committed within the United States.
  • These penalties apply even if the controlled substance is legal under some circumstances in the other country. An American treatment provider working with doctors in England, Denmark, Germany, or Switzerland to provide heroin assisted treatment and sterile syringes to heroin users in those countries could face arrest. As could an otherwise law-abiding American planning with some friends to use marijuana legally in the Netherlands while on vacation there.
  • Even though this bill references drug trafficking in the title, it also criminalizes conspiring to possess and use marijuana or other drugs in other countries if more than one person is involved – even if drug use is decriminalized in that country.  Thus, it imposes America’s harsh drug policies on other countries, and further criminalizes a health issue. The bill’s title is very misleading.
  • Even when applied against drug traffickers, The Drug Trafficking Safe Harbor Elimination Act would likely perpetuate injustice. Under U.S. drug conspiracy laws a person can be found guilty even when there are no drugs or other physical evidence involved. The uncorroborated word of someone pointing fingers to get a reduced sentence is all it takes. Moreover anyone convicted of being part of a drug conspiracy is punished not for the offense they actually committed but for all the offenses committed by members in the conspiracy. This has led to very low-level, impoverished, first-time offenders receiving sentences that are decades long. Conspiracy laws drive the so-called "girlfriend problem" whereby thousands of women every year are sentenced to harsh sentences for the crimes of their abusive partners.
  • The United States houses 5% of the world’s population but 25% of its incarcerated population.  This excess of incarceration is a direct result of punitive and ineffective drug laws, which are currently crippling our social and economic resources.  Trends in the U.S. are shifting toward alternative sentencing and away from the policies developed in the almost forty years since Nixon declared the "War on Drugs."  H.R. 5231 would be a detrimental step in the wrong direction.
  • House Leadership should not bring this problematic bill up for a vote. It has only two cosponsors and wasn’t even considered in committee.

by Drug Policy Alliance on Tuesday, September 21, 2010 at 3:17pm

Why I was “fired” from my physician in Louisville, Kentucky.

 

Here I am in the “great Commonwealth of Kentucky”, on January 2, 2009, without a physician to attend to my health needs, after fifteen long years of struggle.  Why?  Because I smoke Cannabis for pain and anxiety among other conditions.

Since 1998 I have been through at least eight “pain clinics” and ONE M.D., that had stood beside me since 1995.  But as of today I have been “fired” as a patient for having a positive drug screen which only showed positive for Marijuana when he referred me to the last pain clinic.

Cut off, after fifteen years, for having used Cannabis for my own health.

My medical history is complicated to say the least.  I have been diagnosed with many things, and to this day I am not really sure what is wrong with me.  In my experience, the doctors in Louisville like to “cut and release”, and if you ask questions you will get the generalized answers that you already knew to begin with.  In short, if your heart is still beating when you walk in the office, you must be o.k.

The following is a short synopsis of my medical history, (though not all conclusive):

1960-1978 Tonsillectomy and Adenoidectomy due to chronic sickness up to 1970.  

1978 – Diagnosed with chronic depression

1983 – Diagnosed with chronic depression/anxiety

1985 – Tubal Ligation

1990- Along with the “depression/anxiety” I began having chronic abdominal pain and bladder pain.  I was (and had been all of my life) treated for chronic bladder infections.

I was having so much illness that it prompted me to leave my job of five years with a predominant insurance company because I just could not cope with the pain and sickness anymore. 

1991 – I was referred to a “women’s clinic” where I was continually seen for chronic cervical infections and bladder infections. Between 1991-1993 I had many trips to the ER because of those infections.  Of note, they always attributed my pain to the depression and anxiety and never gave me any pain medication until a month before surgery in 1993.

1993 – The Gynecologist decided that I had several cysts on my ovaries after a ultrasound, and said that he would do a partial hysterectomy and a bladder tie and that that should take care of the situation.  During the surgery, a needle was broken off in my pelvic bone, which they managed to extract after several additional hours in surgery.  After the surgery, I continued to have pelvic pain, and bladder infections.

1994 – The Gynecologist decided it was probably adhesions, and that they would do an outpatient surgery to try to resolve the problem.  That did not work either.

1995 – I was finally put on Medicare after having been given Disability in 2003 for depression.  After living through hell the previous ten years, I decided to go to a internist which was down the street from where I lived.  At that point I was put on pain medication.  However, there had been no real diagnosis of the pain I was having.

1995 – A friend encouraged me to see her “surgeon”, at which time I received emergency surgery for Gallbladder Disease.  The Surgeons stopped counting after 60 large stones and informed my family that my “insides looked like someone took a hot glue gun to them”.  The scar tissue had been so bad that they could not find my appendix or “I would have taken that out too”, he had said.  Unfortunately for me, shortly after my surgery he left the country to go back to his home country.

1996 – Continuing on pain medication from my internist, and still having many bladder problems and pelvic problems I went to another Gynecologist who offered to do a “total hysterectomy and adhesion removal”.  I was sent to outpatient surgery, but ended up in the hospital for a number of days because the surgery was intense.

I continued on through 1997 still having abdominal pain, and still on pain medication.  In 1998 he referred me to a “pain clinic”.

1998 – After coming down with an unknown illness with a high fever, my Internist admitted me to the hospital where the next day I had a CVA/Stroke.  The pain clinic I had been seeing had me on oxycontin and hydrocodone, along with Neurontin and was located in the same hospital where I was admitted.  However, somehow, when I was released 10 days later and received my medication to go home on which included pain medication, there was a mix up in the doctor’s names on the prescriptions and I was investigated for “doctor shopping” and released from their pain clinic.  I was cleared of any wrongdoing but the damage had already been done.  My internist continued to prescribe my pain medication until 2003.  Of note, I had stopped the oxycontin and Neurontin as they where really hard on my depression.  The Neurologist that had taken my case in the hospital “fired” me for being “too ill for him to treat”.

2003 – I am forced into a pain clinic again.  Incidentally, this clinic turned out to be the largest legal narcotic writer in Kentucky.  I was given oxycontin, morphine, large amounts of hydrocodone or oxycodone.  The doctor attempted a “plexis block” of my abdomen at which time one or both of my Kidneys were punctured.  I bleed for 12 hours, but “I was o.k., and it was nothing to worry about” per the doctor.  Then came the methadone.  I was frazzled all the time.  I was a “legal” drug addict that almost burned down the house more than once.  I tried to continue on and eventually quit taking everything except hydrocodone and an occasional soma.  But in 2006, I was given a “drug test” which showed that I was smoking Marijuana and guess what…They refused to fill any more narcotics EXCEPT the methadone.  At that point I gave it back to them and told them they could keep it.  I “fired” them.

I then went back to my internist which agreed to prescribe my hydrocodone.  But between 2003 and 2008 I was turned down by many other pain clinics. 

Then in December of 2008 the decision was made that my internist could no longer fill my medication’s because of a PDS at the last pain clinic.  He then “fired” me.

Of note, during the period of 2001 – 2008 I had lost my first Grandchild to a stillbirth, cared for and lost my father in 2001 and continued to live with my Mother and care for her until she was so ill that I was forced to put her in a Nursing Home in 2007.  My Mother died on November 24, 2008.  Previous to that I had lost my best friend “Sally” who was my dog that had always been beside me through it all since 1993.  My Heart has been irreversibly broken.  So with all of this loss on my mind, and then losing my only doctor of fifteen years, I have really been tested.  I credit prayer and family and my “Cannabis” for my survival.  There were so many times I just wanted to call it quits.  But there was always some “need” for me to be here.

Back in 2003 I had started researching online “Medical Marijuana”.  I knew I used it, and I knew I needed it, but I had just thought I was a “pot smoker”.  I had never credited it with saving my life until after my Dad died in 2001.  You see, he had called me about three months prior to his death and asked me if I could get him some.  Because of my ignorance of the medical benefit of Marijuana, my Father died without the medication that could have reduced his misery.  My Mother was diagnosed with HBP and Alzheimer’s which possibly could have been helped with Marijuana although I was too afraid of the “elder abuse” laws to try it.  I feel guilty about that too.  I might have had a healthier Mother for a few more years.

I have never had a police record.  I only have a glass of wine a couple of times a year.  I have even managed to stay out of the Psychiatric Hospital, although there were a few times I would have probably benefited from it.

And now, the doctor that I thought would always be there for me has left me in the cold, without even a personal phone call from him.  The letter was signed by office staff.

I do not hold any grudges against this doctor.  He did what he had to do to save his livelihood.  Although I do not know what the “pertinent details” of the situation where, I am assuming the DEA of KY was somehow involved.

In Kentucky it is called KASPER.  “KASPER” in and of itself has become a syndrome in Kentucky.  What I cannot understand is why, when KY is so known for it’s oxycontin abuse and death’s, should it be illegal for me to smoke Cannabis, in my own home, especially since I do have such a medical record.  (I have never passed a drug screening test due only to Marijuana).

It reminds me of a “genocidal drama”… Give out all the Narcotics that you can, which will downsize the population, and at the same time they can punish the people who are Marijuana users and “force” them into forfeiting their Marijuana, and using the “Pharmaceutical death drugs”.

There is no such thing as a Marijuana friendly doctor in Kentucky.  They are all scared to death.

I must say that if I had not been using Marijuana for the last fifteen years or more, I sincerely believe that I would have died by now. 

I was told by one doctor that I was “living on borrowed time”.

What kind of Government conspiracy would do such a thing as to make a “plant” illegal?

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE, JUST FOLLOW THE MONEY!

The state of Kentucky is for all practical purposes bankrupt.  Violence and homelessness are continually on the rise.  It is NOT Marijuana that has caused this.  Statistically, Kentucky, especially certain counties, are not a healthy place to live.  And the members of my family who do not use Marijuana have had greater health problems than me in a number of cases.

Our Mayor call’s it “possibly city”.

For most of us it is nearly impossible to live here.  Lack of education and health care are abominable.  If you are one of the lucky ones who make more money than you need and/or have the benefits of a major manufacturing company or other entity, then you may survive a little longer and a little better.

But most true Kentuckians have been laborers and farmers all of their lives.  Their needs are never fully met, and the laws that prohibit Marijuana is just another way to “keep us in our place”.

It is a shame that we cannot grow Marijuana and/or Hemp on our own property, legally.

So in all reality, we never truly own anything, including our own bodies and minds.

Marijuana and Hemp prohibition is just one of many dire problems which our country is facing today.  But if we could “free these plants”, that were put on Earth by God, to be used accordingly, then maybe, just maybe, it would be a sign of us being able to take back our country’s freedoms for all people.

Sheree Krider

SMKrider:  In My Opinion

I can be reached by email at ShereeKrider@usmjparty.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Medical marijuana laws benefit big business

 Greg Pivarnik – 3/4/08
Marijuana has medicinal uses. Despite numerous scientific studies and the development of synthetic medicines derived from cannabis, the United States government appears to disagree with
this statement. Marijuana remains a Schedule I drug according to the DEA,
which only benefits the pharmaceutical companies who now have a monopoly on
the therapeutic effects of a plant that can be grown with little effort.

Under the Controlled Substances Act, the DEA lists and categorizes drugs, illegal and pharmaceutical, into five categories or schedules.
According to the DEA Web site, the drugs are placed in a schedule based upon “the substance’s medical use, potential for abuse, and safety or dependence liability.” Schedule I drugs are considered the
most addictive and have no medical use and are considered the most dangerous. Schedule II
drugs have some medical benefits but are highly addictive and so on until Schedule V. Marijuana is considered a Schedule I drug, along with heroin and LSD, because it has a “high potential for abuse” and “has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.” Apparently though,
PCP and cocaine have more of a medical basis considering they are Schedule II drugs.

Unfortunately, the rescheduling of marijuana is something that may be far off in the future, despite research pointing to the possible benefits of medicinal use. Scientists studying its medicinal
properties have already found a number of possible medical uses. Most notably, marijuana can be used to treat pain and nausea associated with a number of diseases. It is mostly prescribed, in states that
allow for its medicinal use, for pain and nausea associated with terminal illnesses. Many times
marijuana has been found to be one of the more effective drugs to treat these symptoms. Extreme pain is
often associated with severe illnesses such as cancers, AIDS and multiple sclerosis (MS). Marijuana also reduces nausea associated with chemotherapy and AIDS patients. It stimulates appetite and
allows patients to eat so they do not lose an excessive amount of weight. Marijuana has been proven to be an effective treatment for neuropathic pain and can control muscle spasms in diseases like MS.

However, MS is not the only disease associated with neuropathic pain. There are many other diseases and disorders that can benefit from possible treatments of marijuana. Marijuana has also been found to
treat patients with glaucoma by relieving pressure in the eyeball and therefore possibly preventing the blindness associated with the disease. Lastly, there are also the well known calming affects of
marijuana that could be used to treat severe anxieties and obsessive compulsive disorder.

The main reason that marijuana remains illegal, or at least not used as medication, is money. Too many companies in the pharmaceutical industry stand to lose too much money from competing with medicinal marijuana. The Pharmaceutical companies do research, create a synthetically made chemical for a treatment of a certain disease and then patent. U.S. patents last around 20 years and
effectively give the company a monopoly on that drug. This in turn drives the price up
for many years after FDA approval, until the patent runs out and generic forms of the drug are made available. The reason that drug companies would not want marijuana manufactured is that it can been
grown cheaply and easily. It could effectively be a less costly alternative to the drug therapies that patients can access now and may treat myriad of disease that could infringe on the consumer
market of other medications.

The amount of money derived from the pharmaceutical industry, and hence the lobbyists that work for them, has led to an inherent hypocrisy in U.S. policy towards marijuana. While listing marijuana
as a Schedule I drug, which supposedly has no medical benefits, the U.S. still allows pharmaceutical companies to conduct research and make products that harness the medicinal powers of THC, the main
psychoactive chemical in marijuana. This already implies that marijuana has medicinal benefit and
therefore should not be listed as a Schedule I drug. One such drug, Marinol, is already available for
prescription use in the U.S. to treat the side effects associated with chemotherapy and AIDS patients. Another marijuana based drug, Sativex, which is used to treat MS, has already been approved in
Canada and has begun trials in the U.S.

It is unfair for the government to conduct a smear campaign against medicinal marijuana, while at
the same time allowing drug companies to purify it and market products for staggering amounts of profit.
For instance, the base cost per year of  Sativex in Canada $4,475. This price is only an estimate before pharmacy costs. On top of that, this estimate only takes into account a minimal amount of doses.
Sativex is a spray administered via the mouth. The average dosage is five sprays a day. However, the dosage is variable up to 14 sprays, which would also increase the costs.

There are those that would say it is beneficial for the drug companies to purify the drugs
because smoking marijuana is itself a health risk. A risk it may be, but taking any medicine is a risk. In
fact, an article in Scientific America esposed a study that concluded that there is no scientific link between lung cancer and smoking marijuana. It was thought that THC “prompts aging
cells to die before coming cancerous.” A more recent study has seemed to confirm this conclusion. In a lab study, mice with tumors were injected with THC and showed a 50 percent decrease in tumor size
after three weeks as compared with untreated mice. Though the studies are preliminary, they still
nonetheless cast doubt on long held myths in marijuana.

In the end the only beneficiaries of the current medicinal marijuana policy in the United States are the drug companies. Patients are forced to dole out money for a synthetic form of a medicine that
could be grown and obtained naturally and possibly far more cheaply.  Of course a side effect of smoking
marijuana is that one would get high. However, these side effects no different from warning labels on
other medications that indicate drowsiness and warn people against driving and operating heavy machinery. In turn, the question can be asked – What makes a synthetically made chemical safer and
more effective than a naturally growing plant?

There is a risk when taking any medication. There have been well-known cases in which people have
died taking prescription drugs. However, it is nearly impossible to overdose on marijuana.

In the end, the only difference between pharmaceutical marijuana and smoking marijuana is that pharmaceutical products create enormous amounts of revenue for big business, while
medicinal marijuana would only benefit the citizens of this country that are in dire need of
cheap and effective medication. And as always, the government sides with big business.

Weekly columnist Greg Pivarnik
is an 8th-semester molecular and cell
biology major. His columns appear on
Tuesdays. He can be contacted at
Gregory.Pivarnik@UConn.edu.


Hello world!

Sheree 2009

BLESSING JEFFREY’S MOM……

A VERY VERY IMPORTANT VIDEO TO SEE.  ABOUT A SEVEN YEAR OLD CHILD WITH MENTAL DISORDERS.
THE MOM, FINDS OUT THROUGH RESEARCH AND HELP FROM DOCTORS THAT MARIJUANA COULD BE A GOOD TREATMENT FOR HER CHILD.
BLESSED BE THE MOTHER WHO CARES FOR HER CHILD, AND DOES NOT LET THE GOVERNMENT TELL HER SHE CAN’T!
VERY INSPIRING,
PERSONALLY, I THINK MOST OF THE KIDS ON PHARMACEUTICALS RIGHT NOW WOULD BE MUCH BENEFITED BY CHANGING THEIR MEDICATION TO MARIJUANA.  THERE IS NO SIDE EFFECTS, ESPECIALLY NONE THAT WOULD OUTWEIGH THE SIDE EFFECTS OF THE PHARMACEUTICALS.
BLESS THIS MOTHER
SHOW HER YOUR SUPPORT