Topsites cache : http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/

Saturday, July 14, 2007

A government gone amuck - threatening to seize the buildings of law-abiding landords in Los Angeles Via Cannabis Culture Magazine [Thanks, Jay], it appears that the DEA has threatened asset forfeiture against the building owners where medical marijuana dispensaries are housed in Los Angeles! This is an extremely chilling step, and a tactic designed to get the landlords, in fear of losing all their property, to act as agents of the DEA and evict the dispensaries. Here's the letter they're sending: (Sent by Certified Mail July 6, 2007) DEA, LA Field Division, 255 E. Temple St, 17th Fl, LA 90012 (213) 621-6700 The DEA has determined you own, or have under your management or control, a building located at [ADDRESS]. The DEA has determined there is a marijuana dispensary, [NAME], operating on the property. This is a violation of federal law. Federal law 21 U.S.C. Sec. 56 (a) states: "It shall be unlawful to knowingly and intentionally rent, lease or make available for use, with or without compensation, a building, room, or enclosure for the purpose of unlawfully manufacturing, storing, distributing, or using a controlled substance." Federal law takes precedence over State law. It is not a defense to this crime or to the seizure of the property that the facility operating on the property is providing "medical marijuana" under California law including the provisions of California Prop. 215. Violation of this law is a felony crime, and carries with it a penalty of up to 20 years in prison. In addition, federal law allows for the seizure of assets, including real property, which have been used in conjunction with the distribution of controlled substances. Specifically, 21 U.S.C. 881 (a) (7) states: "The following shall be subject to forfeiture to the United States and no property right shall exist in them: All real property, including any right, title and interest (including any leasehold interest) in the whole of any lot or tract of land which is used in any manner or part, or to facilitate the commission of, a violation of this sub-chapter." This letter shall serve as notice that, after a thorough investigation, the DEA has determined there is a marijuana dispensary operating on the above described property. By this notice, you have been made aware of the purposes for which the property is being used. You are further advised that violations of federal laws relating to marijuana may result in criminal prosecution, imprisonment, fines and forfeiture of assets. For further information, please contact Acting Group Supervisor Deanne Reuter at (213) 621-6789. Sincerely, Timothy J. Landrum, Special Agent in Charge. This is unacceptable. It is a violation of American principles, and should be an outrage to every property owner in this country. Here is my letter. (Sent by Certified Blog July 14, 2007) To: Karen P. Tandy, Administrator U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration 2401 Jefferson Davis Highway Alexandria, Virginia 22301 The PEOPLE have determined you administer, or have under your management or control, certain buildings and/or facilities located at the following addresses: 2401 Jefferson Davis Highway, Alexandria, VA 400 2nd Avenue West, Seattle, WA 450 Golden Gate Ave., San Francisco, CA 255 East Temple Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012 4560 Viewridge Avenue, San Diego, CA Westmount Place, 3010 North 2nd Street, Phoenix, AZ 115 Inverness Drive East, Englewood, CO 317 South 16th Street, St. Louis, MO John C. Kluczynski Fed. Bldg., 230 S. Dearborn St., Chicago, IL 10160 Technology Boulevard, East, Dallas, TX 1433 West Loop South, Houston, TX 3838 N. Causeway Blvd., Three Lakeway Center, Metairie, LA 75 Spring St. S.W., Atlanta, GA 431 Howard Street, Detroit, MI Phoenix Building, 8400 NW 53rd Street, Miami 800 K Street, N.W., Washington, DC Wm. J. Green Fed. Bldg., 600 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 99 10th Avenue, New York NY 10011 JFK Federal Bldg., 15 Sudbury Street, Boston, MA Metro Office Park, TLD Bldg., 17 Calle 2, Guaynabo, PR The PEOPLE have also determined that you administer 227 domestic offices and 86 foreign offices. The PEOPLE have determined that there is a coordinated campaign being conducted from those locations, using public funds, to deprive individuals of their rights and their lives. This is a violation of the United States Constitution, the founding principles of our country, and of natural law. The United States Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution state (in part): 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. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it... We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment V: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Amendment VI: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. Amendment VIII: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. This letter shall serve as notice that, after a thorough investigation, the PEOPLE have determined that there are violations of these core American principles (among others) being promoted, coordinated and undertaken at the above described properties. This letter further serves as notice that those properties belong to the PEOPLE, and have been assigned temporarily to your management based upon their use for Constitutionally lawful activity in service of the people. If all activity in violation of the rights of the people does not immediately cease, such property shall be seized and returned to their rightful owners -- the PEOPLE. It is not a defense to this action or to the seizure of the property that the activities conducted are generally compliant with federal law. The Constitution takes precedence over federal law, particularly when such federal law has been created in violation of Constitutional principles and by way of false information promoted by the Drug Enforcement Administration. This letter also serves as notice that all funds appropriated for the use of the Drug Enforcement Administration and related activities, whether encumbered or unencumbered, shall be immediately seized and placed in escrow for the use of the PEOPLE. As Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, you may appeal the decision by placing a non-refundable bond equal to 20% of the seized assets and providing proof that none of the funds have been or will be used for activities contrary to the will and benefit of the PEOPLE. You are further advised that the activities of you and your staff related to the encouragement of black market criminal enterprises, the deaths of American citizens, and the theft of personal property may result in criminal prosecution and imprisonment. For further information, please read the Constitution of the United States. Sincerely, The PEOPLE United States of America P.S. Happy Bastille Day. 1:08:56 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

In Pot We Trust I just watched "In Pot We Trust" on Showtime. Powerful documentary, written, directed and produced by Star Price. Be prepared to be pissed off at the government again if you watch it. There are the charlatans like Joseph Califano, and the true drug war believers like the marijuana eradication officer, but you'll also see some real people -- people like Irv Rosenfeld, and several other fascinating medical marijuana patients. 1:24:38 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Friday, July 13, 2007

John Walters pulls out the TERROR card again. Doesn't he realize how much this approach backfired in the Superbowl ad? Drug czar gives warning Federal official calls marijuana growers dangerous terrorists [...] John P. Walters, President Bush's drug czar, said the people who plant and tend the gardens are terrorists who wouldn't hesitate to help other terrorists get into the country with the aim of causing mass casualties. Walters made the comments at a Thursday press conference that provided an update on the "Operation Alesia" marijuana-eradication effort. "Don't buy drugs. They fund violence and terror," he said. And, of course, the drug czar's office calls this a good story on their "blog" (to them, the more outrageous the lies that they can get a reporter to print, the better a story it is). Mass casualties? Is he drunk? Or just drunk with power? 3:46:08 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Data Quality Act, part 3,826 I really admire the tenacity and patience of Americans for Safe Access (ASA) in their dealings with HHS and the Data Quality Act complaint. For those who have been with me for years, you know about this story quite well. For others, a quick recap is in order. The Data Quality Act is a government regulation that allows groups and individuals to submit a complaint that a government agency is disseminating inaccurate information and get it corrected. Well, for years, Health and Human Services (and the FDA) has been disseminating information that marijuana has no medical value or use. It's harder to get much more inaccurate than that. So ASA put in a complaint and asked that the information be changed. Under the law, the agency is supposed to respond in 60 days. October 6, 2004: Original complaint filed (good, I thought -- HHS will have to correct its information by the end of the year. Right.) December 1, 2004. HHS says it needs more time. (Note: You can read all the letters here) February 2, 2005. HHS says it needs more time. April 5, 2005. HHS says it needs more time. April 20, 2005. HHS claims that it doesn't really need to respond. May 19, 2005. ASA appeals the non-response. July 28, 2005. HHS says it needs more time to respond to the appeal. October 5, 2005. HHS says it needs more time. December 8, 2005. HHS says it needs more time. February 7, 2006. HHS says it needs more time. April 12, 2006. HHS says it needs more time. April 20, 2006. FDA comes out with its nonsense declaration about marijuana not being medicine. May 2, 2006. ASA sends a letter threatening to sue if HHS continues to delay. July 12, 2006. HHS denies the appeal (by avoiding the question) February 21, 2007: ASA files lawsuit. May 25, 2007. Government files motion to dismiss claiming that the courts don't have jurisdiction and that ASA doesn't have standing. June 21, 2007. ASA responds And finally, yesterday, ASA got to actually give oral arguments in a district court (arguments on the motion to dismiss, of course, but it's still a step forward) I don't know about you, but I'm exhausted (and I haven't done anything except report it to you). And that's exactly what the government wants. They want us to get so frustrated by the obfuscation and obstruction that we'll give up. But we won't. 8:59:22 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Open Thread This is why the police have lost credibility and lost the cooperation of the citizens. An 8-year-old girl is on a trip with her grandfather (who is also her best friend). The grandfather is killed, crushed under his truck while trying to fix it, leaving the poor girl alone in the cab. Finally the police are taking the distraught girl home, but when they get inside the house, they arrest the family on marijuana charges. It was Washington State and they had a doctor's prescription, but that didn't matter to the police. Katha Pollitt has an excellent response to the Libby commutation in the Nation: Pardon whom? Colorless green ideas sleep furiously. Language Log does what the Supreme Court failed to do -- actually look at the structure of the phrase "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" -- and demonstrates that the Justices don't know what they're saying. Rita has a drug war poem over at StoptheDrugWar. Don't forget to send me your poetry submissions. 8:15:16 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Drug Policy as destructive foreign policy Foreign Policy in Focus' Laura Carlsen has a fascinating piece: Militarizing Mexico: The New War on Drugs The U.S. model not only served to bolster the presidency. It has also proven useful as a tool for geopolitical control abroad. By elevating drug trafficking to a matter of national security, the war on drugs model has led to U.S. intervention in the politics of both drug-producing and transit nations. It has been used to justify the militarization of whole regions of foreign nations (Colombia), invasions to oust inconvenient foreign leaders (Panama), and now the extension of the U.S. security agenda into a neighboring country (Mexico). By exporting its "war on drugs," the United States has pressured other nations to embrace U.S. national security interests as their own. This has been true from the beginning. It's been clear to most educated observers (and a few foreign leaders), that U.S. drug control policy and its promotion of drug policy through international treaty and the U.N. has been less about drugs than it has been about control. Another concern that has arisen from the Colombian experience is that the "war on drugs" has a disturbing tendency to morph into a "war on terrorism" that increases U.S. military reach into foreign lands. Recall the expansion of Plan Colombia's anti-narcotics model into counter-terrorism activities. Since the U.S. government's definition of "terrorism" is both broad and ambiguous, this tendency has led to mission creep and the use of U.S. military aid to attack internal dissidence. For Mexico, the equation of immigration with terrorist threats to promote the U.S. strategy of militarizing the northern border provides a case study in how U.S. counter-terrorism programs lead to militarization, loss of national sovereignty, and violations of human rights. The new drug war provides a dangerous stepping stone in that process. Again, not much new in the article to those of us educated in drug policy reform, but it's good to see it articulated. For a more sadly humorous look at the Mexican drug war, check out this amazing piece in the Dallas Morning News: Drug case could backfire in Mexico Part of Calderon's popularity in the drug war came from the seizure of $200 million and the hopes of the people that it would serve a good use. But there has been quite a bit of concern that it would all evaporate in a frenzy of corruption. That fear has not been eased: But recent video images of the home's owner [^] the Mexican nationalized Chinese native Zhenli Ye Gon [^] strolling New York streets and accusing the ruling party of using him to hoard its illegal money now threatens to taint the spectacular DEA-assisted seizure. [...] The official investigation against him and testimony from employees and relatives, including his jailed wife, suggest cozy ties among the Chinese businessman, politicians and even members of the military. Anti-drug police allegedly extorted bribes from him but also warned him to leave the country before the raid on his house. Opposition parties have called for a congressional investigation into possible links between the ruling National Action Party, or PAN, and Mr. Ye Gon. On Wedneday, PAN legislators joined opposition members in calling for an investigation into the Ye Gon case. As a result, the public no longer sees a $205 million blow against the drug cartels but a cesspool of collusion among drug operatives, politicians and government officials, analysts said. "Cesspool." Good word. 11:04:00 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Today's Congressional hearing David Murray has absolutely no shame. Get this from his prepared statement: Funded by millions from those who want to legalize marijuana outright, marijuana lobbyists have now been deployed to Capitol Hill and to States across the Nation to employ their favored tactic of using Americans' natural compassion for the sick to garner support for a far different agenda. These modern-day snake oil proponents cite testimonials--not science--that smoked marijuana helps patients suffering from AIDS, cancer, and other painful diseases "feel better." Unfortunately for America's sick, the same scenario our Nation dealt with a century ago has returned, and a number of states have passed voter referenda or legislative actions making smoked marijuana available for a variety of medical conditions upon a doctor's recommendation under state law. Let me explain it once again. Even if you forget all the myriad studies that demonstrate significant value from medicinal use of marijuana, the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes is primarily used as a symptom reliever. This doesn't just mean "feeling better." It means reducing the pain so you can work or function. It means reducing the nausea so you can take the healing medicine. It means reducing the spasms so you can walk, or read, or hold a pencil. The only measurement of whether it works is... whether it works. If it relieves the symptom so you can function, then it's effective. The only question is, then, whether it's safe. And to that question I say: "Show me the bodies." Marijuana is arguably the safest drug known to man. If a doctor and a patient agree that it's the best course, then there is no moral or constitutional justification for David Murray's job to exist. And, of course, he pushes the "smoked" marijuana meme to hysterical lengths: In light of these scientifically proven medicinal alternatives, the idea of telling suffering patients that the best we can do for them is to encourage them to inhale the hot smoke of a burning weed, of unknown dose and purity, seems medieval at best. It would be simply ridiculous if his asshole approach wasn't hurting so many people. How dare he? He is a despicable traitor to the human race. And it gets worse. Check out these bizarre 'reasons' medical marijuana laws "do not work" Medical marijuana laws lead to drug-related violence. [...] His reasoning? Because there have been thefts of the medical marijuana -- more a result of the conflicting state and federal laws that prevent developing a secure system. Medical marijuana laws protect drug dealers [...] No. Prohibition protects drug dealers. Fortunately, while I have not yet seen the transcripts, it appears that the subcommittee may have been on the job (although this is a very limited report). I'm anxious to get more information. I'll probably be talking about this hearing for awhile. 9:47:38 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Congressional hearings on the DEA and medicine this morning Via Alexander DeLuca "The DEA's Regulation of Medicine" July 12, 2007 - 10:00 AM 2237 Rayburn House Office Building House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security There will be a live webcast of the hearings -- 10 am Eastern. Witness list: Joseph T. Rannazzisi Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control United States Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of Justice Washington, DC David Murray Director of Counter Drug Technology, ONDCP, The White House Washington, DC Edward J. Heiden Ph.D. Heiden Associates Inc., Washington, DC Valerie Corral Founder of WAMM, Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana Davenport, CA Siobhan Reynolds President, Pain Relief Network, Santa Fe, NM John Flannery Attorney, Campbell, Miller, Zimmerman, PC, and Author of Pain in America and How the Government Makes it Worse Leesburg, VA [Thanks, J] Update: Video feeds appear to not be working. Prepared testimony is available here (click on the witness' name to read their testimony). I've glanced at Rannazzisi's and Murray's so far and they're pretty horrible. Murray just talks about medical marijuana (smoked). I'll be taking a closer look at his nonsense for you a little later. 12:11:55 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Pointing out the Drug Czar's role in encouraging illicit activity I like this approach by the MPP in pre-empting the Drug Czar's photo op: Drug Czar's CA Photo-Op Can't Hide Failure of Marijuana Policies, MPP Charges REDDING, CALIFORNIA -- White House Drug Czar John Walters' Thursday marijuana "eradication" photo-op in Shasta County will only underline the utter failure of current U.S. marijuana policies, officials at the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) charged today. [...] "The drug czar will tout his expensive eradication adventures and hope nobody notices that they've actually helped the illicit marijuana industry thrive," said Bruce Mirken, MPP's San Francisco-based director of communications. "Eradication has simply boosted profits and pushed growers to more remote locations." [...] "Walters denounces marijuana growing in national forests and other public lands, but the very 'eradication' efforts he champions are what drive marijuana producers into sensitive wilderness areas," Mirken said. "There's a reason you never hear about clandestine vineyards hidden in national parks and forests. If we regulated marijuana as we do wine, the problem Walters denounces so vehemently would disappear overnight." Yep. Walters has, for years, tried to pass himself off as caring for the environment, but the truth is plain to see. The policies he has promoted have been responsible for immense damage, and he needs to be held accountable. 11:22:35 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

The powers not delegated to... Via the ACLU: SANTA BARBARA, CA - The American Civil Liberties Union applauded today's ruling by a California Superior Court judge to uphold a voter-enacted initiative that directs police to focus resources on serious crime by making marijuana use the lowest law enforcement priority. Citing California's ban on lawsuits that punish public participation in the political process, the court dismissed the city of Santa Barbara's challenge of the law, known as Measure P, which was brought against Heather Poet because she was the proponent of the challenged initiative. "Today's ruling is a major victory for the democratic process and a resounding affirmation of voters' right to de-prioritize marijuana enforcement," said Adam Wolf, an attorney with the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project, which represented Poet in the proceedings. "The people of Santa Barbara would rather local law enforcement focus on combating serious crime than policing marijuana use. Today's ruling confirms that the voters can make this fundamentally local decision about their community's safety." In addition to finding that the city of Santa Barbara's suit against Poet arose from "her constitutional right to participate in the process of formulating laws" and ran afoul of California's ban on strategic lawsuits against public participation ("SLAPP"), the court held that neither state nor federal law precludes localities like Santa Barbara from prioritizing the enforcement of certain criminal offenses, including the de-prioritization of marijuana offenses. As the ruling states, "Nothing in [Measure P] prohibits enforcement of state law...Police officers can still arrest those who violate drug possession laws in their presence. The voters have simply instructed them that they have higher priority work to do." And here's the kicker in the ruling: "Santa Barbara is free to decline to enforce federal criminal statutes. It is up to the federal government to enforce its laws. Indeed, the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the federal government from impressing 'into its service -- and at no cost to itself -- the police officers of the 50 States.'" Wow! A court ruling that actually recognizes the existence of the 10th Amendment*. That's exciting! Now maybe the voters in Santa Barbara can penalize (at the voting booths) those petty officials who wasted the town's money trying to avoid fulfilling the will of the people. * Just a reminder for those who have forgotten: Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. 3:04:15 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Monday, July 9, 2007

Hmmm... let's call this one an AVAILABLE thread. I'm still on the road, spending some good quality time with my folks, and can only get decent internet access when I sneak away to some cafe for a few minutes. I'll be back full time on Thursday, but will stop in when I can before then. As always, read the wonderful discussions in the comments (I think Allan's looking for a date). Random Student Drug Tests Put In Doubt -- looks like Tennessee may believe more in the privacy of its citizens than the Federal government. We're increasingly needing the states to save us from the United States. The Drug War's Collateral Damage -- a nice OpEd by Silja J.A. Talvi, based on the recent report from the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics. Pot Documentary Has Local Filmmaker On A Roll -- sounds interesting. Hope it gets some major distribution. Which reminds me... I tried to order Damage Done: The Drug War Odyssey, which is now available on DVD, and although I wanted to buy it, they wouldn't send it to me because I live in the United States. If anyone has a contact that could get me a copy to review, let me know. If you're looking for something to do during my vacation, try writing a letter. There's a good new focus alert at MAPinc. -- Common Sense Marijuana Policy 3:56:19 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Friday, July 6, 2007

Another open thread Having a great time in Iowa, and I just got access to the internet for the first time. Some good discussions in comments below. And here are a couple of other things that caught my attention: Nice wording from Daily Kos' Meteor Blades If you've ever considered installing a Gro-Lite in a closet to cultivate a marijuana plant for your very own use, I suggest you consider obstructing justice and perjuring yourself in a case involving national security instead. Frank Greve at McClatchy Newspapers is totally clueless Experts: Global drug abuse largely contained WASHINGTON -- One war appears to be going well for the United States and its allies these days: the drug war. Ruth's Hemp Foods helps the lawsuit against the DEA. Ruth's makes some excellent hemp bars, and now they've come out with a new one for the holiday: Red White and Blueberry. All the profits from the bar will go to support Vote Hemp and their funding of the lawsuit to allow North Dakota farmers to grow hemp. Be patriotic and buy some Red, White and Blueberry. Update: The Drug Czar gloats about hoodwinking McClatchy into believing their misdirection and lies. It really is pathetic. The ONDCP and UNODC throw out a lot of meaningless, contradictory and irrelevant statistics as proof that they're winning the war on drugs. And we call them on it. Clearly. Specifically. http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/Repeatedly. So now the McClatchy papers stupidly pass on the nonsense given to them by the ONDCP and UNODC uncritically and the Drug Czar says that this proves that they were right all along. In what fantasy world? 9:53:59 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []