Pubdate: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 Source: New York Times Drug Policy Forum Website: http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/index-national.html Note: This, and the series of forums, is being archived at MAP as an exception to our web only source posting policies. This discussion is a follow up to the chat with Chris Conrad archived at http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n1990.a12.html Websites Chris recommends are www.chrisconrad.com, www.potpride.com, www.fcda.org, www.hr95.org, www.thehia.org and www.votehemp.com Because the NYT Drug Policy Forum was off-line for almost two days, to within a few hours of the discussion below, resulting in a lower than normal level of participation Chris has been invited back to the Forum to an additional discussion Wed. Dec. 19th, at 8 p.m. Eastern, 5 p.m. Pacific. Future: guest schedule: Catherine Austin Fitts will be the guest Sunday, Dec 2nd at 8 p.m. Eastern, 5. p.m. Pacific in the DrugSense Chat Room http://www.drugsense.org/chat with a follow up visit to the NYT Forum on Wed., Dec. 5th at the same times. She is the author of the Narco News series of articles 'Narco-Dollars For Dummies' posted at http://www.narconews.com/narcodollars1.html http://www.narconews.com/narcodollars2.html and http://www.narconews.com/narcodollars3.html Also: On Wed, Dec. 5th at 5 p.m. Eastern, 2 p.m. Pacific, N.M. Governor Gary Johnson will be the guest in the NYT Forum. TRANSCRIPT: CHRIS CONRAD'S VISIT TO THE NYT DRUG POLICY FORUM Chris Conrad: Greetings! I'm here trying to sort out the screens, but I found this part at least. I'm just not sure where to start reading, since there's already quite a bit of banter going! Richard Lake: Hi, Chris! Glad you made it. A lot going on. But there is no real reason to go back into the past here. Just start with the questions you see now. Any comments on the hemp action, or on the plans to support the cannabis clubs??? Chris Conrad: Yeah, we're planning to have about 50 plus cities taking action to protest the DEA's new policies on hemp foods. This poses an interesting problem for the movement because it technically doesn't stop companies from using hempseed in foods and we don't want to send a chilling message, but clearly that's what the DEA wants to do is force a chill on the industry. Chris Conrad: So we have to protest the DEA's move to chill the industry by creating an impossible standard without, at the same time, sending a message to companies or consumers that they have to stop using hempseed. The burden should ultimately be on the DEA to find any THC in the foods, and realistically there isn't any. But zero tolerance instead of reasonable compliance is not a fair standard for the DEA to hold anyone to promise. Dean Becker: Hi Chris, Hear any more about the San Francisco sanctuary idea since we last talked? Chris Conrad: Supervisor Mark Leno's resolution aims to deter harassment and prosecution of medical cannabis patients, caregivers and dispensaries. It was discussed at the Medical Cannabis Sanctuary and ID Card Hearing on November 27, 2001 at City Hall Committee Hearing Room 263, but I didn't attend. Dean Becker: Chris, Do you foresee additional laws being written in California to either coincide or go beyond the provision 215 or 36, a lashing out by the voters? Chris Conrad: I think there is a need for one, but not the kind of restrictive referenda normally written by Americans for Medical Rights. California is such an expensive state for a campaign that it is discouraging. Based on what juries have ruled in various cases, I think we could get something realistic based on the DEA 1992 yields to set a baseline for cultivation and also to exempt patients from arrest and maybe to leave doctors alone and allow distribution. I have drafted some language, but so far it is in the talk stage. If any potential funders or participants would like to see a copy of the draft language, let me know. Chris Conrad: Do you foresee additional laws being written in California to either coincide or go beyond the provision 215 or 36, a lashing out by the voters? I think that the prosecutors around the state have actually helped us unintentionally by doing these high-profile prosecutions that have educated the community better about how yields work and that police "experts" are not always to be trusted, especially when they contradict the government studies they pretend to have studied. Working as a court expert has been a very stimulating experience, but a little tough emotionally when you don't win and you know the client was innocent. Celaya: Chris It seems like Marijuana Reform is catching fire right now in England with protestors lighting up in groups outside police stations. Any way we could break the U.S. media blackout and let their zeal infect this country? Chris Conrad: It seems like Marijuana Reform is catching fire right now in England with protestors lighting up in groups outside police stations. Any way we could break the U.S. media blackout and let their zeal infect this country? The UK has three ingredients that are missing in the USA 1) a major national newspaper (The Guardian) that decided to keep cannabis reform on the front burner until reforms were enacted, 2) people willing to light up in front of police stations en masse and even if they are prosecuted facing only the most minimal penalties, and 3) politicians who have looked at the issue with honesty. The problem per #3 for us is that this is in part due to the House of Lords not being subject to election so they can be as honest as they want and in part due to the fact that an honest appraisal for politicians in the USA includes the fear that the drug war industrial complex will throw its enormous financial and media resources against any politician who is honest about cannabis. When we can resolve those points, the ball will be rolling here, as well. Celaya: Whew! Those are some heavy points! Exodus? Chris Conrad: The thing is that you can never tell when things are going to go over the top and escalate to quick change. Look at the fall of the Berlin Wall. Look at the collapse of the Taliban. There is a philosophical link between the Taliban and Ashcroft's Drug War, and that is the doctrine of moralistic prohibition. The way to attack Ashcroft there is to use the Bible, like Matt 12, Mark 3, Luke 13, John 9 to show him as being anti-Christ. He is more akin to the Pilate, who used Roman law to kill Jesus. Ashcroft would have done the same, and he should be held to task. The other similarity is that they base their power on suppression, not popular support. When the money dries up, the narcs go away. Same for the gangs. That's why regulation is such a better program. The people did not support the Taliban and they do not support Ashcroft. We just need that international Alliance for true justice to bring him down. Dean Becker: Chris I have tried to consider a way that the members of the drug culture can make their presence known without giving it all away to their bosses, like a ribbon on something. If we were to pack churches, Baptist this week, Catholics next and so on, fill the churches and the parking lots. No mass distribution of data, simply saying by our presence that we want a change, would that have any chance to make an impact, to facilitate a change? Chris Conrad: "If we were to pack churches, Baptist this week, Catholics next and so on, fill the churches and the parking lots. No mass distribution of data, simply saying by our presence that we want a change, would that have any chance to make an impact, to facilitate a change?" There is some real potential there. From my experience most personal drug users have spiritual beliefs and moral values, but they tend to be more mystical in the sense that they don't go to a church with regularity. That creates a barrier that we have not overcome as a subculture. There would have to be some explanation of who these people are, and there is the danger of spooking people out by having their chapel space "invaded" by non-congregation people. You are absolutely right that using the churches is critical to provoking sweeping social and political change in drug policy, particularly in the African American community. The Human Rights and the Drug War display and the book _Shattered Lives Portraits From America's Drug War_ do this by bringing the pictures and stories to communities without having to bring in actual people. Maybe that is an easier way to achieve your purpose Sponsor a rotating church-based display of the HRDW exhibit. I'm sure we would be interested in doing it if the logistics work out and there is some funding generated to cover the basic expenses. Aahpat: Hi Chris and All; I'll be in and out tonight but I wanted to contribute this thought. While looking over legislation I came across the following for the D.C. appropriations for 2001. It is the re-authorization of the veto of I-59. So I am wondering, if they have to re-authorize this suppression of democracy in our national capital every year why can't we run an annual campaign to have Sect. 129 stricken from the appropriations bill. HR 2944 EAS "An Act making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia" SEC. 129. (a) None of the funds contained in this Act may be used to enact or carry out any law, rule, or regulation to legalize or otherwise reduce penalties associated with the possession, use, or distribution of any schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802) or any tetrahydrocannabinols derivative. (b) The Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998, also known as Initiative 59, approved by the electors of the District of Columbia on November 3, 1998, shall not take effect. Chris Conrad: "While looking over legislation I came across the following for the D.C. appropriations for 2001. It is the re-authorization of the veto of I-59. So I am wondering, if they have to re-authorize this suppression of democracy in our national capital every year why can't we run an annual campaign to have Sect. 129 stricken from the appropriations bill." That is a terrific idea, at least as far as a media event. It forces them to publicly violate their oaths of office every year, kind of like a Congress holding a ritualistic killing of democracy in America. The effect of this could be part of a snowballing public disgust with the activities of the Ashcroft coupe that should be spread to his cohorts holding elective office. This could be a good time to tie his person to the issues that garner peoples' contempt so that when the time comes that he is plunged into the political void, he takes some of the baggage along with him. He will always be the guy who lost to a corpse. Dean Becker: We are subject to Pavlov dog syndrome here I think, or like a child who has been beaten too many times, we flinch when we think of cops and so many are afraid to smoke or speak up and the media is just for the most part yellow journalism that breeds and self perpetuates. How do we resolve these 3 points Chris? Richard Lake: Chris, I noticed the following article from the campus newspaper, which includes info I have not heard before. I do know that AMR is looking more at WA, OR, or AZ for another medical marijuana initiative, but have yet to see any feedback from folks in those states on the idea. Any comments? http//www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n1996.a09.html Pubdate Tue, 27 Nov 2001 Source Daily Californian, The (CA Edu) GROUP WANTS STATE TO HELP DISTRIBUTE MEDICAL MARIJUANA Federal Law Complicates Issue Tired of the haze of legal issues surrounding the distribution of medical marijuana, a medical rights advocacy group wants states to be directly involved in the distribution of medical marijuana. Americans for Medical Rights, the organization that sponsored Proposition 215--the medical marijuana initiative--is proposing a ballot measure to set up a state-controlled network of medical marijuana distributors. The proposal has drawn wide support from Berkeley marijuana users who are likewise frustrated by legal complications resulting from the federal law that bans the drug. Although eight states have legalized medical marijuana, the cultivation, sale and use of the drug remains illegal under federal law. "We don't have a choice," said Gina Palencar, head of the initiative drive. "Medical marijuana patients are not going to stop using marijuana for medical purposes just because the federal government is trying to criminalize them." Widespread support is growing in Berkeley and on the UC Berkeley campus for the initiative, which will likely be placed on the 2002 ballots in Oregon and Washington, two states that allow marijuana use for medical reasons. The group's ultimate goal is to put the initiative before California voters, but it is using the other states as testing grounds. The Berkeley City Council last spring completed the arduous task of devising an ordinance for the use of medical marijuana to comply with Proposition 215. The ordinance, deemed too conservative by medical marijuana proponents in the amount of marijuana patients can possess, is generous compared to ordinances adopted by other California cities. "Medical marijuana and legal access to medical marijuana is one of the most agreed upon of sensible drug policies--it's a common ground," said Scarlett Swerdlow of Students for Sensible Drug Policy at UC Berkeley. Swerdlow added that it would only be a first step in a more open discussion on drug policy. "Ultimately, the federal government needs to change its policy," she said. "It doesn't make sense to send anyone, sick or healthy, to jail for using marijuana." By having cannabis distribution facilities that are operated and run by the state, a showdown between the states and the federal government is almost certain. The Oakland Cannabis Buyer's Cooperative, a large marijuana distribution group popular with some Berkeley residents, went head-to-head with the Supreme Court earlier this year and lost. The club stopped distributing marijuana in May, after a two-year court battle. Americans for Medical Rights, a Santa Monica-based group, is not pushing the ballot measure in California because it would be too expensive to conduct a campaign here, Palencar said. As proposed, the measure would allow the state to distribute marijuana in one of two ways. One proposal calls for the state to cultivate cannabis on private farms. That cannabis would then be distributed by state-operated distribution facilities. The other proposal would have the state acquire the cannabis from Mississippi, where the federal government grows it for research purposes. There has been a long and involved effort on the part of the California legislature to finalize a legitimate system of distribution. State lawmakers recently passed a bill that would have recognized the distribution centers under California law and established an oversight framework. Chris Conrad: "I do know that AMR is looking more at WA, OR, or AZ for another medical marijuana initiative, but have yet to see any feedback from folks in those states on the idea. Any comments?" has excellent announcement and discussion lists on forfeiture. Not every forfeiture issue is drug policy related, like the link to this amazing story just posted to their lists http//www.sierratimes.com/archive/files/nov/28/arjj112801.htm But even so I find it a superb resource. Dean Becker: Chris, I like your ideas, attitude and style. Whichever tasks you promote, please let me know what I can do in Houston to help. Redeyedllama: well its quite obvious neither Democrat or Republican political candidate wishes to see a country where patients can receive medicine that doesn't cost an arm and a leg as Gore was with Clinton who wished to revoke licenses of any doctor that prescribed marijuana, and Bush had states choice as part of his campaign yet has not even looked at the chain on his bullgod Ashcroft, meaning that what is necessary is to get enough voter power to make them listen, it s just a matter of finding the resources to accomplish that kind of campaign as I see it... Chris Conrad: "It seems that when all is said and done, that Reformers just don't have the numbers politically to generate an effective challenge. ...Does anyone know what kind of power AI wields and if it would be worth it to for us to lobby them in support of her efforts?" Amnesty seems to be more involved with peripheral issues, and it is cumbersome to get it moving in any new direction but I'm glad someone is trying to do that. It is certainly worth it to lobby them, but in a sense it might be easier to do it indirectly, such as asking them to oppose the suppression of indigenous cannabis cultures in India, Morocco, Lebanon, or something like that. AI is loathe to criticize the USA, where many wealthy funders live, but getting it to criticize second and third world countries (sorry about the political incorrectness of the phrasing) is a little easier and has a stronger argument of cultural genocide than the fairly modern US pot culture. I know the roots go back for centuries, but I meant as far as a widespread social phenomenon. The second point I wanted to address is that I think that we do have the numbers when we include the Friends and Families of Pot Smokers. This is a new organization I have on the back burner to allow people who don't smoke pot to defend it. "Well, I don't smoke pot, but I know a few people who do and they really aren't criminals, in fact they're nice people. That's why I think we should stop wasting police resources on the Drug War and legalize pot for adults." When you include everyone who knows somebody who smokes grass, we are a big group indeed. That's how medical marijuana became such a broad based issue. Not just the patients, but almost everyone who knew a patient voted for the reforms. And one patient can know a lot of people. So can one pot smoker. And it is more effective to have non-smokers advance our position (which I think is ridiculous but true). Dean Becker: Chris, are the items on your agenda that we did not bring forward today that you would like to share with us? Chris Conrad: "...they can accept political and personal contributions from companies that would compete with marijuana without to much to hide ...re the British angle was that s its not as easy to discredit a gov't study such as Britain s which has been well published through most of Europe vs. the studies in various universities locally which have been kept away from press and public eyes..." One of the mistakes made in the post Watergate reforms was the belief that by exposing financial corruption it would dry up in the light of day. Instead it thrived and grew into a grotesque mockery of campaign reporting without limitations or ethics. Now the same politicians are in charge of how to limit the amount of money they collect and to eliminate conflicts of interest. Not possible. Exposure is not enough, we need to limit spending and the news media is the major recipient of the money, and politicians and pharmaceuticals are two of the biggest advertisers, along with the government and fossil fuel related corporations. Scary. You mention the studies being published in obscure medical journals, which is true, but the major national "government" study produced in the USA, the National Academy of Science / Institute of Medicine report, could not be suppressed for more than a few years. When it came out it didn't make much of a splash in part because it was riddled with vagaries and weasel words that diluted its impact. Truth is a very valuable commodity in America because there is so little of it circulating in the media and government at any given time. Donaldway: For the benefit of the transcript, the IOM report can be read at http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/marimed/ Neitzen James: Hey Chris, if you're still around, thanks for being here. I just discovered this forum was back up, and here YOU are on it! I really liked your idea for a 'friends and relations of peaceful pot smokers' association. Keep up your good work! -) Chris Conrad: "Chris, are the items on your agenda that we did not bring forward today that you would like to share with us?" Only the observation that we are fighting on many different fronts now. The Bush administration seems to approach every policy with the frontal assault and brute force. I think that they are sowing the seeds of economic collapse, and that when that happens our circumstances will be more difficult on the one hand, but it will force the issue of our national spending priorities in a way that we could not bring about with the Clinton surplus. It is also likely that Ashcroft has moved too fast in advancing the heavy-handed tactics of political repression, and that Congress may resist. It has only been in the past few weeks that the media has begun to climb out from under the faux patriotism that buried America along with the collapse of the WTC in New York. Just as the federal government demonizes its enemies, it unleashes its own demons for us to expose. The only good that can come from Ashcroft being in office is to show the mean spirited and un-American stripe of his political ilk. This is a good time for us to wrap our causes in the flag and build coalitions that seek to knock him down and let him pull as much of the evil that surrounds him down with him as he can. As always, our tools are truth and compassion, and with them we will rebuild an America based on life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Equal rights are for everybody. Please remember that our books make great holiday gifts, so visit my web pages at www.chrisconrad.com, hr95.org, fcda.org, and potpride.com. Thank you for this opportunity to chat, and we'll do it again Dec 19, eh Dean? Dean Becker: Dec 19 it is. Thank you for your time Chris, you lead by your example. Chris Conrad: Thanks for dropping by. Goodnight everyone. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake