Breaking News:Dangerous Delays: What Washington State (Re)Teaches Us About Cash and Cannabis Store Robberies [REPORT]

Drug Czar Furious Over New York Times Editorial

Posted in:
Just watch how the New York Times editorial board picks apart the Drug Czar's propaganda:

According to the White House, this country is scoring big wins in the war on drugs, especially against the cocaine cartels. Officials celebrate that cocaine seizures are up — leading to higher prices on American streets. Cocaine use by teenagers is down, and, officials say, workplace tests suggest adult use is falling.

John Walters, the White House drug czar, declared earlier this year that “courageous and effective” counternarcotics efforts in Colombia and Mexico “are disrupting the production and flow of cocaine.”

This enthusiasm rests on a very selective reading of the data. Another look suggests that despite the billions of dollars the United States has spent battling the cartels, it has hardly made a dent in the cocaine trade.

The Drug Czar's blog fired back with a predictably off-target, but uncharacteristically hostile response:

Today's New York Times has published an editorial that willfully cherry picks data in order to conform to their tired, 1970's editorial viewpoint that we're "losing the war on drugs."

Despite our numerous efforts to provide the Times with the facts, their editorial staff has chosen to ignore irrefutable data regarding the progress that has been made in making our nation's drug problem smaller.

 And yet, as anyone can see, the NYT piece clearly acknowledges this so-called "irrefutable data." They list the Drug Czar's favorite talking points right in the first paragraph. But then they do something he wasn't prepared for: they say it doesn't matter. The salient point of the whole editorial is that "the drug cartels are not running for cover." In short, for all the Drug Czar's proud proclamations of progress, the drug trade surges on unabated.

It's really just embarrassing that the Drug Czar's only response is to repeat the very points already acknowledged and overcome by NYT. His whole argument is that rates of drug abuse are lower than they were at their highest point in history. That's true, but it's not surprising, not impressive, and not even remotely a result of the Drug Czar's poisonous public policies. With the rage of a shamed tyrant, Walters claims a monopoly on "the facts," as though only the Drug Czar is qualified to interpret the success of his programs. It's like calling CarMax to ask them if they have the best deals on used cars.

Beyond all that, ponder the absurdity of the very notion that we must consult the Drug Czar and his overcooked statistics in order to know whether or not our drug policy is working really well. We can observe these things for ourselves. When we lead the world in incarceration, when we lead the world in drug use, when we drug test our own sewage, and deny organs to medical marijuana patients, and murder innocent people in their homes, and subsidize brutal civil wars in foreign nations, we have nothing to celebrate. All of these grand travesties fester before our eyes and are not mitigated, even to a microscopic extent, by the indignant self-congratulatory fulminations of the very people who visited this spectacular nightmare upon us.

In other words, when the pool is green, no one gives a crap if the lifeguard says the pH balance is normal.
Permission to Reprint: This article is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license.
Looking for the easiest way to join the anti-drug war movement? You've found it!

I was furious about the NY Times editorial too

As always, they refuse to distinguish between marijuana and hard drugs and refuse to discuss alcohol vs. marijuana. As supposed liberals, they do an excellent job of stabbing marijuana users in the back. Go have another drink, you NYT alcohol supremacist bigots.

Malkavian's picture

I think you're falling nicely into the trap set for you

Most activists I talk to yammer on about how "not dangerous cananbis is and how it's nothing like the 'hard drugs' and how it should be legal, because it's not dangerous".

This is a TRAP, and as long as we jump right in it we can't win. Pot isn't completely without dangers, but consider this provocative statement:

It is completely and utterly irrelevant whether cannabis is safe, unsafe, a soft or a hard drug as far as POLICY goes. We must not and should not base our policy of what is legal or illegal on the harms that a drug does.

Why? Because what really matters is picking the drug policy that actually works the best. No matter if a drug is dangerous or not it doesn't automatically mean that either prohibition or legalization must be chosen as the best policy.

Actually, the more dangerous the drug the more important it is to replace prohibition with a legal, regulated market. In a sense heroin, cocaine and Ecstasy (MDMA) is much more suitable for legalization than cannabis.

Inherent in your argument is that the state should stop repressing the soft drug using pot smokers so that they can focus their attention on the "really dangerous drugs".

Let me ask you something. let's say they DID find out that cannabis had some until now hidden and VERY bad dangers ... would you then support heavy Prohibition against pot now that it's been PROVEN dangerous? Shouldn't we do this, because pot is not actually to be considered a "hard drug"?

Of course you wouldn't :o)

The real problem with this cannabis-driven argument is that it fucking walks all over every other user of illegal drugs. So while you're sitting there polishing your halo you're at the same time supporting the drug war against heroin users who live vastely more dangerous lives because so many harm reduction solutions are barred from use.

I respect your desire to legalize cannabis, but please do it in a way that doesn't put everyone else at a disadvantage..

This is a great article by Fredrick Polak, a Dutch psychiatrist and and long time activist: HOW DOES THE LEGAL REGULATION OF CANNABIS COMPARE TO THAT OF OTHER ILLICIT DRUGS? The merit of health arguments in the legalization debate

Thank you

for a well stated argument.

The only issue is the massive failure of prohibition economics based social engineering policies regardless of the substance prohibited.

On the other side of the coin...

would ONDCP advocate decriminalization or legal regulation if all marijuana did was get you high and did not have all the side effects they continously propagate in the media? Of course not.

I respect your desire to

I respect your desire to legalize cannabis, but please do it in a way that doesn't put everyone else at a disadvantage..what the hell does that mean? Alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana, yet it is legal. Cocaine, heroin and ecstasy are much more dangerous than marijuana and alcohol.

Actually, the more dangerous the drug the more important it is to replace prohibition with a legal, regulated market. In a sense heroin, cocaine and Ecstasy (MDMA) is much more suitable for legalization than cannabis. This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. These drugs require synthesis and production which most people wouldn't take on to support their habit. Marijuana is a plant that is grown and dried and smoked, that is all. If you stop the cartels, you can stop the hard drugs, but not marijuana. So it is different, and therefore much harder to stop. Besides people can live perfectly productive lives being part of society while using marijuana on a daily basis. Other drugs this is not the case.

Let me ask you something. let's say they DID find out that cannabis had some until now hidden and VERY bad dangers ... would you then support heavy Prohibition against pot now that it's been PROVEN dangerous? Shouldn't we do this, because pot is not actually to be considered a "hard drug"? Your hypothetical is pointless, because there is ubiquitous information and studies that prove it is not as harmful as "hard drugs" or alcohol or even cigarettes. If it was found to be VERY harmful, of course I would be for prohibiting it! But the fact is it's NOT! The more studies are done the more this is realized...

When the White House

and the congress can conform their drug war prohibition policy to this constitutional mandate I will support their drug war.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity...

The war on drugs doe not in any way shape or form conform to this constitutional promise and mandate. In fact the war on drugs subverts these guarantees.

Walters, Bush, Obama and McCain

are each and all ardent drug warriors. That makes them all Taliban supporters. Their support for the drug war policy creates and fosters a $ 320-billion global black market economy that in turn, and they all know this, supports as much as half the stateless terrorism in the world today. This single fact makes all supporters of the war on drugs traitors to the United States of America.

Article III, Section 3 United States Constitution

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

The black market created and fostered by the war on drugs policy gives America's sworn enemies financial "aid" as well as tactical and strategic "comforts". Our congress has known this since the 1990's.
John A. Glaze
October 2007
For the U.S. Army War College

" estimated 70 percent of the Taliban’s income now comes from protection money and the sale of opium."
Congressional Research Service report to congress.
Illicit Drugs and the Terrorist Threat: Causal Links and Implications for Domestic Drug Control Policy
April 5, 2004

"The international traffic in illicit drugs contributes to terrorist risk through at least five mechanisms: supplying cash, creating chaos and instability, supporting corruption, providing “cover” and sustaining common infrastructures for illicit activity, and competing for law enforcement and intelligence attention. Of these, cash and chaos are likely to be the two most important."
Barnett R. Rubin, Council on Foreign Relation and NYU Afghan policy expert to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee
September 2006

"The international drug control regime, which criminalizes narcotics, does not reduce drug use, but it does produce huge profits for criminals and the armed groups and corrupt officials who protect them. Our drug policy grants huge subsidies to our enemies."
"Of the 36 groups designated by the State Department as foreign terrorist organizations, 14 (or 39 percent) are connected to drug activities, testified Steven W. Casteel, assistant administrator for intelligence of the Drug Enforcement Administration.

He said they range from Middle Eastern terrorist groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia, the Shining Path in Peru and the Abu Sayyaf Group in the Philippines."
Hatch Links Drugs, Terrorism, 21 May 2003, The Daily Herald

The United States congress has known since the 1990's that alQaeda has been promoting the tactical use of heroin distribution as an asymmetric weapon against western culture. As the World Trade Center and Pentagon still smoldered now Obama supporter and advisor Sen. John Kerry told reporters: "That's part of their revenge on the world," Kerry said. "Get as many people drugged out and screwed up as you can." U.S. Sen. John Kerry 21 Sept. 2001
Assertions based on reports going back to 1998 such as this.

The crop will be opium and the farmer will be Osama bin Laden, the most wanted terrorist in the world. Bin Laden, accused by the United States of bombing two of their embassies in East Africa this summer and a string of other attacks, sees heroin as a powerful new weapon in his war against the West, capable of wreaking social havoc while generating huge profits, according to sources in eastern Afghanistan and in Pakistan.
Dec 1998, Indian Times, Heroin In The Holy War

Newsweek even gave the strategy a name in 2003 "Silent Jihad".

"Some militants view opium as something more than a source of cash; they say it's a legitimate weapon in what they call a "silent jihad." Khurshid, a 20-year-old Nangarhar native, says drugs are Afghanistan's way of striking back at the West for sending "liquor, obsceneTV and pornographic films" into Afghanistan: "Immoral Western culture destroys the minds of our children, so it's only just that we export opium and heroin to destroy Western youths."
Flowers Of Destruction, July 2003, Newsweek

The children of the western world are being targeted as cannon fodder in the war on terror. Our political leaders know this and still continue the policy that gives our enemies this weapon and opportunity.

Reply to "falling nicely into trap" post

Try to save your disdain ('yammering") for our common foe. The polls I've seen show fairly strong support for legalizing marijuana (over 40% in referendums in Nevada and Colorado in 2006) and very little for legalizing hard drugs. Seems to me that's reason enough to focus current legalization efforts on marijuana. Once people see how badly marijuana has been slandered (medical marijuana is presumably helping greatly in countering drug war propaganda) I think they will be more willing to distinguish between the damage done by hard drugs and the damage done by the war on them. Current efforts on hard drugs should focus on harm reduction goals, not dreams of legalization.

You say "Inherent in your argument is that the state should stop repressing the soft drug using pot smokers so that they can focus their attention on the "really dangerous drugs".
That's only a possible conclusion to draw and it certainly isn't my view. My argument is the SAFER argument that marijuana is a safer alternative for enjoyable recreation than alcohol, and any serious person knows that's true. I see no evidence that hard drugs are safer than alcohol, so I see no reason for the effort to legalize marijuana and the effort to legalize hard drugs to be closely linked. That would be a death sentence to hopes of legalizing marijuana for the foreseeable future. I certainly hope you (and the Dutch group you linked to) wouldn't go so far as to oppose decriminalization and legalization campaigns that focus only on marijuana. I'd say it's holding progress on cannabis legalization hostage to progress on hard drug legalization that is falling into a trap.

You also say "I respect your desire to legalize cannabis, but please do it in a way that doesn't put everyone else at a disadvantage". But it's overwhelming public opinion, as well as the monstrous behavior of some users of hard drugs, that puts them at a disadvantage and there's nothing particular I can do to change that. I think there's an issue of being realistic about what change is possible in the next few election cycles.

Walters Reply

Did he say 1970's argument that we're loosing the drug war? Wow! has it gone on that long?

It's Official

Drug czars are condemned for their lies by drug users, medical doctors, lawyers, scientists, historians, psychologists, psychiatrists, anthropologists, sociologists, archivologists, journalists, novelists, the clergy, politicians, world leaders, military personnel, police officers, former prosecutors, judges, specialists in drug criminology, and any other profession that crosses paths with the drug war.  Not much will be noted in the official consciousness in any of these cases.

But let that old Grey Lady, The New York Times, expose a bureaucrat as a liar and fake, and the accusation is virtually embossed in the history books from that moment on.  Under the circumstances, one can expect John Walters’ hostile response to the NYT’s editorial and his feeble inferences that the country’s leading newspaper has never supported the drug war—quite the opposite, in fact.

John Walters is fighting losing battles on several fronts.  His intent in this case is to retain an honorable mention of himself, his career, and his sordid and ineffectual tactics, for the history books.  And just like a typical sociopath, anytime Walters is caught telling bald-faced lies, he keeps right on telling them.

One can only wonder what kind of corrupt and dysfunctional mutant will be chosen for the next drug czar by the new administration.  Any future president would be well advised to avoid policy-wonk disasters of the sort depicted by the arch neo-con, John P. Walters, and his ilk.  The simplest and best thing would be to abolish the ONDCP.


some replys to comments

as i read the above comments a few thoughts came to mind that i'd like to bring to light:
1. cannabis shows virtually ZERO adverse health effects if ingested orally, which would be much more practical to have ounces laying around to put in the chocolate cake when all the old "never question uncle sam" generation becomes too senile to vote- but not before they spend the social security that comes out of my check but i'll never see a penny.... when they forget what day it is to vote, cannabis will be the first in the door as well it should- but not because it's any more or less safe than anything else....
any perception altering substance or natural transcendental mental exercise is dangerous and possibly fatal if people don't behave responsibly. in fact, i venture to claim that we would already have hash bars even in kansas if the small numbnutz percentage of drug users hadn't blown the party for the rest of us... OF COURSE it will still remain illegal as long as thugnificent or gangstalicious is rollin down the middle of the road in a hummer full of smoke like cheech and chong. because its fking stupid to drive and get your head right at the same time. STUPID PEOPLE are the reason we can't get high legally yet.
2. regarding the harm caused by drug use / drug abuse (yes they ARE different and don't let the 12 steppers convince you that the DSM-IV is wrong to list separate diagnostic codes for intoxication and for dependence for EVERY common substance of abuse. ADDICTION IS A CURABLE SYNDROME, not a life sentence of doomed disease like some would have you believe.... this is because ADDICTION IS LIKE ANY OTHER SELF- DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOR- IT IS SECONDARY TO A MORE SERIOUS UNDERLYING EMOTIONAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL CONDITION. you don't give an aspirin to someone to stop a headache caused by a brain tumor. you cure the tumor, the pain stops. same with substance dependency... treat the depression CORRECTLY with COGNITIVE BEHAVIORAL therapy instead of throwing SSRI's at everyone going through a divorce (btw that is NOT the intended use of antidepressant medication... they are for people who ALWAYS are depressed, even when their lives are seemingly great-- for neurological regulation, certainly not to keep you from being forced to actually DEAL with your fathers death so you can move on... IT IS NORMAL TO FEEL SAD AND NERVOUS AND SCARED sometimes. IT IS A GOOD THING because that is how we learn. when prozac lets us forget about who gets custody of the kids because the sky is such a beautiful hue of blue this afternoon, THE PROZAC is causing the problem....

fun facts: the most harmful drugs for the body, brain, and mind/spirit are EXCESSIVE alcohol consumption, ERRONEOUS prescriptions for SSRI antidepressants, which if taken by someone whose brain chemistry is pretty normal may cause permanent and severe damage to several areas of the brain and pathways by which different brain areas communicate with each other. non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication when not correctly prescribed or when misused causes much more serious risks to health and life than cocaine and heroin combined (when controlling to eliminate confounding variables like poor injection techniques, dirty needles, and impure (non-pharmeceutical grade) substances. ALL THE PILLS THAT THE COMMERCIALS HAVE CONVINCED YOU THAT YOU NEED ARE GOING TO KILL YOU BEFORE SNORTING A FEW LINES OF COKE MAKING MUSIC ON A SUNDAY AFTERNOON!!!!!
the drugs that are illegal are- when used responsibly- USED vs. abused- are actually safer than most of the prescription medications taken by americans today- even young children... even benadryl can be more dangerous than the illegal drugs, and people dope their 2-year old airline companions with benadryl a million times a day.
we now are confident enough to say that recreational use of intranasal cocaine is a relatively safe activity. and don't even bring up len bias. unless you have brain scans and blood tests to show that he wasn't going to die anyway. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CRACK. it is just a "scary" name dick bennett and ronald reagan made up to stir up fear of urban black americans. "crack" is simply premanufactured, prepackaged, free base cocaine. richard prior wishes he had known about baking soda back in the day. after all, its the only difference between powder and hard. that and a mandatory federal prison sentence, where you'll be able to pass those 5 years smoking base inside, just like outside... medical evidence has now accumulated to safely conclude "crack babies" were essentially babies who simply had a lack of pre-natal care and maternal malnutrition. unless you are doing WAY more than a recreational amount of any version of cocaine- EXCEPT NEEDLES- you will hardly notice the physical rebound (aka "withdrawal"- another scary word that means "that felt really good, i wish i had some more...." IF IT FEELS GOOD YOU WILL KEEP DOING IT... "addiction" is largely a BEHAVIORAL phenomenon that also describes how to train dogs.positive reinforcement.) no massive brain cell loss, no internal brain bleeding, no chromosome damage, no going crazy after 3 hits.....
ALL OF THE WELL-KNOWN PSYCHEDELICS- psilocybin, lsa, lsd, mdma, mescaline, peyote, even ibogaine... are completely safe even at very high doses (with the exception of some mushrooms with hallucinogenic effects but are much more poisonous and are mistaken for the psilocybe family, and higher doses of some of the more exotic psychedelics, mainly used in tribal rituals...) there is NO SUCH THING AS A BAD TRIP. people who have "bad trips" are either: 1. using psychedelics as a party drug which is completely stupid on so many levels... these plants and substances are sacrements from the earth for spiritual guidance, and every one of the well known psychedelics have documented success in treating emotional problems like PTSD, post- partum depression, even alcoholism and substance dependence have been successfully treated with therapy systems which use psychedelic substances as PART of the treatment plan. and they work well.

3.if you read the definition of why certain drugs are in certain schedules, you will find that schedule 1 drugs, by legal definition, have a high potential for DEPENDENCE and are considered very likely to be used irresponsibly to result in death. none of the psychedelics have any significant addiction/dependence (physically.... remember that feeling good and wanting to feel good again is human, its not addiction)- people that actually have the desire to eat large amounts of mushrooms and get off every day for days at a time are few and far between. those that do are very likely self-medicating to deal with a larger more serious problem like a mood disorder or anger control disorders.

HEROIN- well, all the opiates- are the only drugs that can even be shown to have any reason at all to be subject to legal sanctions... that and alcohol. and nicotine. METHamphetamine, but not necessarily dextroamphetamine... the opiates, nicotine, and meth have nasty physical dependence... they change your body and you need them to not be sick after a period of heavy use or very frequent chronic use. the opiates and alcohol kill more people- directly and indirectly- than cocaine, lsd, pcp, ketamine, mdma, marijuana, 5meoDMT, psilocybin, mescaline, and even amphetamine- COMBINED.

4. the drug war has never been about safety or society or anything other than locking n1663rs up and making old fat whisky drinking politicians rich. and hippies. damn peace loving freaks wanna keep us from fighting whoever we want with our own army....

its all about war. war makes corporations and financial institutions rich. war is good for the economy. well, those that survive to be economic.

5- THERE WAS A POST SAYING OBAMA IS A DRUG WARRIOR BECAUSE HE WAS ENDORSED BY KERRY WHO SUGGESTED TERRORIST ENEMIES USE OPIUM AS A WEAPON- YOU NEED TO BE RESPONSIBLE AND PUT THE MOUSE DOWN WHEN YOU PICK THE BONG UP... there has never been this kind of promise of a DRUG FRIENDLY federal executive branch since.... i dunno, i'm not that old. the dude was in the "choom gang" in high school... of anyone that has been this close to the oval office, he is as close to getting "one of us" in there as we have ever seen. UNLIKE CLINTON, he never apologized or lied or tried to act ashamed of getting high. because he knows that EVERYBODY either gets high, gets random testing, got high at one time but the money goes to the kids now...


don't dis obama if you got nothing to dis him for.he's our only chance of seeing some degree of peace and diplomacy. having conversations instead of detonations.

ok i think that's all.... things are true that i forget, but no one taught that to me yet :)

ONE LOVE forever for forever forevers

hard drugs and voter polls

someone mentioned that efforts to legalize all drugs to be free from criminal prosecution actually hurts the chances of cannabis legalization. the poster went on to erroneously assume that "hard drugs" are just as harmful as alcohol and that the "hard drugs" should still remain subject to criminal enforcement. one other statement cited the difference in the number of voters who favor decriminalization of cannabis but not cocaine and the psychedelics.
this is way bowed up for so so so many reasons.
the very premise of the article in the NYT is that the criminal approach has never worked and it never will. it breeds violence and is the direct cause of increased theft, property crime, and other behavior that is actually criminal by nature (unlike getting high on whatever i want in my own house not bothering anybody.) i ask this poster, do you really think that its just about people wanting to smoke pot???? pull up the shades, my friend because the picture is so much bigger than you seem to be aware.
what drug gets legalized first or what drug most voters approve of is not the core issue here. the issue is WHO OWNS MY BODY? the issue is that it is unconstitutional, unAmerican, and unintelligent to make it a crime to do what you want with your own body in your own space as long as you don't infringe on anyone else's rights to enjoy the same liberties. in fact, more lives, more careers, more families, have been destroyed by the CRIMINAL LABEL from prosecution for possession or low level "sales" (aka gettin up some cash with your neighbors to get a qp so everybody gets straight for less bread)- more lives ruined by the label of "criminal" than by the substances themselves. INCLUDING deaths and injuries by DWI. they are dwarfed by the number of professionals who are stripped of their licenses and professional right to practice their trade for something not many people knew they did, in their homes. all the student loans being paid back for degrees that can never be used. 10 years later i am paying for my masters degree in clinical psych that i can never use in my state because i was convicted of possessing 4 grams of marijuana- in my state you receive a citation for that with no chance of serving an active sentence. but i have been serving a sentence for the last decade, trying to find a fulfilling or even financially stable job because nobody hires people with drug records. and i can't pay rent, food, utilities, car insurance, and the student loan i'll never use making 7.50 an hour at wal-mart.

your apparent assumption that respondents that favored legalization of cannabis and those that favored legalization of all substances are necessarily mutually exclusive. you neglect to consider that once cannabis is legal and the sheepish public finally realizes that drugs are not good or bad, they are what you make of them- the absence of chaos following cannabis legalization could very easily lead to a complete disintegration of public support for making it a crime to do anything that does not cause harm to anyone else or our earth.

the most logical and rational approach is to push for a summary repeal of all criminal drug policies and enforcement, a system of mental health treatment that sees substance abuse and dependence as a symptom of more severe underlying problems which are likely the sole etiology of the addictive behavior itself, and a general paradigm shift away from the idea that we are really safe in trusting our government to always act in the best interest of liberty and freedom for the average working responsible american citizen.

get rid of the idea of drug crime and get very very hard on real crime. getting rid of the criminality of drug use- the criminality of an entire cultural generation- will in itself and solely by doing so- decrease street-level crime and gang violence. why do gangs exist? protect drug markets. if i can go to the pharmacy with a note from a doctor stating a physical examination shows no evidence that recreational use of a gram or two of cocaine per day would make me any more likely to die than prostrate cancer. basic universal health care for every citizen- a physical exam to catch problems early and very basic free urgent care for all americans, and a pharmeceutical field that evolves to produce medical- graded standard psychoactive substances. amphetamine, cocaine, methylphenidate,benzodiazepines, barbiturates, hypnotic sedatives, diet control medications, now even cannabis- all currently produced at medical quality of purity standards, dispensed at regulated pharmacies to ensure harm reduction measures are stringent and sufficient, PHARMACISTS THAT DONT GIVE YOU HELL BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN RX FOR ADDERALL AND YOU'RE 35 YEARS OLD---- thats right WALGREENS, ADD DOES NOT END IN CHILDHOOD. great medical and pharmacological training program ya got there.... maybe pick up a DSM sometime. you might be able to use some of what you read there.... but even walgreens, walk in with an annual basic physical exam... BP, heart rate, cholesterol, breathing tests, basic neurological tests... the generic high school sports physical.... just to prevent excessive litigation from 375 pound people that go through 7 grams of powder in a night and think they will immediately take up marathon running.

after all, isn't that what we do now??? "tell your doctor to give you prozac." its cosmetic psychiatry. medicine that vows not only to save life and ease pain, but improve the quality of life for everyone in society. not by giving them all prozac of course... cocaine is safer in terms of permanent brain leision formation and suicidal or homicidal behavior....
we're already getting high legally. we just want to widen our purchasing options. but because the (very unconstitutional) ATF and DEA dress up like delta force and drive military tanks into people's front doors, its no surprise more people won't admit to being unopposed to seeing all drug crime laws for possession, personal use, and personal cultivation, wiped from the books. with the patriot act, just saying that you think cocaine should be legal for adults to purchase and use privately and responsibly, could get you sent away to an unknown place for and unknown amount of time....

once it starts, its all coming through. the full force of the US and other government law enforcement and military forces have been unable to even put a DENT in demand or supply, much less incidence of adult use,. in nearly a century of fighting to do so spending countless trillions of dollars.....

and for what???

bob the enzyte guy??? i am going to tell my doctor i want owsley montery lavender- 500 drops at 250 mics each should last a month, with 3 refills.oh yeah, i have insurance so its only a $20 co-pay right???


and i am sure all of us will support tripling penalties for predatory, violent, remorseless individuals who believe they can enjoy their life more by ending yours... the REAL criminals.... even the white ones.ESPECIALLY the white ones....

ONE LOVE forever

Drug$ are/is...

money,since anyone can exchange drugs for weapons or anything else they need. Drugs have been turned into currency by those that need payment for clandestine services . Thats the reason that the phony drugwar continues, among all the other reasons. Is it not time the citizens of the USA did away with they're czar, as the Russians once had to do? Up against the wall Johnny P !

I repeat, no hope of legalizing hard drugs in foreseeable future

I'm not saying they shouldn't be. But my critics don't seem to be paying any attention to the practical politics side of this. Isn't there a saying about leading with your strength? Well our strength is medicinal marijuana, then recreational marijuana. On hard drugs I think our strength for now is fighting for lesser penalties, better treatment for those who need it, and employment opportunities. I really hope no one would fall into the trap of opposing marijuana only initiatives on the grounds that they don't deal with other illegal drugs. Or opposing harm reduction initiatives on the grounds that they don't deal with the issue of people's right to control their own bodies.

Removing unregulated drug dealers is HARM REDUCTION

People need to think about rights of the community and how the drug war is fostering millions of unregulated drug dealers and violence around our homes and schools. Is that the path to a drug-free, law-abiding society? Does allowing criminals to control these lucrative markets makes us and our children safer?

What is...

the difference between a controlled substance and a regulated substance? The answer seems to be VIOLENCE and huge PROFITS for criminals. Controll is for tyranny as regulation is for democracy. Therefore the USA is now in the hands of a controlled... criminal... tyranny.

There is no control.

"Control substance", "Office of National Drug Control Policy"... these are carefully chosen propaganda labels used to frame the issue as govt being in "control" versus the rabble rousers trying to foster "out of control" legalization.

What we actually have is a self-indulgent policy of persecution in place of regulation. We are more interested in arresting people who use and sale drugs than protecting the public, especially, kids from the harms of an unregulated drug market.


NY Times article generated 227 comments in one day! 99.5% negative towards drugwar.Pendulum swing in the air,methinks.


i dont get it people assainated mlk robert kennedy john kennedy .but let crimnals like john walters run amok where are these assins when you realy need

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <i> <blockquote> <p> <address> <pre> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <br> <b>

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Drug War Issues

Criminal JusticeAsset Forfeiture, Collateral Sanctions (College Aid, Drug Taxes, Housing, Welfare), Court Rulings, Drug Courts, Due Process, Felony Disenfranchisement, Incarceration, Policing (2011 Drug War Killings, 2012 Drug War Killings, 2013 Drug War Killings, 2014 Drug War Killings, 2015 Drug War Killings, 2016 Drug War Killings, 2017 Drug War Killings, Arrests, Eradication, Informants, Interdiction, Lowest Priority Policies, Police Corruption, Police Raids, Profiling, Search and Seizure, SWAT/Paramilitarization, Task Forces, Undercover Work), Probation or Parole, Prosecution, Reentry/Rehabilitation, Sentencing (Alternatives to Incarceration, Clemency and Pardon, Crack/Powder Cocaine Disparity, Death Penalty, Decriminalization, Defelonization, Drug Free Zones, Mandatory Minimums, Rockefeller Drug Laws, Sentencing Guidelines)CultureArt, Celebrities, Counter-Culture, Music, Poetry/Literature, Television, TheaterDrug UseParaphernalia, Vaping, ViolenceIntersecting IssuesCollateral Sanctions (College Aid, Drug Taxes, Housing, Welfare), Violence, Border, Budgets/Taxes/Economics, Business, Civil Rights, Driving, Economics, Education (College Aid), Employment, Environment, Families, Free Speech, Gun Policy, Human Rights, Immigration, Militarization, Money Laundering, Pregnancy, Privacy (Search and Seizure, Drug Testing), Race, Religion, Science, Sports, Women's IssuesMarijuana PolicyGateway Theory, Hemp, Marijuana -- Personal Use, Marijuana Industry, Medical MarijuanaMedicineMedical Marijuana, Science of Drugs, Under-treatment of PainPublic HealthAddiction, Addiction Treatment (Science of Drugs), Drug Education, Drug Prevention, Drug-Related AIDS/HIV or Hepatitis C, Harm Reduction (Methadone & Other Opiate Maintenance, Needle Exchange, Overdose Prevention, Pill Testing, Safer Injection Sites)Source and Transit CountriesAndean Drug War, Coca, Hashish, Mexican Drug War, Opium ProductionSpecific DrugsAlcohol, Ayahuasca, Cocaine (Crack Cocaine), Ecstasy, Heroin, Ibogaine, ketamine, Khat, Kratom, Marijuana (Gateway Theory, Marijuana -- Personal Use, Medical Marijuana, Hashish), Methamphetamine, New Synthetic Drugs (Synthetic Cannabinoids, Synthetic Stimulants), Nicotine, Prescription Opiates (Fentanyl, Oxycontin), Psilocybin / Magic Mushrooms, Psychedelics (LSD, Mescaline, Peyote, Salvia Divinorum)YouthGrade School, Post-Secondary School, Raves, Secondary School