BLOG
If Terrorists and Drug Traffickers Collaborate, Itâs the Drug Warâs Fault
Has drug war destabilization in South America become a threat to our national security?MIAMI (AP) â There is real danger that Islamic extremist groups such as al-Qaida and Hezbollah could form alliances with wealthy and powerful Latin American drug lords to launch new terrorist attacks, U.S. officials said Wednesday.Extremist group operatives have already been identified in several Latin American countries, mostly involved in fundraising and finding logistical support. But Charles Allen, chief of intelligence analysis at the Homeland Security Department, said they could use well-established smuggling routes and drug profits to bring people or even weapons of mass destruction to the U.S.Well that just sucks. Realistically, however, I think weâre relying on a rather twisted interpretation of the drug traffickersâ agenda here. These guys are making huge profits and they donât want to rock the boat. Terrorists might pay for cover upfront, but theyâre bad for business in the long term. I doubt high-level traffickers would deliberately abate straight-up terrorists whose goal is basically to kill their customers. They bring a different kind of attention that you seriously donât want if youâre just moving a product.Still, itâs certainly true that the massive blackmarket infrastructure has led to the development of invisible networks and services that terrorists could take advantage of. If youâre selling underground transit, you donât ask too many questions of your customers. Itâs not willful collaboration we should be worried about, so much as the reality that thereâs an industry built around bringing anyone and anything into our country.After decades of drug war demolition tactics throughout South and Central America, the situation is worse than ever. As new threats emerge, the drug war continues to literally puncture every mechanism that might protect us.
Heroin Trafficking in Afghanistan is a Really Big Deal, Unless the Presidentâs Brother Does It
Rumors that the brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai may be involved in drug trafficking have not been investigated. Why?The assertions about the involvement of the presidentâs brother in the incidents were never investigated, according to American and Afghan officials, even though allegations that he has benefited from narcotics trafficking have circulated widely in Afghanistan.â¦Several American investigators said senior officials at the D.E.A. and the office of the Director of National Intelligence complained to them that the White House favored a hands-off approach toward Ahmed Wali Karzai because of the political delicacy of the matter. But White House officials dispute that, instead citing limited D.E.A. resources in Kandahar and southern Afghanistan and the absence of political will in the Afghan government to go after major drug suspects as the reasons for the lack of an inquiry. [NYT]The whole thing reeks and this "limited resources" excuse sounds dubious at best. Ahmed Wali Karzai is chief of the Kandahar Provincial Council. If heâs a drug trafficker, thatâs kind of a big deal, isnât it? Our inability/unwillingness to even explore such a possibility just shows once again that our supply reduction efforts in Afghanistan are a total joke.
Canadian Police Hire Researchers to Attack Harm Reduction
The battle over harm reduction in Vancouver just gets uglier all the time:VANCOUVER -Â The Pivot Legal Society has asked federal Auditor-General Sheila Fraser to examine whether the RCMP exceeded its law-enforcement mandate by commissioning studies into Vancouver's supervised injection site.Pivot lawyer and spokesman Doug King on Wednesday revealed RCMP e-mails indicating the national police force commissioned reports researching Insite."The RCMP Act gave the RCMP a mandate to act as peace officers for the citizens of Canada. Using public funds entrusted to them to fund a cynical critique of health-based research clearly does not fall within this mandate," King said. [Vancouver Sun]Indeed, police are responsible for enforcing the law, not shaping social policy. Law enforcementâs backhanded attempt at inserting itself into the academic debate over harm reduction is completely inappropriate and disturbing. Does anyone believe that police-sponsored research will ever reach conclusions other than the need for more police power? RCMP now claims that it conducts research all the time, which may be true, but misses the point. Police research should focus on measuring the effectiveness of their own programs, not producing political ammunition against non-police programs that police donât like.
Further Evidence That Drug War Politics Are Changing
As public attitudes surrounding the war on drugs continue to evolve, weâll begin to see more of this type of thing:Containing parts of Kirkland, Redmond, Woodinville, and points east, the 45th Legislative District is hardly a hotbed of radicalism. But the two candidates for one of the district's two House seats share a position well out of the political mainstream: They both advocate wholesale changes to the War on Drugs.In his time away from the capital, incumbent State Rep. Roger Goodman (D-Kirkland) heads the King County Bar Association's Drug Policy Project, where he works on moving drug policy's focus from crime and punishment to public health. His challenger, Toby Nixon (R-Kirkland), who held the seat from 2002 to 2006 before leaving to run for the state Senate (he lost his bid for an open seat to Eric Oemig), has spoken out in defense of Washington's medical marijuana law and pushed a bill requiring performance audits of drug-enforcement policies. [Seattle Weekly]So will the candidates start arguing over whoâs going to do more to end the drug war?Noting that "some have observed that it's unfortunate that we're running against each other," Nixon adds that he's not sure he and Goodman have any disagreements on drug policy reform. But he wishes Goodman had followed his lead and pushed more drug policy reform bills as a legislator.There you have it folks! The first candidate for public office to ever get called out for not trying hard enough to reform drug policy. This is not a coincidence, this is a sign of the times. It wonât be over tomorrow -- weâd be foolish to think that -- but we are entering a phase where weâll begin to see and hear the drug policy debate in new forums. Once reform enters the mainstream political curriculum, the tone changes, the pot jokes start sounding immature and the things that actually matter can finally be discussed.(This blog post was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)
The Amazing Gigantic Missing Heroin Stash
Hereâs another completely odd phenomenon discovered in the laboratory of drug prohibition:It's a mystery that has got British law enforcement officials and others across the planet scratching their heads. Put bluntly, enough heroin to supply the world's demand for years has simply disappeared.â¦For the past three years, production has been running at almost twice the level of global demand. The numbers just don't add up. [BBC]Get it? Afghanistan is producing far more heroin than the entire world even uses. So where the hell did it go?The answer is easy. Itâs in a massive underground refrigerator. Seriously, thatâs exactly where it is. These guys are storing enough heroin to survive a nuclear holocaust. If we killed every poppy plant on the planet tomorrow, they wouldnât run out for years. These heroin barons arenât the nicest people and weâre making them rich with our silly drug war. Anyone who still thinks flamethrowers and helicopter patrols are going to solve the heroin problem needs to chill for a minute and think about whatâs happening here.
The Worldâs Smallest Bag of Marijuana
Try reading this unhinged Boston Globe editorial opposing decriminalization in Massachusetts with a straight face. It is an exhibit in dishonesty and an insult to everything on earth that is actually truly dangerous. The whole thing is nuts, but this line really tickled my bullshit bone:And despite their best efforts to paint an ounce of marijuana as innocuous, the fact is that one ounce of marijuana is worth about $600 and represents about 60 individual sales.Seriously!? Do you even know what marijuana is? The average price is around $200 an ounce. And it's not sold in 1/60th ounce increments. You canât even roll a joint out of that. You know what a joint is, right? Seriously, I would have thought there were enough preposterous reefer madness arguments already in circulation that you wouldnât need to create new ones.One of the great challenges facing those who advocate sensible marijuana policies is that of responding to crazy made-up nonsense over and over again. Sometimes our opponents just lie on purpose. Other times they simply don't know what they're talking about. And frequently we can't tell the difference.
Obama's Mixed Messages on the Drug War
A couple weeks ago, I noted the contradiction between Obama's call for reduced incarceration of first-time nonviolent drug offenders and his support for the heinous Byrne Grant program that has filled our prisons with petty offenders and subsidized mindblowing episodes of racist drug war excess. These completing agendas in Obamaâs crime platform deserve more discussion, thus Radley Balko has a piece at Slate that digs into this.(This blog post was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)
Mexican President Proposes Decriminalizing Drug Use
We covered this in The Drug War Chronicle, but I think it needs more discussion:MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexican President Felipe Calderon, locked in a bloody battle with drug cartels, wants to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of street drugs in a plan likely to irk Washington.Calderon, a conservative in power nearly two years, sent a proposal to Congress on Thursday that would scrap the penalties for drugs including cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, opium and marijuana.â¦Under Calderon's plan, people carrying up to 2 grams (0.07 ounces) of marijuana or opium, half a gram of cocaine, 50 milligrams of heroin or 40 milligrams of methamphetamine would face no criminal charges.Where shall I begin?1. President Calderon himself has endorsed this. He is the golden boy of the U.S.-subsidized Mexican drug war and after accepting our financial support, he now does something certain to enrage the American Drug Czar.2. Calderonâs predecessor, Vicente Fox, tried the same thing and backed down due to pressure from Washington, D.C. Now that Calderon has established his drug war credentials, heâs picking up where Fox left off. Obviously, Mexico intends to decriminalize simple possession and wonât stop until it is done.3. The timing of this move appears designed to circumvent negative attention from Washington, D.C., which is horribly distracted right now for obvious reasons. Iâve been unable to find a response from the Drug Czar or anyone else. Amazing.Mexico is plagued by drug trade violence, the likes of which weâve never seen within our borders, and its political leadership is calling for an end to petty drug arrests. It wonât end the bloodshed â not even close â but it is a dramatic shift away from the U.S. drug war mentality that we must continuously pursue and arrest drug users in order to "win" the war on drugs. This is remarkable to say the least.
FDA Embraces Harm Reductionâ¦Sort of
Check out this interesting logic from the FDA:WASHINGTON - A top government health official rejected the idea of an immediate ban on cough and cold medicines for young children, saying it might cause unintended harm.Food and Drug Administration officials at a public hearing Thursday said they need to gather more data on whether over-the-counter remedies are safe and effective for children ages 2 to 6.The FDA is also worried that a ban â as sought by leading pediatricians' groups â might only drive parents to give adult medicines to their youngsters. [MSNBC]Well, that sounds like a logical concern. People tend to make safer choices when available and more dangerous ones when their options are restricted. Yet federal law still blocks funding for needle exchange and criminalizes people who use marijuana as an alternative to powerful opioid-based pharmaceuticals.                                                                                                                                                                             {Thanks, Caryn]
How Come "Joe Sixpack" is an American Hero, While "Joe Stoner" Gets Arrested?
Paul Armentano at NORML points to Sarah Palin's glorification of "Joe Sixpack" in the vice presidential debate. Indeed, one could scarcely overstate the naked hypocrisy of portraying daily drinkers as American heroes, while our nation continues to arrest nearly a million Americans each year for using marijuana.I usually leave the alcohol analogy alone, assuming that it often speaks for itself, and when it doesnât, the guys at SAFER can be counted on to point it out. But there are moments -- like hearing a major party VP candidate canonize alcohol users in a massively public forum â that remind us how truly discriminatory and fundamentally illogical this disparity is. If regulated sale is the best policy for alcohol, then it is the best policy for marijuana. And if people who drink a sixpack after work can be American heroes, so too are those who derive pleasure and relaxation from cannabis.(This blog post was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)
My back yard
Every week day I bus it up to Oakridge shopping center and pick up my medication for my spinal condition.This is not about the 14 months I've been waiting for decent and humane treatment for the chron
Mark Souder vs. The New Drug War Politics
Drug war hall-of-famer Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN) is running for re-election in a tight race, yet his campaign site doesnât say one word about his extensive contributions as the leading congressional advocate for "tough on drugs" policies. Itâs easily the defining issue of his political career, yet with everything on the line, he doesnât seem to think his drug war demagoguery is a selling point for his campaign. Wouldnât it be ironic if Mark Souderâs campaign has determined that it would be "political suicide" to associate him with the increasingly unpopular war on drugs? Welcome to the new drug war politics, Mark Souder. We made you a nametag and saved a seat next to Bob Barr. When can we expect you?(This blog post was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)
Calvina Fay vs. The New Drug War Politics
The Drug Free America Foundationâs perpetually panic-stricken director Calvina Fay gave a speech at the World Forum Against Drugs that was so over-the-top crazy, I wish more people could have heard it. Pete Guither recounts and refutes it here, so Iâll call attention to the one thing she said that is actually truthful:Just since the beginning of 2008, we have seen an extraordinary increase in drug legalization efforts and activities in the US.Nice to meet you too, Calvina. Welcome to the future of the drug war debate, a bizarre upside down world in which you are the extremist and everyone else is talking about reform. Thatâs the only stop on this train, so I hope you brought some reading material. In fact, here, have a free copy of Drug War Facts. You'll need this where we're going.
New Poll: Democrats and Republicans Agree That the Drug War is a Failure
New Zogby data shows a bipartisan consensus that the drug war is a losing battle:Three in four likely voters (76%) believe the U.S. war on drugs is failing, a sentiment that cuts across the political spectrum â including the vast majority of Democrats (86%), political independents (81%), and most Republicans (61%). There is also a strong belief that the anti-drug effort is failing among those who intend to vote for Barack Obama (89%) for president, as well as most supporters of John McCain (61%).When asked what they believe is the single best way to combat international drug trafficking and illicit use, 27% of likely voters said legalizing some drugs would be the best approach -- 34% of Obama supporters and 20% of McCain backers agreed.* One in four likely voters (25%) believe stopping the drugs at the border is the best tactic to battle drugs -- 39% of McCain supporters, but just 12% of Obama backers agree.* Overall, 19% of likely voters said reducing demand through treatment and education should be the top focus of the war on drugs.* 13% believe that the best way to fight the war on drugs is to prevent production of narcotics in the country of origin.At first glance, 27% support for legalization appears disappointing, but a look at the question itself provides a much more encouraging outlook. Respondents were asked to select "the single best way to handle the war on drugs" and hereâs the breakdown of their responses:Prevent production of narcotics at their country of origin: 12.7%Stopping drugs at the U.S. border:                                         24.8%Reducing demand through treatment and education:         18.7%Legalizing some drugs in the U.S.:                                         27.5%Ending the War on Drugs:                                                      8.2%Not sure/none of the above:                                                  8.1%Legalization was the most popular answer. Support for interdiction/eradication encompassed only 37.5% of respondents, thus the majority clearly supports some level of reform. I donât see how you could look at this without concluding that supply reduction strategies lack public support. A smart politician could easily begin chipping away at the most militaristic aspects of the war on drugs without suffering any political consequences. If there ever existed a tangible political advantage for candidates who play the "tough on drugs" card for votes, those days are behind us. The current political climate favors cutting bad programs and changing business-as-usual in Washington, D.C. The drug war belongs at the top of that list, and while it isnât there yet, we are undeniably on a trajectory towards a unique moment when the political landscape that sustains prohibition will face re-evaluation. At that point, anything and everything weâve understood about the politics of drug policy reform could change overnight.Note: I will begin refering to this concept as "the new drug war politics."
Police Discover Worldâs Largest Marijuana Plants
Drug enforcement officers never tire of their overpowering compulsion to exaggerate marijuana seizures to the point of absurdity. Again and again, weâve caught police making ludicrous claims that contradict basic math and science. The latest example comes from California, where local narcotics officers found some large marijuana plants and tried to frame it as some sort of unbelievable shocker: Marijuana plants seized Monday in Browns Valley and Live Oak "are the largest I've seen," a drug enforcement official said.â¦Some of the plants were 7 feet tall or higher. Most averaged only 5 feet in height but had a circumference of about 12 feet and could have produced about 10 pounds each of marijuana, said Hudson, who called it "some of the highest quality marijuana currently available."It would take about 2,000 normal-size plants to produce an equivalent amount, he said. [Appeal Democrat]That all sounds very exciting and newsworthy, except for one thing: marijuana plants donât yield 10 pounds. They just donât. Thatâs crazy and wrong. To illustrate how absurd this is, I contacted Chris Conrad, a court-qualified cannabis expert and author of Cannabis Yields and Dosage. Hereâs what Chris had to say:Probably they would end up getting about 3-4 pounds of actual bud from a plant that size, depending on how well it is manicured, plus more than that as leaf that could be converted into hash or edibles. Remember that the police use the "bud-leaf-seed" version of cannabis, whereas the actual market is for bud, not leaf or seeds. So cops almost always think there is twice as much 'marijuana' there as does the grower. I was just looking at some big plants in Oregon for a collective, and they claimed 5 pounds per plant, but I think that included the shake, which they said they give away to indigent patients. Visually they looked like 3 pound plants to me, so the implication is that they toss out the fan leaf but keep the bud leaf and trim for patients. That would explain how they could come to 5 pounds.I've never had anyone claim to have gotten 10 pounds from a plant, but quite a few people have boasted about getting between 2 and 5 pounds of bud from one. I haven't had the pleasure of sitting in on the manicure and weighing to see it for myself, yet.Cops often inflate the weight of their yield by using the fresh weight instead of the dry weight of the plants, BTW, so the most typical inflation is 400%; in other words, their alleged 10 pounds is most likely to weigh about 2.5 pounds, based on the typical cop exaggeration.It is almost amusing to picture officers standing around a bunch of big plants issuing arbitrary clueless declarations about the gardenâs quality and yield. They have absolutely no idea what theyâre talking about. Itâs like asking a mugger to appraise jewelry. It might be funny if it werenât for the fact that these spontaneous, incompetent assessments are used at trial to influence how long non-violent offenders will spend behind bars.
The Drug War Bailout
The last time our country faced a major economic crisis, we ended alcohol prohibition. Think about that.
Police Defend the Right to Choke Marijuana Suspects
Watch this video of Mount Juliet, TN police officer Bill Cosby choking a marijuana suspect into unconsciousness during a traffic stop. Officer Cosby apparently believed the suspect was trying to swallow marijuana, however nothing was found in his mouth and he subsequently passed a drug test, proving that he didnât eat it. He just never had marijuana in his mouth. The video is so disturbing, a local judge refused to hear future cases brought by Cosby and the police chief had no choice but to fire him. So youâd think that gratuitous police violence against a non-violent marijuana suspect would find no apologists. Youâd hope that other officers would be universally disgusted by Officer Cosbyâs deplorable example and support his dismissal. And youâd be wrong. I reviewed a comment thread on the case at PoliceOne.com and found that many officers believe choking non-violent marijuana suspects is necessary and even commendable: The charges for the suspect should be reinstated and the officer should be commended for doing his job in a professional manner....This is ridiculous. The officer did nothing wrong and a judge, prosecutor and chief are looking to hang him. It's no wonder we're losing cops by the dozens. Who wants to put their butt on the line when no one appreciates the job you do....After viewing the video, the officer is not out of control or doing anything that isn't called for.These comments imply that you could somehow die from eating marijuana:The officer probably didn't want the guy to die over something as stupid as swallowing some dope....Another Police Officer abandoned by his department because of fear of legal action from a criminal. Of course had he swallowed it and then died the family would have sued because the Police didnt choke it out of him....I hope the Officer is cleared and gets a job at a real department. Also let the bad guys swallow the dope. With luck he will croak and save court costs.This one admits that the choking appears maliciousâ¦then wishes the officer well.That appears to be choking. The fact that it was called a vascular restraint makes it appear as "creative report writing." I pray for Cosby that he makes it through this experience.This one recommends turning off your camera:It has become an awareness to me that these dashcams are causing good cops to get into trouble or fired, so boys turn the damn things off.This one endorses choking and stomping suspects, as long as they're out of the camera frame:Hey brother...choke the asshole out if you are so inclined...stand on his trachea if you want...but how about bringing him to the back of your RMP [squad car]? Could you actually think that was something to get on film? Did you forget about the camera?All of this really speaks for itself. To be fair, some comments were more reasonable, but the overall tone was that the officer shouldnât have been disciplined. That is what real police officers believe, up to and including some of the violent and scary sentiments outlined above. It is really just remarkable to imagine that those who would jettison any accountability for their own violent actions remain steadfast in their insistence that people who use marijuana for fun are dangerous thugs who deserve no mercy. That is the gaping chasm that often separates law enforcementâs self-imposed moral standards from those they apply to everyone else. It is a perfectly horrifying thing to behold, more so when one realizes that no effort was even made to conceal these vile sentiments from the public they serve.Update: Chokings, mistakes, and misconduct aside, the fact that people commonly panic and eat their stash at the sight of police is troubling, isn't it? This needs to stop and I might be the only person who's taken this issue on, by writing Why You Shouldn't Try to Eat Your Marijuana If You're Pulled Over. Unfortunately, more dangerous drugs carry harsher sentences and a greater incentive for desperate people to risk an overdose rather than face prison time. Police use this as an excuse to choke us, but it's actually an exhibit in the absurdity of our drug policy.
SWAT Raids Often Target Innocent People
In addition to killing an unarmed mother of six and shooting a baby, it turns out that the SWAT team in Lima, OH has been raiding innocent people quite regularly:LIMA - More than a quarter of the 198 raids by the Lima Police Department SWAT team in the last seven years came up empty-handed without finding drugs, weapons, paraphernalia or money.And nearly a third of the time, police do not find drugs or a weapon. Drugs alone were found in nearly two-thirds of the raids and a weapon, by itself, was found one-third of the time. [LimaOhio.com]Thatâs a lot of innocent doors getting kicked in and a lot of innocent people having guns held to their head. Yet, the Lima PD actually thinks itâs something to be proud of:"That means 68 percent of the time, we're getting guns or drugs off the street," said Maj. Kevin Martin, who called the numbers a success.Nothing could more perfectly illustrate the complete detachment that underscores a policy of routinely terrorizing innocent citizens. Think about this: the Lima officer who shot Tarika Wilson claimed that he killed her because he was startled by the sound of gunfire caused by his fellow officers shooting dogs elsewhere in the house. That is sort of thing that can happen during these raids, and they know it. Thus, Maj. Martinâs statement reveals that Lima PD has learned nothing after killing Wilson and shooting her babyâs finger off. They are proud that some of the people whose lives they endanger in these raids turn out to be actual criminals. The rest just donât factor into the equation. Not even little babies.
Nasal Congestion Sufferer Arrested for Buying Too Much Cold Medicine
The drug warâs mindless persecution of sick people goes beyond medical marijuana:MASON CITY â Gary Schinagel has suffered from chronic nasal congestion from the time he was a youngster.When he was a child growing up in Sheffield his family doctor told him, âGary, this is something youâll be dealing with all your life.âLittle did he know.Last Wednesday, Schinagel, 47, a senior investment associate at Principal Financial Group in Mason City, was arrested for the illegal purchase of pseudoephedrine. [Globe Gazette]Arrested for buying cold medicine. Itâs happened before, too. Can you even imagine how many cold sufferers have declined to purchase cold medicine for fear of having their door kicked in by the cops?If you donât know about things like this, you donât fully understand what the drug war does. The real drug war consists of the accumulation of every mindblowingly absurd outcome our policies have produced. Itâs not just a game of cops and robbers. Itâs a philosophy that corrupts our consciousness, permeates our policymaking, and eventually results in completely normal and innocent people being arrested all the time for some of the stupidest reasons one could possibly imagine. Also: On a very related note, this weekend CVS wouldn't sell Radley Balko the medicine he needed.