Let them smoke pot

Nice editorial in the New York Times: American Mayors – Let Them Smoke Pot

What the Conference of Mayors resolved seems appropriate — and sensitive to the reality that public attitudes toward marijuana are liberalizing rapidly. In 1969, the Pew Research Center found that only 12 percent of Americans favored legalizing the drug. By 2010, that figure was 41 percent. In 2013, it was 52 percent, a majority.

At any rate, Mr. Holder’s dithering helps no one. The status quo is chaotic and untenable. If you live in Denver or Seattle and you are thinking of applying for a license to sell marijuana, you have a right to know whether federal prosecutors will move to seize your property and jail you.

Kudos to Tom Angell and the Marijuana Majority for their tremendous work organizing this wonderful resolution and getting so many people to write their Mayor (I did). It makes for a very strong argument that marijuana should be a local and state issue.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

59 Responses to Let them smoke pot

  1. Tom Angell says:

    Thanks, Pete! It really was a team effort, with most of the major reform groups coming together behind this campaign: http://nationalcannabiscoalition.com/2013/06/teamwork-gets-the-job-done-for-marijuana-reform/

  2. claygooding says:

    I expect any day for Eric Holder to shut off the bounty money for marijuana possession arrests or call us terrorists and run in circles screaming “what about the children”

    It really is impossible to guess what these idiots will do because the money changing hands in DC distort any form of common sense or decency,,the more they fight us the more they spend until more people are going to ask why when they do capitulate or the country goes belly up spending money on keeping corporations happy. Troubling times in the kingdom Kap

    • kaptinemo says:

      Troubling, indeed. IMHO, every civilization comes into existence carrying a seed of its’ own destruction left over from previous ones, a kind of neurosis, that can be that civilization’s downfall should enough time and energy be expended on nursing that neurosis and not using those resources rationally.

      In our civilization’s case, that neurosis is derived from long-forgotten Puritanism, which is partially why some in our society have spent so much time and energy (and the money of those who don’t share that neurosis) trying to control their neighbor’s appetites to suit their own (in many cases, quite open) prejudices.

      Spend too much time and resources on that, and when the crunch comes, as it always does, there’s not enough to take care of what actually needs doing. Like now.

      Our infrastructure is crumbling, we’re told by national leaders that we don’t have money to fix it, but we do have money for cops to buy Armored Personnel Carriers? Our schools are falling apart, but we have money for drug courts? People are living under bridges, but we have money for ‘fusion centers’? As they used to say when I was very young, “What’s wrong with this picture?”

      We know the answer, but those whose rice bowls are endangered by the application of that answer have fought us tooth and nail, using our money, to maintain themselves at the expense of the entire society…which benefits very little, if at all, from their efforts. If they continue, we’ll wind up just as Lincoln predicted.

      As he put it so clearly:

      “At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it?– Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never!–All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.

      At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.” (Emphasis mine – k.)

      Look around. The rot on our liberties, sired by the DrugWar, is everywhere. The DrugWar was the font of our present civil liberties predicament. It is the foundation for the rising Police State. It is threatening the very fabric of civil society, itself. All because of that neurosis. Lincoln’s predicted national suicide, in slow motion. If we fall, it will be in no small part because of that.

      And we’ll have these prohib idiots to blame.

  3. Francis says:

    If you live in Denver or Seattle and you are thinking of applying for a license to sell marijuana, you have a right to know whether federal prosecutors will move to seize your property and jail you.

    Yep. Of course, you also have a right not to be jailed or robbed for selling a plant.

  4. Howard says:

    “It makes for a very strong argument that marijuana should be a local and state issue.”

    Pete, with all due respect, the locality where local and state officials’ jurisdiction regarding cannabis (and a lot of other things) should end is my home, and more specifically, my self. I’m not a big fan of “leave it to the states to decide” because some states are more draconian than the federal government. I realize ending cannabis prohibition at the federal level is the most important. But it’s likely the state where I reside will continue prohibition and possibly even make penalties worse once the feds are removed from the mix and the ‘state’ is all that’s left to decide for me. Yes, I can always move once I’m no longer tied to a geographical location based on employment and/or family commitments. This is something I will probably do in the coming years (not just because of cannabis laws). But wherever I go, disregarding specific caveats, (re: crimes or harms toward others), ‘local’ and ‘state’ officials have no business in my home or in me.

    • Howard says:

      By the way, I know what I wrote above is painfully obvious. I’d just like to see unjust laws removed at all levels of jurisdiction. Case in point, the state of Mississippi did not repeal alcohol prohibition until 33 YEARS after the fed had done so. A tad behind I’d say…

  5. Francis says:

    Also, just saw this story:

    Marijuana’s march toward mainstream confounds feds

    This one’s a real treat. It has three quotes from our friend, Kev:

    “We’re on this hundred-mile-an-hour freight train to legalizing a third addictive substance,” says Kevin Sabet, a former drug policy adviser in the Obama administration, lumping marijuana with tobacco and alcohol.

    Wait, a “hundred-mile-an-hour freight train” to legalization? I thought it was 300 mph freight train? All right, which one of you isn’t pulling his weight? Let’s get this thing back up to speed. And yeah, I suppose Sabet is “lumping marijuana with tobacco and alcohol” there — while calling for radically different legal treatment.

    Sabet frames the conundrum for Obama: “Do you want to be the president that stops a popular cause, especially a cause that’s popular within your own party? Or do you want to be the president that enables youth drug use that will have ramifications down the road?”

    Yes, that’s his conundrum. It’s not: do you want to be the president that ignores the will of the people by continuing the farce that is cannabis prohibition, a hugely-destructive, hypocritical, and immoral policy that you yourself have previously acknowledged is a failure? Or do you want to be the president that crosses the powerful moneyed interests that actually run this country?

    “If marijuana legalization was about my old buddies at Berkeley smoking in People’s Park once a week I don’t think many of us would care that much,” says Sabet, who helped to found Smart Approaches to Marijuana, a group that opposes legalization. “It’s really about creating a new industry that’s going to target kids and target minorities and our vulnerable populations just like our legal industries do today.”

    “If this world consisted entirely of white adults (like me and my old Berkeley buddies), marijuana legalization wouldn’t be a problem. We could handle it. But unfortunately, we also have to consider children and minorities and others with less-than-fully-formed human agency.” But yeah, there’s nothing racist about the drug war.

    • darkcycle says:

      Bah, went to go comment and the SF Gate’s site is acting bizarrely. I’ve commented there before- a dozen times at least, but now I get error messages when I sign in.

      • claygooding says:

        Mine got in but didn’t post on FB,,it hung up and wouldn’t connect for some reason but the comment hit the page.

        “”Kevin Sabet has worked for the drug warriors in one capacity or another since he won a High School anti-drug poster contest,,he has a doctorate in addiction rehabilitation,,not a medical doctor so his opinions on Medical Marijuana are unqualified and come from research bought and paid for by the NIDA,,bought science from researchers willing to find the harms in marijuana NIDA wanted regardless of the science.

        Marijuana has been used by mankind for over 5000 years by people of all ages before it was prohibited using lies and racial propaganda in 1937 and kept prohibited the same way since.

        There is no historical record of marijuana harming mankind,,no insane asylums filled with marijuana crazed patients,,no lack of ambition or man would have never left Europe for the America’s and not one single death caused by it’s use,,but our government has killed thousands around the world for growing,using and distributing it.

        All the future “harms and health problems” Kevin and his fellow hypocrites in SAM are pushing down peoples throats are a desperate attempt by the corporations making money from prohibition too maintain the prohibition.

        It is all about the money people,as it always has been.””

    • Howard says:

      “It’s really about creating a new industry that’s going to target kids and target minorities and our vulnerable populations just like our legal industries do today.”

      I think what Kevin really wants (badly) to say is this;

      “Look, I’ve staked my reputation and my career on being a prohibitionist. I’ve always been on the wrong side of history. But I’d just be too embarrassed to admit that I’ve been wrong all these years. Sure, standing behind outdated laws that ruin people’s lives is inconvenient for some. But this is about me and my self importance. So I bring up the specter of dope peddlers (and legal industries) targeting children and how parents are completely ill equipped to to handle their parental responsibilities. And, of course, I add in the vulnerable great unwashed (read: minorities). I mean, who can look away from those sad puppy dog eyes as fiendish dope peddlers (and legal industries) are shooting marihuana into their veins, forcing liquor down their throats, and gassing them with cigarettes? But I digress. Actually I have an addiction of my own. I enjoy watching law abiding citizens have their property seized, their children taken from them, and DEA agents shooting their dogs. You see, I have a sickness of my own. I’m a neck deep prohibitionist. Nothing can change that now. Thank you”.

      • N.T. Greene says:

        Let’s be honest.

        If they gave a shit about the kids, they’d want to legalize everything to get it out of the hands of dealers who don’t give a shit how old their customers are. I mean, really! This solution is so simple, intuitive, and… ALREADY IN USE FOR OTHER SUBSTANCES!?

        IIRC, one of the biggest contributing factors to a decline in youth tobacco consumption was… age restriction policies. Oh, and proper education?

        Well, we couldn’t have either of those, because none of the money from that would go into the pockets of the prison industry, drug testing companies, big pharma, or the ‘criminal underground’ they exist in symbiosis with.

        Someone has to stand up and eventually admit that the prison industry as-is is unsustainable without drug offenses. Strange how these are the same people that push for tougher laws and longer sentences, huh? Man, if we were only jailing the violent and deserving, we wouldn’t have any reason to create thousands of new beds a year… or keep good’ol Joe Arpaio employed.

      • kaptinemo says:

        Prohibitionists are a cartel unto themselves; cartels are usually formed amongst those who would be in competition (in this case, for government funding) to be able to work together to suppress threats to their dominance.

        Cannabis re-legalization, by derivation, is equivalent to anti-trust laws, intended to break up the prohibition cartel. That the ‘cartel’ is actually the government’s unlawful, unConstitutional accretion of power is why we have so much resistance. And why apologists for that dangerous accretion of power are becoming ever more shrill, as the details of that accretion are becoming known to the American people…who are rapidly tiring of the unending violations of their rights by their supposed employees.

        And since it’s mainly the government that has been the engine of oppression regarding cannabis, using our taxpayer dollars to accomplish that, and that said government funds those who will pimp themselves for prostituting what intellectual credentials they have to sing the Prohib Anthem, the likelihood is that Sabet and ilk are still on the payroll.

        Nothing much ever changes, the same irrationality – and irrational people – lead to the same kinds of messes; see if you can spot Sabet’s ideological ancestors in these editorial cartoons from the last time the idiocy of prohibition was attempted. Click on any one of them. You won’t have to look very hard…

        • N.T. Greene says:

          The only difference between the prohibitionists and the cartels is… wait.

          They both break laws and erode your ability to make personal choices; they both stand to profit off the backs of the less fortunate and downtrodden; they both want prohibition to continue.

          I suppose the only difference is that one side calls the other side criminal… only to depend on them for funding anyways. And I’m sure we have some nasty black ops stuff funded by drug lords right inside our own borders.

        • allan says:

          they are jihadists… demanding all use disappear? That’s crazy talk.

        • N.T. Greene says:

          Demanding that all use disappear is like demanding that any vice totally disappear.

          I don’t see the states with lotteries or casinos lining up to demand that compulsive gambling be brought to an end by any means necessary… why, that could endanger profits.

          I’m sensing a pattern.

    • strayan says:

      Let’s take Kevin Sabet’s argument that we can’t add a third potentially dangerous (let’s pretend cannabis was for a moment) substance to the list of stuff we should be able to do without being thrown in jail.

      We’ll start with things that get you places.

      We can’t allow people to use skateboards, we already have bikes and roller skates!!!

      Now I’ll do sport:

      We can’t allow people to play lacrosse, we already have baseball and football!!!

      Now I’ll do food:

      We can’t allow people to sell cola, we already have lemonade and root beer!!!

    • Irie says:

      Loved this quote from our friend, Nora Volkow…….
      “The National Institute on Drug Abuse’s director, Dr. Nora Volkow, says that for all the potential dangers of marijuana, “cannabinoids are just amazing compounds, and understanding how to use them properly could be actually very beneficial therapeutically.” But she worries that legalizing pot will result in increased use of marijuana by young people, and impair their brain development.

      “You cannot mess around with the cognitive capacity of your young people because you are going to rely on them,” she says. “Think about it: Do you want a nation where your young people are stoned?”

      FYI Ms. Volkow, with alllllll due respect, young people have been in our masses smoking and stoned for years, American hasn’t fallen yet because of it!!!

  6. Duncan20903 says:


    If you’re in Ohio and have a grow please start being extra careful. In the last 30 to 60 days I’ve noticed news stories about grows getting busted in Ohio. There seems to be at least one every week. In the previous 3-4 years I’ve been following the news about cannabis law I’ve only read of a couple of busts and only recall them being caused by what I call the axe of god. That’s something like the guy that got busted for growing in Ellicott City MD because a drunken driver collided with his house, or the guy in Florida a few years back who got busted because a tornado ripped the roof off of his home and rescue workers discovered his grow.

    There was a time not that long ago when I noticed the same pattern in Florida. If Florida doesn’t have the most indoor grow busts per capita in the US today then they’re near the top of the list. Today’s example:

    • Duncan20903 says:


      I should have mentioned above that not long after I noticed the pattern in Florida it came to light that the jackboots were staking out hydroponic stores and getting the addresses of the grows from people’s license plates. It’s not the only method but certainly the most popular among cops because it doesn’t require any brains to do that. Back in the day I actually used to take a taxi to the hydro store. Cab fare is much cheaper than hiring a lawyer to tell you to volunteer for rehab before you’re ordered to do so in court.

      • darkcycle says:

        I have heard (in the distant past) of the cops actually putting informants into Hydro stores by threatening the owners with felonies. For years after Operation Green Merchant (which, incidentally netted some of my friends, and caused others to change their..ahem…names and flee the area), I would take a borrowed car, or park blocks away. Now, that actually seems all silly and quaint. But I’ve hidden before and I can do it again. Just hoping that those days are now a story to be told to my children.

    • claygooding says:

      It is a sad time for indoor growers because now that every police department in the kingdom has a thermal camera and smart meters for your electrical use. Too many people have stolen electricity so now I see power trucks running the alleys weekly and visually searching for splices and in some TX towns your water,gas and electric meter readers are trained to spot marijuana plants and get bonuses by reporting them.

      I am waiting to see what the new plastic sheeting with thousands of red and blue fluorescent micro bubbles within the plastic sheeting using 1/10th the electricity to produce the same lumens of light in a single direction do to a grow. They are still in the developmental stage but hold a lot of promise.

      Any commercial grower better stay on the cutting edge if they want continued success,,if they are where they have to hide it.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        C’mon clay, you of all people should know that we’re always at least one step ahead of them. Three words — Light Emitting Diode. Also it really doesn’t take a lot of effort to baffle the so called smart meters for the people stuck in the past and still using HIDs.

        One problem that a lot of growers experience is complacency. They’ve been safely using a certain method of operation for years and the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy kicks in. They’ve been safe for so long so they think that means that they will be safe and that isn’t always true.

        For more than a decade I’d put outdoor grows in land contained by Interstate highway cloverleafs. In the last few years I’ve noticed that the State Highway Administration has been spending a bunch of money to put up “no trespassing” signs on those same pieces of land. I am talking about land which there’s no reason for pedestrians to cross to save a few steps, too rural for hobos to set up camp, and to the best of my knowledge no reason other than an outdoor grow for people to go there. Of course it’s exactly why I picked those spots. There’s got to be a reason why those signs have gone up and I think it’s very likely due to people growing.

        Nowadays it’s where I send squirrels that are banished from my yard. linky

        I’m 100% certain that there is a not insignificant number of Ohio growers who are in that complacent place in their minds and it appears to me that the landscape has changed very recently.

      • allan says:

        actually I thought that thermal searches were ruled unlawful? An Oregon case if I recall correkly.

        • darkcycle says:

          Without a warrant. BUT. They use the thermals…. and then look for other evidence with which to request the warrant. They paw through your trash, look at your property, look for masked windows…etc. They have the thermal imagers, you CAN’T expect them NOT to use them.
          I use a thermal defeating reflective tent in the only area of my garden that can be “shot” from the front of the house. They can’t GET to the back (legally).

    • darkcycle says:

      “…drunken driver collided with his house.” Duncan. That actually happened to me when I lived in an unnamed North Seattle neighborhood, circa 1985-ish. Crashed right into the bedroom with the plants. Luckily, we were awake at the time, and we had a Ryder truck we had been using that day sitting on the driveway. You never saw three people move lights and fans and plants so fast in your life. By the time cops got there, the truck was going down the highway. We even had the plastic up from the floor.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        It happens more frequently than I would have guessed. I’m aware of at least two grow busts because of that, the one mentioned above which I recall the details because Ellicott City is local to me, and another which the only detail I recall was that one of the residents died. Dead from a drunken driver while sitting in your living room watching TV. That’s almost like getting swallowed by a sink hole when your asleep in bed. People probably opined about how “lucky” the guy that ended up in jail was. I really don’t think it’s accurate to describe something that could have sucked even worse to be “good” luck.

        Ramble off.

        • darkcycle says:

          I spent ten frantic minutes screaming “SHIT! SHIT! SHIT!” Much louder than I might have liked while my other two housemates kept moving stuff. It was a miracle we didn’t get slammed. The cop? He looked at the car, and the house from the window of his cruiser, and wrote his report there. The tow truck driver, HE looked in the house and gave a raised eyebrow….no furniture, no bed, no dresser….. But after the house got hit, for about three minutes, the lights had to be streaming out like someone was shooting a porn flick.
          In our case, we were lucky, the guy ran away, and the cops were concerned with getting him.

    • Irie says:

      Duncan, years ago, I had a friend who got busted because a would be robber broken into his shed where he was growing, not once but several times and ripped him off,(you would have thought my friend would have been smarter and done something to catch the guy, or at least slow him down). My friend got busted because when the cops got the robber for burglary on other cases, the said robber made a deal with them that if they would reduce his sentence, he would lead them to a grow operation!!
      After this, the cops would then get these guys who were dealing/doing meth, tell them of this suspected grow operation, tell them they would reduce their sentence if they would break into the facility and then after the grown operation was busted, they would say for the sake of getting a search warrant, or in court, they were taken into these facilities by the accused themselves….these meth heads were believed because they would suddenly see the light and the pot heads must be lying, because the DA said so.

  7. allan says:

    from the editorial:

    In 1969, the Pew Research Center found that only 12 percent of Americans favored legalizing the drug. By 2010, that figure was 41 percent. In 2013, it was 52 percent, a majority.

    the difference is education. A sweeping, now decades long answer by us to the prohibition propaganda that had built such a super majority by 1970. Historians, make a note of that… 40 years it took the tugboats of reform to turn prohibition’s ship of war past the tipping point to where it’s now leaning in our direction.

    And we know the flood of our legions commenting and activating across the land, suffering cruel injustices and too often death by the hand of govt thuggery, have been enthusiastically stoking this train’s engines for over a decade.

    it’s been a while since I was a kid and I’m not remembering those childhood fairy tales all too well. What happens to the emperor once everyone knows he ain’t got no clothes on? I know the story but don’t remember the end.

    • Howard says:

      “A sweeping, now decades long answer by us to the prohibition propaganda that had built such a super majority by 1970.”

      Every few years I re-read The Marijuana Conviction (Bonnie and Whitebread II) just to remind myself of the illustrious history of cannabis prohibition. Recently this excerpt caught my attention again;

      “In addition to its own attempts to impress the public with the scope of the marihuana menace, the bureau [Federal Bureau of Narcotics] stood ready to assist others in writing about the new evil, whether the intended product was factual reporting or literary fiction.” (circa 1937).

      Oh boy. Why the hell worry about any ‘truthiness’ in your propaganda campaign when FICTION is at your fingertips? Same as it ever was.

      The Kevin Sabets of the world rely on fiction to guide their modern propaganda campaigns just as their fore bearers did. It’s a rich tradition after all. But a tradition withering on the vine, dying in plain sight.

    • primus says:

      IIRC there was a small boy in the crowd who hollered out; The Emperor Has No Clothes, whereupon the rest of the people realised the truth of that statement and laughed and ridiculed the monarch. In real life, the reign of the monarch would have ended very quickly after such a public shaming, which is why the apologists like Kev-Kev are so important to the PTB; it reduces the ridicule and preserves their cred. Not that it’s working, that is their theory.

  8. claygooding says:

    North Carolina just became the first state to shut down unemployment. The Republican controlled state voted it in today(not signed yet TMK).

    They were thinking of the money they could save but should probably increase police funding,,hungry people living in the streets act funny.

    This is the first but it won’t be the last,,,as the banks cash flow now depends mostly on the black market and the cartels buy more legitimate businesses and properties across America,,the corporations beat their drums and our legislators dance the dance,,until we cut legislators pay.

    • darkcycle says:

      Gee, I guess now they’ll be subject to suit, since all those wages were taxed to pay into the system. They take out the money up front, don’t you know.

      • Duncan20903 says:

        On this side of the country the employer pays the premiums. I think it’s not very likely that employees have standing to initiate a law suit.

  9. Duncan20903 says:


    I’d really like to know when people are going to figure out that Federal preemption isn’t applicable to A-64 or I-502. Don’t any of these clowns stop to think that it took just under 5 years to drive a stake through the heart of Prop 8, but almost 17 years and 4 trips to the SCOTUS later (with 2 specifically arguing Federal preemption later) the Compassionate Use Act (AKA Prop 215) is still the law yet the geniuses on the NY Times Editorial Board can’t figure out that the reason Mr. Holder isn’t commenting is because he doesn’t want to be seen as impotent? I swear I recall a day in America when the press would have been explaining this stuff to people, not sitting in the peanut gallery drooling on themselves like all the rest of the idiots.

    • darkcycle says:

      You’re in a rare form tonight, Duncan my brother. Something fire your grill?

    • kaptinemo says:

      With a wholly corp-rat-ly controlled MainStreamMedia, whose so-called ‘journalists’ are seemingly incapable of doing nothing but acting as stenographers to Power, and whose editorial skills amount to simple cut-and-paste, I have come to believe that the only sources for real information come from the ‘Net. I haven’t watched TeeVeeNooz in years.

      Richard Cowan said it best, way back in the 1990’s, that a large part of the reason for the continuance of cannabis prohibition is bad journalism. But you can’t have bad journalism without bad journalists.

  10. Cliff says:

    When you’re a drug rehab parasite (hammer), pretty soon, everything looks like an addiction which must be treated (nail to be pounded down).

  11. Pingback: Conspiracy Theories! | Let them smoke pot – Drug WarRant

  12. kaptinemo says:

    From the Warshington Post:

    Legalizing marijuana is hard. Regulating a pot industry is even harder.

    You’ll recognize a familiar line:

    “The law also requires regulation for public safety and public health. As with the tobacco industry, voters don’t want firms marketing and selling pot to underage users. And public health officials are concerned about companies marketing to “problem users” who would like to quit or reduce their usage but find themselves unable to. (Emphasis mine – k.)

    Betcha you can guess who came up with that, huh? C’mon, I know you can! I’ll give you a hint: he’s NOT a ‘public health official’, that’s for sure.

    I’ll save my comments for when Pete posts this as a new thread. But the terms ‘flying pigs’ and ‘boogeymen’ come to mind.

    • allan says:

      did someone say ‘flying pigs’?

      and now to the Sunday Poet’s Corner, dug up from the archives:

      pigs of a feather
      often wonder whether
      their flights of fancy
      aren’t rather chancy
      in the light of day
      because others might say
      they’re not sure why
      pigs shouldn’t fly
      but they’ll find a reason
      and call it ‘pigs in season’
      shoot yours today
      before the price gets big
      for the plumage of a pig

    • kaptinemo says:

      Like I keep saying, the more the prohibs lose, the more they get backed into a corner, the more bleedin’, bug-house, bat-sh*t crazy they’ll sound like. That authoritarian irrationality which they have been able to keep hidden from the public will, eventually, erupt to the surface in all its’ insane, threatening, malicious, sadistic glory.

      Oh, speed the day!

      • claygooding says:

        I am waiting to see Sabet,Frum and Kennedy do an exorcism to remove the devil weed from America. They can get that preacher from CA that was so outspoken against Prop 19 as the sky-pilot in charge.

        • kaptinemo says:

          Clay, when you keep in mind the religious orientation of many prohibs, you’re probably closer to the truth than you think.

          It was the Catholic Church, back in 1484, long before Anlsinger, Hearst, et al that banned psychotropic substances other than alcohol (as in sacrificial wine; my, how convenient). That attitude was carried through the Reformation; Protestants weren’t any better in that regard…and it shows today in our drug laws.

          It’s no accident that the movie posters for the propaganda films against cannabis in the 1930’s invariably used religious terminology and symbolism to manipulate the (then less-educated and more religious) population.

          Today’s modern prohibs are just as influenced by their particular personal religious beliefs about cannabis; Sabet is a member of the B’hai sect, which, like most ‘fundamentalist’ religions, is absolutely against any psychotropics.

          The prohibs aren’t very loud about mentioning that facet of their motivations for imposing their beliefs, their prejudices and their bigotry on others, but to claim that their motivations are entirely secular would be the grossest of falsehoods.

    • Jean Valjean says:

      “I and my friend David Raynes (a former Customs officer who knows about drugs) have beaten him in debate…”

      the job skills of a customs officer are not “knowing about drugs” in any medical sense, but are about knowing where to find them in luggage, rectums etc, yet Hitchens feels free to cite him as an expert on the “menace” of drugs.

  13. primus says:

    Wow. I am in awe of his ability to misuse inflammatory adjectives. His writing will be unable to influence the sheeple due to their inability to read such big words. And no pictures, either.

  14. Servetus says:

    Peter Hitchens is proof the war on prohibition is a war on the unwise, senseless, ill-advised, imprudent, thoughtless, injudicious, rash, and irresponsible—all synonyms for stupid.

  15. Duncan20903 says:


    I realized yesterday that it’s been decades since I’ve heard anyone refer to black people as “colored” people. I realized that when I was walking into a store and there was an older, obviously mental ill man who was verbalizing his insanity and his problem was centered on “colored” people. In Landover Hills MD we were the minority. I was particularly intrigued that everyone except me was ignoring him…nobody got bent out of shape by a racist with a broken brain. It was fascinating, I stood there for almost 15 minutes watching.

    So what’s the point? Well, it’s that I’m noticing that the closer we get to ending the stupidity, the more whacked out the prohibitionists are becoming. I can see that man being replaced by Kevin Sabet in a few decades, jibbering and railing against pot addiction to a passing crowd that just doesn’t give a shit.

    We’re not there yet, but today we can read the thoughts of an innumerate prohibitionist who thinks that elective abortion is a crime fighting tool. What a maroon!

    Doesn’t anyone bother to check to see if their hare brained thinking has any basis in reality? Electie abortion wasn’t unheard of in 1972 and it sure didn’t start up assembly line style the day after the SCOTUS announced the ruling in Roe v. Wade.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      Well now maybe I spoke too quickly. It appears that the first Statewide law prohibiting a drug was in 1821 when Connecticut passed a law targeting apothecaries who sold poisons to women for purposes of abortion.

      I’m still learning something new every single day, whether I like it or not. Well at least its over for today.

    • DdC says:

      NAACP, National Association for the Advancement of
      Colored People

    • Windy says:

      “Elective abortion wasn’t unheard of in 1972”
      True, WA State legalized elective abortions in 1970 by a vote of the people. Even if Roe v Wade were overturned, I expect the voters of WA would not repeal that legalization.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        But even more relevant was a significant black market as well as the fact that those with the means could travel to foreign countries where it was legal. In Chicago there was an organization called “Jane”, loosely modeled after the Underground Railroad, which provided women with contact to friendly doctors. All of the regulars here should understand how the black market works. Claiming that there were no abortions in 1972 because it was legal is just as laughably absurd as contemporary claims that if people can’t see the cannabis market then it doesn’t exist. Roe v Wade did not “introduce” America to elective abortion.

        Let’s also not forget that there weren’t any 3rd party payers. Elective abortion was (is?) a “cash and carry” business. The very people which the clown that wrote that article thinks were receiving abortions and so therefore aborting their criminal bastard progeny just didn’t have the financial resources to make it happen frequently enough to make a difference.

        Doctors didn’t have an assembly line ready to go like Anheuser Busch did in December of 1933; just because the SCOTUS struck down a State’s law criminalizing abortion didn’t mean that civil regulation of doctors went out the window. Guess again if you think the regulators in the “red” States just rolled over and didn’t use every trick in the book to delay implementation. Even today in those States there are limited options.

        Compare the whole thing to D.C.’s medicinal cannabis patient protection law. The Feds withdrew their objections to that and the law was fully codified by the end of 2009. Here we are almost 4 years later and not even a single stick of legal medicine has reached a patient. I’m supposed to believe that there weren’t any similar shenanigans over elective abortion in the middle 1970s?

        I was aware that there was a link between cannabis prohibition and elective abortion in the middle centuries of the 2nd millennium which manifested itself through the witch hunts. The story goes that the so called witches were providing herbal solutions to unwanted pregnancies. The “witches” were also providing medicinal cannabis. During the black plague they made the Pope look bad because they provided very real palliation to relieve the suffering of the sick which the Catholic Church was unable to provide.

        I can trace the anti-abortion controversy all the way back to Hippocrates. When doctors took the original Hippocratic oath there was a part where they swore, “I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.” The doctors also swore to keep it in their pants around their patients, “…in every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or men, be they free or slaves.”

        Just another sycophant of prohibition mistaking correlation with causation. Nothing else to see here, move along.

  16. DdC says:

    First prohibitions…

    Probably one of the first prohibition laws for religionists was banning the eden garden pomegranates or whatever… Then the 10 commandments banning more. Cathoholics banned Ganja from the gitgo when the young Novices started finding Jesus without the Priests. Then they banned first class status for women, all non cathoholics and meat for the Fish Industrial Complex. The birth of Fascism. Drugs “laws” in particular were probably first created for abortions by the Greeks… As everyone knows in Mississippi and Texas they still worship Apollo, the Physician and Aesculepius and Hygeia and Panacea along with Geeeeeeeezus, the moneygod of Ba’al in the pits of Babylon. Removing Goitors via cable TV and your kind donation made out to the Fortune 700 Club. As a convenience to our members you can have your social security checks sent to us automatically every month electronically. Save the time and burden of checks and snail mail.

    The Popes hate dope
    Since its foundation, the Catholic Church and its Pope have been the sworn enemy of global marijuana culture.

    While millions of Catholic faithful around the world mourn the passing of Pope John Paul II, pot people would do well to remember that the Catholic Church has long been a leader in the global effort to exterminate marijuana and the cannabis culture.

    Most observers agree that the reason the Catholic Church hates psychoactive herbs is that these substances can create a sense of direct spiritual communion with the divine, while Catholic authority is based on the idea that the only way to reach God is with the Pope and priest as mediator.

    Hippocratic Oath- Classic Version
    I swear by Apollo, the Physician and Aesculepius and Hygeia and Panacea and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:

    I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.

    The Heartlessness of Dying for Prohibition

    I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.

    The Hippocratic Oath

    The Hippocratic oath is an ancient Greek document originating in approximately 400 BCE. No previous drafts of the Hippocratic Oath have been found. The origins have been consistently debated as there is lack of any evidence of the document having been written by Hippocrates.

    Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.

    If I fulfil this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.

    NeoConflicts of Interest
    MJ Research Cut as Support Grows
    Bush Barthwell & Drugs

  17. mr Ikasheeni says:

    Just curious, Does the NYT still invest in employee drug screening?

Comments are closed.