Drug WarRant

If you’re not familiar with the concept of official student groups at state universities, here’s how it works in most cases….

A group of students can get together and form an organization (which may or may not be connected to a national organization) and get approved as an official student group (usually by submitting a set of by-laws, list of officers and getting a faculty advisor). Once approved, the group usually gets certain benefits, such as being able to check out university rooms for free for meetings and events, being able to promote their events and meetings through a variety of means on campus, and have the ability to apply for student fee money for the purpose of providing programming or other activities that are open to the student body as a whole.

Since state universities are government entities, they cannot by law discriminate based on viewpoint.

Northern Illinois University has an odd system. They differentiate between political organizations (campus Republicans and Democrats) and social advocacy organizations (including such things as anti-war organizations and pro-or-anti abortion groups). Political organizations are not allowed to apply for funds, but get the other benefits of being a student organization, social advocacy organizations can also apply for funds.

Students for Sensible Drug Policy was established as a social advocacy organization at NIU but was told by members of the student government, who apparently didn’t agree with their message, that they should apply as a political organization. The SSDP members felt that was wrong and that they shouldn’t be denied the option of applying for funding, so they went ahead and applied as a social advocacy organization. The NIU Student Association Senate denied their application completely, so now SSDP cannot even meet on campus.

Press release from SSDP

“It’s clear that the NIU Student Association Senate is incapable of fairly imposing its policies on student groups and after speaking with lawyers and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), we believe that the NIU Student Association Senate is in violation of the First Amendment,” explained Jonathan Perri, Associate Director at SSDP. “Unfortunately, it also seems that some members of the Senate are simply opposed to SSDP’s mission to promote an open and rational discussion about alternatives to current drug policies, including marijuana legalization, and that this may be the basis for their decision.”

SSDP has been an important voice of reform in this country (and internationally) by involving young people in issues of extreme importance. Just downstate at Illinois State University, where I function as faculty advisor for the SSDP chapter, the group is well received in the university community and their Constitutional rights are protected by both the student government and upper administration.

The student government at NIU is shooting themselves in the foot. They should welcome the debate that SSDP brings, and they should eliminate the bizarre and impractical distinction between political and social advocacy groups.

Sorry about neglecting to pass on the programming note regarding the CNBC documentary that was on tonight called “Marijuana USA.”

Here’s the CNBC page on the show.

There are also showings at midnight and 1 am ET (may be more later).

Let us know if you saw it and what you thought.

Site note: I’ve been getting a huge spike in comment spam this week, so I’m afraid I’m just deleting the entire batch each time without actually looking through 45 pages of them. Sorry if one of your comments got stuck in there.

So we spend millions of taxpayer dollars on the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign — a campaign that has been shown to have almost no positive effect and, in fact, has even been shown to have a reverse effect.

The advertising agencies they hire know this, so they keep trying to come up with a new and different approach that is going to appeal to kids today.

They even pay lip service to the idea that trying to use advertising by the government to change youth behavior is absurd..

We know that you’re very smart when it comes to the messages you see and hear. That’s great and you should question us, too.

Sometimes you just gotta wonder what they think they’re actually accomplishing. I just saw this on TV…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T82Z40t8Y8k

We’re really spending money on this?

OK, well they may not think that’s what they passed, but I don’t know any other way to accomplish this.

Resolved, That the House of Representatives–

1. declares that drug trafficking organizations cultivating illicit marijuana on Federal lands in the United States pose an unacceptable threat to the safety of law enforcement and the public;
2. affirms that it is the responsibility of the Federal Government to confront the threat of illicit marijuana cultivation on Federal lands; and
3. calls upon the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy to work in conjunction with Federal and State agencies to develop a comprehensive and coordinated strategy to permanently dismantle Mexican drug trafficking organizations operating on Federal lands.

Via LEAP, who were ready with a great response:

“No matter how many grow operations are eradicated or cartel leaders are arrested, there will always be more people willing to take the risk to earn huge profits in the black market for marijuana,” said Richard Newton, a former U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent who is now a speaker for the group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. “My years of experience in federal drug enforcement tell me that only when we legalize and regulate marijuana will we put a stop to this madness. After all, you don’t see too many Mexican wine cartels growing grapes in our national parks, and that’s because alcohol is legal.”

At the Drug Czar’s “blog”: ONDCP and Canada Renew Partnership in Substance Abuse Work

Last month Director Kerlikowske visited Ottawa, Canada to share the Obama Administration’s efforts to restore balance to drug control efforts and discuss drug issues affecting both sides of the border.

Ah yes, “balance.” That’s the code word that the drug czar likes to use to excuse why, if he’s already ended the drug war, and they know that supply side policy doesn’t work, they still use so much enforcement. It’s really a “balanced” approach of [and then they mumble] mostly law enforcement. It’s sort of like calling it a balanced approach to a diet when you have a diet coke after eating an entire Death by Chocolate.

On his first trip to the Canada in his official capacity…

Interesting wording there. Perhaps a staffer in the office doesn’t realize that Canada is a sovereign nation (actually, perhaps the entire office doesn’t realize that) and going “to Canada” isn’t going “to the Canada” — it’s not like going “to the mall.”

He also discussed how these measures, combined with smarter use of law enforcement, could help reduce the southbound flow of drugs, especially methamphetamine and ecstasy, from Canada into the U.S. and stream of guns into Canada from the U.S.

Yep, there’s the real agenda. Supply-side, pure and simple.

He also met with the Honorable Peter Kent, Minister of State of Foreign Affairs; the Honorable Rob Nicholson, M.P. for Niagara Falls, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada; the Honorable Vic Toews, M.P for Provencher and Minister of Public Safety; and Member of Parliament the Honorable John Weston to discuss cross-border issues on drugged driving…

Really? He is so determined to beat this dead horse. He apparently sees his claim to fame (other than ending the drug war, of course) to be the creation of an international epidemic of drugged driving out of thing air all by himself. I wonder what those “cross-border issues on drugged driving” are? Do we have a lot of people who are driving high and failing to stop at checkpoints? Is drugged driving something that is catching and they might have to seal the border to keep it from spreading?

During meetings with Mr. William J.S Elliott, Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and with members of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police Drug Abuse Committee, Director Kerlikowske discussed current drug-related challenges and explored opportunities for cross-border collaboration across a range of law enforcement of issues.

More “balance.” And more bad grammar.

Hope you had fun on your trip to the Canada, Director Kerlikowske. Did they enjoy your lies as much as we do?

The day Westminster gave up on science by Ian Dunt

Last week’s police reform and social responsibility bill contains a clause scrapping the requirement for the home secretary to appoint at least six scientists to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD). So that’s that then. They’ve admitted it. The drugs war has nothing to do with reality. It is now to be based entirely on fairy tales.

Of course, it’s always been based on fairy tales. It’s just that the UK is ready to admit it. The U.S. still pretends that there’s some science involved in their policies, but that’s never really been the case, either.

“A number of people expressed concern about what the cost may be to the county,” said Mendocino County Board Chairwoman Carre Brown, also 1st District supervisor. “We have no money to put into this.”

Nor does cash-strapped Mendocino County seem to be alone in its inability to contribute much to the estimated $1.5 million price tag of a combined law enforcement effort to reclaim the Mendocino National Forest for hikers and outdoors enthusiasts, according to Brown.

That’s an estimate offered at the symposium of what it would cost to launch a large, six-county law enforcement operation next year, according to Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman.

Must be tough. Figuring out the huge cost of getting marijuana grows out of the national forest… Oh wait. Wasn’t there a Proposition recently that would have done that automatically and raised tax money to boot? Gee, I wonder what happened with that? They don’t even mention it.

Not all college newspaper contributors are clueless about the truth. Thank goodness for SSDP.

Gutierrez went on to say, however, that he now realizes there is not even time for the institution building to take hold in the remaining years of the Calderon administration. “We have 18 months,” he said, “and if we do not produce a tangible success that is recognizable to the Mexican people, it will be difficult to sustain the confrontation into the next administration.”

He lamented the pervasive, debilitating fear that is so much a part of contemporary Mexican society, where even people in the Yucatan, with “European levels of security” are afraid because of the instability in a few distant cities.

In the U.S., they want us to be unreasonably fearful in order to increase authoritarian government power. In Mexico, they want the people to feel unreasonably safe in order to… what?

A New Zealand glamor model who was charged with possessing half a million dollars’ worth of methamphetamine said test results show the substance was harmless fake snow.

Bought at a $2 store.

Hey, if it’s white and powdery, it must be worth a half million.

The AP points out that their story confirms what critics of drug war have said for years: The government is quick to boast about large arrests and seizures, but its efforts result in little, in any, slowdown in the drug trade.

And not only has it failed to interrupt the drug trade – it has made it much more violent. While Mexico’s and the United States’ “surge” in fighting the cartels over the last four years has not impacted drug availability or slowed down the trade, it has led to close to 30,000 prohibition related deaths in Mexico. It’s not the marijuana or coca plants themselves or the use of these drugs that causes this bloodbath. The brutality is a byproduct of drug prohibition, which makes drugs as valuable as gold and creates a profit motive that people are willing to kill for.

In a sane world, people would be outraged by this.

Vast expenditures resulting in no beneficial results, but causing tens of thousands of deaths. Hmmm… better invest some more money in that enterprise.

This is an open thread.

It’s important in a country like ours to have a mechanism to counter a grave injustice should one occur. In that light, the founders properly saw fit to vest the President of the United States with the power of the pardon.

Of course, we all know about the injustice that can occur in the drug war, with up to life sentences given to many low-level drug offenders.

President Obama has deliberated for two years, reviewing the requests for pardons and has finally identified the worst injustices and is ready to wield his pardon power (Via TalkLeft), including a whopping four drug cases “who were given sentences that the president deemed excessive.” Such as the heartrending case of Roxane Kay Hettinger.

Roxane Kay Hettinger, Powder Springs, Ga., sentenced in 1986 to 30 days in jail and three years of probation for conspiracy to distribute cocaine.

Thank goodness the President was there to rescue this poor woman who spent 30 days in jail 24 years ago.

Or how about this tragedy?

Timothy James Gallagher of Navasota, Texas, sentenced in 1982 to three years of probation for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine.

I doubt that even a pardon can erase the horrible memories of three years not spent in prison 28 years ago.

Thank goodness that those are the worst of the injustices that have occurred in the drug war. I don’t know if I could take it otherwise.

A very insightful article by Juan Gabriel Tokatlian in the Guardian (UK): The only winner in the ‘war on drugs’: The real effect of militarising drugs policy in Latin America has been to cement the hegemony of the US Southern Command

As always with the war on drugs, it’s so important to look at the money, and look at the power. Know who benefits in both those areas, and you know the real players pushing for prohibition.

One of the most interesting and challenging paradoxes of debate on the “war on drugs” is how little examination there has been of its major warrior: the military. In Latin America, that means the US Southern Command (SouthCom). […]

At first, there was a certain reluctance on the part of the military to being sucked into an unconventional, politically-driven fight against the illegal drug trade. But they were eventually won over to participation in anti-narcotics efforts – thanks, in part, to growing anti-drug budgets approved by Congress. […]

After 9/11 and the rise of the so-called “new threats” (the supposed amalgamation of international terrorism, organised crime, drug trafficking and weapons of mass destruction), Washington ceased to observe a distinction between internal security and external defence. SouthCom experienced a “great leap forward”: its role was already extensive, but now it developed into a more autonomous protagonist in the “war on drugs”. Plan Colombia, first, and the Mérida Initiative, more recently, were emblematic of the core rationality of a coercive anti-drug strategy – a strategy that, by definition, placed the military centre-stage in a prohibitionist crusade in the Americas. […]

What we are witnessing practically everywhere in the Americas is a coercive prohibition campaign that brings neither a partial nor a total solution to the drug question. Unless its premises are challenged, a permanent sense of a “clear and present danger” with regard to narcotics will be fostered both in the United States and in Latin America – which, in a circular way, will only serve to justify the existing repressive policies. The role of the US Southern Command in the Latin American front of the “war on drugs” is key to the prohibitionist paradigm.

Powerful stuff. And right on target.

This is, in part, why I feel it’s unlikely that we’ll get anything really useful from the State Department memos from WikiLeaks (although I’m willing to be surprised) — the only real conflicting opinion that’s likely to be found is over who gets the lion’s share of the power and funding from continuing the drug war.

Oh, and don’t forget: Drug Czar Kerlikowske ended the drug war last May.

There’s been a lot of controversy over the new TSA body scanners at airports that can “see” through clothing. Since it’s unlikely that they would even catch the kind of terrorist device that they are being installed at great expense to prevent, what’s the use of them?

Now we know.

Via Toke of the Town.

Legendary rapper Kurtis Blow, 51, was busted Thursday morning at Los Angeles International Airport after a TSA body scanner detected “an anomaly” in his pants, which turned out to be a bag of marijuana.

TSA — keeping California safe from rappers with marijuana.

ACLU sues Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills and Livonia over medical marijuana rules

The ACLU is suing Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, and Livonia because, the ACLU says, the three cities have effectively banned medical marijuana, despite a state law approved by voters that legalizes the drug for medicinal purposes.

It continues to amaze me that some people are still so scared of medical marijuana that they’re willing to buck state law and try to outlaw it locally. What is it that they really fear? (They can’t all be making money from prohibition, can they?) Is it some misguided morality thing? A lifetime of ingrained propaganda?