|
|
|
Drug WarRant
 |
Thursday, June 8, 2006 |
The Vigil for Lost Promise
Tonight is the night for the DEA's Vigil for Lost Promise, remembering those who died from drugs. And if this was a parents' event and not a DEA event, it might be a good remembrance, but the DEA's involvement makes it a cynical exploitation of young people's deaths to promote their destructive (and lucrative) drug war.
I have my own Vigil for Lost Promise and I ask you to take a moment to remember those who have died from the drug war itself and read their stories as well.
The Marijuana Policy Project has also responded with the charge that the DEA vigil ignores other DEA victims:
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's "Vigil for Lost Promises," scheduled for this evening at 6:30 pm. at the DEA's headquarters, commemorates victims of drug abuse but ignores the seriously ill patients who have suffered and died at the hands of the DEA, one such victim charged today.
"At dawn on September 5, 2002, I awoke to five federal agents pointing assault rifles at my head," said Suzanne Pfeil, who suffers from paralysis and pain caused by post-polio syndrome. Pfeil is a member of the Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM) in Santa Cruz, California. "They yelled at me to put my hands in the air and to stand up 'NOW,' while I tried to explain to them that I couldn't," Pfeil said. Eventually, the agents handcuffed Pfeil, confiscated her physician-recommended medicine, ransacked WAMM's premises, arrested founders Mike and Valerie Corral (herself an epileptic) and confiscated the medical marijuana used by approximately 250 patients, most suffering from cancer, AIDS or other life-threatening conditions. "Thirty-three of our members have died since the raid, and there is no doubt that some of those deaths were hastened by the stress, terror, and deprivation of their medicine by the DEA," Pfeil added.
Aaron Houston, director of government relations for the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C., said, "If the DEA wants to honor victims, it should recognize the cancer patients and paraplegics who've had assault rifles pointed in their faces and been slapped in handcuffs by the DEA, for the simple act of taking their medicine." Later this month, the House of Representatives is expected to vote on the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment, which would stop such DEA raids in states with medical marijuana laws.
Houston also expressed concern about misleading material put out by the DEA and some members of Congress, falsely implying that medical marijuana contributed to the death of 14-year old Irma Perez, who died of an MDMA (ecstasy) overdose in April 2004. Detailed information about victims of the DEA's attacks on medical marijuana patients can be found at http://www.mpp.org/pdf/HorrorStories_Brief.pdf. Background on Suzanne Pfeil, the WAMM raid, and Irma Perez is at http://www.mpp.org/pdf/LostPromises_Brief.pdf.
It's good to see that someone else has noted how Irma Perez's death has been exploited by the drug warriors.
The most bizarre statement involved with this vigil comes from DEA head Karen Tandy:
"This vigil gives hope for an America without drugs."
Really? An America without drugs? No aspirin? How about cancer or AIDS drugs? Nicotine? Caffeine? Antacids?
Even if she really means that this vigil gives hope for an America that is devoid of those specific drugs that are currently illegal, where could she even get the idea that's possible? Is she that stupid? (Or think we are?)
Ah... maybe she means there's hope for an America without illegal drugs. And with legalization, that could happen. But somehow I doubt that's what she had in mind.
6:59:47 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, June 7, 2006 |
... and the wars compete for resources
Link
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld wants to end U.S. Army helicopter support for a joint U.S.-Bahamas drug-interdiction program that over the past two decades has resulted in hundreds of arrests and the seizure of tons of cocaine and marijuana. [...]
But in a May 15 letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Rumsfeld said it was time after more than 20 years to shift the equipment elsewhere. The military is being stretched thin by the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and other commitments around the globe.
The Bahamas anti-drug program, Rumsfeld wrote, "now competes with resources necessary for the war on terrorism and other activities in support of our nation's defense, with potential adverse effects on the military preparedness of the United States."
It was bound to happen.
I think we should have a series of debates between Rumsfeld and Walters where they attempt to prove that they are actually deserving of receiving taxpayer money.
11:47:11 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
Shameful treatment of a soldier
PFC Judson Parkin received a Purple Heart Medal for his service in Iraq. His first lieutenant wrote about him:
"He performed his duties in an outstanding manner and never wavered under fire. He upheld the Marine Corps tradition of bravery, risking his life..."
In fact, Parkin was rewarded with seven medals and ribbons in three years of service.
One little problem: right before his deployment to Iraq, they found less than a gram of marijuana in his room. This didn't prevent them from shipping him out, but after he returned...
As the time passes, his ordeal looks more and more like a quote from Kafka, with endless circling of a bureaucratic machine around and around the same issue, never moving an inch ahead, multiple punishments for the same insignificant crime and growing numbers of official letters confirming the receipt of a complaint, but never bringing any solution.
"During Private Parkin's deployment, he was not recommended for promotion because of his past drug abuse," wrote Major J.R. Jurgensen of the U.S. Marine Corps Office of Legislative Affairs in December 2005 in response to Senator Feinstein request about Parkin's fate.
Not recommended for promotion? That's punishment number one.
"His punishment included reduction in rank..." That's punishment number two. "...the recommendation for an Other than Honorable [discharge] (OTH)." And that's punishment number three.
"If the Marine Corps discharges me as OTH," wrote Parkin to Jeff Goldstein, his history teacher in high school, "I will lose ALL my benefits, including the GI Bill and my veteran medical benefits."
Scary as it sounds, Parkin prepared for the worst, but he could not imagine that yet another punishment, arguably the most severe one, was in store for him.
Since September 2005, when his commanding officer at the time, J. M. Odonnell recommended OTH, Parkin was left at Camp Pendelton as a Remain Behind Element (RBE) to wait for a decision made on his behalf.
In the time period, his papers got lost several times, his chain-of-command officers cannot give him any time frame of the upcoming decision or tell him when his punishment number four will be over, so he spends his days tending to miscellaneous chores -- from gardening to heavy lifting -- and basically rotting away.
This is unbelievable.
I can understand the military having rules about the use of drugs and alcohol (and particularly having time and place rules), but this kind of stupidity in our government is harmful. If his infraction was really that serious, they shouldn't have let him go to Iraq.
This isn't the only case like this. There were also the 21 Guardsmen in Iowa who tested positive... again just before shipping out.
6:45:27 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, June 6, 2006 |
Sending Children to the Front Lines
MAZAR-e-SHARIF, Afghanistan, June 2, 2006 (ENS) - It's a day out in
the country for Noor Mohammad, as he stands in the middle of a field
with a stick, beating energetically at the opium poppy plants around him.
"I like destroying poppies," he said. "It's fun to be away from the
city for a day."
Noor, 16, is in the tenth grade at a school in Mazar-e-Sharif, the
capital of Balkh province. His one day trip to the country is part of
an experiment being conducted by the government's counter-narcotics
department in Balkh.
"Even with transportation and lunch, students come a lot cheaper than
any other work force," explained Zabiullah Akhtari, a senior
government official in charge of poppy eradication in Balkh. "We're
going to use students several more times before the end of the poppy season."
Not all the participants share Noor's enthusiasm for the task. By
contrast, Parwaiz, 14, is scared to death. Sitting exhausted under a
tree after his day's labors, he looked around nervously as he spoke
to a reporter.
"It's a difficult task, but we have been ordered to do it by our
school," he said. "Now we're just hoping that armed [militia]
commanders don't attack us."
Link
9:00:29 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Monday, June 5, 2006 |
The drug war is its own drug
Editorial in the Salt Lake Tribune:
The drug war is its own drug. You start with a little, and pretty soon you just need more, and more, until it has consumed your life.
Unable to stem the demand for illegal drugs, and unwilling to fully fund workable alternatives such as treatment and drug courts, lawmakers around the country have become addicted to applying criminal justice solutions to a public health problem.
The result has been similar to the individual who is disappointed to find that casual use of a softish drug hasn't solved all of his problems so, instead of getting clean, he moves on to larger amounts and/or harder drugs.
Interesting analogy. If true, you'd think people like Mark Souder would have OD'd by now...
1:29:22 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Sunday, June 4, 2006 |
Requiring the Government to be lawful is not pro-criminal
Glenn Greenwald makes a great comment about government investigative and enforcement powers.
Didn't we all learn this point early on in school: there are criminals in the world, and allowing the police to break down our doors without warrants would help criminals be caught. Despite that fact, we don't allow the police to break down our doors without warrants, because the police can catch criminals by searching homes only when they have warrants, a process enshrined in the Constitution in order to avoid the inevitable abuse that comes from allowing the Government to search our homes without any oversight. Thus, people (such as the Founders) who favor the warrant requirement before the police can search our homes aren't pro-criminal. They know that criminals can be caught while preventing government abuse and lawlessness. Why is it so hard -- for some people -- to apply that same, quite basic reasoning to eavesdropping and all other forms of surveillance?
Now he was referring the NSA eavesdropping and Canadian terrorists, but the statement applies full well to the drug war.
I sometimes find myself wondering if I was the only one awake when that lesson was taught in school, or if, through some conspiracy, I ended up learning about a different constitution than everyone else. Because so often I hear people complain about "criminals' rights" or spout the inane "If you don't have anything to hide..."
Just because they claim it would make their job easier is no justification for government to break the laws that make us free citizens.
So keep in mind that when I complain about police dogs sniffing cars without suspicion, or police breaking down doors in the middle of the night because there might be some marijuana there, or randomly drug testing kids in schools, or searching people of a certain color in a certain neighborhood, it is not just about my belief that we should legalize drugs, and it certainly is not about defending drug dealers. It is about defending my country from my government. It is about protecting the Constitution of the United States, something my elected servants swore an oath to do, but that I seem to care more about actually doing.
10:10:40 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
|
|
