'Global War On Drugs Has Failed,' Former World Leaders Say

[mississippi]

IMO, not disturbing. It's a mention that folks may learn to get along or they may choose to not get along. And "right" is euphemism to getting along. Not to mention the subsequent comment:

yes, my mistake. thanks for correcting me. i just tried to form my thoughts in a somewhat understandable sentence, but sometimes i cant. (i only speak english as my secondary language.)
of yourse, i wasnt talking about _forcing_ them to think "right" more like convincing them to understand, that the right thing is indeed right. so they see for themselves, that thinking that way might be better then they were thinking before. so help them to form their opinins justly.

 

[Backwoods Bud]

yes, my mistake. thanks for correcting me. i just tried to form my thoughts in a somewhat understandable sentence, but sometimes i cant. (i only speak english as my secondary language.)
of yourse, i wasnt talking about _forcing_ them to think "right" more like convincing them to understand, that the right thing is indeed right. so they see for themselves, that thinking that way might be better then they were thinking before. so help them to form their opinins justly.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

My friend, I've been quoting Nietzsche (which you totally missed) and giving you an education in geography, but it seems I am superficial Beam me up Scotty - no intelligent life forms here.

wax on, mullray

 

[Rednick]

"Life is meaningless"
Me, paraphrasing Nietzsche.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWyH_twcMl0

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Some folks reason vicariously through the likes of Nietzsche (among others) when they can't reason on their own.

Evidence a map of Europe w/o scissored outlay... the warped sense says Europe ain't there.

So they take a dead guy's writings and apply it to their warped personal sense to suggest black is white.

Here's another example of the warped perspectives we live amongst and laugh at:

Palin said Revere warned the British that they couldn't take our guns away. Everybody knows Revere did nothing but pass information to Cornwallis and Adams. Revere was temporarily in the hands of the Brits and indeed told them militia was in their midst. But the onus is that Revere passed information to military leaders of the British approach.

Palin's crap that Revere told the Brits, "You can't take our guns away" is bullshit pandering to contemporary gun nuts for political reasons. Not to mention she's a dumb ass. She's never contributed to a conscious thought where the bottom line wasn't warped.

Now Palinites are changing wiki to reflect Palin's gaffe.

Guess what they reference as fact? The fact that a tv news station reported what Palin said. They stop quoting when those same reports continued with "she's wrong".

 

[BigForest]

Dam you guys are getting deep

 

[BigForest]

Must be good meds

 

[outinit]

I hear what they are saying, loud and clear, but the ones that make the decisions, are definitely NOT listening!!!

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

I remember a cartoon I laughed my ass off about back in about 95 when the net was a tad different. There were two dogs sitting in front of a computer. One of them says "you know what I love about the internet Rex - no one knows you're a dog". Actually, had a laugh even writing it. What has this to do with anything? No idea. And yes I know guns don't kill people - people kill people (yawn) - still those people may have a much harder time of it (killing people that is) if they didn't have guns

Examples of your and Palin's lapse in reasoning is separated by carriage return (you know, the little button the says "Enter".)

That means the two gaffs are separate and apart, not combined by the poster. It's reflection by example.

And you missed the Palin point altogether. She's philosophically wrong in multiple ways.

 

[Rednick]

Palin said Revere warned the British that they couldn't take our guns away. Everybody knows Revere did nothing but pass information to Cornwallis and Adams.

Everybody knows Revere was running 'casue he saw them red and blues in the mirror, and didn't want another DUI, third strike.

 

[Core]

war on drugs

war on drugs

Global commission on drug policy has released a 'War on drugs' report on 2 on june...thought i'd share it ..



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world. Fifty years
after the initiation of the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and
40 years after President Nixon launched
the US government’s war on drugs, fundamental reforms in national and global drug control policies are urgently needed.
Vast expenditures on criminalization and repressive measures directed at producers, traffickers and consumers of illegal drugs have clearly failed to effectively curtail supply or consumption. Apparent victories in eliminating one source or trafficking organization are negated almost instantly by the emergence of other sources and traffickers. Repressive efforts directed at consumers impede public health measures to reduce HIV/AIDS, overdose fatalities
and other harmful consequences of
drug use. Government expenditures on
futile supply reduction strategies and incarceration displace more cost-effective and evidence-based investments in
demand and harm reduction.
Our principles and recommendations can be summarized as follows:
End the criminalization, marginalization
and stigmatization of people who use drugs but who do no harm to others. Challenge rather than reinforce common misconceptions about drug markets, drug use and
drug dependence.
Encourage experimentation by governments with models of legal regulation of drugs to undermine the power of organized crime and safeguard the health and security of their citizens. This recommendation applies especially to cannabis, but we also encourage other experiments in decriminalization and legal regulation that can accomplish these objectives and provide models for others.
Offer health and treatment services to those in need. Ensure that a variety of treatment modalities are available, including not just methadone and buprenorphine treatment but also the heroin-assisted treatment programs that have proven successful in many European countries and Canada. Implement syringe access and other harm reduction measures that have proven effective in reducing transmission of HIV and other blood-borne infections as well as fatal overdoses. Respect the human rights of people who use drugs. Abolish abusive practices carried out in the name of treatment – such as forced detention,


page 2

Global Commission on Drug Policy

forced labor, and physical or psychological abuse – that contravene human rights standards and norms or that remove the right to self-determination.
Apply much the same principles and policies stated above to people involved in the lower ends of illegal drug markets, such as farmers, couriers and petty sellers. Many are themselves victims of violence and intimidation or are drug dependent. Arresting and incarcerating tens of millions of these people in recent decades has filled prisons and destroyed lives and families without reducing the availability of illicit drugs or the power of criminal organizations. There appears to be almost no limit to
the number of people willing to engage in such activities to better their lives, provide for their families, or otherwise escape poverty. Drug control resources are better directed elsewhere.
Invest in activities that can both prevent young people from taking drugs in the first place and also prevent those who do use drugs from developing more serious problems. Eschew simplistic ‘just say no’ messages and ‘zero tolerance’ policies in favor of educational efforts grounded in credible information and prevention programs that focus on social skills and peer influences. The most successful prevention efforts may be those targeted at specific
at-risk groups.
Focus repressive actions on violent
criminal organizations, but do so in ways
that undermine their power and reach
while prioritizing the reduction of violence and intimidation. Law enforcement
efforts should focus not on reducing drug markets per se but rather on reducing their harms to individuals, communities and national security.
Begin the transformation of the global
drug prohibition regime. Replace drug policies and strategies driven by ideology and political convenience with fiscally responsible policies and strategies
grounded in science, health, security and human rights – and adopt appropriate criteria for their evaluation. Review the scheduling of drugs that has resulted in obvious anomalies like the flawed categorization of cannabis, coca leaf and MDMA. Ensure that the international conventions are interpreted and/or revised to accommodate robust experimentation with harm reduction, decriminalization and legal regulatory policies.
Break the taboo on debate and reform.
The time for action is now.



if you want to read more here is the link http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/Report

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

excellent post. thanks you for sharing!

 

[vta]

It's too bad the US won't listen...maybe other countries will

Below is the response from Obama's crew...


America’s Drug Czar: Programmed To Oppose Popular Drug Policy Reforms

By: Allen St. Pierre, NORML Executive

Predictably. Reflexively. Mandated by law.

Yawn….



So the current U.S. drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske*, in true Pavlovian style, reacted negatively to the umpteenth commission report issued last week opining that 1) the war on some drugs has totally failed to achieve any of its stated goals, 2) policy reforms based on public health–not arrest and incarcerate–models are most effective, 3) the war on some drugs wastes preciously needed tax dollars, military expenditures, destabilize international borders and cause havoc in the banking and financial industries and 4) that legalization should readily be on the table, notably legalizing cannabis.

As if a bell rang, the U.S. drug czar’s office dutifully rolled out a brief and defensive commentary published in The Hill (a virtually DC-only publication for inside-the- beltway-types) that touches upon the Obama administration’s only-slightly-different-from-previous-drug czars’-approach-to-maintaining-the-status quo…

*Mr. Kerlikowske is likely going to be resigning soon as drug czar (which is understandable as it is one of the most thankless bureaucratic positions in Washington, D.C. as a job with a prescription for failure) to become the next police chief of Chicago…

Drug policies must be rooted in science
By Gil Kerlikowske
06/06/11

Last week, the Global Commission on Drug Policy issued a report calling for the decriminalization of illicit drugs based on the notion that global efforts to reduce drug use have been a failure. Certainly, given the stature of the Commission and the long-term challenge of drug policies both nationally and internationally, the Commission’s message may appear compelling at first. But there are serious flaws with both the report’s conclusion and its proposed remedy.

We agree with the Commission that balanced drug control efforts are necessary, which is why this administration’s National Drug Control Policy is a marked departure from past strategies. We support diverting non-violent offenders into treatment instead of jail by encouraging alternatives to incarceration. And as a former police chief, I and my colleagues know that we cannot arrest our way out of the drug problem. As I’ve often stated before, drug use should be addressed as a public health problem because we know drug addiction is a disease that can be successfully prevented and treated. Legalizing illicit drugs increase drug use and the need for drug treatment, while also making it more difficult to keep our communities healthy and safe.

Our National Drug Control Strategy is science-based. And science shows that illegal drug use is associated with specialty treatment admissions, fatal drugged driving accidents, mental illness, and emergency room admissions. Illicit drug use has huge costs to our society, outside of just criminal justice costs.

A recent report by the Department of Justice’s National Drug Intelligence Center about the economic impact of illicit drug use indicates that the costs of illicit drug use on health care and productivity alone, are over $80 billion. Making illicit drugs legal would not reduce any of these factors. Nor is drug use a victimless crime. Just last month, during a visit to the Pediatric Interim Care Center in Kent, Washington, I saw firsthand the tragic impact drug use has on newborn babies. Blah Blah Blah.......

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

Our National Drug Control Strategy is science-based.

HAHAHAHAHHAAAA ROFL. omfg. lolololollollllloooo stop i cant breathe..... uh oh my head feels funny!

 

[zen_trikester]

Just realize I double posted vta's last post on the first part of this so it is now removed

This is also an interesting tidbit found here

the Drug Czar is Required by Law to Lie
Most people know that the “drug czar” — the director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) — is an advocate for the government position regarding the drug war. But not everyone knows that he and his office are mandated to tell lies as part of their Congressional authorization.

According to Title VII Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998: H11225:

Responsibilities. –The Director– [...]

(12) shall ensure that no Federal funds appropriated to the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall be expended for any study or contract relating to the legalization (for a medical use or any other use) of a substance listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812) and take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a substance (in any form) that–

is listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and
has not been approved for use for medical purposes by the Food and Drug Administration;

Now, let’s take as a simple example, the issue of medical marijuana. If the government finds that marijuana Has “currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States” or “accepted safety for use of the drug under medical supervision,” then by law, marijuana cannot remain in Schedule 1 of the Controlled Substances Act, which would immediately legalize it for medical purposes.

But by law, the drug czar must oppose any attempt to legalize the use (in any form).

Therefore, despite the fact that there is extensive evidence of medical marijuana’s safety and effectiveness (including the fact that even the federal government supplies it to patients), and clearly the drug czar would know about all this information, he is required by law to lie about it.

The job description also means that since he must oppose any attempt to legalize, he has no choice but declare that the drug war is working, that legalization would fail, etc., regardless of any… facts.

On April 2, 2003, Congressman Ron Paul wrote a letter to the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) asking for an investigation into ONDCP lobbying activities and their dissemination of “misleading information” (a polite euphemism for “lying”)

The GAO responded (pdf):

Finally, apart from considerations of whether any particular law has been violated, you have asked whether the Deputy Director’s letter disseminated misleading information in connection with statements relating to the debate over legalization of marijuana. [...]

ONDCP is specifically charged with the responsibility for “taking such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use” of certain controlled substances such as marijuana —- a responsibility which logically could include the making of advocacy statements in opposition to legalization efforts. The Deputy Director’s statements about marijuana are thus within the statutory role assigned to ONDCP. Given this role, we do not see a need to examine the accuracy of the Deputy Director’s individual statements in detail.

Translation: Since lying is in the job description of the ONDCP, there’s no point in bothering to see whether they’re telling the truth.

Keep in mind that this requirement to avoid the truth if it interferes with the mission of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy is not limited to the current drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, or most recently, John Walters.

Unless the law changes, every future drug czar, even if appointed by a President who solidly supports reform measures, will be constrained by the same job description defined by Congress.

(One may also wonder, of course, if the nature of the job attracts the type of person who perversely enjoys the power of lying to the country.)

Turning this travesty around requires more than the right person for the job. The offending phrases must be struck from the authorizing language (or perhaps a future President will simply not bother to appoint a new czar).

Given the frequency that the drug czar is quoted in the press, either much of the media is not aware that he and his staff are required to lie, or they simply feel obligated to print what they say despite the falsehoods.

After all, don’t all politicians lie some of the time? Yes, but who else is actually required to do so by law?

Lie (verb)

: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
: to create a false or misleading impression

The ONDCP staff lies all the time (and specific examples abound all over the web), but not all lies are mere simple statements. One of the most noxious lies (and a common type of lie used by drug warriors) is the intent to deceive through the use of conjoined statements. Here’s an example of the last drug czar lying to me in an Ask the White House session.

Actually Pete, you’ve got the question exactly backwards. Marijuana is a much bigger part of the American addiction problem than most people – teens or adults – realize. There are now more teens going into treatment for marijuana dependency than for all other drugs combined.

Note the combination of the two sentences. Marijuana is a bigger addition problem than we realize — there are more teens going into treatment… This is a specific intent to deceive, since the drug czar knows that the increase of teens in treatment for marijuana has nothing to do with addiction, and everything to do with an increase in governmental referrals. But by placing the two statements together, he attempts to convince me of the lie.

Here’s another example of the conjoined statement lie:

But marijuana is far from “harmless” — it is pernicious. Parents are often unaware that today’s marijuana is different from that of a generation ago, with potency levels 10 to 20 times stronger than the marijuana with which they were familiar.

Here’s another common ONDCP example:

“Quite a few people think that smoking pot is less likely to cause cancer than a regular cigarette,” reads the ad. “You may even have heard some parents say they’d rather their kid smoked a little pot than get hooked on cigarettes. Wrong, and wrong again,” it continues. “One joint can deliver four times as much cancer-causing tar as one cigarette.” According to ONDCP drug czar John Walters, the idea behind the ads is to “give parents some hard facts that they can use to have informed conversations with their kids about the negative consequences of marijuana. …”

Sometimes they’ll talk about “carcinogens.” Same idea. The intent is to deceive — to convince people that marijuana causes cancer — something they know is not true, so they fall back on the deception. The lie.

New drug czar Gil Kerlikowske seems not to even bother trying to hide it. It’s almost as though he doesn’t care. Note his comments in California where the fact of marijuana’s medicinal capability is quite fully accepted.

“Legalization is not in the president’s vocabulary, and it’s not in mine,” he said. [...]

“Marijuana is dangerous and has no medicinal benefit,” Kerlikowske said in downtown Fresno …

 

[Core]

i think this is rather a positve report....

 

[sso]

they are pulling their head out of their ass a little.

this statement at least seems to indicate that

"And as a former police chief, I and my colleagues know that we cannot arrest our way out of the drug problem"

though the rest of it assures me that their head is still in there up to their ears at least.

 

[vta]

i think this is rather a positve report....seems like little of you readers do 2.....

Of course it is a positive report. The only problem is it falls on deaf ears here in the USA, as you can see by my post of Kerlikowske's reply. If anything I think this report will help more liberal countries continue in the decriminalize of drug use. As far a the USA..these drug warriors only care about their job security and this report threatens that security. Also, the Drug Czar is 'required' by law to lie to any extent needed to protect the continued prohibition of drugs...science or no science.

But yes...it is a very positive report and I am sure more are to come.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^Yup the USA doesn't have enough money to keep pushing the globe around forever. Eventually things will change.

 

[Iraganji]

Hash Zeppelin, I agree.

Hope is what I cling to. I'd like to think that madness isn't a natural state of humanity. Prohibition doesn't work, and to continue is madness.