|
|
| Drug Warriors Try to Censor their Opponents |
|
Posted by CN Staff on January 08, 2004 at 21:47:35 PT By Ted Galen Carpenter Source: Cato Institute 
Representative Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) has discovered a mortal threat to the republic. The threat is a display ad placed by a pro-drug legalization group, Change the Climate, Inc., on Washington D.C.'s bus and subway system. The ad showed a young couple, with the caption: "Enjoy Better Sex! Legalize and Tax Marijuana."And to deal with this outrage, Istook has introduced a measure to financially penalize Washington's Metro transit authority for running the ad. Moreover, Istook's bill would prohibit any transit system that receives federal funds from running advertising from a group that advocates decriminalizing or legalizing marijuana. This is hardly the first time that the blackjack of withholding federal funds has been used to coerce recipients into embracing pet policies of politicians, but it has to be one of the more odious. Istook's bill shows utter contempt for the First Amendment, and indeed for the entire concept of political debate. But drug warriors have repeatedly showed their intolerance of opposing views -- and their eagerness to use the power of government to suppress critics. For example, in the mid-1990s, the late Rep. Gerald Solomon (R-NY) attempted to have the tax-exempt status of the Cato Institute revoked because it had the temerity to sponsor discussions of the legalization option. The most ominous proposal for repressing pro-drug reform speech comes (not surprisingly) from the United Nations. The UN's International Narcotics Control Board has issued a report implicitly calling on member states to criminalize opposition to the war on drugs. Citing the 1988 UN Convention Against Illicit Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, the INCB asserts that all governments are obligated to enact laws that prohibit "inciting" or "inducing" people to use illegal drugs and to punish such violations as criminal offenses. If such a vague and chilling restriction on freedom of expression were not odious enough, the UN board contends that any portrayal that shows illicit drug use "in a favourable light" constitutes incitement and therefore should be banned as well. Since the report also repeatedly denounces medical marijuana initiatives as well as decriminalization or legalization proposals, even the most sedate advocacy of changing prohibitionist drug laws might run afoul of the censorship regime being pushed by the United Nations. It is not reassuring that the U.S. government has pledged to cooperate with the UN group's global anti-drug efforts. Although Washington has not explicitly endorsed the censorship recommendations, neither has it stated that the United States rejects such proposals -- even though it certainly could have added that caveat. Indeed, one official pledged "absolute cooperation" with the UN's drug control programs. Those who might be tempted to dismiss the significance of efforts to gag proponents of drug legalization should know that government officials have already sought to implement censorship measures (albeit more limited ones than the comprehensive bans suggested by some drug warriors). For example, authorities in Maryland prosecuted an individual for publicly divulging the identity of two undercover narcotics officers. Attempting to prohibit such disclosures by charging the defendant with "obstructing and hindering a police officer," Maryland officials endeavored to give undercover narcotics officers the same protection that Congress afforded to the CIA and other intelligence agents to wage the Cold War and the subsequent war on terror. Although the Maryland Court of special appeals eventually overturned the conviction on the grounds that it violated the defendant's state and federal constitutional rights to freedom of speech, several aspects of the case remain troubling. First, the fact that Maryland authorities sought to impose such censorship in the first place; second, that the defendant was convicted in a trial court; and third, that the Court of Appeals overturning the conviction on a divided vote. It is hardly reassuring that a minority of the justices were willing to allow such a violation of the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech to pass muster. Such examples suggest that some advocates of drug prohibition regard the "war" on drugs as more than a metaphor. Pervasive intolerance is also all too typical of a wartime mindset in which opponents are seen, not merely as people who hold a different point of view, but as traitors to a noble cause. Regardless of one's position on drug legalization, Americans who believe in freedom of expression and in the importance of political debate ought to condemn Istook's measure and all other attempts to stifle the pro-legalization case. Otherwise, the First Amendment might become the most prominent example of "collateral damage" in the war on drugs. Note: Ted Galen Carpenter -- http://www.cato.org/people/carpente.html -- is vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and is the author or editor of 15 books, including "Bad Neighbor Policy: Washington's Futile War on Drugs in Latin America." -- http://www.cato.org/foreignpolicy/index.html Source: Cato Institute (DC) Related Articles & Web Site: Change The Climate House Bans Transit Drug-Reform Ads Marijuana Ad On Metro Infuriates Lawmaker Metro's Pro-Pot Ads Get Attention On Hill Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
|
Comment #13 posted by billos on January 10, 2004 at 04:40:51 PT:
|
| it's funny how "they" justify going to hair as "less invasive than urine collection" when the real reason is beacuse people cheat on urine tests and hair will tell a much longer history. I've already thought about what to tell people who may want my hair. Perhaps the ole "I may have taken an illegal percoset a few months ago because it was available and I had wrenched my back at work where the prescribed Tylonal didn't relieve any pain. Can't recall the exact date because it was so long ago but the hair test just may detect this and show a positive.
Sorry, but I cannot take the chance." I know it won't matter to an employer but if enough people said this maybe it would have an impact. If they get away with the hair analysis people are not going to be able to get hired and lots of people employed now will be fired. Also I've noticed that most testing labs do not ask you anymore if you are on any prescriptions that contain drugs that may show up as a false positve. This just proves how lax the rules have gotten (in their favor, of course) and how much they really don't care. A positive is a positive and you are out. In the feds eyes, any false positives are collateral damage in the WoD. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #12 posted by yippierevolutionary on January 09, 2004 at 15:29:51 PT |
| What about him? He was totally bald! If they want a hair sample they can take one out of my hairy ass! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by westnyc on January 09, 2004 at 14:56:32 PT |
| Billos - Drug tests are a violation of the fourth amendment if you are a politician (funny how that works); but, the Supremes ruled that the "Bill of Rights" only pertains to the Federal Government and not to the private sector. Therefore, if you don't like drug testing, you don't have to work for an employer who does it! It's really quite simple, refuse a drug test and lose your job and let your children starve. Another words if you don't like your working conditions - as an "at-will" employee - you are free to seek employment elsewhere. Funny thing is.....If a person's bodily indiscretions such as urinating are not considered private by your employer, well - what the hell is? I know there are people who will say "Don't sell-out, there are other jobs that don't require you to submit to a UA," and I respect their opinions. However, I really think it is time for people to stand-up for their rights and let these bastards in office understand that "we are not taking this anymore!" I mean, isn't it rather odd that they have a saliva test that not only measures impairment which is really all that should be considered (just like alcohol); but also, costs considerably less than urine and hair. BTW - I've said it before - hairtesting will be approved in the next year or so for use by the DOT since it is "less evasive" than urine. When this occurs, these "federally-mandated-tax-payer-funded cottage industries (NIDA, ONDCP,DOT, IRS, etc.)" will require all "subjects" to grow at least one patch of hair somewhere on their bodies for random testing or it will be considered a "refusal to test." As I'm sure you are aware, refusal to test is worse than simply testing positive. Though I am enraged, I can't be nearly as angry as you must feel about Constitutional Right Violations. I neither suffered nor sacrificed in Vietnam defending America's "Values of Freedom," and, see it all be "raped-away" in the name of "Freedom!" [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by breeze on January 09, 2004 at 11:58:08 PT |
| I am sorry if my rant was not broken into pieces - I get started and I rarely stop. Its a bad habit I need to break.
I feel in my heart for all men and women that fought for this country, my father was a boy when he went into a forgotten war and was still a boy when he came home (he was 13 when he joined the fight, 17 when he returned). He has suffered his entire life from tramatic stress disorder. He readily admits that he is a dangerous individual, and he certainly is. He gave so much for a fight against communistic principle, and now years after the battles have affected not only his life, but our family as well, I see how he did what he did was a most honorable thing. I spoke with a mother just the other day, and I listened how she described to me that her son is mentally fried after seeing home from a brief leave of the current war. These are the lost voices, the voices that are never heard, the songs of sorrow that are never on the radio or on the television enough to really hit other Americans hard enough to really instill in their minds that our people are dying for a cause, and that cause is freedom. She told me how her son doesn't feel emotion like he once did, how he feels he is fighting for nothing- and in particular, so idiots like the article above can censor what another believes is right and true. Censorship is only the beggining. Once you have been silenced, no one can hear you scream. Have a good weekend! ;) [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #9 posted by billos on January 09, 2004 at 11:34:23 PT:
|
| I think this censorship crap runs parallel to the random drug tests required by the federal DOT. I have believed from the start that random drug tests are illegal search and seizure. I went and fought in viet-nam believing that the Constitution protected me against such persecution by the federal gov't. We Americans already lost that battle long ago, and I'm sorry but I'm still pissed off about it. As far as the censorship goes, the feds will loop-hole through it by hanging the pocketbook over the victem's heads, and we all know already that these scumbags can be bought. Nice to know my tax dollars are going to good use. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #8 posted by goneposthole on January 09, 2004 at 07:12:34 PT |
| pretty good one there, breeze. you better catch your breath. Bear in mind that I don't endorse the antics of the motley crew behind the following website. Here is some free speech in action (not very flattering of Mr. Kucinich): Welcome to the Kucinich.com! You'll find everything you need to know about the congressman from Ohio's 10th district and now, snicker, a presidential candidate. If you like what Dennis did for Cleveland, you'll love what he can do for the country! This site is dedicated to keep you up to date on the latest antics of Dennis the Menace. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by westnyc on January 09, 2004 at 06:53:17 PT |
| Breeze - It's funny how the constitution was actually enacted to protect the rights and opinions of the minority; yet today, it's all been changed to reflect the ideals and philosophies of the majority. For example - The way the constitution is being read today - If three-hundred-million Americans say "A can of Lemon Pledge is red;" and, one American says "No it is actually yellow" - it has to be red since the majority is always right. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #6 posted by kaptinemo on January 09, 2004 at 05:17:47 PT:
|
| But huge monoblocs of text are very hard to read and keep track of main points. Could you break them up into discrete paragraphs, next time? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #5 posted by jose melendez on January 09, 2004 at 04:31:12 PT |
| If you leave, the criminalizers win. Fight back with the pen! BTW, I got published again, in my local paper: http://www.news-jrnl.com/03LettersIndex.htm [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by breeze on January 09, 2004 at 01:36:13 PT |
| Forgot this one- very relevant to my previous post and toward the legalization of cannabis. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jan2004/2004-j03.shtml [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by breeze on January 09, 2004 at 01:30:50 PT |
| This is merely proof of what many conspiracy "theorists" have been preaching all the while, the United Nations is behind a NWO- and it is comprised of teachings that resonate from many of Hitlers beliefs and teachings.
Consider the coming period of repression that will be guided by these teachings if people do not realize what this country is headed for. Censorship- of any kind, is against first ammendment rights, this is correct. But if you haven't been in touch with any attorneys lately, just call one up and ask ANY one on the phone about miranda rights. They will certainly tell you that Miranda is now defunct and that cops do not have to inform you of your rights.
If you find one who does, please post that attorney on this site.
Now that Bush has decided to allow all illegal aliens to become legal, does this mean the US is safer? No, it means there are changes being created right now to end constitutional rights, and this will come with some method of tracking device, as Orwellian as it sounds. There is a ton of other issues on the table, but no one seems to care that censorship is one of the "rights" being eroded.
How can they care, they are too busy working two jobs to keep a roof over their heads.
You are no longer in a free country, you now live in a nation where everything you grew up thinking and learning is now wrong. The education of this is going to be a school of harknocks for many.
One man was arrested not long ago for holding an Anti- Bush sign at one of bu$h's rallies, no one really made a big deal of it. The news scantly spoke of it.
There are various states that are going broke, the people are taxed to death as it is, but the gov needs more funds to continue operations. Those operations are leading to a police state. Just tonight, a local news station finished telling how my state is going broke, the following piece was how wonderful it was that the sherrifs department had just put new computers in every patrol car to visually identify all "suspects,offenders,and most wanted" criminals. This is going to cost a LOT of money, but never fear- they got the money through a grant! The word grant equals loan. Even though my state is heading for economic disaster, they mangaged to secure a grant for spotting potential law breakers. Pretty soon, it will be used against any dissidents period- people who make their views known on websites, speak out against "elected" officals, wear a t-shirt that is politcally offensive, been known to be anti-social, basically anything that comes to mind that does not fit into the mold of what a citizen of the community should be. For years, racist tactics were used to secure the illegal arrests of hundreds of people. Now, years later, since race is no longer an issue, they have turned to arresting anyone who is not one of them. Hmmm, sounds like a good communist practice in the name of the good ol boy system. Either you are a friend of mine or someone I know, or you are going to jail, just because you aren't in my system. People spent years knocking down the walls of racism, only to have it replaced with something far worse, the stigma of thought crime. Thought crime is where if you do not think like your leaders, you are an enemy, and enemies must be controlled. What better way to do that than to CENSOR anything that would encourage the general public to think for themselves, to challange authourity, to be different from those who believe we should all be on the same thought train. I have seen discrimination first hand- because of color, hair length, religion, body piercings, tattoo's, economical status, age, sexual preference - you can only imagine what I have seen, and i am sure you can identify others that I haven't seen. Sometimes general dislike is even a discrimination tool, but censorship never protects the people from their own ideas, and it is not a plus for society.
I am not fond of certain radio and television advertisements, and I seem to have these very ads thrust in my face constantly, but to imagine having only THAT particular product thrust in my face because it is what the "majority" believe is best for me is both stupid and communist. Imagine living is a society where no dissent is allowed, dissent means freedom, for without dissent, there is no freedom. Where would you be if lust was outlawed before you were born? You would not exist. Where would you be if only people with an IQ over 160 be allowed to drive cars, consult health professionals, have children? My parents were smart- but they didn't have IQ's equal to that of genius. What if this standard/law was set back in the 50's? We wouldn't have a nation today would we. Well, consider the changes that our nation is facing now, and how censorship, among other things, will affect it in the next 25 years. We can only look to Bush for basically ending the future of our children and grand children with his policies. He will eventually go into the history books as the man who destroyed a nation that millions of men and women had built and died for.
If we allow this senator, congressman- or others to continue in their activities that are equal to this type of activity, then we will also go in the history books for helping Bush destroy a once great nation. I know that I am not ready to lose my rights, but it seems that most people I ask could care less. I have an antisocial personality, and I am STILL able to ask people who have just thirty seconds of conversation about what they think about the current field of politics. I have to grit my teeth when talking to them, but I have found that most folks are careful of how they express their views and ideas for fear that somehow I am a government agent out to destroy them personally. Either this or they look at me like I am nuts for even discussing politics.
What most people don't know, is that there is a serious threat in this nation that goes further than any other in our nations history to the lifestyle of the citizen. And it is coming on fast, hard, and with direction.
Hitler said this back in the 30's- "We will distract the people with sports, draw their attention away from what our political agenda is, by pushing sports to heights of popularity that it will become an obsession of the public."
This statement came from a man who gave an open speech just before the first televised event featuring the olympics. Even today, I read of where a basketball player's death added fuel to the WOD in the eighties, leading to mandatory sentencing. Most people know more about sports than who is leading their townships, their state affairs, their government- the IMPORTANT stuff, the things that MATTER. Jay Leno has proven this with some of his street side interviews.
I hate politics. But I have realized its importance, and how important it is to those who have a vested interest in their future, because what you do today effects tommorow.
But people are interested in what is amusing, and little else. I asked a woman who worked in a library if she knew anything about a Kucinich meeting, here reaction was "Kuu-koo who?" While I was basically infuriated that such a stupid person be allowed to work in a place with so many forms of intelligence surrounding them, yet not know of current events- I explained that the man was running for president, she did not even know he was a candidate, and the city is hosting an event that features ALL of the candidates within the month. There were signs sitting RIGHT NEXT TO HER announcing the event!!! And she had no idea who the candidates were.
You gotta be persistent, and on every level if you want to get results. You want to legalize cannabis- you gotta make it a key word on every media channel, on the mind of every judge, on the mind of EACH AND EVERY candidate for office in every seat in government, and you gotta do more than just push, you have to shove.
There is an individual on this site that is persistent in pushing Kucinich in every one of their posts. I applaud this person, because though they reach me with their message more than is required, that person has realized that not everyone who comes to this site reads every single post, every single article. You have to push, and push and push! If you think you are preaching to the choir,and sometimes you are, but often you are preaching to the person who has just surfed into this website. You gotta keep talking. All it is going to take is for this simple little censorship bill to pass, and soon you will not have the ability to express your views. Think back to the good old days of when the television show "Politically Incorrect" which was ended because the host made his own personal view against war very public. Censored Amerika- Its coming, and it is a reality. Here are some links- http://www.freespeech.org/fsitv/fscm2/genx.php?name=home http://abc.go.com/primetime/politicallyincorrect/ [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by SystemGoneDown on January 08, 2004 at 22:27:27 PT |
| This is terrible news. I SWEAR TO GOD, if they censor pro-legalization ads, I am MOVING OUT OF THIS DISCRACEFUL COUNTRY. And if they dare to even call it 'collateral damage' to the war on drugs, I will be enraged. If they dare rape the 1st amendment by censoring it, it will be the saddest things not only because it is against our 1st amendment, but because it will GO UNHEARD OF IN THE NEWS... This is a discrace. Absolutely pathetic. Somebody should beat this shi t out of this Ernest Bitchtook co ck knocker. "Too buisy to watch your little brother because I was getting stoned". No, because I'm too buisy getting busted over something that harms no one...... And who THE FUC K would be stupid enough to consume a small intoxicant like cannabis and forget their obligations with FAMILY?!?!?! People need to see through that BS. The Amerikan gov't can't find a source for linking marijuana with anything that is a danger to society so they associate it with children, to install that chip in our robotic brains that.........marijuana keeps kids from having their "real" brother, uncle, aunt, mom or dad. The basic concept of imprisoning people in society was to separate the threats to society with the rest of society. People need to look into WHAT PRISONS AND JAILS WERE MEANT FOR, and realize that they've been instilled with fear in order to see the logic in the war on laughing grass. PATHETIC. I never quite understood why "hippies" in the 60's were so anti-government and never could get why they had such a grudge. I'm really starting to thouroughly gasp their reasons. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by Virgil on January 08, 2004 at 22:08:42 PT |
| The guy is talking to people that do not know better. The UN is not telling the US what to do, the US is the ravenous monster behind world-wide prohibition and telling the UN what to do. He could have shrunk the ignorance factor among the true conservatives that follow the Cato Institutes preachings. Still it is about as far as a journalist can go if he has children and family to worry about. It was a good article but he missed the bullseye and the ring after that. Of course with most media it is hard to find the arrows as they do not even aim at the target. There idea of a good shot is hitting the ground. [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |