cannabisnews.com: U.S. Brings Anti-Pot Message To Ottawa










  U.S. Brings Anti-Pot Message To Ottawa

Posted by CN Staff on July 08, 2003 at 09:52:23 PT
By Oliver Moore, Globe and Mail Update  
Source: Globe and Mail  

A leading U.S. anti-drug campaigner is expected to warn Canadian officials Tuesday that marijuana decriminalization could be viewed as a threat that, in the post-Sept. 11 world, might provoke stricter border controls.Barry Crane, deputy director for supply reduction at the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), is in Ottawa Tuesday for meetings with federal government officials. He is the latest of a series of high-level representatives to criticize Canadian efforts to change course in the struggle against drug use.
"Any time we look at potentials for liberalizing or decriminalizing drugs, whether it be north of our border or south of our border, we're going to be concerned about increased trafficking," Jennifer de Vallance, a spokeswoman at the ONDCP, told globeandmail.com from Washington. "Clearly any threat to the United States or any potential for an increase amount of marijuana trafficking into the United States will force U.S. officials to take a look at the protective measures they have on the border and if and how they have to increase those measures."The gradual trend toward marijuana decriminalization in Canada has caused an increasingly agitated response from Washington, even as Ottawa has tried to soothe their fears. Mr. Crane's boss — "Drug Czar" John Walters — said in December that Canada is "a dangerous staging area for some of the most potent and dangerous marijuana" and that people with no sense of how strong modern marijuana is "seem to be living with the view of the 'reefer-madness' seventies."In response, Canadian Justice Minister Martin Cauchon has noted that some countries have decriminalized marijuana already, with none of the apocalyptic effects that Washington anticipates."We recognize that Canada's a sovereign nation, and we do not wish to interfere with any particular piece of legislation," Ms. de Vallance said Tuesday. "Our concerns are U.S. drug use and, specifically, trafficking into the United States of high-grade marijuana."Polls show Canadian support for decriminalization as high as 2 to 1, although many people also worry about the possible economic effects of angering the country's biggest trading partner."That is a major concern," Ms. de Vallance said. "Nobody wants to slow down commerce or tourism between the two nations."But those concerns do need to be balanced out against the threat of increased drug trafficking into the United States," she said. "Director Walters, as a member of [U.S. President George W. Bush's] cabinet, is working with his colleagues and evaluating the threat. Dr. Crane is there to talk to his colleagues in the Canadian government to ensure that any decisions that are made are thoughtfully made and have considered all the implications, both economically and as far as national security goes."Source: Globe and Mail (Canada)Author: Oliver Moore, Globe and Mail Update Published: Tuesday, July 8, 2003 Copyright: 2003 The Globe and Mail CompanyContact: letters globeandmail.caWebsite: http://www.globeandmail.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Cannabis News Canadian Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/can.htmU.S. Drug Envoy, Ottawa To Consult on Pot Law http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16781.shtmlDrug Envoy Coming To Co-ordinate Pot Crackdown http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16777.shtml

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #42 posted by FoM on July 09, 2003 at 12:58:20 PT
EJ You're Right
I don't believe Ozzy because he can't reason. He doesn't live in a world of common sense. I feel sorry for him. His son is going to have a hard time. I always want to believe that a person has the self control to keep off hard drugs like he said he wanted to do but there is always the but. How will he cope if his Mom dies? That's extreme but it very well could happen if the cancer comes back. Coping skills take time to learn and I hope he is getting good help.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #41 posted by E_Johnson on July 09, 2003 at 11:30:51 PT
The denial continues
******************************************************Since the unscripted reality show began, viewers have seen matriarch Sharon Osbourne undergo cancer treatments and 17-year-old son Jack recently emerged from a stint in rehab."Drugs are everywhere. We are not winning the war on drugs," said Osbourne, wearing a black T-shirt, brown sweat pants and several gold chains and bracelets.His rock-star father, who's nearly incoherent from years of substance abuse, concedes the high-profile show likely contributed to Jack's problems."I suppose it didn't help matters he was going to clubs and parties," Ozzy said, adding that he credits his son for seeking help on his own."If you were 17, would you have gone to your folks and said, `Mom, Dad, I have a drugs and alcohol problem?' I know I wouldn't," he said. "It was very courageous of him. He's my hero."
*****************************************************Well Ozzy you are not his hero because your daughter told you he had a problem in the first season and you ignored her.And you've paid for your family's two luxury homes by turning your children into Hollywood fame whores.You suppose "it didn't help matters" that he was going to clubs????Where were you the parent when he was going to clubs?How can he be club hopping when that is illegal?What bartenders served your child alcohol?The reason why Ozzy is not going after the people who run these clubs who serve kids like Jack is because then Ozzy's own fame and power and money in the Hollywood scene would be threatened.Every bar that served Jack Osbourne alcohol should be shut down.The laws that regulate alcohol to keep it out of the hands of cxhildren ought to be enforced.It was in the club scene that Jack no doubt came into contact with all of these lethal pills.But they're going to pound on the potheads even though it was the corrupt LA bar scene, MTV and his own parents that did this to him.MTV and the nightclub owners have the money and the power, and the potheads are going to bve the ones asked top paty for this ugly charade of bad parenting and exploitve television.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #40 posted by FoM on July 09, 2003 at 07:44:43 PT
EJ Check This Out When You Have Time
OZZY'S DRUG WARNING: http://www.dotmusic.com/news/July2003/news30091.asp
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #39 posted by E_Johnson on July 09, 2003 at 02:11:51 PT
I could see it in the first season
In a scene in the first season of the show, Kelly and Jack are fighting as usual and Kelly squeals to her mom, "Mom Jack is hanging out in clubs all night with a bad crowd and he's turning into a piece of Beverly Hills trash."But the parents wrote it off as Kelly trash talking her brother.If I were the MTV producer and I heard Kelly say that and I knew the LA scene she was talking about then I would have stopped the filming right then and investigated if this was true.He was a child. They should have done something when this all started. I don't understand how the producers could hear Kelly talking about Jack hanging out all night drinking and drugging in the celebrity bar scene, and not intervene.It was interesting that at the end, he looked around and realized on his own that Kelly was right and he had in fact become a piece of Beverly Hills trash.Thank heavens that he lived to that point though.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #38 posted by E_Johnson on July 08, 2003 at 23:47:13 PT
I think Jack is more ill than he lets on
Ozzy is taking antipsychotic medicine because he hears voices, when means he has schizophrenia. Despite the opinion of some prohibitionist quack in England, schizophrenia is not caused by drug abuse, it has been shown to be heritary, with severe emotional stress during young adulthood often serving as a trigger.What Jack experiences as a state of emotional pain and social awkwardness could be the start of a chronic mental illness. He said he was fine but he didn't look fine to me. He looked miserable and distracted.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #37 posted by goneposthole on July 08, 2003 at 22:24:07 PT
Ozzy Osbourne
He bites the heads off of live pigeons for god sakes; how can anybody take him seriously?The Canadian government should kowtow to the US, and agree with every stupid thing they have to say about how cannabis 'should' be controlled, and then ignore the boneheads. The only thing left to do is to ignore the US gov. and laugh at their stupidity. "War on drugs, war on crime; whatever you want to call it. 
Every year 'they' spend more money, and every year it gets worse."- the words of a retired policeman who didn't mind if people were smoking pot in his presence. Somebody has to end the stupidity. 
                            
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #36 posted by afterburner on July 08, 2003 at 20:59:26 PT:
Sounds Like Jack Needs Ibogaine Therapy.
He is obviously in a great deal of pain and is displaying addictive behavior."Newshawks: The Iboga Therapy House on CBC's National Newshawks with Pot-TV - Running Time: 13 min - Date Entered: 20 May 2003 - Viewer Rating: 9.03 (10 votes) - Number of Views: 945 - Pot TV Producer Marc Emery brings the ultimate addiction interference drug, ibogaine, to the awareness of the Canadian public in this sensational piece that aired on CBC's National." http://www.pot-tv.net/ram/pottvshowse1977.ram "JAMA RECOGNIZES MARIJUANA ACTIVISTS' ROLE IN FIGHTING ADDICTION TO HARD DRUGS http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread15049.shtml
A top medical journal looks at ibogaine as it has risen from a counterculture star to a serious project funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). JAMA even credits the efforts of cannabis activists like Dana Beal and Marc Emery in pioneering ibogaine research."Ozzy is wrong: he should know better than to trust the dis-credited gateway theory. Maybe he is just burnt-out.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #35 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 20:56:45 PT
I Think You Will Like It EJ
He spoke honestly and I am very glad he did. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #34 posted by E_Johnson on July 08, 2003 at 20:46:36 PT
Thanks maybe I will watch it
I now feel guilty for having started watching the Osbournes show when it came out.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #33 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 20:27:18 PT
Just a Comment
The interview has been really good so far. His drugs of choice are Oxycontin and Alcohol. It's a miracle that he is still alive in my opinion. He is going to have a hard time I'm afraid to say.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 20:03:55 PT
Thanks Again EJ
I turned the show on and will watch it tonight.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by E_Johnson on July 08, 2003 at 19:59:33 PT
MTV selling Jack Osbourne 2Nite
MTV News is running a special tonight at 11pm called Jack Osbourne: Back from RehabI find this rather disturbing because first they made his bar hopping and being out all night and being truant from school into their cash cow, and now they are making his rehab into their cash cow.No doubt marijuana will be blamed again for his problems.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 18:20:19 PT
EJ Thanks
You really know much more then I do. I learn so much reading comments. I never thought of how this all happened. My brother in law was in the clothing manufacturing and sales business before he retired. Some of my husband's family members worked in textile mills years ago. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by E_Johnson on July 08, 2003 at 17:59:26 PT
This book is very interesting
Women's Work: The First 20,000 Years, by Elizabeth Wayland Barber.It's about the ancient textile trade and how it determined the roles of women in ancient society.Of course she mentions hemp. But that's just part of the story.Her central argument is that the application of slave labor to textile production is what robbed women of the social and economic and religious status they had in ancient times.She argues that the development of the military technology industry in the form of metallurgy to create better metals to make more lethal swords and spears is what made all of this mass slave labor possible.The better weapons led to an increase in the scale of warfare which led to an increase in the number of captives per battle and the ability to keep them in captivity and force them to work.A war-oriented society needs more sons to replace the ones killed in battle -- and so women are valued more for their ability to create new warriors for battle than their ability to create more fabric for trade.And so the role of women becomes primarily reproductive, the goddesses disappear, and society changes, and women become economically and socially dependent on men.She makes a convincing case that this change in status for women stems from the development of warfare as a primary economic activity, stimulated by the development of new military technology.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by global_warming on July 08, 2003 at 17:05:59 PT:
Barry
Barry, Barry, Barry, sing us a song,I remember all my life
Rainin' down as cold as ice
Shadows of a man
A face through a window
Cryin' in the night
The night goes intoMornin', just another day
Happy people pass my way
Lookin' in their eyes
I see a memory
I never realized 
How happy you made me, oh MandyCHORUS
Well you came and you gave without takin'
But I sent you away, oh Mandy
Well, you kissed me and stopped me from shakin'
And I need you today, oh MandyStandin' on the edge of time
Walked away when love was mine
Caught up in a world of uphill climbin'
The tears are in my mind
And nothing is rhymin', oh MandyCHORUS Yesterday's a dream
I face the mornin'
Cryin' on a breeze
The pain is callin', oh MandyCHORUSYou came and you gave without takin'
But I sent you away, oh Mandy
You kissed me and stopped me from shakin'
And I need youSheez, wrong Barry, wrong song, Barry and Jennifer, they make such a lovely couple,
Oh, and lets not forget John Boy "P in the cup"
These three would have us all take DNA tests,
For the public safety and and for the children,
The children who are leading the way,
Yes there is a change a comin,
The wind has changed direction,
I hope you are not waiting for Mary,
If she comes,
She will have a tightly wrapped joint,
Somewhere in her umbrella,
And lets not forget Joyce,
If you could stop and listen for a second,
You might see, that we are not demons
We love our children
In this grand and mysterious universe,
Here on Earth we have to endure
All kinds of people and ideas,
I say,
"Let not make a bad situation worse,"If my young daughter has a child
Without the blessing of the church
Should I abandon her,
Should I forsake the needs of this grandchild?
Should I build such a great wall
A wall that forever denies me
The ability to say my forgivness?
A wall that forever blocks my feelings
To reach and touch that which I love?Remember this Joyce, you are advocating
This continued "prohibition"
This menatallity that cages our children
This prohibition that is so unforgiving
This prohibition that takes our children
Forces them into prisons
Prisons that rape and returns
Our children more determined
More hateful and mistrusting,
Yes, lets get further apart,Please, do not see this as an attack against you,
I would hope that you can open your eyes
Open your heart
Stop wanting to lock sick people up,I do not wish to nail another Jesus onto a cross,
Surely you can see this metaphor,
With each person that is locked up,
We, as a civilized people,
Deny the reasons why our children become victims,
Look at the news, much death and suffering,
In this world.How can we help?gw
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on July 08, 2003 at 16:40:22 PT
More
Feds to appeal Rosenthal verdict: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/07/08/BA253476.DTL
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 16:38:21 PT
Thanks EJ
I understand what you are saying. It is nice when I look back and think how it was back then at least for me and my friends. It is an idealistic way of thinking and not realistic at all. I sadly admit I know you are right.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on July 08, 2003 at 16:37:38 PT
News
Canada.com article on the current status of MMJ in Canada:http://www.canada.com/health/story.html?id=2A7C819F-82E5-4F51-810C-A9A948D04823Of course, Richard Cowan says that 7/9 is the deadline for Health Canada to comply (see marijuananews.com) but he doesn't elaborate...And a player for the Trail Blazers was recently arrested for his third cannabis charge:http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/front_page/105766551561380.xml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by Big Trees on July 08, 2003 at 16:29:30 PT
Please...
Would the United States just keep your own garbage were it belongs south of the border we DO NOT want it here!!!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on July 08, 2003 at 16:26:59 PT
Minor semi-off-topic gripe
Channel surfing today, on the preview channel they were talking about Pirates of the Carribean, and the voice-over said something like "It's rated PG-13, but parents need not worry about sex, language, or drug use." As he said "Drug use", on the screen a skeletal character opened a large bottle of what I can only assume was wine and poured the whole thing in his mouth. (Of course, it came out his chest - he appeared to be undead.) It was a blatant example of such an irritating double standard that I've been unable to get it out of my mind for over an hour now. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by E_Johnson on July 08, 2003 at 14:53:44 PT
Affordable clothing requires working women
FoM, maybe it was the experience you saw that women did not work, but I will bet that most of the clothing you bought or owned was produced by women working for subpoverty wages.The textile industry still relies on mostly female labor and mostly underpaid labor in developing countries where women are mostly poor. If all women stayed home to raise their kids, clothing would really be VERY expensive, because men would charge a lot lot lot more money to work under textile factory conditions. I don't think it is economically feasible to get anywhere close to an economy where there are no working moms. If we took all the things that women work at now and send the women home and replace them all with men -- the increased labor costs from hiring men instead of women would skyrocket and drive the businesses into ruin.This book is really interesting to read: Women's Work: The First 20,000 Years.http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393313484/qid=1057700465/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-7930078-1926407?v=glance&s=books
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 14:38:48 PT
druid
That's ok. It's easy to miss articles as they move down the page. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by druid on July 08, 2003 at 14:36:34 PT
oops. sorry
I just saw it. I guess I should have searched harder. :(
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 14:36:31 PT
druid
I didn't post the AP article because this one seemed to cover it fairly well. The Anchorage Daily News is a snipped source too unfortunately.http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread16757.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by druid on July 08, 2003 at 14:31:37 PT
Has this been posted already?
Small amount of pot in home OKMARIJUANA: Judge rules state constitution allows possession if there's no intent to sell.The Associated Press(Published: July 5, 2003)FAIRBANKS -- A Superior Court judge dismissed a man's marijuana conviction, ruling that the Alaska Constitution guarantees the right to possess marijuana for personal use in the home.Judge Richard Savell of Fairbanks dismissed Scott A. Thomas' conviction.Thomas was charged with three counts of felony fourth-degree misconduct involving a controlled substance for allegedly growing pot plants in his home last summer. A jury found him guilty of one count of a misdemeanor charge of sixth-degree misconduct involving a controlled substance for possessing 2.6 ounces of marijuana.Lawyer Bill Satterberg filed to have the guilty verdict dismissed. He argued that Thomas' conviction was not constitutional as determined by the 1975 state Supreme Court decision in Ravin v. State.The Ravin decision made it legal for adults to possess marijuana in their homes for personal consumption as long as the amount of the drug wasn't enough to constitute "an intent to deliver."Four ounces of marijuana or more was considered the threshold. State law has since placed the amount at eight ounces.The justices ruled in the Supreme Court case that possession of pot by an adult at home was allowed as a fundamental constitutional right to privacy. However, a 1990 voter initiative changed state law to make possession of any amount of marijuana in any location illegal.In the recent case, the defense argued that the portion of the law prohibiting possession of marijuana for personal consumption by an adult in his or her home is unconstitutional."A direct conflict in the law exists between the right to privacy guaranteed under the Alaska Constitution and the statutory prohibition ... which criminalizes the personal use of marijuana by an adult in the privacy of the home, regardless of the quantity of the prohibited substance," reads a portion of Thomas' motion to dismiss his conviction.Savell granted the motion June 25.Jim McLain, a legal clerk in Satterberg's law office who drafted the motion for dismissal, said Savell's decision does not necessarily set precedent but he expects more debate soon about whether Alaska's marijuana law is constitutional.http://www.adn.com/alaska/story/3410510p-3440920c.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 14:29:43 PT
EJ That's Only from My Life
I never met anyone where the mom worked other then raising the children. I'm not young and come from back east and that is the only way I ever saw it. I'm sure outside of the area where I grew up things might have been different. I can really only comment on what I remember to be the way it was. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by E_Johnson on July 08, 2003 at 14:20:37 PT
Mothers have always worked outside the home
This "getting back to basics" idea is seductive but I don't see a time when women did not work. When was there a time when women did not work?The modern Western tradition of the "housewife" as a woman who literally stays inside the house to raise children was born in ancient Athens.Before the era of the housewife was born, women were responsible for the entire textile production of the village or tribe or city. It takes an enormous amount of work to spin fiber into thread and weave it into clothing and linens for the household on a regular basis. Looms for common textile production did not fit inside houses. Such looms could not be operated by one woman at a time. Women operated the textile production communally and they had to arrange communal child care while they did it, or let the village go naked!In ancient Egyptian friezes they show several women gathered at a large loom while in a separate room there were younger women watching over the children. Organized child care was a necessary part of pre-technological life. No way could one women in a house do everything needed to run the house and raise the kids and produce the textiles and food and food-eating equipment by herself.What changed this? The advent of military technology to a scale that allowed mass taking of prisoners for large scale slave labor.At some point, military conquests in the ancient world stopped being small afairs where one might capture a hundred or so people and turned into battles where there might be a few thousand prisoners in captivity at the end.These prisoners were used by the ancient Greeks to take over mass production of textiles.It was literally slave labor that enabled the housewife to exist in ancient Greece.However, the true housewife who literally was only responsible for duties inside the home was only an achievable lifestyle for those who were rich.Women who were poor had to work outside the home as usual, as servants for rich women, as they have throughout history, as they still do now in America and as they did back in the supposed "good old days" in America.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by afterburner on July 08, 2003 at 13:24:52 PT:
Initiation by Parents, not Criminals and Jailers!
Canada is Algonquin for the village. Canadian Marshall McLuhan spoke of the emergence of a "global village." A popular saying recently is "It takes a village to raise a child." Maybe there is hope for children yet if we do a good job informing people and networking on the Internet. Legal cannabis culture can help bring people together, build new role models and a green reality.ego transcendence follows ego destruction, are we a global village yet?
McLuhan, Marshall - Communications Theorist
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 12:52:02 PT
About Ozzy and Kids
I only watched the show a few times so I'm really not up on much concerning it. I was lucky that most moms didn't work when I was growing up. Children will always push the limits and having a parent to set them straight is vital. I was taught to respect others particularly those who were older or had more experience then me. I didn't have to believe them but I knew better then to think my opinion would matter if I said anything. I don't see respect from many young people towards adults that I've observed online. I don't know why either. We do need to get back to the basics but I don't know if that will ever happen.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 12:29:41 PT
phil_debowl
I'm not sure if I know the answer to your question. The summer months are always slow but we seem to be doing fine with almost 2,300,000 hits in June. Our record was 3,000,000 a few months back. These hits on these threads are from yesterday. I believe we are doing fine but I don't know if the article has made it better. In a few days I should be able to tell more. Hope this helps.http://www.cannabisnews.com/stats/910 /news/thread16750.shtml    863 /news/thread16757.shtml    
    815 /news/thread16751.shtml   
    695 /news/thread16765.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by E_Johnson on July 08, 2003 at 12:17:56 PT
Looking back on the show from day one
It didn't occur to people doing this show that the kids' nightly bar hopping and truancy may have been a sign of emotional distress from children being given more public exposure than they could handle?When children are emotionally overwhelmed, they don't come to their parents and say, "We are emotionally overwhelmed by what you are doing, so please stop it."It takes years of therapy for adults to learn to do that, so why would we expect it of children?The whole show looks ghastly in retrospect, because a lot of the show did depend on the out of control Hollywood lifestyles of the two kids.The adults in charge could have looked at the bar hopping kids as a sign that maybe something was not right about the show.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by phil_debowl on July 08, 2003 at 12:15:39 PT
FOM, Increase in traffic?
FOM, I was just curious if you've noticed an increase in traffic here since joyce posted the free ad. I hope so :). Thanks for all the hard work, it's appreciated.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by Sam Adams on July 08, 2003 at 12:01:06 PT
More on ozzy
EJ - I haven't watched the show at all but I couldn't agree more on your point of role models.  It's not just the Ozzy show that is guilty though - have you watched household advertising?I am really angered by the ads for cleaning products that show 2 or 3 kids rampaging through the house, running right by their mother, knocking furniture over and spilling a big drink on the floor. Mom just laughs and says "oh well, kids! good think I've got Fantasic stain special to get that gigantic purple grape juice stain out of the rug".If my kids were running wild in the house like that and knocking stuff over, they'd get a spanking first and cleaning duty second. This crap validates the erosion of childhood discipline in modern Consumer society. (btw, I don't have kids)Of course, we've hit on one of the TRUE causes of drug problems in the US: the breakdown of personal responsibility, accountability, and integrity, starting with our role models, business and government leaders.That's the American 2-party conundrum - the Republican party that is supposed to stand for virtue and strong families is also allied with Big Business. So their lips are sealed when it comes to criticizing our consumerist, brain-washed culture, but they have no problem attacking marijuana and gay rights.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by Trekkie on July 08, 2003 at 11:43:37 PT
Border wars
This same rhetoric was in a story posted a few days ago.Interestingly, in an interview with a Canadian border patrol officer, he said that pot tends to flow south of the border, while guns and cocaine tend to flow north of the border.Now, which of these imports is more "threatening?"Additionally, as yourself who is tightening the border from whom - and why...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by kaptinemo on July 08, 2003 at 11:25:59 PT:
"Threat" Threat? What 'threat'?
*"But those concerns do need to be balanced out against the threat of increased drug trafficking into the United States," she said. "Director Walters, as a member of [U.S. President George W. Bush's] cabinet, is working with his colleagues and evaluating the threat.*If anyone here is doing the threatening, it's the US...as it has always been in this totally lopsided and insane 'war'.Let's see: The US bombs the bejeezus out of Afghanistan, causing massive social disruption as such bloodletting can only do...but leaves the opium fields intact...thereby enabling some of the worst criminals in the area to harvest a bumper crop...and sell it on the black market.Now, dear reader, I don't know about you, but that merits a 'threat' category far greater than cannabis ever could be. But is 'our man in Kabul' Mr. Karzai being threatened with US punitive actions? Or is it a case of him being 'our sonofabitch', as FDR described Nicaraguan 'Presidente' Somoza?Sure looks like Uncle has a real wide definition of what constitutes a 'threat'..so long as it's not his own doing the threatening...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by TecHnoCult on July 08, 2003 at 11:22:36 PT
Bluff
It doesn't take a genious to realize that the Bush retoric on restricting trake is a bluff. Hendering trade with our biggest trading parter is bound to cause more problems with the economy, and I guaruntee that Bush does not want to do that, at least for the next 18 months.THC
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by firedog on July 08, 2003 at 11:22:30 PT
This can only help us
"Coffee leads to Red Bull, Red Bull leads to crank" I'm sure all the rest of you java fiends are shaking in your boots right now, wondering when you'll turn into full-blown tweekers. Especially if you've already progressed to the Red Bull stage. I wonder where Rock Star drinks come in the progression? Above or below Red Bull?When Ozzy comes out against legalization, it can only help our cause. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by lombar on July 08, 2003 at 11:18:12 PT
ONDCP noises
The US problem will not be more big time smugglers, it will be joe average american tourist with a bag down his pants. Instead of a hearty 'welcome home' from US customs it will be 'bend over and spread 'em'... especially if: you have long hair, tattoos, non-white skin, you're a pretty girl, or the guard just has piles.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by E_Johnson on July 08, 2003 at 11:14:43 PT
MTV should be accountable
In looking back on this show, I was really very bothered by the seeming acceptance on the show of the truant lifestyle of these two children. I should have spoken out about it sooner.It is wrong for a reality show to turn a blind eye to a child's truancy from school.I think MTV should have made the regular school attendance of those two children a part of the show's contract.What MTV has done instead is promoted two very uneducated young people as role models for other young people. And possibly harmed those two kids for life.What have Jack and Kelly learned during the show other than how to face the right camera at the right time and which bars will serve them drinks on the Strip?Now marijuana is going to get the blame for Jack Osbourne's problems.I think poor Jack was doomed when his mother turned him into a clown on her TV show in her own personal quest for power and wealth in Hollywood.
[ Post Comment ]

 


Comment #3 posted by Sam Adams on July 08, 2003 at 11:00:51 PT

Thanks, EJ!
Drinking with two porn stars? Coming home with people from the bar? Sunset Strip sounds like the place for my next vacation!(seriously, your point is well taken, but it's too late for me to worry about being corrupted)
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #2 posted by FoM on July 08, 2003 at 10:56:04 PT

EJ Oh My
It doesn't surprise me him saying that. He lives somewhere in his own head and doesn't seem to get down to reality at all. Like his wife said about Ozzy. She said, When I looked in his eyes the lights were on but nobody was home. I don't believe most people will take what he says seriously. Maybe the White House might. They might even give him a special medal or something. That's sad.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by E_Johnson on July 08, 2003 at 10:36:48 PT

Ozzy Osbourne blames pot not himself
This is what Ozzy Osbourne has to say about marijuana today:---------------------------------------------------The movement against legalizing marijuana have a new, unlikely spokesman: Ozzy Osbourne. "I used to think they should legalize pot, but you know what? They should ban the lot," Osbourne told MTV News, discussing his son Jack?s treatment for substance abuse. "One thing leads to another. Coffee leads to Red Bull, Red Bull leads to crank." The Prince of Bleeping Darkness says he was "shocked and stunned" by Jack?s OxyContin addiction, adding, "The thing that's amazing was how rapidly he went from smoking pot to doing hillbilly heroin." MTV News------------------------------------------------I think the whole movement needs to stand up to MTV on this.I stopped watching The Osbournes because I thought it was almost a kind of child porn. Not with sex, but making a TV show about out of control children who are real and not made up -- that's not even ethical to begin with.What have viwers seen on this show? They have been entertained by watching two teenagers being allowed to skip school repeatedly, being allowed to hang out in bars on the Sunset Strip until all hours of the night and come home drunk with people from bars and stay up all night and have their parents complain only about the noise.They have watched these two children being woken from bed, fed, clothed, taken to school by hired help, while the parents seem to exist to sit around on their behinds and make quips about it all.And guess what Ozzy -- you may or may not remember that your wife just had cancer.How did your son react? By hanging out in bars even more, by attending school even less, and by drinking himself into a stupor with a pair of porn stars who told him he needed to go into rehab.When porn stars in a Sunest Strip bar are the ones to tell your drunken teenage son at 3am that he needs to go into rehab -- I bloody well think that the real problem in your family is not a plant named marijuana, but a man named Ozzy and a woman named Sharon.
[ Post Comment ]





  Post Comment