AMHERST, Mass. – The Massachusetts National Guard and State Police reportedly joined forces to seize a single marijuana plant from an 81-year-old woman.
That’s right folks. Our tax dollars are still hard at work not working for us! How can law enforcement defend this behavior? They wont. They cant. Kinda like how Donald Trump’s behavior cant be defended. Its a similar attitude and culture that we see in both situations.
Just more proof that the Drug War is like the War on Terror in that it has been eroding our rights and freedoms away since its inception. Don’t take my word for it! The first African-American Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshal is saying the same thing here, that the drug war erodes our rights! So many people have claimed that the drug war does not erode our rights… Those people are simply wrong.
Anytime any politician speaks of any type of war we should all tremble at the long history of using wars and war terminology to dismiss the rights of citizens.
Racism, Greed, Ignorance, Corruption… take your pick. Don’t believe me? Click the above link. Red Pill? or Blue Pill?
The history of cannabis prohibition is pretty dirty stuff. It was NEVER about public safety unless you think like they did back then, and are terrified of Blacks and Mexicans in general or of them sleeping with white women?
If you can answer yes to any of the following questions then you may get where they were coming from back then. Racism, Corruption, Greed, and Ignorance.
Is African-American music satanic?
Does Marijuana cause white women to seek the company of negroes? And Darkies to seek out white women?
Is Marijuana an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death?
Does Reefer (cannabis,marijuana)make darkies think they’re as good as white men?
Does Marihuana lead to pacifism and communist brainwashing?
Does marijuana make you likely to kill your own brother?
Is marijuana the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind?
Is the English word assassin derived from the word hashishan?
Does Marihuana make fiends of boys in thirty days?
Does Hashish goad users to bloodlust?
Likely to murder your brother or a pacifist communist? Which one is it? It was never either of course. Just more lies courtesy of the US Govt.
These questions were all taken from direct quotes and statements from Harry J. Anslinger the first US Drug Czar. He popularized the term Marijuana (it was previously known as cannabis by most Americans hence the need for his name change to lie about it.)and began a long campaign of lies to demonize drugs and the people who choose to medicate with them.
He held his job for 30 years and spewed filthy racist lies throughout his career to make the public believe that drugs are a public menace and exported his American Racism throughout the world with his drug policies aimed at controlling ethnic populations.
Its disgusting and I have personally NEVER heard or seen a public official attempt to defend the drug war after being confronted with any of these statements above but the policies of our war on drugs were derived from this thinking, and continue to support it.
Drugs are no way as bad or dangerous as they would have you believe. They were irrationally scared of black people and Mexicans back then! That was the only so-called danger. These were people of the times when they lynched blacks for sport! They wanted to criminalize people for taking medicine.
Chief has been a local cannabis advocate for several years and regularly interacts with public media to include topics and ideas that are relevant to the cannabis community.
In the following transcript from our brief radio call-in to BPRs Ask the Mayor on 4/29/2016..
Starting the conversation on cannabis
Chief catches the entire news team and Boston Mayor Marty Walsh himself off guard by asking very simple and straightforward questions about medicinal cannabis distribution in the city. They were totally unprepared for the question and admitted it had never crossed any of their minds how legal cannabis patients in the city of Boston have been and continue getting their fully legal medication now. It is staggering and disappointing for those of us that use medicinal cannabis to hear that so little thought goes into the voter and patient needs by those that are responsible for policy but you can hear how Mayor Walsh is all excited and knowledgeable about his bureaucratic practices to reap the cash rewards that he may believe the industry has by the way of his dispensary program.
Dispensaries are a twenty year old business model developed for the Californian market, who says it was ever going to work in New England? The blind investment in such a dispensary system is misguided but politicians have been told thats the thing! so everybody hold onto your hats and pocketbooks. The market has been very clear in recent years that patients demand delivery just like anything else they use regularly and may purchase online or through amazon… but as the Mayor admits below there has been absolutely no thought about those types of patient needs at the highest levels of city government.
He knows all about the one dispensary that had yet to open at the time of the broadcast, on Milk St, and knows all about the legal process if you are a big company ready to make millions, but he is clueless when it comes to how patients receive their medicine now? What does this say for individual cannabis rights? What does it say about big business working with government for cannabis profit?
New Politicians Same old Sh**
Marty Walsh is indicative of a certain type of new politician that we are getting more familiar with these days.. The type of politician that stands for and supports the broken immoral, ignorant, corrupt, prohibitionist drug policies of our racist past oblivious to the lies and propaganda that they are practicing, until the voters finally defeat them and their ideas directly, with ballots petitions and votes…
Then these same politicians become experts on cannabis and drug policy overnight despite being so miserably and undeniably wrong for so many decades… and begin to support new regulatory policies aimed at curbing public use and maximizing their governments share of profits.. zoning legal medicinal cannabis distribution points out of and away from our neighborhoods, making sweetheart deals happen behind closed doors for new and old friends and cronies, all the while continuing to push old debunked negative propaganda, continuing to stand in the way of the voter with their tired ignorance, while supporting a possible future big business monopoly behind the scenes at the same time.
Now that the voters are changing the laws without them here come the same politicians that stood against the cannabis community, now claiming to be supportive of the cannabis voting public, to meddle with policy and get their beaks wet.
Government has NO credibility on issue of Cannabis!
Politicians and government have absolutely NO credibility on the issue of cannabis. They have been lying to us for so many decades that any rational person must question what are the legal grounds for class action lawsuits, because it is this writers belief that in the not too distant future cannabis will be confirmed as a legitimate treatment aid to cancer sufferers.
Cancer is the second leading cause of death in America. Second only to heart disease which can be stress related. Which means that for decades our government and politicians have pulled another fast one, another bold and humiliating hoax on the American people…. misleading them and lying all the while raising money for cancer research and knowing since 1974 that cannabis kills cancer cells in controlled university studies, denying them the very thing that may have lead to cancer treatment breakthroughs, brain, stem cell, and nervous tissue breakthroughs, decreased stress, pain and suffering, and perhaps even longer lifespans marked with less stress, and of course violently taking peoples freedom away for simple and non-violent possession in their drug war. It is immoral. It is corrupt. It is ignorant. and It is Racist.
Cannabis still has a serious stigma here in the Bay State. BostonCannabis.Info is working hard to change that.
The following is a transcript from Boston Public Radio show on 4/29/2016 Ask The Mayor w Jim Braude and Margery Eagan
BPR Post at 1:35:55 Chief from Mass Bay Cannabis and BostonCannabis.Info question Boston’s Mayor Marty Walsh about city cannabis policy.
WGBH BPR’s Ask The Mayor 4/29/2016;
MAYOR WALSH: Is it Chief? in Mattapan?
CHIEF: Yes it is how do you do?
JIM/MAYOR: Go Chief.
CHIEF: Thanks for taking my call. Good afternoon. I wanted to ask the mayor.. If he.. I know he is against ah medicinal cannabis dispensaries in Boston but I wanted to know if he is against medicinal cannabis deliveries in Boston? There have been some .. many services operating for a while but have recently been shut down by the department of public health and Im just wondering if the mayor understands the need for those cannabis delivery services and if and what his thoughts are on how people get their cannabis in the city of Boston?
JIM: Thank you Chief
MAYOR: Thank you. Thats the first time I think its ever been brought to my attention I guess my response would be do we deliver prescription drugs from CVSs and from pharmacies……and if we do is there a system in place that they deliver prescription drugs that they could deliver marijuana?
MARGERY: I Don’t know.
MAYOR CONT: I wouldn’t suggest.. if it doesn’t happen i think its a very different thing you have to make sure the right person gets it..its a prescription you have to sign for it. I think.. Im not sure how the policy is going to work but I don’t know if we deliver prescription drugs today. So I..
JIM: But you wouldn’t want them to be treated any differently than prescription drugs are? Is that what you are talking about?
MAYOR: No I mean. I never heard I never even thought of this. No one.. This is the first time I ever heard something like this So I don’t know.
MARGERY:I never heard it either..
JIM: Chief? Chief are you still on the hold.. the line?
JIM: why don’t you.. pardon me?
CHIEF CONT: …people who have cards and they have been trying to get medicine for a long time so they utilize delivery services which have been running long before dispensaries were ever available here in the city. . you know so, now that dispensaries are coming online they are shutting down these delivery services saying they are no longer compliant because there is dispensaries around, while people have become used to getting the service.. uhm..
MAYOR: I have honestly I have got to look into it because I, Im not sure exactly.. I will contact If we want…
JIM: can we put him on hold?
MAYOR: yeah give your number to the producer here and uh we will have somebody from public health, our public health Boston Public Health and give you a call and look into the situation.
JIM:One related question.. we all know we have had this discussion with you ad nauseum and will continue I guess until november how strongly you oppose the marijuana legalization thing. Chief just said you opposed, which I was unaware of, .. ah the medicinal marijuana question too? ..How did you.. I wasn’t aware of that and Im embarrassed that I wasn’t so my apologies in advance or not in advance but my apologies..
How do you justify that a, in a doctor patient relationship a doctor can prescribe an opioid or virtually anything but he or she shouldn’t be able to prescribe marijuana if the doctor believes thats whats..
MAYOR: well.. I mean.
JIM:…is most needed by the patient?
MAYOR: This is a battle.. two years ago that I clearly lost because the voters support it but my point.
JIM: No Im just curious as to what ..
MAYOR: my point.. at the time that you could get marijuana in a pill form. Which is a little bit different than the smoking form. umm but now that the voters voted the way they did we are working, we have one marijuana dispensary coming to the city of Boston
JIM: where is that gonna be?
MAYOR: ahh its one on Milk St.
MAYOR: which is supported by the city, by the BRA by the ZBA because they need to change the zoning and it is in the process of moving forward. Theres a couple of others that are being proposed. I believe out in the Brighton Allston area… and one maybe in a couple other areas of the city.
There have been a couple proposed that haven’t gone anywhere because of the communities uproar but i think that if they do the comm, proper community outreach and they talk to the neighborhood and the neighborhoods ok with it, I mean its the law so Im not gonna stand in the way of the law.
JIM: ah Katie in Dorchester..
MARGERY: Milk St thats sort of an interesting place right in the middle of a financial district.
MAYOR: Yeah it is but what they did was they went into a building
MAYOR: .. and they wanted a storefront view but they we had conversations well if everyone going has a prescription why do you need a storefront? So they moved into the building.
BOSTON — As proponents gathered outside the State House Wednesday, Aug. 3 to urge support for marijuana legalization and condemn arguments against it as rooted in fear, opponents of a ballot question to allow the adult use of marijuana released a list of 119 members of the Legislature opposing legalization.
“I’m always concerned, particularly as a sheriff, about who goes to jail and who does not, and when you look at the overwhelming number of people of color, black and Latino, that are in our incarceration facilities, yes, I am very concerned about that,” Tompkins told the News Service. “That said, I have to balance that with health issues and I have to balance that with what I see going on.”
Sherriff Steve Tompkins is not in a good place when it come to cannabis policy… Lets hope someone pulls him to the side and teaches him a thing or two about cannabis.
He seems to believe its better to continue to criminalize cannabis and take peoples freedom away for possession than to change our culture for the better. The “health issues and what he sees going on” are enough for him to claim that its best left illegal for now. A corrupt position because there are no real health issues to be concerned of. Nothing that rises to the level that he is claiming. Only Reefer Madness concerns.. The continued criminalization of cannabis is a detriment to those that have been living under the terror of the drug war. Steve Tompkins doesn’t seem to believe we have suffered enough?
You probably remember the good ole’ frying pan, fried egg, fried brain anti-drug commercial from back in the day. If taking a good beating from a frying pan is what happens to your brain on drugs, you should check out what’s happened to your Bill of Rights on drugs. Almost 40 years ago, perhaps sparking the Bush team’s bright idea to declare a “war on terror,” President Nixon declared a “war on drugs.”
By the time George Bush Sr. entered the White House in 1989, a Washington Post-ABC News Poll found that 62 percent of Americans would be willing to give up a few of their freedoms in order to fight the war on drugs. And Uncle Sam has been more than willing to take them up on it. Most of the court cases within the past 40 years that have methodically abridged individual rights like freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures and property rights, have all concerned drugs. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall even coined a term for the growing practice of sacrificing constitutional rights in the name of the fighting drugs: the “drug exception.”
It seems appropriate on this Constitution Day to take a few moments to mourn all that we’ve lost from the Bill of Rights and the Constitution due to these “drug exceptions:” Freedom from Unreasonable Search and Seizure: Perhaps the big loser of all has been the Fourth Amendment, which limits the power of the government to enter and search one’s private property. Think about it: Unlike other crimes, drug offenses do not often have complaining witnesses (i.e.: people who come forward to request police assistance). The parties who use, sell or manufacture drugs are consenting participants who likely wish to hide their drug activity. In order to unearth drug crimes, the police must engage in wiretapping, surveillance, undercover operations, the use of confidential informants, entrapment by offering to buy or sell drugs, and countless other practices that strike at the heart of what the Fourth Amendment is all about.
In the name of the drug war, courts have allowed suspicionless drug testing of wide swaths of students and private employees, and the State of Michigan almost got away with conducting random drug testing of welfare recipients. The incidence of surprise, paramilitary-style raids on people’s homes – and courts’ approval of them – in the name of routine drug policing has skyrocketed in recent years. Similarly, courts have repeatedly given the stamp of approval to the ever-increasing use of police drug dogs to search homes, cars, bags and people. Freedom of Speech: When it comes to speaking out against the government’s drug policy, the right to free speech has also fallen prey to the drug war. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court carved out a “drug exception” to one of the most central tenets of free speech jurisprudence: the government cannot discriminate on the basis of the viewpoints being expressed in speech.
In Morse v. Frederick the Court ruled that a student’s speech could be censored at a school-related event (even outside the school), not because it was disruptive or because it provoked imminent lawlessness, but because it contained the word “bong.” The Court drew on other drug-related precedent to find that when it comes to students in the school context (and even students who are near a school, as in this case), the government can make exceptions to free speech rights when it comes to speech about drugs. Freedom of Religion: In a 1990 case brought by Native Americans who use peyote for religious purposes, the U.S. Supreme Court shunned the longstanding rules protecting the free exercise of religion and ruled that all religious practices give way to the general laws of the land – in this case drug laws. In response, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) which restored the rights of people to participate in religious activities even when their practices appear to be in tension with other laws.
The U.S. Supreme Court subsequently struck down RFRA protections as applied to state laws so that when state laws and religious practices conflict, the state laws essentially win out. The silver lining, however, is that courts have ruled that RFRA protections remain intact in matters of federal law, such as in the case of Gonzales v. UDV (involving a church’s use of ayuhausca tea as part of its ritual, in conflict with federal drug laws) and Guam v. Guerrero (involving Rastafarians’ religious use of marijuana, in conflict with federal drug laws). Currently, courts are considering the legality of the Church of Cognizance’s religious use of marijuana. Right to Vote: Because the laws of many states continue to deny voting rights to those with current or prior felony convictions – many of them for drug offenses – an entire class of citizens has been shut out of the democratic process. To da
The shame and disgrace of the drug war is so evident… Between the Patriot Act and our Drug War policies there is so little left of The Bill Of Rights. We will only be able to honestly claim 2 or 3 of the lesser 10 Amendments for our protection in Bill of Rights. Not enough left to wipe your ass with!