------------------------------------------------------------------- NORML Weekly News (Marijuana Appears To Protect Against Brain Injuries, Federal Researchers Find; Hemp Could Be Lucrative Cash Crop For State, University Of Kentucky Report Says; Medical Marijuana Proposals Await November Ballots In Several States; Comprehensive Look At Marijuana's Medical History And Potential As An Analgesic In July Issue Of 'The International Association For The Study Of Pain') From: NORMLFNDTN@aol.com Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:08:10 EDT Subject: NORML WPR 7/9/98 (II) The NORML Foundation Weekly Press Release 1001 Connecticut Ave., NW Ste. 710 Washington, DC 20036 202-483-8751 (p) 202-483-0057 (f) www.norml.org email@example.com July 9, 1998 *** Marijuana Appears To Protect Against Brain Injuries, Federal Researchers Find July 9, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Research published in this week's Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences demonstrates that naturally occurring compounds in marijuana may protect brain cells during a stroke. Researchers at the National Institute for Mental Health found that THC, the chief psychoactive compound in marijuana, and cannabidiol (CBD), a nonpsychoactive component that previously showed promise as an anti-convulsant, both appear to be potent antioxidants in laboratory studies. Doctors rely on antioxidants to protect stroke victims from exposure to toxic levels of a brain chemical called glutamate. Head trauma and strokes cause the release of excessive glutamate, often resulting in irreversible damage to brain cells. Scientists asserted that CBD could hold advantages over other antioxidants because the compound is fast acting and nontoxic. "We have something that passes the brain barrier easily, has low toxicity, and appears to be working in animal trials," lead researcher Aidan Hampson said. "I think we have a good chance" to help patients with this compound. The U.S. study follows earlier research conducted in Israel demonstrating that Dexanabinol -- a synthetic analog derived from marijuana -- protects healthy brain cells against glutamate. Israeli researchers declared this May that the drug will undergo Phase III human trials shortly. They hope to begin marketing the drug by the year 2000. Allen St. Pierre, Executive Director of The NORML Foundation, said that the new research strengthens the need for medical marijuana reform. "This research highlights the therapeutic value of compounds in marijuana besides THC," he said. "Patients find maximum relief from whole smoked marijuana because the plant contains several therapeutic properties unavailable elsewhere. Federal law must change to allow patients access to these naturally occurring compounds." Federal law currently prohibits the medical use of marijuana and all the plant's active compounds other than synthetic THC. Harvard Medical School professor Lester Grinspoon said this research represented the "tip of the iceberg" as far as the medical potential of the marijuana plant. "When science gets serious about investigating cannabis as a medicine, we will discover many more such findings," he said. Grinspoon also stressed that the scientific community has come full circle regarding marijuana's effects on the brain. "The debate has moved from alleging that marijuana destroys brain cells to finding that cannabis is clearly neuropathic," he said. The findings indicate that marijuana may also hold medical value in the treatment of brain diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, the team of U.S. scientists said. For more information, please contact either Allen St. Pierre or Paul Armentano of The NORML Foundation @ (202) 483-8751. Dr. Lester Grinspoon may be reached @ (617) 277-3621. *** Hemp Could Be Lucrative Cash Crop For State, University Of Kentucky Report Says July 9, 1998, Louisville, KY: Hemp would rank second only to tobacco products as a cash crop for Kentucky farmers, concluded a $23,000 study conducted by Center for Business and Economy Research at the University of Kentucky. The 18-month study also determined that present market demand for the crop could support the cultivation of 82,000 acres in the United States. "We believe the UK study is a landmark, watershed event," said John Gilderbloom, a University of Louisville economics professor who wrote a forward endorsing the study. "This is the premiere study done on the impact of hemp." Gilderbloom said the environmental advantages of hemp, coupled with the crop's economic potential, give the plant an edge over other possible alternatives to tobacco. "The UK report could provide the spark for a serious review and evaluation of the benefits of industrial hemp for the state of Kentucky and the United States," he concluded. At least 29 nations -- including Canada, France, England, Germany, Japan, and Australia -- allow farmers to cultivate hemp for industrial purposes. The report found that farmers in the European Union grew over 50,000 acres of hemp in 1997 alone. U.S. law forbids the cultivation of hemp because the plant is of the same species as marijuana. Authors of the study, entitled "Economic Impact of Industrial Hemp in Kentucky," argued that climate and soil conditions make Kentucky "the primary area in North America for growing industrial hemp." They estimated that legalizing the crop could lead to hundreds of full-time jobs and millions of dollars in workers earnings for the state. This study is "the knockout punch for opponents to hemp, including the nation's Drug Czar [Barry McCaffrey,]" Gilderbloom announced. For more information, please contact either Paul Armentano or Allen St. Pierre of The NORML Foundation @ (202) 483-8751. Copies of the study are available online at: http://www.hempgrowers.com. University of Kentucky's Center for Business and Economic Research may be contacted @ (606) 257-7675. *** Medical Marijuana Proposals Await November Ballots In Several States July 9, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Petitioners hoping to place medical marijuana proposals on the November ballots in Colorado, Oregon, and Washington state turned in signatures to their respective Secretary of State offices this week. In all cases, the number of signatures far exceeded the state's requirement to place an initiative on the ballot. "These signatures represent thousands of citizens who care about relieving the suffering of patients with terminal or debilitating illnesses such as cancer and AIDS," said Dr. Rob Killian of Washington Citizens for Medical Rights. The group collected over 230,000 signatures in support of their medical marijuana measure. Proposals in all three states seek to exempt seriously ill patients from state criminal marijuana charges if they use the drug medicinally under a physician's supervision. Medical marijuana petitioners in Nevada are also awaiting validation from the Secretary of State's office to determine whether they turned in the required number of valid signatures last month to certify their initiative. In addition, spokesmen from Washington D.C.'s ACT-UP announced they acquired enough signatures to place their proposal on the upcoming ballot.. A similar initiative filed in Alaska has already qualified for this year's fall ballot. "This will be an unprecedented opportunity for voters across the nation to voice their direct support for a seriously ill patient's right to use marijuana medicinally," NORML Executive Director R. Keith Stroup, Esq. said. For more information, please contact either Keith Stroup of NORML @ (202) 483-5500 or Dave Fratello of Americans for Medical Rights @ (310) 394-2952. Washington Citizens for Medical Rights may be contacted @ (206) 781-7716. *** A COMPREHENIVE LOOK AT MARIJUANA'S MEDICAL HISTORY AND POTENTIAL AS AN ANALGESIC APPEARS IN THIS MONTH'S ISSUE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE STUDY OF PAIN. THE AUTHOR, DR. ETHAN RUSSO OF THE WESTERN MONTANA CLINIC, HAS SOUGHT FEDERAL APPROVAL FOR OVER ONE YEAR TO CONDUCT CLINICAL TRIALS ON THE EFFECTS OF WHOLE SMOKED MARIJUANA AND MIGRAINE. - END -
------------------------------------------------------------------- Feds Seek To Close Three Pot Clubs - Oakland Adopts Lenient Marijuana Policy ('The Oakland Tribune' Notes On The Same Day The Oakland City Council Approved California's Most Lenient Policy On Medical Marijuana, The Clinton Administration Stepped Up Efforts To Close The Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative And Two Other Dispensaries)Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 12:16:58 EDT Errors-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Originator: firstname.lastname@example.org Sender: email@example.com From: Gerald Sutliff (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: Multiple recipients of list (email@example.com) Subject: "Feds seek to close 3 pot clubs" Source: Oakland Tribune, Front Page, above the fold, 7-9-98 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: Jerry Sutliff Feds seek to close 3 pot clubs Oakland adopts lenient marijuana policy by Kathleen Kirkwood, Staff Writer OAKLAND -- The same day local officials approved the state's most lenient policy on medical marijuana, the Clinton administration stepped up efforts to close the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and two other clubs. Federal officials filed a motion Tuesday with U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer asking that the U.S. marshal be authorized to immediately shut down medicinal cannabis clubs in Oakland and in Marin and Mendocino counties. Operators of the Oakland club, which has 1,750 members, said Wednesday they will continue to operate until forced to close. The government also filed motions ordering the clubs to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of a preliminary injunction ordering them to cease operations. Hearings on the contempt motions will be held Aug. 14, said attorney Robert Raich, representing the Oakland club. "This Is being driven by a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington," Raich said. "They don't have to deal with the fallout of their actions. These are seriously ill people we're talking about . .. not hippies who want to get stoned." Late Tuesday, the Oakland City Council quietly endorsed a policy. included among a batch of committee reports, allowing medical marijuana users to have 1 1/2 pounds of cannabis, described as a three-month supply. That breaks down to about a half-pound per month, or 10 marijuana cigarettes per day, for patients who use cannabis as a way to combat nausea from such illnesses as AIDS and cancer. Developed by a committee of police. city legal staff, physicians, patients and Oakland cannabis club representatives. the policy directs officers not to confiscate marijuana, or arrest a user, if it meets the criteria. Oakland patients who present the proper documentation will be able to possess 30 outdoor flowering (or harvestable) plants, 48 indoor plants or 11/2 pounds of processed marijuana. "This takes cooperation between Oakland patients and enforcement to a new level," said Jeff Jones, the Oaklaffd club's executive director. "I hope this kind of partnership will eventually be mirrored across California and country." The policy is the most permissive in the state since Prop. 215, the medical marijuana initiative approved by voters in 1996, was implemented. By contrast, Attorney General Dan Lungren's office has issue guidelines that allow only ounce, characterized as a 30-day supply. The attorney general has criticized the Oakland policy. but a spokesman said Wednesday no action has been planned. The attorney general will wait until Oakland actually carry out its policy. said Matt Ross, a Lungreri spokesman. Although cannabis club supporters say the quantities outlined in the policy are based on ongoing U.S. Food and Drug Administration tests of medical marijuana, FDA officials say they know of no such tests.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Feds Seek To Close Three Pot Clubs ('The Oakland Tribune' Version) Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:36:29 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US CA: Feds seek to close 3 pot clubs Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Jerry Sutliff Source: Oakland Tribune Contact: email@example.com Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Author: Kathleen Kirkwood, Staff Writer FEDS SEEK TO CLOSE 3 POT CLUBS Oakland adopts lenient marijuana policy OAKLAND -- The same day local officials approved the state's most lenient policy on medical marijuana, the Clinton administration stepped up efforts to close the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and two other clubs. Federal officials filed a motion Tuesday with U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer asking that the U.S. marshal be authorized to immediately shut down medicinal cannabis clubs in Oakland and in Marin and Mendocino counties. Operators of the Oakland club, which has 1,750 members, said Wednesday they will continue to operate until forced to close. The government also filed motions ordering the clubs to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of a preliminary injunction ordering them to cease operations. Hearings on the contempt motions will be held Aug. 14, said attorney Robert Raich, representing the Oakland club. "This Is being driven by a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington," Raich said. "They don't have to deal with the fallout of their actions. These are seriously ill people we're talking about . .. not hippies who want to get stoned." Late Tuesday, the Oakland City Council quietly endorsed a policy. included among a batch of committee reports, allowing medical marijuana users to have 1 1/2 pounds of cannabis, described as a three-month supply. That breaks down to about a half-pound per month, or 10 marijuana cigarettes per day, for patients who use cannabis as a way to combat nausea from such illnesses as AIDS and cancer. Developed by a committee of police. city legal staff, physicians, patients and Oakland cannabis club representatives. the policy directs officers not to confiscate marijuana, or arrest a user, if it meets the criteria. Oakland patients who present the proper documentation will be able to possess 30 outdoor flowering (or harvestable) plants, 48 indoor plants or 1=BD pounds of processed marijuana. "This takes cooperation between Oakland patients and enforcement to a new level," said Jeff Jones, the Oaklaffd club's executive director. "I hope this kind of partnership will eventually be mirrored across California and country." The policy is the most permissive in the state since Prop. 215, the medical marijuana initiative approved by voters in 1996, was implemented. By contrast, Attorney General Dan Lungren's office has issue guidelines that allow only ounce, characterized as a 30-day supply. The attorney general has criticized the Oakland policy. but a spokesman said Wednesday no action has been planned. The attorney general will wait until Oakland actually carry out its policy. said Matt Ross, a Lungreri spokesman. Although cannabis club supporters say the quantities outlined in the policy are based on ongoing U.S. Food and Drug Administration tests of medical marijuana, FDA officials say they know of no such tests.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Oakland Medical Pot Limit - One Pound ('The San Francisco Examiner' Version) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 20:12:29 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US CA: Oakland Medical Pot Limit: 1 Pounds Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org (Frank S. World) Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.examiner.com/ Author: Eric Brazil Of The Examiner Staff OAKLAND MEDICAL POT LIMIT: 1 POUNDS Unanimous Council Vote For State's Most Permissive Rules Unanimously and without discussion, the Oakland City Council has established the state's most permissive medical marijuana guidelines. Henceforth, medical marijuana users in Oakland may hold a stash of 1 pounds -- equivalent to 30 outdoor flowering plants or 48 indoor plants -- without fear of arrest. For the time being. What appears to be the definitive test case for California's medical marijuana law -- enacted in 1996 as Proposition 215 -- is brewing in federal court in San Francisco. Among the defendants is the Cannabis Buyers Cooperative of Oakland, which helped develop the guidelines. At issue is a preliminary injunction issued in May by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ordering six Bay Area cannabis clubs to shut down. Breyer said that federal law supersedes Prop. 215. On Wednesday, just hours after the Oakland City Council promulgated its new guidelines, the U.S. Attorney's office filed a motion asking that U.S. marshals be authorized to close down the Oakland club as well as others in Marin and Mendocino counties. The government also filed motions ordering the clubs to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of the Breyer injunction. A hearing on the motions is scheduled on Aug. 14. Oakland's guidelines, developed by a committee of police, patients, physicians and Oakland's legal staff as well as the buyers cooperative, far exceed the limit set by Attorney General Dan Lungren. As far as Lungren is concerned, the limit is two plants or an ounce of marijuana which, by his calculations, is equivalent to a 30-day supply. "Those guidelines have been in effect since December 1966, and no one -- sheriffs, police departments, DAs -- has had any problem with them," said Lungren's spokesman Matt Ross. As for the Oakland guidelines, "we hope that law enforcement will do the right thing when stopping an individual with a pound and a half of marijuana," he said. Jeff Jones, executive director of the 1,700-member Cannabis Buyers Cooperative, said the council's passage of the guidelines vetted by its Public Health and Safety Committee kept the city "on the leading edge of this issue." Jones noted that Oakland modeled its guidelines after those of an ongoing federal experiment, the Compassionate Investigative New Drug Program. That program rations medical marijuana users to half a pound a month or about 10 cigarettes per day. Just eight patients are currently participating in the federal program, Jones said. The guidelines are "already being implemented by the police department, which is working with us to make sure these medical patients aren't being harassed," Jones said. "Police don't want to arrest patients who are legitimately using marijuana," and are able to provide documentary proof that they are, Jones said. But under the guidelines "somebody possessing marijuana for sale or for personal use that's not medical will be cited and arrested." 1998 San Francisco Examiner
------------------------------------------------------------------- Oakland Approves Liberal Medicinal Marijuana Rules ('Orange County Register' Version) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 15:35:10 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US CA: Oakland Approves Liberal Medicinal Marijuana Rules Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: John W.Black Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Source: Orange County Register (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.ocregister.com/ OAKLAND APPROVES LIBERAL MEDICINAL MARIJUANA RULES Advocates of marijuana for medical purposes praised the Oakland City Council on Wednesday after it approved one of the most liberal medical marijuana measures in the country by allowing patients to keep 11/2 pounds of the drug for "personal use." The council late Tuesday approved a policy directing police not to target individuals or confiscate their marijuana if it falls within the guidelines. The policy, passed unanimously, is believed to be the state's most liberal since implementation of Proposition 215, the medical marijuana initiative approved by voters in 1996. The Oakland policy says patients with a valid doctor's prescription may keep 30 outdoor marijuana plants, 48 indoor plants or 1.5 pounds of bulk marijuana. The limit defies a threshold set by Attorney General Dan Lungren, who in Late 1996 restricted ailing pot users to two plants for 30 days.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Lungren To Let Oakland Enforce New Pot Policy ('The San Francisco Chronicle' Version Says California Attorney General And Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Dan Lungren Vowed Yesterday That He Would Leave It Up To Oakland Police To Handle The City's New Policy - For Now) Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:31:59 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US CA: Lungren To Let Oakland Enforce New Pot Policy Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com (Frank S. World) Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/ Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 LUNGREN TO LET OAKLAND ENFORCE NEW POT POLICY Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, July 9, 1998 1998 San Francisco Chronicle State Attorney General Dan Lungren said yesterday that he would leave it up to Oakland police to handle the city's new policy that allows medical marijuana users to store 1 1/2 pounds of the drug at home. ``We would just hope that law enforcement would do the right thing when stopping individuals with a pound and a half of marijuana,'' said Lungren spokesman Matt Ross. Lungren, a candidate for governor who has vigorously opposed the operation of medical marijuana clubs, said he has no plans yet to challenge Oakland's policy. The policy is the state's most permissive to be developed in the wake of Proposition 215, the 1996 voter-approved medical marijuana initiative. Ross said it is premature to discuss whether the attorney general would consider challenging the policy in the future. Lungren's unusual laissez-faire stance came a day after the Oakland City Council unanimously approved a policy allowing medical marijuana users to keep on hand 1 1/2 pounds of marijuana -- up to 24 times what is now allowed under state law. The policy was created by a committee of police officers, attorneys, doctors and members of the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, based on research by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The FDA study showed that patients use a half-pound of medical marijuana a month. But Lungren, using his own set of guidelines drafted by police, sheriffs and district attorneys, limited the threshold to about one ounce, or two plants, a month. A pound and a half of marijuana is ``quite a bit'' of the drug, which sells for roughly $4,000 a pound wholesale, said Ross, who questioned Oakland's figures. The new policy instructs Oakland police to put a low priority on medical marijuana growers. Officers are told not to cite or arrest individuals possessing less than the amount specified under the policy if they provide proof of medicinal use or caregiver status within two days. Leaders at the Oakland medical marijuana club hailed the policy yesterday as a hallmark of city government and voiced confidence that it would survive any legal challenges. ``The federal government and state government are thwarting local governments trying to implement their own policies and ways of dealing with this health issue,'' said Jeff Jones, the club's executive director. Robert Raich, an attorney who is defending the club against a federal shutdown order, agreed. ``There's nothing they can do -- the policy applies only to Oakland,'' Raich said. ``The public health and safety of Oakland is something well within the jurisdiction of the Oakland City Council.'' The medical marijuana controversy has long been complicated by the complex mix of local, state and federal laws. Despite Prop 215, federal law -- which supersedes state law -- says that marijuana used for any purpose is illegal. In May, a federal judge barred six Northern California pot clubs from selling medical marijuana in violation of federal law. Also that month, a San Francisco judge shut down the city's Cannabis Healing Center, the nation's largest pot club. Another pot club in San Francisco and one in Santa Cruz have also closed. In addition to the Oakland cooperative, clubs in Marin County and Ukiah have defied the federal order to shut down. On Tuesday, federal lawyers filed a motion in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, requesting permission for U.S. marshals to close the three clubs, said U.S. Attorney Michael Yamaguchi. The lawyers also called on the judge to force the clubs to explain why they have ignored the shutdown order. 1998 San Francisco Chronicle Page A22
------------------------------------------------------------------- US Drug War Violates Human Rights (A Letter To The Editor Of 'The San Francisco Chronicle' Finds President Clinton's Focus On Human Rights While Visiting China Hypocritical In That He Carries Out A Policy Of Expanding The Drug War, Which, Since The End Of The Cold War, Has Been Responsible For More Human Rights Violations Than Any Other) Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:33:36 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US CA: PUB LTE: `U.S. Drug War Violates Human Rights' Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com (Frank S. World) Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/ Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 `U.S. DRUG WAR VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS' Editor -- During Bill Clinton's visit to China, a favorite theme has been human rights, an area in which his qualifications are both gilt-edged and wildly conflicting. As the American president, he embodies the historic legacy of the Enlightenment, that 18th-century philosophy which first articulated the idea that ordinary humans have ``rights'' and directly inspired this nation's revolutionary manifesto. Although human rights have progressed unevenly and sometimes violently in America, we have ultimately extended them to blacks, women, and the poor -- at least in theory. As our chief executive, Clinton also presides over a drug war which, at American insistence, has become global policy. Since the end of the Cold War, this policy has been responsible for more human rights violations than any other. The critical insight necessary to reach that conclusion: awarding a lucrative monopoly to a violent criminal market is not sane public health, nor is diligent failure in pursuit of that policy's irrational goals responsible government. The unnecessary deaths, ruined lives and political corruption produced are a matter of record. When enough people develop the necessary insight, that record will become an indictment of leaders who proclaim with religious fervor that criminal prohibition is the only permissible policy and doubters must be ``legalizers'' who wish to sell drugs to children. History will not treat such leaders any more kindly than it has the earlier advocates of an equally bogus policy: John C. Calhoun, Jefferson Davis, or Roger B. Taney, for example. THOMAS O'CONNELL, M.D. San Mateo
------------------------------------------------------------------- Ex-Pot Club Director Gathers Top Lawyers ('The San Francisco Chronicle' Says The Trial Of Peter Baez Of The Now-Defunct Santa Clara County Medical Cannabis Center In San Jose, California, Was Originally Scheduled To Begin Monday, But Has Been Postponed Until September 28 - Baez Is Now Represented By A 'Dream Team' Including Gerald F. Uelmen And Tom Nolan) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:30:46 -0700 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US CA: Ex-Pot Club Director Gathers Top Lawyers Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com (Frank S. World) Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/ Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Author: Maria Alicia Gaura, Chronicle Staff Writer EX-POT CLUB DIRECTOR GATHERS TOP LAWYERS Faced with criminal drug charges and a lengthy prison term, the director of San Jose's now-defunct medical marijuana club has assembled a legal ``Dream Team'' to present his defense. Attorneys Gerald F. Uelmen and Tom Nolan were formalarijuana advocate Peter Baez yesterday in a Santa Clara County courtroom. Uelmen, a law ply named to represent mrofessor and former dean of Santa Clara University School of Law, and an expert on constitutional law, has defended clients as varied as O.J. Simpson and Daniel Ellsberg. Nolan, a criminal defense attorney based in Palo Alto, is widely considered one of the best in his field. Neither attorney would comment on the case yesterday, but their appearance in the fray has sparked speculation that the Baez trial may have precedent setting potential. Baez was founder of the Santa Clara County Medical Cannabis Center that opened in early 1997 and closed May 8. The Santa Clara County District Attorney filed seven felony counts against Baez in May, charging him with selling marijuana to people lacking a doctor's recommendation, operating a drug house, grand theft and housing fraud. Before his legal troubles began, Baez had been lauded by city officials for his efforts to help create a medical marijuana ordinance in San Jose. Deputy District Attorney Denise Raabe said she expected the issues at trial to be narrowly limited to Baez's alleged drug trafficking violations. But many others in the medical marijuana movement hope the jury will be allowed to consider broader issues related to Proposition 215, which legalized medical marijuana use in California. In addition, some local attorneys speculated that prominent local officials, including Mayor Susan Hammer and former San Jose Police Chief Lou Cobarruviaz, might be called to the stand to testify about San Jose's unique marijuana dispensary law, bringing publicity to the issue. Kate Wells, a Santa Cruz attorney who worked with Uelmen to defend a marijuana club charged in federal court last year, said Uelmen is intrigued by the evolving area of drugs and the law. Uelmen is also part of the legal team currently defending six Northern California marijuana clubs in federal court. ``This is frontier law we're making here,'' Wells said. ``It's always exciting for an attorney to be in on the ground floor of breaking legal ground.'' Baez's trial, originally slated to begin Monday, has been postponed until September 28. 1998 San Francisco Chronicle Page A22
------------------------------------------------------------------- San Jose Update (A Bay Area List Subscriber Says San Jose Officials Met Tuesday With Medical Marijuana Activists And May Try To Start Over With A New Distribution System For Patients Covered By Proposition 215) From: "ralph sherrow" (email@example.com) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: San Jose Update: Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 16:00:24 PDT San Jose update: On Tuesday, July 7, 1998 Dr. Dennis Augustine, and attorneys Robert Raich and Dan Halpern represented the regulated community in a 1 1/2 hour meeting with the assistant city manager, deputy city attorney, a member from the planning commission and four high ranking officials from the S.J.P.D. regarding structuring a more workable ordinance for prospective medical cannabis clubs/cooperatives. Robert dispersed copies of the Oakland ordinance which was modified from the Arcata cooperative model - developed by Bobby Harris of the Humboldt Alliance for Medical Rights (HAMR) - as an example of what could be done in San Jose. At the request of assistant city manager, Dr. "A" gave a retrospective review of what some of the glitches were concerning the San Jose center's inability to comply with some of the conditions of the Special Use Permit* (i.e. onsite cultivation, etc). He also presented valid arguments in favor of lifting of the transportation ban. Robert recommended we scrap the existing ordinance and start anew. He also suggested that any new ordinance should bypass the city planning commission's zoning regulations for first level approval as it's too cumbersome and unnecessary. There was a real spirit of openness between all parties concerned. The main obstacles to overcome are the transportation issue, mandatory onsite cultivation and an intake and verification procedure that will allay any concerns of the S.J.P.D. whether a patient - if stopped - is a bona fide patient under 215. We are exploring alternative ways whereby the Public Health Department of Santa Clara County could do intake and verification and issue a certificate to the patient that would be subject to yearly renewal. Dr. Martin Fenstersheib, Health Officer for the county was unable to attend the meeting. He has advised the city that he doesn't think he has the budget to provide such a service but discussions are continuing. We were invited to submit a proposal to the city that will satisfy their concerns within the next two weeks. Note: For those unfamiliar with the name Dan Halpern, he is a San Jose attorney that was brought to Dr. "A"'s attention by Bobby Harris who had Halpern represent the Arcata model for San Jose to consider back in February. Talks had been stalled until Dr. "A" made a presentation before the planning commission suggesting that input from the regulated community is crucial to any re-implementation plan in San Jose. He then contacted the Deputy City Attorney - prior to his presentation to the mayor and city council - who agreed that a meeting was appropriate and welcomed Dan Halpern of the law firm of Halpern and Halpern spent five years working in the City Attorney's office while getting his law degree. He is well liked and respected by the city and is a welcome addition to our advisory re-implementation team. * San Jose recently passed a modification to the existing ordinance that called for an Administrative Permit to replace the Special Use Permit. The former allows a prospective operator of a medical cannabis club/center to sign off on permit requirements (rather than the owner of the property) and does away with the need to notify residents 300 feet in each direction as well as petition City Planning in an open public hearing.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Marijuana Signatures To Be Rechecked ('The Las Vegas Review-Journal' Says Nevada Secretary Of State Dean Heller Has Directed The Nye And Lyon County Clerks To Re-Check Signatures In Support Of The Medical Marijuana Initiative Sponsored By Nevadans For Medical Rights)Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:34:51 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US NV: Marijuana Signatures To Be Rechecked Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com (Frank S. World) Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal (NV) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Fax: 702-383-4676 Website: http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/ Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Author: Sean Whaley Donrey Capital Bureau MARIJUANA SIGNATURES TO BE RECHECKED Medicinal-use proposal near to required support in Nye County CARSON CITY -- Secretary of State Dean Heller directed the Nye County clerk on Wednesday to re-examine signatures in support of a medical marijuana initiative and said the results were too close to call. "It will be close," he said. Nye is one of two counties where the ballot question asking voters to approve the use of marijuana for medical purposes remains in doubt. The other is Lyon County, and Heller has asked the clerk there to count all 1,391 signatures to determine if the measure qualifies. Lyon County officials have 12 days to perform the check. If the measure fails in either county, the proposal by Americans for Medical Rights will not make it on the November ballot. Under the proposal, a patient could use, upon the advice of a physician, marijuana for "treatment or alleviation" of cancer, glaucoma, AIDS, persistent nausea, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis and other medical problems. The proposal, one of many being made in states across the nation, has drawn opposition by people concerned that it would be a step toward legalization of marijuana. Heller said the issue in Lyon County is a simple one. A sample showed that the number of valid signatures was more than 90 percent of the 982 required, but less than 100 percent. The county now will check every signature. The problem in Nye County is more complex because officials there did not count many signatures that had minor errors such as incorrect dates or errors by the person circulating the petition. At noon Wednesday, Nye County officials submitted a revised count that showed 752 valid signatures out of 1,228 collected. The revised number remained 174 signatures short. But Heller, citing a 1994 interpretation of the signature-verification process by his office, said another 207 signatures should be checked. These are signatures with no dates or dates earlier than those of the circulators who turned in the petitions, he said. Signatures could be rejected if a person signed the petition and then registered to vote after the fact. Signatures must be from registered voters. But Heller said the other signatures with disputed dates should not be disqualified automatically. They should be checked to see if they are from registered voters, and if they are, they should be counted, he said. Nye County officials expect to finish checking the 207 disputed signatures in a day or two, Heller said. If 174 or more are from registered voters, then the petition will be successful in Nye County, Heller said. If the number is less, then the petition will fail and not be on the ballot. If the petition were found to have failed, the medical marijuana supporters could appeal to Heller and then to District Court to get the initiative qualified for the November ballot. The petition has qualified in 11 other counties where it was circulated but must qualify in 13 to be placed on the November ballot.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Two Counties Must Recheck Names On Marijuana Petition ('The Las Vegas Sun' Version) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 15:58:53 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US NV: Two Counties Must Recheck Names On Marijuana Petition Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com (Frank S. World) Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Source: Las Vegas Sun (NV) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.lasvegassun.com/ Author: Cy Ryan, Sun Capital Bureau TWO COUNTIES MUST RECHECK NAMES ON MARIJUANA PETITION CARSON CITY -- Secretary of State Dean Heller said Wednesday Nye and Lyon counties must re-check signatures of registered voters before the fate of the medical marijuana petition is known. It could be 12 days before it is determined if the initiative petition has the required signatures to qualify for the November election ballot. Petition backers gathered 74,466 signatures in 13 of the 17 counties. The law requires 46,764 names of registered voters and 10 percent of the registered voters in 13 of the 17 counties. Supporters submitted the necessary signatures in only 13 counties, or the bare minimum to qualify. Questions remain in Nye and Lyon counties on whether enough registered voters signed the petitions. Nye County submitted a revised report Tuesday. While 926 names are needed to qualify, County Clerk Arte Robb reported only 752 are valid signatures. Heller, however, said there are 207 signatures which were disqualified by Robb which are in question. He said the Robb tossed out the signatures because the person circulating the petition signed the wrong date. Heller said a 1994 legal opinion by the state attorney general's office held that an entire document cannot be disqualified based on flaws of the circulator. Robb is checking the 207 signatures in question to determine if they belong to registered voters. If all 207 are valid, that would put the total in Nye County at 959 signatures, or 33 more than needed. Heller said he has asked Lyon County to check all of the 1,418 signatures to see if there are the required 982 from registered voters. A random sampling by the county of 509 signatures verified 329. To qualify for ballot, using the sampling method, it would have required 351 signatures. While Heller estimated Nye County officials would have their results in a few days, Lyon County has 12 days to verify the full number. "We're taking our time so there will be no appeal," Heller said. "We're doing it right the first time so any judge will know it's done correctly." The petition, which seeks to amend the Nevada Constitution, would permit people, upon the advice of physicians, to use marijuana for curing or relieving pain in a number of illness such as cancer and AIDS.
------------------------------------------------------------------- High Cost Of Bribes Forces Mexican Pot Growers Across Border ('The Salt Lake Tribune' Recycles A Three-Week Old Story About Mexican Pot Growers Relocating To Idaho Rather Than Pay $10 Per Plant)Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:53:52 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US ID: High Cost of Bribes Forces Mexican Pot Growers Across Border Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com (Frank S. World) Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Source: The Salt Lake Tribune Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sltrib.co Author: Steve Steubner Special To The Tribune HIGH COST OF BRIBES FORCES MEXICAN POT GROWERS ACROSS BORDER BOISE -- In Mexico, the price of growing marijuana is known as ``el mordido'' -- ``the bite.'' The term refers to bribes that growers must pay local police to stay in business. In prosecuting the largest marijuana case in Idaho's history, Assistant U.S. Attorney Kim Lindquist said escalating bribe fees in Mexico inspired growers to cross the border and set up growing areas in Idaho. The growers, nearly all undocumented immigrants from Florencia, Mexico, confessed that they moved their operations into Idaho to avoid paying the $1,000 per 100 plants Mexican authorities demand, Lindquist said. More than a dozen well-hidden pot groves in southwestern Idaho went undetected for at least three years before authorities were tipped off and seized 114,000 plants in August and September. ``They started to feel it in their pocketbook, so they moved their operations to Idaho, where the only risk was getting caught,'' Lindquist said. ``It's a good example of how we're affected by the narcotics trade below the border.'' Lindquist recently saw the sentencing of all but one of 14 defendants who were tried and convicted in federal court in connection with growing the marijuana plants, worth an estimated $26 million on the streets. Salvador Valdez, 21, who was convicted in April of cultivating marijuana, will be sentenced Monday. The defendants received sentences ranging from 10 to 21 years in federal prison and were fined $1,000. The only legal Idaho resident, Roberto Sandoval, 42, of Caldwell, fled after being indicted and is still at large, the attorney said. Another defendant was transported to Amarillo, Texas, to face drug-trafficking charges. Lindquist said he is certain other Mexican growers were involved in raising pot plants in Idaho, but they escaped before law-enforcement authorities raided the groves last summer. Fearful that ``snitching'' on those who fled might endanger their families in Mexico, 11 of the defendants pleaded innocent to federal crimes and refused to cooperate with authorities, Lindquist said. That forced the U.S. Attorney's Office to prosecute each defendant one at a time. All of the cases, except for one, resulted in convictions. Two other defendants who pleaded guilty to state crimes will likely serve one year in jail before being deported to Mexico, said Doug Perry, Gem County prosecutor. The growers confessed that they selected the remote foothills in southwestern Idaho where the terrain resembled a similar setting in Florencia, Lindquist said. The otherwise dry foothills have tiny seeps and creeks that flow under thick brush, which provide excellent camouflage. Growers testified that they made about $1,000 a week. Copyright 1998, The Salt Lake Tribune
------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainbow Tribe Nabs Suspect ('The Arizona Republic' Says Members Of The Rainbow Family Gathering At The Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest In Arizona Captured A Man Wanted For The Brutal Rape And Murder Of A Woman In Florida - Deputies, Responding To A Call From The Rainbows' Security Team, Arrived At The Camp To Find 25 Rainbows In A Ring Around The Man, Bound In A Blanket) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:31:00 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US AZ: Rainbow Tribe Nabs Suspect Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family (email@example.com) Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Source: Arizona Republic (AZ) Contact: http://www.azcentral.com/opinions/letter.shtml Website: http://www.azcentral.com/news/ RAINBOW TRIBE NABS SUSPECT SPRINGERVILLE, ARIZ. -- Police who had shuddered to see 25,000 hippies pitch their hugging, drumming and marijuana-smoke-filled camp last week in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest, saw the Rainbow Family Gathering somewhat differently after unarmed Rainbow peacekeepers captured a man wanted for a brutal Florida murder. ``In my long law-enforcement career, this is something I have never seen happen,'' said Apache County sheriff's Sgt. Jim Morse. Deputies, responding to a call from the Rainbows' security team, the Shanti-Sena, arrived at the camp to find 25 Rainbows in a ring around the wanted man, Joseph Giebel, who had escaped two months ago from Florida police and was wanted for the rape and murder of a woman there. He was bound in a blanket. Giebel is wanted for killing Sherri Lyn Jett, who was raped and beaten to death. Having learned he had been at other annual Rainbow Family Gatherings, Key West police sent his description to the Rainbow Family's Web home page. The deputies could not say how the Shanti-Sena, an unarmed, unstructured organization captured Giebel. The Shanti-Sena, who wear small badges made of bark, includes many military veterans. The week-long gathering ended Saturday except for the Rainbows' cleanup crews, who work for two or three more weeks to clean and reseed the area.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Pot Sinks Swimmer (An 'Associated Press' Story In Canada's 'Nelson Daily News' Says Gary Hall Jr., 23, Of Phoenix, Arizona, Winner Of Two Gold And Two Silver Medals At The 1996 Summer Olympics, Has Been Suspended From Competition By The International Swimming Federation For A Positive Marijuana Test) Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 22:51:44 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US AZ: Pot Sinks Swimmer Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Herb Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Source: Nelson Daily News (Canada) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sterlingnews.com/nelson Author: Associated Press POT SINKS SWIMMER PHOENIX (AP) - Gary Hall Jr., winner of two gold and two silver medals in the 1996 Summer Olympics, has been suspended from competition by the international swimming federation for a positive marijuana test. Hall, 23, who lives in Phoenix, issued a statement Wednesday saying he will fight the allegation but will be unable to compete in this month's Goodwill Games in New York. If that test also is positive, FINA, the sport's international governing body, would determine the length of the suspension.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Two Bullets In The Back ('The Houston Press' Describes The Case Of A 10th-Grade Boy, Travis Allen, In Bellaire, Texas, Killed In Police Custody While Allegedly On LSD - A $25 Million Lawsuit Filed By His Parents Against The Bellaire Police Department And Two Officers Alleging Excessive Use Of Force Goes To Trial On August 17 - When A Grand Jury At First Absolved Police, One Juror Told The 'Houston Chronicle' That Another Politically Connected Juror Had Applied Pressure Not To Indict, Which Led To District Attorney Johnny Holmes Jailing The Reporter And Indicting And Prosecuting The Juror Who Spoke Out) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:11:30 -0700 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US TX: Two Bullets in the Back Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Tammera Halphen Source: Houston Press Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.houstonpress.com Author: Randall Patterson Pubdate: July 9-16, 1998 TWO BULLETS IN THE BACK The fear began. At 1:35 a.m., Carolyn Deal was wakened by the sound of shattering glass. She roused her 62-year-old husband, Jack, who told her to get dressed, lock the bedroom door. She heard coughing just outside as she turned the lock. Jack, fighting the haze of sleep, put the telephone to his ear. "Uh," he said, "there's someone in our house." Over the Bellaire police frequency, the dispatcher sent the call for a burglary in progress. The alarm was screaming when Bellaire police officer Dan Shelor arrived at 1:36. Officers Michael Leal and Carle Upshaw were close behind. The Deals by then had retreated through a bedroom door to their roof. Crouching in the bushes, the police could see that most of the windows around the front door had been smashed. Leal and Shelor took positions in the front of the house, and Upshaw headed for the rear. Then through a front window, a bicycle came crashing out. For an instant, a white male stood in the window frame. The officers shouted, "Get the fuck out of there!" And the man stared at them and disappeared inside. Through another window, Upshaw saw him coming fast toward the rear. Upshaw, too, shouted for the man to come out, and this time, the man turned to the glass door and collided into it. The glass held, but his arms were already covered with blood. Staring at Upshaw, he tried to unlock the door. He couldn't. He walked away, leaving the glass smeared with blood. Leal came back to help. Together, he and Upshaw yelled into the house for the intruder to lie down. The man emerged from the shadows then and began complying. The officers kicked more glass out of the window, and charged in after him. They found him between the long white couch and an antique table. Down the barrel of a gun, Leal discerned that the intruder was only a teenager. Upshaw saw that the boy was not very big. Holstering his pistol, Upshaw began putting handcuffs on the boy. Five, maybe ten minutes later, Skip and Becky Allen were wakened by the ringing telephone. It was a friend of their son's. "Uh, Mr. Allen?" said Mike Morgan. "I think Travis is in trouble with the police." It was quickly decided Mrs. Allen would stay home with Gracie, their two-year-old. Mr. Allen snatched on his clothes and jumped in his truck. He found Mike at Trevor Ayer's house, and they sped through Bellaire. When Mike told him to turn onto Acacia Street, most of the Bellaire Police Department was already there, and a large clapboard house had been cordoned off with yellow police tape. Mr. Allen pulled over and said he'd heard his son was in trouble here. When the officer asked how he knew this, Mr. Allen pointed at Mike, and Mike was taken away. The officer told Mr. Allen to wait. He stood by his truck and waited. It began to rain. Mr. Allen stood in the rain, asking the passing policemen what was going on. At last, one of them answered: There was a deceased person inside. Mr. Allen said his son was supposed to be inside, and couldn't he go in there? The officer asked him if he needed a priest or something. Mr. Allen said no, and he was told to wait. The hearse came. A bag was carried away. Still, Mr. Allen gazed at the house and the landscaped lawn. He kept thinking his son would come running out, saying, "Daddy! I'm okay. I was in trouble, but I'm okay." Instead, after three hours, a Bellaire policeman cameout. He said there had been a struggle, and an officer's weapon had discharged. It had discharged into a person, and that person's name, according to the driver's license, was Travis Allen. He had then died. Mr. Allen could go now. "We don't need you anymore," the officer said. The Deals went to a neighbor's house. Mr. Allen drove home alone. And Bellaire police detectives stayed up all night July 15, 1995, trying to explain how a 128-pound, unarmed boy on LSD had been shot twice in the back by a police officer as the boy lay on the floor beneath another officer's boot. In the days and weeks that followed, the local crime-solving community bent to the task. The medical examiner examined; Bellaire investigators investigated. A grand jury heard the evidence and deliberated. The result was no indictment. The entire criminal investigation was wrapped up within two months; the officer who pulled the trigger was required to take only two days off work. He was absolved so quickly that Skip and Becky Allen were left breathless. They knew their son had deserved a great punishment; they couldn't accept the necessity of death. They lost 60 pounds between them. They went to church, joined grief-recovery groups. Determined to wring justice from the justice system, they finally found themselves in the office of a lawyer. In December 1995, they filed a $25 million lawsuit against the Bellaire Police Department and officers Michael Leal and Carle Upshaw, alleging excessive use of force. The lawsuit has forced the Allens to relive their son's death, but has also uncovered many new details about it. Efforts to dismiss the case have been themselves dismissed. Last week, U.S. District Judge David Hittner scheduled the case for trial on August 17. Travis grew up near the Heights, in an old neighborhood called Magnolia Grove. Skip became a safety director over construction at a Baytown refinery, Becky a therapist for disabled children in the school system. They lived together in a Victorian home with latticework trim and a yard just big enough for lush tomato vines. He was five foot nine and growing. Travis was the one who unloaded the dishwasher, vacuumed the house, mowed the yard, raced motocross with his father, picked up his mother when he hugged her. And laughed. Puberty hit him like a hurricane, but after tenth grade, his clothes and hair had begun to settle down, and instead of skipping classes, he enrolled in summer school to get ahead. He came home that Friday in July at about 2 o'clock and began playing with his sister Gracie. They rolled around in the grass, and two hours must have passed before Travis finally got the lawn mower out. He had mowed only a small section when rain began to fall, at which point he gave up on the grass and put Gracie in a laundry basket. From the porch down the walkway and back, he ran in and out of the rain. Skip remembers that you could hear the laughter all over the block. Then Becky came home, and she wrapped Gracie in a towel and began making dinner. Travis went up to his room. He called his friend Trevor, who said Tony Patt had just called: A neighbor of a friend of Tony's was throwing a party in Bellaire. At dinner, Travis announced that he would be sleeping at Trevor's this evening. "No!" said Skip, because the yard was not mowed, and they were going to get up early the next morning to ride dirt bikes. So Travis finished his dinner and went back to his room. Becky told Skip that Travis hadn't been out all week. Why not let him go? She went upstairs to tell him the news. When she saw his face, she knew he wouldn't mind staying home. But she let him go anyway, "and that's the saddest thing," she says. The city of Bellaire is an enclave town, entirely surrounded by Houston. Most law violations are committed by intruders, and most of these intruders are simply speeding motorists. But every now and then, said Chief Randall Mack, someone comes into Bellaire to rob a bank or something, and "you've got to be ready to do it all." One officer who can always be counted on to go "above and beyond the call," according to Mack, is Michael Leal (pronounced lay-al). Legal concerns prevent Leal from talking to reporters (and Mack, too, wouldn't discuss the case), but Leal is said to be 33 years old now, a resident of Katy and the father of two young daughters and a son. Ten years ago, he joined the department, and in 1991, he was named Bellaire Police Officer of the Year. He long ago became a department instructor in both firearm use and defensive tactics, and also is a founding member of Bellaire's volunteer SWAT team equivalent, whose drills consist of wearing camouflage and shooting one's fellow officers with paint-ball guns. The state requires peace officers to take 40 hours of continuing training every two years, but Leal usually takes triple that in a year. In the summer of 1995, some of his recent courses were "ASP Baton Refresher," "Officer Involved shooting Investigation" and "Mental Preparation for Armed Confrontation," which consisted of video footage of officers getting killed. By July 15 of that year, there had not been a police shooting in Bellaire in 20 years, and there had never been a fatal one. But the record shows, before his shift, Leal took the precaution of checking out two shotguns. When Travis got to Trevor's, James Burns was there, and one of them produced the acid. Weed and ecstasy were the usual choices; acid, said Trevor, was kind of a special occasion. This acid was called Blue Shield, and the dealer had said the paper was dipped three times, instead of once. James and Trevor each took one hit, and Travis, who was a little bigger, took two. When Meaghan Welzbacher came over to pick them up, Travis showed her what was on his tongue. "You be careful now," she said, and Travis smiled. None of them knew the host of the party or cared that she was only 12 years old. Tony said the magic words were "parents not home." The house was small by Bellaire standards, and the party left it much reduced. Punk rock blasted through the air. In the garage, by the keg, someone smashed a mirror. Before long, the guests were running through the house punching the walls. One climbed the roof and hurled a gallon of paint onto the walkway. The whole evening became a blur to James. Trevor saw a lot of flashing lights and moving people. And Travis, who was usually "a grinning fool" when he was tripping, grew terribly frightened. He was seen at the start of the evening in a chair in the back yard with a beer, "just chilling." Later, Jessica McCracken saw him standing very stiff and asked him what was wrong. "Bugs," said Travis. She offered him bug repellent, but it didn't seem to help. With his hands jammed in his pockets, Travis soon began shaking. Someone told him that there were bears in the backyard. He seemed to believe it. He became afraid of the people around him. Most of them were strangers, and he got the notion they were going to jump him for the $20 in his pocket. His friend Mike Morgan finally decided to get him away from the party. They would take a short walk to the end of the street and come back. Along the way, Mike asked what Travis was seeing. "Colors," said Travis. Then he quit responding. They hadn't gone far when Tony Patt and Ben Steinberg pulled up behind them. Travis saw the headlights, and his friends believe he thought these were the people who had come to rob him. Travis flung his money on the ground, and he fled as fast as he could -- over the soft grass and under the trees and into the side of the house that was Jack and Carolyn Deal's. At his feet, there was a 50-pound paving stone; he heaved it through a full-length window and heaved himself after it. Mike, who had chased until this point, heard the burglar alarm and ran the other way. Travis was alone then, and like something wild that has flown inside and can't get out, he knocked over plants and banged against windows until his arms were wet with blood, and he heard voices telling him to lie down. Officer Upshaw put his gun away and was handcuffing Travis when he realized that maybe he should be using gloves. He sent Shelor to get them from the car. Then, unable to think of anything else to do, Upshaw placed his cleated boot in the square of Travis's back and proceeded to wait. The gloves were not in the first car; Shelor searched the second. Inside, Leal kept his gun trained on the suspect. They had sent Shelor away without searching the suspect or the house, or even turning on the lights. The suspect, meanwhile, had begun to resist again. Beneath the boot, he would not lie still. Travis flailed his arms and pushed against the boot, and the more weight Upshaw pressed into him, the more Travis writhed and pushed against it. All the while, he was making an awful grunting sound, which to the neighbors next door, behind closed windows, sounded like roaring, and which Leal described later as "this noise you make when you're exhausted." Leal and Upshaw never reached for the batons that hung at their waists. Leal recalled glancing again and again over his shoulder, shouting to Travis, "Let us see your hands!" And then Upshaw, trying to help, stepped on Travis with both boots and all of his 190 pounds. Again, Travis put his hands beneath him, and the officers swear he pushed himself off the ground with Upshaw on his back. Upshaw reverted then to the one-foot hold, but Leal found himself shouting, "You're going to get shot! You're going to get shot!" It is for moments like this that police officers drill and drill again, so that instinct overrides emotion. Leal's first shot missed Upshaw's foot by less than an inch, but after the recoil, Leal had the presence of mind to aim before shooting again. Under the vaulted ceiling, Travis lay still at last, hemorrhaging onto the Oriental rug. Then the house filled with new horror. Shelor arrived with the gloves. Leal told him to handcuff the suspect, now lying in an expanding pool of blood. Shelor did so and fled the house, and was later referred to a counselor for emotional distress. Leal stayed inside, comprehending in the light that he had shot an unarmed man. The legal standard by which police shootings are judged is whether the officer feared for his life or other lives, and whether that fear was justified. When the house was filled with Bellaire detectives, Leal consulted with his union lawyer and agreed to describe what had happened. He said he had fired when Travis reached into his right pocket. Only when asked what other move Travis had made did Leal add, "I guess he would be rolling to his left. Basically looking at me." The media were handled by Randall Mack, then the assistant chief. "It was obviously a life-threatening situation," he told the Houston Chronicle. In his first press releases, Mack never mentioned that Travis was shot while on the floor with a policeman's boot on his back. The assistant chief only said the suspect had refused to lie down, there had been a struggle, and the suspect had persisted in putting his hands in his pockets. Mrs. Allen had the impression her son was shot while attacking. Bellaire detective Don Hazelwood supplied the Harris County medical examiner an account that was equally vague, much more exciting and wrong: The officers had "wrestled" the suspect to the floor. The suspect had knocked one of them off. He had risen and was reaching into his pocket, when "the second Bellaire officer saw his partner down and fired two rounds of Winchester .45 caliber, Super X-silver tips, 185 grain." Thereafter, the suspect became known as "the decedent." Pathologist Eduardo Bellas went about his work with three Bellaire detectives standing by. "The body was that of a well-nourished, well-developed, thin-framed Caucasian male," he noted. The eyes were hazel; the hair, short and brown-red. The hands were covered with bruises and cuts. There were "brush burns" over the nose and chin, as though the face had been pressed into carpet, though Bellas didn't suggest that. Finally, beside a pattern of bruises, there were "gunshot wounds (2) of the back." The bullets perforated the spinal cord, esophagus, trachea and aorta, passing through all the corridors of life before coming to rest in the upper chest. The heroic tale of the shooting offered no explanation for gunshot wounds to the back. Bellas doesn't seem to have been curious. He concluded that yes, the decedent had died of gunshot wounds. As time passed, Leal apparently became more sure of his own story. After he and Upshaw consulted their union lawyer, they gave their written statements. Upshaw confirmed that under his boot, the suspect had indeed been rolling left. Leal now testified that, "the suspect seemed intent on fixing his gaze on me for the express purpose of whatever was going to happen when he removed his hand from his pocket." Eventually, what was initially described as "basically looking at me" became known as Travis's "target stare." Leal's description of Travis became even more threatening. At first, Leal said they entered the house when Travis had lain down. Later, he said that Travis had never lain down completely. Detective D.L. Oglesby, in his official Bellaire Police Department report, recorded that Leal issued commands to Travis "with no apparent effect." Leal claimed he was crouching to the right of Travis when he fired, but Oglesby later said in his deposition that he thought Leal had leaned over the couch. The report reconciled the difference by avoiding any reference to Leal's position. With Upshaw on his back, and his right arm in his pocket, Travis would have had difficulty rolling onto his left side. If Leal were leaning over the couch above him, it would have been nearly impossible for Travis to have given that "target stare" and still to have been shot in the back. Oglesby initially wrote in the report that Travis had been lying on his stomach when he was shot. But the report had been given to Leal, who sent Oglesby a memo, a copy of which was forwarded to Randall Mack: "I noticed some mistakes that I feel should be corrected," Leal wrote. And though what he said didn't make sense, Oglesby nonetheless changed the report: With a boot on his back, the suspect was rolling onto his left side when he was shot in the back. Oglesby sent a memo informing Leal of the revisions. "You are welcomed to review the report again if you like," he wrote. When the investigation was complete, the case was presented to a grand jury. The judge who presided over the grand jury, Debbie Mantooth Stricklin, was a former prosecutor who had worked for District Attorney Johnny Holmes, and whose husband was Holmes's chief assistant. Prosecutors routinely work with the police and might be expected to sympathize with them. Holmes himself said, "Not a whole lot of people have much sympathy with a burglar in a house." In this case, he said Assistant D.A. Belinda Hill had his absolute confidence. According to his memory, Hill's presentation to the grand jury consisted of the autopsy report and the testimony of Leal, Upshaw and Shelor. Hill made no recommendation for or against indictment, according to a juror. The juror later told the Chronicle that another, politically connected juror had applied pressure not to indict. In the end, the 11-member grand jury missed indicting Leal by two votes. Holmes wouldn't present the case to another grand jury (it wouldn't be fair, he says), but he pursued with great vigor the name of the juror who violated the grand jury secrecy law. For refusing to disclose that juror's name, the Chronicle reporter briefly went to jail. The juror was eventually found and prosecuted. Holmes explained that the grand jury system can't work if its secrets are told. When they heard the FBI was investigating the shooting, the Allens were relieved. "We were beginning to feel that we were the only ones who thought something was wrong," Mrs. Allen said then. An FBI agent went by the Bellaire Police Department to pick up Oglesby's report, but neither Oglesby nor Upshaw nor any of Travis Allen's friends or family were ever interviewed by the FBI. The results of the inquiry were forwarded to the Justice Department, and after waiting months, Skip and Becky Allen made an inquiry of their own as to the status. The reply they received was addressed to Travis, informing Travis that "after a careful review," no evidence could be found that his rights were violated. "Thank you," the letter concluded, "for bringing this matter to our attention." They had never hired a lawyer before and didn't know where to look. The Allens wound up around the corner from their house, in the firm of Richard "Racehorse" Haynes. Their lawyer, Graydon Wilson, claims to have no concept of the word justice." He says there is only the system, and you pour facts into the system, and sooner or later, you get a result. But everything depends on the facts. The lawsuit provided access to internal papers of the Bellaire Police Department, and also to the officers themselves. The Allens sat across a table in the depositions, gazing at the officers' faces. Leal and Upshaw avoided eye contact but otherwise were courteous enough. The only exchange between the parties occurred in the men's room during a break. Skip was standing at the urinal when the officers walked in. Turning to Skip, Upshaw ended an awkward moment. "This thing is taking so long," he said, "they ought to have piss pots by the table." Skip flushed and left. Shelor was not present at the shooting; he had little to say in his deposition but fought tears as he said it. Michael Leal answered the questions directly, addressing his interrogator as "sir." He claimed to be unaware of any department policy changes prompted by the shooting, or even any discussions on how to handle such situations better. It had been dark in the house, he said, and in the shadows between the couch and the table, it was hard to see Travis -- though not hard to see him rolling, reaching into his pocket, staring. "I went forward, bang, bang," Leal testified. He was afraid, but he denied that he had panicked. If he had shot Upshaw in the foot, "he would have recovered," said Leal. When it was Upshaw's turn, he said it never occurred to him to reach for his baton. He couldn't kick Travis because "my foot was busy," he said. Upshaw couldn't remember the size of a baton, or when he had been taught to use it, or whether there was or wasn't a department policy on batons. But this was not to say that he had forgotten his training; it was just that "here today there's nothing triggering my memory for me to remember it." It squeaked out that Upshaw had never really been afraid that night. He was being sued for failing to stop the shooting, which he says he couldn't have done, since he didn't expect it. "I don't know what Officer Leal considered a threatening move," said Upshaw. "In my view, I didn't see anything threatening." Chief Mack later said that he thought the officers "did the best job they could, under the circumstances." But at his deposition, Mack was unsure what these circumstances were. He couldn't recall whether the department hired an outside investigator for the shooting, or whether in 21 years as a cop, he had ever restrained a suspect by standing on his back. ("I may have," he said.) He said his press releases hadn't mentioned the boot or the fact that Travis was on the floor, because he may not have known these things. In fact, he still did not know them, he said, nor did he have any "personal knowledge" regarding the location of Travis Allen's wounds. When pressed, he admitted he had heard the rumor about the back -- but he didn't find it especially significant. He could not judge what had happened because, he said, "I wasn't there." The reluctance of police to judge other policemen finally forced the use of outside experts. Wilson said several local peace officers expressed dismay over the shooting, but none were willing to testify publicly. Wilson brought in from New Hampshire a police instructor in the use of lethal force named Massad Ayoob; and from the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, a pathology instructor named Sparks Veasey. It was Ayoob's expert opinion that "standing upright with both feet on a person's back is more akin to riding a surfboard than to any method of stabilizing a resisting person that I am familiar with." Upshaw's choice not to carry gloves on his belt should not have interfered in the performance of his job, according to Ayoob. If Upshaw had finished handcuffing Travis, the death could have been avoided, he said. Then, looking at pictures of the body, Ayoob noticed that where the bullets protruded from Travis's chest, the outer skin seemed abraded. He and Sparks Veasey came to the same conclusion. If Travis had even been partially on his left side, Veasey reported, "one would expect the wounds would be oblong in character," but they were circular. This trajectory, Veasey determined, "would be more consistent with the decedent being flat on the floor" when he was shot from a distance of about 18 inches. The lawyer for the defense also hired an expert, of course. In the view of David Grossi, a police instructor from Illinois, Travis was an "aggressive, drug-laced, superhuman felon." Assuming the truth of Leal's version, Grossi called the shooting "totally justified, completely necessary and objectively reasonable." The last motion to dismiss the case was denied. In April, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals returned the case for trial, calling it "a significant fact-related dispute." The glass was replaced, and the blood was covered up with paint and new carpet, but the Deals could feel something down below. After a while, they left their home in Bellaire. They settled in an artists' colony in Mexico. For Travis's friends, acid became a symbol of sadness. Many of them gave it up, and said Travis was responsible. Also, they said, you grow out of it. "You got better things to do," said Meaghan, "than deal with an entire day on a drug." They've become econ majors, store managers, waitresses and slackers. Prosecutor Belinda Hill has become Judge Hill. Assistant Chief Mack became Chief Mack. He quietly oversaw a drastic change in Bellaire's use-of-force policy; the policy manual now includes a section called "Use of Force Continuum" listing all the tactics an officer might consider before deciding to shoot. But none of this had anything to do with the shooting, said the chief. Last year, he promoted Michael Leal to sergeant. Leal was put in charge of criminal investigations, supervising everyone who had investigated him. As for the Allens, they filed the lawsuit, they say, to find out how their son died. They know that now. Last year, they had a giant portrait of Travis painted on the southern wall of their house. An inscription reads, "The laws sometimes sleep but never die." Contact Randall Patterson at his online address (firstname.lastname@example.org). Or call him at 713.280.2478. Got a comment/compliment/beef? Send us your feedback. (email@example.com)
------------------------------------------------------------------- County Can't Build Its Way Out Of Jail-Crowding Problem (A Staff Editorial In 'The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel' Wallows In Denial About The Cost Of Locking Up 6 Percent Of The Population For Illegal-Drug Offenses, And Gropes In The Dark For Some Way To Make It Economically Feasible) Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 17:16:57 -0400 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US WI: County Can't Build Its Way Out Of Jail-Crowding Problem Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org (Frank S. World) Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (WI) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.jsonline.com/ Pubdate: 9 Jul 1998 Fax: (414) 224-8280 COUNTY CAN'T BUILD ITS WAY OUT OF JAIL-CROWDING PROBLEM The proposed steep increase in the Milwaukee County House of Correction budget for next year ought to be no surprise. After all, when you expand jail space, you expand jail costs. The addition of 1,000 beds to the house requires an addition to the number of guards and other staffers. Hence, the institution's request for an extra $9 million in property tax funds. The proposed budget does, however, underscore the heavy cost of incarceration and thus the urgency of (1) putting in place less expensive alternatives to jail and (2) steering kids at risk of winding up behind bars away from that destiny. Without Steps 1 and 2, the county will never build itself out of the jail-crowding problem. The county will instead keep feeling pressure to expand jail space even more at a cost of additional millions a year. A promising alternative is a day reporting center. In lieu of going to jail, petty, non-violent offenders report to the center, where they spend a good portion of the day in intensive activities, such as drug treatment, basic schooling, vocational training and life-skills education. The clients have to submit to drug tests, and they are monitored while away from the center. The idea is to change the lives of offenders so they won't keep repeating the behavior that got them into trouble. To its credit, the county is embarking on an experimental $100,000 day-reporting program -- albeit, as they say, a day late and a dollar short. The county was tardy in backing the experiment, and the money allocated may not be enough -- the County Board is quicker to pour millions into lockups than lesser amounts into alternatives. Now, however, the county must give the pilot program a fair chance to work. Adults in trouble often emerge from hard, troubled childhoods. That reality underscores the urgency of ensuring that the child welfare system actually protects children -- a task that falls to both the county and the state. Putting hope back in the inner city, through the development of jobs, must also become a top county priority. Crime flourishes when jobs dry up. All in all, the county has little choice but to boost by millions the House of Correction budget for next year. But the county could and should act now to prevent adding untold millions in expenditures in successive years.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Stirring The Pot ('Metroland' In Albany, New York, Notes The Schoharie County Chapter Of NORML Is Sponsoring A High School Essay Contest On The Drug War's Infringement Of Historic Constitutional Liberties, But Can't Quite Distinguish Between The Purpose Of The Contest From The Promotion Of Illegal Drug Use) Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 18:56:10 -0400 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US NY: Stirring the Pot Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Source: Metroland (Albany, NY) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.metland.com/ Fax: 518-463-3712 Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Author: Erin M. Sullivan STIRRING THE POT A local NORML chapter offers high school essay contest on drug war's dangers The Schoharie County chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws is sponsoring a contest this summer that's probably going to raise the eyebrows of quite a few school districts. The NORML folks are asking high school seniors to respond to this question: How does the war on marijuana threaten America's constitutional democracy? The student who comes up with the best answer is going to get a $500 prize and publication on Schoharie NORML's web site. It's not an attempt to indoctrinate youngsters, according to Walter Wouk, president of the Schoharie County chapter of NORML. Rather, he said, it is an effort to make high school students recognize that the war on drugs is actually a war on constitutional rights. Wouk said the contest was conceived when the organization learned that the Galway Central School District had asked the Saratoga County Sheriff's Department to bring drug-sniffing dogs into the school to perform random drug searches. He said Galway Central Schools' action is part of a growing trend of teaching children that they are "guilty until proven innocent." "You know," said Wouk, "this is America. This is a democracy. You get children used to having police going through their lockers with drug-sniffing dogs, and you get them used to being stripped of their rights." He said the contest is intended not to promote drug use but to remind people that they should not be considered criminals for discussing drug use or expressing their opinions about drugs. "We've been discussing this for a long time," Wouk said. "Last year we went up to the Rockwood Hemp Fest, and I spoke to two college freshmen and a high school graduate. I asked them if they would join NORML, and they were afraid. They were afraid that the government would put their names on a list and get them in trouble or something." However, most school districts make it a point to strictly prohibit drug use and probably don't view "students' rights" in the same light as NORML. Many schools, including the Middleburgh Central School District in Schoharie County, label themselves "drug-free school zones" and impose penalties on students and others who peddle drugs or encourage their use anywhere near the schools. According to Susan Urbach, superintendent of Middleburgh Central School District in Schoharie County, it is a school's duty to protect all students from harmful activities--especially drug-oriented ones. Urbach said that although she is unfamiliar with the contest or NORML, she said she thinks the school district would be opposed to it if it condoned the use of drugs. "We are a drug-free school, and we receive drug-free money from the federal government," she said. "Although this is a free democracy, this school district is not supportive of anything that could harm children." She also added that high school students are not always afforded the same constitutional rights as adults. "I do want to stress that I don't think people ought not to voice their views," she insisted, "but our children are legally underage and depend on adults for guidance." Because she was not sure of the intent of NORML's contest, Urbach declined to say whether or not the school district would penalize students participating in it. The winner of the essay contest will be announced on Schoharie NORML's Web site. Jonathan von Linden, executive director of the Schoharie County chapter of NORML, said students shouldn't fear repercussions from school districts or law enforcement agencies for participating in the contest--although he couldn't guarantee that there would be no repercussions from their parents. "I've been an outspoken advocate of changing the drug laws for 20 years or so, and I live in a small town, and I've never had any trouble," said von Linden. Von Linden said he hopes the contest will help make students and adults alike recognize that there is a fine line between drug law enforcement and stomping on civil rights. "The problem is, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are being trashed under the guise of drug war execution," von Linden said. "People are losing their rights whether they use drugs or not."
------------------------------------------------------------------- Monsignor's Arrest In Queens On Drug Charges Fills Priests And Friends With Shock ('The New York Times' Says James E. White, Arrested For Buying Cocaine From A Narc, Was The Fastest-Rising Priest From His Seminary Class And His Future In The Roman Catholic Archdiocese Of New York Seemed Unlimited)Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 10:26:11 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US NY: Monsignor's Arrest In Queens On Drug Charges Fills Priests And Friends With Shock Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com (Dick Evans) Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Source: New York Times (NY) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ Author: James Risen MONSIGNOR'S ARREST IN QUEENS ON DRUG CHARGES FILLS PRIEST'S AND FRIENDS WITH SHOCK He was the fastest-rising priest from his seminary class, and his future in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York seemed unlimited. James E. White had been the first from his class to be named monsignor, had served in the highly visible post of associate pastor at St. Patrick's Cathedral, and had even worked briefly on the personal staff of John Cardinal O'Connor. And so by 1996, when he was chosen to run an important pre-seminary program to help college students interested in the priesthood, Monsignor White was emerging as an important role model, one of the few prominent black priests in an archdiocese deeply concerned about expanding its reach within the black community. Yet that stellar background has only deepened the sense of personal tragedy felt by his friends and fellow priests after Monsignor White was arrested on misdemeanor drug possession charges on Tuesday. Priests who know Monsignor White expressed shock Wednesday at the news of his arrest, saying it seemed completely out of character for the 50-year-old priest they described as quiet and gentle. Several priests who have known Monsignor White for years, including some who were in his seminary class, said they had never seen any evidence of his involvement with drugs. They added that his arrest was painful and damaging to the archdiocese, especially since New York has so few black priests in senior positions. "I really couldn't believe it," said Msgr. Howard Calkins, pastor of Sacred Heart Catholic Church in Mt. Vernon. "This is a painful moment. I feel for him. I feel for the Archbishop." William Scafidi, pastor of St. Mary's Catholic Church in Newburgh, N.Y., where Monsignor White previously served as pastor, said: "He is an excellent guy; that's why this is so damaging." Monsignor White was arrested along with another man after allegedly buying cocaine from an undercover officer in the Jackson Heights section of Queens. He pleaded not guilty to a misdemeanor narcotics possession charge in Queens criminal court Wednesday and was released on his own recognizance. He agreed to seek drug treatment and was ordered to appear in court on Aug. 18, according to the Queens County Attorney's office. Monsignor White, who is from West Harlem, came late to the priesthood, spending much of his early career as a brother in the Catholic order of the Christian Brotherhood. Ordained at the archdiocese's St. Joseph's Seminary in Dunwoodie, Yonkers, in 1983, Monsignor White was first assigned to Staten Island, where he served as an associate pastor at St. Clement and St. Michael Church for two years. After teaching at Cardinal Hayes High School for four years, he joined the staff at St. Patrick's Cathedral in 1989. While there, he filled in for one of Cardinal O'Connor's secretaries during one summer, said Joseph Zwilling, a spokesman for the archdiocese of New York. In 1991, Monsignor White was given his own parish, at St. Mary's Church in Newburgh, N.Y., which is part of the Archdiocese of New York. Five years later, he was named rector of the St. John Neumann Seminary Residence in the Riverdale section of the Bronx, where about 40 college students considering the priesthood live and study before they are ready to enter the seminary. Catholic leaders and priests said they could not recall any similar cases of a New York priest arrested on drug charges, and they were struggling to absorb the news. Last night, at Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church, the West Harlem parish where Monsignor White said his first mass and where his brother taught for years, his friend, Father Thomas Fenlon, was composing a new church bulletin that addressed the monsignor's troubles. "I was just writing in the bulletin that we support him with our prayers," Father Fenlon said.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Give Hemp A Chance (A Staff Editorial In 'The Lexington Herald-Leader' Says A New Study By A Trio Of Economists At The University Of Kentucky Strengthens The Case For Giving Farmers A Chance To At Least Experiment With Growing And Marketing Industrial Hemp)Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 01:17:08 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US KY: Editorial: Give Hemp a Chance Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com (Colo. Hemp Init. Project) Source: Lexington Herald-Leader (KY) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.kentuckyconnect.com/heraldleader/ Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 GIVE HEMP A CHANCE Drug politics keep us from testing economists' theories It's too bad the politics of marijuana thwart any practical investigation of the economics of hemp. A new study, by a trio of University of Kentucky economists, strengthens the case for giving farmers a chance to at least experiment with growing and marketing industrial hemp, a crop that is illegal in this country although allowed in much of the world, including Canada. Unfortunately, as long as law-enforcement officials keep their heels dug in, the UK economists' predictions will never be put to the test. From national drug czar Barry McCaffrey to state Justice Secretary Dan Cherry on down, the attitude seems to be that letting farmers grow hemp would somehow constitute a government wink at marijuana use. Such fears are misguided on several counts. Hemp farms would be licensed and subject to surprise inspections. The two crops aren't particularly compatible or even similar in appearance, though they are botanical cousins. Forget the facts, though. No politician can risk being labeled soft on drugs. So an environmentally friendly crop that might help family farms finds no champions among the powerful or the elected. No one in Washington or Frankfort has been able to authorize test plots or a pilot program similar to what Canada has. Even the conservative Farm Bureau has endorsed industrial hemp. Its strong fibers have numerous uses -- as a substitute for trees in paper-making, as fabric in clothes, automobiles and carpet, even as a substitute for plastic. The leftover pulp could be used as animal bedding. But the practical experimentation that could determine hemp's potential as an option for tobacco farmers falls victim to irrational fears and politics. Who knows. The market might make the drug czar's case better than he can. After all, only the market can provide irrefutable economic evidence. As it now stands, those interested in industrial hemp as a cash crop are dealing in hypotheticals. There are no facilities in this country for processing raw hemp straw. No one can say with certainty how demand for hemp would be affected by a new domestic supply. Without some domestic sources, it's hard to predict to what extent hemp would replace other raw materials in everything from paper to cars. Even at UK, economists are divided. An agricultural economist who produced an earlier study still says it would be cheaper to import hemp than grow it here. But the most recent study, commissioned by a pro-hemp group and released last week, concludes that hemp could be the best thing for Kentucky farms since tobacco. The study says the existing market for raw hemp would support cultivating 82,000 acres in the United States and growers could expect to clear $200 to $600 an acre. That's considerably less than the profit from an acre of tobacco but better than corn, hay, soybeans and wheat. It's time to quell the reefer madness and figure out how to let farmers experiment with a crop that could help them stay in business. All Contents Copyright 1998 Lexington Herald-Leader. All Rights Reserved
------------------------------------------------------------------- The Drug Policy Foundation Network News (The Premiere Issue Of A Monthly Publication For DPF's Advocacy Network Includes - Money Laundering Bill Expands Civil Asset Forfeiture; Congress Seeks To Expand Workplace Drug Testing; Representative Rangel Seeks Elimination Of Sentencing Disparity; Senator Biden Calls For Legalization Hearings) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 13:19:44 EDT Errors-To: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Drug Policy News Service (email@example.com) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: DPF's Network News (July 1998) DRUG POLICY FOUNDATION'S NETWORK NEWS A Monthly Publication for DPF's Advocacy Network Welcome to the first edition of Network News, a publication of the Drug Policy Foundation, your voice for reasoned and compassionate drug policies. As the 105th Congress entered the last few months of its work, several drug policy proposals captured a great deal of attention. As you may know, DPF has prioritized civil asset forfeiture reform, sentencing disparities, and reform of workplace drug testing as three key areas for reform. *** Money Laundering Bill Expands Civil Asset Forfeiture H.R. 3745, the "Money Laundering Act of 1998," was unveiled by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-Fla.) as one of the bills to expand the war on drugs; its main focus is broadening the government's forfeiture powers. H.R. 3745 raises constitutional concerns including possible Fourth Amendment, due process and privacy rights violations. Additionally, H.R. 3745 intrudes on the role of the federal courts by significantly changing the rules of evidence and civil procedure, and conflicts with current efforts to curb U.S. Treasury and Justice Department forfeiture excesses. Some of the most troubling aspects of H.R. 3745 are the civil (non-criminal) asset forfeiture provisions. H.R. 3745 would: * allow the federal government to go on "fishing expeditions" by subpoenaing bank records before filing a complaint or starting a forfeiture procedure; * make it nearly impossible for a person to assert an "innocent owner" defense; * expand wiretapping authority for suspected violations of IRS form-filing requirements; * unduly expand the number of new acts that can be predicates for triggering the money laundering statute, allowing federal agencies to seize entire businesses and bank accounts for any and all manner of alleged regulatory and state law violations; and * expand the Department of Justice mandate by making DOJ into a de-facto world police force-enforcing alleged violations of foreign nations' laws, even when foreign governments don't want to prosecute. DPF supports meaningful asset forfeiture reform that uniformly limits the scope of the government's forfeiture powers by eliminating some of the most egregious civil forfeiture practices. DPF supports Rep. Henry Hyde's (R-Ill.) Manager's Amendment to H.R. 1965, the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act, and has written Rep. Hyde urging him to oppose H.R. 3745 and to move H.R. 1965 to a vote during this session of Congress. *** Congress Seeks to Expand Workplace Drug Testing The House of Representatives approved H.R. 3853, the "Drug-Free Workplace Act," on June 23, which authorizes federal grants for non-profit organizations in an effort to encourage small businesses to institute drug-free workplace programs. In order to receive these funds, a business would have to follow specific federal guidelines, including establishing an employee drug-testing program. By and large, small businesses have opted not to institute drug-testing because the programs are costly and have shown little evidence of long-term effectiveness, especially in the absence of credible evidence of a substance abuse problem. DPF has written to members of Congress opposing this provision of H.R. 3853 and any other suspicionless workplace urine and hair drug-testing schemes. DPF has expressed its support for the development of alternative measures, such as performance testing, expanding non-invasive workplace drug abuse prevention programs, and health insurance coverage of drug treatment services for addicted employees. As the Drug-Free Workplace Act moves to the Senate (S. 2203), DPF is working to eliminate any mandatory drug testing requirements that are not based on evidence of substance abuse or a reaction to circumstances in which the presence of drugs or alcohol is suspected (e.g., after an accident or mishap due to intoxication). *** Rep. Rangel Seeks Elimination of Sentencing Disparity The criminal justice approach to dealing with the problems presented by drug use has created unacceptable social and legal side effects. Due to discriminatory enforcement practices and unjust mandatory minimum sentencing laws, a disproportionate number of young African-Americans are in prison for low-level drug offenses. While it only takes five grams of crack cocaine to trigger a five-year mandatory minimum, it takes 500 grams of powder cocaine to receive the same sentence. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) has introduced H.R. 2031, the "Crack-Cocaine Equitable Sentencing Act of 1997," to eliminate the sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine offenses. One of DPF's short-term priorities is to raise public awareness of the injustices of mandatory sentencing and its failure to have an impact on crime. DPF's first priority in this area is the elimination of the disparity in sentencing between crack cocaine and powder cocaine. Rep. Rangel has requested that supporters of this legislation write to their members of Congress to express their support and request that their representative become a co-sponsor of this bill. *** Senator Biden Calls for Legalization Hearings On June 17, Sen. Joseph R. Biden (D-Del.) called on the Senate Judiciary Committee to hold hearings on drug legalization to "expose the myths and dangers of legalization." DPF has written to Sen. Biden, committee chairman Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the ranking minority member Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), and committee member Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) expressing its support for these hearings if there is balanced representation. On July 2, DPF Public Policy Director H. Alexander Robinson noted that "a number of DPF members have expressed support for legalization," moreover, "DPF supports a full discussion of the range of alternative solutions to the growing problems caused by drug abuse." In his request that DPF be invited to testify, Robinson noted that "despite [Sen. Biden's] conclusions about the effects of any legalization strategies," DPF believes that balanced hearings should "allow the expression of a wide range of views and thereby serve as a learning opportunity for the Judiciary Committee, the Congress, and the American people." Reform supporters should express their support for Congress holding balanced hearings on drug policy reform and legalization. Introducing DPF's Network News Network News is the newest addition to DPF's regular publications. This monthly newsletter will keep you updated on the latest legislative and regulatory drug policy proposals in Congress and the Administration. Network News will be supplemented by legislative Action Alerts. These two timely publications will help keep DPF Advocacy Network members well-informed about current drug policy efforts. To become a member of the DPF Advocacy Network and receive Action Alerts and Network News, send us your name, fax number, and/or email. Drug Policy Foundation 4455 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite B-500, Washington, DC 20008-2328 ph: (202) 537-5005 * fax: (202) 537-3007 * email: email@example.com * web: www.dpf.org *** Network News was brought to you by the Drug Policy News Service, a service of the Drug Policy Foundation. To sign up for the Drug Policy News Service, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org with the following in the message: subscribe dpnews (Firstname Lastname).
------------------------------------------------------------------- Clinton's Antidrug Plan - $2 Billion Ad Blitz ('The Christian Science Monitor' Notes President Clinton And General Barry McCaffrey Today Will Roll Out A Five-Year Media Campaign Bigger Than Nike's, Sprint's, Or That Of American Express, The Largest Media Blitz Ever Undertaken By The Federal Government, Though There's Not Any Evidence That's 'Totally Conclusive' The Ads Will Have A Beneficial Effect) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:53:52 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US: Clinton's Antidrug Plan: $2 Billion Ad Blitz Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: isenberd@DynCorp.com (Isenberg, David) Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Source: Christian Science Monitor Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.csmonitor.com/ Author: Francine Kiefer Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor CLINTON'S ANTIDRUG PLAN: $2 BILLION AD BLITZ Biggest government ad campaign ever aims to lower youth drug use. But will it work? Think about how many times you've seen an ad with the Nike swoosh or a pitch for Sprint's long-distance rates. Now compare that with the number of times you've seen an ad against drug abuse. The drug ad probably doesn't even come close. But that should change today, when President Clinton and drug czar Barry McCaffrey roll out an antidrug media campaign that's bigger than Nike's, Sprint's, or that of American Express. It's the largest media blitz ever undertaken by the federal government. And antidrug ads like these will be hard to forget: bugs crawling all over a teenage boy (as he might hallucinate while on methamphetamines); a young woman demolishing her kitchen with a frying pan (symbolic of the destruction heroin use can cause); and a sweet grade-school girl who looks at the camera blankly when asked what her mother told her about drugs. (Picture) IN-YOUR-FACE AD: These frames are the first part of an antidrug TV spot that will run in prime time describing the consequences of using heroin. (PARTNERSHIP FOR A DRUG-FREE AMERICA) Drug use by youths has risen throughout most of the Clinton presidency. But now with a five-year, $2 billion ad campaign, the White House hopes to lower it within two years, especially among children 13 and under. But the question remains: Will this high-cost, high-profile strategy work? Research shows a link between advertising and less use, though there's "not any that's totally conclusive," says Lloyd Johnston, principal investigator for the Monitoring the Future study, a comprehensive survey that tracks drug use in America. Several studies, including those done by Dr. Johnston, support the premise that ads affect kids' attitudes toward drugs - and that attitudes in turn affect behavior. When advertising increased in the 1980s, drug use by youths decreased. When it declined in the 1990s, drug use increased (though it leveled off last year and declined in some areas, such as marijuana use). Yet other factors have contributed to increased use of drugs in the '90s. The music industry, for instance, began to send pro-drug messages through lyrics and individual stars' behavior. Marijuana became more acceptable, because many kids' parents once used it and because of its increasing medicinal role. Leigh Leventhal, spokeswoman for the Partnership for a Drug-Free America (PDFA), expects the administration's campaign will have an impact on use. For the first time, she points out, the US government is going to pay for prime-time advertising. That's a welcome development after "dwindling" public-service advertising. "What we've been lacking is consistency, and in order to be consistent and reach kids, you've got to be on prime time," says Ms. Leventhal, whose New York-based nonprofit group is providing the ads for the campaign. TV, Radio, Internet, Schools The media campaign, aimed at nonusers and infrequent users, will go far beyond prime time, though. It will include national and local TV, radio, and print ads. It will also reach kids through the Internet, Channel One in schools, and billboards. The White House calls it "not just an ad campaign," saying the administration will also work with the entertainment industry to portray more accurately the consequences of using drugs. Those inside and outside the White House say that for the media campaign to work, it must target the needs of America's different communities, include parents, provide follow-up support at the grass-roots level, and be consistent. The program is a bipartisan, public-private partnership. Half its cost will be covered by the government, half by the media industry, which will contribute time and space for the campaign. Congress has approved this year's federal installment of $195 million and is likely to support the next installment. The media industry, Leventhal says, "has been enormously generous." On the surface at least, the campaign seems to meet many of the criteria for success. One measure is that in five months of pilot testing in 12 cities, calls to a national clearinghouse hot line increased 40 percent compared with cities that weren't part of the pilot program. Some local hot lines in the pilot cities saw the number of calls increase by 400 to 500 percent. Early Ads Showed Success In the test, the ads were targeted at different communities. Anti-methamphetamine ads appeared in San Diego, because this drug is on the increase in the West and Midwest. But anti-heroin ads were aired in Baltimore, because that's the emerging drug there. All the test cities had ads aimed at parents, because research shows that drug use is significantly lower among children who learn at home about the risks of drugs. Meanwhile, groups like the National Guard and the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America - which include about 4,000 local antidrug groups - are working with the administration to support the campaign at the grass-roots level. The pilot test hasn't been without bumps. "These ads don't talk to my population," says Jeff Spiegel of San Diego's Communities Against Substance Abuse. He wants to see ads that focus on Latinos. The White House acknowledges this gap and others, including a lack of staff to deal with the interest the media campaign is expected to generate. But it says it is trying to solve these problems and points out that its campaign will be monitored and adjusted if it is not meeting goals. (c) Copyright 1997, 1998 The Christian Science Publishing Society. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------- US Starts Paid Ad Campaign Against Drugs ('New York Times' Version) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:53:52 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US: U.S. Starts Paid Ad Campaign Against Drugs Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org (Dick Evans) Source: New York Times (NY) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Author: Courtney Kane U.S. STARTS PAID AD CAMPAIGN AGAINST DRUGS The White House's drug policy agency will introduce its first paid national advertising Thursday as part of its fight against drug use among adolescents. President Clinton will join Gen. Barry McCaffrey, the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, in Atlanta to introduce the campaign, the largest government-financed social marketing effort to date. It will have an initial budget of $195 million, appropriated by Congress, and will involve television, radio, print, billboards and interactive media. The decision to spend taxpayer money to finance the aggressive anti-drug campaign is a marked change from the government's longtime policy of watching from the sidelines as advertising and media professionals coordinated unpaid anti-drug messages as public service advertising. "For the first time we will be able to buy the time slots in the best media vehicles," said Thomas Hedrick, vice chairman of the Partnership for a Drug-Free America in New York, "just like Nike or McDonald's or Pepsi does on a regular basis." The partnership, a nonprofit coalition of advertising and media professionals, has supervised the anti-drug pro bono campaign since 1987. Though the media have donated the equivalent of more than $2.5 billion worth of commercial time and ad space for anti-drug advertising, Hedrick said, the organization has found it increasingly difficult to reach specific audiences with specific ads because the pro bono campaigns depend on the availability of time and space. For instance, in a strong economy, exposure in desirable places like popular prime-time TV series is difficult to obtain, and many public service spots are relegated to late-night time slots when few if any of the intended viewers are watching. "We're going to pay for the precise placement we need to get the right message to the right audience," Hedrick said, "with enough frequency to change attitudes and, over time, drug behavior." The national paid campaign comes after a six-month test in 12 cities, including Atlanta, Baltimore, Denver, Hartford, San Diego and Tucson, Ariz. Each year for the next four years, Congress will be asked to appropriate an additional $195 million to continue the campaign. The ads, which will begin appearing Thursday, will be a mix of work already produced for the partnership and new spots. In an interesting twist, the media that will be selling the paid time and space will be asked for such bonus or in-kind contributions as public service advertising or programs or articles addressing drug issues. For example, a TV network that receives ad dollars for anti-drug commercials may agree to run an episode of a sitcom in which a character confronts the problem of drug abuse or may produce a segment on drug policy for a news magazine show. In the test markets, Hedrick said, the media matched the paid ads with bonus contributions. The television part of the paid campaign is scheduled to appear Thursday night on the four main broadcast networks -- ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC -- and on CNN. The goal is for anti-drug spots to run about 9:15 Eastern time, on the five networks in a TV tactic known as a roadblock. The Daily Fax edition of Advertising Age said that other cable networks like ESPN2, ESPN News, MTV and VH1 had also committed to run spots at about the same time. The plans call for ABC to run an anti-heroin commercial recently created for the partnership by Margeotes/Fertitta & Partners in New York. The spot updates the famous "This is your brain on drugs" commercial by showing a woman wrecking a kitchen with a frying pan to simulate the effect that heroin can have on a life. CBS is scheduled to run a spot aimed at parents that features actor Carroll O'Connor, whose son died after years of drug abuse. On Fox, teen-age viewers are the intended audience for a commercial with the rap star Chuck D. The spot planned for NBC is aimed at young parents, and the spot on CNN, to run during "Larry King Live," is also aimed at parents, addressing the need to discuss drugs with their children. The print part of the campaign is set to begin Thursday in big-city newspapers. One hard-hitting ad, titled "Disconnect," is meant to illustrate a generation gap about drugs. A photograph of a woman is accompanied by these words: "My kid doesn't smoke pot. He's either at school, soccer practice, piano lessons or at a friend's house." Underneath is a photograph of a boy, who says, "I usually get stoned at school, after soccer practice, before piano lessons or at my friend's house." The ads for the paid campaign are being donated by agencies through the partnership, which is serving as an unpaid consultant and will receive no Federal money. Media planning and buying are being handled by Bates USA in New York, part of Cordiant Communications Group PLC, and Zenith Media Services in New York, which is owned by Cordiant and Saatchi & Saatchi PLC. Though many Americans consider anti-drug advertising a necessary component of the federal war on drugs, some perceive the ambitious crusade as money ill spent. Ethan Nadelmann, director of the Lindesmith Center in New York, a drug policy research organization that is part of the Open Society Institute sponsored by financier George Soros, said: "For the past 10 years, our nation's kids have been bombarded with anti-drug messages, and it is these same kids who are experimenting with more drugs. While these ads are well intended, this money could be better spent on programs that are proven effective in reducing drug use, such as after-school programs and treatment on demand." Hedrick, needless to say, disagreed. "I don't understand how it is a big waste of money," he said. "We have seen in independent research a strong and consistent correlation between exposure of anti-drug messages and improving anti-drug attitudes and behavior." "There is simply no more cost-effective way" to deter drug use, he added, "than by investing 1 percent of the federal anti-drug budget in this public-private partnership." Still, Hedrick said, "the proof will be in the pudding." The partnership is awaiting the results of research from the 12 test markets, which are expected sometime in the fall, he said. There will also be research to evaluate the effectiveness of the national paid campaign. Other organizations are also offering their assistance. The American Advertising Federation in Washington -- which represents agencies, media and marketers -- will serve as a clearinghouse for matching public service advertising in 100 local markets where the paid campaign will appear. And the Advertising Council in New York -- the nonprofit organization that coordinates public service campaigns for the agency and media industries -- will serve as a clearinghouse for matching public service advertising nationally.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Clinton, Gingrich Announce New Anti-Drug Campaign ('Associated Press' Version) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 15:35:10 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US: Wire: Clinton, Gingrich Announce New Anti-Drug Campaign Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn) Source: Associated Press Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 CLINTON, GINGRICH ANNOUNCE NEW ANTI-DRUG CAMPAIGN ATLANTA (AP) -- Updating ``just say no'' with images to ``knock America upside the head,'' President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich announced an anti-drug campaign aimed at bombarding the nation with $1 billion in hard-hitting ads over the next five years. Starting Thursday night on network TV, the government campaign -- bigger than last year's huge Nike and Sprint campaigns for comparison-- intends to hit both parents and kids at least four times a week with graphic images of drugs' destructiveness and children's vulnerability. ``These ads were designed to knock America upside the head and get America's attention and empower all of you,'' Clinton told an audience of mostly children, clusters of them sporting Boy Scout and Girl Scout uniforms. Gingrich pledged to try to win congressional approval for expanding the $195 million one-year campaign into a five-year, $1 billion taxpayer investment in stopping youth drug use. And the government will ask media outlets to match the federal money dollar for dollar. In a 1997 national survey, half of high school seniors and nearly one-third of eighth-graders reported using drugs. ``I wanted to come here today to stand with the president to say that on a bipartisan basis -- Democrats and Republicans, the legislative branch and the presidency -- we're all trying to reach out to every young American and say, 'Don't do it,''' said Gingrich, R-Ga. The president recalled his younger brother, Roger, battling cocaine addiction. ``What kind of fool am I that I didn't know what was going on? ... There's somebody like my brother back at your school who's a good kid, just a little lost,'' Clinton said. Politics were only on temporary hold. From the ceremonies in the Georgia World Congress Center, Gingrich headed to a Republican fund-raiser in New York, Clinton to Democratic events in Atlanta and Miami that would raise $1.3 million for the effort to oust the GOP from control of Congress. The president also was stopping in Daytona Beach, Fla., to meet with those who have been fighting the state's raging wildfires. Even before Clinton wrapped his drug speech, Republican Sens. Paul Coverdell of Georgia and John Ashcroft of Missouri issued statements knocking Clinton's record as soft on drug criminals. The ads were in 75 Thursday morning newspapers. Though the bulk of the campaign will focus on TV, ads produced free by some of Madison Avenue's premiere agencies will also run on radio, billboards and the Internet. One spot walks viewers past school lockers into a classroom of pint-sized desks. ``It's true,'' the announcer exhorts parents, ``The use of marijuana has actually gone down ... to the fifth grade. Talk to your kids now, before someone else does.'' Another is a spin-off of the fried egg ``This is your brain on drugs'' ad so widely used during the Partnership for a Drug-Free America's 11-year campaign, with its Reagan-era slogan ``Just Say No.'' The updated version, about heroin's ruinous power, shows a frying-pan-wielding young woman smashing an egg and then tearing up her whole kitchen. That ad has been running since January in 12 test cities where it generated a 300 percent increase in calls to a national clearinghouse of information on drug use, said retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, Clinton's drug policy director. At least $150 million of this year's appropriation will be spent directly on air time targeting middle-schoolers. That, according to 1997 Advertising Age figures, is more than Nike or Sprint spent to air single-brand ads. Based on a study of the test campaign, McCaffrey acknowledged it could be three years before anyone knows whether the ads are actually driving down drug use. And some activists doubted the ads' effectiveness. The Lindesmith Center, a research project of philanthropist George Soros, who supports legalized marijuana for medical use, said the money would be better spent on after-school programs and drug treatment. For more than a decade, media outlets gave the Partnership for a Drug-Free America some $3 billion in free air time for its public service announcements. But since 1991, with the explosion of new competition that cable channels brought, prime time has been squeezed by network promotions, shoving many public service announcements to the wee hours. Teen drug use more than doubled during that period.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Clinton, Gingrich Kick Off Huge Government Anti-Drug Ad Campaign (A Different 'Associated Press' Version) Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 10:22:40 -0400 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US: Wire: Clinton, Gingrich Kick Off Huge Government Anti-Drug Ad Campaign Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Patrick Henry (firstname.lastname@example.org) Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Source: Associated Press CLINTON, GINGRICH KICK OFF HUGE GOVERNMENT ANTI-DRUG AD CAMPAIGN WASHINGTON (AP) - Remember that old fried egg ad with its warning, "This is your brain on drugs"? It's going big time this year, with the federal government spending $195 million more than the annual advertising campaigns of American Express, Nike or Sprint to plaster the airwaves with anti-drug messages. The ad campaign, a five-year project being given a bipartisan send-off today in Atlanta by President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich, could turn into a $1 billion government investment in stopping teen drug use. "This is an effort to talk to a generation that started to get the wrong message," said retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who heads Clinton's drug control policy office. In a 1997 national survey, half of high school seniors and nearly one-third of eighth-graders reported using illegal drugs at least once. Today's unveiling promised a brief cease-fire in the sharp election-year squabbling between Clinton and Republican leaders on everything from drugs to foreign policy. Gingrich, R-Ga., who rearranged his schedule to be at the president's side on his own Atlanta turf, said congressional Republicans were committed to funding the campaign for its full five-year run. "It's important first of all to send a signal to young people that whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, you're committed to getting across the message that drugs are dangerous. This is a national message, not a political message," the speaker said in an interview Wednesday. "The level of support among Republicans in the Congress is strong and growing. ... We want to break the back of the drug culture over the next five years," he said. Politics would be on only a temporary hold. From today's ceremonies in the Georgia World Congress Center, Gingrich was headed to a Republican fund-raiser in New York, Clinton to Democratic money events in Atlanta and Miami. The president also was stopping in Daytona Beach, Fla., to meet with those who have been fighting the state's raging wildfires. Beginning today in 75 major newspapers and on the four major TV networks tonight, parents and a target youth audience between the ages of 9 and 18 will be bombarded by provocative anti-drug ads produced gratis by some of Madison Avenue's premiere ad agencies. The goal is to hit the average family least four times a week either through TV, radio, newspapers, billboards or the Internet. One of the spots is a spin-off of the fried egg ad popularized during the Partnership for a Drug-Free America's 11-year campaign, with its Reagan-era slogan "Just Say No." The updated version, meant to dramatize the effects of heroin use, shows a Winona Ryder look-alike bust up an egg and her whole kitchen with a frying pan. That ad already has been running in 12 test cities where it generated a 300 percent increase in calls to a national clearinghouse of information on drug use, McCaffrey said. The nationwide government campaign is the 15th largest single-brand ad project, larger than the media buys of American Express, Nike and Sprint, said Steve Dnistrian, senior vice president of the Partnership for a Drug-Free America. But its funding will be vulnerable to Capitol Hill's annual appropriations process, which is why all sides strived to keep today's unveiling bipartisan. A one-year campaign is worthless, Dnistrian said. "Coke and Pepsi don't run an ad campaign for a year and then walk away. To maintain market share you have to be out there constantly reminding them." The Lindesmith Center, a research project of philanthropist George Soros, who supports free clean needles for intravenous drug users and legalized marijuana for medical use, issued a statement saying the money would be better spent on after-school programs and drug treatment. For more than a decade, Dnistrian's PDFA has rounded up help from the advertising industry and media outlets who pitched in as much as $3 billion in free air time to put out anti-drug ads primarily aimed at young people. But since 1991, with the explosion of new competition that cable channels brought, prime time has been squeezed by network promotions, consigning public service announcements to the wee hours even as drug use by teens skyrocketed. As part of the new ad initiative, the government will ask media outlets to match the taxpayers' investment dollar for dollar. And McCaffrey hoped the campaign would live well beyond five years to keep up with successive crops of young people. "We'll always have to start over with a new generation of eighth-graders," he said. "Some people like to call this a war on drugs. .. It's a war on ignorance."
------------------------------------------------------------------- Anti-Drug Ads To Bombard Airwaves ('Seattle Times' Version) Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:43:41 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US: Anti-drug ads to bombard airwaves Cc: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: John Smith Source: Seattle Times (WA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.seattletimes.com/ Pubdate: 9 Jul 1998 Author: Seattle Times news services. Material from The Associated Press, The Washington Post and Newsday is included in this report. ANTI-DRUG ADS TO BOMBARD AIRWAVES WASHINGTON - Remember that old fried-egg ad with its warning, "This is your brain on drugs"? It's going big time this year, with the federal government spending $195 million - rivaling the annual advertising campaigns of American Express, Nike or Sprint - to plaster the airwaves with anti-drug messages. The ad campaign, a five-year project being given a send-off today in Atlanta by President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich, could turn into a $1 billion government investment in stopping teen drug use. The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy is launching ads on TV, radio and movie screens, in newspapers and magazines, and on the Internet. "If Corporate America uses mass media to sell everything from sneakers to soda, we've got to use the full power of mass media to unsell drugs to children," said Barry McCaffrey, director of the office. Among the ads are a television spot showing a young woman smashing objects in a kitchen to demonstrate the emotional and physical effects of heroin use and a radio spot that chides parents for not talking to their children about the dangers of drug use. McCaffrey said test-marketing has suggested that the ads do in fact stimulate interest in anti-drug efforts, citing such measurements as increased calls to drug hotlines. But the media campaign, which was first promoted by McCaffrey and won bipartisan support in Congress, has drawn criticism from groups that question whether the use of ads has proved sufficiently effective in the past to warrant the increased investment. "For the past 10 years, our nation's kids have been bombarded with anti-drug messages, and it is these same kids who are experimenting with more drugs," said Ethan Nadelmann, director of the Lindesmith Center, a drug-policy research organization funded by financier George Soros, who has supported decriminalizing the medical use of marijuana. "While these ads are well-intended, this money could be better spent on programs that are proven effective in reducing drug use, such as after-school programs and treatment on demand," Nadelmann said. The federal campaign is primarily aimed at middle-school-age adolescents, approximately 11 to 13 years old, because that is the age at which young people form their attitudes toward drug use and are at increased risk of beginning to use illegal drugs. The other major target audience is parents. In the past, groups such as the Partnership for a Drug-Free America depended on donated time and space to run ads. But since 1991, TV networks have slashed the number of public-service ads they run, shifted others to the middle of the night and created their own ads. Congress responded by authorizing the White House to pay for the anti-drug ads.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Clinton Kicks Off $2 Billion Anti-Drug Media Blitz ('Reuters' Version) Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 23:17:43 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US: Wire: Clinton Kicks Off $2 Billion Anti-Drug Media Blitz Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn) Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Source: Reuters Author: Arshad Mohammed CLINTON KICKS OFF $2 BILLION ANTI-DRUG MEDIA BLITZ ATLANTA (Reuters) - Seeking to shock children into avoiding illegal drugs, President Clinton Thursday launched a $2 billion media blitz of provocative radio, television, newspaper and Internet ads. The money, half from the government and half to be raised from the private sector, will be spent over the next five years, beginning with simultaneous anti-drug advertisements on the major U.S. television networks Thursday night. The ads are designed to be jarring, with one showing a girl screaming and smashing things with a frying pan while telling the audience this is what drugs will do to their lives. Another shows a child recounting her mother's warnings about talking to strangers and playing with matches. Asked what her mother had said about drugs, the girl is silent. Officials said the Clinton administration is trying to use the most sophisticated techniques of television and Hollywood to shake children and their parents out of complacency about the effects of illegal drugs. Critics, however, say there is scant evidence that such ad campaigns work and that the $1 billion that is to come from the government, along with an equal amount in free air time and advertising space from media groups, could be better spent. Speaking in Atlanta, Clinton recalled his half-brother Roger's drug habit and said the ads were aimed at everyone: children, their parents and siblings. "My brother nearly died from a cocaine habit and I've asked myself a thousand times: what kind of fool was I that I did not know that this was going on?" he said. "How did this happen that I didn't see this coming and didn't stop it?" "Nobody in America is free of this: not the president, not any community, any school, any church, any neighborhood," he added. "These ads are designed to knock America up side the head and get America's attention." Clinton launched the campaign in a rare appearance with Republican House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich, who said Congress, which provided $195 million for the program's first year, would come up with the rest of the money. "We are all trying to reach out to every young American and say: don't do it," Gingrich said. The campaign, crafted by Clinton's Office of National Drug Control Policy and the Partnership for a Drug-free America as well as other nonprofit groups, is not without critics. "For the past 10 years, our nation's kids have been bombarded with anti-drug messages, and it is these same kids who are experimenting with more drugs," said Ethan Nadelmann, of the Lindesmith Center. The center is a drug policy group funded by investor George Soros, who advocates decriminalizing some drugs and emphasizing treatment instead of punishment. "While these ads are well intended, this money could be better spent on programs that are proven effective in reducing drug use, such as after-school programs and treatment on demand," Nadelmann added. After presenting the ads, Clinton was to attend an Atlanta lunch to raise $500,000 for Michael Coles, a Democrat seeking to unseat Georgia Republican Sen. Paul Coverdell. In 1996, Coles had sought to oust Gingrich from his House seat. Clinton then flies to Daytona Beach to meet with victims of the wildfires that have swept Florida in recent weeks and then on to Miami for a fund-raising dinner to drum up $800,000 for fellow Democrats at the home of actor Sylvester Stallone.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Clinton To Unveil Anti-Drug Advertising Blitz (A Different 'Reuters' Version) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 12:47:31 EDT Errors-To: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Paul Wolf (email@example.com) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: $ 2 Billion Psychological Campaign Underway Clinton to unveil anti-drug advertising blitz By Arshad Mohammed WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Clinton kicks off a $2 billion media blitz Thursday to bombard children with radio, television and newspaper ads discouraging them from taking drugs. Clinton will unveil the advertisements at a high-tech ceremony in Atlanta, one of the 12 cities where they have been test-marketed before their national release Thursday. The ads are designed to shock, with one showing a girl smashing things with a frying pan while telling the audience this is what drugs will do to their lives. Another shows a child recounting what she and her mother talk about. Asked what her mother tells her about drugs, the girl is silent. Officials said the Clinton administration is trying to use the most sophisticated techniques of television and Hollywood to shake children and their parents out of complacency about the effects of illegal drugs. "The ads are designed to be jarring and provocative," said White House spokesman Joe Lockhart. "They get your attention." The campaign was crafted by Clinton's Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and nonprofit groups with the assistance of public relations experts Porter Novelli. "This is an enormously powerful opportunity to make a difference, for very little money in the medium that Americans understand," said ONDCP spokesman Bob Weiner. Weiner said $2 billion is expected to be spent on the ads over the next five years, with $195 million funded each year by the government and an equal amount raised from the private sector, partly in free air time and newspaper space from media groups. The campaign, however, is not without critics. "For the past 10 years, our nation's kids have been bombarded with anti-drug messages, and it is these same kids who are experimenting with more drugs," said Ethan Nadelmann, of the Lindesmith Center. The center is a drug policy group funded by financier George Soros, who advocates decriminalizing some drugs and emphasizing treatment instead of punishment. "While these ads are well intended, this money could be better spent on programs that are proven effective in reducing drug use, such as after-school programs and treatment on demand," Nadelmann added. Anti-drug groups also said there was no evidence the campaign would work. "While a national media campaign will get a lot of attention and make it look like something is being done about adolescent drug use, there is no research that supports this massive expenditure," said Kendra Wright, director of the Family Watch anti-drug group.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Taking Stock On The War On Drugs (Transcript Of The Lengthy Cable News Network Version, Including A Brief Debate Between General Barry McCaffrey And Mike Gray, Author Of 'Drug Crazy') Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 00:02:46 -0400 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US: Transcript: Taking Stock On The War On Drugs Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Paul Wolf (email@example.com) Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Source: CNN Contact 1: firstname.lastname@example.org Contact 2: email@example.com Website: http://www.cnn.com/ Note: Aired July 9, 1998 - 3:00 p.m. ET TAKING STOCK ON THE WAR ON DRUGS (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is what happens to your brain after starting marijuana. BARRY McCAFFREY, DRUG POLICY DIRECTOR: At the end of the day -- and really this comes lock, stock, and barrel out of Partnership for Drug Free America. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is what your family goes through. McCAFFREY: What we're trying to do is change youth attitudes. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And your friends. REP. NEWT GINGRICH (R) HOUSE SPEAKER: When you have the courage to say, "No, I'm not going to do drugs and you shouldn't do drugs either," when you have the courage to turn in somebody who's a drug dealer, when you have the courage to insist that you want to go to a drug-free school, live in a drug-free neighborhood, when you turn to your younger brother and sister and say, "Don't you do it," you may literally be saving their life. WILLIAM J. CLINTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: These ads are designed to knock America up side the head and get America's attention and to empower all of you who are trying to do the right thing. Please do it. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Any questions? (END VIDEO CLIP) BOBBIE BATTISTA, HOST: Will new government ads keep your kids off drugs? Ask drug policy director Barry McCaffrey why he thinks they work. Also, a man some call Dr. Vomit offers a more graphic deterrent. And this man suggests the government is in denial. Are you? Get ready to talk back. Hello, everybody, and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE, CNN's interactive talk show. I'm Bobbie Battista, and we are taking stock of the war on drugs as the government releases a new series of public service announcements today. With us in our studios, General Barry McCaffrey, director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy and a member of the National Security Council. With us as well from Dallas, we are joined by Dr. Larry Alexander, an emergency room physician who has earned the nickname, Dr. Vomit. And we will get into that a little bit later in the show. General McCaffrey, good to see you. Nice to have you on the show. McCAFFREY: Good to be here, Bobbie. BATTISTA: The ad that we saw just a few moments ago is pretty much the sum and substance of what you hope will be a $2 billion, five-year advertising campaign aimed at keeping kids off drugs. Why do you think these ads will work? McCAFFREY: Well, we're going to begin what we launched today with President Clinton. And we had Attorney General Janet Reno here and Secretary Donna Shalala and the Speaker to try and indicate this is a bipartisan effort. We're going to talk to children, particularly middle school youngsters, about the dangers of drugs, but not just on television, that beautiful Partnership for Drug-Free America work, we're also going to be on the Internet, radio, print media, a very sophisticated five-year effort. BATTISTA: So it's a saturation campaign for the most part? McCAFFREY: We're going to try and talk to every young person four times a week in prime time access. BATTISTA: OK, now how will you know that this kind of an ad is getting to the people it needs to reach? McCAFFREY: We're going to have to evaluate it. We went out to 12 test cities in the last four months and ran these ads, a $20 million effort, saw dramatic feedback of 500 percent increase in telephone calls to these community coalitions, which is really the heart and soul of what we're doing. We think it will work, and we're going to have to evaluate it, though, step by step. BATTISTA: What do you think now of critics who say, "How about taking the $2 billion and spending it elsewhere?" McCAFFREY: Well, one of the nice things is we don't have to make an either/or determination. We've increased the amount of money in drug prevention activities by more than 15 percent just in the coming year. We're going to do a lot of things. We're going to support boys and girls clubs, Pride, DARE Program, a lot of efforts to try and engage young people after school, between 3:00 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. and on weekends and in the summer. BATTISTA: Let me ask you something. You've got a gold bracelet on your wrist. McCAFFREY: Yeah. BATTISTA: And there is special significance to that. Could you tell us about that? McCAFFREY: Well, this is a very special thing. It's Tish Elizabeth Smith's (ph) memory bracelet. She died in her first year at college, this beautiful young woman, a straight "A" student. Her mother is here today, Deborah Padgett Barr, and we're going to talk to her of an overdose of heroin which she took smoking, probably one of her first drug uses in her life. It's a tremendous reminder to people like me of why we're doing this. BATTISTA: Let me talk to Mrs. Barr. You're right, she's right behind you here in our audience. And I see you have pictures of your daughter. Can you share her story with us? DEBORAH PADGETT BARR, MOTHERS WITHOUT CHILDREN: Tish was 18. She had been a very good student in high school. She graduated an honor roll student, went off to college. I encouraged her to take college classes outside of the city, and she would say jokingly, "Mommy, I'm not big enough to leave you." But just a few months later, she left me forever. With the end of her high school days and the beginning of college, there were new people in her life, new situations and challenges. And I think Tish's need to fit in outweighed the logic she used to have. She was very anti-drug as a child. The new friends in her life gave her some drugs, and she started out smoking marijuana in the fall. And I don't think she got the message that I got as a child. That's why this campaign is very, very important. Just like we would immunize our children against measles or diphtheria, this is an opportunity to take information vaccine all across our country and save our children's lives. BATTISTA: Let me bring in Dr. Larry Alexander now, because unfortunately, Dr. Alexander, you see quite a number of cases just like this, don't you? DR. LARRY ALEXANDER, BAYLOR MEDICAL CENTER: Unfortunately, we do. BATTISTA: Can you tell us about a few of those? ALEXANDER: Well, even just this past weekend, we had two overdoses in the hospital that I work in now. And I have changed hospitals since really becoming involved in this. And it's just an example of how this is beginning to spread throughout the entire metroplex areas. I don't think any suburban area is safe anymore. And I agree with Mrs. Barr. I think many of these kids who are trying this are doing it to fit in because their friends are doing it, because they want to belong. And unfortunately, many of them, when they're trying heroin this time, aren't aware that the chieva (ph) that they're using is truly heroin. BATTISTA: All right, let me take a couple of questions here from the audience. Jennifer, go ahead. JENNIFER: I just wondered why the money wouldn't have been split more between community-based programs and programs that work from the ground up, as well as the sort of top down media campaign. It seems like often, children are affected by their peers and what's around them and their environment as much as they're affected by what they see sort of far off in the media. And I was wondering if there would be a way for the money to be allocated both from the top down and bottom up. BATTISTA: General? McCAFFREY: I think your point is right on target. This is an either/or proposition. Tremendous increases in funding, three years in a row, have been the biggest drug budgets in history. The amount of money that's actually going to this piece of it, the youth media strategy campaign, is under one percent of the total. So we don't have to choose. We're going to support broad-based drug prevention programs, including things like safe and drug-free schools money. So I think you're quite right. We have to build community coalitions if we expect to make any progress in this. BATTISTA: Let me scoot over here real quick. We do have to take a quick break, and when we come back, a man who says the drug war is a dirty, rotten, miserable failure. We'll be back. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CLINTON: My brother nearly died from a cocaine habit. And I've asked myself a thousand times: What kind of fool was I that I did not know this was going on? You know, I got myself elected president. I'm supposed to know what people are thinking, what's going on in their minds. How did this happen that I didn't see this coming and didn't stop it? (END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) ANNOUNCER: In today's "New York Times," the first of many anti-drug ads encouraging parents to talk to their kids about drugs appears. A mother says, "My kid doesn't smoke pot. He's either at school, soccer practice, piano lessons, or at a friend's house." The son says, "I usually get stoned at school, after soccer practice, before piano lessons, or at my friend's house." BATTISTA: Welcome back, everybody. We are talking about the war on drugs today. Let's take a phone call now from Joe in West Virginia. Joe, go ahead. JOE: Yes. Over two million people admit to using cannabis in the United States. Roughly 200,000, that's two percent, were caught last year. Conversely, 98 percent were not caught. This to me shows a complete failure of the government's drug policy. The fact is that people who want to use drugs will continue to do so regardless of the laws in place. BATTISTA: Well, General, we had an Internet message there a few minutes ago, too, someone criticizing the effort because it's going after the users rather than the suppliers. McCAFFREY: Of course, what we're talking about today is we're talking about drug prevention, focusing on young people in middle school years, and reducing the likelihood of using cigarettes, alcohol, the most dangerous drug affecting our children, and marijuana. That's 90 percent of the drug abuse problem. And it produces the four million chronic addicts in our country today. So prevention is the heart and soul of this strategy. At the same time, we've got to recognize that we want to support local law enforcement. We want high rates of social rejection of drugs, and law enforcement is part of that equation. BATTISTA: I thought it was interesting a few moments ago when Deborah, whose daughter overdosed on heroin trying it the first time, you said that she was brought up who was very anti-drug as a child and obviously was getting that message from those around her but then tried drugs anyway. So, I mean -- Crystal, go ahead. BARR: I'm not sure that I adequately prepared my daughter for the drugs she would be facing. The drugs of today are not the same drugs that I grew up with, and I did not understand -- For example, I didn't know that kids were smoking heroin. My image of a heroin user did not fit my daughter, so I didn't prepare her for that. I think in her mind, smoking heroin must have seemed much less serious BATTISTA: The PSA we're looking at now as you talk is one, as a matter of fact, that addresses parents and the fact that they should talk to their children about drugs. All right, joining us now is Mike Gray, a writer and filmmaker. He authored the film, "China Syndrome," among others. His latest book is entitled, "Drug Crazy, How We Got Into this Mess and How We Can Get Out." Mike, welcome to the show. Let me ask you, first of all, how you even got into this topic. I mean, how did this book even come about? MIKE GRAY, DRUG WAR CRITIC: Well, I've been aware of the fact, as I think 75 percent of the American people are aware of the fact, that the drug war is a failure. And so six years ago, I decided to start digging into this. And the deeper I got, the more horrified I became. And this book was the result of that. I tried to cover the entire drug war and then shrink it down to 200 pages. So it's basically a two subway ride read, and you can get through the whole thing and understand what went wrong and why. BATTISTA: Well, tell us if you can in a capsule. GRAY: Well, in capsule, we didn't have a drug problem in this country prior to 1914. These wounds are totally self-inflicted. And the terrible tragedy that happened to Mrs. Barr and her daughter and the stories that Larry is talking about, the emergency room heroin overdoses, this all occurred during the most stringent prohibition this planet has ever seen. We enacted it in 1914. At that time, we did not have a drug problem. There were a couple of hundred thousand addicts in the country, and there was no teenage addiction. The teenage addicts were absolutely unheard of. Prior to 1914, for all practical purposes, children didn't have access to drugs. Now, of course, they can get anything they want from the neighbor's kid. BATTISTA: What do you think of this new ad campaign, Mike? GRAY: Well, I'm strongly in favor of prevention messages going out to teenagers. The problem with this ad campaign, like the previous ad campaigns, is it's based upon very flawed premises. Let me tell you, about three years ago when I was in the middle of the research for my book, "Drug Crazy," I got a call from one of my son's former high school buddies. And he said, "I understand you're working on a book about drugs. I need help. I'm a heroin addict." Well, I was blown away. And I couldn't understand what had happened to this kid who was, you know, had a scholarship to college and was on the way to a brilliant career as an artist. And I asked him, "How did you stumble into this hole?" And he said, "Well, they lied to us about marijuana, and I figured they were lying to us about this stuff as well." Well, it turns out we weren't lying about heroin. We were telling the truth. But how is this kid supposed to know? And that's the underlying flaw that permeates this campaign and others is in the attempt to rope marijuana in with these hard drugs: heroin and cocaine. BATTISTA: So you're worried the kids won't take these ads seriously? GRAY: Well, the problem is in attempting to equate marijuana with the evil of heroin, the message that we send them is that heroin is no more dangerous than marijuana. And that's a terrible message to send to these kids, and we are now reaping the message -- the harvest that that message sowed. McCAFFREY: Bobbie, I wonder if I could add something. BATTISTA: Yeah, go ahead, General. McCAFFREY: I think Mike actually has a lot of good points, one of which I would certainly underscore is that we've got to read history. And Professor Dave Musto up at Yale University is a good place to start, probably our prominent historian about drug abuse in America. GRAY: That's where I started. McCAFFREY: We've had a terrible drug problem in America during the early part of this century. Cocaine and opiate use was widespread. We had a terrible drug use problem in the 1870s. We've been here before. And what happens when we get energized and reject this substance abuse, it goes down. So, you know, to some extent, Mike and I may agree on it. Now second thing you've got to clearly argue is that when I'm asked what the most dangerous drug in America is, I don't talk about methamphetamines and heroin. I talk about a 12-year-old smoking pot regularly and using beer. And Bobbie, the reason we say that is that when we look at this Columbia University data, Joe Califano and his associates, a 12-year- old smoking pot is 79 times more likely to end up as a chronic drug abuser than one who isn't. So gateway behavior is a threat. BATTISTA: Let's ask our medical person to get in on that. Dr. Alexander. ALEXANDER: Thank you. I was just about to jump in on that. I agree with a lot of these points that are being made. I do like the fact that we're going to be doing this campaign where people are actually able to see some of these things on television. The problem I have with it, I think, is sometimes it's off target for the kids. They have been hit with so many different things on the media that many times they'll tune these things out. And the message that they get from their friends is that this isn't bad. The message that they sometimes get from their parents who smoke, who drink, who may or may not use marijuana is: "This isn't bad." And then when they do eventually get around to talking to them about the heroin or something other that's harder, then they may not often put this all together. And I think that we need to be working harder to educate these younger kids. The general mentioned that many of these kids now are ten, 12 years old are smoking pot. I have seen that, and it's very, very frustrating when they come in. It's really frightening when you have an 11-year-old who is so drunk that they can't stand up. And you know that they're getting it either at school or after school. And their parents come in and deny it, and then parents have to leave to go out and smoke a cigarette. I think this is really bad behavior. BATTISTA: We have to interrupt for just a second. We will continue our discussion here with our guests. We have to go back to the newsroom now and Natalie Allen. (BREAKING NEWS COVERAGE) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CLINTON: We work more with countries where drugs are grown and processed to try to stop the drugs from coming into the United States in the first place. (END VIDEO CLIP) BATTISTA: And welcome back, everybody, to TALKBACK LIVE. The topic is drugs today. Let's take a look at a couple of faxes from Mark: "The government is spending money on an ad campaign that causes most of our youth to go into convulsive fits of laughter. The kids know that these ads are largely comprised of half truths and fabrications. The fact has sabotaged our credibility as adults and authority figures." And from Thomas in Arkansas: "Drug prohibition can never work for the simple reason that it creates a criminal black market that is impossible to control. It is time to end a brain dead, self-defeating policy that causes a hundred times as much trouble as the drugs themselves could ever do." I guess we would have to ask Thomas what the alternative is. But anyway, let's go to Peter in our audience. PETER: Great. I'm a New York City school teacher in Staten Island, New York, and I have found that one of the most difficult problems in discussing drugs -- I had the opportunity to teach a sociology course this year, and many of the students said to me, "The president of the United States has been on MTV, and he told us that he smoked pot. And therefore, we can do it, too." And they even asked me as their teacher, "Did you ever smoke pot?" And I said, "No, I've never used drugs. I didn't use them in school. I still don't use them today," and they don't believe me. They say, "If the president has done it, why can't we?" And I just feel, General, that we've taken a great step backwards as opposed to the Nancy Reagan campaigns which stated, "Just say no to drugs," that told kids that they could say no and they did have an option. What are your feelings on that? McCAFFREY: Well, you know, what we've got to recognize in our country is that one out of three adult Americans has used an illegal drug: marijuana, cocaine, LSD. We had a revolution in the 1970s which almost wrecked America, our economic efficiency, our homes, the armed forces. It was a disaster. Those 72 million Americans, the Speaker of the House, and others, it depends on how old you are and where you were during that period of time whether you encountered this. But they've rejected drug use. And so you've got people like our president, who is a great father and a parent who doesn't want his daughter using drugs and doesn't want a society that's stoned and dazed. So I think all of us shouldn't say, "Let's look back at the 1970s." Let's say, "Who commits to creating a drug-free country." BATTISTA: Well, maybe it doesn't go far enough with these ads. Let's ask Dr. Alexander why he has been nicknamed Dr. Vomit, for one thing, because, Doctor, you do take a bit more graphic approach to this, don't you? ALEXANDER: I do. I feel a lot of times that these ad campaigns really don't do enough for kids. And after having been through quite a few situations that really just made me angry and actually really hurt me where I had to be the one to call parents to tell them their child had died of a heroin overdose, I decided I wanted to do something about it. And I was asked by the schools to come talk to the kids about drugs. And the first time I went, they didn't seemingly get anything out of it because I went in my suit and tie and I talked to them as a physician. I changed my tactics after that and started dressing down. I dressed in blue jeans, a shirt, tennis shoes, and I started telling them the stories about what I did in the emergency department, what I was seeing. And I found that they began to listen. And I started relating some of the stories about some of the kids that they knew who had died. And in the end, I wound up finding that the thing that really got them was the dramatic approach using the example of what it felt like to die from heroin. And most people who die from heroin die because they stop breathing. And most of the time the reason they stop breathing is because they vomited due to the narcotic effect of the drug. They swallow all the vomit back into their lungs and basically drown on their own vomit. And that seemingly struck a large nerve with most of the kids I talked with. And as the word got around, the kids starting talking more about the vomit doctor. And that's how that name came about. But it seems to work. BATTISTA: And Mike Gray, I read in the research also that you were expounding a bit on how they do things overseas, certainly places in Europe. GRAY: Well, Bobbie, the Dutch don't have this problem. I mean, the Dutch realized a long time ago that a certain small segment of the youths are going to experiment with drugs regardless of what we do. And they felt that it was better for them to experiment with marijuana than with heroin and cocaine. So they erected a barrier between these drugs. They made marijuana available in coffee shops to anyone over 18. And as a consequence, they have an aging heroin population. In other words, the number of the heroin users in Holland are getting older and older, which means that they are not getting new recruits. General McCaffrey informs us that here in the United States, the greatest jump in use is among eighth graders. And this is during this incredibly stringent prohibition. The Dutch have a much more tolerant policy, and their results are better than ours across the board. McCAFFREY: Mike, if I may, let me say again, I think we ought to agree to disagree on the facts. The Dutch experience is not something I would suggest we want to model. It's been an unmitigated disaster... GRAY: General, General, General, let me... McCAFFREY: Let me finish, if I may, Mike. GRAY: OK, all right. McCAFFREY: I would argue instead... Let me just take the title of your book, "Drug Crazy." It seems to me you've got to be crazy to use drugs or to make it easier for young people to do that. And that's essentially what some of us argue the Dutch have tried to do. GRAY: General, let me caution you that your deputy, Jim McDunna (ph), told me that the situation in the Netherlands was a disaster during one of our recent debates. So yesterday, I checked with the Dutch embassy in Washington. And hopefully, they are monitoring this broadcast, and you may get a diplomatic protest from the Dutch embassy because they are quite concerned... McCAFFREY: They've done them from the French, also, I might add, diplomatic protests, and the Germans and others who are concerned about their example in Europe. GRAY: General, let me finish. The French have a higher addiction rate than the Dutch. We have a higher addiction rate than the Dutch. And the worse thing that we have is a decreasing age among the heroin users.McCAFFREY: Actually, you know, I probably would again dispute you on the facts. The rates of drug abuse among young people in Holland have tended to go up dramatically during this period of time, while ours were going down. So I really don't agree with what you're saying. GRAY: Bobbie, I hope for the sake of settling this argument once and for all you will check with the Dutch embassy, because the Dutch embassy is going to issue a formal protest against this... BATTISTA: Mike, unfortunately, hold on to that thought and others. We do have to hit a break very quickly here. We'll be back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) TERRI: Yes, I'd like to respond to the gentleman who asked the question, is the fight on drugs -- is it going to be harder now that the president has used drugs. Well, I'd like to answer that question. I feel that the answer to that question is no, simple because we're not only here to preach the drug-free message to our young adults, we're also here to teach them that they need to learn from their mistakes. Now, I believe if the president of the United States can actually admit on national TV that he has used pot, but now, he's here to fight against it -- now I do believe if students, like the gentleman said early, if the students may look up to the president, and say he has used it, why can't we. If they can look up to him to say that, why can't they look up to him now being that he has made a mistake and say well, he admitted that he made a mistake, why can't we stand up now and say, hey, we don't want to do this. BATTISTA: And welcome back everyone, I'm Bobbie Battista, we're talking about your children and drugs today. And right before we went to the break, Mike Gray, you made a couple references to legalization. And I know Dr. Alexander wanted to comment on that. DR. ALEXANDER: Yes, Mike, I just waned to say I am against legalization for a number of reasons. I think legalizing it takes some of the money aspect out of it, but you've got to realize there's a lot of other things involved -- the emotional, the psychological, the physical addictions that can occur. And legalizing is not going to take care of anything. In regards, the General's comments, I do think that this is on the rise in all levels. I'm a member of the American College of Emergency Physicians -- that's 20,000 physicians across the country, and I've been talking with my colleagues and we're seeing this in the rise everywhere. It's not just in suburban areas anymore, it's spreading out to rural areas. It's not just in the inner cities. And legalizing this is not going to take care of it. I really think we've got to educate these kids more. GRAY: Absolutely, I agree with you that we need to educate. McCAFFREY: You're right on target, I think doctor. GRAY: Let me say the problem with this approach is there are basically only three ways to get a handle on this problem, to get drugs under control and out of the hands of children, which I think we all agree is the primary objective. First, you can either have the federal government control the distribution through careful regulation and taxation to cover rehabilitation of people who fall off the wagon, or you can turn it over to private industry with a regulatory controls and taxation or you can leave it in the hands of the mob. Now mob doesn't check for ID and what I want to know, is why -- what reason do we possibly have for leaving drug distribution in the hands of the mob? We did not have this problem prior to 1914, when we passed this prohibition law. McCAFFREY: You know Bobbie, I wonder if I could interject. BATTISTA: I don't think it matters when we had this problem or when it started. McCAFFREY: Let me add to Mike's point. GRAY: Well, there is cause and effect, you have to understand. BATTISTA: We're dealing with the problem now. We want to deal with the problem now. McCAFFREY: When I hear people say, let's make it look like alcohol and tobacco, I'm astonished. These two mildly addictive substances -- alcohol kills 150,000 people a year. Tobacco kills 440,000 people. They're available, they're legal, they're widely used. Thank God we're cutting down on both those dangerous drugs but we certainly don't want to add the power of commercial interest to hawking methamphetamine and crack cocaine. That's silly. GRAY: That's an absurd idea, general. Nobody is talking about advertising amphetamines to children. The situation that we have now is children have access to this stuff. Not only have we created a situation where children have access to drugs, we've created a situation where they have to be the front line runners in a marketplace so dangerous they have to be armed with automatic weapons. And I have to tell you, I interviewed a prosecutor in one of the lead prosecutors in night drug court in Chicago, and he said if you want to use Vietnam as a metaphor for the drug war, we're at the point where the helicopters are leaving the embassy roof. BATTISTA: All right let's go to our audience now. James, go ahead. JAMES: The gentleman from Los Angeles, I'm hearing in his solution that if we take it off the streets and put it in the private industry of the government that might help solve the problem. I have friends who have been in -- involved in violent crimes and have gotten shot because someone was high, not because they got it legally or illegally. People want to be high. They're committing crimes while they're high. We need to address the problems that come from people using drugs, not where they're getting the drugs from, how they're getting the drugs. The fact that they are getting high and they're committing crimes and it's hurting our society. GRAY: That's a fundamental mistake by the way in the assumption -- Al Capone did not kill people because he was drunk. Al Capone killed people because they were infringing on his market franchise or because they were late on payments. He had to settle all business arrangements violently because he couldn't very well call the cops. BATTISTA: Let me get a comment from Dr. Alexander then on what people are capable of doing under the influence of drugs. DR. ALEXANDER: I think people are capable of doing anything at anytime and I think drugs will lower inhibitions and allow feelings and actions to occur that might not always occur when people are thinking clearly. The problem is, I think, that we're wanting to find a point to put the blame on. This is a multifactorial problem. It's not that you're going to find one problem and that's going to take care of it. We're going to solve it in this fashion. Education has got to be the important thing, but taking it from the government, taking it from the mob, putting it in private industry. We've already seen a lot of these haven't worked in any fashion. I don't know that I have the right answer, but I think we've got to change the way we're doing it now, otherwise we're going to lose the battle all together. BATTISTA: Let me take a comment from Tom and then we've got to go to break. TOM: My comment is, wake up America. You've got 68 million young people that are strong, caring, and capable. Let's use them as teachers to their peers. BATTISTA: We'll take a break here. When we come back, is it possible to have a drug-free America? (COMMERCIAL BREAK) BATTISTA: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. Let's take a phone call. Darryl from Georgia's on the line with us. And Darryl, you don't necessarily feel this is a national problem? DARRYL: No, I don't. I believe that the problem is that we try to make it into a national problem and we try to take everyone's tax money and things like this, when not most of us -- most of us don't have a drug problem, and we shouldn't have to pay for other people's stupidity. It should be controlled by the family and friends of individual drug users, and they should be held responsible for their own stupid actions and not the whole nation held responsible for one person's mistakes. BATTISTA: All right, Darryl, thanks very much. General, I'm just curious as to whether we're spitting in the wind to some degree. Is it possible for us to have a drug-free America? McCAFFREY: No. But on the other hand, in 1979, 14 percent of the country were using drugs. Today, it's 6 percent. We're sure we can cut it by half. We do have something at stake. You know, your caller is quite correct. Most of us don't use drugs. Fourteen million Americans do and they're causing 16,000 dead a year and what we say is $110 billion in damages, so he and I and you, we've all got something at stake and someone else's child who's dead from a drug overdose. BATTISTA: Mike Gray, do you agree with that, that it's not possible to have a drug-free America? GRAY: We've been at it now for 80 years, and we've made the problem steadily worse year by year. And while General McCaffrey says that since 1980 we've cut casual marijuana and cocaine use by half. That's true, but look what we gave up in return. Prior to 1980 we had never even heard of crack cocaine. We had not heard of -- the chief of police of Omaha tells us that in 1985 the crips came out from Los Angeles and discovered this fertile market their in Omaha. A few months latter the Bloods discovered it and all of the sudden they have gang warfare and crack in Omaha. I don't consider that a success. BATTISTA: All right, Rod. ROD: Yes, I have to say that I agree with the general that I don't think there could ever be a drug-free America, because just like in the prohibition back in the early 1900s when they were making alcohol legal and people were still smuggling it in and using it, and we have the same problem today. So until everybody comes together and has some unity and try to stop this and realize that drugs are destroying our communities and destroying our homes and families, then we'll never be able to stop it. BATTISTA: And Jocilyn. JOCILYN: Yes, my question is for the general. Everyone talks about the prevention and prevention. What about those people who have already done drugs and are trying rehabilitate themselves. What are we doing to help those people? McCAFFREY: Boy, I tell, that is right on the money, because we've got four million Americans who are chronically addicted to drugs. We've got probably half the drug treatment capacity we need. Secretary Donna Shalala, Dr. Alan Leshner, the National Institute of Drug Abuse, and others, are pumping more money into creating the drug treatment capacity we need. In particular, we have to hook it to the criminal justice system. But one of the other things that Attorney General Janet Reno is doing, we're starting up drug courts all over the country. There were 12 of them three years ago, today there are over 200 -- before we leave office we hope there will be over a thousand -- where we put people addicted to illegal drugs into mandated treatment, get them back to their families and keep them from prison. That's where we're going with this problem. ALEXANDER: Bobbie, this is Larry. BATTISTA: Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Larry. ALEXANDER: I have a problem with that. Hooking this into the criminal system is not going to solve anything. Addiction is a physical problem. It's just like diabetes, hypertension, things that you're going to have to live with every day. I do agree with general that I think we're not doing enough for rehab. I have kids that we try to get in when they come in in an overdose situation, and we can't find placement. There's not an open bed. Or, the get accepted -- there insurance will cover it three days, or 10 days; that's not enough to get them off of their problem -- get them through this. They've got to learn to deal with this, to cope with it. You can't do that in 10 days. And until this country realizes that when we have someone who's addicted and has a problem and we're willing to fight with them to help them get rid of this problem, we're not ever going to hook this. There will never be a drug-free America. McCAFFREY: Larry, I think we're probably agreeing with each other. I think you're right on target. When I say hook it into the criminal justice system, Joe Califano, of Columbia University and his colleagues, think that probably 50 percent of the people behind bars, the 1.7 million who are there, have some sort of an alcohol or drug problem, maybe as high at 80 percent. So we've simply got to get that group, who are in there for burglary, robbery, other crimes of violence. We've got to get them into drug treatment, or we can never return them to their community. That's what Secretary Shalala and I and Janet Reno are working on. GRAY: Bobbie. BATTISTA: Yes, Mike -- You know what, we have to take a quick break, but I promise you the first word when we come back. And, as we go to the break, we have a question also from the Internet. From Robert, who asks: What makes this approach more effective than previous drug war approaches? We'll try to look at that too, when we come back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) BATTISTA: All right. We're back, and in the short amount of time that we have -- General, we went into the break with an Internet person asking us how this particular approach to fighting the drug war is any different than previous ones? McCAFFREY: Well, I think one of things that's different is we've got a more coherent approach. We understand that it can't be just law enforcement. It has to be drug treatment programs. It has to be fundamentally dependent upon prevention efforts. We have to work in cooperation with the international community. So let me just close by coming back to this issue of the youth media campaign. We're going to provide scientifically, ethically, sound advice to young people, and let them make their own decisions. We're going to be on the Internet, radio, TV, print media. We're going to stay at it for five years. We care about children, and we're convinced that our sales force, which is parents, doctors, ministers and coaches, can get out there with our message. BATTISTA: OK, and a last quick word from Dr. Alexander and Mike. ALEXANDER: I agree with the general. I think it's going to take a combined effort, and I think more people who are experienced in this need to get out and speak, so that kids understand our viewpoint on this, and they can make an informed decision. Our kids aren't stupid, but if they don't have all the facts, they may make the wrong choice, and if they do, they may not survive. BATTISTA: All right, Mike -- about 15 seconds. GRAY: I'm in lock step with the general on the issue of treatment for addicts in prison. We have 50,000 addicts here in prison in California, and only 400 in treatment. But I question whether or not enforced treatment will help. I was addicted to tobacco for many years and like all chronic addictions I had to quit five times before it finally took. But I wouldn't have been helped at all by being in jail in between those times. BATTISTA: All right, we are out of time. We thank all of our guests today, and for you, too, joining us. I'm Bobbie Battista. We'll see you again tomorrow on TALKBACK LIVE.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Prime-Time TV Enters Battle Against Drugs ('The San Jose Mercury News' Version) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 01:13:42 -0400 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US: Prime-Time TV Enters Battle Against Drugs Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family
Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sjmercury.com/ Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 PRIME-TIME TV ENTERS BATTLE AGAINST DRUGS Starting tonight, the federal government is doing something different to fight illegal drug use by young people: paying to air anti-drug spots on prime-time television. The Office of National Drug Control Policy is launching a $195 million-a-year campaign to create and run ads on TV, radio and movie screens, in newspapers and magazines, and on the Internet. In the past, groups like the Partnership for a Drug-Free America depended on donated time and space to run ads. But since 1991, TV networks have slashed the number of public-service ads they run, shifted others to the middle of the night and created their own public-service spots featuring stars of series. Congress responded by authorizing the White House to pay for ads, which allows the anti-drug czar's office to pick which ads should run, when and where. Some experts question whether the ads have much effect on cutting drug use. ``These kinds of campaigns are pretty good for raising awareness, but not very good on having an impact on the problem,'' said Lawrence Wallach, professor of public health at the University of California-Berkeley.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Horror Story From Canadian Border (A List Subscriber Forwards A Letter From A Non-Pot-Smoking Canadian Woman Who, Along With Her Husband, Had Her Rights Violated And Was Barred From Entering The United States To Visit Relatives Due To US Border Agents' 'Zero Tolerance' Policy) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 22:08:03 EDT Errors-To: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: ammo (email@example.com) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: Horror Story from Canadian Border ------ Forwarded message ------ Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 13:59:51 -0700 From: Carla Fry (email@example.com) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Just sharing a little horror story that demonstrates ignorance about hemp. Share the story with who ever you like. WHAT ABOUT THE INNOCENT VICTIMS OF THE 'DRUG WAR'? Recent articles and news stories report the efforts that Canadian and American customs inspectors have instituted to stop the drug trade between our two countries, but I'm here to ask "what about the innocent by-standers that get 'gunned down' in the cross-fire?" I am writing from experience. Unfortunately. My husband and I unwillingly took part in the efforts to combat the export of marijuana from B.C. to the U.S. last week. On July 1st, after a drive from Vancouver through southern British Columbia, we attempted to cross into the U.S. at the Laurier crossing for a surprise reunion with my husband's family, who were having a fun-filled vacation in Sand Point, Idaho. When we came up to the customs agent, all seemed to be going as usual, with questions such as, what were our citizenships, where were we going, for how long, and were we bringing liquor or fruit across the line. Then, something changed. For some reason, which I can only speculate upon now, we became public enemy number one, and during the next two hours of our lives, events occurred that will forever be burned into our memory, and will forever change our lives. We were asked to open the back of our half-ton truck that has a topper on it that we use as a camper & my husband often uses to haul hardware for his various home-improvement projects. After that, we were asked to step inside the U.S. Customs & Immigration building, while another customs agent went through our vehicle in more detail. We could only guess what they were looking for and what would happen next. While the agent was going through all of our bags and searching the cab and box of the truck, the first agent asked us where we worked and had us fill our a customs form. We told him that my husband works for the parks department, and that I have my doctorate in clinical psychology and work with children. We filled our the forms and assumed that we'd be on our way. That was most definitely not the case. In a few moments, the second agent came in and said that she had tested some residue in our truck and that the test indicated positively for marijuana. As you can imagine, my heart jumped to my throat and my husband & I exchanged panicked glances. I was wondering if she was joking, or if we were on candid camera, or if maybe we had been transported somehow into a parallel dimension, because neither my husband nor myself smoke pot. Ever. Not only that, but we've owned the truck for 3 years and never had anyone in the truck who ever smoked or carried pot. Ever. I was certain, thinking about what she had said, from my scientific background, that the test must have been a false-positive. That it was a mistake. It just couldn't be. And certainly not now, with two customs officers staring at us with disgusted frowns, and two immigrations officers coming over from the other side of the building to do the same. I was frightened about what was going to happen next. It turns out I had good reason to be scared. We were instructed not to leave the building, and both the customs officers went back out to the truck, while the other two stood guard over us. Two regular, hard-working, ordinary Canadians had suddenly become America's Most Wanted. Although I was concerned, I had full confidence that they would come back empty-handed and that everything would be cleared-up, as we had nothing to hide. Much to our horror, they came back in claiming that they had two more positive marijuana tests. The second officer showed us the pin-head sized residue that she purported to be marijuana while the first customs officer waved a piece of paper in the air, demanding to know 'What is this!?'. Bad luck for us is what it was. A few weeks earlier I had been at a flea market that sold second-hand goods and some new products as well. Being an environmentally aware and concerned person, I stopped at a booth that had a write up on hemp as an alternative paper, clothing, and petroleum product. The booth was selling hand cream, hemp T-shirts, and various jewelry items that were made from THC-free (the psychoactive & illegal chemical in marijuana), and perfectly legal hemp. I took a business card from the people at the booth, as they had their website address on the card, and I wanted to read up on the advantages and disadvantages of hemp as a renewable resource. This was the card that the customs agent found. This was the card that turned the ice-cold stares of the agents from disgust to hatred. 'Zero tolerance! Zero tolerance!' was thrust at us time and again. The first customs agent, ignorantly informed us that 'marijuana is marijuana' in any form and that obviously, if I supported and condoned hemp products, I believed in the pot-smoking way of life. He was not interested in hearing about whether products contained or did not contain THC. Our ship was, as they say, sunk. The next thing we knew, the agents were sifting through our wallets, pouring over everything from my cheque book, to receipts, to lint, looking for some evidence of wrong-doing. Two agents asked my husband to step into a back room & I panicked, thinking of all the B-movies I had seen where small town cops roughed-up who ever they wanted for no reason at all. I was relieved when I was finally informed that they were only going to search him. Only. I don't know about the average person, but I'm assuming that most people have never been told to put their hands up against the wall, spread their legs, and have some stranger pat down their whole body. Well, we've certainly never experienced it before. But we both did that day. Throughout this whole ordeal, a giant sized picture of the agents' esteemed leader Bill Clinton hung on the wall above us. I couldn't help marveling at the irony of it all. Now, I don't have anything against Bill, myself, but in the midst of the demands for Zero Tolerance from the great Canadian criminals of the year (which is how we were being treated) were being supervised by the "I tried it, but I didn't inhale" president of the country. I almost laughed out loud at one point. But I couldn't laugh. Not at all. We were then given a choice. Our choice was to pick the lesser of two evils. Not much of a choice, if you ask me. But of course they didn't ask me. We were allowed to chose between being arrested for the dreaded marijuana residue, or signing a form that admitted that they had taken marijuana residue from our vehicle. We were very nervous about signing, but did not want to get arrested either. When we asked about the implications of signing, what seemed to be basically an admittance of guilt, the agents all came over and stood around us and said that they could just as easily arrest us. We signed. I still don't know if we made the right decision. Fear and pressure had their way with us. Then we were asked to sign a form saying that we were treated fairly and were not harassed. No. We weren't harassed. Not at all. Four burly border agents breathing down our necks, threatening to arrest us for something we didn't do, asking us to say they 'played-nice'. Again we signed. At that point we just wanted to get out of there. It wasn't to be though. The customs agents were done with us, but the immigration agents were not. Again they asked my husband to step behind the counter. Because he was driving and the truck is under his name, he was targeted for the next round of interrogation. He was read his rights ('You have the right to remain silent...), asked to raise his right hand and swear that he would 'tell nothing but the truth...', while another agent stood over him ensuring that he behaved and answered appropriately. He was asked about 45 minutes worth of questions, fingerprinted, his mug-shots were taken, and he was asked if he would like to leave the country willingly, or be arrested and removed forcefully. I think you know what he chose. Then he was informed that he was banned from the United States for life. At this point we were thinking that all future travel to this country should be forever avoided anyway, but they just thought they would make it official, I suppose. Somewhere in between the photocopying of our driver's licenses, birth certificates, and the business card of the hemp company, we began to wonder if the agents planted the residue that they claimed they had found. As you sit here and read this, you may wonder, if we weren't being a wee bit paranoid. At that point we had every reason to be feeling paranoid. It seemed like the only reasonable explanation. That for some reason, we were being set up to 'take the fall', as we all so often hear about on good detective movies-of-the-week. We wondered if they had a quota of 'bad guys' to fill and that we were the closest they could find. Unlucky us. Then, my husband remembered one foreign object that had been in the back of the truck earlier that week. He had been to one of those auto wreckers where you can go in and take a part off of a car & pay a minimal amount of money for the used product. He is restoring a car right now and had found a rug from a car that fit the one he's working on, purchased it, threw it in the back of the truck and brought it home. Of course, when we went through the border crossing, we did not have the rug with us, or the receipt for the rug, and even though we mentioned the possibility that the rug may have had something on it that fell off and was tested by the agents as positive, they didn't really care. It didn't matter to them whether we had never had pot into the truck ourselves, or if we had a 1000 pound bale of it there to sell to small children. They had their residue as evidence and nothing else mattered. Zero tolerance. Just at the point that I thought that nothing could shock me any more, they said that we could not enter the country to visit our family. I couldn't believe it. Then we found out that my husband's finger prints were being sent to the FBI. I couldn't believe it. The crowning moment was certainly when he was told that he was banned from the country for life. Residue. Could this possibly be candid camera, I still found my self wondering. No, this was far from a joke. We were then informed of what I suppose they considered the good news. Besides the fact that he was 'lucky that he wasn't getting arrested', he was told that he would be allowed to apply to enter the U.S. for yearly passes that the immigration administration may or may not grant. All he would have to do is send $100+ plus his finger prints and a criminal record check from an a local police station, plus another round of finger prints from a U.S. border crossing. They also kindly let us know that if he tried to cross the border without this pass, that he would be immediately arrested and the vehicle he was traveling would be permanently impounded. Happy Canada Day (July 1st is our version of your 4th of July). Was someone, somewhere trying to send us a message about leaving our great land on her birthday? I don't think so. The facts are simple, we were treated like criminals and put through a ludicrous amount of stress and pressure, and I cannot believe, even now, a week later, that my husband's finger prints are at the FBI and he is banned from the country. We were told that they were giving us an example of the American Justice system at work. Truth, Freedom & the American way? Innocent until proven guilty? Until now, I had thought of our two great countries, practically as one. I spent three years of my life in the U.S. going to graduate school. Some of my best friends are Americans. We vacation there regularly. My attitudes have changed completely. This won't change my relationships with my American friends, but it will change our behavior. There's limitless amounts of things to see and do here in Canada. Looks like we'll be seeing and doing all of our vacations up here from now on. Or we can explore Mexico, Australia, or many other more welcoming countries. I do not need to be treated like a common criminal. I will not. So what's the moral of the story? Should every Canadian dip themselves in bleach and sanitize their vehicles, making sure to never drive a used car or have any particles of dust & debris that they cannot identify in their car before going across the line? Should we sit back and allow ourselves to be treated this way? You can be sure that we're not the only ones this has happened to. One thing I do know, is that if the American customs & immigrations agents continue to behave in this way, Canadians will not stand for it, and our peaceful relations, trade and openness will suffer. My way of not feeling like a victim is to let others know, so that maybe they will join in our outrage & send a message that we will not be victimized. Residue. Ya right. Carla Fry e-mail: email@example.com Vancouver, B.C.
------------------------------------------------------------------- The War On Drugs Is About To Escalate In Your Living Room (ABC News Online Version) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 17:29:44 EDT Errors-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Originator: firstname.lastname@example.org Sender: email@example.com From: Gerald Sutliff (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: Multiple recipients of list (email@example.com) Subject: Drug War Redux Dear Talkers, Get this from ABC News, online vty, Jerry Sutliff ABCNEWS.com July 9 - The war on drugs is about to escalate in your living room. A string of provocative, slick Madison Avenue anti-drug ads are headed for newspapers and TV. The goal, say officials, is to hit the average family at least four times a week either through television, radio, newspapers, billboards or the Internet. "These ads were designed to knock America upside the head and get America's attention and empower all of you," said President Clinton, who was joined by House Speaker Newt Gingrich today to unveil the $2 billion, five-year campaign. Half of the funding for the campaign comes from the government, and half will be raised from the private sector. Clinton recalled his half-brother Roger's drug habit and said the ads were aimed at everyone: children, parents and siblings. "My brother nearly died from a cocaine habit and I've asked myself a thousand times: what kind of fool was I that I did not know that this was going on?" he said. "How did this happen that I didn't see this coming and didn't stop it?" A Wake Up Call For Kids The ads are designed to be jarring, with one showing a girl screaming and smashing things with a frying pan while telling the audience this is what drugs will do to their lives. Another shows a child recounting her mother's warnings about talking to strangers and playing with matches. Asked what her mother had said about drugs, the girl is silent. Retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who heads Clinton's drug-control policy office, called the unprecedented federal campaign "an effort to talk to a generation that started to get the wrong message." In a 1997 national survey, half of high school seniors and nearly one-third of eighth-graders reported using illegal drugs at least once. "I wanted to come here today to stand with the president. ...We're all trying to reach out to every young American and say, 'Don't do it,'" said Gingrich, who rearranged his schedule to make today's announcement. Congressional Republicans are committed to financing the campaign for its full five-year run, Gingrich said. The nationwide government campaign is the 15th largest single-brand ad project, larger than the media buys of American Express, Nike and Sprint, said Steve Dnistrian, senior vice president of the Partnership for a Drug-Free America. The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Drug Policy Experts Criticize Anti-Drug Advertising Campaign (A Press Release From The Lindesmith Center, A Drug Policy Research Institute In New York, Protests The US Government's New $2 Billion Anti-Drug Ad Campaign - Research Suggests The Ad Campaign Will Be Ineffective In Curbing Drug Use) From: Ty Trippet (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: TLC_ACTIVIST (TLCACT@snake-eyes.soros.org) Subject: News: DRUG POLICY EXPERTS CRITICIZE ANTI-DRUG ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 10:49:05 -0400 Sender: email@example.com FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 9, 1998 Contact: Ty Trippet 212-548-0604 DRUG POLICY EXPERTS CRITICIZE ANTI-DRUG ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN * Research Does Not Support Campaign's Effectiveness In Curbing Drug Use: Money Should Be Spent On Drug Abuse Prevention That Works, Such As After School Programs Facing a rise in teen drug use and growing criticism of U.S. drug policy, President Clinton and Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey rolled out a national advertising campaign today to discourage drug use. Funded by taxpayers, the $1 billion campaign aims to reduce illicit drug use among our nation's youth. The campaign is being criticized by drug policy experts who say anti-drug media campaigns don't reduce drug use, and that they may encourage drug use. They say the money should be spent on proven drug prevention programs, rather than unproven publicity campaigns. "It's a shame that the Drug Czar continues to ignore science and sound research in favor of ineffective 'feel good' campaigns," said Ethan Nadelmann, director of The Lindesmith Center. "The purpose of the ads is to deter drug use, but there's a chance they make drugs more interesting and attractive to adolescents," said professor Lynn Zimmer, a sociologist at Queens College in New York and author of the book Marijuana Myths, Marijuana Facts: A Review of the Scientific Evidence. "After all, it was the same young people who began seeing the Partnership's anti-drug ads in the late 1980s who, in the 1990s, began using marijuana in greater numbers." Research evaluating the effect of anti-drug ads shows that while they harden anti-drug attitudes among some adults, they have no effect on adolescents. In fact, according to an article in Brandweek, Dr. Evelyn Cohen Reis, the lead author of the only published study evaluating the Partnership's ad campaign, has since said, "You can't tell, based on the paper, that it actually works." She thinks respondents "were telling us what they wanted us to hear." Based in New York, the Lindesmith Center is a drug policy research institute that concentrates on broadening the drug policy debate. The Lindesmith Center is a project of the Open Society Institute, the nonprofit foundation established by philanthropist George Soros to promote the development of open societies around the world. The founder and director of The Lindesmith Center, Ethan Nadelmann, J.D., Ph.D. is author of Cops Across Borders: The Internationalization of U.S. Criminal Law Enforcement (Penn State Press, 1993) as well as numerous articles on drug control policy in leading scholarly and popular journals. The Lindesmith Center's web site is http://www.lindesmith.org.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Censorship Of Cannabis Stroke Protection Story? (A List Subscriber Notes The US Media Are Quashing Recent Positive News About Medical Marijuana Research - Plus Other Subscribers' Commentary) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 21:56:10 +1200 (NZST) To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org From: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn) Subject: Censorship of cannabis stroke protection story? To date I have seen reports of the cannabis/stroke story in the following sources: The Guardian (UK) BBC News Associated Press Reuters NZ Herald (Auckland) The Independent (UK) Irish Independent South China Evening Post (Hong Kong) CNN picked up the AP report, but to date I haven't seen a single US, Canadian, or Australian newspaper pick up this story. Have I missed something, or is there perhaps a little censorship going on? David *** Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 10:30:10 EDT Errors-To: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: "Barrington Daltrey" (email@example.com) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: Re: Censorship of cannabis stroke protection story? I immediately thought the same thing, since I saw the report here on the internet and then not in the newspapers I receive. I even said something about censorship to my wife after I became aware of the story having run in NZ press, but shortly after my comment, a news feature on it ran on the local ABC news affiliate we were watching. So it is not totally missing. Maybe everyone is afraid to contradict McCzar (who claim there are no medical uses for cannabis) for fear of losing their "share" of the $1 billion ad budget. *** Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 10:57:29 EDT Errors-To: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: "Cliff Schaffer" (email@example.com) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: RE: Censorship of cannabis stroke protection story? It was reported on Fox News, and even came up as one of the items on my internet start page. *** Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 11:08:06 EDT Errors-To: email@example.com Reply-To: Gettman_J@mediasoft.net Originator: firstname.lastname@example.org Sender: email@example.com From: Jon Gettman (Gettman_J@mediasoft.net) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: Re: W. Post on cannabis/stroke David Hadorn wrote: >To date I have seen reports of the cannabis/stroke story in the following >sources (snip) >CNN picked up the AP report, but to date I haven't seen a single US, >Canadian, or Australian newspaper pick up this story. Have I missed >something, or is there perhaps a little censorship going on? It made the Washington Post, I missed it but my mother told me about it. In this case it is not so much censorship perhaps as much the general way science is covered in the press. It was the lead item in a column that also included items on asteroids and 9,400 year old footwear. The oldest shoes were made from plants, not identified in the column. Jon Gettman http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-07/06/063l-070698-idx.html [Link to July 6 article at this site.] *** Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 06:10:06 EDT Errors-To: email@example.com Reply-To: Rgbakan@aol.com Originator: firstname.lastname@example.org Sender: email@example.com From: (Rgbakan@aol.com) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: Re: W. Post on cannabis/stroke The story made Seattle TV - health local news feature. The nice thing is they had footage from somewhere showing several quite elder women rolling big fat joints of green bud and lighting up........ it looked like a well done ad for the medica; mj campaign. Regards, George
------------------------------------------------------------------- Survey Finds Doctors Fail To Order Key Drugs ('The Orange County Register' Says A Survey Conducted By United HealthCare Of Doctors In The Nation's Largest Managed Care Company Showed Many Routinely Fail To Give Patients Drugs And Tests Proven To Work Against Conditions Ranging From Heart Disease To Diabetes) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 15:35:10 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US: Survey Finds Doctors Fail To Order Key Drugs Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk:John W.Black Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Source: Orange County Register (CA) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.ocregister.com/ SURVEY FINDS DOCTORS FAIL TO ORDER KEY DRUGS A survey of doctors in the nation's largest managed care company showed many routinely fail to give patients drugs and tests proven to work against conditions ranging from heart disease to diabetes. The survey conducted by United HealthCare looked at computerized patient records of 1,600 cardiologists and internists in Colorado, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas. The Minnetonka, Minn.-based health-care giant found that many cardiologists failed to prescribe widely recommended drugs such as beta blockers for heart attack survivors and ACE inhibitors for chronic heart-failure patients. Current medical literature says the drugs are essential in most cases.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Re - Horror Story From Canadian Border (Richard Rose Of HempRella Suggests A Way To Avoid Unpleasantness At The US-Canada Border, And Notes The Horror Story Illustrates The Need To Differentiate Between Hemp And Marijuana) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 18:24:01 -0700 To: Rgbakan@aol.com, firstname.lastname@example.org From: Richard Rose (email@example.com) Subject: Re: HT: Fwd: Horror Story from Canadian Border Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org When we first started importing HempRella from the plant in Vancouver BC a customs agent tested it for marijuana (what with the big neon green leaf on it and the word 'hemp' all over it). He got all excited when it came back as 'positive as a baggy of pot.' But what they test is cannabis, not THC. My lawyer pointed that out, and that cannabis in many forms is legal (hemp), and then they did a second more elaborate test for THC and it was negative. They released the shipment. These guys get bonuses for busts, even petty ones like this. Someone should have demanded the second test, which would have come back negative. Or refused to sign, requiring them to try the innocent people, and then the test would have been done. But this is also a very real and practical illustration why those in the movement do everyone a disservice by lumping pot and hemp together, just like these customs guys do (and their employers, the US government). Hemp is NOT Marijuana, but both are cannabis. I have yet to hear a cogent reason why the movement should not make this differentiation. So what if they called it hemp 100 years ago and marijuana is a made-up name. If it reflects today's reality then let's use it. Jeez, only a few generations ago they called cars 'horseless carriages.' Language is dynamic. If you wanna call pot something else, at least be correct and call it 'Cannabis,' a word used even far longer than Hemp. Following a policy that has worked so damn well for the government all these years is absolute lunacy. They cling to it desperately, knowing full well that to allow the separation of 'rope from dope' will be a major step in the rapid fall of prohibition. It would be sweet if activists would cling to the need for said separation just as desperately. To do otherwise is nothing less than to aid and abet the evil forces of prohibition, making it just a little longer before these good people from the North can go to another family reunion in the states. Richard Rose, President of The Hemp Corporation, email@example.com. Makers of HempRella, Hempeh Burgers, and HempNut hulled hempseed. Founder of Hemp Food Association (firstname.lastname@example.org)
------------------------------------------------------------------- On Losing The Drug War (Two Letters To The Editor Of 'The Calgary Sun,' The Second Of Which Is A Response By Vancouver Police Constable Gil Puder To A Personal Attack On Him By Staff Sergeant Mike Cullen Of The Calgary Police Service In Bill Kaufman's July 6 Column) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:28:35 -0700 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: Canada: PUB LTEs: On Losing the Drug War Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Source: Calgary Sun (Canada) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.canoe.ca/CalgarySun/ Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Authors: Aaron Lagadyn; Gil Puder BILL KAUFMANN'S column re: ("Losing the drug war -- criminalized users are dehumanized while wealthy dealers take smarmy refuge.)" Kudos to Kaufmann for writing a brilliant article on the facts of life. - Aaron Lagadyn (Pass it on.) *** A THOUSAND miles of distance appear to have given Staff Sgt. Mike Cullen of the Calgary Police Service the courage necessary for a groundless personal attack, evidenced by his comments about me in Bill Kaufman's July 6 column. This certainly contrasts with his silence at April's Fraser Institute conference, when like all attendees he was invited to take the microphone and publicly hold me accountable in person. Whether it's a lack of guts, or simply that he has no evidence to support any disagreement, I'm not sure. What I am sure of is that I'd be happy to publicly debate him on the illicit drug issue anytime -- an offer I've made to many drug squad types and which I've yet to have accepted. As far as being "out to lunch" goes, I'll be doing that shortly and will enjoy my favorite wine, a nice B.C. pinot noir. Taxpayers should be wary of the drug warrior's favorite whine, however, as stated by Cullen himself -- give us more money! - Gil Puder (Well, Staff Sgt. Cullen?)
------------------------------------------------------------------- Criticism Over Drug Adviser's Second Job (Britain's 'Times' Notes That, Only A Few Months Into His Job As Britain's Drug Tsar, Keith Hellawell Has Already Found Other Work)Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 14:26:33 -0400 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (MAPNews) Subject: MN: UK: Criticism Over Drug Adviser's Second Job Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Martin Cooke (firstname.lastname@example.org) Source: Times The (UK) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.the-times.co.uk/ Pubdate: 9 Jul 1998 Author: Stewart Tendler, Crime Correspondent CRITICISM OVER DRUG ADVISER'S SECOND JOB THE Government's drugs adviser was criticised last night for taking a second job as a part-time director with a £300 million property company. Keith Hellawell, who earns £102,000 a year as drugs co-ordinator, is joining Evans of Leeds as a non-executive director. The former Chief Constable of West Yorkshire will get £15,750 plus travel expenses for 12 days' work a year. John Bell, managing director of the company, said that Mr Hellawell was a widely respected figure in Yorkshire and the North East. "Non-executive directors bring their general experience to the boardroom. They are there to assist the executive directors." Mr Hellawell would be expected to attend six board meetings and work another six days during the year. The Cabinet Office said that the directorship was not considered incompatible with Mr Hellawell's drugs work. However, James Clappison, a Shadow Home Affairs spokesman, said the job of drugs adviser needed full-time commitment, adding: "I question whether this is a distraction." -------------------------------------------------------------------
The articles posted here are generally copyrighted by the source publications. They are reproduced here for educational purposes under the Fair Use Doctrine (17 U.S.C., section 107). NORML is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit educational organization. The views of the authors and/or source publications are not necessarily those of NORML. The articles and information included here are not for sale or resale.
Comments, questions and suggestions.Reporters and researchers are welcome at the world's largest online library of drug-policy information, sponsored by the Drug Reform Coordination Network at: http://www.druglibrary.org/
Next day's news
Previous day's news
to 1998 Daily News index for July 9-15
to Portland NORML news archive directory
to 1998 Daily News index (long)
This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/980709.html