Showing posts with label decriminalisation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label decriminalisation. Show all posts

Thursday, 13 August 2020

FIGHTING A UNITED NATIONS PROJECT: THE ERADICATION OF A PLANT

For many years now the United Nations has by international agreement set out to eradicate not only to put a halt to the so-called drug use of cannabis, but also to actually eradicate the hemp plant from the planet, apart, of course, from their own profitable concerns.

This, of course, is nothing entirely new.   Ever since the industrial revolutionâ there has been an elite of profiteering megalomaniacs who want to run the world, and to do that they had to create a world where the people became totally dependent on the products of industry, not agriculture.

The US Civil war was a war between the industrial and the agricultural. Huge numbers were working as slaves and when the slaves were freed they began to seek work for a pittance in the factories being set up in the victorious North. The war on hemp is down to the same greed and power struggle that was behind so many wars.

Now consider what measures you would want to take if that was part of your aim:

You would want to prevent the production of seeds / clones.

You would want to attack the farmers, limit cultivation.

You would want to prevent sale

You would want to limit production

You would need to mis-educate the public in order to get away with such a scheme.

The so-called mind-altering properties of cannabis could certainly be one way to scare the people into believing that the plant was dangerous and that it had to be banned, despite the many beneficial uses.

So is any surprise that we have witnessed such bias and deceit about the plant that even our own Government is confused as to just how dangerous it is in comparison to other substances, whilst authorising extreme force against those who choose to cultivate it.

In previous years, we have watched the following developments around the world:

In the UK, medical cannabis supply operations like THC4MS, and 'medical users' prosecuted.

There was an increased number of raids on Cannabis 'Factories'  (strange that they call them factories yet they contain plants, whereas many chemical factories are often called chemical plants.)

Cannabis was downgraded to a class C "drug", then upgraded to class B again and sentences increased

The Police are arresting cannabis growers whilst doing nothing to stop the real gangster-profiteers contaminating cannabis with grit, glass and who-knows-what yet all the Government did was warn doctors and clinics, not the users themselves.

Cannabis chemicals were rescehdules and so-called cannabis medicines supposedly were to be made available on prescriptions which have turned out to be expensive and hard-to-get.

Meanwhile Government ministers' spouses have been making fortunes through cannabis producing businesses such as GW Pharmaceuticals and British Sugar.

The issue of consumption has become so clouded that there are some cannabis activists groups focussing on 'medical cannabis' supply, playing into the hands of the pharmaceutical companies that have for decades stood against cannabis.

Dutch clones were banned

Many Dutch Coffeeshops and Spanish Cannabis Clubs have been closed although many continue to function withing strict limitations on siting and cutomers.

In Canada, cannabis was "legalised" although there are restrictions of strains and strengths.

Strict contracts and laws on eviction of tenants or mortgage holders who are caught growing cannabis, even with confiscation of property.

Dutch seed producers were attached

Swiss seed companies were attacked

Over 300 Hemp shops in Switzerland were closed down.

Swiss hemp activist and farmer Andre Furst RIP and others arrested and imprisoned. When masked men attacked the hemp farming community, police closed down the community!

In Southern Australia, they started banning books and magazines with articles about growing cannabis, and making it a requirement that owners of hydroponics equipment explain their uses. They will be watching and closing down hydroponics shops.

In Singapore, magazines such as Weed World were banned.

In Nepal, Lebanon, Egypt, Turkey, Morocco and elsewhere, attacks continue on cannabis farmers, often destroying their livelihoods.

In China, Malaysia, Indonesia and several Arab states, they still execute people for cannabis possession. In many countries sentences in excess of ten years in prison are given out frequently, where there is no crime other than the cannabis crime committed.

Social media networks such as Facebook have adjusted search engine results to prevent people finding cannabis related pages and groups and YouTube channels have been closed down.

Numerous petitions on the Downing Street petition site have been ignored and the only petition, with 250,000 signatures, to get to the debating stage was held in a back room with only 17 MP's attending, being clverly diverted into a 'medical cannabis' discussion, the motion then being "This House has debated ... " which was of course meaninglessly passed and the isue once again side-stepped.

The Human Rights of cannabis consumers (those in possession or cultivating for own use in their own homes) continue to be abused, a fact ignored by Judges.

Meanwhile, what have we really done in the face of this resolution by the UK and these attacks on otherwise law-abiding people and farmers?

The people seem to be swallowing the lie, hook, line and sinker. The vast majority of those who use cannabis have sat by and done nothing. In the UK alone there is said to be somewhere between 1.5 and 4 million regular cannabis users - and as many as 1 in 3 adults have tried it. It's probable that the majority of the House of Commons have at one time tried it.


Now, due to the Covid19 pandemic, street demonstrations and marched have been effectively banned.

It's a good job that those that DO feel how they do about the injustices of prohibition, for without maybe just a few dozen people there would be no active public campaign of any name.

Yet for sure, most people who now ignore the law risk their freedom and continue to ignore the law, grow, even sell, and use at their own risk of being busted. I know that those of us that choose to fight prohibition do so because of what we feel about prohibition despite all those tokers who don't.

In the future, I believe, the situation regarding cannabis will worsen both here and abroad. 

Why do I think that?  

Well back to my opening statement, because the United Nations has by international agreement set out to eradicate cannabis. 

We will see continued attacks on growers, and them growshops, magazines and medical users who go public. And if we're not lucky enough to be growing our own and getting away with it, we will have to choose between contaminated cannabis like grit weed, and nothing.  It is just a matter of time and Government priorities.

I have seen that many of our enemies are not just the profiteers of prohibition which includes industrialists and drug dealers, as well as those employed in busting us, yet many are growers and users who seem to spend much more time attacking campaigners than in campaigning to end prohibition and many many more do nothiing.

We need to look inside our hearts and find the strength to push forward rapidly. We need to wake people up, especially the tokers.   It is not good enough to sit back and rely on a few dozen people to campaign for decriminaisation.  If nothing else, more people are needed to give money,  so that much more can be done before it's too late.

That is why I am now involved with and supporting the WTU, which seems to me to be the only campaigning group focussed on the real issue of the abuse of our Human Rights.

Saturday, 3 November 2018

In many prisons cannabis keeps the inmates quiet

In many prisons they unofficially turn an eye away from use of cannabis that is smuggled in: that is because it keeps the inmates quiet and does no harm.
 
The alternative is hooch, home made alcohol, and that does not keep the inmates quiet at all, or hard drugs that can often cause problems.

That is my message to the Government: by turning their eyes away, by police not chasing after small-scale growers and personal consumers, as some forces have now decided to do, it will keep us quiet. 
 
Allow people to grow our own, share it, consume it in private and in safety, away from those that do not want to be near it.
 
 That form of decriminalisation means a change in policy, not even a change in law; that would come later.
 
Immediate decriminalisation would also mean that the Right to a Private Life and the Right to choose and practice ones own beliefs are respected and are protected by law. 

That is completely separate to the issue of supplying medical grade cannabis products and a separate issue to commercial supply.

Because not everyone can or wants to grow their own, they will want to buy: that can easily be achieved through licensed collective growing / transparent cannabis social clubs and licensed outlets with quality controls and taxes on profits

That would surely keep us quiet?

But this government and probably not the next will not do that.

So --- how do we make some noise without getting drunk?

Friday, 28 October 2011

DECRIMINALISATION AND PARTIAL / MEDICAL LEGALISATION.

So-called "legal drugs" such as alcohol and tobacco are only really" legal" in a limited way.

It is also important to realise that it is not the drugs themselves, but the act of possession, production and supply of some drugs that is illegal for some people!

The use of some drugs is allowed in certain situations such as at home or in licensed premises, and can be banned from public or private places. Alcohol and tobacco can only be sold legally from licensed premises. Law limits home production. This is why we do not advocate treating cannabis as we do alcohol and tobacco. Cannabis is a completely different type of substance. It is not a toxin and one cannot overdose.
The controls applied to alcohol and tobacco are not needed for cannabis.

Although wishing to see cannabis available on prescription for ill people, I do not wish to see this as the only available source of cannabis.

For a start, such a situation may well encourage vast numbers of people to visit their doctor who does not normally often or never sees them. Legalising cannabis possession and supply in this way would increase the number of ‘sick’ people in the country, statistically, which may reflect poorly on the move. Some substances only available on prescription are illegal to possess unless obtained by prescription. Such substances are not fully legal; they are not free.

Drugs such as aspirin, which is highly dangerous, are available in a variety of outlets. Other dangerous substances are available from the corner shop (glue), garage (oils), and over the counter at chemists (cough mixture). There is no reason to limit the outlets of cannabis at all.

From The Report of the FCDA, Europe:
" The proposal of some people for 'partial' exemption from the Prohibition in order to make cannabis limitedly available only as a curative medicament, ostensibly has its origin in the emotional response of sympathetic human beings to the needs of the seriously ill or moribund patients. 'Partial' legalisation, however, on evaluation, is an impulsive idea - the reaction of the heart, not the head - and implausible on the very health grounds on which it purports to be based. To try to 'legalise' cannabis for but one of the two groups of people (that is for the already-sick) is inimically discriminatory, as it leaves the other group, who comprise the huge majority, condemned to inevitable worsening of their good health, as described, until they too fall prey to disease and early death. Those catastrophic results to health now widespread in populations, produced directly by the Prohibition of Preventative Cannabis, would be mitigated or avoided entirely by the Preventative protection of a Relegalised cultivation, trade and general availability. Complete Relegalisation of Cannabis provides the healthy population with the pleasant and safe relaxant to use both as Preventative Medicine and to reduce consumption of the malady-causing alcohol and tobacco. At the same time, relegalisation makes cannabis available to patients and the medical profession, as curative medicine of recommendation and advice, if not prescription. Thus, the aims of the 'partial' legalisation lobby are simultaneously achieved, without ignoring the equally deserving needs of those of the population whose health requirement for cannabis is as prophylaxis, or to replace partially or totally, noxious alcohol and tobacco. Certainly cannabis is effective therapeutically and curatively in a wide variety of illnesses and disorders, and if cannabis had always remained available as a recreational substance of legal choice, those cancers which are tobacco-induced could in a great many, theoretically even all, cases have been completely avoided, i.e. prevented. Those individual men and women, the Prohibitionists, who are responsible for the instigation and perpetuation of the fraudulent Prohibition, are instrumental in and culpable for premature deaths. Indeed, studies into these artificial products, i.e. 'concentrates'/THC, including sections of LaGuardia research, record diametrically oppose results from those clinical studies into natural cannabis. For example, doses of lab-THC can cause nausea and headache, two of the many adverse conditions for which the resinous herb in its natural form is renowned as cure."

Later
"Herbal cannabis in natural forms would yield little profit to the pharmaceutical corporations, whilst eliminating some, perhaps in the longer term much more, of the use of their patent drugs."

Later
"Another ludicrous prevarication proposed by pharmaceutical representatives is the irrelevant argument that each of the many, mostly commonly occurring, chemical constituents in the natural herb, be isolated and tested for their potentials before legally re-allowing cannabis for 'medical' or 'general' use, if at all."

Personally I think decriminalisation of cannabis possession without any change in law regarding production - both at home for personal use and commercially - and supply (both for free and commercially) would be a risky move.

Decriminalisation of personal possession would of course ease the burden and cost of the police, stop the arrest of innocent people and could be seen as a step in the right direction, but only if followed by other easing of the law against cultivation and supply.

It could open the doorway for many more street dealers carrying small packs of cannabis of dubious quality to supply the increase in people no longer deterred from buying, by the law.

It would do nothing to promote consumer and quality protection or enable tax on profits, point-of-sale advice and information, or discourage young people.

It would be little more than sweeping the real dirt of prohibition under the carpet.