KIM LUNMAN, The Globe & Mail
Thursday, September 5, 2002

OTTAWA -- A Senate committee recommends legalizing marijuana and putting its distribution in the hands of the state, a controversial position that has touched off a national debate on the drug's use and sparked criticism from the United States.

The 600-page report issued yesterday concluded that marijuana is not harmful to health and should be readily available to cannabis consumers.

"Scientific evidence overwhelmingly indicates that cannabis is substantially less harmful than alcohol and should be treated not as a criminal issue but as a social and public-health issue," said the committee's chair, Progressive Conservative Senator Pierre Claude Nolin. "It is certainly less grave than alcohol and tobacco as far is health is concerned."

The committee is calling on Ottawa to make marijuana legal for those aged 16 and older under a system that would make the drug as easy to buy as cigarettes and alcohol.

It is also calling for an amnesty for anyone ever convicted of marijuana possession.

Marijuana has been prohibited in Canada since 1923.

But opponents of legalization were quick to contradict the report's findings and the Canadian Police Association denounced it as "a back-to-school gift for drug pushers."

John Walters, director of the U.S. National Drug Control Policy and President George W. Bush's drug czar, issued a statement from the White House disputing the report's findings that marijuana is less harmful than alcohol.

"We know that marijuana is a harmful drug, particularly for young people," he said.

"We also know that if you make it more available, you'll get more marijuana use," he said.

"More use leads to more addiction and more problems. That's why we're focusing on informing people about the harms of marijuana."

While both Canada and Britain have recently signalled a desire to relax policies on marijuana, the U.S. Republican administration has shown no signs of backing away from its hard-line war against drugs.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a ruling that marijuana is a dangerous drug with a high potential for abuse.

The Senate committee has issued its controversial findings after two years of studying drug policy and interviewing 234 witnesses across Canada and around the world.

The report's recommendations include:

Providing amnesty for any person convicted of possession of cannabis under current or past legislation. Approximately 600,000 Canadians have been convicted of the offence. About 25,000 people are charged annually.

Revising medicinal-marijuana provisions to provide greater access to those in need.

Amending the Criminal Code to lower permitted alcohol levels to 40 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood in the presence of other drugs, including cannabis.

Introducing legislation to stipulate conditions for obtaining licences for producing and selling cannabis.

Mr. Nolin said the Senate committee is urging the federal government to act on its recommendations as soon as possible.

"In many ways, prohibition is a cop-out. . . . I would like to say to the government, 'The ball is now in your court.' "

The committee's deputy chair, Liberal Senator Colin Kenny, said making pot legal will actually result in the decreased use of marijuana. "No one wants to see an increase in use of cannabis," he said. "The attractiveness of the substance is it's illegal."

The senators estimate it costs Canada up to $1.5-billion annually to prosecute drug charges. Almost a third of those cases involve marijuana charges.

Not surprisingly, marijuana proponents embraced the report. "It's well-researched," said Marc-Boris St-Maurice, head of Canada's Marijuana Party. "The recommendations are excellent. But now it's a question of pressuring government into turning it into legislative reality."

But David Griffin, executive officer for the Canadian Police Association, which represents 28,000 members, criticized the report.

"There are too many politicians playing scientist," he said. "Today's report ignores countless studies about the harmful effects of marijuana."

Justice Minister Martin Cauchon has said he is considering decriminalizing marijuana possession by removing it from the Criminal Code and making it an offence punishable with a fine instead of a criminal record.

Before making a decision, he will review the Senate report as well as that of a House of Commons committee studying the non-medical use of drugs. That report is due in November.

Randy White, vice-chair of the House of Commons committee, denounced the Senate report's recommendation to allow 16-year-olds to legally smoke pot.

"You can't even buy cigarettes or alcohol in Canada until you are 18, but it would be okay to light up a joint? "

Federal Health Minister Anne McLellan said she would have to review the report before making any decisions. "Clearly, I will take seriously those recommendations that deal directly with my department," she said.

FUCK the U.S. Government!

I too am sick of the U.S. pushing the rest of the World around.

Mark Bourrie, Inter Press Service, 29 July 2002
Washington fumes as Canada moves to decriminalize pot

quote:

---

Last spring, US drug czar John Walters threatened Canada with trade sanctions if Parliament relaxed pot laws. The US government has threatened to cut Jamaica's foreign aid if it goes ahead with plans to decriminalize the drug.

---

Erin Anderssen, Globe and Mail, July 13, 2002
Would Softer Pot Law Stir Wrath of U.S.?

quote:

---

Two weeks earlier, on Washington's Capitol Hill and in far less mellow conversation, the committee had heard a different view. The man sitting across the table on that June day was Republican Congressman Mark Souder, chairman of the U.S. equivalent of the Commons committee on drug policy, and the originator of a law that bans student loans for Americans convicted of pot possession. He knew all about Canada pondering the decriminalization of marijuana, and he wasn't happy about it

Mr. Souder's message was clear, committee members say: Proceed and we'll crack down even more on your borders. B.C. bud, he pronounced, is as dangerous as cocaine.

---

Global National Story, May 13, 2002
Canadian Marijuana Reform Concern to U.S.

quote:

---

The war on drugs, nonetheless, is a U.S. fight, and government officials have not been shy about applying pressure to keep Canada and other nations on track, says Ottawa lawyer Eugene Oscapella, one of the founders of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy. In 1999, the United States considered ( and then retreated from ) the idea of adding Canada to its illicit-drug blacklist for being too soft. In its drug literature, the U.S. State Department has criticized the Supreme Court of Canada for restricting undercover operations.

---

Eric Pianin and Stephen Barr, Washington Post, 10/23/01
Lack of Funds For New Agents On U.S. Border Draws Criticism

quote:

---

Although Congress recently approved anti-terrorism legislation that would triple U.S. Customs and Border Patrol manpower along the 4,000-mile U.S.-Canadian border, the administration has decided against using any of the $20 billion in new emergency funds available to hire additional Customs agents.

---

Jerome F. Winzig, Northern City Journal, 31 December 2001
Paranoia about Our Northern Border

quote:

---

This concern about the U.S.-Canadian border is premised on four unstated and unproven assumptions: Canada is a more likely source of terrorists and dangerous aliens than our own ports of entry, Canada is less concerned about terrorists and other intruders than the United States, and terrorism is a one-way threat coming at the United States, never from the United States. Terrorists are more likely to enter the United States on the ground than in the air.

How would we feel if the situation were reversed, if buildings in Toronto had been attacked, and Canada had responded by clamping down on the U.S.-Canadian border, imposing lengthy inspections at all border crossings, and announced a billion dollars on increased spending to patrol our northern border? The thought should be enough to prompt a serious review of these hidden assumptions.

---

Colin R. Singer, Attorney
Should Canada Harmonize Immigration Policies with the US?

quote:

---

The tragic events of September 11th in the United States have raised questions about Canada's immigration policies. The United States Ambassador to Canada and some lawmakers south of the border have strongly suggested that Canadian immigration policies be harmonized with US immigration policies. Canadian authorities must not and cannot accede to such requests.

A proper response to these events indeed necessitates a re-examination of the manner in which foreign nationals are permitted entry to and through Canada’s borders. Staunch defenders of Canada’s sovereignty will no doubt point to the weaknesses within the American immigration system, which may have permitted entry of those individuals responsible for the terrorist bombings through its own borders from Canada or more likely, from other entry points.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noitall:
B.C. bud, he pronounced, is as dangerous as cocaine.

---

Tim Harper - Toronto Star, Sep. 10, 2002:

quote:

---

Don't go it alone, PM tells Bush

DETROIT — Prime Minister Jean Chrétien has all but ruled out any Canadian involvement in an American-led mission in Iraq.

Chrétien told U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday that Washington must forge a United Nations-led international coalition before moving against Baghdad.

In a 45-minute private meeting here, Chrétien said Bush told him the campaign against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with rooting out Al Qaeda or fighting terrorism.Chrétien has stated that intervention in Iraq should be tied to that anti-terrorist effort but he received not even a hint of linkage from Bush.

The Prime Minister said he pressed Bush for evidence linking Saddam with Al Qaeda, the terrorist organization headed by Osama bin Laden that is blamed for the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

"They are not relating it to Al Qaeda at the moment," Chrétien said. "They are not taking that angle at this time."

Bush made no request for Canadian help or participation in any attack on Iraq, the Prime Minister said.

The U.S. president will argue before the United Nations Thursday that Saddam, accused of stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, has thumbed his nose at successive U.N. resolutions and that the fight is not one between Washington and Baghdad, but one that should involve the world.

Chrétien told Bush politely he would listen to his speech.

"I told him it was extremely important to follow the process of the United Nations for Canadians," he said.

Bush, who has gained the support of British Prime Minister Tony Blair and consulted with dozens of other world leaders, has made it clear that a military strike is being prepared no matter what the U.N. might say.

"The timetable is tightening," Deputy Prime Minister John Manley told Canadian Press in an interview. "It has the air of inevitability to it."

Chrétien's support had not been expected yesterday and Bush administration officials went to great lengths to tell reporters en route to Detroit that the meeting between the leaders was to deal with border security.

White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said Bush got no commitments from Chrétien on Iraq. Bush pointed out to Chrétien that Iraq remains in violation of U.N. resolutions, Fleischer said. "The president didn't ask Canada to change their view."

The U.S. president ignored questions from reporters about Canadian support when he and Chrétien demonstrated new border technology systems on the American side of the international border.

Ottawa's reluctance is not expected to have any effect on Bush's determination to topple Saddam, something Washington has signalled it would undertake regardless of whether it receives U.N. backing or broad-based international support.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush says Chrétien would make `a great Texan'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Despite their clear private differences, the two men heaped praise and affection on each other as they publicly celebrated border security improvements on the eve of the anniversary of last year's terrorist attacks.

As trucks in the background rumbled across the Ambassador Bridge between Detroit and Windsor, Bush said Chrétien's plain-speaking style and sense of humour would make him "a great Texan."

Yesterday's meeting between the two men had long been planned, but scheduling difficulties backed it up almost to the Sept. 11 anniversary. The timing also meant that Bush's avowed aim of changing the regime in Baghdad dominated the conversation. The U.S. president has been working hard to court allied support for Iraqi action, and not appear, as Vice-President Dick Cheney put it, "unilateralist."

But Cheney's admission Sunday that Washington's goal is to oust Saddam has led critics to believe Bush is headed to the United Nations to demand weapons inspectors be allowed to return to Baghdad as a pretext for an invasion.

Canadians overwhelmingly supported Ottawa's commitment of 2,000 troops to the so-called "war on terrorism" following last year's Al Qaeda strikes in the U.S. But only 38 per cent of Canadians favoured joining a U.S.-led attack on Iraq, according to a recent Toronto Star EKOS poll.

The Prime Minister said he wanted U.N. arms inspectors to be allowed to return to Iraq to do their job and he wants Saddam to respect previous U.N. resolutions.

"Of course, I agreed with him (Bush) that Saddam Hussein is not a very good character," Chrétien said. "He has attacked two countries, Kuwait and Iran, since he has been there and he has used this deadly instrument (chemical weapons) against his own people."

The Prime Minister agreed also there was a danger Saddam could use weapons against other nations.

Chrétien said he also delivered his views by telephone to Blair yesterday morning. Blair, a key Bush ally, met Bush Saturday to give him his backing for military intervention.

Earlier in the day, Bush and Chrétien demonstrated two new border-crossing programs between Windsor and Detroit. Some 7,000 trucks cross the Ambassador Bridge each day, carrying $570 million in goods between the two nations.

They demonstrated the Free and Secure Trade (FAST) program, which offers quick passage to frequent truck travellers who have been pre-cleared by authorities in either country, and NEXUS, a similar program for pre-screened private travellers. Applications for those programs were opened yesterday and are in effect already at a major crossing between Washington state and British Columbia.

"This great and peaceful border must be open for business, but closed to terrorists," Bush said.

Bush said North Americans must remember "a year ago we saw terrorists, cold-blooded killers, use the openness of our societies against us.

"We have no choice but to confront those threats head-on while we preserve the freedom and openness of our societies."

Chrétien said Canadians will not live on "terms dictated from the shadows. The goal of terrorists is not to conquer us by force of arms, but by force of terror."

Terrorists want us to abandon our pillars of prosperity and freedom, he said. "But freedom is a very, very stubborn thing and it will prevail."

---

About weed, I see legalization of all soft drugs structured the same way that you have it in Holland, it is not legalized but tolerated, meaning that there is restriction on how much an individual can have for himself and sales are only permitted with a permit, that is like alcohol basically. One issue here is about the elimination of black market, which means that the government would control not only the circulation but also the quality. Ironically the strongest opposition so far is coming from the police authority itself; perhaps they are afraid of loosing some dividends here. I have started smoking hashish in the 70’s and slowly it simply disappeared with domestic marijuana taking its place, meaning that it was too costly to import and too much trouble to get tons of hashish across borders, and this is funny, as it was coming from place like Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Nepal. With the costs too high it ultimately was cutting potential revenue for the mafia, so the domestic solution was indeed the best move they could make, but this also was their mistake, since growing marijuana is now a local affair it is also easier to control in the eventuality that it becomes legal. I myself prefer non-hydroponics products, and of course old hashish is way better, it simply doesn’t compound all the effect of sleepiness and even dizziness, as it often is with hydroponics as it is chemically grown with a potency 4 times that of naturally grown marijuana.
Hashish from foreign countries was like a good old bottle of wine, nicely and naturally fermented.

So if marijuana is ultimately evil, it is no worse then what comes from Glaxo-SmithKline and many others drug manufacturers, who directly make huge profits on those that die of diseases like Aids. All natural drugs are good but then again you have to use it moderately. But I could tell you if it didn’t kill Piggy or me then it must be ok.

I myself would also like to see a legalization on prostitution, since this is after all one of the oldest professions, why not protect everybody involved? Once again it would be based on the Amsterdam model, which make so much sense - but this will also jeopardize massive revenues for the mafia.

All the Worlds leaders need to get together around a big Bong...a 'Peace Bong'...and have a big Smokefest.
Then they could all order-up some Prostitutes & have a good ol time!

It's luminously clear to anyone with eyes that Iran will go for our throats at every opportunity. And so they must: The mullahs would be gravely threatened by a free and successful society in Afghanistan and/or Iraq. Tehran has made contingency plans to attack us if we were to invade Iraq (as have the Syrians, by the way, and all have been promised assistance from the Saudis). They mean to teach us a lesson. In Rafsanjani's recent words to the female religious police, "the great powers [that's us] and the regional powers [i.e. Israel and perhaps Turkey] in conducting their policies must take into consideration the goals of the Islamic Republic."

Tough talk indeed, and their words are not based on fantasy, as so many of our leaders seem to believe. Iran has driven us and the Israelis out of Lebanon with our tails between our legs, and they see no reason why the pattern should not hold for Afghanistan and, if necessary, Iraq as well.

Like the Soviet empire and other failed tyrannies, Iran has a great capacity for evil outside their borders. Their Achilles' heel is at home, where their sway over the Iranian people grows weaker by the day. Although the regime is intensifying its repression against its critics, demonstrations continue apace throughout the major cities, and the open wound in the clerical body is getting ugly. In recent days, the celebrated Ayatollah Montazeri — the author of the famous fatwa a couple of months ago that condemned suicide bombing as an anti-Islamic action — wrote a letter to the newspaper Hambastegi in Tehran, saying that no one is obliged to support a religious government, since belief or disbelief in religious rule is not a crucial issue, either for good government or for good religion. This is yet another devastating attack against the religious legitimacy of the regime. Meanwhile, the oil pipeline in Tabriz has been shut down because workers haven't been paid for half a year, and the country is gearing up for national demonstration on September 11.