Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Local Drug War Updates
New filings in Santa Cruz v. Gonzales case, filing motions against San Diego County for not acknowledging Proposition 215 (Compassionate Use Act), and WAMM garage sale!
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE- Friday, July 07, 2006
CONTACT: Ritika Aggarwal,
(831)425-0580 (office), (831)425-0582 (fax), (831)423-5413 (voicemail)
Last Friday, June 30th, the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM) with the city and county of Santa Cruz presented oral arguments in a constitutional challenge to the federal government’s prohibition of medical marijuana. The case, County of Santa Cruz v. Gonzales, represents the first significant challenge to the federal government’s prohibition of medical marijuana since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Gonzales v. Raich.
Attorneys Gerald Uelman, the San Francisco law firm of Bingham McCutchen, Drug Policy Alliance, Ben Rice, and the American Civil Liberties Union argue that the federal government has unconstitutionally attempted to sabotage California’s ability to chart its own legislative course by selectively utilizing arrests, prosecutions and other means to thwart the state’s medical marijuana laws.
In San Diego, the ACLU, American’s for Safe Access, and Drug Policy Alliance moved today to intervene in a lawsuit brought by several CA counties that seeks to overturn the state’s Compassionate Use Act, passed in 1996.
This lawsuit comes one day after a series of raids of medical marijuana dispensaries in San Diego, a county that has chosen to involve the DEA in their actions and disregard the legality of medical marijuana within CA.
Valerie Corral, co-founder and director of WAMM states that “significant harm is caused both to our legal system and to seriously ill people when a city arbitrarily chooses to defy the law.”
The lawsuit, initially brought by San Diego County and later joined by San Bernadino and Merced counties, challenges state laws that permit patients to use, and doctors to recommend medical marijuana under the explicit protection of state law. The lawsuit further challenges the state’s Medical Marijuana Program Act, which calls for the implementation of an identification card program that would allow police to identity legitimate medical marijuana patients in a database.
Although the California Attorney General’s plans to defend the state’s medical marijuana statutes from the counties’ challenge, several groups are intervening in an order to assure adequate representation of those most impacted by the counties’ legal challenge: medical marijuana patients, their caregivers, and doctors.
WAMM is represented by these groups as well, and is a medical marijuana collective in Santa Cruz, California, whose 200 members, a majority of whom are terminally ill, work together with their caregivers to provide free medicine for a variety of conditions to members in the collective. In addition to entering the case, the groups are seeking a court order that would compel the counties to abide by and implement California’s medical marijuana laws. The groups are also asking the court to affirm that the state’s medical marijuana laws are not preempted by contrary federal statutes.
Despite these challenges, WAMM will continue to operate, although desperately needing funding. On July 22, from 10-4pm, WAMM will be hosting a garage sale with BBQ and live music at 815 Almar Street to raise money for its members in need.
CONTACT: Ritika Aggarwal,
(831)425-0580 (office), (831)425-0582 (fax), (831)423-5413 (voicemail)
Last Friday, June 30th, the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM) with the city and county of Santa Cruz presented oral arguments in a constitutional challenge to the federal government’s prohibition of medical marijuana. The case, County of Santa Cruz v. Gonzales, represents the first significant challenge to the federal government’s prohibition of medical marijuana since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Gonzales v. Raich.
Attorneys Gerald Uelman, the San Francisco law firm of Bingham McCutchen, Drug Policy Alliance, Ben Rice, and the American Civil Liberties Union argue that the federal government has unconstitutionally attempted to sabotage California’s ability to chart its own legislative course by selectively utilizing arrests, prosecutions and other means to thwart the state’s medical marijuana laws.
In San Diego, the ACLU, American’s for Safe Access, and Drug Policy Alliance moved today to intervene in a lawsuit brought by several CA counties that seeks to overturn the state’s Compassionate Use Act, passed in 1996.
This lawsuit comes one day after a series of raids of medical marijuana dispensaries in San Diego, a county that has chosen to involve the DEA in their actions and disregard the legality of medical marijuana within CA.
Valerie Corral, co-founder and director of WAMM states that “significant harm is caused both to our legal system and to seriously ill people when a city arbitrarily chooses to defy the law.”
The lawsuit, initially brought by San Diego County and later joined by San Bernadino and Merced counties, challenges state laws that permit patients to use, and doctors to recommend medical marijuana under the explicit protection of state law. The lawsuit further challenges the state’s Medical Marijuana Program Act, which calls for the implementation of an identification card program that would allow police to identity legitimate medical marijuana patients in a database.
Although the California Attorney General’s plans to defend the state’s medical marijuana statutes from the counties’ challenge, several groups are intervening in an order to assure adequate representation of those most impacted by the counties’ legal challenge: medical marijuana patients, their caregivers, and doctors.
WAMM is represented by these groups as well, and is a medical marijuana collective in Santa Cruz, California, whose 200 members, a majority of whom are terminally ill, work together with their caregivers to provide free medicine for a variety of conditions to members in the collective. In addition to entering the case, the groups are seeking a court order that would compel the counties to abide by and implement California’s medical marijuana laws. The groups are also asking the court to affirm that the state’s medical marijuana laws are not preempted by contrary federal statutes.
Despite these challenges, WAMM will continue to operate, although desperately needing funding. On July 22, from 10-4pm, WAMM will be hosting a garage sale with BBQ and live music at 815 Almar Street to raise money for its members in need.
For more information:
http://www.wamm.org
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
From Jan. 31, 2006
Round Two Begins in Legal Fight to Force Feds to Honor States’ Medical Marijuana Laws
CONTACT: media [at] aclu.org
ACLU and Others Ask Federal Court to Approve City of Santa Cruz Plan to Provide Medical Marijuana Directly to Patients
SAN JOSE, CA – The city of Santa Cruz, California and a collective of Santa Cruz medical marijuana patients today asked a federal court to approve the city’s plan to provide medical marijuana directly to patients. The American Civil Liberties Union, Bingham McCutchen LLP, the Drug Policy Alliance and others filed legal documents setting out new claims based on an ordinance recently enacted by the Santa Cruz City Council that establishes the provision of medical marijuana as an official city government function. The legal papers were filed in County of Santa Cruz v. Gonzales.
The U.S. Constitution permits states to determine for themselves what is legal and what is illegal under state law, according to today’s filing. In the case of medical marijuana, the plaintiffs argue that the federal government has intentionally sabotaged this process, selectively utilizing arrests, prosecutions and other means in an effort to thwart state medical marijuana laws.
“The White House wants California to march in lockstep with its misguided prohibition of medical marijuana, but the Constitution says otherwise,” said Allen Hopper, an attorney with the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project. “The federal government cannot force California or the city of Santa Cruz to make medical marijuana use a crime, nor can the federal government use the threat of criminal prosecution to intentionally sabotage state and local laws that it does not like.”
In addition, the group points out that federal government interference with the ability of seriously ill, in many cases terminal, patients to use medical marijuana deprives them of basic due process rights in the Constitution - denying patients access to the only medicine that addresses otherwise fatal symptoms of their conditions.
County of Santa Cruz v. Gonzales originated in 2003 when Bingham McCutchen LLP and the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), along with private attorneys Gerald F. Uelmen and Benjamin Rice, sued the federal government for raiding a Santa Cruz-area medical marijuana cooperative, the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM). The case was delayed pending the outcome of last summer’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Raich v. Gonzales, in which the Court held that the federal government maintains power to enforce federal marijuana laws even in states that have made medical marijuana legal under state law.
However, the Raich decision left intact the ability of individual states to enact and implement their own medical marijuana laws. Responding to local patients, Santa Cruz enacted a first-of-its-kind ordinance to provide medical marijuana as a city function.
“We are asking the court to recognize the individual constitutional rights of patients, along with the city’s right to implement California’s medical marijuana laws,” said Frank Kennamer, an attorney with Bingham McCutchen who represents WAMM and individual patients in the lawsuit. “The Santa Cruz ordinance represents the city’s sincere attempt to provide patients with a safe and legal source of medical marijuana without exposing them to the danger of federal criminal prosecution. These patients have a constitutional right to their medicine.”
California passed Proposition 215, known as the Compassionate Use Act, ten years ago, making medical marijuana legal under state law. Eleven other states have since enacted similar measures. Today’s legal papers state that, “the federal government’s campaign against California’s medical marijuana laws has continued unabated” and that the federal government “continues to purposefully interfere with California and other states’ medical marijuana laws, intending to coerce states to recriminalize medical marijuana.”
The legal papers cite as evidence of the federal government’s “campaign” against state medical marijuana laws federal interference in state legislative decisions to legalize medical marijuana, federal law enforcement decisions to focus on medical marijuana users to the exclusion of similarly situated non-medical marijuana users and federal threats to doctors who recommend medical marijuana to patients.
“The Santa Cruz case not only raises fundamental constitutional claims never before decided by the judiciary in the context of medical marijuana, but also offers some of the most compelling facts ever presented by patients to the courts,” said Daniel Abrahamson, Director of Legal Affairs for DPA. “At the heart of the Santa Cruz case are patients using marijuana to stay alive and to live out their last days with dignity, control and comfort. Their stories and their plight underscore the freedoms guaranteed to all Americans by their constitution - freedoms that federal officials are trying to squash.”
County of Santa Cruz v. Gonzales is currently before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. In addition to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the lawsuit names as defendants U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents involved in the raid of WAMM, DEA Administrator Karen Tandy and Office of National Drug Control Policy Director John Walters.
The group’s amended complaint is available online at:
http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/medmarijuana/23992lgl20060130.html
A profile of WAMM cofounder Valerie Corral is at:
http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/medmarijuana/19898res20050922.html
http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/medmarijuana/24002prs20060131.html
Round Two Begins in Legal Fight to Force Feds to Honor States’ Medical Marijuana Laws
CONTACT: media [at] aclu.org
ACLU and Others Ask Federal Court to Approve City of Santa Cruz Plan to Provide Medical Marijuana Directly to Patients
SAN JOSE, CA – The city of Santa Cruz, California and a collective of Santa Cruz medical marijuana patients today asked a federal court to approve the city’s plan to provide medical marijuana directly to patients. The American Civil Liberties Union, Bingham McCutchen LLP, the Drug Policy Alliance and others filed legal documents setting out new claims based on an ordinance recently enacted by the Santa Cruz City Council that establishes the provision of medical marijuana as an official city government function. The legal papers were filed in County of Santa Cruz v. Gonzales.
The U.S. Constitution permits states to determine for themselves what is legal and what is illegal under state law, according to today’s filing. In the case of medical marijuana, the plaintiffs argue that the federal government has intentionally sabotaged this process, selectively utilizing arrests, prosecutions and other means in an effort to thwart state medical marijuana laws.
“The White House wants California to march in lockstep with its misguided prohibition of medical marijuana, but the Constitution says otherwise,” said Allen Hopper, an attorney with the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project. “The federal government cannot force California or the city of Santa Cruz to make medical marijuana use a crime, nor can the federal government use the threat of criminal prosecution to intentionally sabotage state and local laws that it does not like.”
In addition, the group points out that federal government interference with the ability of seriously ill, in many cases terminal, patients to use medical marijuana deprives them of basic due process rights in the Constitution - denying patients access to the only medicine that addresses otherwise fatal symptoms of their conditions.
County of Santa Cruz v. Gonzales originated in 2003 when Bingham McCutchen LLP and the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), along with private attorneys Gerald F. Uelmen and Benjamin Rice, sued the federal government for raiding a Santa Cruz-area medical marijuana cooperative, the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM). The case was delayed pending the outcome of last summer’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Raich v. Gonzales, in which the Court held that the federal government maintains power to enforce federal marijuana laws even in states that have made medical marijuana legal under state law.
However, the Raich decision left intact the ability of individual states to enact and implement their own medical marijuana laws. Responding to local patients, Santa Cruz enacted a first-of-its-kind ordinance to provide medical marijuana as a city function.
“We are asking the court to recognize the individual constitutional rights of patients, along with the city’s right to implement California’s medical marijuana laws,” said Frank Kennamer, an attorney with Bingham McCutchen who represents WAMM and individual patients in the lawsuit. “The Santa Cruz ordinance represents the city’s sincere attempt to provide patients with a safe and legal source of medical marijuana without exposing them to the danger of federal criminal prosecution. These patients have a constitutional right to their medicine.”
California passed Proposition 215, known as the Compassionate Use Act, ten years ago, making medical marijuana legal under state law. Eleven other states have since enacted similar measures. Today’s legal papers state that, “the federal government’s campaign against California’s medical marijuana laws has continued unabated” and that the federal government “continues to purposefully interfere with California and other states’ medical marijuana laws, intending to coerce states to recriminalize medical marijuana.”
The legal papers cite as evidence of the federal government’s “campaign” against state medical marijuana laws federal interference in state legislative decisions to legalize medical marijuana, federal law enforcement decisions to focus on medical marijuana users to the exclusion of similarly situated non-medical marijuana users and federal threats to doctors who recommend medical marijuana to patients.
“The Santa Cruz case not only raises fundamental constitutional claims never before decided by the judiciary in the context of medical marijuana, but also offers some of the most compelling facts ever presented by patients to the courts,” said Daniel Abrahamson, Director of Legal Affairs for DPA. “At the heart of the Santa Cruz case are patients using marijuana to stay alive and to live out their last days with dignity, control and comfort. Their stories and their plight underscore the freedoms guaranteed to all Americans by their constitution - freedoms that federal officials are trying to squash.”
County of Santa Cruz v. Gonzales is currently before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. In addition to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the lawsuit names as defendants U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents involved in the raid of WAMM, DEA Administrator Karen Tandy and Office of National Drug Control Policy Director John Walters.
The group’s amended complaint is available online at:
http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/medmarijuana/23992lgl20060130.html
A profile of WAMM cofounder Valerie Corral is at:
http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/medmarijuana/19898res20050922.html
http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/medmarijuana/24002prs20060131.html
meanwhile marinol is listed in the pdr, is the federal gov being hypocritical? if your a big contribitor to the major politicians you can disprese marijuana?
I am flabbergasted (yet again) by what goes on in San Diego. Apparantly the numerous strip clubs and rampant prostitution -- by minors in many cases -- is fine, but marijuana for sick people is not? Wow.
I encourage people to read the scientific studies on the safety of marijuana. No one has ever died from marijuana. Unlike cigarette smoke, longterm studies show that it does not lead to lung cancer. It doesn't enduce violent behavior, but rather deters it. All of that on top of the fact that it is an excellent carminative for people suffering from cancer and other life-threatening diseases.
The problem is that this natural drug may work too well. If it were to be completely legalized, entire classes of drugs would most likely be rendered obsolete. Anyone who has ever taken antidepressants knows how bad some of the side effects can be and those drugs are a multi-billion dollar industry. I think that is where all of the harrassment of medical marijuana patients can be traced back to.
I encourage people to read the scientific studies on the safety of marijuana. No one has ever died from marijuana. Unlike cigarette smoke, longterm studies show that it does not lead to lung cancer. It doesn't enduce violent behavior, but rather deters it. All of that on top of the fact that it is an excellent carminative for people suffering from cancer and other life-threatening diseases.
The problem is that this natural drug may work too well. If it were to be completely legalized, entire classes of drugs would most likely be rendered obsolete. Anyone who has ever taken antidepressants knows how bad some of the side effects can be and those drugs are a multi-billion dollar industry. I think that is where all of the harrassment of medical marijuana patients can be traced back to.
Good for WAMM and attorneys fighting the feds in the Gonzales case and state bigots in the southern California county challenges to the state Medical Mairjuana ID card program.
The issue of local passivity and hypocrisy still stands. The ACLU has a big Drug Policy office here in town that is doing nothing to oppose D.A. Lee and Sheriff Robbin's War on Marijuana here.
The local ACLU, which meets monthly, has taken no stand on the people whose liberty and property are being stolen daily by the machine over at 701 Ocean St. (the County courthouse).
City Council and its SCPD-happy City Attorney John Barisone won't simply vote in the "Tax and Regulate" marijuana initiative, but forced activists to spends thousands of dollars and hours putting it on the ballot--in what will obviously be a slam dunk. To add insult to injury, Barisone has issued a hostile report (see: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/07/15/18288169.php).
City Council is backing the WAMM lawsuit, but declining to open its own Office of Compassionate Use--NOW, when it might do some good and stir other cities to act similarly.
Instead of fighting local cases, pressing for jury nullification, sitting in at the D.A.'s office, and picketing the jail, local activists are contenting themselves with largely advisory initiatives.
Up in Mendicino County, Medical Marijuana Patients Union activists are using the Urziceanu decision which "“ This section extends the protections of the Compassionate Use Act to additional crimes related to marijuana: possession for sale, transportation, furnishing, maintaining a location for selling... managing a location for distribution.”
Writes long-time activist Pebbles Trippet, "There is no limit on the total number of patients who can authorize a primary caregiver to cultivate for them and provide their medicine, as long as there are sufficient physician recommendations to cover the quantity and as long as the medicine-providing processes are collectively or cooperatively organized."
Trippet elaborates:
"The Urziceanu ruling protects primary caregivers as follows:
1) Two or more people (patients and/or caregivers)
2) Can engage in “collective cooperative cultivation” of marijuana for medical purposes and not for profit.
3) State law allows “reimbursement” for expenses and services related to provision of medicine (including reasonable salaries).
4) If the primary caregiver is providing for more than one patient (there is no limit to the number of patients a caregiver may provide for), the number of doctor approvals has to be sufficient to authorize the quantity being grown or otherwise provided.
5) The collective or cooperative or their representative registers the garden with the California Medical Marijuana Program Act, which issues ID cards through county health departments, thus extending SB420 protections to that patient or primary caregiver."
full story: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/07/04/18285272.php
Trippet reports local activists were able to secure general agreement from opposing sheriff candidates on: 1) Physician Paperwork Posted At The Door Making Sheriff Entry Unnecessary; 2) A 24-hour Physicians Hotline to ocnfirm a medical marijuana patient's status; 3) Investigative Window Of Opportunity --of 12-24 hours before taking law enforcement action against those who claim to be qualified patients or caregivers, by using the MMAB and/or physicians' database to verify legitimacy and avoid arrest; 4) Giving patients the benefit of the doubt, for example, in cases where physician paperwork is incomplete or outdated...when in doubt about compliance, take photos and samples, not whole plants and not whole gardens.
Full story: http://indybay.org/newsitems/2006/06/25/18282796.php
We need to make similar demands on our local Drug Warriors.
And, of course, attack the prison/attorney racket that destroys so many each day by broadening our focus from medical marijuana to marijuana to the criminalization of drugs generally. Medicalization not criminalization.
Some of the history of the Santa Cruz struggle is detailed below (thanks to http://www.santacruz.indymedia):
Bob Lee's Persecution/Prosecution of Roger Mentch in 2005: http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/16819/index.php
Santa Cruz City Council Hypocrisy: 5 years in without a medical marijuana dispensary; zoning laws that make opening such places very difficult and limit them to places like Harvey West:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/1808/index.php
Debate on Local Medical Marijuana restriction:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17402/index.php
Useful Phone Numbers to Call:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17702/index.php
Local activist efforts against the drug war:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17673/index.php#quickcomment
Harassing the young, poor, and homeless in the local Drug Prohibition War:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/11768/index.php
The issue of local passivity and hypocrisy still stands. The ACLU has a big Drug Policy office here in town that is doing nothing to oppose D.A. Lee and Sheriff Robbin's War on Marijuana here.
The local ACLU, which meets monthly, has taken no stand on the people whose liberty and property are being stolen daily by the machine over at 701 Ocean St. (the County courthouse).
City Council and its SCPD-happy City Attorney John Barisone won't simply vote in the "Tax and Regulate" marijuana initiative, but forced activists to spends thousands of dollars and hours putting it on the ballot--in what will obviously be a slam dunk. To add insult to injury, Barisone has issued a hostile report (see: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/07/15/18288169.php).
City Council is backing the WAMM lawsuit, but declining to open its own Office of Compassionate Use--NOW, when it might do some good and stir other cities to act similarly.
Instead of fighting local cases, pressing for jury nullification, sitting in at the D.A.'s office, and picketing the jail, local activists are contenting themselves with largely advisory initiatives.
Up in Mendicino County, Medical Marijuana Patients Union activists are using the Urziceanu decision which "“ This section extends the protections of the Compassionate Use Act to additional crimes related to marijuana: possession for sale, transportation, furnishing, maintaining a location for selling... managing a location for distribution.”
Writes long-time activist Pebbles Trippet, "There is no limit on the total number of patients who can authorize a primary caregiver to cultivate for them and provide their medicine, as long as there are sufficient physician recommendations to cover the quantity and as long as the medicine-providing processes are collectively or cooperatively organized."
Trippet elaborates:
"The Urziceanu ruling protects primary caregivers as follows:
1) Two or more people (patients and/or caregivers)
2) Can engage in “collective cooperative cultivation” of marijuana for medical purposes and not for profit.
3) State law allows “reimbursement” for expenses and services related to provision of medicine (including reasonable salaries).
4) If the primary caregiver is providing for more than one patient (there is no limit to the number of patients a caregiver may provide for), the number of doctor approvals has to be sufficient to authorize the quantity being grown or otherwise provided.
5) The collective or cooperative or their representative registers the garden with the California Medical Marijuana Program Act, which issues ID cards through county health departments, thus extending SB420 protections to that patient or primary caregiver."
full story: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/07/04/18285272.php
Trippet reports local activists were able to secure general agreement from opposing sheriff candidates on: 1) Physician Paperwork Posted At The Door Making Sheriff Entry Unnecessary; 2) A 24-hour Physicians Hotline to ocnfirm a medical marijuana patient's status; 3) Investigative Window Of Opportunity --of 12-24 hours before taking law enforcement action against those who claim to be qualified patients or caregivers, by using the MMAB and/or physicians' database to verify legitimacy and avoid arrest; 4) Giving patients the benefit of the doubt, for example, in cases where physician paperwork is incomplete or outdated...when in doubt about compliance, take photos and samples, not whole plants and not whole gardens.
Full story: http://indybay.org/newsitems/2006/06/25/18282796.php
We need to make similar demands on our local Drug Warriors.
And, of course, attack the prison/attorney racket that destroys so many each day by broadening our focus from medical marijuana to marijuana to the criminalization of drugs generally. Medicalization not criminalization.
Some of the history of the Santa Cruz struggle is detailed below (thanks to http://www.santacruz.indymedia):
Bob Lee's Persecution/Prosecution of Roger Mentch in 2005: http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/16819/index.php
Santa Cruz City Council Hypocrisy: 5 years in without a medical marijuana dispensary; zoning laws that make opening such places very difficult and limit them to places like Harvey West:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/1808/index.php
Debate on Local Medical Marijuana restriction:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17402/index.php
Useful Phone Numbers to Call:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17702/index.php
Local activist efforts against the drug war:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17673/index.php#quickcomment
Harassing the young, poor, and homeless in the local Drug Prohibition War:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/11768/index.php
The Drug War is a reflection of the Cultural War being waged by the conservative christian capitalists vs. human rights and a diverse population with diverse lifestyles and needs. The connections to captial of the criminalization of "drugs" is clear when we accept realities such as the exagerated prision expansion in California and the huge increase in opium and heroin traffcking out of Afganisthan after we invaded (which had almost stoped under the Taliban - so any of you who have loved ones addicted to heroin, among other dangerous drugs, can thank your currupt federal government), two quick examples of endless problematics with the war on drugs.
The federal government's encroachment on state sovereignty around a policy that is designed to help sick people is an irrational move and also an example of the culture wars we are living under. Extreme irrational facist capitalism is running the world. The Euro-Centric institutions set up during colonialism are still dominating society and making democracy impossible. People must activate as citizens and keep their governments in check and develop clear thoughtful value systems. The conservative right has clear value systems and is highly organized and has huge reserves of wealth and capital. If you are not in line with values of war, exploitation, environmental devastation and all forms of oppression, than get involved and lets start building alternatives and defending our democracy, and we can start with issues like this.
Keep the updates coming, your community appreciates them.
El General*
The federal government's encroachment on state sovereignty around a policy that is designed to help sick people is an irrational move and also an example of the culture wars we are living under. Extreme irrational facist capitalism is running the world. The Euro-Centric institutions set up during colonialism are still dominating society and making democracy impossible. People must activate as citizens and keep their governments in check and develop clear thoughtful value systems. The conservative right has clear value systems and is highly organized and has huge reserves of wealth and capital. If you are not in line with values of war, exploitation, environmental devastation and all forms of oppression, than get involved and lets start building alternatives and defending our democracy, and we can start with issues like this.
Keep the updates coming, your community appreciates them.
El General*
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$220.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network