The USA-DEA Cabal: An Enemy of Reason Autor tekstu: Kaz Dziamka
men seem to have no medical knowledge and understanding of the chemical
properties of marijuana and hemp. They just repeat mindlessly the criminal
falsehoods invented over the last several decades by whoever has had a vested
interest in suppressing hemp and marijuana: mainly the spokespersons for the
pharmaceutical, lumber, big oil, tobacco, and conservative Christian groups.
return to the problem of the definition: Dr. West in Hemp and Marijuana explains
that Cannabis is „the only plant genus in which can be found the unique
class of molecules known as cannabinoids" and that it „produces two
major cannabinoids — THC .. and CBD (cannabidiol)." And while THC's
psychoactive effect is well known, it is not commonly known that CBD blocks the
effect of THC in the nervous system. Concludes Dr. West:
with THC below 1.0 percent and a CBD/THC ration greater than one is therefore
not capable of inducing a psychoactive effect. Hemp, it turns out, is not only
not marijuana, it could be called „anti-marijuana."
While there are other important differences, from a chemical viewpoint
it is clear that hemp and marijuana are not the same plants. The current U.S.
marijuana/hemp law is, then, seriously wrong. But the problem is more depressing
than what appears to be a spectacular stupidity of American hemp and marijuana
legislators and DEA's errant warriors.
the beginning of the 20th century, hemp seemed poised to become an ecological
salvation and a multi-billion-dollar industry. What was needed was a technology
that would eliminate the intensive labor traditionally required to separate the
fibrous bast from the hurds in hemp stalks and thus make large-scale industrial
hemp cultivation economically viable.
though many hemp processing devices had been patented (including Thomas
Jefferson's own hemp break), it was George W. Schlichten, a brilliant German
immigrant engineer, who provided a real breakthrough with his „decorticator"
in 1915. This „marvelous machine," as described in Robinson's book,
remained only a magnificent engineering idea, because no financier could be
found. When its industrial potential was re-promoted in the 1930's by the
scientific magazines Mechanical Engineering and Popular Mechanics, it was
already too late: The MTA killed the budding "Billion Dollar Crop"
industry. To Schlichten, who already at that time was concerned about the horror
of destroying forests for paper production, this legislation was devastating.
Schlichten died, as Robinson says, „a ruined man, and America's future was
there's more than just plain incompetence and ignorance to account for the MTA.
Was there a hidden agenda?
answer is money, greed, and power — as
always in politics. We should never forget that the business of America is
business, sometimes at any cost.
the 1930's the established timber businesses of Hearst, Kimberly Clark, and St.
Regis „stood to lose billions," as Herer points out, if the new hemp
processing technology was to be implemented. At the same time, as it happened,
the synthetic petrochemical giant Du Pont was facing a potentially formidable
natural opponent, hemp, to challenge the company's newly patented processes for
oil- and coal-based plastics and the improved method of making paper from wood.
According to Herer, "If hemp had not been made illegal, 80% of Du Pont's
business would never have materialized and the great majority of the pollution
which has poisoned the Northwestern and Southeastern rivers would not have
so something had to be done to protect the business interests of the richest and
most influential people in the United States against the emerging power of hemp
industry. Hemp had to be outlawed, even though it seemed like an impossible task
to try to ban the most useful crop in the history of humankind.
is likely that the federal legislative process that would have such horrendous
ecological and social consequences not only in the United States but in the
world at large was effectively initiated by the richest man in America at the
time, Andrew Mellon, secretary of the Department of Treasury, owner of Gulf Oil,
and Du Pont's chief financial supporter through his bank, the Mellon Bank of
Pittsburgh. It was Mellon who handpicked his nephew, Harry Anslinger — that
notorious liar and racist — to
head the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (FBNDD), the forerunner
of the current much-dreaded DEA. Through a series of secret Treasury Department
meetings and questionable, if not outright illegal, congressional maneuverings, a stage was set to pass the MTA. The idea was to falsify by gross distortions
and unabashed lies the apparent evil of marijuana smoking, and in the process to
secretly eliminate hemp.
major player in the anti-marijuana hysteria was William Randolph Hearst, another
racist who also stood to lose if hemp became a mass produced crop. Hearst owned
several dozen newspapers, magazines, and radio stations as well as substantial
timber holdings, linked with the paper industry and Du Pont. During his life,
Hearst published so many lies about marijuana in his many newspapers across the
country that the damage has never been undone. Anything that could help sell his
newspapers was fit to print. A typical Hearst lie was the argument that
marijuana caused blacks to rape white women. The man responsible for
institutionalizing yellow journalism in the United States was also, according to
Herer, one of the interests „most responsible for orchestrating the demise
of hemp manufacture."
so hemp was doomed. It had to be eliminated in the land of "free trade,"
and it was. Marijuana was used mostly as a pretext to get rid of hemp, because
both were equally threatening to the established business interests.
The sickening details of this unprecedented and perhaps unparalleled
fraud in the history of American legislation can all be read in the two books
mentioned at the beginning of this essay, as well as in, for example, Drug
Crazy by Mike Gray, and many other printed and electronic sources now
easily available for any interested reader.
although this conspiracy theory of hemp suppression is well supported and
eloquently stated by Herer, Robinson, and others, it does not account for all
the facts. So yet another reason must be sought.
of the often ignored facts in the current discussions of the origin of marijuana/hemp
legislation is that the actual movement to suppress Cannabis began at least two
decades before the MTA on the local, state level. Many states had already
implemented anti-marijuana laws before federal legislation was introduced.
According to Schaffer Library of Drug Policy in „History of Marihuana
Legislation," "public policy toward the drug was well rooted locally"
before Commissioner Anslinger initiated his infamous crusade. „During the 'local'
phase of marihuana prohibition, lasting roughly from 1914 to 1931, practically
every state west of the Mississippi, except for two, had prohibited use of the
drug for non-medical purposes."
was then ordinary American citizens prompted and supported by such perennial
Christian crusaders for moral purity like the Women's Christian Temperance Union
who were clamoring for marijuana ban long before the Federal Government made a fateful decision to join the fray. More recently, groups like PRIDE (Parents'
Resource Institute for Drug Education) and PDFA (Partnership for a Drug Free
America) have continued to pour falsehoods and fabrications about Cannabis
sativa in general and marijuana in particular. PRIDE, as David R. Ford points
out in Marijuana:
Not Guilty as Charged, is active with hundreds of thousands of parents
and students, and its programs are used in homes and schools throughout the
United States as well as in other nations." These groups are well funded
and are supported by the DEA. One example of the many dangerous fictions widely
advertised by PDFA, was, for instance, the infamous „frying pan" TV
ad. As Ford says:
members apparently felt that fiction was a justifiable means to an end. Hardly
scientific, or true. Dr. Donald Blum of the UCLA Neurological Studies Center
told KABC news that in another ad, a photo showing the effects of marijuana in
fact show[s] the brain waves of someone in a deep sleep-or in a coma. It
took weeks before the PDFA removed the dishonest television spot. There was
never an apology. Yet such propaganda continues to terrify parents and brings
more money to these organizations and to the DEA.
The silliness of Nancy Reagan's
highly publicized campaign is yet another example of the same: many Americans
pushing for a ban of marijuana and extremely harsh punitive laws to suppress its
use, and politicians too eager to oblige them. Perhaps uninformed, incompetent,
and vindictive people deserve an uninformed, incompetent, and vindictive
is, of course, possible to argue about what exactly were the causes of the
American obsession with fighting Cannabis. Undoubtedly other contributing
factors can be mentioned. But it is not possible to question what MTA and CSA
and other such federal legislative acts have done to American democracy and its
people. Here are only a handful of selected facts:
half a million marijuana users, usually young people, are arrested each year, an
overwhelming majority non-violent and posing no threat to anybody. These arrests
and imprisonments have ruined or destroyed thousands of lives and caused
needless suffering for the relatives and friends of the arrested. The U.S.
prison industry is among the fastest growing in the country. According to
Robinson, $5 billion was spent in 1995 on new prisons to accommodate the growing
U.S. prison population, which has doubled in the last two decades, an
overwhelming majority of whom are marijuana and other drug users. It currently
stands at about 2 million, the largest prison population in the world. A new
federal prison is being built every two weeks, a de
facto prisonification of the United States, the world's leading jailor.
About 5 billion is spent annually to enforce marijuana interdiction, while less
than 1 percent of the Cannabis eradicated is marijuana. The rest is ditch weed,
which is wild hemp. Which is to say, the great DEA warriors and other narcotics
agents are engaged in a fierce battle with a .. ditch weed. As Vermont
legislator Fred Maslack says: „ As far as the War on Drugs is concerned
they [the DEA] would be better off pulling up goldenrod." Indeed, they
might just as well chase flies: some 70 million Americans have tried marijuana.
It is not possible to eliminate a plant so beneficial to humankind.
1 2 3 4 Dalej..
« Społeczeństwo (Publikacja: 14-05-2003 Ostatnia zmiana: 06-10-2003)
Wszelkie prawa zastrzeżone. Prawa autorskie tego tekstu należą do autora i/lub serwisu Racjonalista.pl.
Żadna część tego tekstu nie może być przedrukowywana, reprodukowana ani wykorzystywana w jakiejkolwiek formie,
bez zgody właściciela praw autorskich. Wszelkie naruszenia praw autorskich podlegają sankcjom przewidzianym w
kodeksie karnym i ustawie o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych.