Fox News in the US is fairly much what you would expect from a Murdoch owned TV station - heavily biased conservative spin, anti Obama/Democrats, anti-abortion, strong patriotic themes bordering on jingoism, pro-war, supporters of the "War on Drugs”, very Christian - anti-Muslim etc. But, apart from the show’s obvious bias, it derives much of it’s derision from it’s promotional tag line - Fox News … Fair & Balanced! It doesn’t take long for someone with an average intelligence to realise just how unfair and unbalanced Fox News really is. For the uninitiated, it would be very easy to mistake it as a self parody comedy sketch.
The latest Fox News outrage is a TV commercial by The Drug Policy Alliance(DPA) released last month. The commercial has upset 2 of their most outspoken commentators, Megyn Kelly and Bill O’Reilly and prompted them to lash out with some very interesting claims. The problem though, is that their claims are false even to the point of being ridiculous. Fox News is renown for misleading figures and bizarre claims when it comes to drugs but this latest effort shows how far some anti-drug pundits will go.
First, the DPA commercial.
DPA Commercial
Watch as Fox News makes their astonishing claims. Keep an eye on the statistics they put up as facts.
Fox News Clip 1
Fox News copped a lot of flack over their report but Megyn Kelly was on a mission. Especially when she found out that fellow Fox News employee, John Stossel agreed with Sting.
Fox News Clip 2
Boy, does that woman hate Sting. You had to laugh though at her “ivory tower” rant and the slur that some unnamed source told her, “Mr. Sting is a big fan of certain substances”.
But, it was Megyn Kelly’s attempt to ridicule John Stossel that was most appalling. Although every attempt was made to push out the usual misinformation and false figures as facts, Stossel stuck with the evidence and corrected Kelly several times for flat out lying. In typical style, Kelly kept changing the topic and throwing up straw man arguments but Stossel debunked every point she made.
-All this as you have California, Washington, New Hamshire, Rhode Island and Massachusetts all considering or have passed laws legalising marijuana
-Alcohol has an addiction rate of 10%. Cocaine … 75%.
-The studies show that the places where it’s been legalised, crime has gone up, addiction has gone up
-- Megyn Kelly
The facts:
-Countries that had effectively legalised drugs had decreases in crime and addiction, not increases
-Alcohol has an addiction rate of 15% with cocaine at 17%
-No state in the US have passed laws legalising marijuana
John Stossel must have upset some Fox News heavies and Bill O’Reilly was sent in clean up the mess. And what better way to discredit the DPA commercials than through the founder, Ethan Nadelmann. Armed with their only fact - children are mistreated more often by those with substance abuse problems - Bill-O went into action a few days later.
Fox News Clip 3
Was it really a surprise that Fox News didn’t have a legitimate argument and their attack on illicit drugs was unfounded? As Ethan Nadelmann pointed out, alcohol is the main cause of mistreatment towards children, not drugs but Bill-O wasn’t going to admit to that blunder. His simply dismissed it as “Bull”. Like Megyn Kelly, Bill-O skipped from point to point as each of his claims were pulled apart with facts. Very shallow reporting from Fox News.
It’s sad that this is how many people are getting their information about drugs. The drug debate should be about what’s best for society and how to deal with the problem of drug abuse but it’s dickheads like O’Reilly and Kelly who are prepared to openly lie and criticise those who are doing nothing more than telling the truth. Supporters of prohibition have self serving reasons for their hard line stance on drugs and will go to extreme measures to push their opinion onto the public. That includes accusing a whole country of being morally depraved because of their liberal drug laws.
The attack on The Netherlands by Fox News last year, is a classic example of how a country with very successful drug laws is made to look as immoral and unsafe because it defies the old established views that tough penalties are the only way to fight drugs. This is not so much, a war on drugs but a war on culture.
Fox News - The Netherlands Report
You may have noticed the blonde factor at Fox News - Megyn Kelly, Monica Crowley and Margaret Hoover. Do they have a factory that spits out lying dumb blondes with ridiculous views? You may also be asking yourself, how can Fox News produce such dribble without a storm of criticism. Where were the media on this? Where was the outrage at such scandalous accusations? Why did it take a YouTube response to set the record straight?
How many times do we have to witness and ultimately pay for this ridiculous attempt to please an ignorant public, boofhead politicians and the moral police? Once again, at The Big Day Out, police caught only a small percentage of attendees with drugs while thousands got through. There were dozens of officers, sniffer hounds and public searches all meant to deter drugs from entering the festival. It happens all too often now with the costs mounting up and the shock value decreasing significantly.
Year after year we repeat the same warnings before the event starts, but every year there are still people who stupidly try to get past us and fail -Superintendent Rod Smith
Not only do the police re-enact the same old strategy but they try to turn it around and put it on the people who attend these festivals. This gets to the crux of the futile approach taken by our government on drug control. We are historically consumers of drugs and we are always going to partake especially young people at a music festival. Whether the constabulary are there or not, drugs are going to be smuggled in and unless every single person, including the staff, the musicians and the police themselves are stripped searched, there will be plenty to go around. That olden but golden observation becomes apparent once more - if we can’t stop drugs getting into prison, how are we going to stop drugs getting into ... the Sydney show grounds, the Melbourne show grounds etc.
A total of 381 people were arrested, with police laying 104 drug possession charges, 12 drug supply charges, six assault charges and one malicious damage charge. Police also issued nine cannabis cautions, ejected 11 drunk people and caught 18 people trying to jump the fence into the venue. -(AAP) PerthNow
It’s becoming all too common for the police to join the chorus of crooked politicians and agenda driven anti-drug zealots pushing out fear, exaggerated harms and lies. Droning on about “no drug is a safe drug” or “we’re putting drug dealers and drug users on alert ... we will catch you!”, might keep those “crooked politicians and agenda driven anti-drug zealots” happy but it’s not really productive. Like so much of the typical anti-drug rhetoric from the media and politicians, messages from the police are often produced just to please converts of the drug war or exploitable parents who have already been paralysed with fear. Think about the hundreds of thousands who use ecstasy, speed, cannabis etc. when they go out or on special occasions. Most of them have never had a problem with their drug taking or even seen any lasting negative effect. They have undoubtedly seen booze cause some major upsets but rarely does the same happen with recreational drugs. In fact, I’d dare say it’s the opposite and they have an absolutely cracker of a night. These are the supposed targets of these anti-drug messages but with the constant stream of dire warnings never coming to fruition, the message fails to make an impact. The truth is, and it’s a hard truth ... recreational drugs are taken so often because they are enjoyable, exciting and exhilarating with very little downside. You don’t hear this mentioned very much.
There is this idea with some young people that taking drugs enhances their day out, in reality, they are putting their lives at risk by taking illegal drugs sold by people out to make a quick buck. They might think this is just an ecstasy pill, but as police members, too often we see the tragic effect of these foolish decisions.
They might think this is just an ecstasy pill, but as police members, too often we see the tragic effect of these foolish decisions.
Make no mistake, there is no such thing as a safe party drug.
[...]
No overdoses were recorded among the 10,500 people that attended the event -Detective Inspector Mark Zervaas - (AAP) The HeraldSun
Yep, you read that right. After all the dire warnings, his last reported comment was, “No overdoses were recorded among the 10,500 people that attended the event”. And we wonder why these messages are over looked by the target audience as just more anti-drug babble.
Apart from being totally pointless, the attempt to stop drugs entering The Big Day Out raises a bigger issue. Why is such a dangerous drug like alcohol allowed to flow freely whilst so much effort is put into stopping safer drugs like cannabis, LSD and ecstasy? This elephant-in-the-room just keeps eluding us over and over as the anti-drug zealots come up with new, fanciful arguments over and over. Remember the constant grind about dope being a gateway drug? That took 40 years of repeated research proving it a myth. Then cannabis supposedly caused all sorts of madness including psychosis, schizophrenia and amotivational syndrome. After numerous studies, they too was finally narrowed down to effect only a tiny group of people with amotivational syndrome being a complete furfie. Since then, cannabis has been blamed for causing testicular cancer, lung cancer, making us sterile, changing personalities and being anti-social. They too are loosing out to science and research which means the anti-drug brigade will have to devise new symptoms of cannabis use to scare the public.
But it’s ecstasy(MDMA) that’s getting the fear treatment at the moment. It wasn’t too long ago that ecstasy was touted as the new drug scourge crippling society. Warnings of massive depression, holes in the brain as seen in CT scans and of course addiction ... all after even one pill. The hype was so intense that the anti-methadone campaign in the US, One Pill Can Kill was mistakenly taken up by anti-ecstasy groups, the police and local nutters.
Ecstasy was perfectly legal until it hit the dance scene in the US. The DEA in spectacular form, ignored a scientific court ruling and rushed through an emergency law to class it as a schedule I drug. This put an end to promising research into Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and other psychological problems. It seemed that too many young(and old) Americans were just having too much fun for the DEA. But it was a Newsweek article that put MDMA on the most feared list in the US. Newsweek cited flawed research that just one pill could create “holes” in the brain and they provided a CT scan to prove it. It was later revealed that the test subject monkeys had been injected with pure methamphetamine instead of MDMA and the hole in the brain scans really meant nothing. But the damage had been done. Much to the delight of anti-drug crusaders, ecstasy was now seen as a killer. It took over 2 decades of overseas research to eat away at the myths surrounding ecstasy and only now is the real truth coming out. Not addictive, very few deaths, very few problems, statistically safer than riding a horse.
Det-Supt Charlie Carver, of the Serious and Organised Crime Squad, said many seized ecstasy pills contained harmful chemicals such as chalk and washing powder. -The Sunday Times
The latest strategy by the anti-drug nutters is not aimed at MDMA itself but the contaminants that are mixed in by manufacturers to extend their product. You have probably read about ecstasy being be cut with glass, rat poison, cleaning agents, heroin etc. The reality is that ecstasy is now being cut more than ever but usually with other mind altering drugs like PMA, Mephedrone, caffeine and ketamine. As far as I know, the claims of glass, heroin and poisons being included in ecstasy pills are myths.
Ecstasy has never been cheaper or more dangerous in Perth, a major new study reveals. -The Sunday Times
Ironically, it’s the drug laws themselves that present the most danger. An unregulated industry(prohibition) breeds crime and a black market where there is no age restrictions, health guidelines or quality control. To top it off, the federal and state governments won’t allow doctors to run pill testing booths at music festivals or raves. This leaves users at the mercy of criminals and what they decide goes in the mix. If you have a complaint, don’t ring The Office of Fair Trading or contact a consumer rights group. The illicit drug industry handles complaints in their own special way - usually with intimidation and violence.
If we look to the club scene in London for setting the trends here in Australia, we should be worried. As MDMA is becoming scarce in London, most ecstasy pills are being filled with steroids, caffeine and mephedrone, a drug we know very little about. This has caused the arrest rate for possession of MDMA to drop significantly in London over the last few year. From 1,197 in 2006 to 773 in 2008. 2009 is looking to be less than 500. This is not a case of drug manufacturers trying to extend their profits but because of a crack down on MDMA precursors by the authorities`. China is now the sole manufacturer of the main precursor for MDMA with exports coming from only 2 countries. They are all heavily regulated and monitored with less than 5 litres in total being sold in 2008 and 2009.
This might keep the AFP, DEA and other drug enforcement agencies happy but as usual, their mindless obsession and limited thinking is killing people. In other words, cracking down on the relatively safe drug MDMA, has caused a surge in PMA, mephedrone, BZP, GHB and other more harmful drugs. Why are anti-drug agencies and groups so inept with logic? They think that if you simply make it harder to get a certain drug then users will just stop taking all drugs? Or when a certain area is targeted by the police - drug users just don’t give up and the dealers quit to get legitimate jobs. The drug scene simply moves somewhere else. Haven’t they ever heard of the Balloon Effect? - squeeze one end and a bulge appears somewhere else.
Insanity
So when will this farce stop? We have silly, ignorant politicians making all sorts of comical statements mixed in with deceitful politicians blatantly lying for some selfish agenda. Giving their support, are the moral crusaders who are mostly happy clappers from the religious right or the new breed of racist, Howard loving, pro-Israel, Tim Blair arse licking neo-conservatives. And in case you still have missed it, we have the sensational and heavily biased Murdoch media pumping out myths, lies and inane opinion pieces designed to brainwash a susceptible public.
Anyone with a hint of intelligence should be able to see the massive flaws in the current system. For example, why do we still have a major drug problem after 50 years of being “Tough on Drugs”? Why is alcohol still legal when it kills 10 times the number of people who die from all illicit drugs combined? Where are the masses of drug induced mental health patients? Why are there still so many drugs available when every week we hear that a new bust was supposed to greatly reduce drug supply?
Where is the common sense and pragmatism? Why do we spend billions on stopping drug supplies but drugs are now easier to obtain than ever before? Why do we keep rolling out the same expensive “Tough on Drugs” strategy when it never meets it’s targets? Why aren’t politicians caught out by the media for lying when they make brash, non-truthful statements? Most anti-drug claims by politicians are simply lies with no scientific evidence but for some reason, opposing political parties don’t just let it slide by but usually try to out do them. This childish banter of “I’m tougher on drugs than you” is purely political and only exacerbates the societal damage already inflicted. And the damage is real, costing many lives and causing incredible carnage. Why is this allowed to continue without any real scrutiny from the media?
While advances in science and medicine bound along exponentially, the approach to drug use lingers in the dark ages. Keeping the public ignorant and fearful of drugs is the prime objective for politicians because it’s a vote winner. That would change if the public were more aware of the facts but with decades of propaganda, myths and fear being forced on them, they don’t have hope. It’s spooky to think that just 10-20 minutes on the intertubes would expose a 100 years of misinformation and lies with the truth there for anyone who cares to find out.
Police Arrest More Than 300 People At Big Day Out (AAP) PerthNow
January 2010
MORE than 300 people were arrested over the two-day Big Day Out music festival in Sydney, with one person caught with 24 ecstasy tablets, police said today.
Police, including officers from the Dog Squad and Commuter Crime unit, targeted drug and alcohol-related crime and anti-social behaviour at the festival in Homebush on Friday and Saturday.
A total of 381 people were arrested, with police laying 104 drug possession charges, 12 drug supply charges, six assault charges and one malicious damage charge.
Police also issued nine cannabis cautions, ejected 11 drunk people and caught 18 people trying to jump the fence into the venue.
Ambulance officers were also kept busy, with 1587 people treated by St John Ambulance volunteers over both days, while 36 patients were taken to hospital.
Many of those revellers were treated for dehydration, as temperatures climbed into the 40's on both days.
Drugs seized during the police operation included cannabis, ecstasy, ice, LSD, cocaine and amphetamines.
"One person was found entering the venue allegedly in possession of 24 ecstasy tablets," police said in a statement.
Superintendent Rod Smith said most festival-goers enjoyed themselves responsibly, but some people still hadn't got the message.
"Year after year we repeat the same warnings before the event starts, but every year there are still people who stupidly try to get past us and fail," Supt Smith said in a statement.
"The results also show that anti-social behaviour won't be tolerated, and those charged over the last two days will have to face the consequences at court."
It appears that NSW Nationals leader and acting NSW opposition leader, Andrew Stoner might be a fan of The Australian Heroin Diaries. After constantly reading about his cohorts getting so much attention here, it seems he has made a gallant effort to join them. And his efforts will be rewarded with some well deserved recognition from us. Here we go.
Andrew Stoner ... you’re a DICKHEAD!
Why is Andrew Stoner a dickhead, you ask? Well, Stoner is the latest Australian politician attempting to gain voter support by spreading lies and attacking the scientifically proven drug policy of Harm Minimisation. The outrage was triggered by a pamphlet from NSW Health - Drug Safety: Guide to a Better Night that was reportedly available to young people at “music retailers, clubs, libraries, TAFE bars, universities” etc. Hmm. Aren’t some of these places restricted to adults over 18 years old? When they say, “For God’s Sake, Won’t Someone Think Of The Children”, it must also mean the kids who illegally enter adult-only premises.
To put out a pamphlet that says Guide to a Better Night ... I think it's sending a message that to have a good night you ought to be taking drugs -NSW Nationals leader, Andrew Stoner
Yes, he did actually say that. Stoner and others feel that giving warnings and safety advice to drug users/addicts somehow triggers kids to suddenly take up drugs or it sends the wrong message that you need drugs to have a good time. A far stretch by anyone’s imagination. The excitement was obviously having an effect on Stoner and he blurted out this beauty.
Clearly, the NSW Labor government has a philosophical approach that legal [sic] drugs are okay as long as you take them safely (but) we don't want anyone to take drugs. -NSW Nationals leader, Andrew Stoner
It wasn’t clear if Stoner was most upset about kids having access to the pamphlet or if it was a general swing at Harm Minimisation. I don’t think he actually knew himself and it only got worse when the anti-harm minimisation nutters joined the fight. First there was Brett Murray, the motivational speaker, author and everyone’s favourite youth inspirer in the lucrative Jesus circuit.
I think this is just a sheer sign of surrender
[...]
There's going to be people out there who commit pre-meditated murder - do we make sure that we have a little pamphlet saying `(ok,) but make sure that you do it in groups'? -Brett Murray in the Sydney Morning Herald
Followed by our old friend, Darren “Maaate” Marton who gave this magical oration:
The Sydney Morning Herald were so riveted, they misspelt Darren’s name. And that was it for Darren.
So we have one guy comparing drug use to pre-meditated murder and another warning us that the evil drug policy of Harm Minimisation was costing us our kids. Some profound theories for us all to ponder.
All this hooha because a health safety pamphlet written for 18-29 year old drug users was found at places that young people might visit ... and other age groups as well. What was in this controversial pamphlet that had the NSW opposition apply for it under the FOI act? From various media articles, I found that it includes this:
-Tips for having a safe night
-Urges young people not to use drugs alone
-Advises to ignore friends who put pressure on you to take a drug when you know it doesn't suit you
-Advises young adults about finding the illegal substance that suits their personality type
-And other radical information for our young, delicate readers.
The Opposition yesterday slammed the brochure as a disgrace and families flagged a campaign to force the Government to toughen its anti-drugs messages to young people -The Daily Telegraph
I want to know why you have to turn 18 to be a drug user/addict. I keep hearing that this information is not suitable for young people. But isn’t this the main flaw behind the anti-harm minimisation argument? - you can not deal with such a complex issue like drug use by slotting people into neat little boxes or using simple, one-size-fits-all policies. If this pamphlet is not available to a 16 or 17 year old, will they simply not take the drug they have just purchased? Is this the type of assumptions you make when you’re so used to regurgitating the, Just Say No myth? I’m sure many anti-drug warriors actually think this way and all the evidence in the world is not going to compete with the back-patting and political point scoring that currently exists.
Acting Opposition leader Andrew Stoner called for the guide to be pulped, saying the harm minimisation message will not solve the problem of drug use -The Daily Telegraph
I wonder if Stoner really understands what harm minimisation is when he makes such damning statements? Like many of the other dickhead politicians who recently embarrassed themselves, it appears to be a case of political opportunity mixed up with ignorance and personal beliefs. Jumping on the anti-drugs bandwagon might be a proven vote winner but increasingly so, you have to sell your soul to the scientifically challenged group known so fondly as the “Anti-Harm Minimisation Nutters”. That puts Stoner in the elite company of Fred Nile, Steven Fielding, Peter Debnam, Anne Bressington, Bronwyn Bishop, John Howard etc.
Lucky him.
Call To Pulp NSW Government's 'Drugs Are OK' Guide The Daily Telegraph/AAP
January 2010
A NSW Government brochure advising young adults about safe drug use should be pulped because it sends the wrong message, the state Opposition said.
The brochure Drug Safety: Guide to a Better Night offers tips for drug use and advises young adults about finding the illegal substance that "suits their personality type".
The Government has come under fire for making the pamphlet freely available to young people through outlets such as music retailers, clubs, libraries and universities, with some youth workers saying it "surrenders" in the war against drugs.
But NSW Health Minister Carmel Tebbutt has defended the guide, saying it has been distributed to an 18-29 age group with harm minimisation in mind.
"The Government's first position is that people shouldn't do drugs," she told Macquarie Radio.
Acting Opposition leader Andrew Stoner called for the guide to be pulped, saying the harm minimisation message will not solve the problem of drug use.
"Clearly the NSW Labor Government has a philosophical approach that legal drugs are OK as long as you take them safely (but) we don't want anyone to take drugs," Mr Stoner said.
"This ought to be pulped completely. This is sending a message that illegal drug use is OK.
"We ought to be putting our resources into ensuring kids stay off drugs and, for those who have actually become addicted, into helping to get off drugs."
If the Government does pulp the guide it would be the second time in two years it has been forced to take such drastic action.
In 2008, former health minister Reba Meagher ordered a drug guide aimed at year 9 and 10 students be destroyed because of community outrage over its similar harm minimisation approach.
It was only 2 days into 2010 and already another Lib had made a dickhead of themselves. Victorian Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu has joined the ranks of other political morons who have lied about or greatly exaggerated the effects of illicit drugs for personal, political gain. Following on from the trend set in SA and WA, Baillieu has declared that he will ban bongs if elected at the next state election.
When professionally made bongs are not available, smokers often resort to making their own from common household items. Most of us have seen the result of a home made bong - that ganja icon made of an orange juice container, a strip of garden hose and some tin foil. Often it is also made with other toxic materials like Blu-Tack, masking tape or glue to seal it around the cone where you light it. Some nasty fumes can come from these products. For example, although no one actually knows all the ingredients in Blu-Tack(trade secret), when lit, it releases quantities of carbon dioxide and monoxide, water vapour, oxides of nitrogen and toxic fumes. Not very healthy at all. I imagine glue and masking tape also have similar toxic fumes when set alight.
To ban bongs, you must effectively ban all drug paraphernalia including other safety products like crack/ice pipes and cocaine kits. These products help stop the spread of killer blood borne diseases like HIV/AIDS and Hep C. Banning drug paraphernalia is a simple way to sentence some people to death or a life of misery. I’m sure Baillieu knows this but as we’ve seen with other selfish, myopic politicians, the quest for votes is more compelling.
I have been criticised as being too harsh on politicians by calling them dickheads and liars but in reality they get off very lightly. They put through laws that effect all of us and some of them may actually cause harm to the public. This puts a lot of responsibility on these people but ultimately it’s their decision to run for office. Most of us understand there is some self promotion required when you’re a politician but when it becomes more important than the issues, a policy lacks any evidence or it is purely for political gain, then we have a problem. Especially when the issue leads to people dying or suffering something as unimaginable as HIV/AIDS. Banning drug paraphernalia will kill people and hurt many families - simple. And the stated reasons given by Baillieu are just wrong. So let me clear this up ... Ted Baillieu is a dickhead. A dangerous, selfish, greedy, lying dickhead.
He(Ted Baillieu) said, research showed cannabis was a gateway drug into more dangerous illicit drugs, with most heroin and cocaine users first experimenting with cannabis -The Sydney Morning Herald quoting Victorian Opposition Leader, Ted Baillieu
Bullshit. The Gateway Theory has been debunked by every reputable study since 1944 and is considered now just an example of Reefer Madness. The Gateway Theory then called the Stepping Stone Theory was pioneered in 1951 by Harry Anslinger, head of the US Federal Bureau of Narcotics who, without a shred of evidence made the assertion that marijuana is a stepping stone to heroin addiction. This completely contradicted his own public and personal views. This has been the basis of US cannabis policy ever since and is still used by anti-drug crusaders. Funnily enough, the original Stepping Stone theory was that spicy Mexican food led to hard drug use(opium/heroin).
The fundamental idea comes from America's puritanical history. It is the idea that pleasure is sinful, and small pleasures lead to cravings for larger pleasures. In this example, those who crave spicy food will inevitably crave larger pleasures, such as opium. -History of the Marijuana Gateway Myth by Clifford A. Schaffer
10 years later, some states in the US banned marijuana because they believed that opium/heroin led to marijuana addiction. LOL!
BTW, Reefer Madness is a reference to a propaganda movie made by the US government that depicted massive exaggeration and falsehoods about cannabis. The movie was meant to evoke public hysteria and damnation of cannabis use. Most opposition to cannabis back then was fuelled by racism, industry protection and moral panic.
Mr Baillieu said research from the Mental Health Council of Australia had found that cannabis users were three times more likely to develop psychosis -The Age quoting Victorian Opposition Leader, Ted Baillieu
More Bullshit. The latest and most reputable research tells us that cannabis alone does not cause psychosis without having an existing condition or a family history of mental illness. Cannabis can introduce psychosis-like symptoms that disappear after the effects of cannabis dissipate. Ironically, Bailieu’s assumptions are based on decades of consuming political spin largely from the feral federal Libs under Howard and junk science from anti-drug nutters who the Libs support.
Cannabis is a dangerous drug which causes serious mental and physical damage to many Victorians every year. As long as John Brumby allows bongs to be sold freely at more than 100 outlets across the state, Victoria's young people and families will continue to suffer from the damaging effects of cannabis. -The Sydney Morning Herald quoting Victorian Opposition Leader, Ted Baillieu
The Victorian government stood their ground, refusing to budge and they deserve some credit for that. As Balillieu said, Victoria is the only state where drug paraphernalia is not banned. The problem for Ted Baillieu is that this makes Victoria the only sensible state when it comes to ensuring proper equipment is available for the safety and health of drug users. Until The Libs comprehend this or at least stop lying, they will be continue to be responsible for many deaths to come and the misery of thousands of Australians.
Baillieu's Election Vow To Ban The Bong The Age
January 2010
BONGS would be banned in Victoria if the Coalition wins the state election this year.
Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu said the move would send a clear message to young people that cannabis is dangerous and harmful.
He said Victoria was the only state not to restrict the sale of bongs despite cannabis being illegal but widely used by young people.
''As long as John Brumby allows bongs to be sold freely at more than 100 outlets across the state, Victoria's young people and families will continue to suffer from the damaging effects of cannabis,'' Mr Baillieu said.
''Victorians can't trust a government that claims it is tough on drugs yet won't take this important step to reduce drug use.''
Under the Coalition's plan, Consumer Affairs Victoria inspectors would police the ban.
Mr Baillieu said research from the Mental Health Council of Australia had found that cannabis users were three times more likely to develop psychosis.
--
Bongs Stay On Sale In Vic Amid Ban Call Sydney Morning Herald By Daniel Fogarty
January 2010
AAP - The Victorian government will continue to allow the sale of marijuana-smoking implements, despite an opposition pledge to ban bongs should they win the next election.
Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu said a Coalition government would introduce the ban to reduce the harm caused to families by cannabis.
"Cannabis is a dangerous drug which causes serious mental and physical damage to many Victorians every year," he said on Saturday.
"As long as John Brumby allows bongs to be sold freely at more than 100 outlets across the state, Victoria's young people and families will continue to suffer from the damaging effects of cannabis."
But a spokesman for the government said it would not change its policy on the sale of bongs.
"We have examined this issue in the past but we do not support a ban on bongs and will continue to focus on prevention, education and working closely with police around law enforcement," he said in a statement.
"Victoria is tough on drugs with a focus on prevention, protecting our young people and reducing demand and the uptake of illicit drugs in our community."
The spokesman said the Opposition had no comprehensive drugs policy and continued to tinker around the edge of a serious issue - addressing the symptoms and not the cause.
Mr Baillieu said that under the Coalition plan it would amend the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act to restrict the sale of bongs, with Consumer Affairs Victoria inspectors being responsible for policing the ban.
He said research showed cannabis was a gateway drug into more dangerous illicit drugs, with most heroin and cocaine users first experimenting with cannabis.
"Victorians can't trust a government that claims it is tough on drugs yet won't take this important step to reduce drug use," Mr Baillieu said.
An election is due to be held in Victoria in November.
--
For the last 100 years, politics, moral panic and special interest groups have shaped the world’s drug policies often leaving facts and science behind in the race for a drug free world. Just last week, Professor David Nutt, chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) in the UK was sacked after he claimed that cannabis, ecstasy and LSD were less harmful than the legal drugs tobacco and alcohol. Professor Nutt, head of psychopharmacology at the University of Bristol has long been a critic of the UK drug scheduling list, often saying that drug policy is not based on science or research but political posturing. The current UK government is the countries first administration in power to ignore a report from the AMCD and implement contradicting recommendations. The science community is in an uproar that an independent scientific committee can have their chief scientist sacked for simply telling the truth that just happens to conflict with the government’s political position. Professor Nutt and his colleagues had previously initiated several government enquiries into drug policy but each one has been shut down by members of the government when it threatened their political position. The failure to class drugs appropriately might seem illogical or just a political game by dopey politicians but the real world carnage for users is life changing. With courts able to dish out some serious prison time, addicts, users and dealers face daily the possibility of spending decades behind bars. The effects are usually devastating on the families and friends involved.
Led by the US, the UN has constantly pushed all member countries to support and ratify treaties with more restrictive and harsher drug policies. This led to various treaties for different regions but they were eventually wrapped into The 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs with The 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances following a decade later. The 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances later expanded the two existing treaties to better tackle global organised crime and place more pressure on consumer countries to arrest drug users and addicts instead of just the manufacturers, suppliers and dealers. Yes, you read that right ... a concerted effort to arrest more users and addicts.
... each Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish as a criminal offence under its domestic law, when committed intentionally, the possession, purchase or cultivation of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances for personal consumption contrary to the provisions of the 1961 Convention, the 1961 Convention as amended or the 1971 Convention. -The 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
The reliance on extreme and harsh punitive measures to manage drug policies has created a massive artificial, illegal industry worth $400 billion dollars a year. It also created a world living in fear. It started in the early 1900s when authorities arrested doctors who prescribed opiates for addiction and continued to the current day restrictions on medical research involving illicit drugs. Drugs that held great promise for various ailments were often forced unnecessarily onto the most dangerous list when they became popular for recreational use by the public. Doctors are hesitant to prescribe strong painkillers for fear of being targeted by the over zealous authorities. Substitution treatment for heroin addicts is limited to a few basic opioids as heroin assisted treatment (HAT) was deemed to breach UN drug treaties. Even medical marijuana has been ignored by most countries as decades of propaganda has tarnished it’s image as a dangerous drug.
Cannabis
Strangely enough, cannabis would have never been banned had the US congress accepted the advice of the American Medical Association(AMA) and not the racist views of Harry Anslinger, director of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Anslinger hated Mexicans (who were the main users then) and had a lot of personal interest in banning marijuana. Incidentally, Anslinger had once claimed it’s use was harmless. Dr. William Woodward from the AMA also appeared in congress that day and contradicted every reason put forward by Anslinger for banning cannabis. But the chairman chose to read articles from the media as proof that cannabis was as dangerous as Anslinger claimed. Ironically, the beat-up in the media was the main issue raised by the AMA that said the US media was not basing their articles on any evidence whatsoever and none of their claims have ever been scrutinised by research. It’s worth noting that the owner of the newspapers that printed these stories was William Randolf Hearst who had huge financial interests in closing down the hemp industry. He was also a well known racist who hated Mexicans as much as Anslinger. After ignoring any science put forward by the AMA, the bill was passed. When the bill went to the floor of the house to be approved another incredible incident helped seal the fate of cannabis and hemp.
Member from upstate New York: “Mr. Speaker, what is this bill about?”
Speaker Rayburn: “I don’t know. It has something to do with a thing called marihuana. I think it’s a narcotic of some kind.”
Member from upstate New York: “Mr. Speaker, does the American Medical Association support this bill?”
Member on the committee jumps up and says: “Their Doctor Wentworth(Woodward) came down here. They support this bill 100 percent.”
And on the basis of that lie, on August 2, 1937, marijuana became illegal at the federal level.
Although 15 states in the US now support medical marijuana which treats millions of patients, it is still listed as a schedule I drug.
Schedule I Drug:
(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States
(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.
As you can see, points B and C simply do not apply to cannabis. This is an example of how outdated and obsolete that drug scheduling is in it’s current form. Since drug laws and punishment are usually based on scheduling a huge array of issues are distorted including crime, sentencing and research.
Although cannabis is classed as having “no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States” , there are many claims about it being a miracle treatment for all sorts of conditions, including cancer. From Ricky Simpson to Harvard University, claims of cannabis fighting cancer cells or even being a cure have been circulating since the 1960s. According to the BBC in their health section, cannabis helps reduce the side effects of chemotherapy by allowing patients to regain their appetite quickly and reduce nausea. For these reasons, it is also used for AIDS patients with Wasting Disease. Cannabis also helps treat multiple sclerosis, menstrual cramps, depression, mood disorders, glaucoma, asthma, strokes, Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's Disease, alcoholism and insomnia. However, according to the BBC there are side effects and the “opponents of the use of cannabis” point out - it damages the ability to concentrate. If these “opponents of the use of cannabis” get their way, all the people suffering from cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis etc. can concentrate all the better on dying a slow, painful death.
Apart from marijuana, other drugs listed in the US as schedule I are heroin, mescaline, MDMA(ecstasy), GHB, LSD and psilocybin(magic mushrooms). You might notice that some of these drugs don’t fit the criteria very well especially point B that says, The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. MDMA, LSD and psilocybin were showing great potential when used during the 1960s and 1970s for various psychiatric studies and physiological therapy. But like all drugs that become popular for recreational use, they were quickly banned in a bid to protect the public from harming themselves. In their haste though, the science community were also mostly denied access to these drugs regardless of their potential medical use.
Prof Roland Griffiths at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in Baltimore Maryland recently published a study of 36 healthy volunteers who were given psilocybin and then observed in the lab. The participants' ages ranged from 24 to 64 and none had taken hallucinogens before. When the group were interviewed again 14 months later 58% said they rated the experience as being among the five most personally meaningful of their lives, 67% said it was in their top five spiritual experiences, and 64% said it had increased their well-being or life satisfaction. -The Guardian: Clinical Trials Test Potential Of Hallucinogenic Drugs To Help Patients With Terminal Illnesses
Prior to the popularity of these new hallucinogenic drugs for recreational use, they were considered to be cutting edge science. They helped scientists better understand the mind and how the brain works including the treatment of several conditions like alcoholism. The potential was exciting for the many scientists who were exposed to a whole new field and were able to treat patients that had not responded to previous treatments. But the rising use of these drugs for pleasure, especially LSD, was just too much for a conservative America and soon stories of people jumping out windows and crossing busy roads while “tripping” became urban myths. Hippies with long hair and other anti-establishment behaviour became the image embedded in the public’s mind when LSD or other hallucinogenic drugs were mentioned. Eventually the media and the government started questioning the safety of using these drugs for research with exaggerated stories of psychosis and other mental health problems. The truth is that these drugs are basically non toxic, non addictive and rarely have long term effects unless there is a pre-existing mental illness. All the success and potential didn’t matter though. They were seen as dangerous to society, immoral and a symbol of rebellious, anti-American youth.
MDMA
The story of how MDMA(ecstasy) became a schedule I drug is just one of the amazing examples of how obscure drug scheduling still is.
Most of the information available regarding street use of MDMA(in the 80s) is based on anecdotal accounts given to the media, therapists, and substance abuse professionals... -Erowid (1987)
Without any qualified evidence, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) defied medical research and used their emergency scheduling powers to temporarily make MDMA a Schedule I drug. Several medical professionals including pharmacology experts argued that a Schedule I status would severely hinder their research into MDMA's therapeutic potential. The science community appealed the emergency classification before the administrative law judge, Francis Young who recommended that MDMA be classed as a Schedule III drug. The DEA rejected the judge’s recommendation and MDMA was made a Schedule I drug permanently. Obviously the medical experts, researchers and scientists were wrong. God damn, even the judge was wrong.
MDMA - Another Case of Crack/Cocaine Disparity?
In response to a mandate from the US Congress and after weighing the views of the Justice Department, the US Sentencing Commission in 2001 increased the penalties for MDMA offences by nearly 3000%. This made the penalty for possessing 4 ecstasy pills the equivalent of having 1 kilogram of cannabis or 1 gram of heroin.
The change makes ecstasy five times more serious to possess or sell than heroin on a per-dose basis [...] This is a wholly political act, not one based on scientific evidence -Edward Mallett - President of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
Opposing the new laws and armed with scientific evidence that MDMA was nowhere near the danger levels of heroin to both society and the user, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Federation of American Scientists called for a relaxing of the laws involving MDMA distribution, possession and use. They were ignored of course in what appears to be the new crack/cocaine disparity fiasco from the 80s.
The crack/cocaine disparity laws were introduced in 1986 by Ronald Reagan in response to the crack epidemic as exaggerated claims of “crack babies” and “instant addiction” hit the media. A mandatory five-year sentence was dished out to anyone caught with 5 grams or more of cocaine which meant crack users were jailed for a drug that was much heavier than it’s powder form. Incidentally, most crack users were African American and later Hispanics. The new laws copped plenty of criticism over the years for creating severe racial disparities in the prison system but for cocaine using middle America, it wasn’t their problem.
The mechanism is known as the "100-to-1 drug ratio," which gives crack cocaine 100 times the weight of powder cocaine. Under the ratio, a person convicted of selling five grams of crack — about the weight of a teaspoon of salt — triggers the same five-year mandatory minimum sentence as a person convicted of selling 500 grams of powder cocaine, roughly the weight of a loaf of bread. -TIME. August 2009
I mentioned the crack/cocaine disparity as it is a clear example of how misguided drug laws can reap so much damage especially for minorities. What’s really interesting though is that the 2001 push for ecstasy offences to be increased so heavily coincide with a White House report showing an increase in use by minorities.
The availability of ecstasy increased dramatically and more blacks and Hispanics are using the drug -White House Drug Policy Report
Is this a coincidence? A new drug policy that penalises by weight instead of dosage when the heaviest drug is being used increasingly by Blacks and Hispanics? It may sound somewhat like a conspiracy theory but since there was so much scientific evidence against these laws and with the history of US drug laws, I can’t help but wonder.
MDMA is now officially classed as having no medical value and too risky for research. How can such a potentially useful drug with a small but significant history of success suddenly be banned and placed onto the US schedule I list? How can they then increase penalties disproportionally to other drugs purely for political reasons? Is research using MDMA dead in the US?
Australia The mere mention of street drugs sends shivers down the spine of most politicians. Unless they play the “Tough on Drugs” game, they risk the chance of being singled out as “Soft on Drugs” by the many anti-drug nutters in politics. Even those who aren’t zealots will still see it as an opportunity to attack their opposition and score political points. The sad part isn’t that it’s confined to just recreational drug use but also when these drugs are associated with medical procedures that they were originally developed for. Nothing highlights this more than when SA Attorney General, Michael Atkinson bucketed Democrat, Sandra Kanck when she suggested a study into MDMA as a possible treatment for post-traumatic stress syndrome(PTSS). In a public dressing down, Atkinson said the Government would "not be supporting Sandra Kanck's latest rave" and "Vietnam Veterans are not laboratory mice for a left-wing social experiment". A year later the study was taken up by the Canadian government.
How can we forget John Howard who in August 1997, vetoed the proposed ACT heroin trial. Although the trial had support from the AMA, the medical community, both sides of parliament and most states, Howard claimed it 'sent the wrong message' and refused to sign off on the proposal wasting 6 years of careful scientific research. Importing heroin is controlled by the federal government and without their approval, the states could not source the drug from overseas. Prior to the proposed ACT heroin trials, Victorian premier, Jeff Kennett had commissioned Prof. David Pennington to report on Victoria’s drug laws. He also favoured a trial of prescription heroin and his report caught the attention of the US government. US president, Bill Clinton sent a few of his heavies to investigate the rumblings of a proposed heroin trial and Prof. Pennington was swiftly summoned to a meeting. The US and their staunch Zero Tolerance policy has dominated the UN drug offices since it’s inception. Any country that dared upset their moralist and anti-drug views were called into line very quickly often with threats. Unlike Switzerland that could run their own heroin trials without fear of US intervention, Australia had a lot under the control of the US/UN particularly, the Tasmanian poppy industry. The US goon squad made it clear that the UN run International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) managed Tasmania’s poppy production levels and a heroin trial was not welcomed by the US/UN. Although the proposed heroin trial was classed as “scientific research”, drug free rhetoric was more important to the US/UN and trumps any namby pamby scientific argument. It seems that the US not only prohibited drug research internally but in any country where they can extend their influence.
It is always sad when science is stymied by ideology, religion or ignorance. The US Bush administration and the Australian Howard government are 2 classic examples of this. During the Bush years, science was pushed aside for the religious convictions of the president and the religious right who supported him. In Australia around the same time, Bush crony, John Howard threatened non-government organisations(NGOs) and other groups who relied on government funding to submit all media releases before publishing them. It was the darkest period in Australia’s scientific history with a great number of important research studies being disregarded by our own government. Instead we were exposed to absolute tripe like The Bishop Report: “The Winnable War on Drugs” and government funded evangelistic groups like Drug Free Australia(DFA). The hardest hit were the NGOs who worked in welfare and of course were supporters of Harm Minimisation. Howard hated Harm Minimisation and even denied it was Australia’s official drug policy. A change of government was welcomed by the scientific community but they were soon faced with political reality when Kevin Rudd requested all media statements from government research groups be cleared with the Prime Minister’s office.
Hope?
Fortunately, the 1961 United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs has a clause that allows some programs to be classed as “scientific research”. Although it doesn’t guarantee acceptance by the UN it is often used by countries that want to keep within UN guidelines and aren’t in the position of being threaten with a US embargo like Australia was with the Tasmanian poppy industry. The Netherlands heroin assisted treatment (HAT) program is still classified as “scientific research” and has to be renewed every few years. Also, the Dutch “coffee shops” that sell cannabis are still technically illegal which keeps them inside the UN guidelines but they choose to de-prioritise the laws under a “gedoogbeleid” or tolerance policy. Australia has the Medically Supervised Injecting Centre (MSIC) which conflicts with UN policy but since it’s classed as a “scientific trial” and the US hasn’t tried to intervene, it’s free to operate but still needs to be re-established every 4 years.
During the Bush years, Mexican president, Vincente Fox introduced a bill that would decriminalise small amounts of all drug. The bill was passed in the Mexican congress but after intense pressure from the US, president Fox vetoed his own bill. An almost identical bill was passed this year under different US and Mexican presidents. Is this a sign of change? Has the anti-drug madness of US presidents like Reagan, Clinton and Bush(Snr. & Jr.) been confined to the history books to haunt them forever? Is the UN’s lack of criticism for the new drug laws in Mexico and Portugal suggesting a rethink of drug policies? Is this a new era for science?
We have lost nearly 40 years of research and potential medical breakthroughs because of the elected twats we put in power, Those who selfishly put their own agenda ahead of the millions who may have benefited by research into illicit drugs. From the US and their objection to researching these drugs down to state governments that oppose medical clinics as being immoral ... the winners are organised crime like drug cartels and some may argue the government who are technically “organised criminals”. The losers are clearly us, the public.
Scientists Study Possible Health Benefits Of LSD And Ecstacy The Guardian By Denis Campbell - Health Correspondent
October 2009
A growing number of people are taking LSD and other psychedelic drugs such as cannabis and ecstasy to help them cope with a variety of conditions including anorexia nervosa, cluster headaches and chronic anxiety attacks.
The emergence of a community that passes the drugs between users on the basis of friendship, support and need – with money rarely involved – comes amid a resurgence of research into the possible therapeutic benefits of psychedelics. This is leading to a growing optimism among those using the drugs that soon they may be able to obtain medicines based on psychedelics from their doctor, rather than risk jail for taking illicit drugs.
Among those in Britain already using the drugs and hoping for a change in the way they are viewed is Anna Jones (not her real name), a 35-year-old university lecturer, who takes LSD once or twice a year. She fears that without an occasional dose she will go back to the drinking problem she left behind 14 years ago with the help of the banned drug.
LSD, the drug synonymous with the 1960s counter-culture, changed her life, she says. "For me it was the catalyst to give up destructive behaviour – heavy drinking and smoking. As a student I used to drink two or three bottles of wine, two or three days a week, because I didn't have many friends and didn't feel comfortable in my own skin.
"Then I took a hit of LSD one day and didn't feel alone any more. It helped me to see myself differently, increase my self-confidence, lose my desire to drink or smoke and just feel at one with the world. I haven't touched alcohol or cigarettes since that day in 1995 and am much happier than before."
Many others are using the drugs to deal with chronic anxiety attacks brought on by terminal illness such as cancer.
Research was carried out in the 1950s and 1960s into psychedelics. In some places they were even used as a treatment for anxiety, depression and addiction. But a backlash against LSD – owing to concerns that the powerful hallucinogen was becoming widespread as a recreational drug, and fear that excessive use could trigger mental health conditions such as schizophrenia – led to prohibition of research in the 1970s.
Under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act it is classified as a Class A, schedule 1 substance – which means not only is LSD considered highly dangerous, but it is deemed to have no medical research value.
Now, though, distinguished academics and highly respected institutions are looking again at whether LSD and other psychedelics might help patients. Psychiatrist Dr John Halpern, of Harvard medical school in the US, found that almost all of 53 people with cluster headaches who illegally took LSD or psilocybin, the active compound in magic mushrooms, obtained relief from the searing pain. He and an international team have also begun investigating whether 2-Bromo-LSD, a non-psychedelic version of LSD known as BOL, can help ease the same condition.
Studies into how the drug may be helping such people are also being carried out in the UK. Amanda Feilding is the director of the Oxford-based Beckley Foundation, a charitable trust that investigates consciousness, its altered states and the effects of psychedelics and meditation. She is a key figure in the revival of scientific interest in psychedelics and expresses her excitement about the initial findings of two overseas studies with which her foundation is heavily involved.
"One, at the University of California in Berkeley, was the first research into LSD to get approval from regulators and ethics bodies since the 1970s," she said. Those in the study are the first to be allowed to take LSD legally in decades as part of research into whether it aids creativity. "LSD is a potentially very valuable substance for human health and happiness."
The other is a Swiss trial in which the drug is give alongside psychotherapy to people who have a terminal condition to help them cope with the profound anxiety brought on by impending death. "If you handle LSD with care, it isn't any more dangerous than other therapies," said Dr Peter Gasser, the psychiatrist leading the trial.
At Johns Hopkins University in Washington, another trial is examining whether psilocybin can aid psychotherapy for those with chronic substance addiction who have not been helped by more conventional treatment.
Professor Colin Blakemore, a former chief executive of the Medical Research Council, said the class-A status of psychedelics such as LSD should not stop them being explored as potential therapies. "No drug is completely safe, and that includes medical drugs as well as illegal substances," he said. "But we have well-developed and universally respected methods of assessing the balance of benefit and harm for new medicines.
"If there are claims of benefits from substances that are not regulated medicines – even including illegal drugs – it is important that they should be tested as thoroughly for efficacy and safety as any new conventional drug."
Past reputations may make it hard to get approval for psychedelic medicines, according to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency.
"The known adverse effect profiles of psychedelic drugs would have to be considered very carefully in the risk/benefit analysis before the drugs may be approved for medicinal use," said a spokeswoman. "These products, if approved, are likely to be classified as a prescription-only medicine and also likely to remain on the dangerous drug list, which means that their supply would be strictly controlled."
Related Articles:
•Clinical Trials Test Potential Of Hallucinogenic Drugs To Help Patients With Terminal Illnesses - The Guardian
•Why is Marijuana Illegal? - Drug War Rant
•Breakthrough Discovered in Medical Marijuana Cancer Treatment - Salem News
•MDMA Scheduling Hearing
•Will Crack-Cocaine Sentencing Reform Help Current Cons? - TIME
•Why the US won't let Australia reform its drug laws - SMH
Enough Lies: The Netherlands Drug Policy Does Work
FACT: Compared to the Netherlands, which allows purchase and possession of small amounts of marijuana by adults, the United States had double the rate of marijuana use overall, with nearly three times as many youths trying marijuana by age 15.
-Marijuana Policy Project 2008
I have just read another article explaining why cannabis legalisation won’t work. And their proof ... The Netherlands. Prohibitionists and moral crusaders portray The Netherlands, especially Amsterdam as some sort of amoral hell where the streets are lined with prostitutes and everyone has to step over strung out junkies in the gutter. A demised nation lost in a selfish orgy of forbidden flesh and rampant drug use. Jeepers, even I wouldn’t go there.
Organisation: Various Campaign: The Netherlands Drug Policy / Cannabis “Coffee Shops” When: 1976 - Propaganda: 9/10 Laugh Out Loud Rating: 7/10
... However, I have lived in the Netherlands for a five-year period. And frankly, I don’t want to see what takes place there happening here. The city of Amsterdam is awash with drugs and crime. Indeed, drug-related crime is four times the rate of the US. You can’t walk down a street of central Amsterdam without being accosted by drug pushers and addicts. I lost count of how many times our push bikes were stolen by the druggies to help support their habits. I don’t want that cesspool of crime, drugs and violence to be replicated here.
-Bill Muehlenberg: CultureWatch
This is of course so far from the truth, it only incites humour in those who aren’t ignorant or are well travelled. The Netherlands is actual conservative compared to other western countries and has some amazing countryside including the beautiful city of Amsterdam. The lifestyle is uniquely European which might be a tad confronting for those used to massive shopping malls and other US influenced cityscapes. Yes, there are druggies, prostitutes and other public inconveniences that the non European drug warriors like to focus on but there needs to be some perspective. Compared to the large US slums, Vancouver's downtown east side or Kings Cross on a Saturday night, Amsterdam is a like a walk through a flowery suburb of the North Shore of Sydney. I remember reading about a journalist looking for crack cocaine in Amsterdam where it took him 35 minutes to find with the help of a local addict. He was only able to find one dealer of any drug and he had to get it from someone else. The same task would take 5 minutes in any major US city. The journalist reported that he encountered no junkies lying in gutters but instead was entertained by a local church music ensemble. What struck him most was how clean and family orientated the streets were compared to his experience back in the USA.
You can't walk down the street in Amsterdam without tripping over junkies
-US Drug Czar
Bill O'Reilly - The Poster Boy for Anti-Drug Conservatives
Fox News monkey-man, Bill O’Reilly is joined by a fellow Fox News monkey-woman and some GOP strategist for what must be the most ludicrous description of The Netherlands ever seen on T.V. The story is actually about how the radical left have exploded since Barrack Obama became president of the USA but The Netherlands are put on display as what can happen if conservatives values are overlooked for liberal freedoms. I must point out to any extreme right wing nutters reading this that the perceived image of The Netherlands portrayed by the 3 casuistic hosts is laughable.
Anne Bressington
Anne Bressington once claimed that the term, "War on Drugs" was coined by the legalisation movement to get people on their side. So you can only imagine what she has said about The Netherlands. Here are some of her gems:
In 1993 the National Intelligence Report (AFP) stated that the streets had been flooded with a new hybrid of cannabis known as “mad weed”. It was called madweed because in Europe it was responsible for psychotic episodes even after one time use. It originated in the Netherlands and the THC content tested as high as 30%.
-Anne Bressington Media Release(Dec. 2006) - Adelaide Is “Cannabis Capital Of The World”
We are like the Netherlands, she says; we may not have cannabis cafes but if you know the right places all you have to do is ask. “I did a tour of Hutt Street this morning,” she said. “I saw people shooting up next to a charity drop-in centre, they score, go into an abandoned paddock next door and they’re all sitting around shooting up. I was told if I wanted drugs to go to the compound, the Caltex station in Hutt Street at 10 a.m. but be there a bit early because its pension day so there will be a bit of a line-up. It’s frightening.” -Penelope Debelle - "Accidental” MP Finds Her Feet (Article about Anne Bressington) (2004)
What is it that politicians and some doctors do not understand about drug policy? In Sweden where drug use is one third of other European countries and where less than 2% of their youth use drugs like cannabis and amphetamines we could look to them for solutions. Instead we continue to replicate the Netherlands policies that have failed dismally.
-Anne Bressington Media Release(Dec. 2006) - Politicians At Raves & Doctors Giving Up On Drug Abuse
Very soon we are going to hear Dr Caldicott and his crew go ‘We must look to the Netherlands for our drug policy’ because we have even outstripped the Netherlands. We have doubled the Netherlands’ drug use in this country. Who would have ever thought? Do not be fooled by the Netherlands having half the drug use that we have because it has an almost legalised, decriminalised system. It is because in this country we have gone to sleep at the wheel. We have taken our eye off the ball and we have allowed this problem to disintegrate to a point where our children’s lives and our grandchildren’s lives are affected and it is not going to get better if we do not change what we do.
Dr Caldicott himself has admitted that one of the costs of having harm minimisation in this country is that we will have more people using drugs, but best to have them using drugs and keeping them alive than having them die in the gutter. Now, I do not quite get the logic.
-Anne Bressington: House Of Representatives Standing Committee On Family And Human Services - Impact Of Illicit Drug Use On Families (May 2007)
Maybe Anne Bressington should spend more time researching her claims.
Despite tough anti-drug laws, a new survey shows the U.S. has the highest level of illegal drug use in the world.
The World Health Organization's survey of legal and illegal drug use in 17 countries, including the Netherlands and other countries with less stringent drug laws, shows Americans report the highest level of cocaine and marijuana use. For example, Americans were four times more likely to report using cocaine in their lifetime than the next closest country, New Zealand (16% vs. 4%),
[...]
In contrast, in the Netherlands, which has more liberal drug policies than the U.S., only 1.9% of people reported cocaine use and 19.8% reported marijuana use.
-CBS News (July 2008)
Closing The Coffee Shops
When the media started reporting that The Dutch were closing some coffee shops, the anti-drug warriors went berserk. This was the great news they had been waiting for. After having to lie for nearly 30 years, they finally had some proof that The Dutch experiment had failed.
We’ve been even doing work with the Dutch, who are usually thought of as the opposite side of us on marijuana or cannabis, where they are talking about higher potency causing acute health problems that they are seeing in the Netherlands. So they too now have been taking steps to reduce the number of coffee houses, to treat the especially higher potency cannabis almost as a different drug in their system. -US Drug Czar, John Walters
The fact is that coffee shops are being closed down because of “drug tourism” from neighbouring countries and because of new laws that restrict coffee shops being too close to schools. It was mainly the border towns and cities that wanted to close up the coffee shops, usually under pressure from other countries. Interestingly, some people couldn’t wait for the news and made claims The Dutch were “winding back” their drug laws 10 years prior.
If the Netherlands is winding back its drug laws, does that not tell us something? Does it not tell us that the Netherlands has conceded that it got it wrong. It is now trying to regroup from the previous untenable position. It is now trying to counter the cancer it released into the community in the best way it can by winding back the previously very liberal drug laws.
-The Hon. M. J. Gallacher - NSW Parliament (1997)
Cannabis is illegal in The Netherlands but the Dutch Ministry of Justice applies a gedoogbeleid (tolerance policy) which is an official set of rules guiding the judicial system to how offenders should be dealt with legally. This allows cannabis to be sold via designated “coffee shops”, the personal possession of up to 5 grams and the growing of 5 plants or less. This loophole is necessary to get around the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of which they are a co-signer. To implement any drug policy or law, countries must work within the UN’s strict guidelines. For example, Australia’s Medically Supervised Injecting Centre(MSIC) and the heroin assisted treatment (HAT) programs in some countries contravene UN drug policy so they are declared as medical research, which is allowed. Similarly with The Netherlands - cannabis remains illegal but they choose to be tolerant under certain conditions. These strict conditions include age restrictions, quantity limitations and quality control. Hard drugs are not tolerated.
Although marijuana sales are regulated and taxed in the Netherlands' famous coffee shops under Dutch "pragmatism" policies, the sale or manufacture of marijuana officially remains a crime under Dutch law. The current conservative Dutch national government has attempted to shut down the coffee shops, but without popular support for such a move has had to settle for tightening regulations on the marijuana outlets and gradually reducing their numbers.
-Drug War Chronicle
Although certain conservative groups want to remove the Dutch coffee shops, there is still overwhelming support from the public, the police and politicians. What we don’t hear about is the growing support to legalise cannabis ... even when half of the countries' judges support it.
It seems the only people opposed to the Dutch coffee shops are a small group in the Netherlands and countries that have dismal results from applying the very drug policies they are trying to push on the Dutch.
UN Tweak Drug Statistics And Facts Cannazine
By Marten Blankesteijn
The United Nations manipulate statistics to suggest that the liberal Dutch drug policy doesn’t work. This statement comes from Tim Boekhout van Solinge, criminologist at the University Utrecht.
‘It is no coincidence. The UN wants to propagate the idea that things are getting out of hand here. This idea is wrong: The Netherlands, on the contrary, are doing very well.’ To substantiate his claim Boekhout van Solinge mentions the 2000 World Drug Report, which stated that The Netherlands harbored the most addicts of all EU members at that time. ‘The UN had reduced the list of 15 to 13 countries by counting the Benelux as one country.
This was a questionable simplification, because by doing so the country with the largest number of addicts (Luxemburg) was added to the country with the smallest number (The Netherlands).
These numbers were not properly linked to total population estimates, instead averages were calculated. That’s how the Benelux ended on top of the list of drug addicted countries. The message for the public was clear: Dutch drug policy is not working.’
The UN are outspoken supporters of the war on drugs, the war against growers, dealers and users that should lead to a drug free world.’ Experts have been clamouring for years that this battle can never be won’, says Boekhout van Solinge. ‘Things are just getting worse.’
In the mean time the UN see Sweden as the lighting example. Since 1977 harsh measures are used in a relentless drug hunt. And this has been a great success – at least, that’s what UN reports say: Sweden has the smallest number of blowers in Europe. But even the Swedish facts are polished to fit the UN message. ‘The reports ‘forget’ to mention that The Netherlands have fewer addicts. Nor is there any reference to the 8% of Swedish students that sniff glue. That Sweden tops the European list in drug mortalities, is also conveniently omitted. When talking drugs, the UN is not a reliable club. These reports have little to do with science.
There are more international organisations that fumble with opinions and research to justify the war on drugs. Says the criminologist: ‘On a conference of the World Health Organisation on cocaine all experts agreed that an overwhelming majority of cocaine users are in perfect control of their use, which led them to conclude that cocaine wasn’t that much of a problem. This conclusion was never made public under pressure of the American government.’
Another example? ‘A WHO report on cannabis paints a dramatic picture of the drug. But when you examine the documents and research used as a basis for the report, you learn that specific research was conducted to estimate what would happen if cannabis would be used as much as alcohol and tobacco are used.
The remarkable conclusion of this research? Cannabis would still be the least harmful.
The Australian Heroin Diaries has been chosen as one of the top 8 blogs in 2009 by AllTreatment.com:
This is a news driven blog, that writes about and commentates on different countries drug policies. The author is a recovering heroin addict which gives a unique view and a much different one from politicians on drug politics. A must read for anyone interested in the politics of drug use and substance abuse.
Australian National Archives The Australian Heroin Diaries was selected for preservation by the National Library of Australia. [Link]
2009 Bucket Head Awards In the ever evolving world of drug policy and treatment, there does remain one constant ... a continuous parade of murky politicians, selfish moralists and dubious opinion writers who share a common goal to demonise drug users at any cost. To recognise their efforts, this special award is for them.
Terry Wright Australia I am a recovering heroin addict. I am not homeless nor do I live in a crowded junkie house. I dwell in suburbia with my partner, two fluffy dogs and a cat. I have a mortgage, a car and go grocery shopping on Friday nights.
I don't break into houses or sell drugs to survive but rather I design computer information systems. Yes I work and I am considered a professional.
I was on methadone but I am now on slow release oral morphine which usually keeps me from using heroin. I don't smoke grass and rarely drink. I don't gamble, commit adultery or break the law (well most laws)... but I sometimes resort to heroin.
This site is dedicated to recognising heroin addiction as a complex medical issue and the need for a scientific heroin trial in Australia. It also aims to highlight the carnage caused by inappropriate drug policies and the ulterior agendas of the people who support them.
Please feel free to add your comments.
Addiction was diagnosed as an illness over 100 years ago ... Society has just decided to treat it as a crime.
It appears that NSW Nationals leader and acting NSW opposition leader, Andrew Stoner might be a fan of The Australian Heroin Diaries. After constantly reading about his cohorts getting so much attention here, it seems he has made a gallant effort to join them. And his efforts will be rewarded with some well deserved recognition from us. Here we go. 
It was only 2 days into 2010 and already another Lib had made a dickhead of themselves. Victorian Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu has joined the ranks of other political morons who have lied about or greatly exaggerated the effects of illicit drugs for personal, political gain. Following on from the trend set in SA and WA, Baillieu has declared that he will ban bongs if elected at the next state election.
For the last 100 years, politics, moral panic and special interest groups have shaped the world’s drug policies often leaving facts and science behind in the race for a drug free world. Just last week, Professor David Nutt, chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) in the UK was sacked after he claimed that cannabis, ecstasy and LSD were less harmful than the legal drugs tobacco and alcohol. Professor Nutt, head of psychopharmacology at the University of Bristol has long been a critic of the UK drug scheduling list, often saying that drug policy is not based on science or research but political posturing. The current UK government is the countries first administration in power to ignore a report from the AMCD and implement contradicting recommendations. The science community is in an uproar that an independent scientific committee can have their chief scientist sacked for simply telling the truth that just happens to conflict with the government’s political position. Professor Nutt and his colleagues had previously initiated several government enquiries into drug policy but each one has been shut down by members of the government when it threatened their political position. The failure to class drugs appropriately might seem illogical or just a political game by dopey politicians but the real world carnage for users is life changing. With courts able to dish out some serious prison time, addicts, users and dealers face daily the possibility of spending decades behind bars. The effects are usually devastating on the families and friends involved.
The mere mention of street drugs sends shivers down the spine of most politicians. Unless they play the “Tough on Drugs” game, they risk the chance of being singled out as “Soft on Drugs” by the many anti-drug nutters in politics. Even those who aren’t zealots will still see it as an opportunity to attack their opposition and score political points. The sad part isn’t that it’s confined to just recreational drug use but also when these drugs are associated with medical procedures that they were originally developed for. Nothing highlights this more than when SA Attorney General, Michael Atkinson bucketed Democrat, Sandra Kanck when she suggested a study into MDMA as a possible treatment for post-traumatic stress syndrome(PTSS). In a public dressing down, Atkinson said the Government would 
I have just read another article explaining why cannabis legalisation won’t work. And their proof ... The Netherlands. Prohibitionists and moral crusaders portray The Netherlands, especially Amsterdam as some sort of amoral hell where the streets are lined with prostitutes and everyone has to step over strung out junkies in the gutter. A demised nation lost in a selfish orgy of forbidden flesh and rampant drug use. Jeepers, even I wouldn’t go there.
