BajaNomad

COULD THE US BE HEADING OFF TO WAR IN A SCHOOL BUS

DENNIS - 2-8-2011 at 08:52 AM

By Matthew D. LaPlante

The Salt Lake Tribune

First published Feb 07 2011 07:12PM
Updated Feb 7, 2011 11:12PM
Fretting over a scenario in which armed U.S. soldiers could be called to the border — or even over it — to hold back lawlessness and violence, Undersecretary of the Army Joseph Westphal invoked a contentious word to describe Mexico’s problem with drug cartels:

He called it an “insurgency.”

Speaking at the University of Utah’s Hinckley Institute of Politics on Monday, the second-highest ranking civilian official in the U.S. Army spent most of his lecture explaining the economic and bureaucratic obstacles faced by defense budget makers amid complicated challenges in the Middle East and South Asia.

But in response to a student’s question about strategic blind spots in U.S. foreign policy, Westphal switched hemispheres.

“One of them in particular for me is Latin America and in particular Mexico,” he said. “As all of you know, there is a form of insurgency in Mexico with the drug cartels that’s right on our border.”

“This isn’t just about drugs and about illegal immigrants,” he said. “This is about, potentially, a takeover of a government by individuals who are corrupt.”

Westfall — who said he was expressing a personal opinion, but one he had shared with the White House — said he didn’t want to ever see a situation in which “armed and fighting” American soldiers are sent to combat an insurgency “on our border, in violation of our Constitution, or to have to send them across the border.”

Westphal is the most senior U.S. official to publicly compare Mexico’s drug cartels to an “insurgency” since Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a similar assessment last September.

gnukid - 2-8-2011 at 09:46 AM

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/clinton-legalize-drugs-to...

Why can’t the US legalize drugs? There’s ‘too much money in it,’ Clinton says

By Daniel Tencer
Monday, February 7th, 2011 -- 5:55 pm

In what will likely be seen as something of a Freudian slip by the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton said recently in a Mexican news interview that the United States cannot legalize drugs as a means of fighting the black market because "there is just too much money in it."

Asked by Denise Maerker of Televisa what she thought of drug legalization, Clinton said it was unlikely to work.

"There is just too much money in it," Clinton said. "You can legalize small amounts for possession, but those who are making so much money selling, they have to be stopped. They can’t be given an even easier road to take, because they will then find it in their interest to addict even more young people."

The comments drew criticism from legalization advocates who argued her position was a misunderstanding of the situation.

"Clinton's response illustrates not only the intellectual bankruptcy of the prohibitionist position but the economic ignorance of a woman who would be president," Jacob Sullum argued at Reason.com.



Clinton evidently does not understand that there is so much money to be made by selling illegal drugs precisely because they are illegal. Prohibition not only enables traffickers to earn a "risk premium" that makes drug prices much higher than they would otherwise be; it delivers this highly lucrative business into the hands of criminals who, having no legal recourse, resolve disputes by spilling blood.
At the Drug War Chronicle, Scott Morgan called Clinton's argument "perfectly incoherent" and argued it flew in the face of economic theory.

I can't help but wonder what everyone on the left would say if this preposterous analysis came from Sarah Palin, rather than Hillary Clinton. It's the sort of profound nonsense that ought to get you skewered by Jon Stewart, yet our Secretary of State will almost certainly get a free pass on misunderstanding literally everything about the escalating violence below our border.
Clinton's interview focused mainly on Mexico's drug war, which was launched in 2006 by President Felipe Calderon and has cost an estimated 34,000 lives, including more than 1,000 minors.

The toll's severity prompted former Mexican President Vicente Fox to come out in favor of legalizing drugs as a way of taking the steam out of organized crime.

President Calderon has not gone as far himself, but did approve legislation decriminalizing possession of small amounts of most recreational drugs, and has called for a debate on new approaches to dealing with drugs.

-- With additional reporting by Stephen C. Webster

Skeet/Loreto - 2-8-2011 at 10:21 AM

Dennis: Mexico has always been Coorupt,especially in their thinking about the STates.

After the PRI was defeated, a more Liberal Group took over and allowed the DOPE Connections to grow. It is very similar to what is happening in the States.


Gnud: As an Ole Timer with a Police Background I think if DOPE is made Legal that the Health Care System will surely go down the Drain.
Look at the number of Arrests of Users and Dealers. What will we do with their problems, we already have the Prisons Full from Criminals doing time for Crimes Committed while using DOPE.

We have to concentrate on teaching the next Generation that it is not always the best outcome to "If it feels Good, just do It' thing.We must learn to Control our Desires.

First thing to do is get rid of the NEA and the next is do away with the Teachers Unions. That would make a good start,People must be taught that a bunch of Govt. nannies are not the Way to go.!!

DENNIS - 2-8-2011 at 10:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Skeet/Loreto
Dennis: Mexico has always been Coorupt,especially in their thinking about the STates.




WOW...I never thought of that. Now, I understand.

By the way, Skeet....it was de La Madrid, the PRI president who told the cartels of his day that if they left their money in Mexico, Mexico would leave them alone.
He didn't realize he was talking to an agressive cancer.

DENNIS - 2-8-2011 at 11:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Skeet/Loreto
"If it feels Good, just do It' thing.We must learn to Control our Desires.



Yep. You got it, Skeeter. Then, we can get rid of them nasty birth control pills. Those women out there wouldn't have to be taking them if they could control their unbridled urges.
We on the right track now.

flyfishinPam - 2-8-2011 at 12:15 PM

After living across the street from a "tiendita" for a year I changed my mind about the illegality of drugs, all of it should be legalized. I saw very small children buying, police, doctors, and all sorts of "important people". What bothers me most is that they'll sell to kids in diapers and that's just one of the problems with of keeping some drugs illegal.


Skeet/Loreto - 2-8-2011 at 12:20 PM

Dennis; Right about De La Madid.
He could not beleive the rapid growth caused by the heavy use of Dope in the States. By that time It was out of Control.

It is the GUYS Dennis, not the Ladies.The Guys have to step up to the Plate and if they are going to Feel Good they are going to have to Accept the Responsibility of their Actions.

Skeet/Loreto - 2-8-2011 at 12:24 PM

Pam and Dennis:

I really do not like to say so but it is going to take a WAR to change things.

Look at what happened to my Generation starting off with the Great Depression, The Dust Bowl, World War 2, Korean War, Vietnam.

We and I mean many people changed our lives but not to DOPE, we went to Work, Helped opur Neighbors and did something without DOPE. Question:

Why cannot this Generation do the Same?????

WAR !!

DENNIS - 2-8-2011 at 12:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Skeet/Loreto
It is the GUYS Dennis, not the Ladies.The Guys have to step up to the Plate and if they are going to Feel Good they are going to have to Accept the Responsibility of their Actions.


Again, you are correct, Skeet. 150 million randy, horn-dogs running all over the place lusting and coupling like satyrs at a pajama party. We have lost our sense of self respect and decency.
We have to come to terms with our excesses...just like you say.
Don't give up hope quite yet, Skeeter. Hallelujah. :saint:

flyfishinPam - 2-8-2011 at 12:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Skeet/Loreto
Pam and Dennis:

I really do not like to say so but it is going to take a WAR to change things.

Look at what happened to my Generation starting off with the Great Depression, The Dust Bowl, World War 2, Korean War, Vietnam.

We and I mean many people changed our lives but not to DOPE, we went to Work, Helped opur Neighbors and did something without DOPE. Question:

Why cannot this Generation do the Same?????

WAR !!


well after all the USA is a WAR driven economy so be it that's your decision, but I'd rather have peace, legalize la droga and we'll have peace and prosperity in Mexico, but that's OUR business and OUR decision to make...keep la droga illegal in the USA and you'll get your war

gnukid - 2-8-2011 at 01:54 PM

Some or most seem to overlook the fact that we are at war in four countries now, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen and today USA has ordered multiple platoon troops to Egypt, not to mention the fact that we fund and are synonymous with Israel aggressions. We have perhaps 800 active military bases worldwide involved in daily shenanigans.

Combine these military tactics with our financial wars, food wars and space wars and one can't resist concluding we are and have been embroiled in worldwar 3 at full tilt. But mention this to the average person and they look at you sideways and say its irrelevant, yet ask them about the superbowl and they can recount every commercial and every word misspoken by Christina Aguillera while they eat plastic and aspartame.

Spot On, Kid!

Bajahowodd - 2-8-2011 at 02:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by gnukid
Some or most seem to overlook the fact that we are at war in four countries now, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen and today USA has ordered multiple platoon troops to Egypt, not to mention the fact that we fund and are synonymous with Israel aggressions. We have perhaps 800 active military bases worldwide involved in daily shenanigans.

Combine these military tactics with our financial wars, food wars and space wars and one can't resist concluding we are and have been embroiled in worldwar 3 at full tilt. But mention this to the average person and they look at you sideways and say its irrelevant, yet ask them about the superbowl and they can recount every commercial and every word misspoken by Christina Aguillera while they eat plastic and aspartame.

From another thread - Important Reading

djh - 2-8-2011 at 02:24 PM

Not quite sure why it was posted in the thread about corruption in Mulege rather than here, but I read the article posted below (it is quite long, very gripping, and quite graphic ~ but it changed my perspective on the "Drug War". I recommend this to all of you:


Quote:
http://variousenthusiasms.wordpress.com/2009/04/28/the-sicar...



Incredibly DISTURBING !

I don't believe that this is a "war" that the US can win via conventional means and thinking.

In fact, I'm reeling from reading this and I don't honestly know WHAT it would take ~ but it is not a simple or small task !

flyfishinPam - 2-8-2011 at 02:38 PM

read it day before yesterday and that's badas$ sh!t for sure. its war. thanks for the funding for the Merida Iniciative but it would be nice if you just let Mexico take care of itself instead, NONE of this sh!t has happened with this alarming frequency since this war on drugs was started by the PAN.

now if you wanna laugh here's a good video (foul language warning)

George Carlin "We love war"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Rlqjxst6xU&feature=relat...

Cypress - 2-8-2011 at 03:04 PM

Legalise pot and release all the folks in jail on pot charges.:D

Dope dont harm me you fools!

mcfez - 2-8-2011 at 04:28 PM

Before and after meth user

3395872_f520.jpg - 47kB

Bajahowodd - 2-8-2011 at 04:50 PM

Hey Deno. Did you ever consider the possibility that harder drugs such as meth have proliferated in the black market simply because marijuana was not legal and available?

I just have to think that if pot was legalized , controlled and taxed, there would be an enormously reduced market for other drugs.

Problem, in my mind, is that a long time ago, the people in charge decided to label marijuana as a gateway drug, without a shred of evidence.

So, today we find ourselves with a huge bureaucracy employing thousands of people that are dedicated to achieve two goals. Goal number one is to preserve their high paying jobs. Goal number two is to somehow eradicate the biblical need for humans to get high.

dtbushpilot - 2-8-2011 at 05:11 PM

"Hey Deno. Did you ever consider the possibility that harder drugs such as meth have proliferated in the black market simply because marijuana was not legal and available?"

Sorry odd, this doesn't pass the smell test. Marijuana is just, if not more so available as meth or any other harder drug. Meth was her drug of choice, I have no doubt that meth wasn't the first drug she tried. She probably started by sneaking her parents booze like the rest of us, I'm also relatively sure that she was smoking pot before she started doing meth......dt

[Edited on 2-9-2011 by dtbushpilot]

Bajahowodd - 2-8-2011 at 05:23 PM

Not really looking to get into a debate. My observation was on a generic level. Just have to believe that if there was widespread legal availability of pot, and maybe even a few other drugs, the stories we read about hard core addicts would be fewer.

Face it. There is a significant percentage of our population that are genetically predisposed to abuse. Whether it's cigarettes, booze, or drugs, the verdict is in.

Science has shown that
many of our friends, brothers and sisters have a disease. I just think that as a pragmatic approach to that, we could control the available intoxicants and just maybe eliminate a big proportion of the crap.

opps.....I didn't have clue

mcfez - 2-8-2011 at 05:48 PM

But: I can tell you that since 1983 I have acquired and / or built Nightclubs in Sacramento to the last one in downtown San Francisco (48000 sq ft of club). I have not only owned the clubs, I worked them too. from bartender to bouncer (whoops...security)..to floor host. I have seen the nightlife. I seen the drugs (dope is dope is dope)(liqueur is a legal drug). I have seen "just a weeeeee bit" of a snort gal to a freakin crank hoar... smoking crank and pot. Dont get me started on the use of drugs being innocent. Bullchit.

I know more about the drug culture than anyone here at this board....including the retired cops here. Yes...and I hang out with retired cops and a retired Federal District Attorney that is my best friend here in Sacramento. The stories are not innocent nor cute. my friend quit because of the sickening aspects of the drug culture...kept getting worst and beyond help.

Hey...I aint not angel. The rest of you here are angels, compare to me I am sure. Go ahead...have a drink or two. Go ahead and blast a line or two. See if I care. Just stay the hell away from me and my family when you become a drunk or a tweeker. I really hate the POTS SMOKERS the most. They act like zombies and marooons........not all of of them.

Fact is in this country....all crime, all criminal issues... are coming from 3% of the population. The rest of the 97% of the population complies with the common law of our land. That 3% will jump higher with the legalization of drugs.

What to do about drugs?

Execute drug manufactures (meth labs to cola converters).
Execute drug dealers classified as 3 time felons.
Execute drunk drivers and druggie drivers involved with death

Just because you cant beat it...you don't freaking join the club!!!





[Edited on 2-9-2011 by mcfez]

drug.jpg - 9kB

Cypress - 2-8-2011 at 06:04 PM

Keeping pot illegal is making criminals of yet another generation and keeping the drug cartels very happy and very rich. The only people that benefit from the illegalization of pot are the police, the alcohol industry, the pharmacutical industry, and the drug cartels.

myopic view of the issue.

mcfez - 2-8-2011 at 06:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by soulpatch
Quote:
Originally posted by mcfez
I know more about the drug culture than anyone here at this board....
[Edited on 2-9-2011 by mcfez]


When someone claims to be THE expert my experience is that they often have a myopic view of the issue.



Claims?
Apparently you don't believe anyone around you on any subject. I got 25 years of the life to back up my knowledge of the drug world. What do have, a newspaper?

gnukid - 2-8-2011 at 07:27 PM

With due respect to McFez and his "knowledge", his post illustrates an important point about the drug addiction machine and it's gears. Mcfez clearly points out that his primary vocation is making night clubs, presumably which mainly profit on alcohol sales to an audience who make up a fair portion of the drug addict audience, yet he claims total disdain for these clients-the same clients he depends on attracting for his profit. This clear connection and his apparent disconnect is illustrative of each of our inability to see the connections, our own relationship to drug trade, and in particular the underbelly of the 'octopus' that infiltrates each of our lives-even though we profusely deny it.

There are some basic facts, drug trade is a highly profitable multi-faceted business that has existed since prior to Queen Elizabeth I founding of East India Trading Company. Even mummies from the era of 1300bc have since been found to have remains of cocaine and other drugs which were certainly not from Egypt but were trafficked there via trade routes-for profit.

There is vast evidence of institutional drug running, well known to every person, yet collectively denied, for example Iran Contra hearings demonstrated that the USofA Government and Military are primarily involved for profit and are capable of lying and denying and continuing for profit-each of the defendants of Iran Contra were set free on probation or had their prosecutions pardoned except one, Thomas G. Clines served time for tax evasion-most of the participants still work for the government and people celebrate Reagan because-'he didn't know'?!@# Freeway Ricky Ross was sent to prison for distribution.

CIA torture-drug planes have crashed on many occasions revealing that the same CIA planes that run torture (rendition flights) also run drugs through Mexico to various US airports such as Venice Airport. This is well reported, yet, you will find a collective disconnect by most people it seems, here on BN or anywhere people largely defend the CIA torture drug flights as necessary for national security-I would be shouted down for saying this in public gatherings, yet it is reported as fact, perhaps knee-jerk denials are due to collective guilt, or who knows why, programming, lies?

Have you already tuned out, do you already have excuses flying through your head, denials?

The sooner that you can have a rational discussion about the world that reflects the truth and see through the veil of self-defeating lies, the sooner you will able to make reasonable solutions to the serious problems, until then you will find yourself completely involved and completely in denial.

Don't get mad, just get real. Put on your critical thinker cap.





[Edited on 2-9-2011 by gnukid]

Lobsterman - 2-8-2011 at 09:48 PM

Yea Horns you're a legend in your own mind. You are building quite a resume' about yourself with your big mouth, i.e hirer of illegals, drug facillator, bouncher bully, alcohol enabler. You must be quite proud of your accomplishments. I'm glad you are on this board cuz you are about the only one that sticks his foot in his mouth almost on every post. I love your trailer trash pic.

Please keep it up cuz I need a good laugh each day.

mcfez - 2-8-2011 at 10:00 PM

I see all three of you clowns from Off Topics here.....

You need to get back there.

sanquintinsince73 - 2-8-2011 at 11:43 PM

Those are some serious allegations, Gnukid. I think that you are starting to believe all the bullchit that you copy elsewhere and paste here.

gnukid - 2-9-2011 at 12:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by sanquintinsince73
Those are some serious allegations, Gnukid. I think that you are starting to believe all the bullchit that you copy elsewhere and paste here.


Ad hominem attacks are a common tactic used when the speaker has no point of fact to argue.

sanquintinsince73 - 2-9-2011 at 08:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by gnukid
Quote:
Originally posted by sanquintinsince73
Those are some serious allegations, Gnukid. I think that you are starting to believe all the bullchit that you copy elsewhere and paste here.


Ad hominem attacks are a common tactic used when the speaker has no point of fact to argue.

Vous me frapper comme une personne en colère qui déteste tout ce que l'Amérique. Vos messages semblent indiquer une haine profonde têtes de série, les gens qui aident à maintenir une économie robuste en Baja.

gnukid - 2-9-2011 at 08:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by sanquintinsince73
Quote:
Originally posted by gnukid
Quote:
Originally posted by sanquintinsince73
Those are some serious allegations, Gnukid. I think that you are starting to believe all the bullchit that you copy elsewhere and paste here.


Ad hominem attacks are a common tactic used when the speaker has no point of fact to argue.

Vous me frapper comme une personne en colère qui déteste tout ce que l'Amérique. Vos messages semblent indiquer une haine profonde têtes de série, les gens qui aident à maintenir une économie robuste en Baja.


C'est ne pas vrai. Effectivement, je suis tres fatigue de une personne
qui ne parler pas de un subject avec faits. Comme ca, est un strategie pour confuse les public...

Argument by obfuscation and argument changing the subject are fallacious strategies used by a speaker who is unable to present facts to make a point regarding the topic at hand.

sanquintinsince73 - 2-9-2011 at 08:50 AM

Perhaps to the person making the statement, these are facts. A good example are the allegations that you posted here that you may perceive as facts but the fact of the matter is that they are just that, allegations.

Cypress - 2-9-2011 at 09:07 AM

What has been accomplished by keeping pot illegal? Less drug usage? Illegal pot is a cash cow for law enforcement, lawyers, and the drug dealers. It's not complicated.

gnukid - 2-9-2011 at 09:15 AM

sanquintinsince73
I understand that this subject may be upsetting and unsettling, it's difficult to discuss.

I made no allegations, I referenced and linked to main stream articles from the justice dept, pbs, and the New york times in regard to historical events that are documented in accepted encyclopedias and major news journals and are accepted in education at the high school level in the USA.

If you are contesting a specific issue please reference the issue so we may discuss your opinion or your source of contrary opinion.

Iran Contra is accepted as a factual event -drugs for money for weapons - this is reported as often repeated scenario that reflects on many of the USA aggressions, e.g. opium trade from Afghanistan has skyrocketed since our invasion. CIA director John Deutch effectively lost his job following the Iran Contra events though the reason given was that accused of a security breach.

East India Trading was/is the Crowns' influential drug running company responsible for opium trade from the 1600's onward.

Drug trafficking and it's sister money laundering are well documented by practically every major bank who have admitted it and paid fines for their deeds it's well reported and accepted. Consider BCCI.

The issue with extraordinary rendition or torture flights using the same planes as drug running and it's tentacles are events reported, I referenced and linked to the articles and photos, the people are identified, the facts stand.

Please speak to the issues specifically. This is not a personal discussion between us, its a discussion about the world that we live in-please reference articles, sources, facts.

monoloco - 2-9-2011 at 09:22 AM

All the laws and enforcement in the world will not keep people from getting high. Last week I went to a lumber yard in La Paz, I noticed a man who looked to be in his sixties buying a small can of Resistol, when I left he was outside with a rag over his face sniffing it. It is an exercise in futility to attempt to control drugs with prohibition, we have been trying to do that for a hundred years and the problem is worse than ever, the ineffectiveness is evidenced by the price on the street. The only sane way forward is legalization and the treatment of drug abuse as a medical problem.

monoloco - 2-9-2011 at 09:29 AM

gnukid, you are spot on in your analysis, the obscene amounts of money generated by the illegality of drugs is a corrupting influence on everyone involved from dealers to law enforcement to politicians.

DENNIS - 2-9-2011 at 09:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by monoloco
All the laws and enforcement in the world will not keep people from getting high.


You're probably right. There have been laws against murder forever and it too just keeps escalating. It seems to have evolved to a form of communication.

monoloco - 2-9-2011 at 09:56 AM

Dennis, The homicide rate in the US steadily increased from 1920-1933 then rapidly declined when prohibition was repealed. I suspect that we would see a similar effect if drugs were legalized.

djh - 2-9-2011 at 09:59 AM

Any of you read this ? ?


http://variousenthusiasms.wordpress.com/2009/04/28/the-sicar...

It provides a very unique perspective into just how difficult this situation we all care about really is....


BTW: I tell the kiddos I work with to "attack the problem, not the person" . . . sometimes we adults need a reminder about this too. We're all in this mess together, afterall.

It is good to share and consider diverse views, compare them, discuss them, etc.
Yaknow . . . . Aluminum is great stuff.... Magnesium is great stuff. Together (alloy) they can create materials which serve purposes that neither one could do by itself....

for what its worth :)

DENNIS - 2-9-2011 at 10:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by monoloco
Dennis, The homicide rate in the US steadily increased from 1920-1933 then rapidly declined when prohibition was repealed. I suspect that we would see a similar effect if drugs were legalized.



Thanks. I didn't mean to relate the two issues.

DENNIS - 2-9-2011 at 10:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by djh
Any of you read this ? ?





Yeah....it's been here a couple of times.
If you like Bowden, look him up on Amazon books. He's a prolific writer, mostly about the El Paso/Juarez area. "Down By The River" is one I recommend.

Woooosh - 2-9-2011 at 10:43 AM

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-02-09-us-mexico-pol...

U.S., Mexico police unite to fight border crime

excerpt: "TUCSON — Top Homeland Security officials said Tuesday that a little-known coalition of U.S. and Mexican police agencies has played a major part in cracking down on smuggling and illegal immigration along the Arizona-Mexico border."

IMHO, one of the biggest hurdles is convincing the Mexican people the USA is on their side in the drug war. It will likely never happen. Every time the USA and Mexico cooperate they have to hide it until they have some measure of success to show. Then they release the news and hope it goes over well with the Mexican people and the GOM. But what will Americans reaction be when the bodies of US police and BP agents start to pile up and the spraying of bullets happens regularly NOB? If the USA decides to wade into this war, it had better move some more resources to it.

wessongroup - 2-9-2011 at 10:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by gnukid
Some or most seem to overlook the fact that we are at war in four countries now, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen and today USA has ordered multiple platoon troops to Egypt, not to mention the fact that we fund and are synonymous with Israel aggressions. We have perhaps 800 active military bases worldwide involved in daily shenanigans.

Combine these military tactics with our financial wars, food wars and space wars and one can't resist concluding we are and have been embroiled in worldwar 3 at full tilt. But mention this to the average person and they look at you sideways and say its irrelevant, yet ask them about the superbowl and they can recount every commercial and every word misspoken by Christina Aguillera while they eat plastic and aspartame.



:lol::lol::lol: your too good .... keep it up.. enjoy your posts so much...

[Edited on 2-9-2011 by wessongroup]

DENNIS - 2-9-2011 at 11:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Woooosh

IMHO, one of the biggest hurdles is convincing the Mexican people the USA is on their side in the drug war.



As long as the US provides such a robust market for the product and seemingly does nothing to change that, it's hard to think the people of Mexico will ever believe we are an ally in their struggle.
Hell...I don't even believe it. We seem closer allied to their enemy.

Woooosh - 2-9-2011 at 11:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
Quote:
Originally posted by Woooosh

IMHO, one of the biggest hurdles is convincing the Mexican people the USA is on their side in the drug war.



As long as the US provides such a robust market for the product and seemingly does nothing to change that, it's hard to think the people of Mexico will ever believe we are an ally in their struggle.
Hell...I don't even believe it. We seem closer allied to their enemy.

We have seen the enemy and it is us? So do you think the USA will then make all of Mexico "the enemy" in the drug war? Eventually ever war comes down to "them' and "us" and we'll have to decide which is more important regardless of public opinion in Mexico.

DENNIS - 2-9-2011 at 11:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Woooosh
So do you think the USA will then make all of Mexico "the enemy" in the drug war?


Could be. Depends on who's left standing after being scanned with the "Collusion Meter."

wessongroup - 2-9-2011 at 11:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by monoloco
All the laws and enforcement in the world will not keep people from getting high. Last week I went to a lumber yard in La Paz, I noticed a man who looked to be in his sixties buying a small can of Resistol, when I left he was outside with a rag over his face sniffing it. It is an exercise in futility to attempt to control drugs with prohibition, we have been trying to do that for a hundred years and the problem is worse than ever, the ineffectiveness is evidenced by the price on the street. The only sane way forward is legalization and the treatment of drug abuse as a medical problem.


Agree overall ... first, as it is my right to stick a rag with glue to my nose and inhale, IF I CHOOSE to do it... it is my right to do what I want with my body ....

Second, the government has no right to be on MY property, (well of course I'm NOB) based on the Constitution of the United States... AS LONG AS I'M ONLY HURTING MYSELF...

Thirdly, Governments control the production of these "drugs" e.i the movement of production of smack from the "Golden Triangle" to Afganistan...

A four-year investigation concluded that Burma's national company Myanma Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) was "the main channel for laundering the revenues of heroin produced and exported under the control of the Burmese army." In a business deal signed with the French oil giant Total in 1992, and later joined by Unocal, MOGE received a payment of $15 million. "Despite the fact that MOGE has no assets besides the limited installments of its foreign partners and makes no profit, and that the Burmese state never had the capacity to allocate any currency credit to MOGE, the Singapore bank accounts of this company have seen the transfer of hundreds of millions of US dollars," reports François Casanier. According to a confidential MOGE file reviewed by the investigators, funds exceeding $60 million and originating from Myanmar's most renowned drug lord, Khun Sa, were channeled through the company. "Drug money is irrigating every economic activity in Burma, and big foreign partners are also seen by the SLORC as big shields for money laundering."[5] Banks in Rangoon offered money laundering for a 40% commission.[6]
The main player in the country's drug market is the United Wa State Army, ethnic fighters who control areas along the country's eastern border with Thailand, part of the infamous Golden Triangle. The UWSA, an ally of Myanmar's ruling military junta, was once the militant arm of the Beijing-backed Burmese Communist Party.
Poppy cultivation in the country decreased more than 80 percent from 1998 to 2006 following an eradication campaign in the Golden Triangle. Officials with the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime say opium poppy farming is now expanding. The number of hectares used to grow the crops increased 29% in 2007. A United Nations report cites corruption, poverty and a lack of government control as causes for the jump.[7]

durrelllrobert - 2-9-2011 at 12:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by mcfez
I got 25 years of the life to back up my knowledge of the drug world.

did you mean " I got 25 years TO life to back up my knowledge of the drug world" :lol::lol::lol:

Got a few minutes to read?

mcfez - 2-9-2011 at 12:12 PM

http://www.globalchange.com/drugtest.htm

..............................We will never know how many have died under the knife of an intoxicated surgeon or as a result of a physician's drug-clouded mind. Doctors don't like admitting errors, even in court long after the event, by which time evidence of substance abuse has vanished.

If you're too drunk or doped to drive, or drive a train, you shouldn't be operating - nor working a crane or cement mixer for that matter. Nor should you be defending someone in court nor making huge financial decisions on which other people's future will depend.


[Edited on 2-9-2011 by mcfez]

durrelllrobert - 2-9-2011 at 12:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by monoloco
Dennis, The homicide rate in the US steadily increased from 1920-1933 then rapidly declined when prohibition was repealed. I suspect that we would see a similar effect if drugs were legalized.

where is Elliot Ness when we need him most?

gnukid - 2-9-2011 at 12:20 PM

California bill SB129 proposes to ban firing employees for testing positive to Marijuana

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/01/29/...

Bill would limit firings of medical pot users

Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press
Mark Leno's bill would ban employers from considering a worker's status as a registered medical marijuana patient or a positive drug test when making hiring and firing decisions.

Californians who use medical marijuana outside of work would be protected from job dismissal due to pot use under a bill that has been introduced by state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco.

The bill, SB129, would make it illegal for an employer to consider either a worker's status as a registered patient or a positive drug test when making hiring and firing decisions. The bill would not change existing laws that bar employees from using medical marijuana at the workplace or during work hours.

Workers such as health care providers, school bus drivers and operators of heavy equipment - so-called "safety-sensitive positions" - would not be protected by the law.

"The bill simply establishes a medical cannabis patient's right to work," Leno said. He called it "a completely reasonable piece of legislation. It astounds me that there would be any controversy around it."

While the proposal has yet to garner formal opposition, the California Chamber of Commerce opposed a bill that would have created the same protections for medical marijuana patients in 2007.

That bill, authored by Leno, was passed by the Legislature but vetoed by former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. In his veto message, Schwarzenegger wrote he was "concerned with the interference in employment decisions as they relate to marijuana use" and that employment protection was not a goal of Prop. 215, which voters passed in 1996 to allow medical marijuana.

Leno said the notion that voters only intended for unemployed people to be able to take medical marijuana is "nonsensical on its face."

The effort to pass such a law stems from a California Supreme Court decision in 2008 that allowed employers to fire workers who test positive for marijuana use, even if those workers are medical marijuana patients. In a 5-2 decision, the court found Prop. 215 does not limit an employer's authority to fire workers for violating federal drug laws.

Marijuana possession and use is illegal under federal law.

A spokeswoman for the Chamber of Commerce said the organization could not comment until it examined the proposal. She did note the chamber's strong opposition to Prop. 19 - the failed November ballot measure to legalize possession, use and cultivation of recreational marijuana in the state - because of impacts on employers and safety issues.

E-mail Wyatt Buchanan at wbuchanan@sfchronicle.com.



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/01/28/...

Woooosh - 2-9-2011 at 12:45 PM

If you can't work without being on alcohol or drugs- perhaps it's time to apply for disability benefits. I'm not talking trace amount in people's systems- I am talking about actively using while at work. Most workplaces already test for alcohol/drugs after any work-related injury so they won't get hit with worker's comp claims. If you need it that bad, stay home and do it. jmho

Lobsterman - 2-9-2011 at 01:25 PM

This is really a tuff issue that might never be resolved because people in a free society like ours will get their hands on whatever they want whether it is legal or not. It just might cost a little more if illegal. Today however medical MJ costs more than buying it off the streets. We as a society must do a cost-vs-analysis of how much it cost to enforce the laws of the many different drugs vs not enforcing the law. Laws drafted by governments set those norms and we as a society must obey the laws or face the consequences of arrest or firing from your job. IMO the laws on MJ are hurting society both fiscally and spiritually more then the benefit the nation gains enforcing those costly laws. I voted for Prop 19 and my wife did not.

mcfez - 2-9-2011 at 02:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Lobsterman
This is really a tuff issue that might never be resolved because people in a free society like ours will get their hands on whatever they want whether it is legal or not. It just might cost a little more if illegal. Today however medical MJ costs more than buying it off the streets. We as a society must do a cost-vs-analysis of how much it cost to enforce the laws of the many different drugs vs not enforcing the law. Laws drafted by governments set those norms and we as a society must obey the laws or face the consequences of arrest or firing from your job. IMO the laws on MJ are hurting society both fiscally and spiritually more then the benefit the nation gains enforcing those costly laws. I voted for Prop 19 and my wife did not.


Actually Lobsterman, I agree with you in part, for once. Med pot is a useful instrument for aiding the sic. It's just the other crapola out there that is nutso stuff.

monoloco - 2-9-2011 at 04:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by wessongroup
Quote:
Originally posted by monoloco
All the laws and enforcement in the world will not keep people from getting high. Last week I went to a lumber yard in La Paz, I noticed a man who looked to be in his sixties buying a small can of Resistol, when I left he was outside with a rag over his face sniffing it. It is an exercise in futility to attempt to control drugs with prohibition, we have been trying to do that for a hundred years and the problem is worse than ever, the ineffectiveness is evidenced by the price on the street. The only sane way forward is legalization and the treatment of drug abuse as a medical problem.


Agree overall ... first, as it is my right to stick a rag with glue to my nose and inhale, IF I CHOOSE to do it... it is my right to do what I want with my body ....

Second, the government has no right to be on MY property, (well of course I'm NOB) based on the Constitution of the United States... AS LONG AS I'M ONLY HURTING MYSELF...

Thirdly, Governments control the production of these "drugs" e.i the movement of production of smack from the "Golden Triangle" to Afganistan...

A four-year investigation concluded that Burma's national company Myanma Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) was "the main channel for laundering the revenues of heroin produced and exported under the control of the Burmese army." In a business deal signed with the French oil giant Total in 1992, and later joined by Unocal, MOGE received a payment of $15 million. "Despite the fact that MOGE has no assets besides the limited installments of its foreign partners and makes no profit, and that the Burmese state never had the capacity to allocate any currency credit to MOGE, the Singapore bank accounts of this company have seen the transfer of hundreds of millions of US dollars," reports François Casanier. According to a confidential MOGE file reviewed by the investigators, funds exceeding $60 million and originating from Myanmar's most renowned drug lord, Khun Sa, were channeled through the company. "Drug money is irrigating every economic activity in Burma, and big foreign partners are also seen by the SLORC as big shields for money laundering."[5] Banks in Rangoon offered money laundering for a 40% commission.[6]
The main player in the country's drug market is the United Wa State Army, ethnic fighters who control areas along the country's eastern border with Thailand, part of the infamous Golden Triangle. The UWSA, an ally of Myanmar's ruling military junta, was once the militant arm of the Beijing-backed Burmese Communist Party.
Poppy cultivation in the country decreased more than 80 percent from 1998 to 2006 following an eradication campaign in the Golden Triangle. Officials with the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime say opium poppy farming is now expanding. The number of hectares used to grow the crops increased 29% in 2007. A United Nations report cites corruption, poverty and a lack of government control as causes for the jump.[7]
At one point Khun Sa offered to sell the entire opium crop to the US for much less than we spend on interdiction, but we declined, of course.

Woooosh - 2-9-2011 at 04:49 PM

Another win for the NRA. The "emergency" clause was intended for natural disasters say a gov't office.

"Mexico drug violence not an 'emergency,' White House says
Rule requiring gun stores to report multiple sales of assault rifles, other long guns, delayed"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41495274/from/RSS/

monoloco - 2-9-2011 at 04:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by gnukid
California bill SB129 proposes to ban firing employees for testing positive to Marijuana

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/01/29/...

Bill would limit firings of medical pot users

Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press
Mark Leno's bill would ban employers from considering a worker's status as a registered medical marijuana patient or a positive drug test when making hiring and firing decisions.

Californians who use medical marijuana outside of work would be protected from job dismissal due to pot use under a bill that has been introduced by state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco.

The bill, SB129, would make it illegal for an employer to consider either a worker's status as a registered patient or a positive drug test when making hiring and firing decisions. The bill would not change existing laws that bar employees from using medical marijuana at the workplace or during work hours.

Workers such as health care providers, school bus drivers and operators of heavy equipment - so-called "safety-sensitive positions" - would not be protected by the law.

"The bill simply establishes a medical cannabis patient's right to work," Leno said. He called it "a completely reasonable piece of legislation. It astounds me that there would be any controversy around it."

While the proposal has yet to garner formal opposition, the California Chamber of Commerce opposed a bill that would have created the same protections for medical marijuana patients in 2007.

That bill, authored by Leno, was passed by the Legislature but vetoed by former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. In his veto message, Schwarzenegger wrote he was "concerned with the interference in employment decisions as they relate to marijuana use" and that employment protection was not a goal of Prop. 215, which voters passed in 1996 to allow medical marijuana.

Leno said the notion that voters only intended for unemployed people to be able to take medical marijuana is "nonsensical on its face."

The effort to pass such a law stems from a California Supreme Court decision in 2008 that allowed employers to fire workers who test positive for marijuana use, even if those workers are medical marijuana patients. In a 5-2 decision, the court found Prop. 215 does not limit an employer's authority to fire workers for violating federal drug laws.

Marijuana possession and use is illegal under federal law.

A spokeswoman for the Chamber of Commerce said the organization could not comment until it examined the proposal. She did note the chamber's strong opposition to Prop. 19 - the failed November ballot measure to legalize possession, use and cultivation of recreational marijuana in the state - because of impacts on employers and safety issues.

E-mail Wyatt Buchanan at wbuchanan@sfchronicle.com.



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/01/28/...
If a person can be fired for legally using marijuana with a doctors prescription, could they also be fired for using a prescribed pain killer or anti-psychotic drug that have potentially more dangerous side effects?

What are you talking about durrelllrobert ?

mcfez - 2-9-2011 at 05:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by durrelllrobert
Quote:
Originally posted by mcfez
I got 25 years of the life to back up my knowledge of the drug world.

did you mean " I got 25 years TO life to back up my knowledge of the drug world" :lol::lol::lol:


Resize-Wizard-1.jpg - 11kB

Good to bad. A history

mcfez - 2-11-2011 at 07:48 AM

http://www.adn.com/hooked/

Cypress - 2-11-2011 at 09:02 AM

The simplest solution is usually the best. :light: Just cut out all the BS and legalise pot.:bounce: