Skip to main content

Add new comment

David762 (not verified)

In reply to by Steve Schumacher (not verified)

When the Controlled Substances Act was passed, cannabis was not even considered to be placed in a Schedule classification. It was the Nixon regime, thoroughly annoyed with the anti-war movement, that placed cannabis "temporarily" under the CSA. As an extra "twist of the knife", cannabis was placed on Schedule [1], in keeping with Anslinger's long campaign in support of Rockefeller's Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Medicine agendas, as well as Hearst's wood pulp industry. As John D. Rockefeller was fond of saying, "competition is a sin".

Nixon commissioned a thorough scientific study of cannabis and it's effect upon society, fully believing that Shafer's Commission would return plentiful data to justify keeping cannabis illegal. When the report was completed, it immediately went into the circular file when the study recommended decriminalization or outright re-legalization. And cannabis has remained a Schedule [I] substance ever since, even after 2 separate DEA Administrative Law judges ordered the DEA to reschedule cannabis.

Ideally, cannabis should be re-legalized, like tomatoes. California has a new proposition that should be on the November 2012 ballot to make cannabis "legal like wine", which is close enough, compared to what is in existence today. What the MMJ movement has done is to vastly improve the quality and variety of cannabis available for medical purposes, especially when compared to the cannabis smuggled across our southern border.

This brings up another point. Over 40,000 Mexicans have been killed over the last 6 years in the Mexican government's war against the drug cartels. How many people have died violently in the importation of Corona beer? How many $Billions have been spent in the war on drugs? How many millions of people have had their lives ruined because cannabis was made illegal? And how many $Billions of drug cartel funds have been funneled through the Wall Street banksters? Considering that corruption of government officials was rampant under 10 years of Alcohol Prohibition, does anyone believe that such corruption isn't 1,000 times worse after 70 years of cannabis prohibition? Re-legalizing cannabis would remove a significant portion of the profit from the drug cartels, and deprive "our" many USA government officials of their extra "campaign contributions". Money is the "mother's milk" of the political class, and widespread corruption provides its' own inertia to change in drug laws, even without crony corporate interests at stake.

Thu, 05/10/2012 - 6:46am Permalink
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.