ONLY ONE SIDE?

It was with great dismay that I learned of the events at the Dalles
May 4th Town Hall forum "The Truth About Marijuana." When is there
only one side to "the truth?"

From my understanding of the meeting, the book "Marijuana Myths,
Marijuana Facts", was distributed. The 1997 book is a review of the
scientific evidence available at that time about marijuana. A review
by scientists about scientific evidence is heretical? Or not worthy of
at least a cursory read? And from the Chronicle's May 9th letter, Not
Authorized, the letter writers say, "a packet of information that was
reviewed and approved..." will be provided by the Wasco County
Prevention Coalition.

If those who do the reviewing and approving provide only one view, how
much truth can their biased presentation provide?

In 1998 the citizens of Oregon passed a measure allowing access to
cannabis for patients with 59 percent of the vote. Voters also
rebuffed an effort at recriminalizing cannabis with an overwhelming
2/3 of the vote. Apparently many voters in the state do not
necessarily buy the government's propaganda (the source of the
Coalition's "information" packet?) of marijuana's harmfulness.

This is America, the United States of. Freedom of assembly, freedom of
speech and yes, freedom to protest. If there are voices in your
community who willingly wish to present an alternative view to "the
truth about marijuana," should they not be heard? How can a Town Hall
forum be a town hall when part of the town is denied a voice? Seems
like an excellent lesson in civics, and not just for the town's
students, is occurring in the Dalles.

Allan Erickson

Eugene