TRANSCRIPT: CHRIS CONRAD'S VISIT TO THE NYT DRUG POLICY FORUM

Chris Conrad:

Greetings! I'm here trying to sort out the screens, but I found this part
at least. I'm just not sure where to start reading, since there's already
quite a bit of banter going!

Richard Lake:

Hi, Chris!

Glad you made it. A lot going on. But there is no real reason to go back
into the past here. Just start with the questions you see now.

Any comments on the hemp action, or on the plans to support the cannabis
clubs???

Chris Conrad:

Yeah, we're planning to have about 50 plus cities taking action to protest
the DEA's new policies on hemp foods. This poses an interesting problem for
the movement because it technically doesn't stop companies from using
hempseed in foods and we don't want to send a chilling message, but clearly
that's what the DEA wants to do is force a chill on the industry.

Chris Conrad:

So we have to protest the DEA's move to chill the industry by creating an
impossible standard without, at the same time, sending a message to
companies or consumers that they have to stop using hempseed. The burden
should ultimately be on the DEA to find any THC in the foods, and
realistically there isn't any. But zero tolerance instead of reasonable
compliance is not a fair standard for the DEA to hold anyone to promise.

Dean Becker:

Hi Chris,

Hear any more about the San Francisco sanctuary idea since we last talked?

Chris Conrad:

Supervisor Mark Leno's resolution aims to deter harassment and prosecution
of medical cannabis patients, caregivers and dispensaries. It was discussed
at the Medical Cannabis Sanctuary and ID Card Hearing on November 27, 2001
at City Hall Committee Hearing Room 263, but I didn't attend.

Dean Becker:

Chris,

Do you foresee additional laws being written in California to either
coincide or go beyond the provision 215 or 36, a lashing out by the voters?

Chris Conrad:

I think there is a need for one, but not the kind of restrictive referenda
normally written by Americans for Medical Rights. California is such an
expensive state for a campaign that it is discouraging. Based on what
juries have ruled in various cases, I think we could get something
realistic based on the DEA 1992 yields to set a baseline for cultivation
and also to exempt patients from arrest and maybe to leave doctors alone
and allow distribution. I have drafted some language, but so far it is in
the talk stage. If any potential funders or participants would like to see
a copy of the draft language, let me know.

Chris Conrad:

Do you foresee additional laws being written in California to either
coincide or go beyond the provision 215 or 36, a lashing out by the voters?

I think that the prosecutors around the state have actually helped us
unintentionally by doing these high-profile prosecutions that have educated
the community better about how yields work and that police "experts" are
not always to be trusted, especially when they contradict the government
studies they pretend to have studied. Working as a court expert has been a
very stimulating experience, but a little tough emotionally when you don't
win and you know the client was innocent.

Celaya:

Chris

It seems like Marijuana Reform is catching fire right now in England with
protestors lighting up in groups outside police stations.

Any way we could break the U.S. media blackout and let their zeal infect
this country?

Chris Conrad:

It seems like Marijuana Reform is catching fire right now in England with
protestors lighting up in groups outside police stations. Any way we could
break the U.S. media blackout and let their zeal infect this country?

The UK has three ingredients that are missing in the USA 1) a major
national newspaper (The Guardian) that decided to keep cannabis reform on
the front burner until reforms were enacted, 2) people willing to light up
in front of police stations en masse and even if they are prosecuted facing
only the most minimal penalties, and 3) politicians who have looked at the
issue with honesty. The problem per #3 for us is that this is in part due
to the House of Lords not being subject to election so they can be as
honest as they want and in part due to the fact that an honest appraisal
for politicians in the USA includes the fear that the drug war industrial
complex will throw its enormous financial and media resources against any
politician who is honest about cannabis.

When we can resolve those points, the ball will be rolling here, as well.

Celaya:

Whew! Those are some heavy points!

Exodus?

Chris Conrad:

The thing is that you can never tell when things are going to go over the
top and escalate to quick change. Look at the fall of the Berlin Wall. Look
at the collapse of the Taliban. There is a philosophical link between the
Taliban and Ashcroft's Drug War, and that is the doctrine of moralistic
prohibition. The way to attack Ashcroft there is to use the Bible, like
Matt 12, Mark 3, Luke 13, John 9 to show him as being anti-Christ. He is
more akin to the Pilate, who used Roman law to kill Jesus. Ashcroft would
have done the same, and he should be held to task. The other similarity is
that they base their power on suppression, not popular support. When the
money dries up, the narcs go away. Same for the gangs. That's why
regulation is such a better program. The people did not support the Taliban
and they do not support Ashcroft. We just need that international Alliance
for true justice to bring him down.

Dean Becker:

Chris I have tried to consider a way that the members of the drug culture
can make their presence known without giving it all away to their bosses,
like a ribbon on something.

If we were to pack churches, Baptist this week, Catholics next and so on,
fill the churches and the parking lots. No mass distribution of data,
simply saying by our presence that we want a change, would that have any
chance to make an impact, to facilitate a change?

Chris Conrad:

"If we were to pack churches, Baptist this week, Catholics next and so on,
fill the churches and the parking lots. No mass distribution of data,
simply saying by our presence that we want a change, would that have any
chance to make an impact, to facilitate a change?"

There is some real potential there. From my experience most personal drug
users have spiritual beliefs and moral values, but they tend to be more
mystical in the sense that they don't go to a church with regularity. That
creates a barrier that we have not overcome as a subculture. There would
have to be some explanation of who these people are, and there is the
danger of spooking people out by having their chapel space "invaded" by
non-congregation people. You are absolutely right that using the churches
is critical to provoking sweeping social and political change in drug
policy, particularly in the African American community.

The Human Rights and the Drug War display and the book _Shattered Lives
Portraits From America's Drug War_ do this by bringing the pictures and
stories to communities without having to bring in actual people. Maybe that
is an easier way to achieve your purpose Sponsor a rotating church-based
display of the HRDW exhibit. I'm sure we would be interested in doing it if
the logistics work out and there is some funding generated to cover the
basic expenses.

Aahpat:

Hi Chris and All;

I'll be in and out tonight but I wanted to contribute this thought.

While looking over legislation I came across the following for the D.C.
appropriations for 2001. It is the re-authorization of the veto of I-59.

So I am wondering, if they have to re-authorize this suppression of
democracy in our national capital every year why can't we run an annual
campaign to have Sect. 129 stricken from the appropriations bill.

HR 2944 EAS

"An Act making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia"

SEC. 129. (a) None of the funds contained in this Act may be used to enact
or carry out any law, rule, or regulation to legalize or otherwise reduce
penalties associated with the possession, use, or distribution of any
schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802) or
any tetrahydrocannabinols derivative.

(b) The Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998,
also known as Initiative 59, approved by the electors of the District of
Columbia on November 3, 1998, shall not take effect.

Chris Conrad:

"While looking over legislation I came across the following for the D.C.
appropriations for 2001. It is the re-authorization of the veto of I-59. So
I am wondering, if they have to re-authorize this suppression of democracy
in our national capital every year why can't we run an annual campaign to
have Sect. 129 stricken from the appropriations bill."

That is a terrific idea, at least as far as a media event. It forces them
to publicly violate their oaths of office every year, kind of like a
Congress holding a ritualistic killing of democracy in America. The effect
of this could be part of a snowballing public disgust with the activities
of the Ashcroft coupe that should be spread to his cohorts holding elective
office. This could be a good time to tie his person to the issues that
garner peoples' contempt so that when the time comes that he is plunged
into the political void, he takes some of the baggage along with him. He
will always be the guy who lost to a corpse.

Dean Becker:

We are subject to Pavlov dog syndrome here I think, or like a child who has
been beaten too many times, we flinch when we think of cops and so many are
afraid to smoke or speak up and the media is just for the most part yellow
journalism that breeds and self perpetuates.

How do we resolve these 3 points Chris?

Richard Lake:

Chris, I noticed the following article from the campus newspaper, which
includes info I have not heard before. I do know that AMR is looking more
at WA, OR, or AZ for another medical marijuana initiative, but have yet to
see any feedback from folks in those states on the idea. Any comments?

http//www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n1996.a09.html

Pubdate Tue, 27 Nov 2001

Source Daily Californian, The (CA Edu)

GROUP WANTS STATE TO HELP DISTRIBUTE MEDICAL MARIJUANA

Federal Law Complicates Issue

Tired of the haze of legal issues surrounding the distribution of medical
marijuana, a medical rights advocacy group wants states to be directly
involved in the distribution of medical marijuana.

Americans for Medical Rights, the organization that sponsored Proposition
215--the medical marijuana initiative--is proposing a ballot measure to set
up a state-controlled network of medical marijuana distributors.

The proposal has drawn wide support from Berkeley marijuana users who are
likewise frustrated by legal complications resulting from the federal law
that bans the drug.

Although eight states have legalized medical marijuana, the cultivation,
sale and use of the drug remains illegal under federal law.

"We don't have a choice," said Gina Palencar, head of the initiative drive.
"Medical marijuana patients are not going to stop using marijuana for
medical purposes just because the federal government is trying to
criminalize them."

Widespread support is growing in Berkeley and on the UC Berkeley campus for
the initiative, which will likely be placed on the 2002 ballots in Oregon
and Washington, two states that allow marijuana use for medical reasons.

The group's ultimate goal is to put the initiative before California
voters, but it is using the other states as testing grounds.

The Berkeley City Council last spring completed the arduous task of
devising an ordinance for the use of medical marijuana to comply with
Proposition 215.

The ordinance, deemed too conservative by medical marijuana proponents in
the amount of marijuana patients can possess, is generous compared to
ordinances adopted by other California cities.

"Medical marijuana and legal access to medical marijuana is one of the most
agreed upon of sensible drug policies--it's a common ground," said Scarlett
Swerdlow of Students for Sensible Drug Policy at UC Berkeley.

Swerdlow added that it would only be a first step in a more open discussion
on drug policy.

"Ultimately, the federal government needs to change its policy," she said.
"It doesn't make sense to send anyone, sick or healthy, to jail for using
marijuana."

By having cannabis distribution facilities that are operated and run by the
state, a showdown between the states and the federal government is almost
certain.

The Oakland Cannabis Buyer's Cooperative, a large marijuana distribution
group popular with some Berkeley residents, went head-to-head with the
Supreme Court earlier this year and lost. The club stopped distributing
marijuana in May, after a two-year court battle.

Americans for Medical Rights, a Santa Monica-based group, is not pushing
the ballot measure in California because it would be too expensive to
conduct a campaign here, Palencar said.

As proposed, the measure would allow the state to distribute marijuana in
one of two ways. One proposal calls for the state to cultivate cannabis on
private farms. That cannabis would then be distributed by state-operated
distribution facilities.

The other proposal would have the state acquire the cannabis from
Mississippi, where the federal government grows it for research purposes.

There has been a long and involved effort on the part of the California
legislature to finalize a legitimate system of distribution.

State lawmakers recently passed a bill that would have recognized the
distribution centers under California law and established an oversight
framework.

Chris Conrad:

"I do know that AMR is looking more at WA, OR, or AZ for another medical
marijuana initiative, but have yet to see any feedback from folks in those
states on the idea. Any comments?"

has excellent announcement and discussion lists on forfeiture. Not every
forfeiture issue is drug policy related, like the link to this amazing
story just posted to their lists

http//www.sierratimes.com/archive/files/nov/28/arjj112801.htm

But even so I find it a superb resource.

Dean Becker:

Chris,

I like your ideas, attitude and style. Whichever tasks you promote, please
let me know what I can do in Houston to help.

Redeyedllama:

well its quite obvious neither Democrat or Republican political candidate
wishes to see a country where patients can receive medicine that doesn't
cost an arm and a leg

as Gore was with Clinton who wished to revoke licenses of any doctor that
prescribed marijuana, and Bush had states choice as part of his campaign
yet has not even looked at the chain on his bullgod Ashcroft,

meaning that what is necessary is to get enough voter power to make them
listen, it s just a matter of finding the resources to accomplish that kind
of campaign as I see it...

Chris Conrad:

"It seems that when all is said and done, that Reformers just don't have
the numbers politically to generate an effective challenge. ...Does anyone
know what kind of power AI wields and if it would be worth it to for us to
lobby them in support of her efforts?"

Amnesty seems to be more involved with peripheral issues, and it is
cumbersome to get it moving in any new direction but I'm glad someone is
trying to do that. It is certainly worth it to lobby them, but in a sense
it might be easier to do it indirectly, such as asking them to oppose the
suppression of indigenous cannabis cultures in India, Morocco, Lebanon, or
something like that. AI is loathe to criticize the USA, where many wealthy
funders live, but getting it to criticize second and third world countries
(sorry about the political incorrectness of the phrasing) is a little
easier and has a stronger argument of cultural genocide than the fairly
modern US pot culture. I know the roots go back for centuries, but I meant
as far as a widespread social phenomenon.

The second point I wanted to address is that I think that we do have the
numbers when we include the Friends and Families of Pot Smokers. This is a
new organization I have on the back burner to allow people who don't smoke
pot to defend it. "Well, I don't smoke pot, but I know a few people who do
and they really aren't criminals, in fact they're nice people. That's why I
think we should stop wasting police resources on the Drug War and legalize
pot for adults." When you include everyone who knows somebody who smokes
grass, we are a big group indeed. That's how medical marijuana became such
a broad based issue. Not just the patients, but almost everyone who knew a
patient voted for the reforms. And one patient can know a lot of people. So
can one pot smoker. And it is more effective to have non-smokers advance
our position (which I think is ridiculous but true).

Dean Becker:

Chris, are the items on your agenda that we did not bring forward today
that you would like to share with us?

Chris Conrad:

"...they can accept political and personal contributions from companies
that would compete with marijuana without to much to hide ...re the British
angle was that s its not as easy to discredit a gov't study such as Britain
s which has been well published through most of Europe vs. the studies in
various universities locally which have been kept away from press and
public eyes..."

One of the mistakes made in the post Watergate reforms was the belief that
by exposing financial corruption it would dry up in the light of day.
Instead it thrived and grew into a grotesque mockery of campaign reporting
without limitations or ethics. Now the same politicians are in charge of
how to limit the amount of money they collect and to eliminate conflicts of
interest. Not possible. Exposure is not enough, we need to limit spending
and the news media is the major recipient of the money, and politicians and
pharmaceuticals are two of the biggest advertisers, along with the
government and fossil fuel related corporations. Scary.

You mention the studies being published in obscure medical journals, which
is true, but the major national "government" study produced in the USA, the
National Academy of Science / Institute of Medicine report, could not be
suppressed for more than a few years. When it came out it didn't make much
of a splash in part because it was riddled with vagaries and weasel words
that diluted its impact. Truth is a very valuable commodity in America
because there is so little of it circulating in the media and government at
any given time.

Donaldway:

For the benefit of the transcript, the IOM report can be read at
http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/marimed/

Neitzen James:

Hey Chris, if you're still around, thanks for being here. I just discovered
this forum was back up, and here YOU are on it!

I really liked your idea for a 'friends and relations of peaceful pot
smokers' association.

Keep up your good work! -)

Chris Conrad:

"Chris, are the items on your agenda that we did not bring forward today
that you would like to share with us?"

Only the observation that we are fighting on many different fronts now. The
Bush administration seems to approach every policy with the frontal assault
and brute force. I think that they are sowing the seeds of economic
collapse, and that when that happens our circumstances will be more
difficult on the one hand, but it will force the issue of our national
spending priorities in a way that we could not bring about with the Clinton
surplus. It is also likely that Ashcroft has moved too fast in advancing
the heavy-handed tactics of political repression, and that Congress may
resist. It has only been in the past few weeks that the media has begun to
climb out from under the faux patriotism that buried America along with the
collapse of the WTC in New York. Just as the federal government demonizes
its enemies, it unleashes its own demons for us to expose. The only good
that can come from Ashcroft being in office is to show the mean spirited
and un-American stripe of his political ilk. This is a good time for us to
wrap our causes in the flag and build coalitions that seek to knock him
down and let him pull as much of the evil that surrounds him down with him
as he can.

As always, our tools are truth and compassion, and with them we will
rebuild an America based on life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Equal
rights are for everybody.

Please remember that our books make great holiday gifts, so visit my web
pages at www.chrisconrad.com, hr95.org, fcda.org, and potpride.com. Thank
you for this opportunity to chat, and we'll do it again Dec 19, eh Dean?

Dean Becker:

Dec 19 it is. Thank you for your time Chris, you lead by your example.

Chris Conrad:

Thanks for dropping by. Goodnight everyone.