As I contemplated today's intense start, I had a chance to see how much I truly fit in to the "bunch" at the Food Bank. We weren't in the rain for long. It was a great, "full," humbling, but also bonding experience. I guess that I should be thankful that my life has many diverse happenings. And loving the one I'm with, even in this situation, was an enlightening experience. Via her friends conjured up by relentless research, digging, there is once again hope imo on the high seas of Justice.
She claims to be a Shaman's "assistant," a first mate (and only mate,) but that is a matter of perspective lost in the shuffle of details at times. We are both in a down and out, yet strangely alive time of our lives. Things are truly tense occasionally for many reasons beyond our control, but then she is a lot of fun. Not much less confrontational than most females, she is at least clever as many, as well as, somewhat informed, and fun if one enjoys conversations ranging far and wide. I don't know how got hooked up with this "horn swaggler!" And sometimes a tinge of regret climbs aboard a sinking ship to worry a despairing deck hand, but she does have her strengths, and the stubborn tenacity of the English/Irish wenches is something to behold.
I am going to wage a real battle for justice with her help, She has spent well over one thousand hours researching an ever broader ripple in my legal ocean. It was cast here by someone also in need of salvation as a shaman and even better, more giving, an ethical fearless provider of the tools to worship by such as LAD-00023
I am a creature of opportunity. And when despair overtook me in Judge Rideout's courtroom after he dismissed our valid request for stay of proceedings by saying, while misinterpreting our argument: "This is something I might entertain over a martini with friends," on March 23. No one can fight this battle from a prison cell as effectively as they can from a state of freedom. There are ways to seek justice when you are able to sign, file, download papers, call people, email experts and in many other ways research your cause as well as intelligent discussion.
Out here, I can actually study the guidelines by which a judge is required to make their decisions and see if a judge or even the prosecutor is acting according to their laws and rules.
I believe that the Judge and prosecutors are supposed to be acting in an attitude of fairness and harm reduction to the community, not to wrongly implement any misguided or improper political agenda, nor to punish anyone if they are not a threat to the community. I feel that people in these important positions are required to act in accordance with relevant, up to date, best information and not necessarily think in the mindset of last century's prohibitionist theory.
What got me started in my search for real justice again, was that i am struggling through a stressful time and that I am not one to consult doctors very often. What is revealing to me is that although the courts are prosecuting me as Klaus Kaczor, I don't have any ID as KK. Getting a health care card seems virtually impossible at the moment. It seems mine expired in 1999. Therefore from the before the age of 49 through 61, I had no contact with the health care system! Must be making some good decisions concerning my health, eh?
I was also much happier before this Justice system got hold of me and decided to harm me personally, as well as send my harmless customers back to dealing with organized crime. My diet was self administered as it has been that prerogative of all my ancestors since before we climbed from the ocean. I have harmed no one by checking for age and supplying safer substances than alcohol and tobacco to intelligent adults, whose right it also was by virtue of being alive and living as an organic being in this biosphere. These laws have come into effect to the detriment of all human beings in the last century, while Nature and freedom of choice served as the unfailing self regulating mechanism of natural selection until then, from the beginning of life. Open your eyes! There is no law that says Judges must be blind. What I am researching now is the criteria a Judge must use to evaluate the cases before him.
I am certain that adhering blindly to a prohibitionist political agenda isn't one of the Judge's guidelines. First of all, if a Judge is supposed to be the final evaluator of whether the law is being applied fairly, shouldn't he or she be impartial from the outset, not rely on the charges and accusations as even being factual. If there is never an indication of violence, of harm to the community, then why incarcerate someone? The fact that drug dealing has been harmful to the community is a lie for lack of evidence, as no one has yet in the trial, and mostly no facts are ever presented, to establish that my or anyone's drug sales have ever harmed anyone as much as sales of liquor have. No one had ever made complaint about being harmed by me. Only the cops and the Government of Canada has spent effort and time reinforcing criminal empires, while giving someone with a less ethical core, a chance to make a good living> Maybe one of the VPD's or RCMP's best buddies.
There is a revolution occurring in the field of psychedelics. This weekend brought together a global gathering of academics, clinicians, psychonauts, artists and visionaries. With over six hundred switched on attendees the sheer verve, enthusiasm and energy of the resurgent movement is impossible to deny. There is no place for the tired cliches of the war on drugs, these people are not rambling burn outs, they mean business, are highly educated, and have the hard science behind them as well as embodying the messages of the plant teachers. This marks the beginning of a rennaissance in the psychedelic movement, one which by its sheer scale surprised the conference organisers and attendees alike. We are back with a vengeance....
The overwhelming evidence is in. Global drug policy is not based on the scientific evidence of benefits vs harm. This was demonstrated by the firing of Dr David Nutt who had the temerity to present the scientific proof to the UK government that the issue is not LSD and Ecstasy, but rather is alcohol and tobacco. This is an issue that Dr Julian Vayne confronts in XVI. For those unfamiliar with the issue, the benefit and harm matrix is provided below for a clear visual representation of the real impact of drugs. The research of Dr Nutt was backed up by all of the papers presented. It is essential that we propogate this knowledge.......
The state is against us, and all of the scientific research in the world, and all the incremental wheedling and calls for patience by organisations such as MAPS or the Beckley Foundation will not lead to legalisation. At best, this will give the military industrial complex some more tools for dealing with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the broken soldiers back from the wars for oil. Or worse still, instigate some state sanctioned control of supply to recognised therapists and respectable religions. This is anathema to us. Though there is undoubtably valuable work being done by MAPS and the Beckley Foundation, we do not accept that these groups speak for us. Nor will we let them usurp that role..........
Click the Title Link for the full article
Last night's drunken idiocy following the Stanley Cup game disturbing the peace, brought home the significance of this great article from the Scarlet Imprint I received this morning.
As another side (the ugly side) to the landscape, take a look at today's gleanings from a close neighbor in Salem Oregon. The American drug insanity is the cause of their spiritual depravity. Without these substances in our diet we can not access our rightful destiny to spiritual unity with the life form of the Universe.
We can count on at least eight teenagers DYING EVERY DAY due to alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes, because alcohol is the morally-condoned government-approved method of getting high. Their parents do it, their teachers do it, and law enforcement does it. Most everybody gets drunk, sadly.
Because adults selfishlessly enjoy drinking alcohol, they don’t want anything to change on that horizon. Even though it kills children every single day, of every single month, of every single year. Instead, let’s talk about pot. It’s a much safer subject.
So safe in fact, that it does not pose any risk to society whatsoever. While eight kids died from drinking today, and will tomorrow, NONE will die from marijuana use.
I have asked some deep metaphysical stuff of my friends today. It was one of those stressful days where life's little rude moments seem to coalesce into the straw that broke the Camel's back. I now belatedly remember a friend saying, "What kind of a life will that be?" He was referring to my vocalization about something I was then mulling over. "It'll be nothing but teen-aged sniveling, and dirty towels/hair plugging up the works!" The trouble is I never listen.
He was a wise one and I miss all of my neighbors! The pox on the "rat," but it was my chances I was taking. Full liability is mine, as well.
I take heart in knowing that when all is said and done and the chips are counted I will be found to be on the side that is right on this issue, that I did the least harm compared to the government.
These guys at the "DEA" are true activists. Although I may be a recipient of their generosity, I am honestly astonished at the level of commitment- let me spell that out- unpaid time and effort, that this organization has donated to the cause of achieving Justice.
Remember this spending of a few bucks on your part could pay off in you gaining your freedom! Please find their donate button and spend freely. Here is the new battle cry....
Smoke one gram less per week and send $10 to the cause of this wonderful organization or Free Casey cause.
No one over there (Europe-Great Britain) is overly concerned with Bud the "silly" Oracle, or, Klaus Kaczor and his gang of "demented" men, it is all about getting their wonderful perception of the law in front of a court anywhere in the western court. The argument is given during the last part in the video below And here in the blog again:
Unconscious social norms v conscious law:
As a species, humans are social animals in the process of evolving consciousness. Social animals unconsciously adopt social norms by means of imitation of role models. This ensures social coherence based on consensus – copy others and you’ll fit in. Likewise interacting human individuals may unconsciously imitate each other’s body language, ‘mirroring’, as means of social coherence. Unconscious consensus norms may be irrational, unconnected to objective evidence and reasoning, and may be unfair, applied selectively to the powerless but not to the powerful, as in scapegoating. Social animals are ruled by the powerful, based on survival of the fittest and self-interest (e.g. selfish genes).
Unlike animals, humans have the ability to make conscious decisions based on objective rationality (the objective assessment of all relevant factors and how they are linked logically by cause and effect) and subjective fairness, (the subjective balancing of value judgments since a decision or action may be good for one group but bad for another). Humans can then establish conscious rules or laws that define how their social group will operate, the limits to social behaviour. Conscious laws can be far more efficient than social norms because they can adapt to our changing society far quicker than unconscious social norms. Human societies are evolving from being based on the rule of the powerful majority, determined by social norms, towards being based on the rule of conscious law, determined by rationality and fairness.
Given their incomplete evolution of consciousness, humans find their decision making inevitably influenced by both unconscious social norms and conscious social laws – ‘if everyone drives above the speed limit, so will I’. The design of laws may be irrational and unfair if they are overly influenced by unconscious social norms; alternatively laws consciously designed to be rational and fair may be interpreted and applied irrationally and unfairly.
The relevance for drug regulation is this: the discrimination between consumers & traders of legally-available drugs and consumers & traders of 'controlled' drugs is based on unconscious social norms and the rule of the powerful majority whereas the law itself, the Misuse of Drugs Act, is consciously intended to be evidence-based, rational and fair. So our fundamental claim is that the law is not implemented in accordance with the law but in accordance with social norms that favour the majority at the expense of minorities.
The relevance for drug regulation is this:
Through the Misuse of Drugs Act Parliament has given Government the legal power to restrict individual rights for the sole legal purpose of reducing harm to society from drug consumption.
There is no indication in the MDA text that Government should exercise their legal power unequally between drugs used by the majority of voters and drugs used by minorities. Government appears biased, using its legal power for a political purpose (gaining the support of the majority of voters) rather than the legal purpose (reducing drug harm).
The whole crux of the argument is simple and so obvious. It boils down to the converse of this plainly stated fact:
What is the reasoning behind exempting the most dangerous drugs (Alcohol and tobacco) from the scrutiny of the drugs and substances act, if the act is a neutral instrument for social health purposes? From there you will come to the question "Does the act require prohibition of anything?" Next you come upon "What rational reasoning is it based on to implement effective control of all substances according to their danger to society?" "For the safety of society, why would you treat the most dangerous substances as if they are insignificant?" "Under law must we be treated equally and not arbitrarily?"
People can't see it, as did the natives in the Americas not see the ships of the Spanish when they first arrived. The way we have come to understand this Prohibitionist reality via the "Mindset of Prohibition" is that such a thing doesn't exist, therefore it can't be there. Aren't drugs either legal or illegal?
I remember the Prosecutor misnaming the MDMA as Cocaine (I guess it is the same thing to her) in a summation to the Judge and almost groaning when saying "There was almost a pound of Cocaine, your honor." All the MDMA I ever sold, didn't touch the damage a single person drunk on Stanley Cup beers did last night by disturbing the peace, or, even come close to the physical damage this poison does to each victim. The True facts are on the chart above about how dangerous MDMA is to you and others, not in the Federal Prosecutor's mouth.
Take a good look there Judge Rideout and see how government funded studies compare the relative dangers of these two substances and tell me who is killing people with their substances, honestly. Certainly not those selling MDMA.
It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong.
Giancarlo Arnao's essay on the semantics of prohibition analyses the role of language, especially in the ambit of law and politics, in the systematic demonisation of (some) drugs and users of (some) drugs, from the inaccurate use of terms such as "narcotic" in international conventions, to the meanings of "abuse", "addiction" and "non-medical use". This essay is a great introduction to the way our understanding of "drugs" is socially constructed and politically biased.
Perhaps with all ouor modern knowledge we do not need the divine mushrooms any more. Or do we need them more than ever? Some are shocked that the key even to religion might be reduced to a mere drug. On the other hand, the drug is as mysterious as it ever was... (Wasson 1961)
Only recently have some academic anthropologists begun to consider contempporary drug subcultures to be worthy of formal study (Adler 1985; Holden 1989a).
I will neither promote nor inveigh against contemporary non-traditional use of entheogenic drugs. True, some of the drugs discussed in this book are illegal, and there are those who think it irresponsible to discuss this subject without denouncing their illicit use. On the other hand, the bulk of the compounds studied in this book are legal, and there is no question that there are presently in the United States alone at least a million users of entheogenic drugs, legal and illegal (Goldstein & Kalant 1990), and it is to these psychonauts (Junger 1970), as well as to interested scientists, that this book is directed. There is no need to encourage would-be users to sample the entheogens- the drugs have their devotees, and in any case the current supply is probably insufficient to meet the demand of established users (Blanco 1993).
In this exordium, however, I will denounce in no uncertain terms the futile, counter-productive and ill-advised proscription of entheogenic drugs by the governments of the United States and other countries. As Baruch Spinoza so presciently put it:
All laws which can be violated without doing any one any injury are laughed at. Nay, so far are they from doing anything to control the desires and passions of men that, on the contrary, they direct and incite men's thoughts the more toward those very objects; for we always strive toward what is forbidden and desire the things we are not allowed to have. And men of leisure are never deficient in the ingenuity needed to enable them to outwit laws framed to regulate things which cannot be entirely forbidden... He who tries to determine everything by law will foment crime rather than lesssen it.
It is self-evident that the millions of contemporary users of proscribed entheogenic drugs are laughing at the laws presuming to forbid them, and that they are far from deficient in the ingenuity needed to outwit those laws. It has ever been so with laws presuming to regulate the legitimate appetites of human beings; and there is no question that such laws represent an abuse of governmental power. As the great libertarian Edmund Atwill Wasson wrote in 1914, in a critique of the prohibition of alcohol in the United States (Wasson 1914):
It is one thing to furnish the law, and another to furnish the force needed to ensure obedience. That is why we have so many dead-letter laws in this country, --we forget that a law is not self-enforcing.
In theory, law is the instrument of popular will in democratic countries, and in practice has been used as a weapon by majorities to repress and harass minorities, especially laws against drugs which are associated with those groups (Helmer 1975; Musto 1973). The prohibition of alcohol in the United States is an exceptional case of laws fomented by a fanatical and active minority resulting in the harassment and repression of the majority (Musto 1973; Wasson 1914). When a law is sufficiently unpopular, as was the Constitutional amendment prohibiting alcohol manufacturing and sale for ludibund purposes in the United States, the people in theory will rise to overturn it. Would that it were so with unjust laws, or unenforceable laws! When a government proves itself all-too-willing to attempt to "furnish the force needed to ensure obedience" to unenforceable and (arguably) unjust laws, then the very freedoms or "human rights" on which democratic rule is ostensibly founded are jeopardized (Shulgin 1991). This is the case with the contemporary "War on Drugs" and the unprecedented intrusions into personal liberty which it inexorably occasions. It is a case where the "cure" is far worse than the "disease"; in which the proposed "therapy" is toxic and will prove fatal if administered in sufficiently high dosage. While the use of the drugs this shock therapy addresses continues unabated or indeed increases, freedom and dignity are on the ropes, and in danger of going down for the count.
I will adumbrate four different lines of argument against the contemporary prohibition of entheogenic drugs and, by extension, prohibitions of other drugs- from alcohol, caffeine or nicotine (all of which have been illicit substances in the past) to cocaine, heroin or marijuana (all of which have been legal far longer than they have been controlled substances). These four lines of argument might be grouped under the following headings: 1) scientific; 2) practical or legal; 3) moral; and 4) economic. I will also pose the following question: "why is it that western society cannot cope with euphoria and ecstasy?" This question is at the heart of the prohibition of entheogens. Although they are disguised as "Public Health Laws," the strictures against the entheogens are first and foremost limitations on the practice of religion in a broad sense; or in a broader sense still, are attempts to enshrine in law a certain perverse brand of what once was called "natural philosophy." I call it science, and the modern laws against entheogenic drugs are manifestly anti-scientific and indeed represent "crimes against nature."
The problem with these so called help channels is that their agenda is about control and reinforcing the government propaganda not really helping anyone specifically.
Humans are a complex creature and addictions need to be studied in a realistic way, not by people who wish to use this frailty for the purpose of enforcing their agenda. Below is my audio comparison of the prohibition problem with Michael Crighton's talk at the Smithsonian on fear and complexity
To get some real perspective as to why we have such a huge cocaine/hard drug problem in North America and why Marijuana is a class one drug where cocaine is a class two take a look at the video below.
And if for a second you feel that this was in the past, in the good old US of A, have a good look at the corruption of Law enforcement here in Surrey today. Everyone in the remand center understands what this was all about. Not sex!
Or has anyone heard of any progress on this case of murder? Have any of the cops involvced in asking the HA to do something about this rogue member even been questioned as to whom they consorted with? This is after a crime of murder in which the VPD is at least peripherally involved and yet they are never held to account while they can hold an activist such as myself who is concerned about this type of corruption to "account" under the CDSA and make me out as the problem. What a lovely set-up, for ever working hand in hand for under the table payoffs with the very violent organized criminals who you are protecting using these laws! Fill up the jails with low level "assets" and activists such as me and pretend for those brainwashed gullibles that you are a vital part of our new Prison Industry
An effective website is Transform Drug Policy Foundation. Sadly this intelligent website is also located in the UK. We are far behind in the anti prohibition/legalization debate because of sideshows such as myself and the UDS, as well as CC, medical marijuana, and other dog and pony self interest activism. This is a matter of human rights and the freedom to live a peaceful life like any responsible tobacco smoker or alcohol drinker. Criminal law should only be used to govern people's harmful behavior, never to target a minority for political purposes. This only leads to widespread corruption of government, police and a general response of lawlessness by those who suffer under tyranny. The side effects of organized criminal violence is lucrative criminal enterprise and are also not conducive to a happy society while drug use is promoted to ever younger children. And what for? so that those do-gooders on sites like sobrietytelevision can apply their brand of moral self righteous agenda and bring people to their way of thinking, to save people from the hell they create and support?
Great act of bravery by this young Lady, Brigette DePape.
For myself who doesn't have a single piece of identification it is a difficult road ahead. To get employment, to apply for assistance and health care, to receive any formal help from the government of Canada is virtually impossible. The fact is it is much easier to find a job/opportunity in the underground industry. Is that why there are so many repeat offenders?
Luckily I have someone, although very poor herself, who is supportive of me. I will also keep on trying to find something that can give me a meager income from lawful sources. My chances at this age, with my history, will likely be a hindrance rather than an asset. Ce la vi. Thankfully I have no addictions of any kind and my requirements are meager. But sadly there is very little hope. This of course is how they win. They are very much trying to build a prison industry on people like me to provide jobs for government bureaucrats, guards, cops and lawyers as well as judges. One sweeping law denying equal justice, as in the USA our parent country, will garner a non productive industry as a make work project. There is no logical rational for this type of criminal law to exist. The law really only works as an instrument of political oppression to harm an otherwise peaceful minority via an adverse moral judgement, where it was designed to be a tool for public health safety. The minister is misapplying the CDSA while allowing the very dangerous drugs, Alcohol and Tobacco, to be exempt from it although these substances cause 60 times more fatalities than all of the so called "illegal" drugs combined. The peripheral damage to society is repeated in stories such as mine, as well as the dangerous violence committed by organized crime and the police corruption it fosters in reaction.
Still nothing can pass through the Government propaganda machine no matter how reasonable. Take for instance this talk of a North American defense perimeter against Global terrorism. What an outrageous lie. The whole terrorism claptrap is smoke and mirrors. The real Global terrorists are the Americans and their serf countries like Canada. Who else is hucking missiles on flimsy excuses, and invading countries around the world? And just like the gullible Germans believed Hitler's lies so do moronic citizens in North America believe the crap. Only today it's Muslim terrorist we have learned to hate.
At least I have time to write fueled by my anger. What a great load of crap people swallow. Like Obama isn't worried about a double dip recession. Nothing to worry about if he could start another war.... Maybe Libya? And Canada doesn't see it a problem that the US is sliding into economic oblivion, all we need to do is be ready to revise our estimates.
The Daiichi plant at Fukushima is still leaking radioactive material, nearly three months after an earthquake and tsunami knocked out the plant's cooling systems. But the government says it is still on track to bring the reactors to a cold shutdown by January.
The way they say "knocked out the plant's cooling systems" makes sound so inevitable, doesn't it? As if the generators could not have been placed anywhere else given the Tsunami threat in the area. How excellent an omission, a point not to dwell on. Tens of thousands of people adversely affected by a simple failure of basic engineering principle. No one mentions it because everything dangerous that we rely on is at the same level of safety, and these experts are extremely fallible. The crap we are told to believe in is the same as this, not worth the powder to blow it to hell. Like Government has it all under control. Like our drug policy is helping make us safe as the lying experts claim.
The big lie of our times is that this man is a criminal. Listen to the BS that the cop goes on about heavy duty pot leading to organized crime. Do these bozos never have to say things that make sense or can they just make it up as they go on? Who gives a crap about the pot maybe adding a 2% risk of schizophrenia? There is a friggen 99% chance of smoking tobacco causing cancer! What are these morons trying to say? "If we spend millions of taxpayer dollars we might find something wrong with marijuana" Post the risks on a package of joints and let adults make up their friggen minds as they do for alcohol and tobacco! This is double speak propaganda. Allow the worst drugs a pass and then target the minority for their comparatively safer choices.
Think of the outrageous lies that people send their kids out to die for!
The absolute nonsense the gullible guppies snap up, like twenty goat herders from Afghanistan, with box cutters did this against the mightiest nation on the planet.
The bigger the lie, the more it is accepted.
The reason Mr. Harper wanted so much to have a majority is the same reason the liberals, any political party, crave it: To have a majority in Canadian government means that you control the propaganda machinery of the state. Canadian, all governments really are corporate fronts. That is why we tried to leave it by forming our own society. These corporations are so corrupt they would deny peaceful people their rights and freedoms no matter the pretense of a Bill of Rights. Alex Carey had it correct, there is no democracy only the pretense of it to dupe the masses of gullible people who don't have a clue as to the true condition of slavery they are under.
The worst cuts in Canadian history to social services are set to be implemented under the guise of tax relief. At the end of it you will be paying more in taxes, but receiving less of your money back. Take a look at the wealth Alberta's government could have at its finger tips and how little of it trickles down to its citizens. Not much compared with the wealth of the corporations which are stealing the resource heritage of Albertans.
Will Jack Layton be the opposition leader who might be able to wrangle out a backlash to the Conservative dictatorship over the next 5 years? Will it matter?
Elected Senators indeed, Mr. Harper! Not bloody likely, only voter rejected claptrap fills vacant seats, today. Canadians, like the rest of North American citizens are morons of the extreme sort, too stupid to understand what is a lie and what is in their best interest.
Who even thinks about justice in a world that is this stupid?
Here is something you can do from the comfort of your home to "end the war on drugs"
If you haven't watched this excellent 9/11 truth video featuring the Theologian Dr. David Ray Griffin, 9/11 the Myth and Reality, below, it will be worth it. What makes me refer to it after watching it again, is that one of the solutions he encourages people to get behind besides Revolution and Non violent Revolution is that of making funds available to by the public for helping ordinary people to run for public office. This, he says is a guard against Plutocracy, or rule by the rich. He mentions this in the last five minutes of the video and it rang an immediate bell about Mr. Harper wanting to slash public funding for election campaigns.
You will notice the age of his audience and the way they seem to not want this type of criminal fraud masquerading as their government. The fact is Canadians are largely asleep behind the wheel and addicted to the slave's drugs Alcohol and Tobacco. Although I listened to most of the hockey game tonight, the drunken idiotic clamor of celebration which continued for hours after the win, made me want to revisit the "Legal" drug issue here again tonight. Alcohol makes one stupid and happy being entertained with small things, such as believing that a home team Stanley cup victory is an important thing in one's life, no matter if you have a hard time walking to the store and never learned how to skate. Tobacco is a non beneficial altered state, other than it makes one feel better to have fed the addiction which it demands of its slaves, both are tax treasures for the government with the added benefit that smokers will usually die by the time it comes for the government to dole out its pensions and social benefits. Tobacco the perfect "legal" drug: an instrument which raises huge taxes, keeps the addict busy providing for their addiction with a false measure of relief as soon as they light up and providentially eliminates the user at the end of their productivity cycle.
My GF heard Rob Nicholson, Minister of Justice, speaking tonight in a Youtube and remarked, "he doesn't sound all that bright," thinking that we had a good chance to win with our reasonable argument. It's not about reason, just as it isn't about getting to smoke pot if medical marijuana becomes freely available, IMO. It's really time for a revolution before the mass roundups start, because that is where it is heading in Canada. If these things depended on reason, arguments such as this would hold sway. And the friggen Liberals and NDP don't want to get together and form a viable opposition to the left of these right wing freedom hijackers, Mr. Harper's marching corporate Nazis. All for themselves and their dreams to hijack full control, nothing for the benefit of the people. That is why two out of five voters stay home, nothing in it for them either!
Here is something giving some background to today's world and which is much deeper than hockey. Something not too many Canadians would be interested in because it doesn't go well with beer.
One thing I get from watching this stuff is that government policy is what is causing these shitty side effects in society, human nature remains the same. What you see around you depends on the mindset you have. If you are born with a conservative filter you will see depravity and degeneration in liberalism. If you are born more liberal minded you will see a moving forward to an inevitable growth/mental expansion and danger in conservatism. People don't realize we need a balance of both ends of the spectrum of political thought.
The Drug laws don't work because they are the problem, not human nature. Intolerance based on fear installing regressive laws is the cause of human conflict, not mental expansion. The ever increasing use of substances by humans is a direct result of the policies in effect. It could not be due to any other thing. Humans don't change in their basic nature over a century, only their reactions to the social stimulae change. If they are being enslaved they will seek avenues of escape.
What my Lady and I have been discussing this morning is the legal argument upon which she is fixated. Me not so much (that's why I have her in my life-to add balance.) I see that the forces that be are not about to obey the rule of law. IMO no matter how reasonable an argument, if they don't wish to hear it then it will be dismissed. On the one hand, thankfully we activists are a diverse bunch with different paradigms, mindsets and experience history. I've told her that a lawyer will see this as a legal fight, where as someone like Tim Felger will see it as a street fight with the cops. A self medicating toker who can't function without his Marijuana will see it as a medical MJ issue. What we are missing is the unifying effect of true leadership like the sixties and Martin Luther King, Malcom X, Timothy Leary, John Lennon and others. Governments have made it dangerous and socially isolating for truly talented leaders who are prosperous in their own right due to business savvy and talents, to stand up and be counted. We have no leadership who can can command thousands out onto the streets to tell them "You fuck with our leaders, we will disrupt your friggen day." The medicating effects of these substances and the fact that these drugs are so widely available has cut the legs off the anger which needs to come to the fore. How dare these assholes in Government take away our freedom to peacefully do as we wish, like any tobacco smoker, wine drinker! They do this while at the same time creating a pariah of organized crime as another entity of prey upon our community. All due to the bullshit propaganda of fear of drug use campaign, just like the fear of terrorist BS. All because perverted idiots who claim to know what is best for others based on small minded linear thinking are in power putting forth their fear based agenda, social policies to cure society from its own human nature. The Neo-cons used their own CIA propaganda as a basis to formulate cold war policy, not the facts about Russia. It is the same with drug policy. The facts are ignored and self initiated fears stand in for reason. This lie is then spread far and wide with government machinery until no judges, lawyers, teachers, are left to promote the truth and rely on rational thinking. How does a reasonable argument based on logic, on truth, get through this armor of unreason? My GF would say "not easily," and I love her for this dogged tenacity.
When we get "mad as hell" and disrupt the complacent lives of the sheep, showing up in the streets by the thousands we will succeed. The rag tag fifty to a couple of hundred or so supporters who showed up on behalf of Marc Emery, although marginally better than the twenty or so faithful (I appreciate them very much) that showed up in court on my behalf aren't going to cut it in the grand scheme of things. We need tens of thousands to disrupt traffic on these issues so that the armed goons who are all about assaulting people at the G8 get the drift we want our friggen rights, too! How much do we want them? Bad enough to get off the couch and leave the bong behind for a day! This is the same issue, at the core, that people in the middle east are risking their lives for. Freedom from the tyranny of unreasonable government. How dare Mr. Harper tells us what we can peacefully enjoy in our diets by saying "drugs are bad?" How dare Rob Nicholson misuse to CDSA as an arbitrary instrument of oppression where it was designed to control and regulate all drugs and substances for public safety purposes, not to make criminals out of a certain minority of people?
It always amazes me that it is a small group of neo cons in the Reagan administration, or a even a single guy like Anslinger, Harper, who ends up in very powerful positions skillfully manipulating their way by coopting the state propaganda machinery for their own purposes. Proroguing parliament, contempt of parliament denying democratic rules of government and the bozos seem to think that these are brilliant tactics, rather than the imminent signs of dictatorship.
As I walk around Surrey I see the real evidence of failure everywhere I look. People ravaged by hard drug and alcohol use are numerous. The malls are full of zombies bereft of humor looking for something they can't seem to find. You can see this everywhere in Canada as well as the world. Has no one in government stopped to asses their policies and where they are leading society? Do we only come out in happy drunken revery for sporting events and the rest of the time we slink around under a crap consumerism marketer's spell? I can see why people who have been to jail more than once don't seem to fear it. Too bad they settle for such a small valueless trade-off to access their return holidays. I see tattoos on their arms claiming to want wealth or they will have death. In my opinion they settle for neither.
I suppose that the model of materialism driven by corporations via an addiction to consumerism is not very rewarding in itself. People must feel cheated by the so called rewards of this society to turn to substance abuse in the numbers they are. There must be something in the equation that isn't adding up as per claims made. Also the model of criminal sanction, harsh as it may be, doesn't seem to control the problem. It appears that the criminal prohibition of some drugs replacing control and regulation is what is actually making a lucrative enterprise out of drug distribution, especially the most addictive/harmful substances. While building up the police state response to match the increasing violence of powerful organized crime the problem gets continually worse.
By classifying such drugs as MDMA as being extremely harmful contrary to the evidence it makes their profit margin much more rewarding as the demand increases with publicity.Do you not see the increase in the trade happening right before your eyes? Do the Christian /religious right wingers only want increased punishment at the expense of an ever increasing more violent trade in these substances as the outcome? Does only their moral stand matter, not the proliferation of drug abuse to an ever younger market? Once the young start using these substances, no matter how safe compared to alcohol or tobacco they are, they will have learned to choose substance abuse rather than real life. They do that in respect to alcohol and tobacco today, and in the dangerous numbers that they access Ecstasy, Marijuana, and even crack or crystal meth. One of the reasons youth start smoking tobacco and drinking alcohol before they are of legal age is because the are classed as "legal" drugs and therefor seem to be more acceptable in society's eyes to youth. To actually tackle the major problems we face in relation to substance abuse we must make a dramatic change in our approach to the problem. We must understand that this is a mental health not a moral/criminal problem.
The gateway drug abuse problem is our misunderstanding of why people are reaching out to access altered states in the first place. For adults to drink alcohol and watch a hockey game is an adult right as it should be to walk through the park on LSD. Neither activity differs substantially in the context of normal behavior unless either substance is misused and others are placed at risk. Who will think of obeying a law when either substance is within reach and the choice depends on what altered state one wishes to enjoy. The choice involving LSD will likely bring about a deeper introspection and spiritual connection from which personal growth and mental expansion might occur. The same goes for Marijuana compared to alcohol or tobacco. The fact is no amount of criminal interdiction will eradicate the human desire to achieve these altered states and that has been proven over millennium of drug use by every society of humans that has ever existed. The only interdiction that has proven to work is that treatment of the social context in which substance use is respectfully considered and given its rightful space in the lexicon of human activity. When the use of such substances as LSD and MDMA is elevated to a spiritual learning development, then we will see people who seek to learn accessing it. The party goers will dread the intensity and supercharged experience, while people who wish to get a grip on their inner selves, their propensity to addictions of all kinds, including materialism can safely without being classed criminals expand their understanding. Certainly these psychedelic substances which have the power to raise awareness can lead to a resurgence of spirituality to ward off the empty effects of consumerism for those who seek them out. There is nothing to fear here, rather the reintroduction of safe respectfully accessing these altered states could actually begin to fill the empty pews in churches again with true seekers of the almighty rather than withered closed minded self righteous bigots who always seem to think that it is their duty, not God's role, to judge their fellow man.
Had a great visit with a councilor/advocate whom I can relate with. He is an old warrior in a state of peaceful growth who has been in recovery for over a quarter of a century and in this field for about 15 yrs. What endeared him to me was has sophisticated Zen-like views on life and the fact that he has about 300 acid trips under his belt. What we talked about was the fractional effects of addictions on an individual and how to move on we must rebuild, reconstitute ourselves, not necessarily in a new way, giving up old goals, but on a revamped personal foundation. A continuous growth/exploratory mission should I accept it. He had great insights with examples from his life and I felt close to him in my understanding of life. Plus he had some practical help with referrals to job oriented and life skills advocacy. We spent two hours in a wide ranging discussion and I did catch some glimpses of hope. He saw corporations as an expression of a human trait, which I found interesting, as I see government/justice as an expression of human genetics. I find his grasp of human addictions very interesting and feel that he has something to teach me that I need to learn to move forward on more that the legal harm understanding. He doesn't seem to be a phony. There appears to be a treasure trove of understanding and perhaps real help for me in his counseling. What we also agree on is that addictions are not a moral choice, therefor criminal law would have nothing to do with solving addiction problems. This understanding seems to be the pervasive majority viewpoint of today's mental health professionals.
As a species, humans are social animals in the process of evolving consciousness. Social animals unconsciously adopt social norms by means of imitation of role models. This ensures social coherence based on consensus – copy others and you’ll fit in. Likewise interacting human individuals may unconsciously imitate each other’s body language, ‘mirroring’, as means of social coherence. Unconscious consensus norms may be irrational, unconnected to objective evidence and reasoning, and may be unfair, applied selectively to the powerless but not to the powerful, as in scapegoating. Social animals are ruled by the powerful, based on survival of the fittest and self-interest (e.g. selfish genes).
Unlike animals, humans have the ability to make conscious decisions based on objective rationality (the objective assessment of all relevant factors and how they are linked logically by cause and effect) and subjective fairness, (the subjective balancing of value judgments since a decision or action may be good for one group but bad for another). Humans can then establish conscious rules or laws that define how their social group will operate, the limits to social behaviour. Conscious laws can be far more efficient than social norms because they can adapt to our changing society far quicker than unconscious social norms. Human societies are evolving from being based on the rule of the powerful majority, determined by social norms, towards being based on the rule of conscious law, determined by rationality and fairness.
Given their incomplete evolution of consciousness, humans find their decision making inevitably influenced by both unconscious social norms and conscious social laws – ‘if everyone drives above the speed limit, so will I’. The design of laws may be irrational and unfair if they are overly influenced by unconscious social norms; alternatively laws consciously designed to be rational and fair may be interpreted and applied irrationally and unfairly.
The relevance for drug regulation is this: the discrimination between consumers & traders of legally-available drugs and consumers & traders of 'controlled' drugs is based on unconscious social norms and the rule of the powerful majority whereas the law itself, the Misuse of Drugs Act, is consciously intended to be evidence-based, rational and fair. So our fundamental claim is that the law is not implemented in accordance with the law but in accordance with social norms that favour the majority at the expense of minorities.
The relevance for drug regulation is this:
Through the Misuse of Drugs Act Parliament has given Government the legal power to restrict individual rights for the sole legal purpose of reducing harm to society from drug consumption.
There is no indication in the MDA text that Government should exercise their legal power unequally between drugs used by the majority of voters and drugs used by minorities. Government appears biased, using its legal power for a political purpose (gaining the support of the majority of voters) rather than the legal purpose (reducing drug harm).
"The war on drugs has failed to cut drug usage, but has filled our jails, cost millions in tax payer dollars, fuelled organized crime and caused thousands of deaths. We need a new approach, one that takes the power out of the hands of organized crime and treats people with addiction problems like patients, not criminals,” said Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin Group and cofounder of The Elders, United Kingdom. “The good news is new approaches focused on regulation and decriminalization have worked. We need our leaders, including business people, looking at alternative, fact based approaches. We need more humane and effective ways to reduce the harm caused by drugs. The one thing we cannot afford to do is to go on pretending the “war on drugs” is working."
Yet in Canada there is no hope as long as the Harper dictatorship implements the America drug war in compliance with its Washington masters. Not any concerns for Justice, or the harm being perpetrated on its own communities, or the safety of individual Canadians, guides our government. Only jingoistic "drugs are bad" statements are offered Mr. Harper, as if propaganda were relevant in this vital issue. The fact is his party only gained 2% in the polls in the last election while a whopping 60% voted for something different from the crap we are being dealt by the former major parties. Idiots are in power goose stepping to right wing ideology already on the wane in the USA, let alone the world. Tough on crime bill slated to be passed in September will help put more violent crime on the streets of Canada.
Unlike the above photo of me during my activism, when I thought I was doing something for the good of my community, this is the way I feel today! Why shouldn't I be honest? What is the point of writing anything that is not honest? Only a passion to express my true feelings (wrong as they may be) ever drives me to write anything.
Tomorrow I have a meeting with a councilor and a group, perhaps that will help drive away the blues somewhat! Maybe in writing and blogging these feelings, those who torture others because they can using unjust laws, might put a face on their self righteous pleasure. I am looking for neither sympathy, or, encouragements to "jump." I am putting into words how I feel, as I always have. Baring my soul. I am who I am, yours to maul with judgmental delight, or commiserate with, incorporate as a part of yourselves: a universal human with faults and strengths, such as yourselves, just trying hard to get up from a bad fall.
Today I am totally annihilated by the Canadian CDSA, a policy of harming people who would choose to exercise their natural rights to ingest what they will, and access the altered state of thought that they enjoy, peacefully. When I was helping others access their freedom of thought, no one other than a bitch who didn't like my dog ever complained over what I did. I actually tried to do this in a store setting last year so that it would be like any other business. The neighboring business trumped up a complaint that the odor bothered him, because the law encouraged it as a tool of oppression to use against a peaceful neighbor. The hate encouraged by the government for one citizen by another is unbelievable. How could such a society be a happy place to live and let live?
From Halperngate II:
"Many thousands of people are incarcerated because of individuals like Halpern. Halpern is the “poster boy” for most American rats/snitches/informants/cooperating witnesses, and he is now a member of the majority, the mundane, the ordinary."
Whatever the outcome of this idiocy, I don't feel like trading off my intellectual and personal liberty as a sacrifice of compliance to this law, this injustice, any longer. I have formulated a scenario which I would think is a likely event. I would think that accessing a DMT trip one more time naturally, would be worth all the phony compliance to tyranny that is demanded of me. The personal outcome for me is bleak to the extreme and I wish for a conclusion.
Some people would say this is a coward's way out. Maybe so for some people. Today I am perfectly straight, not under any altered state. That is not my choice. The consumption of marijuana and other substances made me happy and able to cope with the vagaries of life which is the right of everyone. I used to wake up happy to enjoy my little world without hurting anyone else. I made a living providing accessibility to others who enjoyed the peaceful use of such substances and was independent financially, giving fair deals. I made sure no children were able to access these substances. I was working to redistribute the excess wealth back into the community. Now that veil of happiness has been cast aside, stomped to pieces by VPD storm troopers, and replaced with state sponsored terrorism applied on an unequal basis (compared to other substances such as more dangerous Tobacco and Alcohol) to myself, as it is to others.
The lies and misdirection a perverse government can put up using the wealth of a nation are insurmountable when they can use an unjust interpretation of a law, ostensibly created for public safety, to implement tyranny curbing peaceful human freedom at the direct expense of public safety. A state in which the police publicly cooperate with organized crime to carry out an execution is not a place where I want to live. A Government that perpetrates organized hate crimes without holding itself accountable to further anti drug propaganda, is not something I wish to be part of.
Someone said that I all I should have done is hold out in jail as Chief Justice Bud the Oracle until they Justice system accepted the fact that it had no jurisdiction over me. That is a great theory, but in my case it was not practical. My free life was very precious to me and I would have become as despondent as I am today, always knowing that everything I ever cherished, including my Wolf was lost forever. Jailed and never having hope for an ending because these goons with guns could do anything they want.
The cops took my camera again , as well as both of my hats, even the one I had on my puppet. No peaceful humorous street theater for the VPD. They would rather order a hit with the Hells Angels, than work with a peaceful activist. They took even the access to my mother's telephone number from me. I will never be able to reach her again. All my father's predictions about how useless and evil I would become since the age of four have turned out to be true according to him. Canada has made me into a dangerous criminal for wanting community safety, and equal rights to those of drinkers and tobacco smokers. My choices for helping to mitigate my painful misdeeds concerning the ones I have loved and hurt are not acceptable to the Justice Minister. According to Rob Nicholson my brand of self medication is not legal or acceptable, but to become drunk as many do who can't handle their own interpretation of life, would be preferable.
I have been wondering what it would feel like to fly again. A great surge of DMT distorted adrenaline as a precursor to the next inevitable stage in life, rebirth. I can't see a way back to my happy life from here, only further oppression. Therefor, while I am able to access this fork in the road of life I think I might.
I truly believe that a life without liberty is not worth living. The fact is that Canada feels like Guantanamo Bay to me. I am sure that a few in that hell hole would trade off their existence for a taste of the release of a final DMT trip, if they could. Such idiocy in this world, perpetrated by "democratic" governments! I hope that the one person in my life close to me now can find a way to forgive my selfish solution. I don't have the strength of Casey William Hardison. If anything put yourself in his position and rise up to help him, please. I really do not like being a burden to anyone and have zero hope in finding employment with a criminal record at my age, other than what I was doing. This is the part of the crime growth curve that the Harper government is counting on to fill the new prisons it is building. I don't wish to be a low level part of the prison industry while the rich powerful people, lawyers get richer, and the wealthy never face justice the same way others do. Let me take a walk so that hopefully I'll find courage. It costs nothing to walk. I am sure the person who has my Wolf now will continue to love him and take care of him, thanks.
Unlike others who use activism as a cover for drug dealing, I won't take that route. Go your own way and do your own things, but I am personally going to find a solution for myself that does not pretend to anything other than my personal needs and goals. Everyone else can say what they will about me and my activism, but the bottom line is I sincerely tried to achieve something more than just personal rewards and glory. Yeah, I did it wrong and failed but at least I tried. And my life was fun to live. Hopefully I will see those moments of euphoria one last time.
PS: The most significant thing that helped me put the preamble up and not seek to carry out my quest for "courage" is that the telephone number of my mother was found a few minutes ago. I had planned to just leave this thing unpublished for someone else to find and put up.
It also makes me furious that this inhumane system took Ashley Smith this way: a teenager who was given a life sentence for throwing apples at a postman.
Does anyone have employment of any kind out there for me? A large part of my depression is that I have to trouble someone I love to put up with me and support me. That is very hard for me to take. I was always proud of being self supporting.
One thing that I envy Casey William Hardison for is his close relationship with his father. My father withheld his love for me, and I have done the same with my children. It is very difficult for me to actually love anyone deeply, including myself. Self medication is a part of normal human behavior and not up to the control of others who believe they know better. As long as people don't harm others. Self awareness is the key. The facts of Casey's life intrigue me his father was member of AA and well loved. Casey's life is very interesting as well. He seems to be a very intelligent, insightful and strong person. People like this should be an inspiration to society, not jailed. Do we not all have strengths and weaknesses that we can learn from? What kind of Government would harm people such as this? Thousands upon thousands of harmless people who seek to exercise their expanded mental machinery peacefully are sacrificed on the alter of right wing idiocy in so called democratic, free countries. And for what? So that organized crime can flourish and cops strut around powerfully violent, controlling people's diets in reaction to violent criminals the government has created with the law. All the while claiming this law is for noble purposes reducing harm to society, while leaving untouched the users of the most harmful substances. It makes not one shred of sense!
The fact that a religious organization got intervention status in court on the insight safe injection trial greatly disturbs me. These would have the court close its eyes to the real world, deny that rampant injection drug use is here to stay caused by denial in the first place and condemn thousands to death to float their, and, the government's lie. These are the same daft idiots who claimed the world would fall apart should gay marriages be legalized. These are spawn of the same morons who started the prohibition movements almost one and one half centuries ago, installing a mindset of ignorance and denying human rights, who help organized crime to flourish. And still these friggen idiots are at it, trying to interfere with the rights of others. May they go to their gods quickly and leave the rest of the world in peace.
You will notice in the above letters from people jailed for the production of LSD and other Etheogens that this is a war against alternative spiritual practices (Other than Christian corporate power) The Corporate thugs have jailed or intimidated those who might create magical elixirs which lead to a mental awakening, so that humanity might remain enslaved to the myopia of common marketed experience. People don't see that and are brainwashed into fearful imaginings at the mention of LSD, without the least bit of critical, self initiated, research into the matter needed to free themselves of any propaganda. It is not LSD which has landed us into this situation, but the law.
As I truly believe unless humanity gets off this Christian inspired judgmental consumerism sown with war against nature, and each other, we will perish as a species.
It is ever so important, and I plead as I am certain other chemist prisoners of the war on drugs do, that we must remember what these molecules have shown us. In the words of a dear, dear friend, they have shown me “the land without evil.”
Casey William Hardison Page 55
Your words have given me hope Casey!
We must do everything in our power to carry the light, the lamp, the vision forward toward this Age of Entheogens. Fiat lux, fiat amor, fiat pax!
The frustration of being shunned by those who are supposed to be there to protect you is only slightly less painful than being misunderstood and discredited by your fellows. People have been fed endless reams of propaganda about the use of substances and drug laws, over generations, to the point that this subject has developed into something untouchable. Although lawyers claim to be looking out for your interests they are cowed by their own misunderstandings that the way things are and have been is how they will always be. The insecurity of so called legal experts to seek justice where few brave souls have trodden is the same human enigma which hinders any kind of change. Human rights from racial, religious equality, women's rights especially abortions, gay rights to very recently gay marriage have all been a long time coming. One thing in common was that even those whose best interest lay in change of their own situation had a vast majority of disbelievers and detractors within their ranks until the crucial events were close on the horizon. Even today's leading edge drug activists use the language of prohibition and continue to unthinkingly entrench it by supporting "medical" marijuana initiatives. How dare people think that only doctors can prescribe a plant which has been in common usage for at least three millennium without causing a problem. That is the same status as alcohol had during prohibition: only on a doctor's prescription. This led to a situation where the privileged who had the ability to afford good health care could access their drug of choice. Control for the sake of monopoly has caused great havoc in our communities. Thought control has stripped freedom from a thinking man's psyche and caused government tyranny to pervade so called free societies at the expense of law and order.
Without going into the legal arguments involved in prohibition, either for or against, the whole idea that someone should presume to be able to make you a criminal for something you might ingest, if you harm no one, seems absolutely absurd. If you say that this is for the good of society at large, at least public health, then what excuse would you have not to class alcohol and tobacco in the same league? This is not rational thinking and yet people are harmed directly and indirectly by a law that makes no sense. Nowhere in the prohibitions act does it mandate making substances illegal. This a misinterpretation of the act by the minister. The act itself mandates only control and regulation. In the courtroom the crown prosecutor giggled and rambled on about how my drug dealing disturbed the neighbors surrounding me. Not one person complained to management, yet she gets to spin lies on a presumption that because the law she is enforcing deems my behavior criminal, what I do must be offensive to my neighbors. The truth of it is that the disturbances and wife beatings caused by alcohol had police to the building on almost a daily basis, not my drug dealing.
Humans are encouraged to consume, or participate in, many dangerous activities that have a greater potential to harm others, which at first glance seem innocuous or even crucial to our daily existence. Take the marketing of vehicles and government promotion of oil production, as consumer driven addictions and you will see how private enterprise has developed our reliance on automobiles to the point where we can not perceive of a life without them. Roads and infrastructure are created with tax dollars, all so that individuals can be free to travel anywhere at anytime. The costs of pollution are leading to a global crisis of unsolvable proportions which threaten all of mankind. Health problems are a side effect of lack of exercise and exposure to the elements, as well as noxious gases. Tens of thousands of people are killed directly each year by the careless misuse of automobiles, and yet no one is criminalized for making a mistake, unless impaired, in their normal careless use. There is no reason, except personal addiction to automobiles, why good public transport systems couldn't do better and be much safer at moving the masses around. Cars are a consumer product which people become addicted to, more so than many psychedelic substances, and are a lot more dangerous to humanity, by a huge factor, than all illegal drugs combined. It seems that all is allowable as long as prodigious amounts of resources and human endeavor serve corporations in their unimpeded efforts to enslave us to their products. Continuous growth is encouraged to raise more slaves who can easily be manipulated by marketing into supporting/buying/believing anything. Enlightenment has become the antithesis of consumerism, justice and good government.
The largest fraud I have seen recently was the 911 scam. Those buildings could not have come down by two aircraft. That feat is impossible, seen especially evident in the free fall collapse of building seven. Still, the "threat" of global terrorism is used to front for unprovoked oil wars. Not one shred of evidence has ever linked Osama Bin Laden to 911 in a court of law, only allegations by governments bound on attacking other nations on trumped up lies. Supposedly he could not have been taken to stand trial and his body had to have been dumped at sea. These are the kind of state assassinations/murders which were frowned upon by people who claimed to live under the rule of law in civilized societies only a few decades ago. Mass murderers/war criminals were put on trial in earlier times so that evidence of their crimes could be brought forth to convict them in a courtroom. Today people like George W Bush can start a war based on lies and false unproven allegations and millions of morons will believe every last detail of those lies because they heard their leaders lie to them on TV. They will be incensed to hate anyone without a shred of proof.
Ten minutes after I saw the 911 scam unfold on the campground office TV, I returned to my RV deciding to stay put for another day. While sitting outside peacefully smoking a joint, my neighbor, an American in a forty foot motor home frowned on me for smoking the herb as he lit up a cigarette and proclaimed "it was that bastard Osama Bin Laden who was behind it." Wow, he had it all figured out from the get go. Someone did a great job setting up this bearded fanatic right from before it happened, in my view. It couldn't have had anything to do with this American's, all Americans', addiction to the consumption of gasoline. And holy crap my kind had caused a major share of today's problems, too: friggen dope smoking hippies. The utter stupidity and hatefulness of people impresses me, today. How dare someone smoke something other than tobacco or experience an altered state other than drunkenness.
This lying criminal, Richard Nixon, brought on the surge in the war on drugs and ruined the world, torturing millions of harmless people and increasing the power of violent criminal organizations. At that time, in the sixties and seventies, we were concerned about continued proliferation of warfare, environmental issues, nuclear dangers in arms proliferation and power plants. Today our concerns are being realized and the morons march on, gullible as ever. Barely do you hear of the latest disaster in Japan anymore, although its effects will be with us for tens of thousands of years. No one mentions that this disaster was totally preventable by placing the generators for the emergency cooling system, higher up near the roofs of the buildings. These plants were designed by people with engineering degrees who could not think outside the box, thinking ahead to a situation which could easily occur in an area prone to earthquakes and resulting Tsunamis. They copied the plans from plants existing in stable areas and did not think creatively enough, yet were given honors in University and laughed at people who did LSD and had inventive creative insights. Millions of people will suffer because these dummies graduated and were given jobs.
Just as today idiots wanting to spend more time in Afghanistan to avenge the deaths of those who have fallen. The legitimate government in power at the time of 911 said to coalition allies "show us the proof that Al Queada and Bin Laden had anything to do with the 911 act and we will turn him over." Canada belongs to the evil axis today and perpetrates crimes against humanity at the bidding of its master, implementing American drug policy on its people. Thousands of people die each decade and tens of thousands are incarcerated as direct and indirect victims, most of whom have never hurt anyone else due directly to their drug use. This paradigm is due to morons who hold the reigns of power and serve their own interests, like the self serving parliamentarians trying to appear tough on crime, who are on a highly political campaign to prohibit Salvia because they saw Miley Cirus do a hit on Youtube. Salvia is a common ornamental found in many flower beds. Oh boy, another lucrative product for criminal enterprise, eh! What a ship of fools! Has anyone seen a Youtube video of drunken teenagers? This of course is not political expedient to prohibit, because even judges and the Prime Minister swill martinis and we all know that prohibition of this substance didn't work, caused crime, violence and proliferation to ever younger consumers. It's all in the numbers of stupid people one has to persuade. There is a huge number of morons willing to believe what these parliamentarian "experts" tell them, because long ago they have left off thinking critically and eagerly consume whatever bullshit they are told to. Like the Vancouver Sun, the Courier, writing that there was a security incident that endangered the vice president's life at the Olympics because a security guard bought pot off me from my store on Broadway, or that the neighboring business could smell pot through the wall to the extent it made him noxious. What passes for good evidence, realistic reporting, truth, today, is pure crap.
Not once in all the so called in depth reporting on any channels that I have watched on TV in the remand center, have I EVER HEARD ANYONE MENTION THE FACT that the nuclear disaster could have been entirely avoided if the emergency generators to power the cooling systems had been placed higher up on earthquake proof, Tsunami untouchable platforms. Yet these morons of writing for local newspapers could attribute a security breach at last year's Olympics, because a security guard bought pot from me. I guess one needs the mentally expanded hardware achieved from the use of psychedelic substances to see the obvious on the first day the of disaster in Japan. If you google the cause of the nuclear disaster you will not find anything there but the Tsunami listed as the cause of the nuclear disaster. These friggen nuclear plants were supposed to have been able to withstand a Tsunami and would have, if there were electricity to power the emergency cooling systems.
Just as these "trained" experts couldn't see the obvious, today's legal experts and parliamentarians can't see the idiocy of their drug laws. The havoc and deaths which have resulted from this legal myopia will likely exceed that of the Japanese nuclear disaster, worldwide. Both are man made mistakes in trying to react to predictable, seemingly insurmountable forces of nature: earthquakes and the desire of humans to be free to peacefully do what they enjoy doing. Here is a real expert's Blog, Prof. David Nutt. In his May 9th article Curiouser and curiouser: Could ecstasy actually heal brains as well as minds? Professor Nutt puts a lie to the crown prosecutor's assumption that I am harming people by selling MDMA. Lies stand in for evidence in any courtroom where a drug case is decided. It is no one's business what substances someone uses safely, including alcohol.
However you might feel that as all drugs may be harmful then ecstasy could surely only be harmful also? Well maybe not. We should remember that MDMA was developed as a therapeutic tool for psychotherapy and its successful role here was severely curtailed when the drug was made illegal. Thirty years on, MDMA has only recently been reintroduced into clinical trials with great success in one study in resistant PTSD [Mithoefer et al 2010].
But what about the rats – does it still cause brain damage there? A new paper shows an intriguing effect and one, which many will find paradoxical: MDMA improved recovery from brain injury rather than worsening it [Edut et al 2011]. This paper has not apparently received any media attention so far which I why I felt compelled to do what I could to make it more widely known.
In my own life I could use a little bit of help to counter the severe depression that the application of moronic drug laws has put me in. The only thing legally available to me without a prescription, alcohol, is dangerous and unappealing to me. But because idiocy rules and has permeated itself into legal standing, we must continue to suffer. All so that morons who have been elected/advanced into positions of power can harm society to enhance their political, judicial and legal careers by imposing their moral perceptions and ignoring the facts. Drug use when the user does it responsibly is no one else's business, just as is the use of garlic, gasoline, tobacco, alcohol.
Here are some thoughts of a friend with whom I agree:
They have tried to make us think drugs are illegal when they cannot be because it is persons who are regulated under the law and people have equality rights under neutral law. Drugs have no equality rights so they tried to make us think drugs not drug users. They took a&t(Alcohol and tobacco) & excused the users and abusers of it from the operation of the law as a policy because propaganda errors of law made them think drugs are illegal that all use is misuse and also they wanted to protect the market for a&t and not associate it with drugs that have negative cultural connotations but in fact the law is written to regulate and must distinguish between persons causing harm through misuse and persons concerned with peaceful use. It is not use itself that is a crime according to the Act. The Act is written to control problematic drug users not to make all use misuse because that can't be it erases people's equality rights to misconstruct, maladminiser and then misapply the law in that way.
The judge in Malmo thought that the CDSA concerns illegal drugs he could not see past the propaganda to see that it is a regulatory apparatus that drugs cannot be illegal that the law must distinguish between use and misuse and that it is perfectly fine to put a&t in and it would make no difference to any of the users.
The noble purpose to protect users from harmful substances is fine but it is being misused to target certain users of harmful drugs while exempting a particular market thereby applying the law in an arbitrary way especially with harm from a&t sixty times greater they are failing to protect people from the most harmful drugs while imprisoning other users of less harmful drugs.
The demand is that the Act be construed and applied in a neutral manner that does not violate common law and human rights. MiSS Users of the most harmful drugs A&T must ought to be regulated under the Act, but are not due to the misconstruction that is 'legal drugs' and proper assessment based on evidence based reasoning be used to determine where exemptions and regulations are appropriate proportional sentencing otherwise the Act as applied is arbitrary and therefore it is void.
I still have no evaluation on legal grounds as to why my request for stay of proceedings was not granted before Judge Rideout. The fact that he was able to dismiss my argument by saying "This is something I might entertain over Martinis with friends" has no valid legal basis for denying my request for a stay of proceedings. And just because some legal references like Judge Jackson's were 60 years old, does not invalidate them. It may actually give them more credence, because what we see in today's judicial remarks is a definite confusion in legal thought, brought about most likely by years of propaganda acceptance. Here was my presentation in court.
Your honor, I believe that my human rights are being violated by this process that seeks to abuse the processes of this honourable court by asking it to apply an unconscionable law to me, and I seek the protection of this court from what is both an abuse of process under common law, and a violation of my human rights. I am an amateur and this is my attempt to explain these two separate arguments.
There are two inequalities of treatment that apply to me should these proceedings not be stayed:
1) There is an unequal application of the Act as applied to persons concerned with the equally harmful drugs (alcohol and tobacco) without a rational and objective basis.
2) There is a failure to treat unlike cases differently, that is, the failure to regulate persons concerned in peaceful activities (re controlled drugs) differently from persons causing harm.
Those inequalities of treatment constitute unequal deprivation of liberty at common law and are discriminatory toward me under the Charter rights law entailed in Section 15, your honor, which grants equality before the law. I assert that this argument does not enter the political arena, but is squarely a legal argument that reveals that the decision makers have made errors of law, and that such errors fatally undermine the legitimacy of whatever policy ensues.
The common law argument includes a failure to use S 55 and 60 equally, proportionally, and rationally to achieve it’s objective of protecting the public against the scourge of the misuse of any harmful drug. Given that the jurisdictional facts are now made out regarding the profound harmfulness of tobacco and alcohol misuse upon society, there can be no justification for having a ‘separate but equal’ form of administration governing problematic drug users. Under such circumstances it is submitted that the government are obliged to act to give effect to their powers and to do so fully cognizant of the law that empowers them to do so.
The human rights law under the Charter includes S 2 (b) which upholds my freedom of thought, your honor.
Your honor, my position is that I refer to myself as an activist. I know that may sound arrogant to self-ascribe myself as an activist but I have felt compelled to create change in my community for the better based on what many experts and authorities think is a problem and what I also perceive and experience in my daily life, your honor.
I assert that the government has abused, and continues to abuse their powers in the administration of the Act, and that also the law as applied is inconsistent with my human rights that are protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I refer also to my lawful excuse. I base my lawful excuse on my belief that it is unconscionable to uphold an unconscionable law that is arbitrary and would deny my being. I have attempted to be lawful in my excuse.
I am sure that your honor will perform the highest duty of scrutiny to my argument.
The most important thing, your honor, is that I believe the Act under which I was charged is most unfair in the hands of government. Government have abandoned jurisdiction over the vast majority of drug misuse through an error of law that describes abusers of alcohol and tobacco as being concerned with ‘legal drugs‘. The Act regulates human action, not drug action and is expectant that any harmful drug be scheduled, and makes provision for regulations to be made to supervise the supply of such drugs in a responsible manner, see section 55 of the Act. The error of law that believes that the Act can only be used for outright prohibition results in another inequality of treatment that is treating peaceful and responsible users of some drugs in the same way as abusers and irresponsible users. This error perhaps explains why government feel an electoral pressure not to schedule alcohol or tobacco, they imagine, incorrectly that such status equates to prohibition. This is incorrect, the Act can act as an evaluative instrument to make sensible differentiation between circumstances that fairly address the mischief that the Act seeks to ameliorate, and those peaceful ones where it does not seek to interfere into personal liberty.
The most important thing, your honor, is to construe the neutral Act and scrutinize whether the exclusion of the users of the most harmful drugs to society from the Act is consistent with the purposes of the Act. In other words, your honor, there is authority to suggest that the government must act to ensure that the Schedules and regulations at the core of the operation of the Act are subject to legal and fair administration, and it is my understanding that this is an ongoing duty.
Your honor, there are as I have stated, two inequalities of treatment that are inherent in the administration of the Act that proceed these proceedings.
1) Your honor, the Act as applied is discriminatory toward me. The Act fails to treat my case like those of others in society who have similar behavior. There is an unequal application of the Act as it is applied to people who use the Scheduled drugs in my indictment, and the equally harmful drugs, that is alcohol and tobacco, without a rational and objective basis.
2) There is a failure to treat unlike cases differently, viz the failure to regulate persons concerned in peaceful activities (re controlled drugs) differently from persons causing harm.
These inequalities of treatment constitute unequal deprivation of liberty at common law and are discriminatory toward me under my Charter rights entailed in S. 15 which is equality before the law, your honor.
The Charter right includes S 2 (b) which upholds my freedom of thought.
Your honor, my position is that I refer to myself as an activist. I know that may sound arrogant to self-ascribe myself as an activist but I have felt compelled to bring attention to this issue based on what many experts and authorities think is a problem and what I also perceive and experience in my daily life.
I believe that I have established the basis of an argument that the government has abused their powers in the administration of the Act, and that also the law is inconsistent with my human rights that are protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I refer also to my lawful excuse. I am an amateur in these courts your honor and I regret that the way that I have expressed my lawful excuse has not been acceptable to these courts. However, I base my lawful excuse on my belief that it is unconscionable to uphold an unconscionable law that is arbitrary and would deny my being.
I am sure that your honor will perform the highest scrutiny to my argument.
The most important thing, your honor, is that I believe the Act under which I was charged is most unfair. The Act results in the two inequalities of treatment of which I have outlined so far and it also violates my freedom of thought.
Given that the jurisdictional facts are made out regarding the harmfulness of these substances, the government is duty bound to Schedule them accordingly in order to give effect to the objects and purpose of the Act.
It is my understanding your honor that the Act as applied is arbitrary.The Act discriminates against me. Given that the facts are made out regarding the harmfulness of these substances the government is duty bound to Schedule them into the Act accordingly in order to give effect to the objects and the purpose of the Act.
I consider that the government, your honor, does not have the legal right to arbitrarily pick and choose which harmful drugs should be the subject of the Schedules of the Act. The government must act to ensure that the Schedules and regulations at the core of the operation of the Act are subject to legal and fair administration and this is an ongoing duty.
Alcohol and tobacco are the two most harmful and dangerous drugs if measured by list of causalities. The government chooses to deal with alcohol and tobacco users separately. This means the exclusion of the users of the harmful drugs alcohol and tobacco from the Act as applied is arbitrary. But it is a principle in law that similar situations should receive similar treatment, and so the practice, your honor, of allowing the free-flow of the harmful drug alcohol in society, and even permitting wine-making, while imprisoning and otherwise depriving cannabis users of their property for choosing to use an analogous drug such as cannabis is clearly irrational and discriminatory.
Further, your honor, the Act fails to justifiably discriminate: the regulations for the non-medical use of those drugs excluded by government policy from the Act, that is, alcohol and tobacco, distinguish between reasonably safe, responsible drug use and trade; and unreasonable harmful irresponsible drug use, production and trade.
That is, your honor, regulations for the non-medical use of those drugs included by the Act fail to make this justifiable distinction, instead of applying a blanket prohibition of all property rights of possession, supply, production and export/import.
The Act as applied also fails to justifiably distinguish two distinct forms of unreasonably harmful use, production and trade: a) use or trade unreasonably harmful to the consumer or trader alone, ‘voluntary risks’, and b) use or trade unreasonably harmful to others, that is ‘involuntary risks.’
Voluntary risks do not infringe human rights while involuntary risks do. The Act as applied fails to justifiably discriminate between those in different situations.
I am an amateur your honor. I have had limited resources to cite case law while I have been jailed. I believe that the principles in the law I cite are transferable to our own Canadian law.
I cite the European human rights case of Thlimmenos v. Greece (2000) 31 EHRR 411 para 44: “The right not to be discriminated against in the enjoyment of the rights guaranteed is violated when States without an objective and reasonable justification fail to treat differently persons whose situations are significantly different.”
Further, in the US Supreme Court (Railway Express Agency Inc. v. New York 1949, para 112), Justice Jackson explained why the courts have a duty to prevent abuse of political power by upholding the right to equality before the law.
“There is no more effective practical guarantee against arbitrary and unreasonable government than to require that the principles of law which officials would impose upon a minority must be imposed generally. Conversely, nothing opens the door to arbitrary action so effectively as to allow those officials to pick and choose only a few to whom they will apply legislation and thus to escape the political retribution that might be visited upon them if larger numbers were effected. Courts can take no better measure to assure that laws will be just than to require that laws be equal in operation.”
As a result of this abuse by the executive, your honor, a fair trial is not possible.
There has been a failure to consider making regulations under S 55 (1) (a) of the Act.
It appears, your honor, that the Parliament has neither stated nor fixed any criteria to guide the government’s decision making re drug control and classification under the relevant sections of the Act as applied.
The government, your honor, has fettered the Act as applied to an overly rigid and pre-determined policy of prohibition.
Further, your honor, the government has failed to understand and give effect to the Act’s policy and objectives.
The CDSA is arbitrary as applied. This indictment will lead to an abuse of process; the executive abuse of this power threatens my liberty and is discriminatory toward me according to the human rights law within the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I am seeking the court to confirm the abuse of power and declare that there should be a stay of these proceedings. The crux of this argument is that where the law is applied to a criminal defendant in such a way as to subject that defendant to severe inequality of treatment in terms of common law and human rights law, is the issue justifiable and am I entitled to the court’s protection?
I argue, your honor, that if the court finds abuse under any of the established judicial review headings, ie illegality, irrationality, and unfairness, then:
1) One or both of the inequalities of treatment exist; 2) they have abused the Court’s process and 3) my charges should be stayed.
I further submit to you, my honor, that the CDSA claims a power the CDSA does not possess, to exempt individuals or classes of individuals from the operation of the law by excluding de facto the dangerous or otherwise harmful drugs alcohol and tobacco from the Act’s control.
And:
The CDSA in the minds of the decision maker makes some drugs or substances legal, while making other drugs or substances illegal, when in fact it is people’s behavior that should be regulated with respect to any harmful drugs or substances.
Why has the government not acted in the public interest re alcohol and tobacco?
As I understand it, your honor, case law says the government must act when the law creates an imperative for them to do so. The fact they ignore the majority of drug misuse in this way is ultra vires the law and subjects me to inequality of treatment.
I refer, your honor, to S. 60 of the CDSA:
“The Government in Council may, by order, amend any of the Schedules I to Viii by adding to them or deleting from them any item or portion of an item, where the Governor in Council deems the amendment to be necessary in the public interest.”
I argue:
There is a failure to implement proportionally. There is a failure of reasonableness. There is a failure to make regulations under the powers of S. 55 of the Act. There is a failure to implement fairness. Why is alcohol and tobacco not in the Act? This does not mean prohibitions as Section 55 (1) (a) could create regulations to allow responsible use.
The common law violation includes the failure to use S 55 and 60 equally, proportionally and etc.
I also cite the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms S (2) (b).
Discrimination stands on its own, but it also applies to the ways that the law is utilized, so I argue that:
Governments and mal-administration of the drug law classification and control system through their ultra vires exemption from the law of the vast majority of harmful drug users (drinkers and smokers), and their failure to seek proportionate regulation of persons who use the controlled drugs responsibly (not the legitimate target of the Act) as a different class from those persons who do not (the intended target of the Act), results in an arbitrary and discriminatory differential between those who use alcohol for sacramental purposes, and those that use cannabis for the same ends.
Further:
My right to ‘freedom of thought’ or any person’s right to ‘freedom of thought’ is such an essential liberty that creates the foundation of civil rights, that it is one of the few unqualified rights.
I argue, your honor, that my activities do not impact upon public safety, the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others in the slightest, and even if an argument could be made that they might, they certainly do not impact to anything approaching the degree that the users of alcohol and tobacco do (as the government report submitted states in terms of the harm caused by misuse of these drugs being approximately sixty times greater than that caused by all of the currently controlled drugs combined.)
I do not argue the Act 2 (b) claim in terms of the practices of a formal religion or belief system, but in terms of access to thought, a state of being that is the precursor to all civil liberties, that is intrinsically part of my existence, my consciousness.
The matter of applying anxious scrutiny to the construction of the Act and the conduct of the executive in respect of their legal obligations is a matter par excellence for the courts; this is not a practical claim made within a legal arena; the case here concerns Rule of Law.
I object to the introduction of irrelevant political motives into the administration of law by the executive.
At this juncture I bear the burden on the balance of probabilities of demonstrating a prima facie case that the administration is being carried out contrary to any of the raised common law principles of illegality, irrationality, unfairness and unreasonableness and/or the separate challenge on human rights grounds.
Such common law principle rooted in the doctrine of the equal applicability of laws may give rise to a finding of substantive or procedural defects within the administration of the legislation.
Your honor, I refer now to my Human Rights Claim, in overview:
I cite the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms S 15 (1) - The prohibition against discrimination.
Once again your honor I must explain that I have had limited access to case law because I am jailed. But I have done the best I could with the resources available to me. I believe that the principles are transferable to our own Canadian law.
In Pretty v. United Kingdom (2002) 35 EHRR 1 at 77, the Strasbourg Court said:
“Strong arguments based on the rule of law could be raised against any claim by the executive to exempt individuals or classes of individuals from the operation of the law.”
This is especially so where the exemption is contrary to the legitimate aim and principles for which the legislation was created and intended.
And so, while asserting that the “search for balance”…constitutes the foundation of a “democratic society”, in Chassagnou and Others v. France (1999) 29 EHRR 615 at 112, the Strasbourg Court described the crux of such matters.
“Although individual interests must on occasion be subordinated to those of a group, democracy does not simply mean that the views of a majority must always prevail: a balance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of minorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position.”
More, in Thlimmenos v. Greece (2000) 31 EHRR 411 the Strasbourg Court said:
“The right not to be discriminated against in the enjoyment of the rights guaranteed under the convention is also violated when states without an objective and reasonable justification fail to treat differently persons whose situations are significantly different.”
And:
“It is a principle of fundamental justice that laws should not be arbitrary (R v. Malmo Levine) That is, the state cannot limit an individual’s rights where “it bears no relation to, or is inconsistent with, the objective that lies behind (it)” (Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General.)
Yet, as applied by the Executive, the Act fails to justifiably distinguish the relevant differences between differing use risks and/or outcomes of controlled drugs use, viz responsible versus irresponsible use, ie use versus misuse.
In summary, as applied by successive Governments, the Act discriminates on the grounds of property, drug orientation, legal status, association with a national minority, and political power within the ambits of two or more Convention rights. I have had limited access to read these Convention rights but I believe they are the Canadian equivalent of what is termed in European law to be Article 1 Protocol 1, Articles 8 & 9.
Further, my ‘freedom of thought’ or anyone’s ‘freedom of thought’ is engaged and infringed due to the nature of the property controlled under the Act as applied, and since the freedom of thought is an absolute right, any interference in or limitation upon thought engages it. Government respects the right of consumers of the harmful drugs alcohol and tobacco to ‘alter mental functioning’ but denies this right to consumers of cannabis and other “controlled” drugs despite the evidence that many such drugs are lesser or equally harmful than alcohol and tobacco.
Alternately, if such restrictions on S. 2 vis-Ã -vis controlled drugs are proportionate and in the public interest then Government is failing to protect the public from the equally or more harmful drugs alcohol and tobacco.
This claim is freestanding and conjunct discrimination in on the grounds of property, drug orientation, association with a national minority and legal status.
S. 55 means that the Act as applied does not mandate prohibition but can be used to regulate persons (not drugs really) so there is no reason why peaceful use cannot be respected and alcohol and tobacco included.
These errors of law cause the inequalities of treatment stated above in this text by preventing the Government from giving proper effect to the Act’s policy.
I ask the Court to confirm the abuse and stay the proceedings.
Casey Hardison is currently serving a 20 year sentence in the UK for the manufacture of LSD, DMT and 2-CB. Casey defended himself using complex and innovative human rights arguments and continues to challenge the legality of the administration of the Misuse of Drugs Act:
Please don't forget to give to Casey's cause.
The very solid argument belongs to all, was first developed by Casey William Hardison and the legal foundation in search of Justice for Casey: Drug Equality Alliance
These guys at the "DEA" are true activists. Although I may be a recipient (indirectly) of their generosity mostly in 'SITTING IN' on the discussion format, I am honestly astonished at the level of commitment- let me spell that out- unpaid time and effort, that this organization has given to the cause of our freedom.
Remember this spending of a few bucks on your part could pay off in YOU gaining your freedom! Please find their donate button and spend freely. Here is the new battle cry.... Smoke one gram less per week and send $10 to the cause of this wonderful organization or Free Casey cause! No one OVER there is DIRECTLY concerned with Bud the "silly" Oracle, or, Klaus Kaczor and his gang of "demented" men, it is all about getting their wonderful perception of the law in front of a court anywhere in the western world. You too are welcome to contact them and state your case.That, in today's world, is far from the norm.
Bud Oracle
For Official Election Profile click the photo
Why donate to Bud?
I am still carrying on this battle for sanity. I spend much time on the issues, and I hope to bring this case further than just the sentence hearing on September 2. If I can, I will ask to be heard at the Supreme Court level to get a stay in the proceedings on the much same argument I put before the Provincial court (See the bottom of this post.) To this end I hope to be able to raise airfare for an advocate from the Drug Equality Alliance to stand up and present the argument free of charge. The chances are not all that great, but we are working at the documentation to be heard at the Supreme Court level all by our amateur selves. It is our hope that we might get this argument before the courts somewhere in the world to raise the spirits and chances for freedom for Casey William Hardison who is still serving out his 20 year sentence. I don't know about you, but I can't just sit on my ass and dream about the times I used to get high, when this man and so many others are being tormented in prison for their belief in human rights. There is a strong likelihood that I too may be returned to jail at the time of sentencing but whatever it might be is nothing to the amount of time others are doing for supplying you with some nice psychedelic adventures to practice your freedom.
Podcasts of Bud's best contributions to our society
Posts
