11:00 AZ time, 2:00 pm Eastern Time

I comfort myself by believing that this was a case of fanatics shooting their entire load in one vicious, coordinated attack. I don't think our response will be tempered at all - I just heard Sen. Joe Biden say that we are "at war" right now. Damn right. Britain's Tony Blair said:

"This mass terrorism is the new evil in our world today.

"It is perpetrated by fanatics who are utterly indifferent to the sanctity of life and we, the democracies of this world, are going to have to come together and fight it together and eradicate this evil completely from our world."

I believe that we will have the international support we need to act.

10:10 AZ time, 1:10 pm Eastern Time

This is in reference to the unbelievable and massive attack against New York City and Washington D.C. this morning. I reel.

Pacifist that I normally am, and as much as I want to rip W. over his unilateral actions of late which no doubt gave aid and comfort to our enemies, I say it's time to demand that the Taliban turn over Usama Bin Laden RIGHT NOW or we invade and give the Taliban leadership a taste of "collateral damage." This was the stupidest thing that those idiotic extremists could ever have done, and we sorely need to point that out to them in very ugly terms.

It matters not whether Bin Laden is responsible (although I've heard that he hinted at a U.S. "huge and unprecedented attack" in an email a few weeks ago). These people are the ones with the resources and the rhetoric. This may be unjust, and I may change my mind after I settle down a bit, but I think that these guys have de facto put themselves in our crosshairs, and I say "Fire!"

You assholes over there who are giving good Muslims the world over a terrible name have got to go. This is it, this is enough, and I predict right here that they will see some dark days ahead.

June 17, 2001

I open up today's Sunday edition of The Arizona Republic, and what do I see? The straight dope: In the war on drugs, Amerca's soul is the casualty. This is half of a Viewpoints debate features a pro/con pair of essays on the state of drug interdiction in the U.S. (The response is titled If legalization wins, addicts will lose). I wish only to make three observations. One, these drug pieces are popping up more and more frequently. Two, the piece most critical of the Drug War was featured more prominently, was longer, and was more pointed in its observations. Three, the opposition's response (penned by ONDCP war horse Chuck Blanchard) actually contained the phrase "Drug possesion offense should not result in a jail term,..." Yes, the times they are a changin'. Send the author of the first piece, Doug MacEachern, a nice email :).

An observation: The government insists on demonizing marijuana, the most popular illegal drug in America, as being as dangerous as any and all illegal substances. As the public learns of its benign nature, and the lies that have been imposed on us, so goes public opinion regarding their demonization of other drugs. The Drug War folds all the quicker, and it's their own fault.

Follow this link for an eye opening piece written by Gabriel Ángel, issues commander of the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia). It is called They Should Not Cry Later - The Nefarious Effects of Repressive Logic and the War on Drugs. I pinched it from The Narco News Bulletin (with permission), a site in itself well worth monitoring.

Medical update: Watch for marijuana's emergence as a hero in the battle against the always painful and often fatal viral disease Meningitis. According to anecdotes, its anti-inflammatory properties seem to do a wonderful job of reducing painful and damaging cranial pressure while the antibiotics do their work. I take no small pride in playing a part in connecting the anecdoter (anecdotee?) with Dr. Lester Grinspoon, author of Marijuana, The Forbidden Medicine, who is posting this info on his web site, www.RxMarijuana.com.

May 20, 2001

An interesting little duel I had with one John Douglas of The Grand Rapids Press. This is his editorial which got it started:

Sunday, April 29, 2001
John Douglas
jdouglas@gr-press.com
The Press at 155 Michigan St. NW.
Grand Rapids, MI

It should make every decent citizen in American as mad as can be.

I'm talking about the incident in Peru that robbed a Fruitport missionary man of his wife and infant daughter.

Oh sure, I'm upset about the Peruvian Air Force that would shoot down an unarmed plane on a whim or more precisely on the notion that it might be carrying drugs. I hope that our country doesn't take this action lightly in its dealings with Peru.

But my real anger is not directed toward that country and its backward air force (or at least its backward pilot). My anger is directed towards the real killers of Veronica Bowers and Charity Bowers.

Who are they?

They are all the people in this nation who have the idiotic notion that the taking of illegal drugs is a proper thing to do. I blame every American who smokes pot, sniffs cocaine, smokes crack or indulges in any of the many illegal drugs. I blame them for the deaths of these two innocents from the West Michigan community. Fruitport lost two citizens in a violent confrontation with people involved in the anti-drug war in Peru. These two people died because there are so many weak-minded people in this county who must have their supply of illegal drugs. These people are ultimately responsible for the deaths of those two human beings.

Drug users are responsible for all of the violence that goes on in the dark world of drug trafficking, and there is plenty of it. Not only are their murders and executions of all kinds of people in the areas where the drugs originate like Columbia and Peru, but there is violence galore in our cities where people scramble to get rich dealing out this vile product.

And why is all this being done?

So that lamebrains in America can have their drugs. It is time to quit being forgiving over those people who befoul our country with their drug activity. It is time to cease feeling sorry for those who chose to use illegal drugs, an activity which causes death and destruction.

It is time to get over this notion that smoking marijuana is a cute and harmless activity. It is time to forget about this idea that drug users are poor unfortunates. People make the decision to use drugs in the face of an educational effort unlike any other in the world. Everyone knows that drugs are bad for you. If they missed that message, they at least know that drugs are illegal.

I think we need stiff punishment for drug users. Any that surface in our courts must face these penalties, including jail time, before they can take advantage of any kind of rehabilitation program. It is time to look at drug users for what they are: major causes of violent and lesser crimes in our country and in other countries and a major drain on the nation's resources.

Let us help the children of our nation who are victims of the drug trade, but I also say let's deal with the adults in a way that reflects the major crime that drug use is.

If we want to legalize drugs, that is all right with me. Legalize them but don't make me pay for rehabilitation through taxes or higher insurance rates. In the meantime, let's not forget the deaths of two innocent people in our community and let's think of them when we heard of someone who is using illegal drugs.

...My first shot:

Mr. Douglas,

Your seething is palpable, and, through a combination of accomplished writing and the content of your message, I sit here and feel just as you do. I mean, I'm pissed.

How dare you? As a pot-smoker who has argued and written for decades that I resent that my dollars go to criminal organizations, I insist that you should be helping all of us to legitimize supply, and not jumping in with the retrograde drug warriors in demonizing people like me. Many thousands of lives have been ruined, and countless families have been destroyed by this sort of righteous indignation. It's so easy to just point at a group of people and say it's their fault, rather than to recognize that we all have a real problem which can only be solved by rational policy. Demagogues and dictators the world over are quite familiar with this knee-jerking emotionalism.

There has never been a rational policy in the United States regarding drugs - we slid from no policy in the 19th century to bad policy in the 20th, and coerced and scolded the rest of the world to follow our lead. And there is no "anti-drug war in Peru." It is in the United States, exported to scape-goat supply countries, and not incidentally, the shootdown policy wouldn't even exist without the sanction and collusion of the U.S. - all diplomatic "local jurisdiction" double-speak aside. Your "real anger is not directed toward that country", conveniently ignores the U.S.'s role in those shootdowns, which are valient expressions of the drug warrior work you seem to so admire.

I do agree that "it is time to quit being forgiving over those people who befoul our country with their drug activity." First of all, I don't need your or any other pusillanimous moralizer's forgiveness, for I have done nothing to be ashamed of. I am a productive, responsibe, tax-paying parent and marijuana smoker. The iconoclasm of me and my compatriots enriches this country. We do not befoul the country - those who would strangle individual freedom for dogma and moralistic ideology befoul the country. I do not befoul our country - America is a better place precisely because I exist. Shame on you. Shame on you for even suggesting to step on my spirit.

Drug users are NOT major causes of "violent and lesser crimes in this country." The only crime I am guilty of is a manufactured one - I have never harmed anyone, and harming person or property is the only activity which can be defended as a true crime. Violence and crime surround drug activity is the sole cause and responsibility of the prohibitionists.

After all of this, "if we want to legalize drugs," that is all right with you. Oh, really. A rather flippant declaration after your rave, I'd say.

Are you really so thick-headed as to not see that all of the problems and complaints you've ranted about are a product of prohibition? That they would go away and suddenly all of those "lamebrains in America" paper-tiger drug abusers will magically transform into the responsible citizens they are, and not targets for prosecution, punishment, overdose and black-market activity? A very small percentage of drug abusers develop problems, a fact that should be intuitive, given the huge numbers of consumption in the country. If drugs were so nefarious, Western Civilization would have ended somewhere in the '70's.

You fail to see that, as the late great and sober Frank Zappa instructed, "the crux of the biscuit is the apostrophe," and the apostrophe in this case is the bifurcation of legalization/prohibition. It IS the issue, not American citizens who choose to use drugs in spite of the govenment lies.

Whew. You must have felt great after spilling all of that bile - as I feel pretty good myself right now.

Peace and Love,

Michael J. Petro
Phoenix, AZ

...Mr. Douglas replies:

I am simply fed up with all the money spent on both sides on drugs and drug prevention and the drug war. It is money down the drain no matter how you look at it. If you feel so strongly about it why don't you stop smoking until it is legalized or at the very least go down to the police station and smoke so you can practice civil disobedience. I am also fed up with potheads being the cause of some horrid creatures coming into my neighborhood so that the stoned folks can get their supply.

You are the problem until such time as it is legalized.

John Douglas

...I hit him again:

John,

Thank you very much for responding.

I have to tell you that I think we are both fed up with the same things - our visions of possible solutions are what differ. Perhaps if you'd stop the personal attacks (I don't know what sort of drugs the "horrid creatures" in your neighborhood are procuring, but my circle of "pothead" friends are quite gentile and middle-class, and we don't run around "scoring" in other people's neighborhoods), we can elevate the discussion.

I have empathy for the impulse to stereotype and demonize drug users; after all, this propoganda has been going on for some time. I just wish to nip it in the bud when a person in the media just runs with it like you did in your piece.

I would ask that you take the anger that you have, and join with us in ending the violent and expensive absurdity of the drug war - important progress is finally being made. It's really not about the drugs or getting high - it's about freedom and human rights in the most forward democracy on Earth. Twenty-five percent of all of the prisoners in the world are United States citizens. Enough already.

Please accept my apology for any harsh words.

...John gets the final word:

No apology needed. we are just on opposite sides of a fence and passionate about it. Plus if I can't take it, I shouldn't dish it out.

...Nah, I do:

Mr. John Douglas went on to write another editorial in his paper, and it was horrible. Not to our cause, however - it was filled with very ugly language which will do nothing to further his credibility. Some choice phrases were "sanctimonious pot users", "[Dealers] are scum", "If the potheads believe so strongly...why not stop their illegal usage and work towards legalizing, after which they could go back into their stupor.", "they could get as high as they wanted and no one would care", "the potheads would rather skulk around with their drug activity and occasionally lash out", "if you folks would ever come out of your marijuana haze long enough to take a good look at yourselves, you would see that you are the enemy, and as far as I'm concerned, a major enemy in the war against drugs."

Sigh. It's tough being the target of such language, and I understand the pain of all peoples who have been stereotyped in such hurtful ways. What the hell is a "marijuana haze" and a "stupor", anyway, John? The only cure for it is keeping perspective. Mr. Douglas is obviously not a deep thinker, and it appears that he has a nasty little xenophobic bent. I'm not going to dignify his last column with a response. The tar pits beckon for these dinosaurs.

April 29, 2001

Back from the three-day NORML 2001 Conference last Sunday and still catching my breath! This was the year not to miss: When the inspirational Ethan Nadelmann, Executive Director for The Lindesmith Center, speaks on the first day, rather than closing on the last, you know that you're in for it. Representative Barney Frank, Governor Gary Johnson, a moving Terence Hallinan, District Attorney for San Francisco, and Chicago Tribune columnist and "McLaughlin Group" TV pundit Clarence Page were among the luminous first-time speakers. I was especially excited to have Clarence Page autograph my Republic editorial from a few weeks ago.

This is not to give short-shrift to the drug policy reform regulars who came to report. They are an impressive bunch of thinkers and speakers, and very affective in transmitting the cool confidence of being on the right side of the issue. Besides the venerable Ethan, highlights of the first day included warm welcoming comments from the perspicacious NORML Board Chair Dan Viets, and the utterly hilarious and heroic retiring Executive Director of the ACLU, Ira Glasser. Day two opened with the always amazing Marsha Rosenbaum, in the midst of a battle with skin cancer no less. The lovely West Coast Director of TLC/Drug Policy Foundation brought along a touching and often funny video featuring teenagers' comments on the state of drug education policy today. "This is your brain on..." Oh, the setup is priceless, of course. And then! pot-doctor celebrity and author Dr. Lester Grinspoon, neurologist Ethan Russo, the blinking and peering observations of High Times senior editor and photographer Steve Wishnia, and author of "Drug Crazy" Mike Gray (I remembered to bring the book jacket this year for Mike to sign). We were treated to a sometimes barking-mad (God love him) Richard Cowan of MarijuanaNews.com and Pot TV on day three, as well as high energy presentations by Phil Greazzo of New Hampshire NORML and a very impressive explanation from Florida State University students Abbey A. Tyrna and her fellow organizer (whose name I sadly did not record) about how they bull-doggedly built a Students for a Sensible Drug Policy chapter there.

Two relevent news events occured during the conference. A plane carrying Baptist missionaries in the jungles of Peru was shot down by Peruvian jet fighters with the assistance of U.S. CIA surveillance planes. A woman and her infant daughter were killed by the gunfire, and the pilot, legs riddled with bullets, brought the flaming pontoon craft otherwise safely to a river, where locals provided whatever medical attention they could. The U.S. has since suspended air interdictions there and in Columbia pending the cover-up, er, I mean, investigation. Also, Salon.com journalist Daniel Forbes discovered who our new drug czar would be and made a generous appearance the morning after posting the story to tell us about it. (By the way, it's moral crusader William Bennett's lap dog, John Walters, who by all appearances may "out-Barry" McCaffrey when it comes to providing fodder to ridicule the Drug Warriors. Which we have been counseled against doing. But sometimes...)

Barney Frank was very kind to speak on "Marijuana Policy in the 107th Congress, and What You Can Do To Help". He very patiently explained the obvious - that congressional representatives respond to constituents from their district - but also gave a feel for how these folks calculate influence. Mr. Frank says that he sees each constituent who contacts him as representing about 1,000 votes. He pointed out that if you can gather up 11 or 12 others (I read "over 10"), rare is the Congressman or Senator who will ignore your overtures. Also, he underlined what seems to become a growing realization within the movement (and all movements, for that matter): Public demonstrations are largely ignored by pols. If you think about it, when a movement faces a hostile or indifferent press (as marijuana law reform classicaly does, although that's changing), coverage of a demonstration will generally be limited to the more extreme, fringe, and sensationalist people and images which emerge from the protest. Noting a long-time debate the openly gay congressman says he has with the gay movement, he said that the press only focuses on "the guy in the leather and studs".

But, in terms of generating press, the highlight of the conference had to be Republican Governor Gary Johnson's opening day luncheon speech, followed with an appearance with Barry McCaffrey on Sunday's "Meet The Press" for a debate. A trouncing, I should say. The Washington Post featured the governor's appearance at NORML on the front page of its "Style" section, under the annoying headline "The Pol and The Pot". Much grumbling at the conference for not being taken seriously, but hey, we're kind of used to it. Used to it, but not satisfied with it, media.

One set of points made at the conference particularly sticks in my mind, and I apologize to the speaker who brought them up, because I can't remember which one he was. Quite simply, a) Stop ridiculing our opponents in the debate. b) Demonstrate that your policy proposals address favorably those issues with which our opponents are concerned. What are the issues? Well, universally they are "Is this good for my family?" and "Is this economically beneficial to me [my country]?" We have strong affirmative arguments for both of these, and we should stick to them. Nobody cares about the merits of "getting high", and, sadly, "personal freedom" generally only rings a bell when people approve of your behavior.

Did I mention some of the unofficial celebrations going on throughout the hotel? Why, no, I didn't :). You'd think there'd be something about toking up in the capitol of the "most powerful" country in the world, but I didn't feel anything special. Then again, I'm a bit cynical about power.

A public "Thank You" from a little voice goes out to R. Keith Stroup, the Executive Director of NORML, for putting on a dignified and inspiring forum on personal freedom in America. You couldn't wish for a more tenacious civil activist - founding NORML thirty years ago and coming back from horrendous Carter administration problems to see it here now, flying high.

Finally, I wrote the following essay to fulfill a request by NORML Chair Steven Dillon, Esq., whom I shared a cab with in Washington on the way to a celebration at Madam's Organ during the Conference. We were discussing Proposition 36 and I noted that we here in Arizona were a little ahead of the Sunshine State on this one. Perhaps only to shut me up :), Steve asked me to write something up and send it to him:

Arizona helped "sell" California's Proposition 36

Long heeded as an early incubator of policy experiments, California once again took the initiative last year and tackled a controversial public policy. Proposition 36, which offers treatment options rather than jail-time for non-violent drug-offenders, is rightly lauded as a bold step on the leading edge of the march towards the end of the United State's War on Drugs. While this large State understandably captures the attention of the nation, few appreciate the genesis of this initiative.

In 1996, Arizona passed people's initiative Proposition 200 by a two-thirds majority. In substance, law was made to unfetter doctors' recommendation of federally proscribed drugs, such as marijuana, and to shift the state's policy towards drug-offenders from punitive to treatment-oriented approaches. (California also passed a medical-only initiative in that same year; Arizona's proposition was effectively gutted by the State Legislature - two years later, Arizona voter's strongly re-affirmed their proposition with additional language to prevent such tinkering of people's initiatives in the future).

As the proposition was implemented, the numbers rolled in, and they were frequently cited during California's 2000 campaign by the state's press, as well in national newspapers. In a debate laced with rhetoric and theory, a refreshing flow of cold facts bolstered the Sunshine State campaign:

"An Arizona Supreme Court study of Proposition 200's first year showed that 77 percent of 2,622 offenders tested drug-free at the end of their outpatient treatment programs. By diverting hundreds of lawbreakers who would have gone to prison, the court estimated, the state saved $2.5 million in corrections costs. Updated numbers are expected early next year.

"Accountability" won't be lost under 36; it would simply be deferred until less coercive treatment had received a realistic trial. A similar system was passed in Arizona in 1996. It has been working well and saving money for Arizona ever since." - Daniel Macallair & Chuck Terry (contact Tom O'Connell), San Diego Union Tribune (CA), Jul. 28, 2000

"Modeled after a successful 1996 Arizona initiative, Proposition 36 would prevent the courts from incarcerating first- and second-time offenders convicted of possession of drugs for personal use. Instead, they would be herded into treatment programs." - Ben Ehrenreich, LA Weekly (CA) Oct. 20, 2000

"The Arizona strategy, approved on the 1996 ballot as Proposition 200, is a law enforcement adventure being watched by a divided national criminal justice community ever on the lookout for antidotes to America's drug problems. It represents a swing of the pendulum away from incarceration as first and last resort...a law unique to Arizona sends them not to prison, but back into the world." - "Arizona's Anti-Drug Gamble: Taking Jail Out of the Equation" - Peter Slevin, Washington Post (DC) Oct. 20, 2000

"That's what Proposition 36 will do in California, creating a treatment program similar to a program that has saved considerable money and misery in Arizona." - The Orange County Register, Oct. 20, 2000

"Since voters passed the Arizona measure in 1996, an additional 2,000 drug users have entered treatment, Maricopa County Deputy Chief Probation Officer Zachary Del Pra testified at a recent hearing in Sacramento. Sixty-one percent of them are completing their treatment programs successfully, Del Pra said." - Andy Furlillo, Sacramento Bee (CA) Oct. 22, 2000.

"...The California measure is stricter than a similar measure approved by voters in Arizona in 1996. Preliminary studies of Arizona's experience suggest that more than half the offenders who successfully completed treatment stayed drug-free." - New York Times (NY), Oct. 26, 2000

So, it is with a great deal of pride that I report that my adopted home state, the archconservative territory of the late, great Barry Goldwater, indeed led this new wave. And I can only thank state officials for implementing our people's initiative and demonstrating to the rest of the nation the clear economic and social benefits of moving away from a punitive approach to consensual, non-violent activity which may attract some social disapprobation.

March 30, 2001

The Arizona Republic today published a "My Turn" editorial by yours truly. If the link below is obsolete, the second one is a mockup of the original web page:

Former Drug Czar's Message Ignores Reality (Arizona Republic link)
Former Drug Czar's Message Ignores Reality (Mockup)

March 10, 2001

Diamonds are, or should be, the fur coats of the new millenium. Any one who saw 60 Minutes' piece a couple of weeks ago on the DeBeers cartel and the violence in Sierra Leone should tell everyone they know that it is now officially sickening to buy these price-fixed commodities, or strut around with them on. I don't know what the new engagement rock should be, but jade is a far rarer gem, and its color seems up to the task of representing for what marriage is: Yanking yet another prospect from the rest of us :). Reflecting on the stunningly successful DeBeers marketing tactic of "Diamonds Are Forever" (sentimentality keeps a lid on a yet-to-thrive "used" diamonds market), I think it would be excellent if everyone took their mutilation-and-death-tainted diamonds to eBay.com and flooded the market with cheap bids. Those ubiquitous shiny chunks of carbon are best left to industry, where they're relentlessly ground back into dust.

The Drug Reform Coordination Network and Students for a Sensible Drug Policy took out a great ad in Rolling Stone magazine, appearing on page 68 of their March 29 issue (the one with The Sopranos on the cover). Go to their websites. Join the fight.

In response to an insipid editorial supporting D.A.R.E. (check out their creepy child-propoganda site) in The Arizona Republic, I wrote a letter. I don't think they're going for it, so I'm reproducing it here. So there.

Dear Editor,

Your recent editorial defending D.A.R.E. ignored some important facts.

First, drugs should not be an option for students entering the "void" of school life. As stated by the teenage actress in the new movie "Traffic", drugs are much easier to get in school than alcohol. The reason for this is simple: We cannot regulate that which is illegal. In order for drugs to become as controllable as alcohol, and thus more successfully kept from school children, they must be regulated; as it stands, criminals control the market and to whom they are marketed. We cannot have zero tolerance in our schools as long as prohibition stands.

Second, and more to the point regarding D.A.R.E., I find it objectionable to expose a majority of innocent schoolchildren to haranguing about what should be adult behavior because of whatever degree of infiltration of drugs has already occurred in a school. The only "education" children need is this: "You’re not an adult. Finish school."

Third, your paper neglected to mention the fact that D.A.R.E. continues to use the same time-honored tactics of blustery disinformation that erode respect for the D.A.R.E. educators and the veracity of their message. The myth of marijuana as a "gateway drug" is still being spun in our schools, in spite of the fact that every study which looks at this question finds that the only "gateway" which may exist is due to its indiscriminate legal status, lumping it in with "harder" drugs and their dealers (Institute Of Medicine report on marijuana, 1999). True education about drugs would not lump heroin, cocaine, and marijuana together, and as it would be dubious policy to explain to children that some drugs are "better" than others, I refer you to my second point.

The violent black-market in drugs is, I believe, the single biggest danger to our children and the civil rights of adults. It is imperative that these commodities are legally regulated, and the sooner the better.

Sincerely,

Michael J. Petro

March 4, 2001

I've just made my reservations to attend the NORML 2001 Conference, April 19-21 (nicely straddling 4/20). Priceline.com actually worked for me this time.

Very much looking forward to the conference, to smelling the, er, mood and taking in the atmosphere. There should be some real optimism and celebration this year, I think - real progress has been made towards the liberation of America's Favorite Weed. And some intra-organizational silliness surrounding and following last year's has surely faded from memory somewhat :). Plus, my friends get to look for me on C-SPAN.

I don't know about y'all, but I have the feeling that we are in for four years of the Republican version of "National Malaise." The socially liberal/tolerant feel of the last eight years contrasted sharply with 12 years of Reagan/Bush Protestant Nationalism, and I'm having flashbacks. Which, I suspect, the rest of the country will grok as well soon enough. And I think that those "conservatives" who baked Clinton in his own hash-pipe on every occasion will be missing that atmosphere of tolerance, too. There's something pure and clean about tolerance which trancends worldviews, though SOME would sooner choke than admit it.

There's been a rash of newspaper articles breast-beating about the "Bowling Alone" syndrome, and its threat to democracy. (This refers to a book by one Putnam, which observes that we post-cultural American beasts are less likely to join the Elks and are hence more likely to begin eating our young, albeit virtually via first-person shooter). Seriously, some good points are made, and the whole theory can be damned frightening if one were inclined to buy into an awkward worldview shared by these social journalists: That somehow we can objectively identify our own psycho-evolutionary pitfalls and magically transcend our own foolishness long enough to apply remedies - these, of course, graciously served up to us from these transcendental chaps. One woolly-minded optimist posed that as flex-hours become more common amongst us, that this will somehow alleviate the situation. Gee, in my mind, it seems that the locked-down 40 hour week, with common weekends off, would encourage communal behaviour, but, hey, I don't want to burst the guy's bubble. They seem worried enough. In any case, the "old" ways of building political consensus, via these little smoke-filled bowling clubs and the like, gave rise to some of the most demagogic, deal-making leaders in our short history. I'm more than happy to witness an alternative unfolding... I hate clubs, I vote, and so do you.

Note: I'm please to hear the foolish talking about drilling Alaska. Even if they were successful, the entire inventory up there is a mere drop in the bucket compared to our national consumption, and it makes them look damned stupid to want to despoil that land. On the other hand, if they send one surveyor up there, I'm counting on all of you to scream bloody murder.

Yikes, who want's to end anything with the words "bloody murder?" That's why I wrote this paragraph. Cheers.

January 7, 2001

I've just seen the movie "Traffic", and still, I will refrain from a review other than to concur, with the rest, that this is a great film. I haven't seen a critic misapprehend this one as of yet.

I would like to make a few comments about the audience, though. My friend and I went to an early matinee, and there were no lines, so we took our time at the concession. Finally wandering in, we were surprised to find a full theater, and to the back we had to go. Surveying all of the bald spots before me, I was struck by how seriously this movie was screened by this crowd. I've been to other "drug" movies before, and this was a far cry from the giggling thrill-seekers who always cause my eyes to roll up into my head.

We were rapt to the end, silent except for the occasional gasp or knowing groan. There truly was education going on here. Treading potentially revolutionary ground, Soderbergh's dialogue artfully hit all of the points which we red-faced anti-warriors have been sputtering for years, taking our licks. And, to paraphrase the singular Sally Field: They got them; they really got them.

We left the theater, me thrilled, my friend properly impressed, and there was a long line waiting for the next show.

January 1, 2001

Ah, the millenium has finally arrived. Not that stupid odometer rollover we had last year that got the whole planet excited. No, this is the full on, Thus Spake Zarathustra, turn of a thousand years. And what have we got?

Things looked just so much more sunny a year ago. Odometer or not, the world celebrations were bracing and spectacular. And the progress of the War Against The War On Drugs this past year was fantastic:

	State initiatives. California, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon and Utah (Utah!!!) passed related, grass-roots initiatives covering reform in interdiction, treatment, medicinal (marijuana) rights, and asset forfeiture this last November. And much more decisively, needless to say, than the Presidential (so-called) election.
	Governor Gary Johnson. My Republican Hero is solidifying a new base of voters who are actually thinking about the ravages of this Prohibition. He's stumping and tub-thumping (he'll be speaking at the NORML 2001 conference in April). The lame-duck governor of New Mexico (he has two whole years left), claims to not have any further political ambition, thus perhaps explaining his courage. Bullshit. Let's draft this wunderkind for a little Bush-wacking in 2004.
	The Canadian Supreme Court. These venerable dudes gave the Canadian government one year to reform their marijuana laws to make room for compassionate use. The consequence if they don't? All marijuana laws become null and void.
	Steve Kubby. A Libertarian candidate in California's last gubernatorial election, (and arguably the prime mover behind the success of Proposition 215 - Compassionate Use Act of 1998), and himself a medical marijuana patient (adrenal cancer), found himself harassed by the local yokels in Placer County for growing medicine according to guidelines established in Oakland. An embarrassing prosecution followed, resulting in an 11-1 hung jury to acquit. Says Steve: "...please focus on the stunning victory in zero tolerance Placer County, where 92% of our ultra-conservative jury voted to uphold the Compassionate Use Act AND support the Oakland Guidelines of 144 plants per patient." Focus, indeed. And chalk another one up for his brilliant legal team, led by J. Tony Serra, who was portrayed by James Woods in the fine movie, "True Believer." Steve's not finished, either. He's leading a move to impeach Placer D.A. Bradford Fenocchio. Hee hee.
	The soon to be very missed President William Jefferson Clinton. OK, so it's too little too late, but he's been pardoning some Drug War Prisoners. And he admitted to Rolling Stone Magazine that small amounts of marijuana should be decriminalized. And he's received a petition from over 600 members of clergy and community leaders to amnesty all of the non-violent drug offenders currently stagnating uselessly in prison. And I doubt if he has the skin to do it, but at least we're asking...
	"Traffic." Steven Soderburgh's new movie may well prove to be very effective in mass education about the futile War. I'm not going to review it here, but it has been generally very well received by the critics. See it, and tell your friends.
	"Grass." Ok, so this one did not prove to be very effective in mass education about the futile War. But Canadian Ron Mann's documentary, narrated by Woody Harrelson, is a blast and good for our self-esteem.
	U.S. District Judge William Alsup. The judge ruled last September that doctors don't have to worry about having their license to prescribe pulled if they happen to recommend a treatment to their patients (specifically, medical marijuana). Well, it's a shame it even had to come up (thanks, Barry McCaffrey), but good on Alsup.
	There's a bunch more stuff, but this is getting longer than I wanted here. NORML has a great news archive.

Some Very Bad Things From The Front:

	Peter McWilliams. This gentle author was murdered this summer by the Federal Government, who denied his anti-nausea medication (Peter was suffering from AIDS and cancer) while he was on bail awaiting trial for financing some medical research (growing pot) for a book. He choked to death on his own vomit. Peter was very active right to the end, and I miss his input.
	Todd McCormick. Todd is nearly a year into a five-year prison sentence for researching the aforementioned book with Peter McWilliams. Plagued with a childhood disease mis-diagnosed as cancer, Todd is in severe pain because of bone-fusing which occurred during his formative years as a presumed cancer patient. He was recently thrown into solitary for testing positive for THC while in prison, which could very well have been the result of pre-sentencing use of the legally prescribed Marinol (it is unknown how long this distillate of marijuana remains in the fatty tissues.) And to add insult to injury, the test itself was prompted by Todd's request for a legal prescription of Marinol from the prison authorities, to ease this poor man's pain. E-mail me and I will send you his prison address so that you can write and comfort him, and send him some books and stuff.
	Renee Boje. Faced with 10 years in prison for watering plants in the aforementioned book project (she wasn't; she was to be an illustrator), The lovely Ms. Boje is hiding out in and applying for refuge in Canada. Wonderful. The Land of the Free should be very proud of Herself. The jury's still out on whether Canada will assist.

Back to the millenium. Do you feel as uneasy as I do? The Middle-East is all in a twist again, the market's softened, nearly half the people voted for George W. Bush. Nearly half, and yet, there he is, installing himself into the Oval Office. Yikes. I know it sounds disingenuous, but I really am disturbed not only by how this happened, but I don't think it's a good thing to have a President in power with a snatch like that. It smells worrisome. And we've got Colin Powell surveying the burgeoning Vietnam in Columbia. What on earth will he do with it?

The Four Horsemen are starting to look pretty attractive.

Mike Petro