Korean Job Discussion Forums

[igotthisguitar]

[igotthisguitar]

Well Hall-EL-luh_JAH & Praise the Lord !

Court Allows Church's Hallucinogenic Tea
By GINA HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer
Tue Feb 21, 3:13 PM ET

WASHINGTON - A small branch of a South American religious sect may use hallucinogenic tea as part of a ritual intended to connect with God, a unanimous Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.



In its first religious freedom decision under Chief Justice John Roberts, the court said the government cannot hinder religious practices without proof of a "compelling" need to do so.

"This is a very important decision for minority religious freedom in this country," said lawyer John Boyd, who represents about 130 U.S. members of O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal who live in New Mexico, California and Colorado.

The tea, which contains an illegal drug known as DMT, is considered sacred to members of the sect, which has a blend of Christian beliefs and South American traditions. Members believe they can understand God only by drinking the tea, which is consumed twice a month at four-hour ceremonies.

A trial judge found the government's evidence that the drug is harmful was equal in weight to information provided by the sect that said its method of use in tea is not.

Roberts, in writing the opinion for the court, said the government had failed to prove that federal drug laws should outweigh the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which Congress passed in 1993 to prohibit burdening a person's exercise of religion.

The Bush administration had argued that the drug in the tea not only violates a federal narcotics law but a treaty in which the United States promised to block the importation of drugs including dimethyltryptamine, also known as DMT.

Religious groups of various faiths, along with civil liberties organizations, filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting the sect. "This is just one step in the right direction in the fight for religious liberty," said Jared Leland, legal counsel for The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty in Washington.

The justices sent the case back to a federal appeals court, which could consider more evidence.

Roberts, writing his second opinion since joining the court, said that religious freedom cases can be difficult "but Congress has determined that courts should strike sensible balances."

The case is Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal, 04-1084.

[igotthisguitar]

[igotthisguitar]

Mexico's Fox backs down on drug law

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 10:19:57 PM ET

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - In a surprise reversal, Mexican President Vicente Fox will not sign widely criticized narcotics legislation to decriminalize the possession of small quantities of marijuana, cocaine and heroin, his office said on Wednesday.

The president's office said the law, which also toughened sentences for dealing and holding larger amounts of the intoxicants, would be sent back to Congress for revision.

"In our country the possession of drugs and their consumption are, and will continue to be, crimes," the office said in a statement.

Fox's decision was unexpected, given that the legislation was initially designed by his office and introduced by his party. This week, his spokesman praised the law and insisted the president would quickly sign it, despite rumblings of discontent from Washington.

The legislation, passed by Congress last week, shocked Mexico's northern neighbor, which counts on its support in a war against gangs that move massive quantities of cocaine, heroin, marijuana and methamphetamines through Mexico to U.S. consumers.

It was also criticized by authorities in Mexican tourist towns who worried about a flood of hard-partying U.S. thrill seekers attracted by the new, lenient rules.

(c) Reuters 2006. All rights reserved

http://www.metronews.ca/reuters_international.asp?id=145466

[tiger fancini]

[Satori]

A strong and impassioned rebuttal by patchy indeed. I simply cannot be bothered to go thru and pick out all the falsehoods in it, but I`ll offer this.

You talk about people eventually needing more and more of the drug, and eventually needing it just to THINK. Not so at all for the average user. You are talking about ADDICTS, these are people with addictive personalities and they will get addicted to whatever they try in life, be it drugs, alcohol, work, sex, status, drama, whatever. It is true that after your first year as a pot smoker you will never get those utter blissfull laugh out loud at nothing, everything is shiny and beautiful type highs every again. But its totally not true that you need to keep upping the dose. The same amount will get you stoned ad infinitum. It wont be as good a stone, but then smoking more wont get you any higher either. I still smoke the same amount in a session I always did, and this is the same for everyone I know.

A lot of your post, patchy, reveals a profound lack of knowledge of the subject. And what you do know is stuff you have read. And when you talk about users and effects, you exaggerate, and refer to things that happen to extreme users. The majority of users use it socially and moderately, the same as the majority of drinkers. And this is the key point, smoking pot in the way that most users do, once or twice at week ( some a lot less too ) simply does not have the effects you talk about. And no, the average person doesnt get "hooked" and need more and more or start smoking three times a day.

Here is something to contemplate. You could smoke a joint a week, for ever, and not get any noticable negative effects given that you are not predisposed to schizophrenia. In fact, most people smoke in small groups and dont even come close to having a full joint to themselves. A typical session would result in three or four good tokes and that`s it. It`s enough to get high, and it really is a very small amount. You might get a slight reduction in oxygen processing ability of the lungs, which could be easily countered by going for a 45 minute jog every day, which is a good thing to do for anyone, regardless of anything else.

And you say being high is not respectable, as if that is a blanket true statement. I say that is a statement of judgement. What is a fact, is that many people who do hold positions in society that are widely agreed to be respectable DO smoke pot.

[4 months left]

[quote="khyber"]

[igotthisguitar]

[JeJuJitsu]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15145917/

Marijuana may help stave off Alzheimer�s
Active ingredient in pot may help preserve brain function

[igotthisguitar]

One more reason why prohibition works ... (for the criminals)

Mexican Traffickers Wage "Publicity War"
By JULIE WATSON, Associated Press Writer
Thu Apr 12, 2:44 PM ET

MEXICO CITY - Drug traffickers are waging a highly effective publicity campaign in Mexico that began with a chilling show of brutality in Acapulco: two police officers' heads, streaming with blood, were stuck on metal spikes outside a downtown building with a fluorescent cardboard sign. "So that you learn to respect," it read in thick black letters.

[bacasper]

U.S.: Coca Cultivation Up Despite Six Years of Plan Colombia

By Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Nov 6 (IPS) - Despite the expenditure of nearly five billion dollars in U.S. military, security, and economic assistance, the cultivation of coca leaf and production of cocaine in Colombia actually increased between 2000 and 2007, according to a major review by the U.S. Congress's independent investigative agency.

In a report released this week by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), investigators found that "Plan Colombia" -- the comprehensive anti-drug scheme initiated under the administration of former President Bill Clinton in 1999 -- has largely failed to achieve its goal of reducing illegal drug production in the Andean nation by at least half by 2007.

While the Plan appears to have reached that goal for opium poppy cultivation and heroin production, the far greater cultivation of coca increased by about 15 percent and cocaine production by about four percent over the six years, according to the report.

The results should prompt a major new assessment of Washington's anti-drug strategy by the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama, particularly as it pertains to Colombia and other Andean countries, according to several critics of the Plan.

"The new Congress and administration should take this opportunity to launch a serious debate and establish a realistic drug policy -- one that doesn't expect immediate and dramatic results and that makes the necessary investments in rural development and building strong civilian institutions," said John Walsh, a drug expert at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), a human rights group here that has opposed the disproportionate emphasis under Plan Colombia on military aid and the use of aerial fumigation to wipe out coca crops.

"It should also go without saying at this point that the best-designed and most well-executed programme in Colombia will be for naught if the United States does not finally address cocaine demand here at home," he added.

"This certainly represents an opportunity to re-think a policy that is obviously not working," said Adam Isaacson, a Colombia specialist at the Washington-based think tank, the Centre for International Policy (CIP). "This, combined with the other bad human rights news coming out of Colombia, should inspire a change in direction by the new administration."

He was referring to the dismissal last week of 27 officers, including three generals and 15 who had received training by the U.S., and soldiers accused of summarily executing innocent civilians and dressing up them up as guerrillas in order to claim a high "body count" in the ongoing counter-insurgency campaign against the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

The firings followed a lengthy investigation of a series of incidents that human rights groups insist represent just the tip of the iceberg of a growing scandal. They reportedly resulted in the suspension of U.S. military aid to three army units implicated in the killings, as required under the so-called "Leahy Law," a foreign aid provision named after Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy that denies military aid to any foreign military or security unit for which substantial evidence exists of serious human rights abuses.

The firings were followed Tuesday by the resignation of Colombia's U.S.-trained army commander, Gen. Mario Montoya, who also faces serious human rights charges himself.

These events, as well as the GAO report, have so far drawn little attention in Washington due to the presidential election and its immediate aftermath, but they could still have a significant impact once Obama and the new Congress are sworn in Jan. 20.

Obama, like most Democrats, has opposed ratifying the long-pending free trade pact with Colombia due to concerns about worker rights, and particularly the assassination by right-wing death squads of union leaders in Colombia. The burgeoning scandal over civilian executions, as well as the increase in Democratic majorities in Congress, is certain to weigh against the hopes of Colombian President Alvaro Uribe for quick approval.

Moreover, Uribe's perceived preference for Obama's Republican rival, Sen. John McCain -- as underlined by his having been one of the few foreign leaders to have met McCain's running-mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, in New York during the campaign -- is unlikely to endear him to the new administration, according to Isaacson. This despite the fact that Obama's likely choice to direct Latin American affairs in the White House, Dan Restrepo, played a key role in introducing the Colombian president to Democratic leaders earlier this year.

article continues at link