"the center of true religion"

The most beautiful and profound emotion we can experience
is the sensation of the mystical.
It is the sower of all true science.
He to whom this emotion is a stranger,
who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe,
is as good as dead.
To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists,
manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty,
which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive forms-
this knowledge, this feeling,
is at the center of true religion.

~ Albert Einstein ~

The Disastrous War on Drugs Turns 40: How Does the Grassroots Stop the Misdirection by an Oxymoron?

The following is my reply to Ethan Nadelmann's essay concerning the future of drug policy reform

"The Disastrous War on Drugs Turns 40: How Do We Stop the Madness?"
http://www.alternet.org/story/149895/the_disastrous_war_on_drugs_turns_40%3A_how_do_we_stop_the_madness?page=entire

==========


The surest way to end Cannabis prohibition is to recognize Cannabis as both unique and essential to the survival of our species. The ecological argument of Cannabis vs. climate change has yet to be considered by the drug policy reform establishment, so how can we expect anyone else to understand that reintroduction of Cannabis agriculture, manufacture and trade to the free market economy is critical to the survival of our species?


DPA tripping to extinction
Or...
UV-B radiation is blocked by Cannabis monoterpenes -- so what's "illegal"?

What is it about Cannabis vs. climate change, that the drug policy reform establishment doesn't want to recognize the strongest argument in favor of ending prohibition -- Cannabis monoterpenes potential for radiative forcing as a biogenic way of addressing "global broiling" by increasing UV-B radiation?


If DPA won't bring attention to Cannabis vs. climate change, then all of you DPA $upporter$ who really want prohibition to end this year, instead of "someday,maybe" can stop sending money to George Soros, and start sending it to Reverend Roger Christie in Hawaii. As far as I know, DPA hasn't sent Roger a thin dime in twenty-five years of Cannabis activism.


Expanding upon my previous hurried comments, offered ultimately as good news (in harmonic tones effecting world peace)...

We the People must consider that prohibition of Cannabis could end in a week through a simple, objective shift in values. Cannabis is both unique and essential, not illegal. A matter of historical, religious and scientific fact, any other assessment of Cannabis as other than "strategic" treasonously undermines national security.

Cannabis is healing. Fossil fuels are toxic. Cannabis is globally distributed and free to anyone who wants it. Petroleum is unevenly distributed and expensive in every way. How could our species ever achieve balance as long as our money is based in toxins that are "Gaiacidal" and spiritually bankrupt, from inception?

Game over. The DEA has been begging to be sued for ten years of public fraud based on this spurious and fatally misleading definition of "hemp":

"...stalks and sterilized seeds — is what some people refer to as “hemp.” However, “hemp” is not a term that is found in federal law."

DEA Clarifies Status of Hemp in the Federal Register, October 9, 2001
http://www.justice.gov/dea/pub...

Neither statement is true.

It is a "misprision of treason" for failing to act in the interest of national security by refusing to recognize the true value of a strategic resource. Cannabis can't be both a "strategic resource" and a "Schedule One drug," so who is responsible for perpetuating this legal contradiction?

Come on DPA, MPP, NORML, etc. what EXACTLY is the hold-up in applying a fraction of your massive combined annual budgets to supporting the magnificent grassroots exercise of the Law of the Land, over anti-Constitutional prohibition statutes being tested in "Trial for the Century" of THC Ministry Founder, Reverend Roger Christie? If you recognize the historical significance of Cannabis, then you must see the power of Roger's challenge of wrongful authority. Why won't you support it?

Cannabis is not, cannot, and never has been truly illegal because without it our species won't see the end of this Century. Time is the limiting factor in the equation of survival. We don't have another planting season to waste.

The First Amendment is the first line of defense against prosecution by any objective court. Genesis 1:29 makes the end of Cannabis prohibition a matter of religious freedom. Our freedom to farm "every herb bearing seed" is the first test of religious freedom. On page one of the King James Bible used in U.S. courts and swearing in of elected officials, "God" is quoted on the first page, referring to "herbs" three times.

Drugs don't make seeds. Herbs do. The legal distinction is enormous. Yet with all of the resources of the drug policy reform establishment applied to the argument against the horrid, inevitable results of prohibition, the most fundamental truths are still not being presented or supported.

Why does the drug policy reform establishment continue to fail in presenting the most straight-forward and powerful arguments? Millions upon millions of dollars have been applied to pointing out the problems and lobbying for legislative action. How much has really changed as a result of all that time and money spent?

My frustration with the drug policy reform establishment has to do with the oxymoronic paralysis of progress that is the direct result of a disparity of wealth that exists within the drug policy reform culture. Over the past twenty years of being involved with the global effort to end the "drug war" I've witnessed talented, intelligent communicators of truth, such as Reverend Roger Christie (See http://the-last-marijuana-tria.../) be roundly ignored by the inefficient and ineffectual expenditure of millions of dollars, countless volunteer work hours, and much too much precious time, to be content with another of Ethan's lucid, eloquent, informed, though practically incomplete, accountings of the harms of prohibition. What's missing is a cohesive, comprehensive, objective valuation of Cannabis as a "strategic resource""of first necessity""critical to national security""unique and essential""beyond the rightful jurisdiction of any court" as Jack Herer, Roger Christie, I and many others in the grassroots Cannabis culture have been writing, filming, and speaking in public about for decades, over and over again. And conditions continue to deteriorate at an accelerating pace without a proportionate response, and in the case of Ethan's recent NORML conference outburst, counter-productive public rudeness.

As brilliant and passionate and dedicated to a righteous cause as Ethan Nadelmann is, why is he and how can he not recognize Cannabis as both unique and essential? It is baffling to me. Prohibition cannot exist in the presence of true value, so what's blocking that shift?

Six American Presidents have recognized Cannabis as a "strategic resource" available by "essential civilian demand" yet DPA fails to acknowledge the power in that. Will President Obama be publicly mandated by the drug policy reform establishment to recognize Cannabis as both unique and essential, an historically revered "strategic resource" deserving of sacramental legitimacy? How bad do things have to get before Cannabis is recognized by the drug policy reform establishment as critical to national security and global integrity?

How long will it take before common awareness that (at last!) the majority of American's polled understand the urgent necessity of ending Cannabis prohibition leads to victory over unaccountability, falsehood and illogic? Instead of keeping the keep the ball rolling on the most recent wave of positive energy generated by Prop 19, by focussing on Roger Christie's "Trial for the Century" the drug policy reform establishment is ignoring (or in the case of NORML's St.Pierre & Belville, taking pot shots at) a major legal opportunity.

The Constitutional battle that's about to happen in Hawaii presents an opportunity to actively engage the 'feral government' that has blatantly traded due process for slander & libel, in the unlawful imprisonment-with-out-trial-or-bail of Roger Christie. Simply by accusing Christie of being a "danger to his community" the rights and privileges guaranteed by the State and Federal Constituions protcting freedom of religion have been suspended to silence a recognized "Peacemaker."

Roger Christie's trial is several magnitudes of significance larger than Prop 19, with a fraction of the investment from the monied elements of the drug policy reform establishment -- which includes the wealthy pot growers and most of the rich dispensary owners making bank on prohibition, whose vested interests don't favor seeing the Cannabis plant liberated.

There is so much to be said by the grassroots that has not been heard because the "freedom to complain" is being eloquently choreographed, scripted and substituted for the larger truth applied in direct action. On January First, 1992, Roger Christie and I set a legal precedent when we planted 'marijuana' in a public exercise of peaceful civil disobedience in Lahaina, Maui, after I sent a registered letter to Hawaii's State Attorney General, Warren Price. The formal challenge of rightful jurisdiction was six pages long (with references) and demanded that AG Price take individual responsibility for the true value of Cannabis. Once again a contest between Price vs. value. Price lost, and resigned from public office a few months later.

As I've written to DPA, MPP, NORML, etc. for years, the arguments in favor of Cannabis vs. climate change are the most broadly compelling, along with food security and nutrition, two areas where Cannais is both unique and essential. Why have there not been Congressional hearings to weigh the value of Cannabis agriculture against the lingering vestiges of "Reefer Madness"?

Ofcourse the conditions of environment, economics and social imbalance has created a condition of extreme global emergency, poised on the edge of synergistic collapse. The Earth's boreal forests are dying from pest infestation, logging, increasing UV-B radiation and warming of the atmosphere. The pines used to produce copious quantities of atmospheric aerosols called "monoterpenes." Presently, the balance of monoterpenes in the atmosphere is plummeting. If we don't start planting Cannabis as fast as we can, everywhere we can, it will soon be too late to avoid irreversible collapse. Expanding the arable base, increasing efficiency of our economic model to mandate accelerated reforestation with the help of the "Tree of Life" is humankind's only chance for survival.

If I am wrong, then I invite anyone to give me one good reason that's true not to grow Cannabis. If anyone has a better idea than Cannabis agriculture, manufacture and free, untaxed trade, for mitigating climate change, then I'll work on your idea for free for the rest of my life.

We have nothing to fear but the atmosphere itself. If we don't solve the climate change equation, it won't matter what problems we do solve.

There is no money on a burned out planet Mr. Soros, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Branson, Mr. Nadelmann... while US currency still has perceived value, please, invest in Roger Christie's "Trial for the Century" in order to reclaim the world's most useful crop. This is where the real progress can be made in a timely way.

Bans on irreversible plant technologies (GMOs) need to be immediately imposed on agriculture as unnecessary and counter-productive to feeding the world, and a threat to global integrity.


Free Roger Christie! Now!!

Substantive Due Process & the curious case of Roger Christie

"Substantive Due Process" is the fundamental constitutional legal theory upon which the Griswold/Roe/Casey privacy right is based. The doctrine of Substantive Due Process holds that the Due Process Clause not only requires "due process," that is, basic procedural rights, but that it also protects basic substantive rights. "Substantive" rights are those general rights that reserve to the individual the power to possess or to do certain things, despite the government’s desire to the contrary. These are rights like freedom of speech and religion. "Procedural" rights are special rights that, instead, dictate how the government can lawfully go about taking away a person’s freedom or property or life, when the law otherwise gives them the power to do so.

"Supporters of Substantive Due Process...point to its long history and its dynamic ability to defend basic human rights from infringement by the government. They argue that Substantive Due Process provides comprehensive nation-wide protection for all our most cherished rights, which might otherwise be at the mercy of state governments. They argue that the doctrine is a simple recognition that no procedure can be just if it is being used to unjustly deprive a person of his basic human liberties and that the Due Process Clause was intentionally written in broad terms to give the Court flexibility in interpreting it."

http://www.stanford.edu/group/psylawseminar/Substantive%20Due%20Process.htm

Strict scrutiny
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny

Strict scrutiny is the most stringent standard of judicial review used by United States courts reviewing federal law. Along with the lower standards of rational basis review and exacting or intermediate scrutiny, strict scrutiny is part of a hierarchy of standards employed by courts to weigh an asserted government interest against a constitutional right or principle that conflicts with the manner in which the interest is being pursued. Strict scrutiny is applied based on the constitutional conflict at issue regardless of whether a law or action of the U.S. federal government, a state government, or a local municipality is at issue.
The notion of "levels of judicial scrutiny", including strict scrutiny, was introduced in footnote 4 to United States v. Carolene Products (1938), in the context of the New Deal. Governmental restrictions on constitutional rights that undergo strict scrutiny are most commonly but not invariably found invalid. The first and most notable case to apply strict scrutiny and find the governmental actions valid was Korematsu v. United States (1944), in which the Supreme Court upheld racial-based curfews of Japanese Americans during World War II.

Strict scrutiny arises in two basic contexts: when a "fundamental" constitutional right is infringed[citation needed], particularly those listed in the Bill of Rights and those the court has deemed a fundamental right protected by the "liberty" or "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment; or when the government action involves the use of a "suspect classification" such as race or, sometimes, national origin that may render it void under the Equal Protection Clause. These are the two applications that were anticipated in footnote 4 to United States v. Carolene Products.

To pass strict scrutiny, the law or policy must satisfy three prongs:

First, it must be justified by a compelling governmental interest. While the Courts have never brightly defined how to determine if an interest is compelling, the concept generally refers to something necessary or crucial, as opposed to something merely preferred. Examples include national security, preserving the lives of multiple individuals, and not violating explicit constitutional protections.

Second, the law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest. If the government action encompasses too much (overbroad) or fails to address essential aspects of the compelling interest (under-inclusive), then the rule is not considered narrowly tailored.

Finally, the law or policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest. More accurately, there cannot be a less restrictive way to effectively achieve the compelling government interest, but the test will not fail just because there is another method that is equally the least restrictive. Some legal scholars consider this 'least restrictive means' requirement part of being narrowly tailored, though the Court generally evaluates it as a separate prong.

Legal scholars, including judges and professors, often say that strict scrutiny is "strict in theory, fatal in fact," because popular perception is that most laws subject to this standard are struck down. However, an empirical study of strict scrutiny decisions in the federal courts, by Adam Winkler, found that laws survive strict scrutiny over thirty percent of the time. In one area of law, religious liberty, laws that burden religious liberty survived strict scrutiny review in nearly sixty percent of applications.[1]

the Big Picture

Call in to my Blogtalkradio show at noon today to discuss the Big Picture: "Cannabis vs. Climate Change."

Arguing inconsequential details of ending prohibition is "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." If we have another growing season to make the coordinated transition from global hydrocarbon addiction/overdose to carbohydrate sustainability, we'll be very very very lucky.

Humans have got to grow as much Cannabis as fast as we can, in as many soil and climate conditions as we can, or increasing UV-B radiation is going to cook us. Google "global broiling, hemp" to read details of hemp monoterpenes replacing the monoterpenes from pine trees, declining as the boreal forests disappear.

Arguing about taxing®ulating pot (i.e. imposing an insolvent, politically corrupt, counter-productive, crippling bureaucracy on organic agriculture) is a potentially extinctionistic waste of precious time, the limiting factor in the equation of survival.

Cannabis is different than booze or tobacco because the quality of marijuana products is determined primarily by genetics, not agricultural method. While organic cultivation sets the standard for purity, relatively minimal gardening skill and attention to the plants is required to produce an enormous quantity of a very high-grade product. Dispensaries will wind up growing their own or buying from self-regulated caregivers & gardeners who grow more than they need to satisfy demand from community, friends and family.

Free market competition and personal reputations for excellence will determine whose Cannabis products are most in demand. Because of its exceptional degree of safety, marijuana has been traded under the worst possible conditions of social imbalance, without harming anyone.

Tainted products are an unfortunate reality in a black market, not in a free market. Testing and safety analysis is and ought to be more affordable and available for those who want to have their herb analyzed, but .

Individual responsibility for personal choices needs to be taught from a young age. Imposition of regulations on adults who make safe choices based on mature judgement is tyranny.

"Dolphin Economics and a polar shift in human values"
projectpeace
Date / Time: 2/8/2011 12:00 - 2 PM
Category: Energy
Call-in Number: (347) 202-0195

Sorry to disagree with you CB, but Flop 19 was a tar-baby that may represent "political reality" to some, but would have caused a shitstorm of legal confusion and a blizzard of media distraction had it passed. As it is, the way is clear in the US for a stronger grassroots movement in proportion to the crises we face: "essential civilian demand" for a "strategic resource."

DPA, abNORMLly tripping to extinction -- meet Reformus interruptus amongus.....

Or...UV-B radiation is blocked by Cannabis monoterpenes -- so what's "illegal"?

It was surreal, fascinating, though a sadly de-energizing trip, to observe the intentional immobilization of the grassroots Cannabis culture by the monied, drug policy reform establishment (oxymoron). DPA's duplicity was explicitly revealed in the spontaneous outburst by Ethan Nadelmann at the Berkeley NORML conference last Saturday. The mere mention of "essential civilian demand" was enough to cause Ethan to violate Robert's Rules of Order in a spontaneous outburst that was so panicked and vehement as to be unintelligible.

I wonder if anyone remembers what Ethan actually said, when he terminated my brief moment (perhaps 30 seconds?) at the public microphone. All I recall is Ethan's loud, unruly response to my question about a federal strategy of "essential civilian demand" (1,2), directed to Assemblyman Tom Ammiano.

Giving Ethan the benefit of the doubt that he is truly working to effect an end to Cannabis prohibition, rather than choreographing an industry coup under the direction of George Soros, has become impossible and incredible., In fact, at the Berkeley NORML conference, Ethan clumsily abandoned his usual composure to dismiss a potentially effective legal strategy to end prohibition, with subversive, authoritarian misdirection.

Rather than affording me a few minutes to introduce the most compelling arguments and strategies for achieving Cannabis freedom (as conference attendees were repeatedly invited & effectively prevented from doing), and raise support for Roger Christie in Hawaii, the NORML conference lined up attorneys and bureaucrats to further confuse the direct action element of the grassroots Cannabis contingent.

From his condescending reference to my writing as "stuff" to his failure to acknowledge the significance of hempen atmospheric monoterpenes, the leader of the drug policy reform establishment either doesn't want to believe in, or doesn't understand the significance of Cannabis vs. climate change. Even more disturbing is his obstruction of truth, and other people's right to hear and consider it.

I told Ethan immediately after the panel dispersed, that what's lacking in the drug policy reform establishment is a commitment to truth. Without it we are lost. Leaders sacrifice credibility when they lose respect for the truth and the responsibility for humility that goes with it. Too bad. For awhile, Ethan was a great leader toward reason, and an effective spokesperson for the inevitable, rational result. In derailing a critically important message of truth, that I have sent him for years, he has relegated himself to being just another footnote to an insolvent economy buying time on a dying planet.

If DPA refuses to participate in a moderated discussion on Cannabis vs. climate change, then all of you DPA $upporter$ who really want prohibition to end this year, instead of "someday,maybe" can stop sending money to George Soros, and start sending it to Roger Christie. As far as I know, DPA hasn't sent Roger Christie a thin dime in twenty-five years of activism.

Now that Roger Christie's Ministry has been arrested and charged federally; and Roger Christie (a recognized "Peacemaker" in Hawaii) is currently imprisoned-without-trial; denied bail five times; slandered as a "danger to his community"; been denied visitors; and had his trial postponed until April 26th, Roger has transcended himself by eliciting ham-fisted injustice from the prison industrial complex. Roger's "Trial for the Century" is the grassroots counter-point to the impacted, too comfortable, drug policy reform establishment, of which Ethan Nadelmann is the appointed head.

Only when Roger Christie walks out of federal prison, a free Cannabis Minister, will the integrity of the Constitution and the spiritual legitimacy of the world's oldest culture be restored, for the first time in our lives.

Federal references to "essential civilian demand"


1. Executive Order 12919 of June 3, 1994
National Defense Industrial Resources Preparedness

Sec. 103. General Functions.
Federal departments and agencies responsible for defense acquisition (or for industrial resources needed to support defense acquisition) shall:
(a) Identify requirements for the full spectrum of national security emergencies, including military, industrial, and essential civilian demand;

PART IX—GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 901. Definitions.
(e) ‘‘Food resources’’ means all commodities and products, simple, mixed, or compound, or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. ‘‘Food resources’’ also means all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, cotton, tobacco, wool, mohair, hemp, flax fiber, and naval stores, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12919


2. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 44 - Emergency Management and Assistance--CHAPTER I--FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY >
44 C.F.R. PART 334—GRADUATED MOBILIZATION RESPONSE
Title 44 - Emergency Management and Assistance

(f) At Stage 1, declaration of national emergency or war, the crisis is under the control of NSC or other central authority, with GMR being integrated into partial, full or total mobilization. At this point the more traditional mechanisms of resource mobilization are pursued, focusing on resource allocation and adjudication with cognizance of the essential civilian demand.
http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title44/44-1.0.1.6.83.html


3. THE DPA-MONSANTO CONNECTION: GEORGE SOROS DONATES $1M TO PROP. 19 CAMPAIGN: WHY GEORGE SOROS WANTS MARIJUANA LEGALIZED
"The DPA is the leading organization spearheading the reform of Cannabis policies in the United States, and has been made up of some of the most powerful and influential characters in today’s global petro-bio-chemical-military-banking-industrial complex."
http://votetaxcannabis2010.blogspot.com/p/monsanto-connection-george-soros_27.html

"Where Next for Marijuana Reform?" NORML in Berkeley -- A Plan for the Now! Year

Aloha! & kine regards to all who are on course to participate in the NORML conference at the end of this month. I trust it will serve a broader understanding and maximize efficient use of everyone's precious time, to offer in advance what I feel is the most effective public protocol for ending Cannabis prohibition, by this Spring -- not in 2012.

Time is the limiting factor in the equation of survival. Increasing UV-B radiation is of primary ecological concern. Cannabis must be intensively planted this spring for the production of atmospheric "monoterpenes," biogenic sunscreen for the planet.

While informative and stimulating, drug policy reform events have typically effectively misled and postponed drug policy reform progress by perpetuating bureaucratic confusion at the grassroots level. Clear-cut, simple strategies for an effective, national shift in policy have been marginalized from within the entrenched drug policy reform establishment. Typically there is an arrogant unwillingness to advance arguments inclusive of industrial hemp as part of a comprehensive legal mandate to end marijuana prohibition through objective resource revaluation.

Simple strategies calling for formal revaluation of Cannabis agriculture are casually dismissed as idealistic without being seriously discussed. Instead the concerned public is being misguided into supporting expensive and convoluted political campaigns that introduce division and go nowhere.

There isn't time for the drug policy reform community's continued failure to end Cannabis prohibition. The NORML conference will best serve it's stated objectives if it is the catalyst for a class-action federal lawsuit charging the DEA with "misprision of treason." Failing to act on the true value of Cannabis is a threat to national security.

Waiting until 2012 to try to end Cannabis prohibition by the timid uncertain comfort of a popular vote is an unacceptable, ineffective, sheepish waste of time. In the most real and immediate perception possible, obvious conditions of accelerating radical global imbalance require the most direct and comprehensive courses of action possible.

The truth is that Cannabis is both unique and essential, too valuable to be within the rightful jurisdiction of any court. Cannabis is essential for three specific reasons, all of which are critical to human survival, beyond merely "legal." No one needs permission from the electorate to survive. Another vote isn't needed.

NORML, DPA, SSDP, DPFC, LEAP, MPP, ASA, HIA, VH have all failed to identify Cannabis as both unique and essential. It is this failure to accurately assess the true value of Cannabis that has limited the effectiveness of the grassroots Cannabis culture. If the Cannabis culture under-values itself, then how can we demand accountability of our government? Thomas Jefferson singled out hemp as being "of first necessity" while six American Presidents have signed six Executive Orders identifying Cannabis as a"strategic resource."

Cannabis cannot possibly be both "strategic resource" and "Schedule One drug" -- the terms are oxymoronic. Since the definition of "hemp" posted on-line for the past ten years by the DEA is conflicted and blatantly false, it ought to be a very simple legal matter to charge the higher echelon of the DEA with criminal negligence and possible fraud. It is a "misprision of treason" to fail in recognizing the true value of Cannabis, when six American Presidents have signed six Executive Orders identifying hemp as having strategic value.

"Essential civilian demand" is the ultimate product of immediate necessity and true value. An accurate, objective, comprehensive valuation of Cannabis agriculture, ecology, manufacture and trade immediately removes Cannabis from the rightful jurisdiction of any court. Popular vote is not needed, nor is it the most direct way of securing access to any and all strategic food resources.

Neither civilian demand nor individual liberty depends on majority vote. A cogent, efficient rationality rules by existing Constitutional protections, pervasive reason and preeminent concern for the common good.

Once access to hemp for industrial applications is achieved at the national level, a major economic motivation for marijuana prohibition will have been eliminated. The prohibition of marijuana will fall away as people come to recognize the many other benefits of Cannabis. Current imbalances in the marijuana trade will be naturally evened out by widespread cultivation of hemp and the proliferation of more small outdoor marijuana gardens for personal use and regional industries.

Forget diversionary illusions of taxation and regulation. The bureaucratic costs and inefficiencies of both would encumber the free organic agricultural market that requires as much initial momentum as it can get. This year, the United States and other countries could experience an agricultural renaissance, with requisite retooling in preparation for the Fall harvest.

Regional economies based in "Gaiatherapeutic" industries are part of the larger picture, that reconsiders drug policy in the context of fundamental economic and environmental solutions."Essential civilian demand" at the Federal level is what's required, right now, before this spring.

Every planting season that passes without the benefits of Cannabis agriculture is gone forever. If time truly is the limiting factor in the equation of survival, then how hot do things have to get before all solutions are considered?

There is only insanity in continuing the tragic farce of asking for permission to survive from chemically corrupted bankers who run the country, caring only for profit and control. The government is an outlaw to its own Constitution. The American people are being humiliated and bullied by the fear-mongering war machine that dominates through blatant lies, revenue raising and armed intimidation.

By arguing for "legalization" at the state level, rather than moving forward with a federal and international strategies for total Cannabis freedom, the funded drug policy reform establishment validates the drug war. Rather than suspending Cannabis prohibition using the strongest arguments possible, watered-down truths are being understated and doled out in fragmented rationale.

As for Prop19, its greatest short-coming was the potential for vast legal confusion it invited, industry elitism it conveyed and the burdensome record-keeping it institutionalized. Hemp farmers don't need to be taxed and regulated. We need large quantities of fertile, feral American seed and the freedom to plant it.

Poop19 perpetuated the myth of marijuana's "harms" and maintained the illusory need or effectiveness of government oversight (i.e. "control" [sic]).

"Prop-Up-Prohibition # 19" also reinforced the rediculous illusion that a change in the Cannabis laws has to happen legislatively, by popular vote, state by state. It does not. Federal law protects our freedom to farm "every herb bearing seed."

In fact, what Flop 19 did prove is that a direct-line, federal strategy is needed, a strategy that is not contingent on popular approval.

I trust that this will advance further discussion of the most effective and immediate strategy possible.

"Where Next for Marijuana Reform?"

Essentially the question implies a future step, rather than recognizing that we're in mid-step, right Now! The energetic momentum of public support still lingers after the dream of "legalization" was effectively stimulated by the run up to Prop 19.

The time to use that inertia is right Now! The legacy of freedom we are obligated to pass on to our children is not predicated on some vote in 2012. Cannabis prohibition could be ended at the national level through "essential civilian demand" if the full force of truth is applied, using all of the resources available to the drug policy reform community in a coordinated national and international effort. Inviting international opinion into discussion of American drug policy seems obvious. Everyone is impacted by the perverse dynamics of American marijuana policy.

Because of the legitimate historical and tradition link between agriculture and religion, there can be no rightful jurisdiction over any "herb bearing seed" let alone one that has been recognized as critical to national security. THC Ministry founder, Reverend Roger Christie, sits imprisoned-without-bail since July 2010, his trial postponed until April 2011. The outcome of Roger Christie's trial may largely be determined by the rapidly shifting public perception of Cannabis value.

2012 is a million minutes away. Anything can happen between now and the next election. Once the U.S. dollar loses its "preferred currency" status things are going to look a lot more different than anyone can anticipate. The conditions we face require immediate action, not prolonged cooperation with a rogue outlaw political regime that's selling off our country to corrupt banksters.

Any politician who doesn't support the reintroduction of Cannabis into United States agricultural rotations must be regarded as either grossly uninformed, incapable of leadership, or guilty of "misprision of treason" -- failing to act in defense of national security.

The illusion of beneficent governance, into which most of us were born, is fed by our naive trust and dependence. In reality, no one needs permission to survive. Environmental indicators make it apparent that our generation has the particular responsibility of addressing climate change. Reintroducing the world's most useful agricultural resource, back into U.S. crop rotations for the first time in our lives, regardless of majority approval is what's required.

For possible insight into extremes of where we may be headed, if we are not proactive, see

Zeitgeist: Moving Forward
http://www.zeitgeistmovingforward.com/

I am recommending that we convene an international Court of Public Opinion to publicly decide whether Cannabis is a "Schedule One drug" without value or a "strategic resource" that's critical to national and international security. Revaluation of Cannabis as being both unique and essential will end the prohibition of it.

My goal is to end Cannabis prohibition in time for people to plant it, primarily for reasons of ecological urgency, this spring. The immediate relevance of atmospheric "monoterpene" decline, due to the accelerating death of the world's boreal forests, ought to be of international concern. Monoterpenes protect the Earth from increasing UV-B radiation that's broiling our planet and causing myriad problems, including temperature increase.

Of necessity, the most direct and decisive process for ending prohibition must be implemented immediately. Now that the healing properties of raw Cannabis leaves and flowers is being revealed, there can be no law limiting production of this essential nutritional resource.

A test of rationality is presented to us in the case of Reverend Roger Christie, whose trial is coming up in April, in Hawaii. I'm coordinating an independent offense defense committee in order to participate in the court proceedings as an adviser to the defense. Those people who are interested in helping to secure Roger's release are invited and encouraged to participate.

In response to Dr. Nichols

Dear Dr. Nichols,

While I truly appreciate the pangs of conscience you suffer, surely you must acknowledge individual responsibility as a primary factor in the life choices people make, particular concerning which substances they use.

You have chosen to study chemical drugs, for quite noble reasons, in spite of the possible dangers they pose to people who choose to ingest them (predictable). You must be aware that pharmaceutical drugs are implicated in the deaths of more than one hundred twenty thousand people per year in the U.S., not to mention countless episodes of non-lethal overdose, causing adverse reactions, pharmaceutical addiction, etc. These are numbers that indicate a fundamental danger in the choice to use chemical drugs for any reason at all.

May I recommend your consideration of herbal therapeutics as a much safer, perhaps more promising area of investigation for achieving your worthy goals. The most obvious plant candidate for study in the treatment of Parkinson's is Cannabis, one of the "safest therapeutically active substances known to man." (DEA Judge, Francis Young, 1982) I offer for your consideration

Cannabis Use, Effect And Potential Therapy For Alzheimer's, MS and Parkinson's
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071014163644.htm

Even more fundamental than the use of 'marijuana' are the nutriceutical properties of hemp seed, in prevention and treatment of many imbalances, is a largely over-looked, primary avenue of science that could benefit tremendously from your skills and experience. No one has ever died from ingesting Cannabis in any form.

I wish you the very best of luck in resolving your conflict over people's misuse of your work. I trust you will consider the work I do for the inertial interest and curiosity it is meant to generate in scientists who are looking for the best answers to the imbalances we face. There is perhaps no greater threat to science than the confusion and suppression being imposed on objective scientific inquiry, tarnished by the atmosphere of politically corrupted bias against the therapeutic potential in "every herb bearing seed."

Sincerely yours,

Paul J. von Hartmann
Cannabis scholar