Joanne Koh City Journal article

I am no expert on journalism, but this here seems to be an example of some fine work. I didn't feel upset or sickened even once as I read it.

Breaking the taboo

Thank you SSDP Victoria—I really like Branson's son. My intuition tells me that he is genuine and that means a hell of a lot. Curiously, the interviewer is also respectful. There may be hope for us yet ...

Poor cannabis

I forgot that the prohibition of cannabis has been twice as long as for other substances.

There's enough to go around for everyone.

"Tasmania's lucrative poppy crop is worth about $100 million." 

I bet it wouldn't be worth that much without the War on Drugs...

Free Lunch with Andrew Reynolds

"I can't control what other people are doing; I just need to be able to control what I'm doing" - Andrew Reynolds ("sober" ten years and counts drug users among his closest friends)

"War On Drugs" by Stuart McMillen

I'm never gonna be a parent, but I would not hesitate to include this before bedtime.

Kipling

As sexist and racist as Rudyard Kipling was/is, he introduced me to this quote today:

"If I can attain Heaven for a pice, why should you be envious?" — Opium Smoker's Proverb

This quote hung over me as I read this excellent article today.

Take-home Narcan (THN) versus Truce

Please do not be mistaken, as THN is a reasonable concept—reasonable does not make it meaningful, though. It's an easy grab that people who really have no idea about opiate use happily cling onto. Why is it easy? It is easy precisely because you can employ the phrase, "SAVING LIVES". Palatable, huh? Easily digestible in a "working families" kind of way. What gets omitted, though, is the subtext; that is, THN will save the lives of those aberrant individuals who need to finally see the light or come to their senses. It also fits in nicely with an economic rationalist agenda, whereby tax dollars are saved due to the decreased need for ambulance call-outs that have been wasted on the aberrant. At the end of the day, the overdosed individual is nothing more than "fucked-up". A "fucked-up" individual who may deserve Narcan because she/he is somebody's daughter, brother or grandchild; but a "fucked-up" individual nonetheless.

So, while some are taking this avenue of righteousness that is, no doubt, a handy topic that brings in the "compassionate" funding dollars, others are looking at the bigger picture and proposing a truce in the War on Drugs. Here is an example: "Time for a Truce?". You see, I am willing to bet everything that I hold dear that if a national, anonymous referendum was held, in which participants were asked what would have actually made a difference to opiate users' lives over the last, let's say, twenty years between THN and a truce, the former would not even receive earnest consideration.

Sure, those chronic pain patients who think nothing of letting those close to them know about their prescribed use—they might have benefited. But what about the countless illicit opiate users who voluntarily chose to use heroin on their own, followed by a heap of benzodiazepines and/or alcohol, because they were just simply fed up with being treated like a complete "scumbag"? Or what about those individuals who wouldn't have anyone that they could give the THN to, for fear of disclosure?

You know what really saves lives when "the dust settles", so to speak? Treating people like the human beings that they actually are. Allowing them to apply for jobs without the fear of an unfairly-assigned criminal record acting as a blockade; recognising that drug use is innate to the human species and subsequently providing autonomy for all people; leaving fellow citizens with enough money to eat, pay the rent and live their lives. The list goes on...

Again, don't be mistaken—THN is reasonable; but in the way that it is currently being sold in Australia, it is merely serving as a distraction from the real problem at hand. Instead of saving lives, we should be giving them back to those who've had their dignity stripped away. However, if you have no experience of what the unjust removal of one's dignity can mean, why bother thinking or acting in such terms?

ResponsibleChoice.com.au

While we're on the subject of people who care: http://www.responsiblechoice.com.au/

And not a skerrick of government funding to be found—could this be causation? 

Flagpole sitting

When I first heard this Harvey Danger song during those years when being approved for a social security loan in Australia wasn't a big deal, I never imagined that it would one day feature in a musing on the global drug user "movement". However, for those familiar with the tune, it is not the "I'm not sick, but I'm not well" refrain that serves as a reference—it is actually the line, "I've been around the world and found that only stupid people are breeding".
   
Funnily enough, some of the people I hold the utmost respect for in my personal life are parents; you see, that is not the issue. I have just noticed a distinct trend, whereby the regression that is progressively taking over the "movement" is most often perpetuated by those who have two points of justification for their supposedly "mature" mindset:

• A family to look after
• Bills to pay  

Now, I only contend with one of these aspects of life, but I am well aware that both are necessities for many, in many places throughout the world. Fine.

However, what is not fine, is trying to convince me (and many others) that this somehow makes the subsequent compromising of integrity "ay okay". In the same manner that "I'm just doing my job" is not a valid excuse for officers who enforce unjust laws and "You need to break a few eggs to make an omelette" is not a reasonable rationale for the corporate tyrants who continue to exploit Third World labor, it is just not okay—simple. And as a famous pop musician once crooned, "I'm not the only one". 

But unlike the perpetrators and tacit supporters of the War on Drugs, I am in no way suggesting that you should be prevented from proceeding with your blessed life—no way! All I ask is that you articulate (ideally, in a matter-of-fact tone) the situation for what it really is, rather than what you have deluded yourself into thinking that it is. Just in case you are still perplexed, it may begin with something like this:

"I don't really care about drug users; in fact, I don't really know what a 'movement' actually is. But anyway, I do care about those close to me and everyone needs money right? I'm just like everyone else and I have to do what it takes ..."—and so on. 

"Hey, I used to too; it's not a big deal."

You might have read the Ben Cousins-related post on this web-based information resource; you might have not. Regardless, the "art" or "sport" of skateboarding promotes the ethos that it's "not what you do", but rather, "how you do it". It is like music to my ears in a world where supposed "success" seems to outshine the concept of ethics far too often.

This web-based video upload is not likely to move the ground beneath your feet or within your mind (hell, you might not even get through the entire fifty seconds); but, for me, it is further evidence for why skateboarding is part of a future where the burdens of 'judgement' and 'superiority' disintegrate, making way for alternative concepts, such as 'community', 'fun' and 'creativity'.

Lest We Forget

In over 220 years of the U.S. Constitution, the 18th Amendment is the only Amendment to have ever been repealed. What was the "18th Amendment", I can't actually hear you ask? Read on... 

"The 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution banned the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcoholic beverages in the United States and its possessions. Contrary to common belief, it did not prohibit the purchase or consumption of alcohol."

Cheers!

Fingers crossed ...

... for Australia's legal sector (but not with both hands, of course).

Horrorshow's 'The Party Life'

Here's an insightful example of drug-related media (this blog is not promoting any external websites, but lyrics sites don't seem to permit "cutting and pasting" - apologies): 

HORRORSHOW F/ NICK LUPI - THE PARTY LIFE LYRICS
[Solo]
They say you can't buy love right?
I just saw some guy outside
Reckons he's selling it for thirty bucks a piece
(Love is the drug!) But anyway

It's clock off time, and some friday night decadence is heaven scent
Now your working week worries are irrelevant
to the task at hand, of the master plan
of getting so far plastered you can hardly stand
Shit, I know it's gross
You'll still catch me at the bar with my glass steady getting comatose
And don't front, I'ma see you there too
as all the thoughts of staying sober disappear into the awkward small talk
It's crystal clear, even with the beer goggles
Is it half empty or half full when you've drunk the whole bottle? (which is it?)
It's no wonder, drunk girls make punch-drunk love confessions
Boys get drunk and throw punches
So let's just all get bent, watch it unravel
Maybe that'll break down the walls of make-up and dress sense
(What's your poison?) cause it ain't just booze these days
Shit, you can sniff, bong, smoke or munch your money away
Set your brain on fire chasing a chemical heaven
You look like shit but you never felt better
And shit, I hate dancing, more power to the wall flowers
But in nocturnal mode, it's the main attraction
So from the house parties looking like a scene from "Kids"
to driving green Mitsubishis down the Kings Cross strip
Pour out a little liquor on the street
for all the nights that you passed out without brushing your teeth

[Chorus]
We live the party life, so get drunk, take drugs
Make love, and we'll do it all again tomorrow night cause
Rain, hail or shine these are the days of our lives
Let's waste 'em away one day at a time
With that party life, so get drunk, take drugs
Make love, and we'll do it all again tomorrow night cause
Rain, hail or shine these are the days of our lives
Let's waste 'em away one day at a time

[Nick Lupi]
See it's clock off time but my work has just begun
Two days off from real life, we gon' touch the sun
Party like we don't trust the sun (ay Solo?)
Now let me show 'em how the fuck it's done
See where I'm from part of the weekend never dies, it just lays low
While we preoccupied with getting by but
When it arrives we all getting live
All heading to the same place, whatever you ride
We living for the now, not concerned with the future
Kidding ourselves like we're gonna slow down
But all this real life talk will only kill my buzz
So I put it to the back and slowly fill my cup
Cause I know reality, it can't be faced when I'm high
That's exactly why I got this bag of kush and some papers, let's ride
Escaping through them late nights, trekking it home
to the unpleasant glow of daylight
These kids are dancing down the fine line between trendy and junky
and when the music stops, it gets ugly
Chemical romance, slow dance with heaven
Shit, I don't like the drugs but they love me, trust me
Uh, pour me another, uh, maybe a couple more
So I can disconnect until all my troubles call
Remember all's fair in love and warfare
Oh yeah, this is for my whole team of midnight juggernauts

[Chorus]

[Solo] + (Nick Lupi)
It's like this city never sleeps, simply turns into a nightclub
where your love ain't as important as your money or your drugs
Here, try some, you only live once
But some of these people acting like they ship already sunk
(So, let's get it while we still forever young
 Before the sun sets on yesterday's buzz
 Before adolescence catches up with what's left of my lungs
 Left wondering how it ever begun)
In this world wide ashtray like any other Saturday
We got the social smokers in with the pack-a-days
(I stay hammered straight with no chaser
 Any other way, mate I wouldn't have it)
It's like what goes up (till gravity calls me
 back from cloud nine for the plunge)
"And I hate all my friends cause all my friends are taking drugs" - Suffa
But shit I'm guilty as charged (so who the fuck am I to judge?)

[Chorus] 

{*Scratches*}
"All we wanna know is 'Where the party at?'" - Notorious B.I.G.

LyricsBay | HORRORSHOW F/ NICK LUPI - THE PARTY LIFE LYRICS

Listen to it here.

Students For Sensible Drug Policy Victoria University

This blog hopes that it is not dreaming, as it seems like some significant people are learning about the significant flaws attached to government funding when the drug war is involved. In the state of Victoria, Australia, an autonomous sex worker group called Vixen is holding a festival this year, and you can find the Students For Sensible Drug Policy Victoria University chapter here (you might need to be logged onto Facebook to see it, unfortunately). At this stage, I highly recommend supporting both.

Transparency

Anyone who bothers reading this will most likely accuse this blog of malevolence and counter-productive negativity. However, it is a sentiment borne of having one's life co-opted by exploitative parties motivated by something other than genuine interest and care. I don't expect the majority of people to understand, but maybe it is what 'gay' people feel under criminalization. I spent many years in intimate confines with people who, in all fairness, not only had no idea about illicit drugs, but, at the end of the day, couldn't care less about the people who use them. I just wish people would admit it and be honest, rather than making things worse by allowing their delusion to impact on actual lives. Maybe women in Canada will feel it if abortion is re-criminalized. I'm not trying to be divisive; just transparent. People should be honest, admit that they need a paying job and the sector is where they landed - this would be an example of integrity. It's not ethical to profit from an inhumane war, but at least people would be recognizing their decisions for what they really are.

So let's be frank - this paper from Melbourne-based NGO, Anex, is one that needs to be read with a well-developed intuition. I also recommend that readers based in Australia spend some time with the people who are employed by the organization, as you may well find that there is no substance to my opinion. As far as my fairly intimate experience goes, this is an organization that is not comprised of illicit drug users, nor do its employees engage in activities related to illicit drug use beyond their paid employment. From a significant period of time understanding this organization, there is a complete absence of passion for the welfare of people who use illicit drugs beyond ego, travel and the next funding round.


Therefore, I can only conclude, based on both intellect and intuition, that this paper is motivated by a fear of future funding cuts - not a concern for people who use illicit drugs. In all fairness, though, how can we expect someone to be genuinely concerned when they have no personal connection to the topic they are working on?

A sense of humor

"...(and a sense of humor, properly developed, is superior to any religion so far devised)..."
 
                                                                                             - Tom Robbins, Jitterbug Perfume (1984)

Would a little progress be alright?

Maybe in order to improve matters somewhat, we need to understand that there is 'self consideration', 'self absorption' and 'selfishness'. Once the difference between the three has been established, I think it is then possible to comprehend that firstly, humans are, by necessity, always motivated by their personal needs and there is nothing wrong with this; and, secondly, that in order for humans to be genuinely fulfilled and happy, we need to live in an environment where those around us have equal opportunities to satisfy their personal needs. It may seem paradoxical, but in coming to terms with our innate self-interest, we can then understand the essential importance of empathy/sharing/compassion/altruism etc.

I said "maybe".

A refreshing breeze and Monica Barratt

Whilst this miniscule bit of internet 'real estate' holds no illusory beliefs regarding its influence or status (and quite happily continues to serve its humble original function), it is good to know that the much wider world feels the coolness that those behind it regularly experience from standing in the passages of humane awareness. Rejuvenation is vital in a climate where heated debate, abusive coercion and manipulation, intense desperation and relentless delusion is forecast every... single... day.

At the very least, this piece of online media from Victoria, Australia's The Age newspaper should be commended for its gentle soothing effect - in meteorological terms, it is possibly akin to the 'Fremantle Doctor' of Western Australia or the rain during the Indochine monsoon season. On a grander scale, Monica Barratt's collaboration with Ormsby et al may be the sign of a new horizon entirely.

M. Scott Peck

In contrast to the fictional underpinnings of the last post, M. Scott Peck's definition of 'evil' has more in common with the very real drug war, as well as the sectors that simultaneously feed off/support it, than many of his fans might realize. Does it remind you of anyone you know?:

According to Peck, an 'evil' person:

Is consistently self deceiving, with the intent of avoiding guilt and maintaining a self image of perfection.
  
Deceives others as a consequence of their own self deception.
   
Projects his or her evils and sins onto very specific targets (scapegoats) while being apparently normal with everyone else.

Commonly hates with the pretense of love, for the purposes of self deception as much as deception of others.
    
Abuses political (emotional) power ("the imposition of one's will upon others by overt or covert coercion").
   
Maintains a high level of respectability, and lies incessantly in order to do so.
    
Is consistent in his or her sins. Evil persons are characterized not so much by the magnitude of their sins, but by their consistency (of destructiveness).
    
Is unable to think from the viewpoint of their victim (scapegoat).
    
Has a covert intolerance to criticism and other forms of narcissistic injury.

Most evil people realize the evil deep within themselves but are unable to tolerate the pain of introspection or admit to themselves that they are evil. Thus, they constantly run away from their evil by putting themselves in a position of moral superiority and putting the focus of evil on others. Evil is an extreme form of what Scott Peck, in The Road Less Traveled, calls a character disorder.

***Peck also stated that these people are rarely seen by psychiatrists and have never been treated successfully when treatment is initiated. Have a great day everyone!

Just a little excerpt...

...from one of my all-time favourite writers, Tom Robbins, whose Jitterbug Perfume I am currently engaged by:

"...an organism steeped in pleasure is an organism disposed to continue...the will to live cannot be overestimated as a stimulant to longevity...ninety percent of all deaths are suicides. Persons...who lack curiosity about life, who find minimal joy in existence, are all too willing, subconsciously, to cooperate with - and attract - disease, accident, violence."
                                                                                   -  Jitterbug Perfume (1984)

Of course, this is not to promote simplistic hedonism or pleasure at the expense of others, or to suggest that longevity in such matters is important... but hopefully, you already know this.

Monkeys, Banana, Stairs, Water

Thanks to David Thorne, I can post this amusing and entirely reasonable segment of writing that has a two-fold implication for the drug sector - firstly, on a macro level, it is a fitting analogy for the innumerable bastions of mediocrity that seem intent on thinking less and regurgitating more; and on a micro level, I think we can apply this quite readily to the poorly-managed, uninspiring and co-opted work places in the sector, filled with delusional morons who ultimately have no passion for their work unless it fuels their ego or bank balance. 

For the moment, though, I think matters are best left to Thorne and your hopefully inspired thoughtfulness: 
 
I once read about five monkeys that were placed in a room with a banana at the top of a set of stairs. As one monkey attempted to climb the stairs, all of the monkeys were sprayed with jets of cold water. A second monkey made an attempt and again the monkeys were sprayed. No more monkeys attempted to climb the stairs. One of the monkeys was then removed from the room and replaced with a new monkey. New monkey saw the banana and started to climb the stairs but to its surprise, it was attacked by the other monkeys. Another of the original monkeys was replaced and the newcomer was also attacked when he attempted to climb the stairs. The previous newcomer took part in the punishment with enthusiasm. Replacing a third original monkey with a new one, it headed for the stairs and was attacked as well. Half of the monkeys that attacked him had no idea why. After replacing the fourth and fifth original monkeys, none had ever been sprayed with cold water but all stayed the fuck away from the stairs. 

Being here longer than me doesn't automatically make your adherence to a rule, or the rule itself, right. It makes you the fifth replacement monkey. The one with the weird red arse and the first to point and screech when anyone approaches the stairs. I would be the sixth monkey, at home in bed trying to come up with a viable excuse not to spend another fruitless day locked in a room with five neurotic monkeys.

Since 1996???

So it really seems like the magazine entitled Modern Drunkard is approaching its platinum jubilee. Well, with a motto like "STANDING UP FOR YOUR RIGHT TO GET FALLING DOWN DRUNK SINCE 1996" and offerings such as 'Drunk of the Issue' and membership to the 'Blackout Brigade', it shouldn't be that much of a surprise.

However, I still can't find the blurb that explains that they produce a publication that celebrates self-indulgent drug use and/or dependence... It's not a big deal, it is just that I am currently designing my own babel-style software that translates delusional data on the interweb. For example, if processed through my program, the aforementioned motto would read: "WE ARE SO BRAIN-DAMAGED FROM OUR WILD DRUGGING THAT WE CAN'T ACTUALLY COMPREHEND THAT WE ARE GLORIFYING AND CELEBRATING THE DANGEROUS USE OF A VERY HARMFUL DRUG THAT CAUSES MORE PROBLEMS THAN A DRUG SHOULD EVER DO (NOT TO MENTION THE BLATANT LACK OF INSIGHT THAT THOSE ADDICTED TO ALCOHOL TOO OFTEN DISPLAY) SINCE 1996".

Ahh, maybe I'm the delusional one here - see what you think: Modern Drunkard Magazine.  

Top 5 Ignorant and Misguided Comments by Individuals Working in the Field of Drugs

1. Drug users in the First World should just shut up because there are those in other countries who can't even get on drug treatment.

2. Actually, drug users have got it pretty good here.

3. I smoke these cigarettes because I enjoy them.

4. Most people grow up and learn to stop taking drugs.

5. If we only had a better society, people would just stop.

(Interestingly, these are most often delivered by individuals who, when genuinely engaged on the topic, know very little about drugs and, if the truth be known, "just want to get to Bali again this year").

***Rest assured that this is merely a brief interlude - this blog will return to its articulated purpose in due course.

Zero Hedge

Maybe it has something to do with the world ending this year, but yet again this blog has found inspiration in the most unexpected of places - and this time it's the Finance sector??? (If I was eleven years-old, it would be highly likely that I would employ the 'WTF' acronym, both now and in subsequent text messages).

This blog decided to share something from the 'team incognito' at Zero Hedge because, as anyone who has followed the writing herein will know, progressive change in this most suffering of areas has not only been sorely lacking, but stagnation (or regression, according to some) has also come at the expense of both life and limb. So it thus becomes somewhat overwhelming when a piece of 2009 insight, allegedly from individuals based at the crux of the financial echelon, galvanises one's understanding of what has been weighing down the movement that could be doing so much when it come to redress and Prohibition's fallout.

So what exactly is meant by "so much" here, in this particular context?

When the field of drugs, including the funded efforts to reduce their harm, awaken to the heart of what really is its purpose then it may become clearly evident that it doesn't matter whose name comes up when a comparatively 'groundbreaking' event is referred to; it isn't important how many cut-and-paste email responses you made public as proof of how 'tuned in' and talented you really are; it matters not which award that person received and in what city that other person was seen speaking in, and also during what year; there is no real value in merely the amount of funding your organisation received (as well as the paid holidays you managed to wrangle with the funds that were supposed to be for 'Admin'); and it is of negligible consequence what your annual report looks like this year, what year your fleet vehicles are, how many committees you will be sitting on this year, how many EFT you are in charge of, how much press the symposium received, who got a 'Thanks' in whoever's latest book, which film that person was called in to be a consultant for, who it is that now calls themselves (and gets paid as) a 'consultant', whose blog appeared in... blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...

So without further ado, here's the enlightening, albeit belated, shine of Zero Hedge:
  

Zero Hedge's Op-Ed To The New York Times
Submitted by Marla Singer on 08/23/2009 11:34 -0400

I sent this Op-Ed proposal to the New York Times on Friday.  Perhaps they will print it.  If so, I will donate the proceeds (don't they pay you $450?) to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Zerohedge.com is a finance-focused weblog bringing together nearly 40 anonymous contributors dedicated to providing the public with a deeper, more detailed discourse on all things finance. After less than ten months since our first post, we’re among the top online publications nationwide in terms of readers, eclipsing other properties with several years of history, A-list contributors, and the backing of the country’s largest, mainstream media firms. Like many publications before us, not least the Federalist Papers, we encourage our contributors to use pen names.  Part of our rationale in adopting a publication-wide preference for anonymity (or, technically, pseudonymity) for our contributors and staff is to avoid making “the story” about the messengers rather than the message.  We believe content should stand on its own merits; if it cannot, neither a sterling reputation on the part of the author nor dazzling penmanship will manage to prop it up.  Likewise no amount of nefarious author history should, in isolation, tear down well-written, fact-based discussion and analysis.  An intelligent and skeptical audience should not be dazzled by several layers of foundation, whether on a swimsuit model or a sow.

On Thursday, following weeks of criticism of our anonymity on CNBC and elsewhere, a reporter from the New York Post confronted our public relations representative over the alleged identity of one of our contributors.  As a matter of policy, Zero Hedge does not comment on the identity of contributors or staff, but over the course of a 30 minute conversation with the reporter, something interesting emerged: the reporter in question was so befuddled by this policy that she barely knew what to say.  She had, quite literally, no idea how to write a story that wasn't primarily about personalities.  Her attempt to bribe our public relations representative with favorable coverage for an exclusive is an example of what is wrong with financial reporting today.  When reporting egos flatter (or threaten) other egos to pull facts, or garner the access required to secure a six-figure advance for their upcoming tell-all book, does anyone really believe we can expect an objective retelling of the facts worthy of the sacred, constitutionally-protected trust we as citizens have given the Fourth Estate?  Have the press forgotten that this is, in fact, a trust, and not a quitclaim deed?  Do they not realize that they are the Estate's trustees, and not its property owners?

Now, more than ever, anonymity is critical to the Republic.  This should surprise no one.  It has been a critical part of speech in this country since before its founding. Without the courageous and then-anonymous writings of, e.g., Thomas Paine or the authors of The Federalist Papers, our nation would be a very different place today.  Though we cannot confirm or deny that Thomas Paine or any of the founding fathers are Zero Hedge contributors today, we do believe we understand something of their motivation for using pen names.

Early on in Zero Hedge's history the view surfaced that, to bring up circulation, we should dumb down our content and post more biographical detail to bolster our credibility.  Thankfully, we decided against that.  The results, in terms of readership, and despite the absence of “credentials” as they are traditionally understood, speak for themselves. This is but one reason that today more than ever, we think it is time to end the cult of personality in financial reporting.  It is no accident that Harry Markopoulos (the accountant whose repeated attempts to expose Bernie Madoff to anyone who would listen were as often ignored) sought to avoid the limelight.

In 1995, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commissions: “Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.... It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the bill of rights, and of the first amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation—and their ideas from suppression—at the hand of an intolerant society.”  Given the financial events of the last twelve months, we think it clear that this must be the end of the status quo for financial regulation in the United States.  We are also keenly aware that a number of extremely well-resourced, established players have little incentive in seeing any change at all.  As we live in an age where posting on a blog can get you fired years later after a casual, lunch-hour Google search by a Human Resources representative, has there ever been a more important time for anonymous speech in financial reporting?  We think not.

We revel in an educated, skeptical audience that takes us to task for every fact, assumption, and bit of analysis we write.  We think this keeps the focus where it belongs, away from the personalities and egos that muddy the water of skeptical inquiry.  Believe us, doubt us, argue with us, then decide where the best analysis is being generated: from reporters at brand-name media outlets, without a lifetime of expertise on the subjects on which they write and whose allegiances lie as much as with the sources they need to keep happy as with the readers they purportedly serve, or with those insiders who by shedding the burden of identification, are free to expose the abuses, absurdities, and abscesses of both those in power and those who report on them.

"Marla Singer," Zero Hedge

Tha Doggfather?

We must admit that Snoop Dogg has never been a 'go-to' kinda person when it comes to musing on the appalling state of the drug war and what can be done about it. And even though an adoption of the 'Doggy Style' that Snoop has waxed so lyrical about would win the anti-Prohibition movement more fans than it would know what to do with, the word that was going around not so long ago was that he is now more about the "gin and juice" than the 'blazing' of his more formative years. Anyhow, a close friend stumbled upon this excerpt from his magnum opus yesterday, and this blog seemed like, far and away, the best place on the interweb to reproduce it...

"Experts will tell you that the War on Drugs will only be won when we lock up all the dealers, or get tough with all the users, or build a 12-foot wall between us and the motherfuckers on the other side of the border. I don't know about any of that shit, but I can tell you this, from first-hand experience: this war everyone is supposed to be fighting won't be over until someone invents a cure for getting high. You take away all the cocaine, fools will still be smoking Indo; you take away all the Indo, they'll be drinking; you bring back Prohibition and they'll start sniffing glue. Let's face it: getting faded is a basic human drive, like food and water and sex and sleep. It's never been about some kind of so-called socio-economic disadvantage. You can't educate people into staying straight. There's no percentage in trying to scare people away from whatever it is that scratches that particular itch... you can't explain that away, or pass a law against it, or try to convince anyone to just say no. For most motherfuckers that's like trying to say no to air. And there's no-one alive who can hold their breath for that long."

A(wo)men.