SD DEA 4560 Viewridge Ave 858.616.4100
_v Anslinger smiling in hell at legacy

U.S. atty for Eastern District of California Paul Seave declined to discuss the measure at all. In Mendocino County, enforcement won't change, said Norm Vroman, the county's district attorney. "(Marijuana) was illegal before the vote, and it is after," he said. Every season, Mendocino, along with neighboring Humboldt and Trinity counties, draws federal and state authorities who swoop in to eradicate marijuana plants by the ton. Nearly 90,000 plants have been destroyed or seized this year.

Right now, Vroman said, he has about 100 marijuana cases pending, but didn't know if any involved possession of 25 or fewer plants. Because of the commercial growers and traffickers that innundate his office, he conceded that the humbler home grower often escapes detection. "We just don't have that kind of personnel," he said.
Mendocino County Sheriff Tony Craver, who signed the petition to get the measure on the ballot, is busy these days on talk radio trying to ward off the notion that he supports legalized marijuana.
He said he does support letting people vote on the issue and further study that could lead to more effective laws. Craver said he is sworn to uphold state and federal laws, which means he'll still be arresting illegal pot growers. "It's a real heartbreaker for me," he said. "I'm seriously committed to the people of Mendocino County, but this is the law, and I'm afraid that's where it's at."

Widely supported by medical marijuana users, the measure also drew support from those who do not smoke pot, backers say. It drew no organized opposition. "We framed it as a personal freedom issue," said Hamburg. "People on the right and left have said they don't want government intruding in their lives. It doesn't mean we want everyone out there smoking dope."
Govt helicopters swarming overhead in search of illicit plants are a discordant backdrop to daily life here, said Michelle Staples, as she loaded purchases into her car at a Ukiah drugstore. She is not a user herself, but she said she voted for Measure G because she is convinced marijuana is no worse than legal drugs such as alcohol and that the money spent on enforcement is an embarrassment. "We should be spending that money on our schools," said Staples, 53, who cares for retired racehorses.

At a popular coffeehouse on the main drag of Ukiah, 17-year-old Brett Reid tore into a calzone for lunch and considered life in the Emerald Triangle. "I don't think I know of one person who hasn't tried it," he said of his county's cash crop. The measure quickly became fodder for school civics projects, he said. He went to a forum as a homework assignment expecting to walk into a Grateful Dead concert-like setting. But to his surprise, the participants and attendees were as straight as his parents.
"There were doctors and lawyers there," he said. At his high school, a poll of seniors in history classes showed 90 percent would support the measure if they could vote, he said. In fact, he said, teachers and students seemed to come together over the issue.It's that kind of place.

  [ Given the premise that marijuana is a gateway drug, a dubious claim even as allusion and indefensible as a claim by medical science, gates permit passage both ways. There is no drug or intoxicant remotely as well suited for experimenting in order to learn moderation. You can smoke yourself into a stupor and suffer nothing from it more than a lost hour or three.
This tremendous potential for establishing self determined constraints is precisely why the national security state was compelled to decree it "Schedule I" lest it jeopardize tyranny by teaching the self-determination required by liberty. ]

Pot panel may help turn over a new leaf
Jamaica commission set to present final recommendations to Parliament on whether to decriminalize ganja
6.2.01   Mark Fineman L.A.Times pA3

Kingston, Jamaica   Imagine a lush, tropical land just a few hundred miles off the U.S. coast where marijuana, though illegal, is a cultural icon worshiped by thousands and so plentiful it goes for just $26 a pound. Now, imagine this place when it's legal. That's precisely what Jamaica's govt-appointed National Commission on Ganja has been doing for the last 9 months. Led by the dean of social sciences at Kingston's Univ. of the West Indies, the 7 member commission has heard from more than 150 people & institutions ranging from the Medical Assn. of Jamaica to the Rastafarian Centralization Org., and it has sounded out more than a dozen communities nationwide.
This month, the official body will present its final recommendations on whether marijuana should be decriminalized here.

An interim report that Commission chair Barry Chevannes presented to Jamaican PM P.J. Patterson in May gave no clear indication whether the commission will endorse decriminalization, a recommendation that would then be put to Parliament for a vote. "It may be deduced so far that most persons & organizations would support the decriminalization of the use of ganja for private purposes & in private spaces," the preliminary report said. "However, there are those who would prefer to maintain the status quo regarding the criminal status of ganja in Jamaica." The Bush admin isn't likely to welcome decriminalization. Even under Clinton, State Dept & DEA consistently expressed concern over Jamaica's large marijuana crop and its exports to U.S. markets.

Chevannes said the commission is seriously considering the "external consequences" of its recommendation. Beyond a potential U.S. condemnation, they include a possible snowball effect on other marijuana-producing Caribbean islands that have considered decriminalizing the plant in the past. And K.D. Knight, Jamaica's national security minister, said this week that he opposes decriminalization.
The commission chairman cited a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck a blow to medical use of marijuana in America as a sign of the times in Jamaica's powerful neighbor to the north. "The U.S., in the kind of mood it is in today, well, this matter will be one for the commission to weigh," Chevannes said.

Privately, however, U.S. & Jamaican law enforcement officials say the island's marijuana trade has been eclipsed by a more lucrative role as transshipment point for Colombian cocaine bound for U.S., a multibillion-dollar industry that is fueling gang wars in Kingston, the capital, and a murder rate that ranks among the highest in the world. Some proponents of decriminalization argue that Jamaican police could focus more resources on combating the cocaine trade if relieved of targeting ganja; last year, police officials say, they seized more than 6 tons of marijuana and destroyed more than 1,000 acres of the plant.

Yet ganja remains plentiful, readily available and cheap; by comparison, a pound of the Jamaican herb that goes for $26 here can fetch more than $1,500 in the U.S. "One opinion on the commission is that [decriminalization] would not significantly increase the use of marijuana," Chevannes said. "Right now, anyone who wants to smoke ganja is virtually at liberty to do so. It is freely available at large gatherings. And, indeed, if police were to arrest everyone who's doing it, tens of thousands would be in jail." Still, he added, police here arrest about 5,000 people on marijuana charges annually, 90% of them for minor offenses. "So, arguably, the only thing the decriminalization of it would be doing is taking the status of a crime off thousands of people," Chevannes said. "And most of them are young people. "Were the commission to recommend decriminalization, it would not seriously change anything here."

San Francisco   The California Supreme Court agreed yesterday to decide whether employers can terminate employees for lawfully using medical marijuana. The case concerns a former computer systems administrator for a Sacramento telecommunications company who was fired after 8 days on the job because he tested positive for marijuana, despite the employee having a lawful recommendation by a doctor to use marijuana to alleviate back pain from a previous injury. The justices neither commented on the case nor said when they would hear it.

Gary Ross, fired in 2001, sued for wrongful termination and employment discrimination, contending that he had a right to use marijuana under California's 1996 Compassionate Use Act. He said marijuana did not hinder his work performance.
The 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento dismissed the case, saying "employers have legitimate interests in not employing persons who use illegal drugs."
Ross appealed to the state Supreme Court. The appeals court had ruled that because marijuana was illegal under federal law, the state courts had "no legitimate authority to require an employer to accommodate an employee's use of marijuana."

Bay Area pot guru busted in Utah
11.21.01   Bob Egelko SF Chronicle

The godfather of medical marijuana in California didn't get much respect last week in Cedar City UT where police caught him smoking a joint in his motel room. Facing a felony charge of possessing marijuana for distribution, Dennis Peron said yesterday it was time that Utah had a law like California's Proposition 215, which he drafted in 1996. "I'm going to go back and fight it and going to try to change the state law, " he said. "It's going to be a tough nut to crack, but it's not impossible." Peron said he and fellow Bay Area marijuana activist John Entwistle had been heading for Zion National Park with a Utah friend last Wednesday and decided to sample the marijuana they had brought along, even though "I didn't think it was a good idea."

A maid picked up the scent in the hall, and the motel owner called police, who held the three men spread-eagled on the floor for 10 minutes "like we had committed a terrorist act," Peron said. Officers searched the room and 2 cars outside and found enough marijuana to conclude the three were dealers. Peron said it was only a few ounces, to be used for medical purposes as allowed by Prop. 215. He and Entwistle both have doctors' recommendations to take marijuana as part of their therapy for alcoholism, he said. Iron County Atty Scott Burns, the prosecutor, said yesterday that police had found nearly a pound, "an amount consistent with persons who possess with intent to distribute." Regardless of California law, Burns said, "In Utah in 2001 it's illegal to possess a pound of marijuana, notwithstanding doctors' orders."

Police impounded the cars and all their cash, about $8,000, according to Burns, or $3,700, according to Entwistle, and the three were kept in jail overnight until a friend bailed them out. While the cars were returned, Burns said the cash would be held as evidence until the end of the case. The charge is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison, but Burns said the usual sentence was 30 days in jail and a $1,000 fine

ID card for marijuana patients urged
9.25.01   Ray Huard SD UT

"This is just another way for (patients) to be able to prove their medical need," said city's Medical Marijuana Task Force chair Juliana Humphrey. "For the police, they don't want to arrest sick people." The council voted 8-1 to support the legislation, which would establish a voluntary state registry for medical marijuana users. Those who chose to register would be issued cards by county health depts indicating they were entitled to use marijuana for medical purposes. "It is a health issue," said Councilman George Stevens. "It is a very serious health issue to relieve their pain." Councilman Brian Maienschein was the dissenter.

Even as the state legislation works its way through the process, the city's Medical Marijuana Task Force plans to present a proposal for municipal identification cards to the council's Public Safety & Neighborhood Services Committee as soon as next month, Humphrey said in an interview after the council vote. A state program is preferable because it would apply to more people and eliminate jurisdictional concerns, Humphrey said. But she said the city will proceed "on a parallel track" with the state legislation. "We're going to carry on for our own citizens," Humphrey said. Humphrey said the task force's proposal would be based on what others have done, including the city of San Francisco.

In considering the issuance of identification cards, Humphrey said: "San Diego is not going out on a limb here. All (we are) doing is assisting in the implementation of an existing law." San Francisco is the only large California city that issues such cards. It adopted a program last year that allows sick people with a doctor's note to pay a $25 fee to get a card that allows them to use marijuana to relieve their symptoms.

East County pot growers sentenced
12.18.02   SD Union Tribune

San Diego   4 men whose marijuana farm was discovered during an East County raid on a stolen car ring were sentenced today to 3 years probation and ordered to complete 21 days of public service work. Robert Watson, 36, Mark Watson, 42, Steven Watson, 19, and Scott Chase, 26, pleaded guilty to cultivating marijuana.
They were arrested 9.12.02 as officers looking for stolen vehicles served a search warrant on a 30-acre ranch in Descanso. 5 other people were taken into custody on auto theft charges. About 10 vehicles were recovered at the ranch, incl a forklift, dirt bike, 5 Ford Expeditions, a Ford Excursion, a water truck and other construction vehicles. Investigators said many of the vehicles were stolen from storage lots of 3 auto dealerships in San Diego County.

Authorities were led to the East County site after a Hwy Patrol officer picked up an electronic signal coming from a stolen Bobcat forklift equipped with a LoJack anti-theft device. Agents also found 2,200 marijuana plants, indoors & outdoors, with a street value of more than $500,000.
Some of the plants were 6 ft tall, and a barn behind a home had been turned into a grow house, complete with heat lamps, fans and thermometers, authorities said. Neighbors said Robert Watson & his brother rented the ranch from a wealthy owner. They said Watson's companion, cousin and nephew also lived there.

Roll up for the marijuana mystery tour
2.14.03   Ryann Connell WaiWai

Hokkaido, the most pristine of Japan's main islands, is going to pot literally, according to Tokudane Saizensen (3/13). Despite concrete jungles in mega-cities of Kanto & Kansai, there's apparently plenty of grass in the northernmost island, both of the backyard variety & underground.
So prevalent is cannabis in the north that Marijuana mystery tours are all the rage. Hokkaido has attracted so many weed fans, it's become known as "Hemp Heaven." Hokkaido became Japan's hemp haven during the Meiji Era (1868 to 1912), when the plant was grown to use making ropes, military uniforms and other defense-related items. Hemp farms were set up throughout the island and flourished through until the end of WWII.

However, Tokudane Saizensen notes, things changed in 1948 with the enactment of the Cannabis Control Law, which effectively banned the cultivation of hemp, whose use was curtailed anyhow by the importation of imported textiles and creation of other fabrics. The hemp farms disappeared.
Getting rid of the weed wasn't easy. Fields popped up from seeds uncollected at the old hemp farms. Cannabis plants grew wild throughout Hokkaido and the plant, capable of surviving in harshest of conditions spread everywhere. It remained largely untouched, though, thanks to a strong Japanese stigma about drug use and ignorance of powers of the plant.

That changed as the Internet spread through mid- to late-'90s; Marijuana Mystery Tours in Hokkaido became an island's tourist attraction. "Go to most Hokkaido bookstores and they'll be packed with books about dope," a reporter from a Hokkaido newspaper tells Tokudane Saizensen. "The books are filled with information about where the grass is growing, its street value and even have people writing about their experience on cultivation tours."
Seizures of cannabis & hashish in Hokkaido both reached record levels last year. Authorities are well aware of the prevalence of wild hemp on the island and are removing about 1 million plants a year. That's not stopping people's interest in the area. "Loads of information about marijuana farms (in Hokkaido) appear in online bulletin boards. People won't stop writing about them," the journalist Tokudane Saizensen. "It's this information that becomes the basis of the Marijuana Mystery Tours."

DEA targets larger marijuana providers
Federal agency sees big profits for medical dispensaries as a sign of illegal high-stakes drug dealing. Advocates say the raids are unfair.
1.1.07   Rone Tempest L.A> Times

Hayward CA   Until federal drug agents arrested him last month, Shon Squier was one of Hayward's most successful and generous young businessmen. Customers lined up outside his downtown storefront, particularly on Mondays, when he offered free samples to the first 50 visitors. Business was so good that Squier, a former construction worker, was able to donate more than $100,000 to local charities.
But Squier's success as a dynamic medical marijuana entrepreneur was also his downfall. Federal drug agents raided his home and business, arresting Squier and his store manager, freezing bank accounts containing $1.5 million and confiscating several expensive cars, motorcycles and $200,000 in cash.

Medical marijuana advocates claim the raid constitutes unfair, selective enforcement by the Drug Enforcement Administration of the estimated 170 medical marijuana dispensaries in the state, including 85 in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Just down the street, another medical marijuana dispensary, not as big or as flashy as Squier's, was left untouched by the DEA agents in the 12.11.06 raid.

The federal drug agency, which does not recognize California laws legalizing the sale of marijuana to patients with doctor's prescriptions, contends the amount of money involved proves that the medical marijuana trade is nothing more than high-stakes drug dealing, complete with the same high-rolling lifestyles.
"These people will tell you they are just interested in the terminally ill," said DEA special agent in charge of the California eastern federal district Gordon Taylor, "but what they are really interested in is lining their pockets with illegal drug money. When you pull the mask off, you see that they are nothing more than common dope dealers."

California's two medical marijuana laws, Proposition 215, approved by voters in 1996, and Senate Bill 420, passed in 2003, are not clear about how much money proprietors can take out of their businesses. One section of SB 420 states that medical marijuana caregivers should be allowed "reasonable compensation" for their services. Another section states that distribution should be done on a nonprofit basis.
"The legislation is about as clear as mud the way that they wrote it," said pro-medical marijuana group Americans for Safe Access lawyer Joe Elford. "The dispensaries are legal under state law because they are cooperatives and collectives. It is my best guess in terms of what the Legislature intended is that they shouldn't be operating to make a profit."

With the proliferation of medical marijuana dispensaries of all sizes across the state, the DEA and Internal Revenue Service have recently concentrated their investigations on young, high-profile operators like Squier, 34, and Luke Scarmazzo, 26, co-owner of a Modesto dispensary.
Scarmazzo got the attention of the DEA earlier in the year, when he produced a rap video that showed him counting stacks of hundred dollar bills, blowing billows of smoke at the camera and flipping off federal agents. The Scarmazzo video, featuring the background sound of a pump shotgun racking a round, includes actors posing as members of the Modesto City Council. Online at http://www.krazmusic.com , it includes the refrain

: I'm in business, man.
I mean business, man.
Let me handle my business, damn

Here in Hayward, Squier and his business manager, Valerie Lynn Herschel, 23, are charged with the illegal manufacture and distribution of marijuana, a federal "controlled substance." Federal agents confiscated hundreds of plants, brownies, cookies and other products containing marijuana from Squier's business, Local Patients Cooperative.
"I only gave the people what they wanted, easy safe access to medical marijuana," said the slightly built Squier, cuddling his pet Chihuahua in his former office, which was stripped bare by federal agents.
He described his business as a responsible enterprise that paid federal and state payroll taxes for 60 employees, contributed to the Hayward High School football team and gave discounts to Hayward residents, veterans and customers in wheelchairs.
Squier said that he served about 75 customers a day and had 70,000 individual patients in his books. The success of his business allowed him to buy a $1.5-million home in the Hayward Hills overlooking San Francisco Bay, a Hummer and a late-model Mercedes.

Half a block down Foothill Boulevard, Tom Lemos, 45, continues to operate his much lower-volume Hayward Patients Resource Center. Whereas Squier and Scarmazzo flaunted their wealth, Lemos, who claims to have 3,000 to 4,000 regular customers, emphasizes his modest lifestyle.
"I live in a rental apartment and I drive an '86 Isuzu with 245,000 miles on it," Lemos said.
Appearing before the Hayward City Council on 12.19.06 to ask for a renewal of his agreement to operate in the city, Lemos opened his remarks by stating: "I don't live in a large house." Compared to his "small, homey" medical cannabis operation, Lemos said, Squier's high-volume Local Patients Cooperative down the street was a "Wal-Pot."

After hearing Lemos' presentation and testimony from several of his patients, the City Council agreed to extend his agreement for 90 days, suggesting that he would be granted a longer-term permit if he moved from the downtown area to a more remote location, away from schools and the general public.
Even before the federal bust, the city had informed Squier that its agreement with him would be terminated. Similarly, after Scarmazzo began operating in Modesto, the City Council passed an ordinance banning additional cannabis cooperatives, and the city had on several occasions attempted to halt Scarmazzo's operation.

The raids on both the Hayward and Modesto operations support what medical marijuana advocates contend is an unwritten practice by the DEA of being more likely to crack down on an operation that has lost local govt support.
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that federal laws banning marijuana sales take precedence over those in California and other states permitting the sales, the DEA was empowered to arrest patients and operators at any one of the dispensaries that started up after passage of Proposition 215.

Instead of going after everyone, however, the federal agency appears to concentrate on the larger and higher-profile operations. Medical marijuana advocates contend it is unfair of the DEA to cite examples like Squier and Scarmazzo to represent the typical dispensary operators.
"Most operators are not wealthy individuals," said Americans for Safe Access lawyer Elford. "As far as we can tell, the majority of dispensary operators are simply people who are interested in providing safe, affordable and reliable medicine to the people who need it and are not in it for the profit."

The "big fish" strategy enrages Oakland lawyer James Anthony, who represents Scarmazzo in civil matters.
"Why does the DEA suddenly concern themselves with how successful a medical cannabis collective is?" he asked. "Are they saying that if these guys had led monkish lives, then they would have left them alone? Are they judging Donald Trump on his lifestyle?"

U.S. Food & Drug Administration is contradicting itself. It recently reiterated its position that cannabis has no medical utility, but it also approved advanced clinical trials for a marijuana-derived drug called Sativex, a liquid preparation of two of the most therapeutically useful compounds of cannabis. This is the same agency that in 1985 approved Marinol, another oral cannabis-derived medicine.

Both Sativex and Marinol represent "pharmaceuticalization" of marijuana. They are attempts to make available its quite obvious medicinal properties, to treat pain, appetite loss and many other ailments, while at the same time prohibiting it for any other use. Clinicians know that the herb because it can be smoked or inhaled via a vaporizer is a much more useful and reliable medicine than oral preparations. So it might be wise to consider exactly what Sativex can and can't do before it's marketed here.

A few years ago, the British firm GW Pharmaceuticals convinced Britain's Home Office that it should be allowed to develop Sativex because the drug could provide all of the medical benefits of cannabis without burdening patients with its "dangerous" effects, those of smoking and getting high.
But there is very little evidence that smoking marijuana as a means of taking it represents a significant health risk. Although cannabis has been smoked widely in Western countries for more than 4 decades, there have been no reported cases of lung cancer or emphysema attributed to marijuana. A day's breathing in any city with poor air quality poses more of a threat than inhaling a day's dose, which for many ailments is just a portion of a joint, of marijuana.

Further, those who are concerned about the toxic effects of smoking can now use a vaporizer, which frees the cannabinoid molecules from the plant material without burning it and producing smoke.

As for getting high, I am not convinced that the therapeutic benefits of cannabis can always be separated from its psychoactive effects. For example, many patients with multiple sclerosis who use marijuana speak of "feeling better" as well as of the relief from muscle spasms and other symptoms. If cannabis contributes to this mood elevation, should patients be deprived of it?
The statement that Sativex, "when taken properly," won't cause intoxication hinges on the phrase "when taken properly." "Properly" here merely means taking a dose, by holding a few drops of liquid under the tongue, that is under the level required for the psychoactive effect. As with Marinol, people who want to use Sativex to get high will certainly be able to do so.

One of the most important characteristics of cannabis is how fast it acts when it is inhaled, which allows patients to easily determine the right dose for symptom relief. Sativex's sublingual absorption is more efficient than orally administered Marinol (which requires 1 1/2 to two hours to take effect), but it's still not nearly as fast as smoking or inhaling the herb.
That means "self-titration," or self-dosage, is difficult if not impossible. Further, many patients cannot hold Sativex, which has an unpleasant taste, under the tongue long enough for it to be absorbed. As a consequence, varying amounts trickle down the esophagus. It then behaves like orally administered cannabis, with the consequent delay in the therapeutic effect.

Cannabis will one day be seen as a wonder drug, as was penicillin in the 1940s. Like penicillin, herbal marijuana is remarkably nontoxic, has a wide range of therapeutic applications and would be quite inexpensive if it were legal. Even now, good-quality illicit or homegrown marijuana, which is, at the very least, no less useful a medicine than Sativex, is less expensive than Sativex or Marinol.
"Pharmaceuticalization" of marijuana has promise. No doubt the industry could produce unique analogs of the naturally occurring cannabinoids that would be useful in ways smoked cannabis is not. But for now, medicines such as Sativex provide only one advantage over the herb: They're legal.
I have yet to see a patient who preferred Marinol to smoked marijuana. Similarly, the commercial success of Sativex will largely depend on how vigorously the marijuana laws are enforced. It is not unreasonable to believe that drug companies have an interest in sustaining the prohibition against the herb.

GW Pharmaceuticals founder Geoffrey Guy claims his aim was to keep people who find marijuana useful out of court. There is, of course, a way to do this that would be much less expensive, both economically and in terms of human suffering.

For pot growers, suburbia is fertile ground   The recent discovery of huge marijuana cultivation operations in homes in Diamond Bar and Chino Hills is raising concerns.
3.30.07   Tony Barboza, David Pierson L.A. Times

Diamond Bar Mayor Steve Tye never noticed anything unusual about the upscale 3 bedroom suburban home a block from his house. That is until Wednesday, when Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies burst in and found the entire house had been converted into a massive indoor marijuana farm, complete with elaborate irrigation system and overhead lights on timers that were hooked up illegally to bypass meter readings.
It's the second time in just over a week a house turned pot farm has been discovered in Diamond Bar, a wealthy suburb of 58,000 in the eastern San Gabriel Valley. Two more marijuana-cultivating homes were found in a neighboring city this month.

Detectives are now investigating whether the houses might be tied to a similar suburban pot-growing ring busted last year in Northern California and allegedly run by a Chinese gang. In Diamond Bar alone, authorities have hauled away what authorities estimate to be more than $22 million in pot plants.
Tye said he was stunned when sheriff's deputies told him 1,800 marijuana plants worth an estimated $10 million were being grown near his house. He suspects the growers were counting on Diamond Bar's low profile to conceal their operation.
"It's a disturbing trend. I think people that break the law are always looking for an opportunity to stay hidden from the authorities," he said. "They've used up growing it in mountains, the outlying areas, and now their next greatest idea is doing it in neighborhoods."

Authorities in neighboring Chino Hills have found about $6 million in pot plants in recent weeks, including at one house raided Wednesday. Two weeks ago, police seized 1,300 plants from a 6 bedroom house in Chino Hills, said San Bernardino County Sheriff's Dept spokeswoman Jodi Miller.
Officials aren't sure whether the cases are connected, but there are some striking similarities. Both houses in Diamond Bar recently had been purchased, apparently with the intent to use suburbia as a cover for major pot cultivation. That's a substantial investment in an area where most houses sell for $600,000 to $1 million, authorities said.

In the first Diamond Bar house, deputies found a special ventilation system designed to prevent the odor of pot from escaping. The lack of such a system in the Diamond Bar house raided Wednesday allowed the odor of marijuana to waft out to the street, which tipped neighbors off, said Los Angeles County Sheriff's Narcotics Bureau Lt. Jim Whitten.
"Every room had marijuana growing in it except the bathroom and kitchen," he said. "There's no evidence of anybody living here. It was just all set up for growing."

Last year, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and local police discovered similar elaborate pot farms hidden in nearly 40 suburban homes around Northern California. As in the Southern California cases, the suspects allegedly purchased the homes for $500,000 or more and meticulously converted them into cultivation centers.
They knocked down walls, installed irrigation systems and even hired gardeners to cut the lawns and take out the trash to avoid raising suspicion, authorities said.

DEA officials believe the Northern California pot ring was operated by a Chinese American crime operation based in San Francisco's Chinatown. Whitten said L.A. County sheriff's investigators were trying to determine whether the Diamond Bar and Chino Hills cases were tied to the ones in Northern California but have yet to make a definitive link.
Diamond Bar, Chino Hills and surrounding communities have seen a huge influx of Asians in recent years, many moving up from Chinese enclaves closer to downtown L.A. Joaquin Lim, a councilman in Walnut, which is near Diamond Bar, said he was surprised about the possible Chinese gang links to the pot busts. He said his city has dealt with a few prostitution rings secretly operating in suburban homes, but never huge marijuana farms.

"I was totally shocked by how elaborate the operation was," he said. "Criminal elements like to pick Walnut and Diamond Bar because they are remote and [seem like] good places for criminal activity." Police officials in other San Gabriel Valley communities with large Asian populations said they have not seen any increases in home marijuana farms.
It's not uncommon for pot to be cultivated in houses. But detectives said they were surprised by the huge quantities, which usually are found in large outdoor farms hidden in canyons and on remote parkland. Still, the DEA reports say the amount of pot recovered from indoor farms has increased in recent years.

Elmer Omohundro, 76, who lives down the street from the drug operation uncovered Wednesday in Diamond Bar, said the house gave no clues that thousands of pot plants were inside, even to his trained eye as a retired L.A. County sheriff's captain.
"I didn't see anyone other than people who would come over every month or two to pull some weeds outside. I thought they were gardeners," he said, adding the house was recently remodeled and sold. "I never expected that kind of activity. I never saw anything that would give it away."

Wash.D.C.   Danny Kyllo was not growing rhododendrons in his home on Rhododendron Drive in Florence OR in 1992. He was growing marijuana, which when cultivated indoors requires high-intensity lamps that generate considerable heat and, in this instance, generated a Supreme Court case. Last Monday's decision merits attention because the opinion for the closely divided (5-4) court was written by Justice Antonin Scalia. He is commonly, and not improperly, called a "strict constructionist.'' He describes himself as an "originalist,'' meaning that he construes the Constitution by reading the text as its words were used and understood at the time by those who wrote them.

The logic & structure of the document illuminates the original meaning of those words. Scalia's originalism was no impediment to ruling that Kyllo's Fourth Amendment right to protection against unreasonable searches was violated by a technology never envisioned by the Constitution's authors. Dissenting from his civil libertarian opinion were 3 more-or-less conservative justices (Rehnquist, O'Connor and Kennedy) and the court's most liberal justice, Stevens.
Acting on information from informants & utility records, law enforcement officers used an Agema Thermovision 210 thermal imager to detect that the roof over Kyllo's garage and a side wall of his home were unusually hot. Using that evidence, they acquired a search warrant, found more than 100 marijuana plants and arrested Kyllo. He said the evidence was illegally obtained because the warrant was issued partly on the basis of the thermal imaging results, and the imaging itself constituted a search conducted without a warrant, in violation of the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches.

The amendment was written in the context of the English common law principle that "the eye cannot by the laws of England be guilty of a trespass.'' However, more than the law enforcement officers' eyes were involved in the scan of Kyllo's home that was conducted from the street and took only a few minutes. The question for the court, as Scalia posed it, was: How much technological enhancement of ordinary perception from such a vantage point, if any, is too much?
Scalia, joined by Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg and Breyer, stressed that the thermal imaging technology used is "a device that is not in general public use'' and a homeowner has a reasonable expectation of privacy for activities that could not be detected without technologically enhanced eavesdropping. But, then, such eavesdropping is, in a sense, a contradiction in terms.

There often is wisdom in the logic of common language, so notice the derivation of the word that would commonly be used to describe what the government was doing: "eavesdropping.'' The late Justice Hugo Black noted that people surreptitiously seeking information used to lurk in the "eavesdrop,'' in the shadow under a building's eave. This may not have been nice, but neither was it invasive. It was the equivalent of surveillance by the "naked eye'', in this example, the officers' eyes unassisted by any sense-enhancing technology. Privacy is neither an easily identifiable thing, like the Grand Canyon, nor an absolute value. However, the concern of the Constitution's Framers for protecting privacy began by assuming that privacy of the home is the most precious and most easily defined sort.

In Kyllo's case, Scalia offered this "originalist'' criterion: What preserves the "degree of privacy against govt that existed when the Fourth Amendment was adopted''? Scalia and four colleagues concluded, "On the basis of this criterion, the information obtained by the thermal imager in this case was the product of a search.'' Stevens, writing for the 3 other dissenters, sided with law enforcement, accusing the majority of abandoning "judicial restraint'' as it overturned the Ninth Circuit, the home of liberal judicial activism, which had ruled against Kyllo.
Stevens argued that searches of "property in plain view'' are presumptively reasonable. Scalia responded that it is "simply inaccurate'' to say, as the dissenters did, that the thermal imaging did not obtain information about the home's interior, the most protected realm of intimacy. Congress is about to step onto the dark and bloody ground of the judicial confirmation process. Jurisprudential theories, "strict construction,'' "originalism,'' the Constitution as a "living document'' that "evolves'' to meet "new problems''. will be bandied. Some senatorial and other critics of President Bush judicial nominees will portray those nominees as too much like Scalia, and hence too strict in their "originalist'' constitutional construction to understand the applicability of the document to modern conditions. The decision in the Kyllo case should, but probably will not, cause these critics second, or perhaps first, thoughts.

A German artist is to sow 70,000 cannabis seeds in Kassel, Germany in June. Robert Jelinek will sow the seeds during the first few days of the Documenta XI festival, which begins on June 8. Any plants actually left standing are meant for public consumption and should be ready for harvesting just before the festival ends Sept. 15. 70,000 Cannabis Plants From Kassel is intended as a protest against the continuing criminalisation of cannabis throughout most of Europe

Suit aims to stop raids on pot farms
4.22.03   L.A. Times

Medicinal pot farmers deputized in Santa Cruz
12.11.02   Ken McLaughlin San Jose Mercury

Valerie and Michael Corral, the founders of a medicinal marijuana farm that was busted in early September, are now Deputy Valerie Corral and Deputy Michael Corral by order of the Santa Cruz City Council. Taking another pot shot at the federal Drug Enforcement Administration, the council voted 7- 0 Tuesday to give the Corrals the "authority to cultivate, distribute and possess medical marijuana".
The Corrals' attorney, Ben Rice, maintains that the "deputy" status allows the Corrals to carry a controlled substance because they are enforcing local drug laws, in this case, the city of Santa Cruz's ordinance regulating the way medicinal marijuana can be distributed. But the DEA indicated it wasn't amused by the Corrals' new "deputy" status. "No one in the United States is allowed to distribute illegal drugs, period", DEA spokesman Richard Meyer said after the council's vote.
Valerie Corral said Santa Cruz is the third city in California to deputize medicinal marijuana providers. One person has been deputized in Oakland and two in San Francisco, she said. Though the council action is largely symbolic, the Corrals carry the official title of Santa Cruz city deputy.

Tuesday's action follows a highly publicized pot giveaway on the steps of City Hall on 9.17.02, 12 days after the raid on the farm in the hills near Davenport. The farm was operated by the Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana, better known as WAMM. The rally and giveaway, attended by 6 council members and about 1,000 other people, tried to send a message to the federal govt that it needs to acknowledge that states should be able to decide for themselves whether marijuana can be used as medicine.
No arrests were made, although a mysterious helicopter hovered overhead as politicians, prominent attorneys, physicians and numerous AIDS and cancer patients pledged to prod Washington lawmakers to preserve medicinal marijuana laws. The council acted Tuesday at the request of the Corrals, who are still waiting to see if federal prosecutors will charge them with anything. Their attorneys have advised them that the new "deputy'" status will help them in their legal battle because it indicates overwhelming community support.

"Democracy is very important to me", said Michael Corral, referring to the 1996 passage of Proposition 215, a measure that state residents thought would result in the legal distribution of medicinal marijuana. The federal govt, however, has taken the position that states can't allow the possession and distribution of a controlled substance.
Meyer said the controversy has not affected the cooperation with the Santa Cruz Police Dept, which has been put in an awkward position of having to work with the DEA and ignore its medicinal pot edict at the same time.
"We have great respect for Santa Cruz police officers", Meyer said. "And we are committed to protecting Santa Cruz citizens".
The Corrals' fight has gained some heavyweight legal help, including noted constitutional law expert Santa Clara University law Professor Gerald Uelmen. Only a "twisted and perverted bureaucrat" could approve sending in agents with automatic weapons to wipe out WAMM's tiny farm, Uelmen has said. He has joined Rice in a legal effort to force a legal showdown aimed at preserving states' rights on the marijuana front.

Since the bust, Valerie Corral said, WAMM has been able to continue to provide marijuana at an undisclosed Santa Cruz location to about 235 members, 83 percent of whom are considered terminal. 3 have died since the raid, and one is in critical condition, she said.
The marijuana comes from donations. ``We live in an extremely generous community,'' she said.
Mike Rotkin, who just returned to the council after a 2 year hiatus, said he was upset by national press coverage that portrayed Santa Cruz as the town that wants to "get everyone stoned". WAMM, he said, has been an exemplary organization that has shown it is "serious about treating terminally ill people".

In any any health-food store you’ll find breads, waffles, granola bars fortified with hemp. Recently, there’s been an explosion in hemp foods, says market research firm Mintel's Marcia Mogelonsky in Chicago. Is hemp the next big health trend?

Similar to flaxseed, hemp seeds boast a highly desirable ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fats, making them a heart-healthy choice; their impressive mix of amino acids makes them a high-quality plant protein. Plus, hemp seeds impart a nice nutty flavor and great chewy texture to foods.

Medical marijuana dispensaries, which the Riverside County Board of Supervisors will consider licensing next week, are illegal and could attract violent criminals, the district attorney's office concluded in a report released Wednesday. In the legal white paper on the issue, Dist. Atty. Grover Trask's office labeled the dispensaries easy targets for assaults and robberies and warned that many of the people selling the drug to medical users in dispensaries are hardened criminals.
Instead of buying marijuana at a dispensary, medicinal users should grow their own supply if they wish to remain protected under state law, the report stated.
"We aren't saying medical users can't use it and can't get it," but they must follow the law, said Chief Deputy Dist. Atty. Kevin Ruddy.

The opinion comes as the supervisors are scheduled to vote Tuesday on an ordinance to regulate the distributors in unincorporated areas. Supervisor Roy Wilson, who represents the Coachella Valley, said he was unsure whether the report would affect his vote, but he wondered why the legal opinion came so close to the vote.
"My initial feeling is, I don't know why we're getting that opinion at such a late date," he said. "We've had the planning staff looking over this for over a year now."

The district attorney's report said the 4 proposed regional dispensaries, two in Palm Springs and one each in Corona and Palm Desert, are subject to search and seizure by law enforcement.
"They are a clear violation of federal and state law, they invite more crime [via robberies] and they compromise the health and welfare of the citizens of this county," the report states.
Ruddy said the report was issued because of the continuing debate over the storefront operations and wasn't intended as a signal that the office would start aggressively prosecuting medical marijuana users.
"Our office doesn't go after anybody," he said. "If a case is presented to our office and we believe from the facts that someone is selling marijuana without a legal defense, then we will prosecute them."

State and federal laws conflict over the use of medical marijuana. In 1996, California voters approved Proposition 215 to legalize the drug for therapeutic use. State lawmakers in 2003 passed legislation that allowed counties to issue identification cards to medical users to shield them from prosecution by local law enforcement.
However, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that federal authorities could still seize and destroy marijuana stashes because federal law mandates that all marijuana use is illegal despite its intended purposes. "It is illegal to possess, manufacture or to traffic in marijuana," said Thom Mrozek, spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Los Angeles. "There is absolutely no distinction made for medical purposes."

Medical marijuana users and several studies contend that monitored dosages provide effective pain relief for those with certain serious ailments and diseases. Local patients' rights advocacy group Marijuana Anti-Prohibition Project dir. Lanny Swerdlow questioned why the district attorney's office waited until now to join the policy debate.
"The D.A.'s office has refused to attend any of the meetings to discuss the ordinance, so here we are, less than a week before it's set to be voted on, and they try to scuttle the whole thing," he said.
Nearly 10 months ago, Riverside County became the first in Southern California to issue photo identification cards in an effort to comply with the state law shielding medicinal users from prosecution. A few thousand such cards have been issued. The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors followed suit in May, voting to issue the cards

Orange County sheriff's deputies late Tuesday discovered another marijuana farm. Deputies said they are startled by the repeat discoveries of pot farms flourishing in the county's hillsides and canyons, including Tuesday afternoon's raid on what authorities say is the largest marijuana farm ever discovered in the county with an estimated street value of $12.5 million.
"Two weeks ago we found 4,000 plants, and now we have this discovery that we believe is 18,000 to 20,000 marijuana plants," said sheriff's spokesman Jim Amormino.

The latest find was along the western edge of O'Neill Regional Park, just beyond the perimeter of a gated community of million-dollar homes. The plantation was spotted from a sheriff's helicopter on patrol about 3 p.m. near Sunrise street in Mission Viejo.
Initially, only a few thousand plants were found, but when narcotics investigators returned at daybreak Wednesday, they followed an irrigation system feeding into seven to eight distinct patches, Amormino said.
"It appears they were tapping into a local homeowners association water supply," he said.
Deputies also found an encampment where they seized two loaded .22-caliber rifles, he said.

About 4,000 plants were found 9.9.06 in Silverado Canyon, valued at $1 million. In August, about 1,000 plants were found off Ortega Highway, and hundreds of plants were found inside a San Clemente home.
The recent outdoor discoveries are probably linked and the work of a group or criminal cartel, Amormino said. The discoveries parallel a statewide law enforcement trend of having dramatically increased seizures this year.
State Justice Dept's decades-old Campaign Against Marijuana Planting announced 9.7.06 that law enforcement had eradicated 1.2 million illegally cultivated marijuana plants, worth $4.9 billion, so far this year. The number surpassed the prior record of 1.1 million plants worth $4.5 billion, set in 2005, said Aaron Carruthers, a state attorney general's spokesman.
Law enforcement officers, other than CAMP agents, have brought in an additional $425 million worth of marijuana plants this year, he said.

Given the size of the O'Neill park pot farm, it is clear the cultivators were growing the plants for distribution, said UC Irvine prof. emeritus in criminology, law and society Gilbert Geis.
"People are otherwise dependent on getting marijuana from Mexico," Geis said. For criminals, he said, "it makes sense to grow it domestically" as long as they feel the penalties are not excessive and the chances of getting caught are slim.

The counties with the highest number of illegally cultivated pot plants in 2006 were Shasta and Lake in Northern California. Shasta had 204,571 plants worth $818 million, and Lake had 186,327 plants worth $745 million.
Officials said it was unclear whether the string of pot farm discoveries in Orange County's undeveloped foothills is part of a trend or coincidence. But investigators point to dry weather in Northern California and tighter security on the Mexican border, making it "harder to bring marijuana into the United States," Amormino said.
What makes the latest discovery unusual, he said, is that the plants are near the Stone Ridge development in Mission Viejo, a gated community of homes costing more than $1.5 million each. Until this year, the largest seizure of pot plants in Orange County was 5,000 taken during a raid several years ago in Trabuco Canyon, Amormino said.

courtiers' dynasties

This came soon after Oliver North had ripped Noriega off for $5 million dollars in that boat deal with Donald Aronow (Ch.18, The Conspirators Al Martin 2001 National Liberty Press Pray, MT). He was still upset about Ollie taking his money. So the 3 of them went down to have a discussion. They met at the Intercontinental Hotel in Panama on Dec. 10 to smooth things out." "Noriega was promised a bigger cut of the pie, when he said he wasn't making enough money," Martin continues. "He claimed there were a lot of people on his end within G-2 that had to be paid. Abrams tried to tell him that everybody was not getting the cut they had. The price of cocaine was falling so rapidly because we were importing so much of the stuff. Consequently the whole pie had become smaller than before. …

His father Vernon Walters got him the position. His father is very, very loyal to the Bush Cabal and had been for years. You don't see Vern much anymore. Vernon Walters was one of the original post-war Military-Industrial Complexers." USArmy Lt.Gen. Vernon A. Walters, CIA Dep.Dir. 1972 -1976 for Nixon. When the Watergate scandal erupted, Walters covered CIA's liabilities.Agency fingerprints were all over Watergate burglary, and prime players, Cubans, Hunt and McCord, were all CIA agents or assets. Later, according to "Silent Coup" author Len Colodny, old friend Gen. Alexander Haig was instrumental in getting Walters translator job for secret Paris talks between Kissinger & N.Vietnamese. Walters was also acting CIA Dir. 1973 between Jas. Schlesinger & Wm Colby. V. Walters appt Amb.-at-Large by Pres. Reagan.

Martin's book describes real reason why price of cocaine kept falling in the mid 1980s. Chapter called "Classified Illegal Operations Cordoba and Screw Worm" describes how Oliver North planned to distribute "more cocaine into U.S. than ever imagined before. 'Operation Screw Worm' was last & largest. It envisioned a tremendous expansion of 'authorized' narcotics trafficking." Martin writes, "North had set up the time in May 1986 of the first biweekly policy and planning session of the FDN. Fred Ikley & Donald Gregg were there. The usual cast of characters, Manuel Diaz, Nestor Sanchez. North envisioned a 50,000kg increase per month which absolutely astounded me," Martin continues.

Jeb Bush, I think, correctly voiced concerns that had already come into play that the CIA was dealing in so much cocaine that its street value was becoming depressed. This had already happened. In 1985; cocaine was commanding $30,000/kg. By 1986, it dropped to $15,000.kg and was continuing to drop. But North felt it was important to raise the revenues, so there was going to be a tremendous increase in importation," writes Martin (p.65, The Conspirators A.Martin)

John P. Walters as head of White House Office of National Drug Control Policy "Drug Czar." His previous job was Dep.Dir. for Supply Reduction, no.2 position under Wm Bennett in Geo.Bush pere admin. According to Wash. Post, "Walters stresses the importance of criminal penalties for drug users and openly opposes the use of marijuana for medical purposes." Walters uniquely qualified by his intimate knowledge of how to cover up US Govt drug trafficking. He has vowed to continue the pretense of the phony War on Drugs.
According to Justice Dept, there is $500 billion to $1 trillion of money laundering a year in the U.S.

Financing the federal deficit and keeping the stock market buoyed depends on daily reinvestment of laundered monies. A large percentage of that depends on the cash flow from the high-margin profits of narcotics trafficking, govt contract fraud, burgeoning for-profit prison industry and its concomitant slave labor market, all key components of phony War on Drugs." 5.11.01 AP story ironically headlined "Bush's choice for drug czar vows to help addicts." Maybe John Walters will make the price of cocaine drop again.

  AH elder sibling
Hutchinson struggling to keep AR Senate GOP
Race against ex-senator's son nasty, expensive & close
10.28.02   Lois Romano Wash.Post pA6

Van Buren, AR   This is not how it was supposed to be for Republican Tim Hutchinson so late in the game, pleading for votes in little coffee shops in his old congressional district, a place where he must win big to retain his Senate seat. But even his former district here in northwest Arkansas is fair game these days, and Republicans are clearly worried that Hutchinson is in serious trouble as he battles Attorney General Mark Pryor (D).
"How long you got?" Hutchinson said when asked how it came to be that he is fighting for his political life. "It's a Democratic state. I'm a first-term senator. I have an opponent with a very well-known name and very famous father. . . . We have a soft economy. That's a tough environment."

That sums up the Hutchinson-Pryor contest, one of the closest and more negative races in the nation as the parties ferociously fight for control of the Senate, now in the hands of the Democrats by a single vote. Both campaigns are operating at a feverish, finger-pointing pitch, dominating the airwaves with back-to-back tv ads paid for by their campaigns, the state & national parties, and special interest groups. The race is the most expensive in Arkansas history, with the $20 million price tag well exceeding what the four 1998 Arkansas House races and the Senate race combined cost.

"I'll vote, but it's discouraging that you can't get a positive reason to vote for either of them, it's all so negative," local photographer Martin Duckworth said as Hutchinson made his rounds at the Cottage Café here. "Then you wonder why there's such low voter turnout." Indeed, no one issue has grabbed the electorate, with the candidates trying to get traction on Social Security, prescription drugs and homeland security, and by criticizing each other. The most recent independent poll for the Arkansas News Bureau & Stephens Media Group, showed Pryor, son of former senator David Pryor D-AR with 48%, and Hutchinson favored by 43% of those surveyed. Others polls have had the race a dead heat.

Surveys have shown Pryor, 39, holding leads in Democratic strongholds in the east, and Hutchinson, 53, ahead in the northwest, but unexpectedly struggling to keep a sizeable lead on his home turf. Many believe that this part of the state, one of the fastest-growing regions in the country, is the key to the race. It is where GWBush chose to make his last campaign stop the day before the 2000 presidential election. Consequently, both Senate candidates have been spending much time in the traditionally GOP stronghold, home of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. & Tyson Foods Inc.
Experts say that Hutchinson must garner at least 60% of the vote in his old district to be competitive on Election Day. As a statewide candidate for atty general in 1998, Pryor won Hutchinson's district. "Everyone knew this race would be a dog fight from day one," said one prominent Republican, who asked that his name not be used. "But the key for Tim has always been that he has to have a big turnout in the 3rdCongressional District. And for whatever reason his base has shown a lack of enthusiasm."

What everyone is reluctant to address directly is Hutchinson's highly publicized divorce, which remains a subtle issue in the campaign, according to political experts, and which may be hurting him in his own back yard. Hutchinson, former Baptist minister, ran as a family-values Christian conservative in 1996, becoming the first GOP sent to the Senate from Arkansas in more than a century.
3 years ago, he divorced his wife of 29 years and married a younger former aide, Randi Fredholm, calling the episode his "failing." The local media rarely mentions it anymore, and Pryor's camp won't talk about it, but the contrasts Pryor has presented have not been subtle. Pryor rarely misses an opportunity to talk about "values." He presents himself in slick television ads as a religious family man, reading from a Bible and saying grace with his wife, Jill, and their two children. When he turned down an invitation to debate on "Meet the Press," Pryor explained voters wouldn't be able to watch the show "because they're in church on Sunday morning."

Republicans fear, and experts agree, that Hutchinson's personal situation might keep his Christian base at home in a race where GOP turnout in a Democratic state is crucial. "There can be the 'principled voter,' people who are upset and may sit this one out. It a reasonably well-educated person who … may be offended by his behavior," said Art English, a political science professor at the UA Little Rock.
In addition, Hutchinson. who likes to say that there are "two incumbents in the race", is in the unenviable position of running against the son of one of the most beloved politicians in the state.

San Diego CA   With passage of Prop. 36, non-violent Calif. drug offenders are now eligible for treatment instead of prison. Officials say an increasing number of these defendants require intensive treatment in residential programs, but there's a shortage of these residential facilities and trying to find communities willing to accept new ones isn't easy. Last summer, one of region's largest drug treatment providers made proposal to the City of El Cajon. McAlister Institute wanted to put residential program for recovering women & their children at the site of former convalescent hospital. Agency dir. Jeanne McAlister thought she had all her ducks in a row. "Because it was zoned properly," she said. "It had previously been a treatment facility, that's what it's set up to do."

The site was right next to an elementary school. When the proposal came before the El Cajon City Council, scores of people rose to protest. After hours of public comment, lawmakers killed the plan. McAlister says local residents evidently have a false impression of what people in recovery are like. "They see the drug addict depicted on television as being this low life, but these were women who had children, who would be in what we call early intervention and they wouldn't be as far down as what you see on television," she said. "And we just couldn't convince them that these were the very women that were sending their children to El Cajon schools anyway." El Cajon mayor Mark Lewis points out he's not against having a residential treatment facility in his city. "There's definitely a need in El Cajon for those people who are addicted to drugs or to alcohol," Lewis said. "But we have to be aware of the fact that we have to be sensitive in regards to the neighbors."

Drug treatment providers say they've heard that excuse before. Everybody gives lip service to the need for residential treatment. They don't want it in their neighborhood. In addition to El Cajon, communities of Oceanside, Vista, and Imperial Beach have rejected facilities in last few years. The County currently has 1000 residential treatment beds, most of which are located in central San Diego. Jeanie Emigh, with the Probation Dept, says if current Prop. 36 trends continue, the County will need an additional 200 beds by the end of this year. "But we're only in the first year of this 5 year funded project," Emigh said. "And as people fail at greater numbers in the outpatient programs, we will need to more rapidly expand our residential capacity."
In anticipation of increased demand, many local treatment providers added beds last year. But now they're full. Prop. 36 defendants who need residential care are going on waiting lists. Judge Patricia Cookson runs East County's drug court. "It's almost sabotaging their own sobriety," she said. "And frankly it is a problem for the courts as well as treatment providers. Judge Cookson says Prop. 36 defendants have been addicted to drugs for an average of 11 years: "The reason why you're sending them to residential in the first place, is that they cannot cope with outpatient treatment. They're unable to become clean & sober on their own. If you don't have any beds available, I think it's not only sabotaging the defendant but it's also sabotaging Prop. 36."
While there's clearly growing need for new residential treatment centers, community resistance remains high. People fear such facilities will bring crime into their neighborhoods and will lower property values. Probation Dept's Jeanie Emigh says many of those who oppose residential programs often confuse them with sober living centers.
"Sober living programs are often unregulated, not connected with a residential provider, where you or I could go out, for instance, and buy a home and rent it to 6 or 8 unrelated adults, and call it sober living," Emigh said. "And there's no resident person on site overseeing it, and some of these facilities have often gotten into difficulty with the neighbors.

In contrast, Jeanne McAlister says residential treatment facilities are licensed, regulated, and have supervisors on site. And she says residents don't just sit around, they take classes in relapse prevention, anger management, and parenting. "We're the very best neighbors you can have," McAlister says. "We clean up the neighborhood, we go out & clean up the streets, we tell our people to be polite and if they're not, we get rid of 'em."

Nonetheless, the struggle to find communities willing to accept residential treatment facilities continues. McAlister says she's thinking about trying again in El Cajon, especially in light of recent events. "They're putting a topless bar across the street from a dance studio where women take their children for dance lessons," she said. "And I just get really furious about that. They'll let a topless bar go in, but they wouldn't let a treatment program go in?" San Diego County officials say one way or another more residential capacity must be found. In fact, Prop. 36 has created an immediate demand for another 75 beds by the end of this month.

In an infuriating blow to reason, logic, fairness, compassion and equal justice, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that people living in public housing can be evicted for any drug activity by any household member or guest, even if the drug use happened blocks away from the housing project and even if the tenant had no inkling that anything illegal was taking place. Highest judicial body said unanimously to toss innocent people out of their houses for crimes they didn't commit and didn't even know about. Generals in the drug war are getting desperate & silly. The justices did not merely uphold the constitutionality of the "one strike and you're out" eviction policy implemented by the Clinton administration in 1996; they also rushed to its defense, calling it "reasonable."

The ruling is a gut-wrenching reminder of just how differently America treats its rich & its poor. The multimillion-dollar homes of Beverly Hills or the Upper East Side of Manhattan have their fair share of kids struggling with drug problems. But as concerned as these kids' parents are, you can bet that their problems are not compounded by the additional worry that the entire family will be tossed out onto the street because their kid is smoking a joint 3 blocks away. Why hold poor people to a standard many of us could never meet? "A tenant who cannot control drug crime," wrote Rehnquist, "is a threat to other residents & the project." Would the chief justice apply the same condemnatory logic to Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who also lives in public housing and apparently was unable to control his troubled daughter?

Indeed, our political establishment, whether in governors' mansions or not, is filled with people unable to "control drug crime" by a household member. Politicians incl Sen. Ted Kennedy D-MA, Richard Lugar R-IN and Richard Shelby R-AL and Reps. Dan Burton R-IN, Spencer Bachus R-AL, John Murtha D-PA, Randy "Duke" Cunningham R-SD and Maurice Hinchey D-NY weren't punished for the sins of their kids. Unlike thousands of mostly poor & minority drug offenders who had the book thrown at them, these lawmakers' offspring were frequently granted special treatment. Not surprising poor kids are routinely sent to jail while rich kids are given ticket to rehab, or that poor parents are thrown out of their houses for not knowing what their kids are doing while powerful parents are given our sympathy and understanding.
But it is unjust.

Why don't Kennedy & Burton call joint Senate-House hearing on "one strike *amp; you're out" no-fault evictions. They can call Jeb Bush, Pearlie Rucker and their respective daughters (one taken to rehab, one taken to jail) as the first witnesses.

More students training as drug counselors   Vocational interest booming since state law changes. Nearly all trainees are in recovery or have relative with a dependency problem.
4.2.02   Lisa Leff LA Times

Ventura   Oxnard College's Intervention & Recovery class is an eclectic group from an elegantly dressed Ojai mother who has lost a daughter to heroin to ex-gang members from La Colonia and reformed meth dealers. They are all studying to become certified drug & alcohol counselors through the addictive disorders program, one of the state's oldest college-based training grounds for chemical dependency professionals.
"You have everybody, all the way from 17- or 18-year-olds up to grandparents. You have your [recovering] alcoholics or drug addicts, the ones who got themselves together before they had to go to prison, and you have a lot of parolees in the room," said student Kris Giles, 33, of Newbury Park. "We are all on the same level."

Spurred by statewide efforts to raise standards for drug counselors and Prop. 36 passage , which mandated treatment over jail time for certain low-level drug offenders, enrollment in this & similar programs at 26 other community colleges has exploded. This semester, Oxnard's program has more than 400 students, compared with 275 a year ago.

Nearly all the students are in recovery or have a family member with a drug or alcohol problem, said William Shilley, 73, former priest turned family therapist who founded the program in 1981. To become certified, students must complete 720 hours, about 2 years of course work and 250 hours of field experience.
For most of the students, enrolling in an academic program with a fixed schedule is a huge step. Many have histories that include childhood sexual abuse, domestic violence, prostitution or addiction. They have limited education and struggle with financial difficulties.
"They are all walking miracles because they have been through an awful lot and they have done one of the most difficult things to do in life, which is change their lifestyle," Shilley said. Many program alumni now hold leadership positions at alcohol & drug rehab facilities in Ventura, Santa Barbara and Los Angeles counties.

Shilley teaches most of the 19 courses in the Oxnard College program's curriculum. As founding member of Calif. Assn. for Alcohol/Drug Educators, he also travels around the state setting up continuing education courses, lobbying lawmakers and advising drug & alcohol treatment programs.
"Bill is the professional in the state," said association President Angela Stocker, College of San Mateo's addictive disorders pgm dir. "He has done more to raise the standards for counselors than any one person." Shilley's students see him as a mentor & compassionate father figure. "He looks for the best in everyone and makes them feel like he respects them and cares personally about them," said Deborah Goldberg of Westlake Village, who with her husband, Leonard, were Shilley students a decade ago when their daughter was using drugs.
With Shilley's help, the Goldbergs established Visions for Recovery, a nonprofit group that raises money for alcohol & drug prevention programs.

Shilley's students say they attend the program as a way to make up for the years and relationships they lost to their addictions. "It blows me away that I have so much knowledge from my personal research that I can help someone else," said Elizabeth Humphrey, 38, who has been sober for 3 years and enrolled in the program last fall. "The best counselors are people in recovery because we already know the games, we know the manipulation, and we know the conning. We can't be fooled."
Shilley estimates that about half his students end up completing the program. Some decide that drug counseling does not pay enough and pursue other careers. Others leave when they have a relapse. A few find that their pasts catch up with them. This semester, for example, 2 students dropped out because they were sent to jail.

But many find the strength to continue. One is the mother of a former pupil who couldn't get off heroin. The Ojai woman said she has not seen her 23-year-old daughter since November and doesn't know where she is, but thinks using her child's old textbooks and sitting in the same classroom she once did gives her hope.

AMA discusses marijuana medical use
6.16.01   AP

Chicago   One month after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the medical use of marijuana, the American Medical Association is being urged to endorse the illegal drug as last-resort pain relief for seriously ill patients. At its policy-setting annual meeting starting here Sunday, the AMA also is being asked to endorse a moratorium on executions nationwide, although it rejected a similar proposal last year.
The measures are among more than 250 reports, resolutions and proposals conference delegates are asking the nation's largest group of doctors to approve. Whether the historically cautious group will take a more activist role at its five-day meeting remains to be seen as the group struggles for effectiveness amid a worrisome slide in membership.

The challenge is to appeal to physicians with divergent political views while at the same time tackling issues relevant to patients.
"They don't want to take positions that they're concerned the public would consider not necessarily appropriate for physicians to take,'' said Dr. Jimmy Hara, a sometimes AMA member and co-president of the Los Angeles chapter of the activist group Physicians for Social Responsibility.
Desperately seeking to attract new members, the AMA is more likely than ever to stick to middle ground, Hara said.

The marijuana question is an example. The Supreme Court's May 14 ruling that it's illegal to sell or possess marijuana for medical use appears to be having little effect in the 8 states with medical marijuana laws, and some have even moved to expand marijuana laws despite the ruling.
The AMA's current policy opposes use of medical marijuana but says there should be more research on the issue. But a report by an AMA council says the group should support the "compassionate use'' of marijuana while also urging further research.

Like all proposals at the meeting, the marijuana report could be altered or withdrawn before being sent to the House of Delegates for a vote on whether to make it policy during the meeting's final 3 days.
The AMA enters this year's meeting leaner, in better fiscal health, and, its leaders maintain, better equipped to tackle ongoing challenges such as membership and managed care reform. In its year 2000 financial report, the AMA reported earning $2.7 million on operations, compared with a $15 million loss in 1999.

The turnaround was achieved by reducing or eliminating programs and cutting staff by 14 percent, or 188 jobs. But the AMA lost more than 3,000 members and $4.2 million in revenue from membership dues last year, continuing a slide that began several years ago. That puts membership at 290,357, or only about one-third of the nation's 800,000-plus doctors, residents and medical students.
10 years ago, the AMA had nearly 300,000 members, or about 40 percent of the nation's doctors.
"Membership is the most crucial area for the AMA,'' the financial report said, acknowledging that the group's effectiveness and success depends on rebuilding its ranks.

The AMA formed an advisory committee after last year's annual meeting to address the problem, and gained insight into possible remedies from a doctors' survey the committee conducted at the AMA's winter meeting in Orlando.
Comments included complaints about high dues ranging from $420 annually for regular members to $20 for medical students. But one respondent told the group the "biggest issue in AMA membership deterioration is public perception that AMA has become a trade union interested primarily in MD income.

Many physicians would return to membership if widespread perceptions become that AMA is really 'physicians dedicated to the health of America.' ''
Alternative dues packages for residents and fellows and outreach programs targeting young doctors, residents and even pre-med students are among solutions the AMA has implemented or is considering, the committee said in a report to be presented at the meeting.

Other proposals at the meeting include:

•   urging the AMA to officially recommend a low-salt diet to all Americans, even those without high blood pressure, "as an effective means of preventing the development of hypertension.''
•   calling for a ban on prescription drug ads to the public to decrease drug costs and improve doctor- patient relationships.
•   calling for the AMA to lobby for mandatory alcoholism screening for all drunken-driving offenders.
•   health of the AMA-sponsored union, Physicians for Responsible Negotiation, also will be discussed in light of a recent Supreme Court decision preventing private-hospital doctors from organizing if they have supervisory duties.

Convicted drug users in California are more likely to be arrested on new drug charges since Proposition 36 took effect than before voters approved the landmark law mandating drug treatment rather than incarceration, according a long-awaited study released Friday.
The state-funded study, conducted by UCLA researchers who have pored over 4 years of drug-related court cases, raises new questions about the effectiveness of Proposition 36 at a time when lawmakers and courts are discussing stricter requirements for defendants.

UCLA researchers tracking drug offenders found high levels of new drug arrests among those eligible in the first year of Proposition 36, which took effect in 2001. About 50% of those offenders were picked up by police within 30 months, compared with 38% of similar offenders convicted before Proposition 36.
The report notes that some increases in arrests were expected because Proposition 36 left offenders on the street who would have previously served time. But the research also underscores the difficulty the state has experienced in getting drug offenders into treatment and out of trouble.

Only about 25% of the defendants who are sentenced to drug treatment complete the programs. Data released Friday show that even among those who complete drug treatment, more than 4 in 10 had new drug arrests within 30 months of their Proposition 36 convictions.
The numbers are worse for those who don't finish drug treatment. Researchers were surprised to find that those who failed to show up for rehab were less likely to be rearrested than those who went to some treatment but dropped out: 55% compared with 60%.

Supporters of Proposition 36 said the report shows how hard it is to treat a chronic disease like drug addiction but argue that the obvious conclusion is that more intensive treatment services are needed.
Critics, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, believe that the initiative needs to be overhauled and have advocated adding jail sanctions for participants who relapse.
UCLA researchers said their study shows the measure has helped tens of thousands of drug users complete treatment but needs more money to improve supervision and intensify treatment.

"We have a lot of serious addicts in Proposition 36, and a lot of them are warehoused in treatment that's not appropriate for their needs," said UCLA researcher Angela Hawken who worked on the study.
"It needs tightening up, even though it really has been a major improvement over what was done before. We face a major prison crisis in this state, and if we're going to get this law to help us, we need to improve it."

UCLA researchers have spent the last 4 years examining about 200,000 Proposition 36 cases, providing the first long-range look at how defendants fared after their initial sentences. The review released Friday tracked 44,000 defendants sentenced from July 2001 through June 2002.
The data showed lower rates of new arrests for property crimes among those who finished treatment, nearly 10% compared with about 17% of defendants who dropped out of the program. Arrests for violent crimes were low for all groups. Overall, the report found Proposition 36 had no direct effect on crime trends.

The report will probably be a factor in budget talks in Sacramento, where Schwarzenegger has proposed a $25-million cut to the program. The researchers instead called for at least $79 million more in funds to increase supervision of defendants and address treatment shortages.
The report also highlighted disparities, with young Latino males far less likely than other groups to enter long-term residential treatment. In addition, few Proposition 36 defendants received narcotic-replacement therapy, such as methadone, despite widespread evidence that it is effective in helping addicts.

The findings come as Schwarzenegger and other critics are seeking to add sanctions to the program in an effort to encourage more offenders to complete their treatment.
Repeated studies, including the most recent, show that of the nearly 50,000 people sentenced under the proposition each year, nearly a third do not report for treatment. Of those who do enter rehab, about two-thirds fail to complete it.

Last year, Schwarzenegger signed a law that made it easier for judges to exclude some offenders while adding jail sanctions for those who relapse. But supporters of Proposition 36 warn that adding jail stints would signal a shift away from treating drug addiction as a health problem, arguing that voters in 2000 backed treatment, not jail.
They sued the governor and won an injunction temporarily blocking last year's reforms from being implemented. Drug Policy Alliance Proposition 36 coordinator Margaret Dooley said the latest assessment shows that any cuts to funding by Schwarzenegger are "absolutely the wrong way to go."
"If he had any doubt about that," said Dooley, whose group has been a principal backer of the law, "I hope this clears that up."

She said the new drug arrests, including those by defendants who completed Proposition 36 treatment, reflect the chronic nature of drug addiction and are unsurprising. The failure rate the state has seen, she added, is in line with other treatment programs.
"If a person relapses, the response is treatment, same as when you have a relapse of cancer or if your diabetes becomes unmanageable and you have to go back and get it under control again," she said.
"If we kept more people in treatment longer, if they got the minimal dose of 90 days that we know is needed, if we didn't stick long-term opiate users in outpatient care, the results would be better. When we talk about drug crimes, we're talking about the effectiveness of our treatment and how people are faring afterward."

The UCLA study offered several recommendations for improving Proposition 36, options researchers said should be bundled together to improve results:

• Place more drug defendants in long-term treatment programs, including inpatient care, at an estimated cost of $19 million a year.
• Provide at least 90 days of treatment to all offenders, at a cost of $18 million a year. The length of treatment now varies widely, with many receiving far less than 90 days.
•   Provide higher levels of narcotic replacement therapy for opiate users, at an annual cost of at least $3.7 million.
•   Significantly increase community supervision, particularly for offenders who enter Proposition 36 probation with multiple previous convictions, at an annual cost of about $25 million.

John Henry, toxicologist and professor at London's Imperial College of Medicine, who was not affiliated with the study, said it was possible that coca leaves, which contain a small amount of cocaine "were smoked by people in Britain in the 17th century." Cocaine itself did not come to Britain until about 1900, but coca leaves, chewed by many Incas in the 1500s, were transported to Europe in the 17th century by Spanish explorers.

Napa CA   Grabbing a quick cup of chai tea at a bakery during her lunch hour, Kelly Williams, who at 17 is years away from the legal drinking age, talks about wine: "My brothers and I have a good sense of responsibility when it comes to drinking," says the St. Helena High School senior, who comes from a family of well-known local winemakers. "We've grown up with the sense that it's a part of life. It isn't a forbidden fruit. That's just the way my parents have raised me."
Likewise, Kelly's 17-year-old stepbrother, Jake Engelskirger, a senior at Napa High, enjoys sipping wine at home occasionally. He does not, like many of his friends, attend parties where minors drink to get drunk. "There's a huge difference there," he says, sitting on a school bench at day's end. "I've really lucked out because my parents have done a fantastic job of teaching me about respect for alcohol and wine."

Kelly and Jake, who believe the best place to learn about drinking is at home, may unwittingly be endorsing a traditional yet controversial kind of alcohol education. The idea that parents might — or should — take a hand in teaching their children how to drink responsibly before the kids are unleashed on the world after high school is one that is surprisingly little discussed in alcohol education circles.
Every year, just in time for New Year's Eve, the University of Michigan releases a major survey about teens and illicit drug use (including alcohol). This year's results found that while slightly fewer teenagers are drinking, the numbers remain consistently high. Some experts say that whatever else, the current approaches to alcohol education, which emphasize abstinence until the age of 21, are not working.

There are shelves of research and debate on certain aspects of underage drinking. Public service campaigns have focused on eliminating drunken driving, not serving alcohol to underage drinkers and, after some highly publicized arrests and accidents, asking parents not to provide havens for underage drinking parties. Increasingly, local governments are putting teeth in that request, passing laws that specifically punish parents who allow such parties. Movements to lower the drinking age, which is uniformly 21 in the United States, crop up now and then. But little effort has been devoted to studying whether the home may be a good place to learn how to be responsible about alcohol, which some researchers think is a topic ripe for exploration.

"I cannot come out and say that we can teach responsible drinking; I would be at major risk from an institutional perspective for saying that. But what I can say is that there is at least some evidence that by providing alcohol in a protected environment within the context of a meal, perhaps, we can at least minimize the excitement of it. But you would never get funding for a project like that, not in our current political climate," says Kristie Foley, an assistant professor of public health science at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, the lead author of a study published last year in the Journal of Adolescent Health that examined the effect that parental approval has on underage drinkers. Among her findings: "Parents who provided alcohol to their adolescent children or drank with them were more likely to have children who neither regularly used nor abused alcohol."

In almost any discussion of teenagers and alcohol, the subject of European versus American attitudes is bound to arise. The conventional wisdom is that European children, particularly from the Mediterranean region, or "wine" countries, sip wine from an early age and that this practice infuses them with a healthy attitude toward drinking.
The view that Europeans are better at instilling maturity about drinking, however, is hotly contested by studies compiled by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. A 2004 paper using data from European and American surveys, which compared the drinking rates of American and European 15- and 16-year-olds, found that, with the exception of Turkey, young Europeans from 34 countries drank more and were intoxicated more often than Americans.
Research has found that most Americans take their first drink of alcohol as young teenagers, but the underage drinking rates have been declining modestly since the early 1990s. The University of Michigan's Monitoring the Future Survey, sponsored by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, found that although 44% of eighth-graders said they have ever had a drink, only 17% reported drinking once or more in the last 30 days. Likewise, 64% of 10th-graders have had a drink, while 33% said they'd had one or more in the last 30 days. And 77% of 12th-graders have had a drink, while 48% have imbibed in the last 30 days.

Even with a slight decline in drinking and the popularity of "zero tolerance" approaches, a question almost demands to be asked: Shouldn't teenagers be taught about how to be responsible when they (almost inevitably) engage in this behavior?
"You're putting your finger on a pretty controversial issue in the field," says Joel Grube, director of the Prevention Research Center in Berkeley, which is funded by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. "First of all, it is illegal, but there are researchers and others who believe that what you need to do is teach young people how to drink safely." (He is not among them.) This, he says, is the field of "harm reduction", the theory governing the logic behind giving addicts clean needles. People will always engage in certain behaviors, the thinking goes, so work to limit the damage.
Psychologist Stanton Peele, an addiction expert at the New York-based Drug Policy Alliance, which seeks to reform what it considers failed drug policy, is a proponent of harm reduction. "Every civilized non-psychotic human being has offered their children alcohol," says Peele, who says Americans are terminally mixed up about how to address such issues. "We always approach appetitive behaviors in a moralistic and restrictive way: don't do drugs, don't smoke, don't drink." Peele had just attended a drug and alcohol awareness night in Summit, N.J., where the discussion focused on binge drinking among young people. "Nobody ever brought up the idea of responsible use or any kind of training in responsible use."

Jake Engelskirger took a mandatory health class at Napa High and, he says, the issue of alcohol was never addressed. "There was a whole sex ed week, and a little about drugs, but nothing about alcohol."
Some researchers think the drivers education model offers something of value for alcohol education. Sociologist David Hanson, a retired professor from State University of New York at Potsdam who has studied alcohol use in college students, embraces what he readily admits is a non-starter of an idea: learner's permits for drinkers.
"Clearly, driving is dangerous, it takes maturity and skill, but we don't simply tell young people driving is dangerous, it kills and injures a lot of people, you're too young to do it, and then on their 21st birthday hand them the keys to the car and say, 'OK, now you can drive.' This is what we do with drinking."

The best way for parents to teach their children about drinking, says George Packer, director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest's Alcohol Policies Project, is to set a good example. "I don't think there ought to be general rules on the topic. That should be left to individual parents. If that were to become the norm, I think there would be substantial problems because a lot of parents don't really know much about alcohol either, and training kids to drink in the home will probably not have that much effect on the kids' drinking outside the home, which is where most of it occurs."

He offers another caveat: "When you adopt the thinking that teaching people to drink is important, that's already, I think, down a slippery slope that suggests drinking is important, everybody does it. It's a pro-drinking message in and of itself."
Although it is illegal in California for anyone younger than 21 to consume or possess alcohol in public, or for anyone to purchase or provide alcohol to an unrelated minor, parents may legally serve their children alcohol in their homes, says David Labahn, executive director of the California District Attorneys Assn. As long as no unlawful behavior ensues, driving, fighting or public inebriation, there's no legal prohibition.
"There is no statute that says a parent or guardian is precluded from serving, say, a 17-year-old individual a glass of wine," Labahn says. "As you go down in age, some medical professionals might say that furnishing alcohol is detrimental to the child's development, and that could be child endangerment or contributing to the delinquency of a minor." But he could find no instances of prosecutions involving this issue.

Jim Koch, founder of the Boston Beer Co. and father of four, bristles at the idea that it is wrong to teach children about alcohol by allowing them to try it. Koch, the familiar voice and face behind Sam Adams beer, laid down a few rules about drinking for his older kids when they were teenagers. "I may part company with others, but as a parent, you have to assume that before they're 21, they're going to be exposed in one way, shape or another to alcohol …. I believe that a parent has a responsibility to educate, guide and shape a kid's attitude."
Among the rules he has taught his children: Don't have more than one drink an hour. If you're drinking out of plastic cups, nest the cups so you don't forget how much you've had. And never, ever do shots. "Nothing good happens when people do shots," he says.
His children would sometimes accompany him during business visits to restaurants and bars, and in places like those, they learned how unpleasant drunk people can be. "If you're 14 and you see someone who's drunk, it's no longer something you aspire to," Koch says. "You are watching repulsive behavior and you don't want to be that way."

Jen Sherwin, a 23-year graduate student at Cal State Chico, grew up with winemaking parents at the Sherwin Family Vineyard on Spring Mountain in the Napa Valley. When she left home for college, she says, she was surprised at how many students went overboard with alcohol. "It was absolutely insane. There was a lot of alcohol poisoning, a lot of kids had to get their stomachs pumped. People would drink 24/7. I was like, oh my gosh, I have to study."
What she observed was that the kids who went the craziest were the kids from families that were restrictive and did not talk to their children about alcohol except to forbid it. "I had other friends up there from Napa Valley who didn't go overboard either, because we are used to being around wine, and the freedom of being able to drink wasn't overwhelming to us."

Julie Johnson, a former public health nurse and Napa Valley winemaker, has spent many hours pondering the obligations of parents to children in a place where wine not only brings pleasure but also puts bread on the table. In 1981, Johnson and her now ex-husband founded the winery Frog's Leap.
Today she owns a small winery called Tres Sabores, and her husband, Jon Engelskirger, is the winemaker at Turnbull Wine Cellars. She is also Kelly Williams' mother and Jake Engelskirger's stepmother. Sitting in Peet's Coffee in Napa, she leafs through the contents of a file she has compiled over the years. "Here's one that's interesting," she says, holding up an old newspaper story about the demotion of a Denver-area principal for allowing seventh- and eighth-graders to take a sip of wine during a three-hour meal at the end of a school trip to Paris. "I think there's a whole history of knee-jerk reactions to the subject."

Johnson thinks that her generation of winemakers, people who were trained in viticulture and oenology programs at UC Davis and Fresno State in the 1970s and are more or less the reason for the American wine boom of the last two decades, are something of a test case for the subject of teaching kids about alcohol. "I don't know any vintner or winemaker who has consciously refrained from offering their kids the occasional sip of wine," Johnson says. "We didn't stop any of our blended family of 6 children from enjoying a glass of champagne in a toast to our new marriage 3 years ago."

She believes, perhaps naively, she admits, that parents can teach children to be conscientious alcohol consumers, foremost by talking about the issue and modeling appropriate behavior, but she also understands that not every parent is equipped for the task. Like Koch, she has imparted rules to her children: It's not healthy for you to drink while your body is growing, it's never healthy to drink to excess and it is absolutely unacceptable to be drunk or be out of control.
So far, her parenting techniques seem to be paying off. All three of her children, she says, have commented on "how the kids at their schools who get wild and abuse alcohol the most have the least trustful relationships with their parents and/or have to deal with the most punitive attitudes and mixed messages about alcohol at home or in their churches."

To hear Johnson's 17-year old daughter talk, the lessons imparted at the family table have been taken to heart.
"I've just grown up around the idea that you shouldn't just drink alcohol for the sake of alcohol, that it should taste good and it should feel good when you put it in your mouth," Kelly Williams says. "It's something to enjoy, not abuse."

Just say yes to Ritalin!
9.25.00   Lawrence H. Diller, M.D. Salon.Com   video & links

As a doctor with a practice in behavioral pediatrics , and one who prescribes Ritalin for children , I am alarmed by the widespread and knee-jerk reliance on pharmaceuticals by educators, who do not always explore fully the other options available to deal with learning and behavioral problems in their classrooms. Issues of medicine aside, these cases represent a direct challenge to the rights of parents to make choices for their children and still enjoy access to the public education they want for them , without medication. These policies also demonstrate a disquieting belief on the part of educated adults that bad behavior and underperformance in school should be interpreted as medical disorders that must be treated with drugs.
Unfortunately, I know from the experience of evaluating and treating more than 2,500 children for problems of behavior and school performance that these cases represent only a handful of the millions of Americans who have received pressure from school personnel to seek a "medical evaluation" for a child , teacher-speak for "Get your kid on Ritalin."
Most often, evaluations are driven by genuine concerns first raised by a teacher or school psychologist. But too frequently the children are sent to me without even a cursory educational screening for learning problems. With a 700 percent increase in the use of Ritalin since 1990, parents have been repeatedly told that their kids probably have ADHD and that Ritalin is the treatment of choice. More and more often, the parents who buck this trend are being told they must put their children in special restricted classrooms or teach them at home.

Patrick and Sarah McCormack (not their real names) came to my office in a panic last year because a school wanted them to medicate their 7-year-old son. Sarah tearfully explained that the principal and psychologist at Sammy's school in an upscale Bay Area town were absolutely clear that the first-grader should be on Ritalin. An outside private psychologist who had previously tested Sammy did not find any learning problems but concluded that he had ADHD and was defiant of authority. She suggested medication. The school psychologist, in his report on Sammy, was straightforward in recommending "psychopharmacological therapy" for the child. The McCormacks were told, in no uncertain terms, that unless Sammy's behavior changed, he would be transferred to a special class for behavior-problem children at another school or the McCormacks would have to consider alternatives to public education like home schooling.
Patrick and Sarah had few problems with their son at home, though they conceded he was a "handful" and sometimes had problems getting along with other children. They deeply valued his outgoing personality and feared that Ritalin would change him. They also worried about the immediate and long-term side effects of the drug. They acknowledged that Sammy struggled at school but felt school personnel had not done enough and were using the wrong approaches with their kid. They hoped he could continue at the neighborhood school where he had made friends despite his problems. They wanted my opinion and support for their point of view at the school.

When I met Sammy in my office, he was full of life and reasonably focused, chatting at length about activities at home and at school. Though he was in first grade, he could read at a fourth-grade level. I got a better picture of his problems when I met him with his parents. When they were there he acted impulsively, getting up and down from his seat and moving about the room when we tried to have a family conversation. Sammy regularly interrupted his parents and bossed them around, especially Sarah. His lack of respect troubled me, but I felt optimistic that Sammy could be successful without medication, especially after I spoke with his teacher. She was more positive about him than others who had reported on his conduct at school. She felt he had made progress in her classroom but still wondered how she could help him better stay on task. She was open to ideas. I suggested that Sammy be immediately rewarded for good behavior and given chips for finished work that could be exchanged for prizes at the end of the day. She was comfortable with giving him tangible consequences for not meeting her expectations.

I suspected that medication would probably help with Sammy's self-control, but, as I told the McCormacks, it was not absolutely necessary. I told them that children of Sammy's age never become addicted and that the drug's effects on his behavior would last only four hours per dose. But it was more important that they work on their parenting, and I referred them to a counselor. I couldn't say for sure whether changes at home and school would make the difference for Sammy, but I certainly felt it was up to the parents to decide on the medication. I said I would support their decision either way. A year later the McCormacks returned, frustrated and embittered. Sammy had a very good end to first grade, but second grade with an unsympathetic, unyielding teacher had been disastrous. The principal and school district were now insisting that Sammy be on medication if he was to stay in a regular third-grade classroom. The school said it "could not meet the child's needs within the regular classroom setting without medication." He was disrupting the classroom. Other parents had complained about his behavior. A one-on-one aide assigned to Sammy had not worked. Sarah thought the aide was nothing more than a snitch who regularly recorded Sammy's misdeeds for the principal.
If the family refused to give Sammy medication, the boy would be transferred to a different school, a bus ride from their home, to be in a special class with four other "disturbed" children. They could also home-school him or challenge the school's decision in a hearing. Ultimately they could go to court, but a final decision could take years , by then Sammy might be in middle school. The parents were loath to move Sammy to a new school. However, they still were against using medication with their son.

Families like the McCormacks, who reject medication and face a loss of access to conventional public school classrooms, are increasing in numbers. In May, I testified before a congressional subcommittee hearing on ADHD and Ritalin organized by several congressmen who had received letters from distressed parents pressured by their local schools to medicate their children. The pressure has become so intense in some areas that resolutions urging teachers to restrain from recommending medical evaluations and Ritalin for students are under consideration in several states. One passed recently in Colorado. Yet even as the issue of parents' rights is being considered in some areas, the stakes have dramatically increased in others, where schools are seeking the intervention of CPS to get parents to medicate their kids. It is no longer simply an issue of which school or which class a child will attend. Instead, some parents are being threatened with the possibility of losing custody of their children if they refuse to comply with suggested treatment for an alleged medical condition.
Many doctors and educators would agree that withholding medication can be viewed as a form of child abuse or neglect. Dr. Harold Koplewicz, vice chairman of the New York University Child Study Center, said on "Good Morning America" last month that he felt a CPS referral was justified when a family refused to medicate a child for whom a diagnosis of ADHD had been made by an experienced evaluator. "Ritalin is simply the best treatment for this disorder," he said. I can't agree. It is true that the courts have ordered medical intervention when a child's life is threatened. Judges have overruled the wishes of Christian Scientist parents not to give antibiotics to children who face life-threatening infection. Similarly, blood products have been given to children in surgery over the objections of Jehovah's Witnesses. But those situations are quite different from ones in which ADHD is diagnosed and Ritalin is prescribed, according to Dolores Sargent, a former special education teacher now practicing family law in Danville, Calif. "ADHD children and families do not face immediate life-threatening situations," she says, "and ADHD continues to be a 'disease' with multiple causes and no definitive markers. It's unlikely any decision that insists on the use of Ritalin for ADHD could withstand a court challenge."

The existence of effective alternative treatments makes any forced decision to medicate children against parents' wishes both legally and ethically shaky. Yet, the willingness of some CPS workers to pursue families unwilling to dose their children shows how strongly entrenched medication for behavior problems in children has become in our country. A local CPS office cannot demand that a child be medicated , yet , but it can ascertain whether a child is safe in his or her parents' home. Legally, CPS can alert parents that their child's uncontrollable behavior, which puts the child at significant risk of abuse at home, must change. If they feel this advice is not being taken, the agency can remove children from their homes.
What seems to be overlooked in this simplistic, and seemingly convenient, way of dealing with hard-to-handle kids is that alternative strategies to medication exist, from family counseling to short-term respite care. The perceived superiority, rapid onset and inexpensive nature of Ritalin make it a very attractive choice for school administrators, who may pressure parents of students who threaten to drain their beleaguered schools of time or money. As more and more families opt for the Ritalin fix, it becomes easier to insist that other families in similar situations try the drug, even though these families may not want their kids to take stimulants. I still prescribe Ritalin, but only after assessing a child's school learning environment and family dynamics, especially the parents' style of discipline. But I continue to ask questions about Ritalin in a country where we use 80 percent of the world's stimulants. I have no doubt that Ritalin "works" to improve short-term behavior and school performance in children with ADHD; however, it is not an equivalent to or substitute for better parenting and schools for our children.

I was surprised to see Surgeon General David Satcher quoted recently as saying that he believes Ritalin is under- prescribed in our country. I participated in last week's Conference on Children's Mental Health sponsored by his office and found that Ritalin is thought to be both under-prescribed and over-prescribed, depending upon the community being assessed and its specific threshold for ADHD diagnosis and Ritalin treatment. Data shows, for example, that African-American families use Ritalin at rates one-half to one-quarter of their white, socioeconomic peers. Asian-American youth are virtually absent in statistics for Ritalin use. I happen to believe that Satcher's comments were intended for these communities and, ironically, will not have any impact on them. Instead, I think, his statement will have perverse impact on white middle- and upper-middle-class families. In some communities, Ritalin use among boys in this group is as high as one in five.
After much agonizing, Sammy's parents decided to put him in a special education class rather than give him Ritalin and, for the moment, things are going well for him. But they plan to move from the Bay Area, largely because of Sammy's school experience. With 4 million children taking Ritalin in America today, there are undoubtedly millions of other parents struggling with the decision of whether to medicate their children. The McCormacks' story demonstrates the dilemmas and pressures many of these families face. Proponents of drug treatment for children's behavior problems applaud those parents who choose Ritalin to improve their children's learning experience. But civil libertarians , and doctors like me , worry about the specter of more families being forced against their will to put their children on psychiatric medication. These families, and their right to make choices for their children, deserve our support and protection.

"The CIA couldn't even mine a harbor without getting its trench coat stuck in its fly. … it's important to differentiate between malign intent & gross negligence."

Gary Webb   spelling it out
for ex CA gov. Jerry Brown on the radio

"… there are no rules but to complete the mission."
Mike Holm, DEA Miami

9.98   B.Wilson & C.Bowden 'The Pariah' Esquire

US drops informant's murder as Ochoa sentencing issue   7.29.03   Catherine Wilson AP

Ochoa, 46, has been a prime target of U.S. anti-drug forces since the 1980s when he & 2 brothers pioneered cocaine air drops with other leaders of the now-defunct Medellin cartel. He was extradited on the condition that he could not be prosecuted for crimes committed before Colombia & U.S. resumed extraditions in 1997, wiping out charges covering all cartel operations.
An independent arm of the court, which produced a confidential report on Ochoa's sentence, suggested he should receive a prison sentence of 19½ to 24½ years for 2 drug conspiracy counts, according to sources close to the case. Prosecutors have the right to ask for a longer sentence than federal rules limiting the discretion of judges would normally allow. Lead prosecutor Ed Ryan had no comment Tuesday on Seal or Ochoa's possible sentence.

The defense, which believes the Colombian govt put a 12-year cap on Ochoa's potential sentence, also had no comment. Ochoa is due to learn his fate at a hearing 8.26.03.
With Seal out of the picture, the defense is still insisting on a closed-door hearing to review any classified documents relating to Ochoa. U.S. Dist. Judge K. Michael Moore hasn't issued a decision on the request. Drug smuggling pilot Seal was slain in Baton Rouge LA. The govt claimed he was killed on orders from Medellin cartel leaders.
Others say he was targeted days after threatening to expose secret U.S. shipments of weapons to Nicaragua's Contra rebels after Congress cut off official funding. Some pilots purportedly were allowed to carry drugs north as an incentive to carry arms south.

New Orleans atty Sam Dalton represented the Colombian hit men who killed Seal in the penalty phase of their trial. Sam Dalton subpoenaed the CIA about what he suspected was its complicity in Seal's assassination in a court of law. "We were trying to subpoena the CIA because we felt like they had documents, exhibits, and evidence that would indicate complicity in Seal's assassination," Dalton says slowly.
Through discovery, his investigation gained access to something more valuable than gold, the contents of the trunk of Barry Seal's Cadillac on the night he died, and discovered that a cover-up was underway before Seal's body had grown cold in the Baton Rouge morgue. "The FBI went into the Baton Rouge Police Dept and literally & physically seized the contents of that trunk from the Baton Rouge Police. In fact, the Baton Rouge Police probably would have had to draw their guns to keep possession of that trunk," Dalton says today, in an explosive interview on the just-released 2-hour TV special "The Secret Heartbeat of America."

His voice slows further, his words growing more deliberate. "And, actually, by law, the Baton Rouge Police should have done that, but they didn't." What was there about Barry Seal that led the FBI & CIA to refuse to cooperate with state officials in publicized assassination? Dalton wanted to know. He began legal battle to gain access to the evidence seized. Even he sounds surprised that he was, eventually, at least partly successful. "They (the CIA & FBI) wouldn't even honor the subpoena," he states, about the demands of the trial judge for the return of the seized evidence.
A wild card entered the picture, as wild cards often do in America, even today, in the form of a courageous state judge. "It wasn't until a state judge really backed them up, and threatened to hold them in contempt, that they partially complied."

Dalton described brinkmanship to gain access to what the defense should have had as a matter of course during discovery. "If it hadn't been for a good state judge, with enough courage to back the federal govt up," Dalton stated, "we'd have never gotten inside that trunk. He (the judge) made them give us that trunk back."

Rogue Elephant   Kent Heiner ¹ ²

Eisenhower January 8th National Security Council meeting,
"The key to winning this war is to get the Vietnamese to fight. There is just no sense in even talking about the United States forces replacing the French in Indochina. If we did so, the Vietnamese could be expected to transfer their hatred of the French to us. I cannot tell you how bitterly opposed I am to such a course of action. This war in Indochina would absorb our troops by divisions!" (Prouty 1992:51)
Sec.State John Foster Dulles proposed that the U.S. should carry on guerilla operations against the Viet Minh in the event of French defeat. The Council decided that Allen Dulles was to develop this contingency plan. On the 29th of January, the President's Special Committee on Indochina met (in the absence of the president himself) to discuss possible aid to the desperate French. "At the end of the meeting," writes Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, "Allen Dulles, then the director of central intelligence, suggested that an unconventional-warfare officer, Col. Edward G. Lansdale, be added to the group of American liaison officers that General Henri Navarre, the French commander, had agreed to accept in Indochina." (Prouty 1992:38-39,349) The absence of the President for this critical decision was not atypical of the administration's Southeast Asia policy (Scott 1972).
The battle at Dienbienphu was lost by May 1954. Because the U.S. would not become directly involved, the conflict was taken to the conference table, and a peace settlement was reached that year in Geneva, creating separate administrations in northern & southern Vietnam. The north was to be Communist, led by Ho Chi Minh, and the south non-Communist, until an all-Vietnam election in 1956 could unify the country. The elections never took place; Ngo Dinh Diem, the president of South Vietnam sponsored by the U.S. and managed by Lansdale, declared that the terms of the Geneva Accords were unacceptable and that there would be no elections as therein specified.
[ NatSec replaces democracy's advocacy ]

Vietnamese Binh Xuyen organized crime syndicate, controlled Saigon. By the time fighting broke out between Diem's forces and the organized- crime-supported United Front in March 1955, the U.S. and France had already chosen opposing sides. In fact, the two sides were "pawns in a power struggle between the French 2eme Bureau and the American CIA." Diem's forces prevailed after a month of skirmishes and six days of heavy and destructive fighting; the Binh Xuyen were pushed back into the swamp areas from which they had come. In retaliation, some of the French started a terrorist bombing campaign against Americans in Saigon. This ended when Lansdale determined "who the ringleaders were (many of them were intelligence officers) [and] grenades started going off in front of their houses in the evenings." (McCoy 1972:119-25)
After Castro took over Cuba and closed the island to mafia activity, the Dominican Republic became a staging point for a CIA-sponsored invasion of Cuba, as well as a new transit point for Trafficante's narcotics traffic. … Trujillo … assassinated in May 1961, just after the CIA's failed invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. … As one of the CIA-connected men who had supplied Castro with arms before he came to power and subsequently fell from favor with the U.S., Ruby is thought to have negotiated Trafficante's release from Castro's prison (Giancana 1992:279; Marrs 1989:394-98). … In 1947, an FBI staff assistant in Congressman Richard Nixon's office wrote a memo asking Ruby to be excused from testifying before congress on the grounds that Ruby was "performing information functions" for the Congressman's staff (Marrs 1989:269). … Ruby was able to give his FBI handlers valuable tips while eliminating his own criminal competition. … At a midnight press conference at Dallas Police headquarters twelve hours after the assassination, he shouted out a correction to a statement identifying Oswald as a member of the "Free Cuba Committee," an anti-Castro organization. Ruby called out, "That's [the] Fair Play for Cuba [Committee], Henry," identifying Oswald with the pro-Castro organization in the name of which Oswald had distributed leaflets and made television appearances in New Orleans that summer (Scott 1993:161).

Johnson who derailed the Texas investigations into the President's murder by forming a presidential commission to handle the matter. … In New Orleans in the summer of 1977, CIA and military personnel were discovered using offshore oil rigs to smuggle drugs into the U.S. in cooperation with the Marcello crime family (Ruppert 2000). Some of the rigs were owned by George H. W. Bush's own Zapata Offshore company (Bush was CIA director until 1977) and were serviced by Brown and Root, the Houston-based contracting company which sponsored Lyndon Johnson's political career. Brown and Root is currently owned by Halliburton, for which current Vice President Dick Cheney was CEO. … At a White House reception on Christmas eve, a month after he succeeded to the presidency, Johnson told the Joint Chiefs: 'Just get me elected, and then you can have your war.'" (Scott 1993:32)
… in January 1965. That year, Ed Lansdale went to Vietnam as Senior Liaison Officer of the U.S. Mission to South Vietnam. The years 1965 and 1966 were enormous landmarks for CIA involvement with Southeast Asian heroin. The CIA-mafia alliance moved many of its former Cuba operatives to Southeast Asia. By 1965, a power- hungry Laotian general named Ouane Rattikone was "on a big move . . . to consolidate the opium business" and had cut the Corsican transport pilots out of the picture, leaving Air America as the only alternative (McCoy 1972:301,362-63). The CIA headquarters for secret operations in northern Laos came to share the city of Long Tieng with a heroin-refining laboratory which General Vang Pao opened in 1970 (McCoy 1972). … Richard Nixon cited business with Pepsi-Cola as being the reason for his presence in Dallas on the day of President Kennedy's murder, but his alibi did not check out (Marrs 1989:270)

Ted Shackley had been the CIA's JMWAVE station chief in Miami from 1962-65 and had directed the Cuban Bay of Pigs veterans against Castro; … Deputy Chief of Station in Laos 1965 … Associate Deputy Director of Operations (an office with Agency-wide responsibilities to which he was appointed by Director George Bush) before officially retiring from the CIA in 1979 …
A Special Forces colonel who was in Laos in early 1965 told Journalist Daniel Hopsicker that up until that time, the opium bought from the Laotian hill tribesmen was disposed of in a monthly bonfire. He noted that the arrival of Ted Shackley, Oliver North, and Richard Secord coincided with a change in procedures; orders were given to store the opium for removal to another site instead of burning it.
Secord sent his Air Force planes to bomb Vang Pao's rivals. Barry Seal at some point became a part of the Southeast Asian enterprise, piloting personnel and contraband (Hopsicker 2001:183-88). … Michael Hand, a CIA agent from Long Tieng, had founded the bank with four Air America officials.

Although his reappointment of CIA Director Allen Dulles and FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover were Kennedy's first official acts as President, … After the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in April 1961, … Kennedy fired the top leadership responsible for the invasion, including Director Allen Dulles, his deputy Charles Cabell, and Dick Bissell, the deputy director in charge of the CIA's covert action wing. On June 28, 1961 Kennedy signed National Security Action Memoranda (NSAMs) 55,56, and 57, which placed the responsibility for covert operations, traditionally the CIA's, in the hands of the Defense Dept and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. … In its final months, with NSAM 263, the Kennedy administration announced its plans to withdraw 1,000 military personnel from Vietnam by the end of the year and to have the bulk of the approximately 15,000 such personnel out of Vietnam by 1965. … prosecution of Willis Bird, who had been charged with the bribery of an aid official in Vientiane. But Bird never returned to the U.S. to stand trial (Krüger 1980:130; see also McCoy 1991:168-69). … CIA agent Richard Case Nagell … Dick Russell's The Man Who Knew Too Much.
… Howard Hunt, close associate of David Atlee Phillips, with whom he worked in the both the CIA's Guatemalan campaign of 1954 and the Bay of Pigs invasion of 1961. Hunt would later be arrested for his role in the Watergate affair. … In one of Hunt's libel suits, one Marita Lorenz gave sworn testimony that Lee Harvey Oswald, American mercenaries Frank Sturgis and Gerry Patrick Hemming, and Cuban exiles including Orlando Bosch, Pedro Diaz Lanz, and the brothers Guillermo and Ignacio Novo Sampol, had met one November midnight in 1963 at the Miami home of Orlando Bosch and had studied Dallas street maps. She also swore that she and Sturgis were at that time in the employ of the CIA and that they received payment from Howard Hunt under the name "Eduardo," … They arrived in Dallas on 21 November 1963, and stayed at a motel, where the group met Howard Hunt. Hunt stayed for about forty-five minutes and at one point handed an envelope of cash to Sturgis. About an hour after Hunt left, Jack Ruby came to the door. Lorenz says that this was the first time she had seen Ruby. By this time, she said, it was early evening. In her testimony, Lorenz identified herself and her fellow passengers as members of Operation Forty, the CIA-directed assassination team formed in 1960 in preparation for the Bay of Pigs invasion. She described her role as that of a "decoy." … (Lane 1991).

… In the middle of Richard Nixon's second term as president, Ford was appointed by Nixon to replace Vice President Spiro Agnew due to legal proceedings against Agnew. When the Watergate cover-up caught up with Nixon, he resigned and left Ford to take over the office; Ford immediately pardoned Nixon in advance of any Watergate-related charges which might be brought against the ex-president. 15 months after Nixon's resignation in August 1974, Gerald Ford chose George Bush to head the CIA. It was in these circumstances that the National Security Council, over which Ford had direct oversight, made a deliberate and secret decision to use drug profits to fund the arming of the Kurds. As part of this program, the CIA used offshore oil rigs, some of which were owned by Bush's Zapata Offshore company, to smuggle the contraband past U.S. Customs (Ruppert 2000) …
At the time of DeMohrenschildt's 1977 death, his address book contained George Bush's name with the words "Zapata Petroleum Midland" (which places the entry at a pre-1959 date), and George's college nickname, "Poppy" (Tarpley and Chaitkin 1992). … "Skull & Bones" society, organization founded in 1833 by a member of the Russell family, which owned the largest opium-trading company in U.S. … the "old China trade" … presidency of Zapata Offshore (1959), the U.S. House of Representatives (1967), the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee (1972), the directorship of the CIA (1976), the Vice Presidency (1981), and finally the Presidency (1989). … 1963 FBI memo informs us that "George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency" was briefed by the FBI on the reaction of Cuban exiles to the assassination of President Kennedy.
… Seal was Ferrie's successor as manager of the CIA's Louisiana air fleet after Ferrie's 1967 murder during the prosecution of Clay Shaw, a New Orleans businessman who ran the International Trade Mart, where Seal is known to have had an office in 1969 (Hopsicker 2001) … Congressman Hale Boggs, … disappeared on a plane flight in 1972. (Groden and Livingstone 1989:116; Marrs 1989:562). … summarily deported by Robert Kennedy to Guatemala in 1961. Marcello, after what he described as an ordeal in a remote Guatemalan jungle, flown by Dave Ferrie back to the states. Ferrie was with Marcello in court on the day of the assassination and had to make a hasty trip to Dallas, where he and Barry Seal are reputed to have flown getaway planes for the conspirators (Hopsicker 2001: 164-65).

CIA denies documents on SE Asia bioweapons plan ¹   Plan's demise is victory for safety regulations; CIA's use of secrecy law raises questions about U.S. role in dubious biological eradication project.
10.10.01   Sunshine Project

Austin & Hamburg   In 9.24.01 letter invoking national security law, CIA has refused to respond to a Sunshine Project Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents related the spy agency's involvement in a project to make biological weapons for use against cannabis (marijuana) fields in the Philippines. The grounds for the CIA's refusal and the curious circumstances surrounding the project suggest possible U.S. involvement in the bioweapons plan. But its demise also points to the positive biological security potential of health, environment, and research regulations. The cannabis eradication research came to the Sunshine Project's attention in Dec. 2000. On 12.22.00, UN Drug Control Program (UNDCP) Director Pino Arlacchi cited the Philippines research in a report to the Commission on Narcotic Drugs.

Controversial projects to develop biological weapons to eradicate drug crops have been dubbed "Agent Green" by the Sunshine Project. U.S. & UNDCP proposals to use fungal weapons against coca in Colombia were stopped in early 2001 following a wave of protests from non-profits and the Ecuadorean, Venezuelan, Peruvian, and Brazilian govts. But a parallel U.S.-financed project in Tashkent, Uzbekistan continues to develop an ecologically-unsound fungal weapon to kill opium poppy. It is primarily intended for use against Afghanistan's Taliban. The project in the Philippines was touted as something different, not just the U.S. operating through the auspices of UNDCP. Arlacchi's report suggested the research was the Filipinos' idea, implying intl backing for the controversial biological eradication approach condemned by non-profits as biological warfare. After Arlacchi's report, the Sunshine Project quickly made a FOIA request to the USDA, because USDA's Agricultural Research Service is the scientific vanguard of the biological eradication efforts in other regions. But USDA promptly & unequivocally responded that it had no knowledge of the Philippine program.

While USDA's answer apparently provided support for Arlacchi's suggestion that the activity was a domestic anti- narcotics effort, research in Manila by a Philippine NGO painted a very different and much more detailed picture. The Philippine govt had actually stopped the project over a year before Arlacchi's report. The proponent & lead scientist of the aborted bioweapons program was not Filipino; but Sri Lankan. The scientist did not work for a Philippines-directed institution; but was a microbiology professor at a university run by a U.S. based Protestant denomination. The microbiologist's project was endorsed in 1998 by a govt anti-narcotics committee; but solely as a greenhouse experiment. Moreover, the anti-narcotics committee's authority was limited to endorsing the work, and it was not empowered to grant requisite govt permits. In fact, the project never began research because appropriate govt agencies the Depts of Health (DOH), Environment & Natural Resources (DENR), and Science & Technology (DOST), did not give their approval.

In late 1999, as intl concern over the use of biological weapons on narcotic crops heated up, the Sri Lankan microbiologist decided to leave the Philippines. The professor said he was being sent to another of the denomination's colleges, this one located in the U.S. Philippine officials quickly shelved the non-project, over a year before UNDCP Director Arlacchi cited it in his report. A 2001 survey of life sciences depts at U.S. & Canadian colleges belonging to the religious denomination yields no persons fitting the Sri Lankan project director's description. Filipino rebels are alleged to participate in the narcotics trade by funding their operations through cannabis sales. The proposed use of biological eradication agents there parallels the situation in other parts of the world where biological weapons are being thrown into an explosive mix of anti-narcotics and counterinsurgency operations. In S.America, impacting the FARC is a goal of biological eradication of coca, while in Afghanistan fungal eradication of opium poppy is intended to work against the Taliban.

After USDA's negative FOIA response, the Sunshine Project immediately petitioned the CIA because of that agency's counterinsurgency & anti-narcotics roles and because it originated & nurtured the biological eradication strategy through research grants dating from the 1970s. The CIA's use of FOIA national security exemptions as grounds for its refusal to answer indicates possible U.S. intelligence involvement in the aborted Philippines project. Invoking the FOIA exemptions rather than denying involvement (with a "no documents exist" response) raises questions because there is no reason to take this legal step unless a paper trail exists.

Unearthing CIA's possible involvement in Philippines project comes close on heels of embarrassing news about CIA biological defense research published by the NYTimes 9.4.01 According to the Times, CIA researchers working in "Project Clear Vision" constructed & tested mock biological bombs and planned to create genetically engineered anthrax as part of a "defensive" program. Many biological weapons experts consider the CIA work practically indistinguishable from offensive biological weapons research. Clear Vision also ran afoul of the UN's Biological & Toxin Weapons Convention, the primary intl agreement against biological warfare.

Crack Cop
FBI documents link an ex-Laguna cop and drug runner to an Irvine executive with ties to the CIA
7.13.01   Nick Schou OCWeekly

a big CIA contact
Lister's jump from police work in Laguna Beach, the Mayberry of Orange County, to life as a security advisor in war-torn Central America is just as strange as it sounds. In 1969, he served as a military policeman, interrogating captured North Vietnamese soldiers. Then, after a few years with the Maywood Police Dept, Lister joined the Laguna Beach PD, where he worked as a burglary detective. In 1979, a year before Lister quit the Laguna Beach force and just months after he first met Nelson, he launched Pyramid to carry out private security work.
There's no question that Pyramid was involved in some highly unusual business in Central America. According to a 1998 U.S. Justice Dept Inspector General report, the company was investigated by the FBI at least 5 times between 1983 & 1986. "In Sept. 1983, Lister's company, Pyramid International Security Consultants, was listed as the subject of a neutrality violation investigation involving the sale of weapons to El Salvador and the loan of money from Saudi Arabia to the Salvadoran govt," the report states. "Lister was also alleged to be attempting to sell arms to several other countries."

El Salvador circa the early 1980s was not open for business to just anybody. The entire region was wracked by civil wars & coups d'etat; El Salvador's military-led govt was engaged in a systematic campaign of torture & murder against anyone branded a communist or subversive. But in a 1996 interview with San Jose Mercury News reporter Gary Webb, former Pyramid employee Christopher Moore (another ex-Laguna Beach cop) claimed Lister shrugged off the dangers of doing business there. Lister reportedly told Moore he had "a big CIA contact" at an Orange County company and both Pyramid and its employees would be protected while in El Salvador.
"I can't remember his name, but Ron was always running off to meetings with him, supposedly," Moore told Webb. "Ron said the guy was the former deputy director of operations or something, real high up there. All I know is that this supposed contact of his was working at the Fluor Corp. because I had to call Ron out there a couple of times." Moore said he traveled to El Salvador on Lister's behalf, accompanied by a Spanish-speaking man who said he worked at the Salvadoran consulate in Los Angeles. Once in the capital city of San Salvador, Moore says, he met face to face with Roberto D'Aubuisson, a former Salvadoran army intelligence officer, drug and weapons dealer, and leader of the right-wing ARENA party. But D'Aubuisson's legacy is darker still: he was the architect of El Salvador's paramilitary death squads, a Hitler admirer, and a sociopath reputed to have personally authorized the 1980 murder of Salvadoran Archbishop Oscar Romero.

"That was probably the highlight of my life at that point," Moore told Webb. "There I was, a reserve police officer who'd only been in the country for a couple of days, and I was sitting in this office in downtown San Salvador across the desk from the man who ran the death squads. He had a gun lying on top of his desk and had these filing cabinets pushed up against the windows of the office so nobody could shoot through them." The timing of Moore's trip to El Salvador coincides with a 1982 Pyramid contract proposal to provide security to the Salvadoran Ministry of Defense; narcotics detectives found the paperwork in a 1986 raid on Lister's home. The contract, written in Spanish and running more than 30 pages, shows Pyramid boasted the services of numerous (but unnamed) former CIA physical security officers and surveillance experts.
Intriguingly, the document suggests that Lister was negotiating directly with Defense Minister General José Guillermo García, linked by El Salvador's Truth Commission to the 1981 massacre of more than 800 villagers in El Mozote. A close ally of D'Aubuisson, García was one of the most powerful members of the right-wing military junta that took control of El Salvador in 1979. One of Lister's partners in the venture, San Diego SWAT team weapons maker and govt supplier Tim Lafrance, told the Weekly in 1997 that Pyramid was a "favored corporation" used by the CIA to help smuggle weapons to the Nicaraguan contras. Lafrance said he traveled to El Salvador with "2 giant boxes full of machine guns and ammunition", goods Lafrance said returned with him at the end of the trip."The whole idea was to set up an operation in El Salvador that would allow us to get around U.S. laws and supply the contras with guns," he explained. "The smart way to do this was to find a military base. It's much easier to just build the weapons down there."
[ concurs with govt methods recounted by Terry Reed, auth. Compromised]

While in El Salvador, Lafrance claimed, he manufactured weapons for Nicaragua's CIA-backed rebels known as the contras inside a mass-transit center run by the military. The weapons were airlifted by helicopter to contra training bases in Honduras, on Nicaragua's northern border. Lafrance also asserted that Pyramid's employees were guests at the well-appointed barracks of the elite, U.S.-trained Atlcatl battalion, the unit that carried out the massacre in El Mozote.
The Pyramid security contract offers further evidence of Lister's CIA connections. On its cover page, the contract lists Richard E. Wilker as the firm's "technical director." Wilker is identified in corporate papers as an employee of another Newport Beach company, Intersect Inc. Wilker's current whereabouts are unknown, but two founding members of Intersect, both former CIA agents, told the Weekly they knew Lister. Although both nervously denied the CIA ever employed Wilker or Lister, the firm's vice president, John Vandewerker, said Wilker once traveled to El Salvador on business and mysteriously had to flee the country. "It was kind of touchy … as far as getting out of the country and all that kind of stuff," he said. Vandewerker also said that either Lister or Wilker had once helped him apply for a job with Nelson at Fluor Corp. "For a while, I tried to get a job at Fluor when I stopped working, and I know Rich [Wilker] was trying to sell something to Fluor," he said.

Nelson seemed to be a potential source of employment for many former CIA agents, an irony, given that one of his final acts as a deputy director at the CIA was to recommend the agency terminate full-time jobs for CIA agents who were "marginal performers." "We owe these people a lot," Nelson wrote then-CIA director George Bush in a 1976 memo. "But not a lifetime job." Hundreds of CIA agents left the agency's payroll that year, including Vandewerker and Nelson himself, who said he was retiring for personal reasons. During his FBI interrogation, Nelson claimed Lister had applied for a job with Fluor. "He was never offered a job," states the FBI memo. The next sentence was censored by the FBI, but the memo continues, "Nelson thought Fluor might be able to use his [Lister's] company"- an apparent reference to Pyramid. "Nelson said [Lister] started traveling overseas, Lebanon and Central America, and he always had some scheme that never materialized."

'a dumb thing'
The Lister-Nelson-D'Aubuisson connection is only one strand of Lister's life story. But the FBI documents also appear to allude to another: Lister's claim that he was simultaneously running cocaine with the support of the CIA. Nelson told his FBI interrogators that during a March 1985 meeting with Lister, the former Laguna cop begged Nelson for help. "I did a dumb thing because of greed," Lister reportedly told Nelson. What Lister meant is unclear, the next 7 lines of the FBI memo are blacked out. But Nelson's response is intact: he told the FBI he informed Lister there was no way the Agency could help him. Perhaps Lister was talking about the activity that earned him the most money, and ultimately the most trouble, in the 1980s.
In 1982, the same year Lister first traveled to El Salvador for Pyramid, and while meeting regularly with Nelson, Lister hit upon a lucrative business scheme: running cocaine to raise cash to support rebels in neighboring Nicaragua. Despite their close ties to the CIA, the rebels had a problem: their reputation on Capitol Hill. Among many U.S. lawmakers, they were known as terrorists, more likely to murder Nicaraguans than liberate them. The U.S. Congress fought the Reagan administration's requests to fund the contras and then, in 1984, banned any U.S. military aid for the rebels. 2 years later, a federal investigation known as Iran-contra revealed that the Reagan administration had illegally sneaked around the ban, selling weapons to Iran for cash it transferred to the Nicaraguan contras.

There was also evidence the contras were selling drugs in the U.S. to finance their operations. Among others, Lister would later claim that he helped in the fund-raising. He hooked up with Danilo Blandon, a drug-dealing Nicaraguan exile then living in Los Angeles. According to voluminous law-enforcement documents, Blandon and Lister established a vast cocaine network throughout California. The network was especially strong in South Central. Blandon would later testify that Lister's job was money laundering and security. Lister kept Blandon well- stocked with surveillance gear & high-tech weapons: Mack 10s, police scanners, Uzis, even grenade launchers. Blandon said he passed the equipt on to his South-Central LA connection, "Freeway" Ricky Ross. Using Lister's gear to avoid police detection, Ross emerged as the region's most notorious cocaine trafficker. He would later recall that one of his favorite entertainments was to use his police scanners to eavesdrop on cops raiding rival drug rings while he and his buddies counted the cash from their latest deal.
Even as the FBI investigated Lister on weapons export charges, narcotics agents were zeroing in on the Blandon- Lister-Ross network. A separate FBI report from the same period shows that while its agents were interviewing Nelson, they were also investigating Lister's purchase of a Mission Viejo home for $374,000 in cash. The FBI memo also shows that while the bureau was investigating Lister, Nelson had been coaching him on his upcoming grand-jury testimony. "He [Lister] then told of his meeting with the FBI and that he had been subpoenaed before the grand jury in San Francisco," the FBI memo states. "He told Nelson he was terrified. Nelson said go. . . . [Lister] admitted being stupid and that he had done a dumb thing. Nelson said [Lister] left and then called back after his grand-jury appearance and said he really did well."

Whatever else Lister told Nelson about his testimony is a mystery because the FBI censored the next three lines, again citing national security considerations. The FBI memo reveals that, seeking to help Lister in his trouble with the FBI, Nelson made telephone calls to at least one other former CIA agent, a strange action assuming the CIA never had any relationship to Lister. "Nelson told [Lister] no one could help him, including the CIA," the memo states. "Nelson told [Lister] he had discussed his problem with another retired CIA agent and that no one could help him until he cleared himself with the FBI. Nelson said he told [Lister] he no longer cared to continue their relationship and he has not heard from him since." Nelson described Lister as a "blowhard" and a "name dropper who always had a get-rich scheme." He added that Lister "did have some good ideas, such as a laser-sighting device, but could never get it off the ground. [Nelson] knew of no intelligence activities by [Lister]."
That last claim was & is clearly disingenuous. First, the source of the claim is a retired CIA official who admitted he spoke with other former agents on Lister's behalf while the latter was being investigated by the FBI. Second, whatever Lister and Nelson were up to in the 1980s, it is important enough to remain classified as "vital to U.S. national security" today, nearly 2 decades later.

'a major Central American cartel'
Nelson retired from Fluor in 1985. Within a year, Lister was in deep trouble. Although the FBI never prosecuted him for his intl arms sales, his drug dealing finally caught up with him in October 1986. After spending months on the case, a multi-agency narcotics unit led by LA County sheriff's detectives raided dozens of houses and apartments belonging to various members of the Blandon-Lister-Ross drug ring-including Lister's mountain retreat in Crestline, which police suspected was a drug warehouse.
Police also raided Lister's Mission Viejo home. They found him there, unshaven, still drinking his morning coffee. Because both of Lister's properties were clean, police suspected he had been tipped off about the raid. Clad only in a bathrobe and looking wild-eyed, Lister boasted that he knew he was being watched by police and claimed that he did business in South America and worked for the CIA. Inside his house, detectives found what might have seemed evidence to support that assertion: military training films, photos of Lister posing with Nicaraguan contras, an array of sophisticated surveillance gear, a copy of the 1982 Pyramid contract, even his notes listing Nelson & D'Aubuisson as business contacts. All that, but no drugs. Lister wasn't arrested. Just days later, most of the paperwork seized from Lister's home mysteriously disappeared from the LA Sheriff's Dept evidence room.

Unperturbed, Lister continued to deal drugs. In 1988, he tried to sell 2 kilos of cocaine to a prostitute he met at a Newport Beach boat party. The woman turned out to be a Costa Mesa police informant, and Lister ended up behind bars for the first time since he began dealing drugs with the contras. Two kilos was enough to land Lister in prison for years; instead, he walked out of jail after only two days. Having signed a deal with the Orange County district attorney's office, Lister had become a narc. But his new career as an informant was short-lived. The following year, DEA agents arrested Lister again, this time in connection with a San Diego-area cocaine distribution ring. Two years later, a jury convicted Lister on drug-trafficking charges; he was sentenced to 97 months in prison and 60 months of probation. Lister appealed, asserting that while an informant, he had testified before two federal grand juries about a "major Central American cartel" and his "activities in Central America concerning certain key figures from Nicaragua alleged to have been involved in the Iran-contra scandal."

In establishing grounds for a softer sentence, Lister told the court he had certainly run drugs, but he had also cooperated with the govt. He claimed he gave prosecutors thousands of pages of documents and notes regarding his work for the CIA "from 1982 to 1986 and beyond, and I did it in detail, location, activity," he said. "I gave them physical evidence, phone bills, travel tickets, everything possible back from those days-which most people don't keep, but I do keep good records-to assist them in this investigation. They were excited about it." It's not clear what happened to the notes Lister says he gave investigators or to his testimony about his work with a "major Central American cartel." What is clear is that he put on quite a show. In 1998, the U.S. Justice Dept noted, "An FBI special agent was convinced that Lister [and] Blandon . . . were connected to the CIA."
Lister's appeal was successful in erasing a conviction on tax evasion charges. After completing a drug-treatment program, he walked out of prison in 1996, three years early. His whereabouts are unknown, and he has refused repeated offers to share his story with the press. Nelson, Lister's "big CIA contact" at Fluor Corp. in Irvine, died 6 years ago in Corona del Mar. Fluor officials refused to comment for this story but have previously told the Weekly the company had no business in El Salvador in the 1980s. That would suggest that Nelson's "Central America" meetings with Lister had nothing to do with Fluor and everything to do with Pyramid-and perhaps Nelson's former employer, the CIA.

Tom Crispell of the CIA's public-affairs office said the agency has already denied any involvement with Lister. "This individual [Nelson] had been retired from the agency for a number of years, and we're not in a position to comment on his private life or conversations he had in his private life," Crispell remarked. But Crispell's claim runs headfirst into the facts, chief among them: the CIA refused for years to release any documents on Lister and, when it finally did so, released them in heavily redacted form citing national security concerns. "Now we know that Lister was meeting with Nelson and that the grand-jury investigation was somehow tied into this," responded Gary Webb, who left the Mercury News shortly after his editors backed away from his Dark Alliance series focusing on the CIA- contra-crack connection in May 1997. "What we don't know is how Lister even knew Nelson, why Nelson would continue to meet with [a man dismissed as] a bullshit artist, and why anyone would even consider helping Lister once he cleared himself with the FBI."
The documents are mute on one other, particularly chilling mystery: What kind of top-secret "business"relationship could Nelson, a retired CIA deputy director, possibly have with Lister, a drug-dealing, gun-running "security consultant" and D'Aubuisson, the leader of El Salvador's death squads?

2 air marshals accused of drug smuggling
2.13.06   AP

2 U.S. air marshals face federal drug charges accusing them of using their positions to smuggle narcotics through airport security and onto planes for transport, federal prosecutors said. Shawn Ray Nguyen, 38, and Burlie L. Sholar III, 32, both of Houston TX, were arrested Thursday after an informant delivered 33 pounds of cocaine and $15,000 in "up front money" to Nguyen's Houston home, authorities said.
"We expect and demand that our law enforcement officials will themselves abide by the laws that they are sworn to uphold," said First Assistant U.S. Attorney Don DeGabrielle.

According to a criminal complaint, authorities began investigating Nguyen in November after receiving a tip that he was involved in selling drugs. Authorities said Nguyen recruited Sholar and the two planned to smuggle 33 pounds of cocaine aboard a plane bound for Las Vegas in exchange for $67,500. Both men face 10 years to life in prison and a $4 million fine if convicted.
The exact number of air marshals is classified but thousands were rushed into service after 9.11.01

Mexico

Mexican magazine editor killed
1.23.02   Lisa J. Adams AP

Francisco Cayuela Villareal, head of the Tamaulipas state prosecutor's office, said there were suspicions surrounding the victim and that he may have been killed by drug dealers out for revenge. Villareal said officers had found 1.2 ounces of cocaine in Fernandez's car, "an amount that would be too much for immediate consumption, but that would be for sale.'' He also said that it was suspicious that Fernandez had two bodyguards. "No journalist, regardless of how important he is, would be in a financial condition to pay the services of bodyguards, who charge some 20,000 to 25,000 pesos ($2,700),'' the government news agency Notimex quoted the state prosecutor as saying. Villareal also said that one of the bodyguards has a criminal record including homicide and drug trafficking and that there is an arrest warrant pending against him. He did not elaborate. The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists said it hadn't fully investigated Fernandez's killing, but noted that Mexicans authorities often attack the character of victims in high-profile crimes. "Rumors are often planted by authorities or others to destroy the credibility of the victim and distract attention from the killing,'' said group's Americas program head Marylene Smeetz.

On the U.S.-Mexico border crossing, the new most-wanted posters went up last June, and the biggest, most violent suspects in the multibillion-dollar drug business are finally out of the picture, their faces crossed out because they are out of commission. Mexican officials had arrested or killed key leaders of the mighty Arellano Felix cartel, said to supply 40% of the cocaine that comes into the U.S.. In all, Mexico has arrested about two dozen big fish since President Vicente Fox came to office.
But law enforcement officials say the street price of cocaine, key measure of supply & demand, has barely budged. That suggests the hydra effect, where new leaders of criminal or terrorist organizations inevitably emerge to replace even the biggest fish.

They didn't come much bigger than Benjamin Arellano Felix, head of the drug cartel alternately known as AFO. Mexican Army officers arrested Arellano Felix quietly at a home in Puebla, Mexico, on March 9, a month after his brother Ramon, AFO's enforcer, was killed in a shootout. Benjamin Arellano Felix had more influence & power over U.S.-Mexico drug trade than anyone else in either country. Untouchable for 13 years, his cartel corrupted countless officials, generals and senior police. Those they couldn't buy, they killed. Ultimately, their power rivaled that of the Mexican state.
"After Ramon was killed, when Benjamin was taken into custody, the phone has rung off the hook," says DEA special agent in charge of the Arellano Felix task force Jack Hook. "We have more leads, more witnesses and sources to talk to than we can probably handle right now." For years, fear stopped informers from dialing the hot line, so that is a big change. But it appears to remain business as usual on the border, good business for drug runners. "We still see tremendous amounts of cocaine coming across the border," Hook told ABCNEWS' Nightline . "And, not much has changed at all. "Volume really hasn't changed," he added. "No change in the [U.S. street] price."

In fact, the Tijuana newspaper Zeta reports the Arellano family business is stronger than ever. Publisher Jesus Blancornelas, also author of a new book on the history of the Arellanos, believes that the younger members of the clan already have stepped in to take their place of their dead or captured older brothers. "I think they'll be smarter," Blancornelas said through a translator. "They have seen their brothers in action and have learned from their mistakes and the unity is stronger."
Blancornelas is still protected by a dozen armed guards he's had since the Arellanos tried to kill him back in 1997. He escaped an assassination attempt that killed his driver. Now, after arrest & inevitable trial of Benjamin, there are others who are afraid, he says, perhaps incl Mexican politicians with ties to Arellano Felix.

"Benjamin Arellano respects those who arrested him, but he'll accuse those who he bought to protect him," Blancornelas said. "There will be vengeance by death or by accusation."

While some politicians may worry Arellano will talk, others who once worked for the cartel believe it was time for the brothers to go. "There are people much more powerful than the Arellanos who feel a sense of relief that they're out of the picture now," said a former cartel employee "Steve," who asked ABCNEWS to conceal his true identity. "They can deal in more of a peaceful way … and in a more of a calculated way, not the old OK-Corral shoot- out type of thing. In other words, becoming more sophisticated. The Arellanos were becoming the dinosaur of the cartel era."

A violent era seems to be over, but does it make a difference? It depends on which side of the border you are on. U.S. prosecutor Gonzalo Curiel knows first-hand about the reach of the Arellanos. In the 1990s, he was the target of an assassination plan after he sought the extradition of 2 cartel members. Curiel was put under U.S. Marshal protection. "In my view, something did change," Curiel said. "The worst case scenario would have been the Arellanos would have not only have maintained their grip but, would have even become more powerful. So that they would have been incapable of being toppled." "This was a huge deal to many people," he added. "I think a lot of people in Mexico had lost confidence in the ability of their govt, their institutions to make a difference when it came to this violent & ruthless organization."

Other officials also consider it a big deal, as represented by the border crossing wanted/captured posters designed to send a message to every successful drug courier. "That's our statement to them that they're not invincible, and that we will continue to work and investigate & target the members of that organization until that organization is completely dismantled," Hook said. But when authorities do catch them, there probably will be others who will step right up to the plate to take their place, esp. with a $65-billion-a-year U.S. drug market still open for business."That's true," Hook said. "That's true."

Feds catch drug kingpin while fishing
8.17.06   Michael J. Sniffen AP

Wash. D.C.   The Coast Guard caught Mexican drug lord Francisco Javier Arellano Felix deep-sea fishing off Mexico, decapitating a murderous cartel that dug smuggling tunnels under the U.S. border, officials said Wednesday. Arellano Felix, 36, was captured when the crew of the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Monsoon boarded a U.S.-registered sport fishing boat at 9 am local time Monday about 15 miles off the coast of Mexico's Baja California peninsula, Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Thad Allen told a news conference.

"We've taken the head off the snake," said DEA chief of operations Michael Braun. DEA agents discovered Arellano Felix's fishing plans and asked the Coast Guard to seize the boat in international waters.
"This is a huge blow" to one of the three largest Mexican drug cartels, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty said. However, he added, "much more remains to be done."
Braun said, "We're piling on this organization because they are extremely vulnerable right now."

The cartel was once led by 7 brothers and 4 sisters, but Braun noted that Javier's brother Ramon was killed in a shootout with police in 2002, his brother Benjamin is in a Mexican prison and brother Eduardo, while at large in Mexico, is not considered "capable of leading the organization at this time."
"That's not to say that there aren't one or more others capable of stepping up and running it," Braun said.

Arellano Felix is wanted in both U.S. & Mexico for his role as leader of the violent and sophisticated Tijuana-based Arellano Felix gang, which McNulty said was blamed in a 2003 U.S. indictment for 20 murders in the U.S. & Mexico.

The Arellano Felix gang, along with the Gulf Cartel and the Federacion, are the largest Mexican drug cartels. The Arellano Felix gang is believed to be responsible for the massive drug tunnels discovered last January. The longest tunnel stretched 2,400 ft from a warehouse near the Tijuana airport to a warehouse in San Diego's Otay Mesa industrial district. More than 2 tons of marijuana were found in the tunnel. The DEA says the gang is responsible for smuggling of tons of marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamines over the last decade.
In addition, Braun said the Arellano Felix gang was involved in smuggling multiple tons of cocaine from all 3 major cocaine-producing countries in Latin America, Colombia, Peru and Bolivia. McNulty said the gang received some cocaine from FARC, a leftist revolutionary guerrilla group in Colombia.

The Cutter Monsoon is towing the fishing boat, the Dock Holiday, back to San Diego where DEA agents will arrest Arellano Felix and others among the 8 adults and three juveniles who were captured on board. Officials anticipated announcing additional charges against the group in San Diego on Thursday.
Federal drug agents began preparing for the operation 14 months ago after learning that Arellano Felix was planning to go fishing aboard the vessel off La Paz, Mexico, the U.S. officials announced. The agents enlisted the Coast Guard's help in mounting the operation and were helped throughout by Mexican law enforcement officers, McNulty said.

Arellano Felix was among 11 individuals named in a federal indictment unsealed in California in July 2003. The indictment charged racketeering, money laundering and drug trafficking conspiracies. It sought forfeiture of $300 million in illegal profits. Some of the counts carried maximum penalties of life in prison.
U.S. State Dept has offered $5 million rewards for the capture of Javier or his brother Eduardo. McNulty said there was no indication whether anyone would receive the award for Javier's capture.
Javier Arellano Felix was charged in Mexico in 1993 with conspiring to assassinate Roman Catholic Cardinal Juan Posadas Ocampo, U.S. officials said.

A law enforcement official said 2 suspected assassins for the Arellano Felix cartel were among those aboard the Dock Holiday. He requested anonymity because he was speaking before the list of passengers was released officially. The suspected assassins captured with Javier were identified as Arturo Villareal-Heredia and Marco "El Cotorro (The Parrot)" Fernandez, the law enforcement official said.

Opium: (raw, to be smoked): 5 grams


Heroin: 25 mg


Marijuana: 5 g


Cocaine: 500 mg


LSD: .015 mg


MDA: 200 mg


MDMA (Ecstasy): 200 mg


Mescaline: 1 g


Peyote: 1 kg


Psilocybin 100 mg


Hallucinogenic mushrooms
(raw, off the farm): 250 mg


Amphetamines: 100 mg


Dexamphetamines: 40 mg


Phencyclidine (PCP, or Angel Dust): 7 mg


Methamphetamines: 200 mg


Nalbuphine (synthetic opiate): 10 mg

Mayor Jerry Sanders and other local officials were astounded to hear that Mexico is close to legalizing an array of drugs from marijuana to heroin for personal use.
“I view this as a hostile action by a longtime ally of the U.S.,” Sanders said at a City Hall news conference.
Mexico's Congress approved a bill yesterday that would allow possession of small quantities of marijuana, Ecstasy, cocaine and even heroin. Mexican lawmakers say the change would actually strengthen drug enforcement efforts, but that's not the interpretation north of the border.

“Legalizing these drugs is certainly going to have a spillover effect in San Diego,” said Damon Mosler, head of narcotics at the San Diego County District Attorney's Office. “It means they'll be importing people who want to do drugs, and exporting those who need the financial wherewithal to continue to do those drugs they've become addicted to,” he said.
While shock and outrage dominated local reaction to the proposed law, federal authorities noted they were still gathering information on the specific details of the bill. They said the legislation appears to “clarify” policies, rather than legalize drugs.

In Mexico, the situation wasn't any clearer. Ruth Hernández, a congresswoman with the National Action Party, said the law's intent is actually to prosecute more people for drug possession.
“This is not a law that will tolerate the consumption of drugs, but the way it was expressed makes it appear like that, and that's why it's creating a lot of consternation,” Hernández said. “The law should be sufficiently clear so there is no doubt in its interpretation.”
She said she abstained from voting on the measure because of her concerns with how it's being interpreted. President Vicente Fox is almost certain to sign it, said Oscar Aguilar, a Mexico City political analyst. Fox's office proposed it, and his party supports it.
“He's not going to abandon his party 2 months before the (presidential) election,” Aguilar said.

Locally, the region's top political and law enforcement officials gathered at the news conference late yesterday to attack the policy change.
“This is going to have a tremendously bad effect on San Diego and the people who visit here,” Police Chief William Lansdowne said. Sanders said he plans to encourage Fox not to sign the bill.
The legislation is “appallingly stupid, reckless and dangerous,” said the mayor, who was flanked by Lansdowne, District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, Chula Vista Police Chief Richard Emerson and others.
“One has to ask the question: Are the drug lords running the show?” Dumanis said. “More addicts will flood our streets and crime will go up.”

Officials are concerned about the proposed law's effect on young adults. With a drinking age of 18, teens already pack bars and nightclubs in places like Tijuana, Cancun, Acapulco. But many avoid drugs because they're worried about getting caught.
The Bush administration had no immediate reaction. Calls to the San Diego offices of the Drug Enforcement Administration and Immigration and Customs Enforcement were referred to the U.S. State Dept.

“Preliminary information from Mexican legislative sources indicates that the intent of the draft legislation is to clarify the meaning of 'small amounts' of drugs for personal use as stated in current Mexican law,” Janelle Hironimus, a State Department press agent, told The San Diego Union-Tribune  in a prepared statement. “We are working with our colleagues in Mexico to get additional information on this proposed legislation,” she said.
The statement also noted that the United States and Mexico “have a strong history of counter-narcotics cooperation, and the Fox administration has taken a firm stance against illegal drug cultivation, trafficking and abuse.”

Currently, Mexican law leaves open the possibility of dropping charges against people caught with drugs if they are considered addicts and if “the amount is the quantity necessary for personal use.” The exemption isn't automatic.
The new bill drops the “addict” requirement, automatically allowing any “consumers” to have drugs, and sets out specific allowable quantities. Tijuana-based human rights activist Victor Clark, who follows drug trends closely, said it appears the law would lead to more people being prosecuted for drug possession. Clark said that under the previous law, many people were able to argue that they were addicts, and that meant they were back in the streets within hours.

Sale of all drugs would remain illegal under the proposed law. Still, the effects could be significant, given that Mexico is rapidly becoming a drug-consuming nation as well as a shipment point for traffickers.
The policy change is likely to surface when National Drug Control Policy dir. John Walters arrives in San Diego to meet with officials Wednesday.
A spokesman for Walters said the director's trip was planned prior to the development south of the border. Mexican officials hope the law will help police focus on large-scale trafficking operations, rather than minor drug busts.

  [ By this date, military importation, as if in preparation for larger scale test or initial marketing of Afghani heroin, et al, has already been noted even unto photos by speculative alarmist Daniel Hopsicker.
It is not beyond NatSec subterfuge to engineer this contretemps as a reliable double win, making Mexico look tough on drug enforcement via President Fox's subsequent veto of this legislation, and, less visible but more salient, providing Walters a stalking horse red herring diverting attention from the actual, nefariously complicit agenda. ]

Under the measure, criminal charges would no longer be brought for possession of up to 25 milligrams of heroin, five grams of marijuana and a half-gram of cocaine.
“No charges will be brought against … addicts or consumers who are found in possession of any narcotic for personal use,” according to the bill, which also lays out allowable quantities for a large array of other drugs, including LSD, Ecstasy and amphetamines.

In California, it's illegal to possess cocaine, heroin, LSD, Ecstasy and amphetamines. Medical marijuana can be used in certain circumstances, but casual use is illegal. Possession of less than one ounce of pot can draw a citation and a fine.
“Simple possession is an effective investigative tool into other crimes, including trafficking,” said Mosler of the District Attorney's Office.
While the drug amounts the bill outlines appear to be small, they're enough to supply some users for several days, said city of San Diego's paramedic service medical dir. Dr. James Dunford. “It's a travesty from a public health perspective,” he said.

[ a travesty only given public policy of prohibition. Based on more rational policy of harm reduction, it's exactly appropriate, and no less when given police budget constraints exacerbated by reappropriation to NatSec of first responders allocated to terrorist witch hunting enemy combatants out of uniform. ]