War on marijuana unconstitutional, doctors testify in federal court Monday

War on marijuana unconstitutional, doctors testify in federal court Monday

Here's an eye opening update to the war against marijuana.

The U.S. government claims marijuana is a dangerous, addictive drug with no medical benefits. But that claim will be up for debate Monday in California when a federal judge is scheduled to hear testimony from doctors that conclude the opposite.

Doctors Carl Hart, Associate Professor of Psychology at Columbia University, retired physician Phillip Denny, and Greg Carter, Medical Director of St. Luke’s Rehabilitation Institute in Spokane, Washington will testify Monday that marijuana — real name, “cannabis” — is not the demon drug the federal government makes it out to be. Accepted science does not justify the listing of cannabis as a dangerous “Schedule I” substance, many say.

“[I]t is my considered opinion that including marijuana in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act is counter to all the scientific evidence in a society that uses and values empirical evidence,” Dr. Hart declared. “After two decades of intense scientific inquiry in this area, it has become apparent the current scheduling of cannabis has no footing in the realities of science and neurobiology.”

This is good news. We need to be pressuring the government CONSTANTLY to reschedule this drug. Marijuana being a illegal is one of the biggest conspiracies in our nation and it NEEDS more attention. The American public needs to stand up and say NO to the government on marijuana being illegal. With this article, we now have scientists backing us up. Though unfortunately, scientists' opinions appear to mean little to politicians when making decisions on science related matters.

President Richard Nixon placed cannabis in Schedule 1 in 1970, overruling the recommendations of his own National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, which found “little proven danger of physical or psychological harm from the experimental or intermittent use of the natural preparations of cannabis.”

Though, we should definitely keep a close eye on this as it develops.

This is an unprecedented hearing, writes cannabis law reform advocate Paul Armentano, deputy director of NORML.

“This is the first time in recent memory that a federal judge has granted an evidentiary hearing on a motion challenging the statute which classifies cannabis to be one of the most dangerous illicit substances in the nation.”

Attorneys Zenia Gilg and Heather Burke write that “In effect, the action taken by the Department of Justice is either irrational, or more likely proves … [that] marijuana does not fit the criteria of a Schedule I Controlled Substance.”

Hopefully this case goes somewhere.

Government witness Bertha Madras, former White House Drug Czar deputy director under George W. Bush will defend the Schedule 1 designation. Madras states cannabis has no accepted medical use and is unsafe.

Madras states she supports the pharmaceuticalization of THC and CBD, while criminalizing the use of the plant they come from.

“Although more than 30% of current therapeutic drugs are plant-derived, no one currently eats or smokes foxglove plants to treat a heart condition, chews cinchona bark to alleviate malaria symptoms, or eats opium poppies to relieve post-surgical pain,” Madras writes.

Pharmaceuticalization of THC and CBD? This woman is either crazy or a shill for the pharmaceutical companies. Probably both. The below should be mentioned as well:

Critics of Madras note the government has actually patented cannabis for use in stroke therapy.

Gotta love the government talking out of both sides of its face...

Its about time.

Feel free to think your own expletives.

The dreaded x2 ... idk

a reply to: Iamthatbish

Somethings got to give soon. The government can't just keep lying to the public's face about marijuana.

Supreme Court Says No Medical Marijuana

Isn't the Supreme Court, the real Supreme Court already decided this? Is this really up for debate when
the justices have spoken? Why would one arm contradict the other?

And I would like to point out, when did this happen? I don't remember this at all, its like they had this session
in secret, we could've organized millions of people if we knew this was a topic in the supreme court.

So hypocritical saying, no medical value, but ah, we would like to pharmaceuticalize it, uh, WTF! Gotta call em on their
bs complete bull crikey.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

As a parent that doesn't lie, my kids are growing out of "Have you seen me smoke? Then I don't smoke."
I'm really hoping something changes so I can have discussions that won't be so difficult regarding my beliefs and the laws.

a reply to: nrd101

Well the article I posted was dated yesterday. The article you just posted was dated back in May. Is the judicial system not allowed to go back and review rulings they have already ruled on all of a sudden?

a reply to: Iamthatbish

Just tell them the truth. You'll go a lot further than hiding or obfuscating things to "protect their innocence" or something.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Has this Madras any idea that there are other people and many other cultures on Earth besides America? At least her effed up view of her America. You don't have to leave the US to find people who chew on, eat, smoke or otherwise ingest a plant for it's related benefits. What an idiot. People don't all live in fairy land where health insurance grows on trees and actually helps them or is even affordable. People drown a toothache with fermented potatoes. Miners in Bolivia chew on the same leaves that produce coc aine for vigor and to fight impotence.

People have survived or been killed in our relationship with plants since we got here. It's a symbiotic relationship that will always be. There are mushrooms that will kill you to death that I can grow, own, trade or what ever I want, perfectly legal. His buddy that makes people feel funny gets me locked up? CVS and Walgreen's are everywhere but haven't always been. She thinks that government should be able to regulate, distribute, control, and ultimately profit off all plant use.

They need to stay out of our business. We need government not babysitters. We pay them for a service not for subjugation. They forget who's the boss... Tony Danza of course.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Truth is my kids still think I'm meditating. I also have internal conflict because I see that kids aren't as mature as we were at their age.

The truth we discussed due to a movie having a smoke scene was that they needed every brain cell that they had so they could make good choices.

I totally had joy in my heart that that was the end of that talk.

a reply to: wastedown

Well said! I agree with every single one of your points as I thought the same things when I read that. Even in the United States, there are people who will eat the plant instead of take the pill for remedies. The alternative medicine market thrives on it (at least the medicines that are on the up and up and not the snake oil ones). That's why I said this woman must be a paid shill by the pharmaceutical companies. That industry is destroying our country (WHOLE other conspiracy that needs to be uncovered and exposed. I should do the research and write the thread).

a reply to: Iamthatbish

At the end of the day, you are the parent. But if I was a parent, I would sit them down and explain to them that I understand that marijuana isn't bad for you, but it is illegal. I'd go on about this, but I don't want to violate the personal usage T&C.

a reply to: Krazysh0t
I see where you're going, I happen to agree. Don't forget my concern is my children's maturity to this sensitive topic. If I didn't have to worry about a child repeating my opinion in the wrong place and time it wouldn't be nearly as frustrating.

Procreation talks weren't even this difficult!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Iamthatbish

At the end of the day, you are the parent. But if I was a parent, I would sit them down and explain to them that I understand that marijuana isn't bad for you, but it is illegal. I'd go on about this, but I don't want to violate the personal usage T&C.

Depends on the state...say you sit your kids down and say you medicate for whatever reason. Kids talk with their peers. Some of their peers might have parents that buy the whole "devil weed" thing and call social services on you...especially if you are of the non-caucasian persuasion.

Wow, while they debate it Washington DC has a medical program. Anyone else see the absolute hypocrisy here?

The twelve dozen bull elephants in the room is, what happens if marijuana is declared legal?

Probably half the people in prison past and present are because of small time marijuana charges. Just think of the lawsuits. Will they be reimbursed for time served, and legal expenses? Their records expunged so they can now get jobs? How about the knock-off effects of families disrupted, children who grew up without two parents in the house because one got busted, etc?

Getting the U.S. government to admit it was wrong, wrong, wrong, and not only that, but in the process contributed to hundreds of criminal cartels and the accompanying violence? And their own part AS a criminal cartel WRT importation of illegal drugs?

Good luck with that.

a reply to: signalfire

Private prison industry, extra gear given to cops for the drug war, timber, big pharma, education, alcohol, tobacco, the CIA funding the drug war while creating it. This is an uphill battle and you slip on what's rolling down the hill.

a reply to: signalfire

WHOA there! Slow down. Getting the government to legalize marijuana and having the government admit it was wrong about it being illegal are two TOTALLY different things. I believe that the government still hasn't admitted to any wrong doing or back compensation for Prohibition. So I doubt we'd see anything you just mention happen if marijuana were legalized.

One would have to develop a mindset in order to survive in prison? A different mindset to survive out of prison..

All of a sudden, this mindset looses it's bindings and is now able to press his mindset in a 'new environment'? Cuz that's all he knows, and now he's pissed-rightfully so... will his cannabis arrest record be expunged across the board?

Are these 'loosers' conditioned (have the mindset) to bring peace with them upon release?

There needs to be a release program in place that also assesses their mindset upon release?

What mindset is the supreme court obligated to serve?

If cannabis has no medical value then why has the government been providing medical marijuana for the past thirty years?
OPED: Psst... Government-Supplied Marijuana Program Turns 30

That program marks its 30th anniversary May 10. That's right, our government has been supplying medical marijuana to a small number of patients -- the program peaked at 34 approved participants in 1991 -- for three full decades.

This may seem puzzling. After all, hasn't White House Drug Czar John Walters called medical marijuana "snake oil," a "con," a "farce," and even compared it to "medicinal crack"? Surely if our government really thinks marijuana is useless and dangerous, it wouldn't supply it to sick people?

A better question might be: Why is our government working so hard to avoid learning that marijuana can be a safe and effective medicine? The federal medical marijuana program, begun on May 10, 1978 as part of the settlement to a lawsuit filed by glaucoma patient Robert Randall, is officially a research program. Randall, Rosenfeld and the other participants were required to sign a consent document specifically referring to it as a "study."

But there has been no study of these patients, at least not by the government. While shipping literally hundreds of pounds of marijuana to these patients over the course of 30 years, the federal government never lifted a finger to find out whether it was helping or hurting.