Exposing Oklahoma to Future Civil Rights Claims

RICO Pharma-Cigarette Racketeering/ False Claims Act/ Future Civil Rights Claim for Okahoma's FALSE contention of Marijuana as "Dangerous" to justify 10 years prison sentence of mother for sale of 3 dime bags

http://newsok.com/how-31-of-pot-gave-mom-a-10-year-prison-sentence/article/3542585?custom_click=lead_story_title

Patricia Marilyn Spottedcrow is now serving 10 years in prison, has been taken away from her four young children and husband, and has ended her work in nursing homes...

On Dec. 31, 2009, Spottedcrow and her mother, Delita Starr, 50, sold a “dime bag” of marijuana to a police informant at Starr's home in Kingfisher, court records state.

Starr handled the transaction and asked her 9-year-old grandson — Spottedcrow's son — for some dollar bills to make change for the $11 sale.

Two weeks later, the same informant returned and bought $20 of marijuana from Spottedcrow.

The two women were arrested for drug distribution and because Spottedcrow's children were in the home, an additional charge of possession of a dangerous substance in the presence of a minor was added....

The women were each offered plea deals of two years in prison. But because neither had prior convictions and the drug amounts were low, they gambled and entered a guilty plea before a judge with no prior sentencing agreement.

Starr received a 30-year suspended sentence with no incarceration, but five years of drug and alcohol assessments. Spottedcrow was sentenced to 10 years in prison for distribution and two years for possession, to run concurrently. She will be up for parole in 2014...

In addition, Starr was fined $8,600 and Spottedcrow $2,740.

“Never in a million years did I think I'd be here 10 years,” Spottedcrow said of prison.

“We were under the impression we would get probation. When I left for court, I just knew I was coming back home. It hit me like a ton of bricks. There were no good byes, they took me away right then. How do you tell your children you are going to prison? How do you prepare for this?”

Former Kingfisher County Judge Susie Pritchett, who retired in December, said the women were conducting “an extensive operation” and included children in the business.

“It was a way of life for them,” Pritchett said.

“Considering these circumstances, I thought it was lenient. By not putting the grandmother in prison, she is able to help take care of the children.”

A presentencing investigative report prepared by the Department of Corrections rated Spottedcrow's risk of re-offending as “high” and recommended substance abuse treatment while incarcerated.

“It does not appear the defendant is aware that a problem exists or that she needs to make changes in her current behavior.”

Spottedcrow was unemployed and without a stable residence when arrested, the report states. The family lost their Oklahoma City home for not paying bills.

“When she needed money … this is the avenue she chose rather than finding legitimate employment,” the report states. “The defendant does not appear remorseful … and she makes justifications for her actions.”

‘Kids are involved'

Pritchett said on first drug offenses, sentences are usually suspended and may require treatment or random drug tests.

Only if there are other more serious circumstances is a first-time drug offender sent to prison, she said.

“When kids are involved, it's different,” Pritchett said.

“This was a drug sale. When I look at someone in front of me, I'm thinking, ‘What is it going to take to rehabilitate this person?' We look at their attitude and other factors.”
When Spottedcrow was taken to jail after her sentencing, she had marijuana in her jacket. She pleaded guilty to that additional charge Jan. 24 and was sentenced to two years in prison and fined nearly $1,300. That sentence also will run concurrent with her other conviction.

Spottedcrow has four children — ages 9, 4, 3 and 1 — and is determined to keep her 8-year, common-law marriage intact. “It's been really hard on my husband,” she said. “I know a lot of things can happen, but he'll always have my back and be there.”
Her son is aware of what has happened, but the girls have been told their mother is away at college.

“I missed my daughter's fourth birthday, and I'll miss her fifth one too. My other daughter just started talking, and I'm not there to hear her,” Spottedcrow said.

“My baby woke up … and doesn't know where her mommy is. This is the hardest thing to do, and know I can't do anything about it. I just have to focus on myself and take it day-to-day and plan for going home. I will want to see my kids at some point. I'm trying to take this slow. I can't get depressed about it.”

Oklahoma's two prisons for women — the maximum-security Mabel Bassett in McLoud and minimum-security Eddie Warrior in Taft — housed 2,622 prisoners last year.

Of those, 48 percent are serving time for nonviolent drug offenses and 22 percent for other nonviolent offenses such as embezzlement and forgery.

Of the 1,393 women received by Oklahoma prisons last year, 78 percent were identified by DOC as minimal public safety threats.

Read more: http://newsok.com/how-31-of-pot-gave-mom-a-10-year-prison-sentence/article/3542585#ixzz1EZ8PhLOp

Sending Mom's to prison, breaking apart families, at a cost of thousands annually, for a FALSE CLAIM that the substance they must be so punished for selling -- Marijuana -- is sufficently a "dangerous" substance.

Egypt's Revolution Sparked by Brutally Criminal Anti-MJ Police

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/02/egypts-revolution-continuing-criminal.html

for the continuing pharmacratic inquisition racketeering/Pharma-Tobacco Market Protectionism

Police torture & murder of a citizen -- Khaled Said -- for posting a video of pharmacratic inquisition police corruption, sparks a revoluion that will do just what with the pharmacratic inquisition?

http://www.elshaheeed.co.uk/home-khaled-said-full-story-background-truth-what-happened-torture-in-egypt-by-egyptian-police/

Khaled [Said] has become the symbol for many Egyptians who dream to see their country free of brutality, torture and ill treatment. Many young Egyptians are now fed up with the inhuman treatment they face on a daily basis in streets, police stations and everywhere. Egyptians want to see an end to all violence committed by any Egyptian Policeman. Egyptians are aspiring to the day when Egypt has its freedom and dignity back, the day when the current 30 years long emergency martial law ends and when Egyptians can freely elect their true representatives.

According to Associated Press, Khaled was killed “after he posted a video on the Internet of officers sharing the spoils from a drug bust among themselves”. After Khaled was killed, the Police authorities refused to investigate in Khaled’s death saying that he died because he swallowed a pack of Marijuana. When many Egyptians started to ask questions, the Police issued few statements saying that Khaled was a drug user (as if it is ok to murder and torture to death all drug addicts! [sic- or that use = addiction] – And every one who knew khaled reject these claims completely). Another official statement said that Khaled is an army deserter (which was also proved to be false accusation after wards and his army service report is now published showing that he has fully completed this service). The authorities then refused any further investigation. After pressure mounted, and the European Union representatives in Egypt asked for an impartial investigation, the Egyptian authorities finally decided to question and arrest the two Policemen and they were charged with two counts: “using excessive force”!!! and “unjustified arrest”!! of Khaled Said.. No one was charged with murder!

Now consider this observation:

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2011/feb/07/american_facing_death_penalty_eg#comments_area
All week I was wondering what will happen to cannabis laws in Egypt if protesters are successful in ousting Mubarak. If Egypt is one of the poorest countries on the planet, they could legalize all cannabis products and turn their economy around. Drug tourism and huge fields of hemp. It would be interesting to know if a majority of protesters are for legalization or not.

To that, [the ancient regime] Rome's Pharmacratic Inquisition, as represented by the timeline, as with the instigation of cocaine demonification, including that by the U.S. State Department in deceiving other nations' governments, I would add, what also about the right to film police, which within the U.S. is opposed by the masonic Fraternal Order of Police, and the rights of whistleblowers?

The following case, and how it eventually plays out, could mark further developments in resistence or continued subserviance in Egypt to Rome's Pharmacratic Inquisition.

American Facing Death Penalty in Egypt for Non Psychoactive Hemp Oil
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2011/feb/07/american_facing_death_penalty_eg

---

How this plays out shall be an important measure of Egypt's 2011 revolution.

Rome's Pharmacratic Inquisition

A Short History of Cannabis
http://www.ukcia.org/research/potnight/pn4.htm

During the Middle Ages, while adopting wine as a sacrament, the Inquisition, instituted by the Roman Catholic Church, outlawed cannabis ingestion: anyone found using the herb to communicate with God or heal others would be branded a witch. In 1484, Pope Innocent VIII singled out cannabis as an unholy sacrament of the Satanic mass. Yet while the Church persecuted cannabis users in Europe, the Spanish conquistadors were busy planting hemp around the New World to provide raw materials for, among other things, sails, rope and clothing.

Pope Innocent VIII Witch Bull
http://antiquecannabisbook.com/chap2B/Church/InnocentVIII.htm

"Desiring with supreme ardor, as pastoral solicitude requires, that the catholic faith in our days everywhere grow and flourish as much as possible, and that all heretical pravity be put far from the territories of the faithful, we freely declare and anew decree this by which our pious desire may be fulfilled, and, all errors being rooted out by our toll as with the hoe of a wise laborer, zeal and devotion to this faith may take deeper hold on the hearts of the faithful themselves.

It has recently come to our ears, not without great pain to us, that in some parts of upper Germany, as well as in the provinces, cities, territories, regions, and dioceses of Mainz, Koln, Trier, Salzburg, and Bremen, many persons of both sexes, heedless of their own salvation and forsaking the catholic faith, give themselves over to devils male and female, and by their incantations, charms, and conjurings, and by other abominable superstitions and sortileges, offences, crimes, and misdeeds, ruin and cause to perish the off-spring of women, the foal of animals, the products of the earth, the grapes of vines, and the fruits of trees, as well as men and women, cattle and flocks and herds and animals of every kind, vineyards also and orchards, meadows, pastures, harvests, grains and other fruits of the earth; that they afflict and torture with dire pains and anguish, both internal and external, these men, women, cattle, flocks, herds, and animals, and hinder men from begetting and women from conceiving, and prevent all consummation of marriage; that, moreover, they deny with sacrilegious lips the faith they received in holy baptism; and that, at the instigation of the enemy of mankind, they do not fear to commit and perpetrate many other abominable offences and crimes, at the risk of their own souls, to the insult of the divine majesty and to the pernicious example and scandal of multitudes. And, although our beloved sons Henricus Institoris and Jacobus Sprenger, of the order of Friars Preachers, professors of theology, have been and still are deputed by our apostolic letters as inquisitors of heretical pravity, the former in the afore-said parts of upper Germany, including the provinces, cities, territories, dioceses, and other places as above, and the latter throughout certain parts of the course of the Rhine; nevertheless certain of the clergy and of the laity of those parts, seeking to be wise above what is fitting, because in the said letter of deputation the aforesaid provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, and other places, and the persons and offences in question were not individually and specifically named, do not blush obstinately to assert that these are not at all included in the said parts and that therefore it is illicit for the aforesaid inquisitors to exercise their office of inquisition in the provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, and other places aforesaid, and that they ought not to be permitted to proceed to the punishment, imprisonment, and correction of the aforesaid persons for the offences and crimes above named. Wherefore in the provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, and places aforesaid such offences and crimes, not without evident damage to their souls and risk of eternal salvation go unpunished.

We therefore, desiring, as is our duty, to remove all impediments by which in any way the said inquisitors are hindered in the exercise of their office, and to prevent the taint of heretical pravity and of other like evils from spreading their infection to the ruin of others who are innocent, the zeal of religion especially impelling us, in order that the provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, and places aforesaid in the said parts of upper Germany may not be deprived of the office of inquisition which is their due, do hereby decree, by virtue of our apostolic authority, that it shall be permitted to the said inquisitors in these regions to exercise their office of inquisition and to proceed to the correction, imprisonment, and punishment of the aforesaid persons for their said offences and crimes, in all respects and altogether precisely as if the provinces, cities, territories, places, persons, and offences aforesaid were expressly named in the said letter. And, for the greater sureness, extending the said letter and deputation to the provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, places, persons, and crimes aforesaid, we grant to the said inquisitors that they or either of them, joining with them our beloved son Johannes Gremper, cleric of the diocese of Constance, master of arts, their present notary, or any other notary public who by them or by either of them shall have been temporarily delegated in the provinces, cities, dioceses, territories, and places aforesaid, may exercise against all persons, of whatsoever condition and rank, the said office of inquisition, correcting, imprisoning, punishing, and chastising, according to their deserts, those persons whom they shall find guilty as aforesaid.

And they shall also have full and entire liberty to propound and preach to the faithful the word of God, as often as it shall seem to them fitting and proper, in each and all the parish churches in the said provinces, and to do all things necessary and suitable under the aforesaid circumstances, and likewise freely and fully to carry them out.

And moreover we enjoin by apostolic writ on our venerable brother, the Bishop of Strasburg, that, either in his own person or through some other or others solemnly publishing the foregoing wherever, whenever, and how often so ever he may deem expedient or by these inquisitors or either of them may be legitimately required, he permit them not to be molested or hindered in any manner whatsover by any authority whatsoever in the matter of the aforesaid and of this present letter, threatening all opposers, hinderers, contradictors, and rebels, of whatever rank, state, decree, eminence, nobility, excellence, or condition they may be, and whatever privilege of exemption they may enjoy, with excommunication, suspension, interdict, and other still more terrible sentences, censures, and penalties, as may be expedient, and this without appeal and with power after due process of law of aggravating and re-aggravating these penalties, by our authority, as often as may be necessary, to this end calling in the aid, if need be, of the secular arm.

And this, all other apostolic decrees and earlier decisions to the contrary notwithstanding; or if to any, jointly or severally, there has been granted by this apostolic see exemption from interdict, suspension, or excommunication, by apostolic letters not making entire, express, and literal mention of the said grant of exemption; or if there exist any other indulgence whatsoever, general or special, of whatsoever tenor, by failure to name which or to insert it bodily in the present letter the carrying out of this privilege could be hindered or in any way put off,-or any of whose whole tenor special mention must be made in our letters. Let no man, therefore, dare to infringe this page of our declaration, extension grant, and mandate, or with rash hardihood to contradict it. If any presume to attempt this, let him know the he incurs the wrath of almighty God and of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul.

Given in Rome, at St. Peter's, in the year of Our Lord's incarnation 1484, on the nones of December, in the first year of our pontificate."


Roman Catholic Church Anti Christ Cocaine Prohibition
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2008/07/roman-catholic-church-cocaine.html

It contained extract of Coca leaves, with 6 milligrams of the alkaloid cocaine per fluid ounce.

It was found to be an effective and safe product, endorsed by prestigious medical doctors for a variety of uses, starting as a vocal aid for opera performers. Its uses included that as a treatment for addictions to Opium, alcohol and even Tobacco. In Paris, Mesureur, the French Ex-Minister of Commerce, and the current (in 1910) Director of Hygiene and Public Health, who approved and signed the French government's radical poster campaign against alcoholism, would state that:

http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2008/03/coca-to-combat-opiate-alcohol-and.html

“The dangers of alcoholism would be avoided if no other stimulant were taken for mental or physical trials than that offered by the generous."

“I have also employed it in cases, happily rare in our army, of chronic alcoholism resulting from the abuse of brandy, absinthe or strong liquors. The produced all the excitement sought by drinkers, but had at the same time a sedative influence on their nervous systems. I have frequently seen hardened drinkers renounce their fatal habit and return to a healthy condition." "I have also used to save smokers of exaggerated habits, from nicotinism. A few glasses of taken in small doses, either pure or mixed with water, acted as a substitute for pipes and cigars, because the smokers found in it the cerebral excitement which they sought in tobacco, wholly preserving their intellectual faculties."

The amount of cocaine was absorbed slowly, resulting in a relatively long lasting effect that ebbed away gently without depressive rebound or craving- as seen with cocaine in concentrated doses- hence it did not produce addictive toxic-mania behavior. Furthermore, because cocaine is a powerful anesthetic, its consumption in this oral dilute form discouraged excessive consumption as this anesthetic action would numb one’s stomach, reducing one’s appetite for more.

The negative effects of concentrated cocaine were observed shortly after its commercial introduction about 1884, particularly with its administration via subcutaneous injection.

http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2008/03/drug-warriors-ignore-pharmacokinetics.html
http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2008/03/crystalline-gleam-in-eyes-of-fathers-of.html

After three and half decades of Vin Mariani sale and use, its creator Angelo Mariani was summoned to the Vatican- ultimately twice. In January 1898, Pope Leo XIII issued Mariani a gold papal medal awarding him as a benefactor of humanity. In January 1904, Leo XIII’s successor Pope Pius X issued Mariani another such medal. It is not publicly known what exactly transpired between Mariani and the Vatican.

Yet within a few months, the political scene turned against Mariani and Coca with an apparent vengeance. In 1904, members of Roman Catholic orders as the Knights of Columbus Harvey Washington Wiley, an important figure in the American Medical Association, the American Pharmaceutical Association, the Chief of the Bureau of Chemistry at the USDA, and Knights of Malta member, publisher William Randolph Hearst began a crusade against cocaine in any form regardless of the concentration factor. ...


Catholic Church Calls on World Governments to Reject Drug Legalization, But Says Repression Cannot Be Sole Response 12/7/01
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle-old/214/thepope.shtml

In a new pastoral manual issued last week by the Vatican, the Catholic Church called on the governments of the world to resist the temptation to legalize the drug traffic. The manual, "Church, Drugs, and Drug Addiction," was produced by the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Health Care Ministry after Pope John Paul II called in 1997 for a study of "the distressing drug problem in the world."

The manual, which is not yet available online, opens with the words of John Paul II, the cleric who has led the Church since 1978. "The Pope tells us of three specific actions for a pastoral care program which confronts the drug problem," Archbishop Javier Lozano Barragan told a Vatican press conference heralding the release of the manual, "prevention, treatment and repression."

The text of the five-chapter manual refers in depth to prevention and treatment, but the Pope made his stance clear in his opening remarks. In them, the pontiff affirmed that "we must all fight against the production, creation, and distribution of drugs in the world, and it is the particular duty of governments to courageously confront this battle against 'death trafficking.'"

According to Archbishop Barragan, the Vatican is opposed to the legalization of any drugs, even soft drugs such as cannabis, because it considers their use incompatible with Christian morality. (Until copies of the manual are available, it remains unknown if the Church now finds alcohol use incompatible with Christian morality.) But, said Barragan, the Church understands that repression alone will not end drug use, and it will urge governments and societies to change their cultures to combat the problem.


Europe: Vatican Updates List of Deadly Sins, Adds Drug-Taking, Drug-Selling
Phillip Smith, March 13, 2008, 11:00pm, (Issue #527)
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2008/mar/14/europe_vatican_updates_list_dead

In an interview with the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano this week, the head of the Holy See's Apostolic Penitentiary announced that the Church had updated its list of mortal sins, and that drug-taking and -selling had made the list. The sale and use of drugs is sinful because they "weaken the mind and obscure intelligence," said Bishop Gianfranco Girotti. ...


There is a special place in Hell reserved for the Vatican
Thursday, February 26, 2009
http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/2009/02/26.html#a3321

Oh sure, there were the Crusades, the Inquisition, the destruction of science (Galileo), silence during the Holocaust, coverup of pedophiles, and the direct responsibility for millions of deaths to AIDS due to opposing safe sex practices (particularly in third world countries).

But NO, that's not nearly enough for the Vatican. Surely there's more evil that they can promote, more people they can kill in the name of God the Pope.

Oh yes, how about drug users. Let's kill some of them, too.

You see, the United States finally, finally, finally, came to its senses and the Obama administration sent a new message through its representatives to the United Nations that at least needle exchange as a harm reduction approach would be accepted. While that was not nearly all that was needed, it was at least an opening, and even the most rabid global drug warriors agreed that needle exchange was now a sure thing to be included in the new global drug policy.

But then, guess who intercedes?

The Vatican has been accused of putting the lives of thousands at risk by attempting to influence UN drugs policy on the eve of a major international declaration.

The Vatican's objection to "harm reduction" strategies, such as needle exchange schemes, has ignited a fierce debate between the US and the EU over how drugs should be tackled.

A new UN declaration of intent is due to be signed in Vienna on 11 March. However, there are major disagreements between member countries over whether a commitment to "harm reduction" should be included in the document, which is published every 10 years.

Now the Vatican has issued a statement that claims that using drugs is "anti-life" and "so-called harm reduction leads to liberalisation of the use of drugs". The Vatican's last-minute intervention appears to have led to Italy withdrawing from the EU consensus on the issue and thrown the talks over the declaration into confusion. [Guardian, UK] ...

Drug Statutes Infinitely Worse Than Commonly Acknowledged

Most view the 'drug war' in a vacuum- refusing to acknowledge its inherent nature as a market protection scheme of actually banning the inherently safest for the sake of protecting markets in the more dangerous substances - perverting the former while further spreading the latter

Coca is what is decribed as appearing as the safest of all of the stimulant plants by UCLA's Dr. Ronold K Siegel.

Coca was what the USDA was most concerned about being used as a substitute for Tobacco, which we all know (and knew in the 1914 U.S. Congress debates on the Harrison 'Narcotics' Act) is the most dangerious.

Cocaine as known under prohibition is unnaturally concentrated as promoted by prohibition 'laws' equating its whole weight with pure cocaine, much as anti LSD statutes include the paper blotter- hence helping shift markets and use to - using caffeine as an example, be akin to smoking, sniffing or shooting pulverized NoDoz and Vivarin- prohibition promotes drug ABUSE.

The U.S. and these other nation states, including the United Kingdom and Sweeden are guilty of mass murder via a scheme of a criminal mercantilism to protect the substance that has killed at least 100 million during the last century, while perverting the safest into crack.

Research: 'coca' 'coca forgotten medicine' 'tobacco versus coca' and 'criminal mercantilism' at 'Freedom of Medicine and Diet'

Coca Internationally Bottlenecked

D-Day for Bolivia’s coca chewing amendment
European divide deepens over lifting ban on coca chewing Hypocrisy rules in the arguments behind objections
Martin Jelsma
Monday, January 31, 2011

http://www.druglawreform.info/en/weblog/item/1124-d-day-for-bolivias-coca-chewing-amendment

Today is the deadline for countries to submit objections to Bolivia’s proposed amendment to remove the ban on coca leaf chewing in the 1961 UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. As far as we know, six countries have formally notified the UN that they reject Bolivia’s amendment: the United States (January 19), Sweden (Jan 20), the United Kingdom (Jan 21), Canada (Jan 26), Denmark (Jan 28) and Germany (Jan 28). Some other European countries may add their objections today.

The U.S. government – anxious to avoid the impression they were the ones leading the opposition against the Bolivian proposal – initially convinced three other countries to object first so they could hide behind them. But the strategy failed when Egypt (last year), Macedonia (Jan 17) and finally Colombia (Jan 26) all withdrew their objections. The Non-Aligned Movement, Mercosur and UNASUR (Union of South American Nations) all expressed their support for the amendment. The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, the advisory body to the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), strongly recommended that governments support the amendment. Civil society organizations worldwide are calling on countries to abstain from submitting an objection.

EU divided

Meanwhile the U.S. turned to its allies in the European Union, where especially the UK tried to rally support for the US objection. But the European Union was unable to agree on a coordinated position, and the divide only deepened further last week. The controversy appeared on the agenda of many EU coordination meetings in Brussels, Vienna and New York. Spain had made clear from the beginning they were not going to object; to the contrary, they would strongly support Bolivia’s proposal. Most other EU countries – all under heavy U.S. pressure to object – were undecided, and for several months Spain remained isolated in its explicit support, in spite of broad sympathy for their position from many EU officials in the corridors.

With the deadline of January 31st approaching, last week several other EU countries (Portugal, the Czech Republic, Greece, Poland, Belgium, Austria and Finland) made clear that they would not be objecting either. Norway and Switzerland (non-EU members) also made clear they had no objection to the amendment. On the other hand, Germany, Denmark, France, Italy and a few others, said they still intended to submit an objection and made a final appeal to others to join them. Germany and Denmark indeed sent their notification on Friday. For the EU, aspiring to reach common positions on international issues, it was a painful process to see the divide deepening.

The Bolivian amendment only proposes deleting the reference in the Single Convention (in article 49) saying that “coca leaf chewing must be abolished.” The few objections submitted thus far make hardly any attempt to argue against what Bolivia has actually proposed. The U.S. objection merely states that the objective of the Single Convention is to limit the use of narcotic drugs exclusively to medical and scientific purposes and that Schedule I lists coca leaf as a narcotic drug. No further explanation is provided, but the implication is that because coca chewing is not a ‘medical or scientific purpose’ it needs to be abolished. The U.S. avoids to address the inconsistency with the 1988 Trafficking Convention saying that all measures “shall take due account of traditional licit uses, where there is historic evidence of such use” (article 14) or with the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, key arguments brought forward by Bolivia. The UK , Canada and Denmark more or less copied and pasted from the text of the U.S. objection, not adding any further explanation.

Sweden and Germany , however, argue their objection somewhat differently. Sweden says it understands the concerns of Bolivia about the conflict between the Convention and the traditional coca leaf chewing. However, Sweden maintains that “the Bolivian proposal poses the risk of creating a political precedent and might directly infringe on the international framework for the fight against drugs” that “would send a negative signal.”

Germany recognizes “that the proposal touches upon complex development and health policy issues, in addition to the intricate drugs issues” and is aware of the particular importance of coca chewing “as part of the cultural identity of the indigenous population, the majority of all Bolivians”. Based foremost on “fundamental drug policy consideration” Germany cannot accept the amendment but proposes further dialogue with Bolivia and “will give favourable consideration to the question of convening a conference of states to discuss the issue”. Convening such a conference is precisely what the other objectors hope to avoid.

Hypocrisy rules

Perhaps starting to feel embarrassed under pressure from the media and thousands of coca-chewing protestors gathering last week in front of their embassy in La Paz, the U.S. issued a clarifying statement last week. The U.S. “respects the culture of indigenous peoples and recognizes that coca chewing is a traditional custom in Bolivian culture” and the “position of the U.S. government to not support the proposed amendment is based on the importance to maintain the integrity of the 1961 Convention, which constitutes an important tool for the global fight against drug trafficking.”

There is a profoundly disturbing hypocrisy behind this line of reasoning that has now become the main argument for the objection for the U.S. government and its EU allies. Of course they fully respect indigenous rights, they have no problem with coca chewing, they simply want to defend the integrity of the drug control treaty system, and allowing this amendment to be adopted would open a Pandora’s box. The Single Convention is sacrosanct, cast in stone, and allowing any changes would jeopardize the integrity of the control system.

Apparently they forgot that in 1971, a decade after the adoption of the Single Convention, the U.S. itself propose numerous amendments. “The United States believes it is now time for the international community to build on the foundation of the Single Convention, since a decade has given a better perspective of its strengths and weaknesses”, they argued at the time . The UK was the first to support the U.S. call to improve the Convention and to convene a Conference of the Parties to discuss the proposals, adding some amendment proposals themselves, which led to the 1972 Protocol amending the 1961 Convention. At the time, the U.S. did not “regard its proposals as sacrosanct; it welcomed suggestions for new improvements; it hoped also that other countries would come forward with their own proposals, whether or not related to ones the United States had already made. It was pleased to see that the Swedish delegation had already begun that constructive process.” While the U.S. proposals were of course aiming to bolster the control regime and the role of the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), Sweden used the opportunity to offer other proposals, including positive ones, like deleting references to “addicts” in the treaty and introducing possibilities of alternative sentences for drug-dependent offenders.

So, the three main objectors to the Bolivian amendment proposal now, US, UK and Sweden, arguing the need to protect the integrity of the treaty by not allowing any amendments, were precisely the ones who proposed the first amendments themselves, at which time they argued the need for the control system to develop and improve.

The other disturbing element underlying their objections to Bolivia’s proposal now is that they are essentially saying to Bolivia: “We don’t really have a problem with coca chewing, but we prefer that you keep violating the Convention rather than try to change it according to the established procedures.” A more ‘negative signal’ regarding the integrity of the treaty system is difficult to imagine, coming from countries ostensibly protecting it.

Hopefully, today no other countries will submit objections and align themselves with such unfounded and hypocritical arguments against the amendment. While the deadlines for objections ends today, the decision making process around it will continue the months to come. The ECOSOC will have to reach a decision on how to proceed, and the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) probably will be consulted about it during its annual session in March. Objecting countries will be challenged to present more substantive arguments to explain their position.

Given the embarrassing hypocrisy and flimsiness of their positions, the good news for the governments that have so far objected is that even though today marks the deadline to submit objections, governments can still withdraw their objections after today in the lead-up to the ECOSOC and CND discussions. That would be the only way to prevent further embarrassment about their disrespect for indigenous rights and for the integrity of UN treaties and about the hypocritical arguments most of them have used to try to justify their position.

Bolivia Demands WHO to Disseminate Study on Coca Leaf

http://www.insidecostarica.com/dailynews/2011/january/25/latinamerica11012502.htm

La Paz - Bolivia will demand the World Health Organization (WHO) to spread the results of the study on coca leaf in 1995, to give everyone a real insight into its properties

According to the research, coca leaf chewing is not harmful to human health and therefore the WHO recommended then further research to identify the properties of the coca leaf, said Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca.

During his appearance on the Sunday program "El Pueblo es Noticia ", the Bolivian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship regretted that the WHO has not published the research and attributed this attitude to possible pressure from some power.

Bolivia launched an international campaign for the UN to approve an amendment to the Convention adopted in 1961, banning the chewing of coca without considering that this is part of the ancestral culture of some Andean peoples and is in full force, because of the faith in its healing powers.

Choquehuanca said the Bolivian intention was communicated to the WHO by President Evo Morales through a letter, after which the approach went to the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), for procedural issues.

This UN dependence set an 18 month-term for members to express their position on the chewing of coca.

"This period ends on January 30. So far there is any official position of UN member countries, there is expressions of support that were released to Bolivia, although", said the Foreign Minister.

As part of the international campaign, Choquehuanca visited last week Spain, Belgium, France and Britain and verified the interest in knowing the reasons for coca leaf chewing.

US continuing cigarette mercantilism 2011

this is a continuation of the policies enacted during the early 1900s over concerns about Coca displacing Tobacco - despite Coca's safety and Tobacco's then already known dangers -- for the sake of a mission of agrilcultural mercantilism

THE COCA LEAF

Storm in an Andean Teacup

A Battle Over Mastication

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v11/n043/a03.html?397

TOURISTS who visit Bolivia's capital, La Paz, or Cusco, Peru's former Inca seat, are routinely given welcome cups of coca tea to mitigate soroche (altitude sickness). For centuries, people who live in the high Andes have chewed coca leaves, whose alkaloids act as a mild stimulant and help to ward off cold and hunger. The Spanish conquistadors declared coca a tool of the devil, until they saw how it improved the work rate of the Indians they sent down the mines.

But refine the alkaloids in coca, and you get cocaine. In 1961 a United Nations convention on narcotics banned the leaves, giving countries 25 years to outlaw this ancestral practice. Half a century on, consuming coca remains legal in Bolivia, Peru, Argentina and some parts of Colombia, in defiance of the convention. In Bolivia and Peru, some cultivation is legal too. In 2009 Bolivia, where a new constitution protects coca as part of the country's cultural heritage, proposed an amendment to the convention that would remove the obligation to prohibit traditional uses of coca. Other South American countries agree.

The amendment would have passed if no objections were raised by the end of this month. But this week the United States spoke up, probably scuppering the change. The European Union (at Britain's behest) may follow. They argue that tolerating the use of coca harms efforts to suppress cocaine. Bolivia insists it would continue to fight cocaine and limit coca cultivation. But cultivation in Bolivia and Peru has long outstripped traditional use, and is rising sharply.

Yet this smacks of hypocrisy. The United States' State Department's website recommends coca tea for altitude sickness, and its La Paz embassy has been known to serve it to visitors. The UN's declaration on indigenous peoples, which the United States endorsed last month, guarantees the protection of "cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions".

"It's clear to me that some people there [in the State Department] realise it's senseless to continue the war on drugs," says Fernando Henrique Cardoso, a former president of Brazil who wants marijuana decriminalised and is chairing a commission on drug policy worldwide.

But the drug warriors in the American administration seem to have prevailed over the diplomats. Bolivia is considering pulling out of the convention if its modest proposal is struck down. The State Department has been trying to repair ties with Bolivia's socialist government since a spat in 2008 in which ambassadors were expelled.

But all too often American policy towards Latin America has been dominated
by drugs.