Theodore Roosevelt- market supression of Coca leaf to protect Tobacco leaf CONSPIRACY?!

 

Teddy Old Virginia

Tobacco Cigarettes

introduced 1914, year of the U.S. Harrison "Narcotics" Act

(year of this particular label yet disclosed)

According to wikipedia:

Teddy was a Norwegian brand of cigarettes, owned by the multinational company British American Tobacco. Cigarettes were manufactured by the Norwegian subsidiary of BAT (formerly "Dr. J. L. Tiedemanns Tobaksfabrik").^[1]

History

Around 1905, after the establishment of the British-American Tobacco Co., (Norway) Ltd. in Oslo, the was an ongoing tobacco 'war.' The conflict was between the American tobacco trust (led by American Tobacco Company's James 'Buck' Duke) and the Norwegian manufacturers. In the United States president Theodore 'Teddy' Roosevelt was fighting the American trust/enterprise, and he was seen as an ally by the Norwegian manufacturers. In 1914 J. L. Tiedemanns Tobaksfabrik honored Roosevelt by launching a cigarette brand named Teddy. The trust war in Norway ended in November/December 1930 when BAT (Norway) was split between BATCO (45%), Tiedemann (45%), DnC (5%) - a bank, Andresens Bank (5%) - a bank owned by the Andresen family, the real owners of J. L. Tiedemanns Tobaksfabrik, when A/S Norsk-Engelsk Tobakkfabrikk (NETO) was established. In November 1933 NETO was completely in the hands of J. L. Tiedemanns.^[4][5]

In a commercial shown on early Norwegian TV, Teddy was presented as a cigarette for sportsmen and physically active Norwegians.

The brand was introduced in 1914 and the cigarettes use a Virginia tobacco. The brand was discontinued in 2010

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teddy_(cigarette)

 

Accordingly, these cigarettes were a reward to Teddy Roosevelt as a reward for his work in opposing the U.S.A. Tobacco trust.  

But why no further elaboration?

Where are the books, magazine articles or even scholarly thesis papers upon any of this?

And why 1914?  Which is incidentally the year of the Harrison 'Narcotics' Act banning whole Coca leaf and cocaine entirely (outside of a NON-refillable prescription), which the United States Department of Agriculture detested as an agricultural commodity market competitor to Tobacco.  See the infamous 1910 U.S. Department of Agriculture Farmers' Bulletin 393, issued April 29, 1910 "HABIT-FORMING AGENTS: THEIR INDISCRIMINATE SALE AND USE A MENACE TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE" by L.F. Kebler, Chief, Division of Drugs, Bureau of Chemistry, WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1910.  Condemns ALL forms of "cocaine" regardless of how low-dilute the dose and the formulation.  And mentions Tobacco ONLY in the context of TOBACCO-HABIT CURES, at page 15.

"There are quite a number of so-called tobacco-habit cures on the market.  All of them are ineffective, and some contain cocain [sic] in one form or another.  Instead of eradicating what is commonly believed to be a comparably harmless habit [!], there is a grave danger of fastening a pernicious drug habit upon the user.  Examples of preparations of this character recently examined and found to contain cocain and cocain derivatives are Coca Bola, Tobacco Bullets, and Wonder Workers.  The Coca Bola is marketed by Dr. Charles L. Mitchell, of Philadelphia, and the Tobacco Bullets by the Victor Remedy Company, now the Blackburn Remedy Company, of Daytona, Ohio, while the Wonder Workers were promoted were promoted by George S. Beck, of Springfield, Ohio."

 

Of course with the alkaloids cocaine, nicotine and caffeine ALL serving as central nervous system stimulants, each represents its own agricultural commodity - cocaine (Erythroxlyn Coca) - caffeine (Coffee and "Tea") - nicotine (Tobacco, naturally as Rustica, but as by the early 1800s crafted as Virginia "Bright Leaf" - a considerably larger leaf resulting in reduced nicotine content per area of leaf, rendering it feasible for inhalation deep into the lungs and making it far far more habituating).  By the mid 1860s Virginia Bright Leaf Tobacco (crafted there and in the Carolinas), became popular. However, such was via hand rolled cigarettes.  It was the 1881 development and patenting of the Bonsack cigarette mass production machines that tremendously facilitated far far greater levels of consumption.  Such machines were industrially adopted during the early and mid 1880s.  Yet sales growth was relatively modest until the period 1906ish-1914, with the imposition of Uncle Sam's bans upon Coca (as well as smoking Opium the importation banned by the U.S. Senate and House in 1908).

The Harrison Act was signed into statute December 17, 1914 by U.S. President Woodrow Wilson.

The Opium Exclusion Act (banning the importation of Opium prepared for smoking) was enacted February 9, 1909 under U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt (days before being succeeded by William Howard Taft).

The Foods and Drugs Act banning the sale of "mis-branded" and "adulterated" products sold as "foods" was signed into statute June 30, 1906 by U.S. Theodore Roosevelt.  On the surface this appeared sound.  But the devil was in the details.  Firstly, it limited its labeling requirement to its list of substances, without any consistency-e.g cocaine had to be listed, but neither caffeine or nicotine.  This was even so in products clearly containing cocaine, e.g. Coca leaf products.  But not with either Coffee, Tea nor Tobacco, thereby crafting a double standard, implying cocaine/Coca disparagingly, while granting the others a free pass.  Nevertheless, such an inclusion of cocaine in the list of substances that had to be labeled should have logically indicated that cocaine was not illegal, nor any of the other such listed substances, including opium.  Yet numerous manufacturers of beverages failed to so label the cocaine content, fearing loss of sales amidst the growing propaganda campaign by such publications of Colliers Magazine (try researching that publication), with its infamous series of articles bashing the so-called "patent" medicine industry, titled "The Great American Fraud".

Indeed, such writings, published under the name of Samuel Adams Hopkins, were crafted together with the guiding hand of L.Y. Kebler as well as Harvey Washington Wiley, the latter the chief of the U.S.D.A. Division of Chemistry.  BOTH Wiley and Kebler were American Medical Association stooges.  And their official U.S.D.A. writings all bashed Coca leaf, Opium, "cocaine" and "narcotics" while saying absolutely NOTHING concerning Virginia Bright Leaf Tobacco, nor cigarettes.

But would not products labeled in accordance with this 1906 Act be permitted?  For instance, the soft drinks, made with Coca leaf extract, and containing about 1 milligram of the alkaloid cocaine per fluid ounce. (The Act was silent upon limits upon allowable amounts, such as how many milligrams per fluid ounce).

Apparently so from any rational reading of the Act, but definitely not so from the position of the U.S.D.A.'s American Medical Association stooges Kebler & Wiley.  Manufacturers of such products sold as "foods" were finding themselves being charged - regardless of the matter of "mis-labling" - with supposed "adulteration".  Under what supposed "argument"?  The supposed "argument" was that the inclusion of the alkaloid cocaine in any detectable amount constituted a supposedly dangerous and deleterious ingredient.  Yet the Act did not ban cocaine.  Nor did it even grant the U.S.D.A. the power the declare cocaine or any ingredient occurring naturally within a non illegal substance (indeed the Act nowhere even mentions Coca leaf).  The Act DID grant the U.S.D.A to declare ingredients that were ADDED.  So the U.S.D.A. was being empowered to declare *added" ingredients, but not those already occurring.  (The Act was silent upon any requirement of scientific backing, credibility nor consistency).

So, how were these U.S.D.A./American Medical Association stooges Kebler and Wiley able to bring prosecutions against Coca leaf extract beverage manufactures when Coca naturally contained the alkaloid cocaine?

Their argument was based upon a false & unsubstantiated supposition upon "injurious" regular and repeated use, hence having them more or less effectively ban the cocaine alkaloid entirely from products sold as "foods".  Products sold as "drugs" would be preserved, hence the subsequent political push to "amend" the 1906 Act, (see April 1912 joint Senate-Congress deliberations, with the participation of a certain new U.S. elective official, Congressman Harry James Covington).

But with the Act not allowing such U.S.D.A. prosecutions for substances occurring naturally within a used parent substance, but only those that were ADDED, how could such prosecutions fail to be laughed out of court?  Such after all was the distinction that caused the failure of their widely publicized and groundless suit against Coca Cola in 1911.  

So why did we not continue to have bottled naturally cocainated soft drinks under federal statute until the February 1, 1915 taking of effect of the Harrison Act?

And why would Angelo Francois Mariani, who produced Vin Mariani Coca Wine - effectively surrender within the U.S. early in 1907?  

Vin Mariani, sold in 17 fluid ounce (one pint) bottles, containing the extract of 2 ounces of a blend of several varieties, yielding a natural cocaine alkaloid of 6 or 7 milligrams per fluid ounce (others had such per fluid ounce content of perhaps 9 milligrams, while unscrupulous competitors sold so-called Coca wines made with either purely isolated cocaine or some chalk like alkaloid paste, with as much as even 30 or more milligrams cocaine per fluid ounce!).  Vin Mariani was developed circa 1863 in Paris, France.  It eventually was manufactured in other locals, including in New York City, with the same ingredients.  The American Medical Association would condemn Vin Mariani during the first year of the existence of its "Council on Pharmacy" (1905).  But that report as published to the public, contained nothing substantive, only for a supposed matter of "misbranding" for marketing implying that it was "French" product (its origin of initial formulation) when it was being compounded with the same components in New York- go figure.

What was the basis for Vin Mariani's surrender, by eliminating the cocaine alkaloid from Vin Mariani produced for U.S. markets, effective May 1907?

And what was the specific reason for Mariani & Company's Jacob Jaros attempt at a meeting with Wiley sometime in late 1908, early 1909?

That Vin Mariani so surrendered indicates that Mariani saw it as a lost cause within the U.S., as the U.S. government was so obviously and blatantly bent upon protecting its cherished agricultural commodity of Virginia Bright Leaf Tobacco from the market competition of Coca (which was NOT suitable as an outdoor crop within almost everywhere within the continental United States of America due to its inability to survive frost).  After all, the Panama Canal would have undeniably significantly reduced shipping distances of fresh Coca leaves from the western coast of Peru to north Atlantic markets.  The U.S. would gain control of the canal's construction project in 1903, and be completed by 1914, the year of the passage of the Harrison Act.

So are these "Teddy" cigarettes a reward simply for supposedly reining in U.S. Tobacco interests for the sake of Tobacco interests elsewhere?  Or is it also a reward for U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt's overt participation for a blatant market conspiracy for banning Coca leaf (as well as smokable Opium) so as to enable the 20th century Tobacco-cigarette explosion?

Did Angelo Francois Mariani attempt a meeting with Theodore Roosevelt, perhaps somewhere around 1904-06?

See:

https://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2017/02/defeating-drug-war-requires-better.html

 

Also:

 

https://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2011/05/freemason-t-roosevelt-approved-wiley.html

 

 

 

Harrison "Narcotics" Act sponsor Yale Skull & Bones

 according to wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Burton_Harrison#Early_life

Harrison was born in New York City, to Burton Harrison, a lawyer and private secretary to Confederate President Jefferson Davis, and Constance Cary Harrison, novelist and social arbiter. Through his mother, Harrison was great-grandson of Virginia-planter, Thomas Fairfax, 9th Lord Fairfax of Cameron. Through Fairfax in birth and marriage, Harrison was also relative to United States founding fathers: Gouverneur Morris (his great-great-uncle), Thomas Jefferson, the Randolphs, the Ishams, the Carters, and Confederate General Robert E. Lee. 

Harrison graduated from Yale College in 1895, where he was a member of the Psi Upsilon fraternity and the secret society Skull and Bones,^[1]: 166 and from the New York Law School in 1897. From 1897 to 1899, Harrison was an instructor in the Evening Division at New York Law School. He later left to serve in United States Army during the Spanish–American War, as an assistant adjutant general with the rank of captain.

A member of the Democratic Party, Harrison was elected to the 58th United States Congress, and served from March 4, 1903, to March 3, 1905. In 1904, Harrison ran unsuccessfully for lieutenant governor of New York. Afterwards, he resumed the practice of law. He was again elected to the 60th, 61st, 62nd and 63rd United States Congresses, and served from March 4, 1907, to September 3, 1913, when he resigned to become governor-general of the Philippines. His Harrison Narcotics Tax Act was eventually passed on December 17, 1914. 

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Narcotics_Tax_Act

The Harrison Narcotics Tax Act (Ch. 1, 38 Stat. 785) was a United States federal law that regulated and taxed the production, importation, and distribution of opiates and coca products. The act was proposed by Representative Francis Burton Harrison of New York and was approved on December 17, 1914.^[1][2]

"An Act To provide for the registration of, with collectors of internal revenue, and to impose a special tax on all persons who produce, import, manufacture, compound, deal in, dispense, sell, distribute, or give away opium or coca leaves, their salts, derivatives, or preparations, and for other purposes." The courts interpreted this to mean that physicians could prescribe narcotics to patients in the course of normal treatment, but not for the treatment of addiction.^[when?]

What it actually did was to prohibit sale and possession outside the regimen of a non refillable prescription, with the decision making upon what constituted legitimate medical practices for such to the dictatorial powers of the U.S. Treasury Department.  

It so banned Opium, Coca leaves and any mixture, preparation containing any amount of cocaine, and any opiate preparation containing per fluid ounce amounts of more than 2 grains Opium, 1/4 grain morphine or 1/8th grain heroin, in any over the counter product without a prescription.  The absolute ban on cocaine in any detectable amount reflected the protection of markets for Tobacco/nicotine.  This act was timed with the completion and opening of the Panama Canal, which would have significantly improved importing Coca leaves to North Atlantic markets.  The US had acquired the canal project in 1903, months prior to the USDA taking a sharp uptick in interest in blocking Coca, which the USDA had feared as a market competitor to Tobacco- e.g. the fear over "Tobacco Habit Cures" espoused in the infamous 1910 USDA Farmers Bulletin article Habit-forming Agents their sale and use a menace to the public welfare (which was strangely silent upon that of  mass machine produced Tobacco cigarettes..

U.S. Cigarette production spiked with drug prohibition: 1906, 1914,1937;

coinciding with the crackdowns on Opium, Coca and Cannabis

(p230 Licit & Illicit Drugs Breecher)

 

https://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2017/02/defeating-drug-war-requires-better.html

 

 

INVESTIGATE FDA/AMA & mass media campaign against Ivermectin Therapeutic Benifits for treating Covid

Never forget how the mainstream media deliberately confused veterinarian and human formulation doses, much as their predecessors did with Coca and higher dosage "Coca" products.

The U.S. National Library has reported favorably on the use of ivermectin - a patent expired medicine - for treating cases of Covid:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33278625/

February 2021

Ivermectin, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-parasitic agent, was found to inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication in vitro. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to determine the rapidity of viral clearance and safety of ivermectin among adult SARS-CoV-2 patients. The trial included 72 hospitalized patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh, who were assigned to one of three groups: oral ivermectin alone (12 mg once daily for 5 days), oral ivermectin in combination with doxycycline (12 mg ivermectin single dose and 200 mg doxycycline on day 1, followed by 100 mg every 12 h for the next 4 days), and a placebo control group. Clinical symptoms of fever, cough, and sore throat were comparable among the three groups. Virological clearance was earlier in the 5-day ivermectin treatment arm when compared to the placebo group (9.7 days vs 12.7 days; p = 0.02), but this was not the case for the ivermectin + doxycycline arm (11.5 days; p = 0.27). There were no severe adverse drug events recorded in the study. A 5-day course of ivermectin was found to be safe and effective in treating adult patients with mild COVID-19. Larger trials will be needed to confirm these preliminary findings. 

Nonetheless the USFDA postulates otherwise, focusing upon excessive use via formulations meant not for humans but for 900lb horses

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19

Numerous media organs report simply against ivermectin, often citing nameless multiples of "medical experts" while failing to report what can be found by simply searching *ivermectin - U.S. National Library of Medicine*

And of course, thoroughly discredited medical monopoly trade organizations as the viciously mercantilistic American Medical Association- an entity long overdue for being sued into oblivion for starters their key role in the banning of Coca leaf for the sake of market protectionism for Tobacco cigarettes, circa 1907.

Why do these media organs, along with the AMA, almost never report on the US NLM findings?  Why not even mention the favorable conclusions, nor any reports or article to the contrary showing some sort of study, agreement and even disagreements there regarding ivermectin for treating Covid?

An investigation is needed into this mis-reporting by such media sources as CNN, MSNBC (Microsoft/Bill Gates NBC), the Daily Beast, Huff Post (what happened to Arianna Huffington over the past 15 or so years- did she join some club?), and even NPR.  How about issuing subpoenas to the people running these news outlets for interrogators - public and televised

If safety is an issue, why block the availability of human dose formulations?  Even the FDA's safety concerns are focuses upon excessive dosages from veterinarian formulations, especially taken without adequate dosage information.  And if ivermectin is dangerous in certain contexts, say with other medicines, then let the information be spread as to what to avoid taking it with.  So why is youtube blocking videos on that very topic?

If ivermectin turns out to be better some some cases of Covid than others, why the refusal to allow availability and conduct data gathering?

Why was CNN-MSNBC treating the head of the infamous American Medical Association as some sort of respectable figure and that organization as trustworthy?

Accordingly a dosage regimen of ivermectin costing less than $3.00 can be used to remarkably treat cases of Covid.  With proper availability (human dosage formulations) and advise (informing about interactions, ivermectin could make a considerable dent in Covid.

Yet the same type of folks who decry ivermectin tend to be very pro covid 'vaccine' despite the lack of testing routinely demanded for vaccines.  Go figure.

There MUST be a public investigation as to the obvious mass media conspiracy against non patented, as well as patent expired medications for potentially treating covid!

Particularly with the deceitful NPR National Public Radio.

Deleted Wiki Covington & Burling - Tobacco Industry Information

 Information removed from the wikipedia article on the Washington D.C. regulatory powerhouse corporate law firm Covington & Burling, founded 1919.

Something to give pause to the idea of that law firm's connections with organizations as MPP, the DPF/DPA and others

Philip Morris & Tobacco Institute

Covington & Burling represented tobacco interests for decades, instrumental in the founding of, and serving as counsel to, the Tobacco Institute, established in 1958.^[8] The institute attacked scientific studies, although more by casting doubt on them rather than by rebutting them directly. It also lobbied Congress, although initially at a low level.^[9] The institute also served as corporate affairs consultants to the Philip Morris group of companies, according to a 1993 internal budget review document which indicated the firm was paid $280,000 to "serve as general counsel to the Consumer Products Company Tort Coalition, agree the legal objectives with member company litigators, draft legislation and amendments, prepare lobby papers and testimony for legislative committees and administer the coalition's budget."^[10]

The Department of Justice (DOJ) brought suit against multiple Tobacco companies and trade associations under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act and after a lengthy trial, on August 17, 2006, the Judge issued a 1,683 page opinion (449 F.Supp.2d 1, D.D.C. 2006) finding the tobacco companies liable.^[11] The court found "As set forth in these Final Proposed Findings of Fact, substantial evidence establishes that Defendants have engaged in and executed – and continue to engage in and execute – a massive 50-year scheme to defraud the public, including consumers of cigarettes, in violation of RICO." The court issued a harsh rebuke: "over the course of more than 50 years, Defendants lied, misrepresented, and deceived the American public, including smokers and the young people they avidly sought as 'replacement smokers,' about the devastating health effects of smoking and environmental tobacco smoke, they suppressed research, they destroyed documents, they manipulated the use of nicotine so as to increase and perpetuate addiction, they distorted the truth about low tar and light cigarettes so as to discourage smokers from quitting, and they abused the legal system in order to achieve their goal – to make money with little, if any, regard for individual illness and suffering, soaring health costs, or the integrity of the legal system."^[12]

But the Court also directly addressed the law firm Covington & Burling specifically: "Covington & Burling was counsel for the Tobacco Institute and was also described as counsel for the 'industry'. ... An attorney from Covington & Burling attended every meeting of the Committee ... also cleared press releases issued by the Tobacco Institute. ... Covington & Burling, became the guiding strategists for the Enterprise and were deeply involved in implementation of those strategies once adopted."^[13] Along with two other firms, which helped create the Tobacco Institute in 1958, and served the industry for the next 50 years came this condemnation:

"Finally, a word must be said about the role of lawyers in this fifty-year history of deceiving smokers, potential smokers, and the American public about the hazards of smoking and second-hand smoke, and the addictiveness of nicotine. At every stage, lawyers played an absolutely central role in the creation and perpetuation of the Enterprise and the implementation of its fraudulent schemes. They devised and coordinated both national and international strategy; they directed scientists as to what research they should and should not undertake; they vetted scientific research papers and reports as well as public relations materials to ensure that the interests of the Enterprise would be protected; they identified 'friendly' scientific witnesses, subsidized them with grants from the Center for Tobacco Research and the Center for Indoor Air Research, paid them enormous fees, and often hid the relationship between those witnesses and the industry; and they devised and carried out document destruction policies and took shelter behind baseless assertions of the attorney-client privilege. What a sad and disquieting chapter in the history of an honorable and often courageous profession."^[14]

The defendants filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals. On May 22, 2009, the three-judge panel unanimously upheld Judge Kessler's decision finding the tobacco companies liable. The court upheld most of the ordered remedies, but denied additional remedies sought by public health interveners and the Department of Justice (566 F.3d 1095, 2009).^[15]

During the $280 billion U.S. federal lawsuit against big tobacco, Covington & Burling partner John Rupp, a former lawyer with the industry-funded Tobacco Institute, testified that "the industry sought out scientists and paid them to make an 'objective appraisal' of whether secondhand smoke was harmful to non-smokers, a move they hoped would dispel the 'extreme views' of some anti-smoking activists." He "said the scientists, who came from prestigious institutions such as Georgetown University and the University of Massachusetts Amherst, did not consider themselves to be working 'on behalf' of cigarette makers even though they were being paid by the industry." Rupp said, "We were paying them to share their views in forums where they would be usefully presented," according to Reuters.^[16]

U.S. Customs Now Stealing Peoples' Coca Tea Shipments

No legitimate legal authority

Based upon junk statutes that are grossly unconstitutional, a denial of equal protection, a criminal mafia agricultural market protection racket to flood the planet with TOBACCO, and a public health threat of monstrous enormity

Posted to the Facebook page of the Drug Policy Alliance:

U.S. Customs has embarked upon massive thefts of Coca tea shipments. They are stealing millions of dollars in merchandise that they have zero legitimate legal reason to steal (seize). They are making absolutely false statements regarding cocaine (the delightful alternative to caffeine and especially nicotine). The junk statutes that only morons would support were enacted to thwart this competitor to Tobacco to protect and open up markets for the 1907+ explosion in Tobacco cigarettes. Coca use as a Tobacco habit cure was the reason cited by the 1910 USDA Farmer Bullitan article Habit-forming Agents their sale and use a menace to the public welfare. U.S Customs needs to stop participating in this criminal tobacco mercantilism. Where is the DPA on ending this criminal and nonsensical ban? At the start a lawsuit enjoining U.S. Customs from this criminal involvement and pay damages for stealing peoples' Coca tea.

--

 

U.S. Customs thefts of Coca tea: a criminal interference in trade based upon junk statutes best described as legislative crime in furtherance of a criminal mafia market protection racket to protect Tobacco and be instrumental in spawning the 1907+ market explosion in TOBACCO CIGARETTES.  Note that the machinery for mass produced cigarettes was invented in 1881 and quickly deployed, yet sales growth was little, until the 1907-1914 period with the empowerment of the U.S. Department of Agriculture' to make baseless claims per se against cocaine in any amount and remove all cocainated products from retail, thus REMOVING THE COMPETITION TO NICOTINE.  Both cocaine and nicotine are reinforcing CNS stimulants.  Coca and Tobacco have overlapping uses.  Coca leaf is smokable like Tobacco, yet Tobacco is too toxic to drink, thus no Tobacco Tea.  The respective polices towards Coca and Tobacco represent a GROSS violation of equal protection as well as a crime against the public's health of monstrous enormity. 

U.S. Customs is now touting their criminal thefts of Coca tea shipments as concenrning so called "Green Cocaine" leaving out the word tea and behaving completely oblvios to its vast disticnions from say pure powder coaine with added green food dye.

Douglas Greene's 1st TV Appearance on the Morton Downey Jr. Show July 4, 1988

Douglas Greene
b March 13, 1967-June 4, 2019

July 4, 1988 appearance with Ron Paul and Dana Beal on The Morton Downey Jr. Show

Dana Beal, Doug Greene with Lisa Sliwa at right, 

July 4, 1988 Morton Downey Jr. Show

It was 1987.

1986 had brought the the great new bi-partisan U.S. escalation of the 75+ year old "drug war".


Seizing upon the fatal overdose (cocaine) of Len Bias, a University of Maryland student and draft pick of the Boston Celtics in 1986, and in an orchestrated response to newspaper hyperbole, the bipartisan government of President Ronald Reagan and U.S. Speaker of the House William O'Neil, with rashly promoted legislation to further escalate the long-running drug war (started up during the years leading up to the start of World War I largely for the sake of making the world markets safer for cigarettes), by a so-called Anti Drug Abuse Act of 1986.

This spurred the entry of a bunch of us into the protest movement against the drug war.

We included Doug Greene and yours truly, meeting other more established protesters, and threading our way into a variety of venues.  Greene, lived in Cedarhurst, N.Y., on Long Island near the eastern edge of Queens, was an NYU under-graduate in psychology, and involved with the Libertarian Party. I was from New Rochelle, N.Y. in southeastern Westchester County, and was an incoming 1st year student at University of Bridgeport School of Law student, recently inspired to research the war on cocaine, as well as researching the story of the longest used and favorably regarded cocaine containing product prior to the start of the drug war- Vin Mariani and its creator Angelo Francois Mariani.

Doug and I met at a Libertarian Party event in White Plains N.Y. in April 1988.

I vividly recollect seeing him that first time with his name-badge, and immediately recognizing his name from an article he authored for the (now defunct) newsletter "Burning Issues" written and published by R.B. Wilks - an energetic anti-drug war female activist and for a time girlfriend of Libertarian Party activist (and former member of Young Americans for Freedom) Don Meinshausen.  His article against the drug war made the rarely made much needed point that the self perpetuating problem is not "drugs" but rather prohibitionist policies banning a substance in any and all forms without regard to potency/concentration, with the dynamics meaning safer, dilute, guaranteed low potency options are eliminated and replaced with infinitely riskier higher concentration/wildly variable potency.  Hence, Greene then advocated for legalizing Opium and Coca leaf, providing a welcome contrast to the standard group thought of thinking of "heroin" and "cocaine" concentrated white powders.

His name's irony was immediate and comforting. 

Doug Greene, born March 13, 1967.  A man with a surname suggestive of his public stance for green plant drugs - Cannabis, Opium and Coca - as well as his advocacy of veganism.  And born a mere 3 months before the release of that Monkees song "Pleasant Valley Sunday" with its line "Mr. Greene, he's so serene, he's got a TV in every room"  - a prophetic description of a Mr. Greene into having the newest level of computer/operating system.

Greene interned that year at the Drug Policy Foundation, working under Arnold Trebach and Kevin Zeese. We both attended the 1988 NORML convention, held in a hotel on Wisconsin Avenue in upper Georgetown, Washington D.C.  And later that summer, Greene first introduced me to that most colorful personality and political protester long headquartered at 9 Bleeker in Manhattan, Dana Beal.  A longtime drug war opponent - he has a recording of him calling out George McGovern on the issue back in 1972 - Beal holds annual pro marijuana legalization marches the earliest Saturday in May; and he has his own approach to the drug war: highlighting its absurdity via his advocacy of the use of Iboga plant root bark alkaloid Ibogaine as a drug-addiction interrupter, as discovered by his longtime friend Howard Lotsoff in 1962, who tried Ibogaine and found his physical addiction to Heroin had vanished.

Greene and Beal would get seen to the world by getting on an episode of that unforgettably late 1980s icon of "trash-talk" television- The Morton Downey Jr. Show, named for its host.

The show was started by WWOR of Secaucas, New Jersey, and first aired October 19, 1987.

It was textbook "trash-talk" - host with panelists and audience, with questions/statements from the latter permitted. It combined a variety of elements of "audience" shows from those devoted to matters as personal soap opera stories with its vast arrays of family feuds, into a show addressing political issues, with a design to provide a platform for dissident views, but in an arena so stacked as to have them effectively silenced with the moderator encouraged a raucous audience to chant the establishment mode of thought, regarding persons with ideas contra.  The show's early ratings successes lead to it being taken on national syndication in 1988.

Hmm, allow a platform for a few dissidents, but in a sort of arena where rather than their ideas receiving a fair and just consideration, instead are met with the most simplistic ridicule, representing that of the powers that be be here presented as the popular opinion that they seek to perpetuate.

Of course include those espousing status quo views.  For instance, Lisa Sliwa (Evers), then wife of the founder of the citizen vigilante organization the Guardian Angels, Curtis Sliwa.

The episode that Greene and Beal appeared was that of July 4, 1988, featuring - as its best known speaker that day - Ron Paul, Congressman from Texas..

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/andrewkaczynski/ron-pauls-1998-appearance-on-the-morton-downey-jr


See the following link at 18:30- 20.20
Doug Greene and Dana Beal July 1988 Morton Downey Jr. Show

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxXwKPLZyVs

DPA Drug Policy Alliance 2019 Proposal: Nicotine Versus Cocaine 1906+ Disaster!

Nicotine v Cocaine 1906+ Disaster

Douglas A. Willinger

“one of the recommendations from the project was to examine a key factor that shapes U.S. drug research: the pervasive belief that some drugs are inherently harmful and addictive, a position that influences research questions and populations studied, as well as the outcomes that are measured.”

This pervasive belief dates back in U.S. national legislation to the 1906 Food and Drugs Act.

It was widely lauded for its task of stopping the interstate commerce in “adulterated” and “misbranded” products sold as foods or drugs, as an “progressive” act of consumer protectionism.  

But, alas, it was seriously flawed and biased, a proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothes, cleverly written to enable anti-competitive regulatory abuse favoritism for key agricultural commodities.  

It did not prohibit any substance fought by the “drug war”.  

It introduced the idea of labeling ingredients, but only in a fashion designed to convey the idea of a set of essentially blacklisted substances, via the 1906 Act’s enumerated list - morphine, opium, cocaine, heroin, alpha or beta eucaine, chloroform, cannabis indica, chloral hydrate, or acetanilide. 

As this list is limited it for instance conveys the a likely impression to potential and actual consumers that such are intrinsically more worrisome than those unlisted, such as say caffeine and nicotine.  

It established a bureaucratic regulatory dictatorship to establish what was “legitimate” concerning not only foods and drugs, but also medical practice; and committed the mortal sin of granting such regulatory authority to the Bureau of Chemistry of the U.S.D.A. without any requirement of science credibility; hence it was under this sort of initial legislative direction that we the people got a wolf in sheep’s clothing, as a tool of longstanding dominant economic interests to use the power of the expanding “progressive” state to suppress their market competition.   AKA cigarette protectionism.

To wit, Opium and Coca Leaf.

Opium is the classic “narcotic”, a drug inducing sleep.  An effective pain killer and even anti-depressant.  Physically addictive, and because of its utility and relative lack of toxicity, is adaptable to higher and higher doses via the then recent – later 1800s – developed practices of refining plants into powders, creating ultra-concentrated HC. forms of alkaloids found in the plant matter in minute quantities.  Hence, drinking or eating Opium, or Opium infusion – tea – was far less addicting than an injected alkaloids, say morphine or its man-modified form heroin.

Coca leaf, which contains the alkaloid cocaine akin to Coffee containing the alkaloid caffeine and Tobacco leaf nicotine, has an ancient history of use in South America, particularly the Andean mountain areas, as in and near Peru, routinely served to tourists to help acclimate them to the high altitude conditions.  Europeans first encountered Coca leaf about the same time as Tobacco, yet Coca was hampered due to its volatility – it more easily went stale – making it a less desirable shipping commodity, thus delaying its market penetration within Europe for 300+ years, to the creation and marketing of Vin Mariani and its widespread medical use for the half century leading up to its 1914 U.S. prohibition.  Vin Mariani was a “wine of coca” made with an extract blending three varieties of Coca leaves.  It contained roughly 6 or 7 mg of cocaine alkaloid per fluid ounce.  It inspired numerous competing coca wine products, eventually including non alcoholic beverages that became known as soft drinks, such as Coca Cola with reportedly 1 1/2 milligrams per fluid ounce .  It also came with products pattered after traditional uses of Tobacco, with cigars, cheroots and cigarettes made with Coca leaves.

These sort of uses of “cocaine” were comparable to that of caffeine in Coffee, nicotine in Tobacco.

Concentrated cocaine was only first made commercially available as pharmaceutical forms about 1885 via Merck, in Germany, and Parke Davis, in the U.S., in salt (hydrochloride) and freebase (sulfate) varieties, dry or in solutions for injection.  Uses of 89% pure cocaine powder (HCI), and solutions of lesser concentration though meant for the infinitely more direct mode of administration as injections, would clearly introduce many undesirable case studies, particularly in the field of anesthesia.

There are numerous medical records concerning all of this.   

The issue became muddled with those misrepresenting acute toxicities of ultra-high doses as intrinsic to any dosage, with societies with relatively little exposure to Coca thus being susceptible to dis-information designed to spark support for the drug war.  Sadly, for its market competition being squashed by the drug war, with the USDA prosecution of beverage manufacturers for containing a supposedly dangerous, deleterious substance, the cocaine alkaloid, Tobacco cigarettes would be overwhelmingly the main daily use stimulant drug war beneficiary. 

“I have … used [Vin Mariani] to save smokers of exaggerated habits from nicotinism.  A few glasses taken in small doses … 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 facilities.”

The Drug Policy Alliance and allied groups need to commission a study of uses of the parent plant products Opium, Coca, in products so designed to deliver doses of opiate and/or coca alkaloids.

This DPA study should look at the health issues of relating to any displacement of existing markets in Coffee, Tea, anything else that contains caffeine, as well as those in Tobacco and anything else that contains nicotine.  Imagine particularly Coca displacing nicotine markets.

It could and should for instance ask a “what if” question regarding alternative historical possibilities, a world that did not get the drug war. 

Douglas A. Willinger
Freedom of Medicine and Diet

San Marcos, California
September 13, 2019

 ---

I am author of papers that were published in the Drug Policy Foundation Conference compendiums, The Ever-changing, Ever-confused Popular Conception of Cocaine; Cocaine Prohibition; Water or Gasoline for the flames of drug abuse; and Onwards to Coca!

I was a panelist in the 1991 and 1992 Cocaine panels, and the 1992 panel Is America Exporting its Problems.

I organized and moderated the panel COCA '95, a Necessary Policy Alternative from Abroad.

Additional panel proposals I submitted, but which were rejected include (1994) Coca: Turning Over A New Leaf Towards Reducing Health Care Costs, (1997) Tinctures of Opium, Wines of Coca: How Prohibition Perverts Useful Substances into white powder poisons,and (2009) Agricultural Politics of Drug Policy.

I have attended every main DPF/DPA conference since 1989.

http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2012/06/douglas-andrew-willinger-angelo.html

Since 2007, I have authored a blog on drug policy related matters Freedom of Medicine and Diet.  It includes details on the polices towards Opium, opiates, Coca leaf and cocaine, as well as the formulation of the legislative and regulatory matters, dating forward from the 1906 U.S. Food and Drugs Act that empowered the USDA Chemistry Bureau dictatorial powers, lacking any requirement of underlying consistent science.

http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/

http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2017/02/defeating-drug-war-requires-better.html

Points About the 'Progressive' Era War Of Drugs

Points About the 'Progressive' Era War Of Drugs as embodied by such pieces of U.S. legislation as the 1906 Food & Drugs Act ; the 1914 Harrison 'Narcotics' Tax ...

http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2011/03/drug-war-tobacco-pharma-agricultural.html