Category Archives: Prohibition

Cannabis, Live Like It's Legal, Metallica, Prohibition

Daktory

Saturday 17 January 2015 Richard 5 Comments

Dakta Green, Gizella van Trigt and Taranaki Blaze are jointly charged with cannabis offences. These are the charges arising from the raid that closed The Daktory in June 2012.

There are 15 witnesses for the prosecution. All police officers. This includes the main witness for the prosecution, Sargeant Lawes. The same Sargeant who committed perjury during their pretrial. We look forward to his testimony. The Daktory won a previous case and your support now will help win another!

Please show your support at the Auckland District Court, 65/69 Albert Street, this Monday at 9:00 AM.

INVITE ALL YOUR FRIENDS! Lets make this HUGE! See Facebook groups here and here.

Edible indicas, smokeable sativas
Never ending potency
Cannabis club house, comfy chairs and couches
We create the Daktory

Living like it’s legal
Mary Jane has found me
Cannot stop the Daktory

Ending prohibition
Turns into obsession
Cannot kill the Daktory

Cannot stop the Daktas
Daktory is found in me

Daktory! DAKTORY!

Failed confiscation, return of Dakta Vendor
Cops are ripped and blown away
Now is the hour, taking back the power
Daktory is here to stay

Living like it’s legal
Mary Jane has found me
Cannot stop the Daktory

Ending prohibition
Turns into obsession
Cannot kill the Daktory

Cannot stop the Daktas
Daktory is found in me

Daktory! DAKTORY!

Lyrics by Dakta Goode, music by Metallica. 🙂

Alternative Medicines and Treatments, Break on through to the other side, Charity, Christian Libertarianism, Compulsion, Dispensationalism, Easy Listening, Faith, Fighting Cancer, Freedom, Heroism, Justice, Liberate your Mind!, Love, Merciful Grace, Mercy, Prohibition, Quandaries, Salvation, Self-ownership, Theism

Christian grace and compassion for the Suffering. Against suicide, yet tolerant of euthanasia.

Monday 27 October 2014 Tim 2 Comments

Mother-Theresa-with-Baby-Mother-Theresa-41801 (1)

Two different perspectives about Life, Death, Suffering, and Euthanasia have appeared here recently…

Why No Christian Should Support Euthanasia, by Blair Mulholland

and

God’s gift to the terminally ill by Richard Goode.

Most thinking people fall squarely into either of these camps.

I would like to suggest that there is a third way… a middle course.

Having come down from my mountain I’d like to wade in 🙂 … Mine is the lonely path… loved by few… because it appears to these antagonists that I’m too cosy with their enemy… not resolute enough… yet I believe it to be the best course.

I support certain aspects of Blair’s Anti-Euthanasia post to a high degree… yet ultimately I support Richard’s conclusion regarding Opium.

Both are arguing from the premise of ‘the sanctity of human life.

It’s a very interesting subject because it’s one of these issues which if the Christian is not careful, he will find himself supporting harsh and inhumane Laws out of a misguided sense of piety (like the twats who support drug prohibition).
It is ‘one of those’ controversial issues which some Christians insist gives them the right to impose *Un-Libertarian* prohibitions on others…. thus these so-called Christians also tend to insinuate that Real Christians *cant be Libertarians*… that there can be no separation of Church and state.

It is my experience to note that most of the Anti-Euthanasia Religionists do this because they still have not figured out the dispensational distinctions of the Christian living under grace, from the OT Jew living under the Law.
They dont yet grasp the reality that Euthanasia is just like the issue of Smoking Cigarettes…. that a Christian can be ideologically *against Cigarettes* yet also ought to be Ideologically *against a prohibition on cigarettes*… and that it is quite right to speak out against the vise of smoking cigarettes… if they be so moved…. yet to maintain a libertarian respect, and compassion for cigarette smokers and their rights rather than the Legalistic spirit *self righteous persecution and hate*.

dare

Let me speak about what I mean with myself as the example.
As a Christian I do believe in the sanctity of human life, and that it would be insulting to God and a gross lack of faith, for me to ‘Commit suicide’ out of depression… yet I also know that we are not under the Law, and that God is a merciful God.
I do believe that he put things like Alcohol, Opium, etc on the Earth to alleviate pain and I am not so silly as to not be able to distinguish someone wishing to avoid a Ghastly and excruciating death, from someone callously throwing their life away out of spite, or sloth.

Not appreciating these distinctions is a bit like those dullards whom cant distinguish Loving discipline from child abuse (forgive my terseness).

Assisting a terminally ill person to end their own life, or taking your own life rather than facing the torture of a brutal enemy, are not the same things as assisting a Depressed, faithless, Godless, and ungrateful, (yet otherwise healthy) person to harm themselves.

The thing is that I dont think *prohibitive Laws* have anything good to add to this situation for the Obvious reason that a depressed person determined to kill themselves is in no way obliged to obey Human conventions…. which is all a prohibition is… when not underpinned by a personal ethic… and those whom actually have such a personal ethic *dont need any such law*.

Depressed yet otherwise able bodied people don’t need help to kill themselves.
Only the dying fear that the longer they endure, the less capable they become to take their own life in a peaceful way…. And so then may come to rely on their loved ones for assistance.
The people who want such prohibitions simply seek to persecute the caring Doctors and Family members whom assist their patients and loved ones from ending their sufferings.
I think many are acting out Malice against people whom dont share their personal religious sentiments, which is far Colder …. far less forgiveable than simple ignorance or delusion, … cloaking their evil hearts under the guise of ‘concern’ and religious piety.

This is the very antithesis of Christian Love.

Worst of all is that fact that many supposed ‘Orthodox’ Christians employ false doctrines … resorting to the time of Jewish Law, and Christs preaching to the Jews about being found worthy to enter his kingdom.
They attempt to say that a Christian risks loosing their eternal salvation if they choose Euthanasia…. Because they have failed to ‘endure unto the end’… etc.

This is a clear demonstration of mishandling the word of truth and results in a horrible in-humane doctrine which increases the un-necessary misery and human suffering in the world and when these false doctrines are used to Rally zealots into lobbying the government against Libertarian Law reform…. It causes unbelievers to despise Christianity as Barbaric and oppressive.
It causes Christianity to stink and makes a mockery of the Grace and compassion of God.
It Damns men’s souls via unbelief.

The Truth is quite different.
Under God’s Grace…. In this dispensation we are free from the Law, and salvation is absolutely a free gift…. Not determined at all upon our good works, endurance, etc.

So the Libertarian Christian (like me) does believe in the Sanctity of Human life, and intends to do what I believe is the Godly thing to do… with as much bravery as I an muster…to endure… and face my own fate (Following in the footsteps of my Heroic Grand Father) yet I confess that certain terminal conditions terrify me… and I reserve the right to chicken out and take matters into my own hands.

I know that such a decision would be to opt for the ‘weaker’ path for the Christian to take, yet I am confident of God’s grace and mercy.

I certainly don’t desire any legal prohibitions to prevent me having this option, and I would never be so cold and uncaring as to desire to prohibit others having the right to make this decision for themselves either… or loving parents making the painful decision that it is not in their child’s best interest to postpone the inevitable!

*This is a fundamental principle of Christian Libertarianism … That we are not the property of society… or the government…. We own ourselves… and it is up to us whether or not we will impose upon ourselves certain religious convictions regarding our own death.*
Parents must have their parental rights and responsibilities respected by the state.

Though I hate the false doctrines which try and ensnare fearful souls back under Law, and I have contempt for people whom seek to use the Law to unnecessarily prolong human suffering, I have no problem with people peacefully… and without recourse to political coercion propagating their belief that Euthanasia is wrong…. From forming associations which seek to propagate that belief… from boycotting Doctors whom are known to assist terminal patients to end their lives with dignity.
This is how Libertarianism works… Nobody *forcing* their opinions on others.

* The most important Political reality is that having legally assisted suicide (of itself)does not effect any third party’s rights…. And thus such prohibitions cant be justified*… I’m not saying there cant be any legal challenges Re: debts, and other contractual obligations)

When it comes to my loved ones, there is no way I would assist any of them to die, if they have still have the power of reason, yet have not receive the Gospel.
Death in that case will not end their suffering… it will be but the beginning.
Yet I would assist them if they are trusting in the Resurrection of Christ…. and even though…. perish the thought that many may so choose…. I would not seek a law to forbid people from arranging for their own death… or assisting their loved ones… even if they reject Christ.
God has given them the right to go to their deaths un-repentant, and in their own sins.

Christianity is properly a tolerant liberal faith…which seeks to make the world a better place via preaching the gospel and Christian values to whomsoever hath an open ear… not a Religion of Political force.
Christianity seeks to convert hearts and minds… not impose an artificial draconian order.

Man’s knowledge and powers of Medical intervention have made these sorts of Moral dilemmas far more acute as we understand a lot more about things like Opium, Diseases, and how to prolong life than in the past, and so a lot of the so-called ‘life’ many people ‘endure’ at the end is wholly due to the Un-natural interventions of Humanity… orchestrated in the name of ‘the Sanctity of human life’… ie this so-called ideal results in untold more *un-necessary and futile* misery.

*And it is to a large degree this *artificially engineered period of misery* which we are talking about here… as if Nature… and Human concerns were left to themselves… death would naturally end this misery a lot sooner.
Ie Medicine could concern itself more with ‘Mother Theresa…hospice care’ rather than Frankenstein type fanaticism…. Living Heads in a Jar… trying to steal a few last breaths… under delusions that this is honouring God.

And If I am ever undone…. laid out flat… writhing in agony … beyond repair… I hope my caregivers are not Frugal with the ‘Milk of the poppy’….
Fear not for me… My time will be done…. And my soul is secure in Christ.
Likewise all you whom have loved ones knocking on Heaven’s door… Tell them to trust their souls to the Gospel of Grace and the Resurrection of Christ… and to ‘relax’… accept death … in the faith and hope of God’s Love and promises.
That’s what I intend to do.
Tim Wikiriwhi.
Christian Libertarian.

Guardian Angel. Happy Birthday Mercedes Corby.

Monday 6 October 2014 Tim Leave a comment

happy birthday Mercedes

You exemplify everything which is good about Family, and a Libertarian commitment to justice.
Fighting for your beloved sister caught in the Jaws of an Evil system, you risked everything for her sake.
Happy Birthday Mercedes…. from Eternal Vigilance.
We salute you!

Tim Wikiriwhi.
Christian Libertarian.

s and mmm

From the Facebook page People for Schapelle Corby

Tuesday (7th October) is Mercedes Corby’s birthday. Please join us in wishing her a truly wonderful and stress-free day.

When Schapelle was wrongly arrested in 2004, a nightmare began for Mercedes too. She stayed in Bali to be with her sister, and brought up her young family there. She helped to sustain Schapelle through the most harrowing and horrendous experiences.

She took up the cause with everything she had. Knowing her sister was completely innocent, she did everything in her power to free her from the chains of corruption.

She confronted politicians, she faced down the AFP, and she fought through the courts in Australia, where even her sister’s book royalties had been stolen by the government. She followed every lead, and sought help everywhere possible.

She explored every avenue in Indonesia, applying for clemency for Schapelle, and eventually, getting the parole through. She campaigned endlessly, and she told the truth to anyone who would listen.

In doing so, she became a threat to many interests and many corrupt individuals. So she was abused, maligned, and vilified by the most repugnant media on the planet. She became a target for sewer journalists, and malicious cowardly predators. She was even brutally beaten on the street.

One day, her own story will be told, and like Schapelle’s, it will shake the world.

Today, she remains by her sister’s side. And again, like Schapelle, her human rights continue to be openly breached, as she is illegally gagged. Her own government support this, and the media applaud it. But still she remains strong.

She is one in a million

Happy birthday Mercedes!

Mercedes-Corby-6399819

Peter Dunne, Prohibition, Psychoactive Substances Act

This garbage is not worth re-electing

Wednesday 6 August 2014 Richard Leave a comment

Minister criticises pro-cannabis groups over medicinal marijuana

The Associate Health Minister has weighed in on the medicinal marijuana debate criticising pro-cannabis groups as “misleading and emotive”.

Peter Dunne says the claims from pro-cannabis groups that the Government is blocking research into medicinal marijuana is wrong.

“That is not only absolutely wrong but also shows a woeful ignorance of the process for approving any new medicinal products,” says Mr Dunne.

This comes after the issue was put into the spotlight on TVNZ’s Sunday and Breakfast programmes when a Kiwi dad spoke out asking the Government to “step up” and reassess its laws on medicinal marijuana, saying the positive effect it has had on his daughter has exceeded his expectations.

Brent Gallien, the father of an 11-year-old who suffers from a rare and severe form of epilepsy, says his daughter was suffering several seizures every day before she was prescribed a cannabis extract called Sativex.

Mr Gallien says there are better products that have a far less risk of causing negative side effects but the Government has so far refused to approve them.

But Mr Dunn says if cannabis is sought for its medicinal benefits, then it must be subject to the same rigour and testing that’s expected of all pharmaceutical products. He says consumers need to be directing their questions to the pharmaceutical industry not the government.

“The fact is the government does not oppose the trial and development of cannabis-based medicines, as the availability of Sativex on the New Zealand market already shows.”

Here’s a paraphrase of Peter Dunne’s position about this time last year when he voted to enact the Psychoactive Substances Act, a vile piece of legislation, and Dunne himself was its chief architect.

Mr Dunn says if synthetic cannabis is sought for its recreational benefits, then it need not be subject to the same rigour and testing that’s expected of all other pharmaceutical products. He says if you’ve already been selling it for three months or more and no one’s complained yet then it can stay on the shelves.

Reread the paragraph below to fully comprehend the scale of the double standard now on show.

But Mr Dunn says if cannabis is sought for its medicinal benefits, then it must be subject to the same rigour and testing that’s expected of all pharmaceutical products. He says consumers need to be directing their questions to the pharmaceutical industry not the government.

I do believe that when we read

The Associate Health Minister has weighed in on the medicinal marijuana debate criticising pro-cannabis groups as “misleading and emotive”.

we are seeing a disordered personality engaging in projection, the ascription of one’s own faults and failings to others. Dunne is the one whose utterings on drug policy have ever been misleading and emotive.

Regardless, Dunne’s criticism of pro-cannabis groups is the height of insolence for a public servant, especially in view of the fact that his drug policy is manifestly not in the best interests of those whom he is supposed to serve. He treats those who rightly criticise his policy and those who suffer under it with utter contempt. This is characteristic behaviour for Peter Dunne.

It’s nothing new. In 2006, Dunne responded to medicinal cannabis user Greg Soar’s pleas with

This garbage is not worth replying to

and recently, Dunne pulled his head out of the sand long enough to tell us

I have yet to see any evidence that cannabis in any form has contributed in any way to help children, or indeed anyone, recover from serious diseases.

I hope Dunne watched the recent Sunday program on ONE about Charlotte’s Web. He needs to educate himself about the many and varied therapeutic uses of medicinal cannabis. His wilful ignorance and wanton denial are epic.

Dunne is not worth re-electing. I look forward to bidding good riddance to bad rubbish this September 20.

Addiction, Drugs, Easy Listening, Jihad on Drugs™, Liberate your Mind!, Nanny State, Nazi Thugs, Prohibition, Propaganda, Truth, Tyranny

More Prohibitionist Lies exposed: ‘Crack baby’ study ends with unexpected but clear result. By Susan FitzGerald, For The Inquirer.

Thursday 24 July 2014 Tim 1 Comment

crack

“Ever since her birth 23 years ago, a team of researchers has been tracking every aspect of her development – gauging her progress as an infant, measuring her IQ as a preschooler, even peering into her adolescent brain using an MRI machine.

Now, after nearly a quarter century, the federally funded study was ending, and the question the researchers had been asking was answered.

Did cocaine harm the long-term development of children like Jaimee, who were exposed to the drug in their mother’s womb?

The researchers had expected the answer would be a resounding yes. But it wasn’t. Another factor would prove far more critical.”

….

“My worst fear was that Jaimee would be slow, mentally retarded, or something like that because of me doing drugs,” she said. She agreed to enroll her baby in the cocaine study at Einstein. Drakewood promised herself that she would turn her life around for the sake of Jaimee and her older daughter, but she soon went back to smoking crack.

Hurt arrived early at Children’s Hospital one morning in June to give a talk on her team’s findings to coworkers. After nearly 25 years of studying the effects of cocaine and publishing or presenting dozens of findings, it wasn’t easy to summarize it in a PowerPoint presentation. The study received nearly $7.9 million in federal funding over the years, as well as $130,000 from the Einstein Society.

Hurt, who had taken her team from Einstein to Children’s in 2003, began her lecture with quotations from the media around the time the study began. A social worker on TV predicted that a crack baby would grow up to “have an IQ of perhaps 50.” A print article quoted a psychologist as saying “crack was interfering with the central core of what it is to be human,” and yet another article predicted that crack babies were “doomed to a life of uncertain suffering, of probable deviance, of permanent inferiority.”

Hurt, who is also a professor of pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania, is always quick to point out that cocaine can have devastating effects on pregnancy. The drug can cause a problematic rise in a pregnant woman’s blood pressure, trigger premature labor, and may be linked to a dangerous condition in which the placenta tears away from the uterine wall. Babies born prematurely, no matter the cause, are at risk for a host of medical and developmental problems. On top of that, a parent’s drug use can create a chaotic home life for a child.

Hurt’s study enrolled only full-term babies so the possible effects of prematurity did not skew the results. The babies were then evaluated periodically, beginning at six months and then every six or 12 months on through young adulthood. Their mothers agreed to be tested for drug use throughout the study.

The researchers consistently found no significant differences between the cocaine-exposed children and the controls. At age 4, for instance, the average IQ of the cocaine-exposed children was 79.0 and the average IQ for the nonexposed children was 81.9. Both numbers are well below the average of 90 to 109 for U.S. children in the same age group. When it came to school readiness at age 6, about 25 percent of children in each group scored in the abnormal range on tests for math and letter and word recognition.

“We went looking for the effects of cocaine,” Hurt said. But after a time “we began to ask, ‘Was there something else going on?’ ”

While the cocaine-exposed children and a group of nonexposed controls performed about the same on tests, both groups lagged on developmental and intellectual measures compared to the norm. Hurt and her team began to think the “something else” was poverty.

As the children grew, the researchers did many evaluations to tease out environmental factors that could be affecting their development. On the upside, they found that children being raised in a nurturing home – measured by such factors as caregiver warmth and affection and language stimulation – were doing better than kids in a less nurturing home. On the downside, they found that 81 percent of the children had seen someone arrested; 74 percent had heard gunshots; 35 percent had seen someone get shot; and 19 percent had seen a dead body outside – and the kids were only 7 years old at the time. Those children who reported a high exposure to violence were likelier to show signs of depression and anxiety and to have lower self-esteem.

More recently, the team did MRI scans on the participants’ brains. Some research has suggested that gestational cocaine exposure can affect brain development, especially the dopamine system, which in turn can harm cognitive function. An area of concern is “executive functioning,” a set of skills involved in planning, problem-solving, and working memory.

The investigators found one brain area linked to attention skills that differed between exposed and nonexposed children, but they could not find any clinically significant effect on behavioral tests of attention skills.

Drug use did not differ between the exposed and nonexposed participants as young adults. About 42 percent used marijuana and three tested positive for cocaine one time each.

The team has kept tabs on 110 of the 224 children originally in the study. Of the 110, two are dead – one shot in a bar and another in a drive-by shooting – three are in prison, six graduated from college, and six more are on track to graduate. There have been 60 children born to the 110 participants.

The years of tracking kids have led Hurt to a conclusion she didn’t see coming.

“Poverty is a more powerful influence on the outcome of inner-city children than gestational exposure to cocaine,” Hurt said at her May lecture…. ”

Read full article >>>Here<<< catnip

The War on Drugs is not only Unjust, Bigoted, and Oppressive in the extreme… It is an evil founded upon a mountain of falsehoods, Lies, and foolishness.
Cannabis is proving itself to be one of the most beneficial plants to humanity.
Science is now exposing the myths about Magic Mushrooms and Ecstasy… Now they are being investigated for their beneficial qualities for the brain, and helping with PTSD, etc… and yet the disastrous War on drugs continues.

Tim Wikiriwhi

The New Jews… Meth Users.

and >>> New Prohibitions. How our Police and Government work for Criminal Gangs.

And >>> Historic battles. The Libertarian struggle against Drug Prohibition. Why BZP should have been kept Legal.

and >>> Drug users fill New Zealand jails

And >>> What you should know about Drug Prohibition.

And >>> The Child Casualties of the Jihad on Drugs.

And >>> Prohibition is a Bad trip!

And >>> A Transitional Drug Policy

P-lab risk vastly exaggerated: Mike Butler … Breaking News.

Utilitarianism vs Libertarianism. Socialist pragmatism vs Libertarian Idealism

Addiction, Alternative Medicines and Treatments, Bigotry and Hate, Bogus Science, Compulsion, Corruption, Freedom, Hedonism, Hypocrites, Jihad on Drugs™, Justice, Liberate your Mind!, Nanny State, Nazi Thugs, Prohibition, Propaganda, Psycho Killer, Satan Laughing Spreads His Wings, Self-ownership, Tool, Tyranny, Zombies

The Speed of Hypocrisy: How America got hooked on Legal Meth. Motherboard.

Tuesday 8 July 2014 Tim 3 Comments

motherboard

A terrible number of words have been written about Breaking Bad, yet none have struck upon the irony at its core. For all of the cult hit’s vaunted fine-brush realism and sly cultural references, the show never even winked at the real world “blue” that grew up alongside it.

During the five years Heisenberg spent as a blue-meth cook, the nation experienced a nonfictional explosion in the manufacture and sale of sapphire pills and azure capsules containing amphetamine. This other “blue,” known by its trade names Adderall and Vyvanse, found its biggest market in classrooms like Walter White’s. As this blue speed is made and sold in anodyne corporate environments, the drama understandably focused on blue meth and its buyers, usually depicted as jittery tweakers picking at lesions and wearing rags on loan from the cannibal gangs of Cormac McCarthy’s The Road.

For presenting such a compelling one-sided cartoon of speed in America, Breaking Bad deserves recognition as a modern day Reefer Madness. That 1937 film immortalized the selective attentions of the first drug war, in which hysteria was stoked over Mexican marijuana but nothing was said about that era’s brisk drugstore trade in Benzedrine, the patented speed of the Great Depression.

american_horror_story__asylum_by_apetrie74-d5loi6o (1)

To understand why the “edgy” AMC drama fits so snug in the Reefer Madness mold, it helps to see the show from the perspective of pharmaceutical executives, whom I suspect held some rowdy Breaking Bad viewing parties.

Because here’s the thing about hide-the-children caricatures of street speed and the class stigmas they weave: Without them, the needle starts to skip on pharma’s marketing lullabies about the safety and expanding therapeutic application of their purer product. Take away Goofus and Gallant-style contrasts between backwoods Crank Zombies and suburban Adderall Aspirationals, and suddenly we’re having some very awkward conversations about the periodic table, addiction, and the experience of getting high.

Aside from some foul cutting material, Winnebago methamphetamine and pharmaceutical amphetamine are kissing chemical cousins. The difference between them boils down to one methyl-group molecule that lets crank race a little faster across the blood-brain barrier and kick just a little harder. After that, meth breaks down fast into good old dextroamphetamine, the dominant salt in America’s leading ADHD drug and cram-study aid, Adderall…

Read more >>>Here<<< And Here>>>> Forbes: Everything You’ve Heard About Crack And Meth Is Wrong

I have no doubt that with the process of time that all the Hype about synthetic cannabis will also be exposed as just another Prohibitionist witch craze…. as suggested here >>> NZ Research finds Synthetic Cannabis Low Risk. The Star Trust.

tumblr_mctsfxmnxq1r2vhg5

The common thread of Drug Prohibition has been lies and Politicised Pseudo-science inciting a public Hysteria for the express purpose of justifying the State usurping tyrannical powers in complete disregard for Rights and liberties… in the name of ‘Safety and social order’.
Socialists have convinced the Clean shaven Perfumed masses of arrogant vicious little dipshits that Pragmatism trumps just Ideals… that it’s Ok for the State to trample those whom dont share their tastes and phobias underfoot.

Even though their interventions are Catastrophic… The Liars and the Fools delude themselves that the alternative…. Liberty and an end to the War… would result in something much worse.
Western Social Democracy is a Lunatic asylum… run by sadistic psychopaths whom cloak their criminality in the garb of ‘Sisters of mercy’… and ‘Doctors.’…. they will cut the devil out of you! Their noble Ends justify their Depraved means.
(Hence my choice of ‘American Horror story’ Artwork for this Blogpost 🙂 )
What is beyond insane is that the same legions of Zombies whom are happy for the State to persecute Meth dealers and users will happily allow major corporations to manufacture truckloads of the very same products and to gobble them down via Doctors prescriptions!
The very height of self delusion and hypocrisy.
Tim Wikiriwhi.

tumblr_mbay49Oful1r5t6uoo7_400

Addiction, Cannabis, Easy Listening, Freedom, Hedonism, Indoctrination, Jihad on Drugs™, Justice, Liberate your Mind!, Live Like It's Legal, Marketing is Everything, Nanny State, Nazi Thugs, Prohibition, Propaganda, Psychoactive Substances Act, Tyranny

P-lab risk vastly exaggerated: Mike Butler … Breaking News.

Thursday 29 May 2014 Tim 3 Comments

The following is a few excerpts from a very Bold New`Zealander whom has the audacity to question many Mainstream pet political superstitions.
Mike is revered for his substantial efforts to expose the lies of Waitangi treaty separatism.
Today he challenges the lies and exaggerations of the NZ Police in respect to their Propaganda campaign designed to justify their oppressive war against Meth amphetamine.
I make a few short comments on the bottom.

mike Butler

“Details of the number of clan-lab busts and information on the harm likely to occur from living in a property where meth-amphetamine has been produced shows that the scale of the problem has been substantially overstated.”

“Having established that the incidence of illegal manufacture of P is quite rare, how harmful is it to live in a dwelling where such illegal manufacture has occurred.

The best that Ministry of Health guidelines can say is: “Though often found in small amounts, clandestine methamphetamine laboratory (clan meth lab) contaminants may pose health hazards to people exposed to them” – with the operative word being “may”. (1)

Burns, tissue irritation and rashes can be the consequence of chemical spills and skin contact. Other health effects such as nausea, dizziness and headaches can result from the inhalation of vapours and gases.

A request under the Official Information Act on the numbers of illnesses, hospitalizations and deaths resulting from methamphetamine contamination or fires from P labs shows no record of such hospitalizations, with a note that the collected data does not have any codes to record such hospitalizations. …”

“It is safe to ignore claims that the police are finding a new lab every 45 hours. Police dismantled just 77 of such labs last year and the most labs busted in a year occurred in 2005, when 211 were found.

Bear in mind that the total number of rental properties in New Zealand is 480,000 while the total number of dwellings is around 1.3 million. “….

091012 1 meth lab sb

” An eye-watering part of the report may be found in the over-the-top clean-up requirements. Demolition is recommended to ensure “no residual risk” of a miniscule amount of a substance that may trigger a visit to a doctor if directly contacted. This is what is required to ensure “acceptable residual risk”:
Remove carpeting, wallpaper and unpainted gib board.
Remove suspended and attached ceiling tiles.
Spray paint textured ceilings.
Remove upholstered furniture, mattresses, paper items, and other porous contents.
Remove clothing, toys, bedding, baby bottles and cups, and other personal items used by infants and small children.
Dispose of those items in an approved landfill with appropriate acceptance criteria
HEPA vacuum all remaining porous surfaces such as raw wood, brick and cement block.
HEPA vacuum all wood floors and all floors beneath removed carpeting.
Detergent wash all building surfaces twice, rinsing with fresh water.
Spray paint all building surfaces with two coats of a high-quality paint, polyurethane or concrete/brick sealer. (2)
Over-reaction to clan labs is captured in what the report describes as “community perception of risk” (where most people freak out at the mere hint that a property is contaminated) that is not based on technical risk assessment alone, and “outrage at involuntary exposure to hazards not of one’s own making”.

cops

Such fear and alarm, overstatement of risk, panic knee-jerk reaction by local bodies and government agencies, and opportunism by clean-up companies, has combined to create a minefield for property owners. Everybody should take a deep breath until hard scientific data that derives from the New Zealand experience proves that the actual chemical risk is not very great at all. ”

Mike Butler…. Read Full article >>>Here<<< Read more Eternal Vigilance ..... The New Jews… Meth Users.

Forbes: Everything You’ve Heard About Crack And Meth Is Wrong.

The Tyrannical War on drugs is out of control and purporting injustice on a monumental scale.
It has *always* relied on Lies and propaganda to Terrorise the gullible public into mandating the Jackbooted police with all their Weapons of War.
Just recently we saw the Media beat up and Political Machiavellian surrounding the Legal supply of synthetic cannabis.
You have to have Poo for brains not to realise that the terror mongering of The Anti-legal High Prohibitionists is typical Nonsense which has always underpinned prohibitions of every sort, and that all their so-called ‘evidence’ is ridiculously un-objective and Extremely dubious.

Read>>>> NZ Research finds Synthetic Cannabis Low Risk. The Star Trust.

Of course the police dont want the sheeple to consider the reality that it is Prohibition which is responsible for clandestine P labs being set up in Rental properties, and that prohibition prevents Meth from being manufactured in safe industrial facilities… thus any explosions and fires which result in destruction of property, Injury, and even death, may be squarely blamed on *Prohibition*.

Tim Wikiriwhi.
Libertarian Independent.

Addiction, Alcohol, ALCP, Alternative Medicines and Treatments, Beer, Break on through to the other side, Cannabis, Christian Libertarianism, Democracy, Easy Listening, Freedom, Hedonism, Hypocrites, Jihad on Drugs™, Justice, Keeping It Real, Liberate your Mind!, Libertarianz, Live Like It's Legal, Nanny State, Prohibition, Propaganda, Psychoactive Substances Act, Self reliance, Self-ownership, Slavery, Socialism, State Rape, Tax, Totalitarianism, Uncategorized, Zombies

Utilitarianism vs Libertarianism. Socialist pragmatism vs Libertarian Idealism

Friday 23 May 2014 Tim 20 Comments

quote-Aristotle-plato-is-dear-to-me-but-dearer-102583

It has been with great sadness that over the past year I have witnessed my fellow Libertarian Blogger Richard Goode change tack and sail off course, and now become an apologyst for Socialist Statism.

This has been evidenced by his entire behaviour in relation to the Psychoactive Substances Act, and particular with regards to Synthetic Cannabis.

To make my point I refer you to all his Blog posts on this subject in which he consistently demonstrates that he believes all the Negative hype about the dangers of Synthetics… which is in my view incredulous considering the history of Prohibition, and it’s reliance on Lies and phobia about drug use, as supposed vindication for the Governments perpetration of a highly oppressive war upon it’s own citizens.

While he calls himself a Libertarian, He has in reality swallowed the Socialist lie that Harm Minimisation is a legitimate function of Government and has attempted to formulate an argument for this >>>Here<<<, yet it is a tragic testimony to his having put the Cart before the horse. While Libertarianism has many pragmatic advantages over Socialist tyranny, Libertarianism is firstly an Individualist Ideology.... a philosophy which embodies clear principles of Law and Justice which protects the sovereignty of Individuals from tyrannical Government, and the pragmatic advantages for society... to the degree that there are any... are merely the By-product which flows from these principles. The Free society is a far more Humane and enlightened civilisation than socialism, and the type of Self reliant- self responsible, and charitable citizenry it fosters, and the peaceful Social interaction which spontaneously generates in a coexistence free of political coercion and advantage... are all extremely preferable ... pragmatically speaking.... yet to mistake these benefits as being the vindication for it's principles is utterly false. The Vindication for Libertarianism is in it's *Justice* for Individuals, and it's defence of the Individual's self-ownership, and it's Principled limits to political power... whether the will of a Monarch, or 'The mandate of the Majority'...the will of the largest Mob. Ie Libertarianism protects Individuals, minorities, and even Majorities, from Social arbitrary Law. That is what vindicates Libertarianism... not its pragmatic social advantages, and certainly not any idea of 'Harm minimisation' for the individual. Libertarians ought to have social concern for others, yet that is an utterly foreign principle to Libertarian ideology... It is in fact a definitive *Socialist* political lever, and pseudo-justification for Political intervention...and it is here where my friend has gone so far astray... Libertarianism embodies voluntary community action. Believe me when I say that I sympathise which how he was lured down this road... It was because the Anti-Prohibitionist movement (in particular Cannabis Law reformers) whom were never Libertarians began to argue for an end to prohibition... not on the basis of Individual rights, but on the basis that Cannabis was safer than alcohol. This was the socialist 'Harm minimisation' Doctrine... which sought to win over the socialist parliament by convincing a big enough mob that by allowing legal cannabis, they would be helping to reduce the Evils of Alcoholism which have been exacerbated by its monopolistic Legal Status. These arguments are thoroughly aimed at a socialist pragmatic mentality which prevails both within New Zealand's parliament, and in our society as a whole. It is a Utilitarian mentality which has abandoned all ideological principles of justice in pursuit of 'The Greatest Happiness'. Under this philosophy the Government can do whatever it pleases with individuals as long as it can convince a majority, that it's actions are conducive to the collective well being of society as a whole. Thus Individuals have become the property 'of society'. Society may overstep a persons individual liberty and self-responsibility either under the pretence of protecting the Hapless individual from himself, or the pretence of minimizing 'problems' that individual choices can have upon Society at large... esp Financial strains upon 'social services' which are run by the government and funded collectively via taxation. Druggies are deemed to be an inexcusable burden upon the system. pink judge

It is under these pretences that modern Socialist judges have no compunction against Jailing peaceful old Pot smokers whom refuse to submit to the Political will of Nanny state.
*Jail is deemed to be for their own good, and the Good of society as a whole*

They believe the ruinous effects upon an individuals life of incarceration are in fact preferable to ‘allowing him’ to continue in his drug use, and that society is safer while drugs are actively being suppressed by the Police.
*Freedom is dangerous* *Nanna Knows Best* *Etc*.

Now it is not the place here and now for me to argue why this whole socialist perspective is utter tyrannical, or why Libertarianism denies it is the proper duties of government to provide social services like public health care.
It ought to be enough to point out how utterly at variance with Libertarianism, this whole approach to ending Cannabis prohibition is.

I shall proceed to explain how my Brother Blogger took his wrong turn and has now wandered so far off track that he has crossed the line and is no longer worthy of the Name *Libertarian*.
My explanation is not written to vilify, but to show how easily this deviation occurred.

Not only do I sympathise with my fellow blogger, but hope that after contemplating what I have written that he will correct his course back over to the Libertarian side.

Many years ago many Kiwi Libertarians, including myself, as members of the Late Great yet struggling Libertarianz party, were supportive of a proposal written by Richard Goode for having a Transitional policy for Drug Law reform, which was accepted because it provided a rational pathway of least resistance to ending the war on drugs.

Our previous policy of simply legalising all drugs was too much for the voting public to swallow and had absolutely no hope of ever being adopted in totality, and so the new proposal presented to the voting public and parliament, was that the War be de-escalated starting with de-criminalising the softer drugs first, and then as fears were alleviated by having legal highs, that support could then be gained for further reforms, with ultimate end being an absolute end to the war on drugs.

elephant_one_bite

We would devour the Prohibition elephant one bite at a time… leaving the boniest portions till last.
And what defined ‘soft drugs’ was their perceived ‘safer than alcohol’ status.

The virtue of this policy was that it was idealistic, yet also realistic as means to our ultimate end because it was far more popular with the People… there was already support for Cannabis Law reform and our definition of cannabis as a ‘softer drug than alcohol’ was met with great enthusiasm from the Socialist faction of Cannabis Law reform movement whom are by far the greatest majority in the movement.

I have no doubt that Richard ‘liberated’ his definition for ‘soft drugs’ for the Libertarianz party transitional drug policy directly from the Socialists.

Richard’s policy was genius, as it unified Idealism with pragmatical realism, and popularity.
He ought to be proud of it.

Unfortunately though, in the years that have since past, and with the de-registration of the Libertarianz party, and Richard joining and now representing the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party, which is still predominantly a Socialist Party, He has obviously lost his Libertarian bearings.

He has forgotten that The Libertarians supported his transitional policy because of it’s progression of Justice… not because it’s starting point of legalising softer drugs was in any way supposes Libertarians endorse the socialist idea that Governments ought to concern themselves with ‘harm reduction’.

It is only in the light of these sorts of consideration that as Libertarian I had anything good to say about the Psychoactive substances act.

To the degree that it did allow a special dispensation to some products to be legally available, and also allowed a convoluted means (in theory) for other products to eventually make it to Market… having run the ‘regulation gauntlet’, it was supposed to be an improvement on the ‘Ban everything as they appear’ prohibition-ism which was the prevailing ‘socialist wisdom’ at the beginning of the rise of synthetic dugs which are now being manufactured to bypass existing prohibitions.

The thing was that Richard had now utterly lost all sight of what Libertarianism is about, and swallowed the socialist ‘Harm minimisation’ pill that he actually condemned the PSA for being too Libertarian!
*He was thoroughly in the Socialist Camp that it is the governments duty to decide what Citizens are allowed to ingest*

He was outraged that Peter Dunne was not acting Nanny Statist enough… because in his mind it was committing a crime by allowing dangerous and untested Synthetic Cannabis to be legally sold!

He relentlessly fanned the fires of Anti-Synthetic Cannabis hysteria… much to the joy of many of his Pro-cannabis Socialist mates, and condemned the Legal highs industry as evil profiteers at the expense of Hapless sheeple.

He told them to voluntarily remove their products, and castigated them for not heeding him… saying that a backlash was growing which would result in their products being banned.
I said that I didn’t think that would happen, yet I was wrong on that count… and I am sure he experienced euphoria when…. being an election year… and with all the Media sensationalism surrounding the Anti-legal high lobby that via the ensuing shysterism/ party politicking of the powers that be.. that the Libertarian portions of the Act got blotted out, and the means by which products could be deemed safe and thereby legalised… was virtually shut.

(Read my post on this >>>Here<<<) This was a leap backwards in the struggle to End Drug prohibition as it re-invigorated Prohibitionism. The world was watching and prohibitionists everywhere celebrated. Having Legal highs in New Zealand... they say... proved to be a failure. discoredia-the-evil-dead-drugs-raves-and-othe-L-MthvyL

Richard and his friend Blogger Mark Hubbard now dwell on the Dark side.
They ignore studies which suggest synthetic cannabis is relatively safe, and instead invoke terror by calling it ‘Legal Heroin’ ‘like P’…. etc… as if Libertarians support the War on Heroin and Meth!

Mark blames the Government for all the supposed troubles experienced by Legal high users… as if they have no personal responsibility.

*BOGUS!*

I have no problem with Libertarians believing certain drugs to be dangerous… even if they are getting their information from patently Dubious sources.
Of course there can be dangers involved in taking drugs.
Alcohol is dangerous… yet to say their Dangerous nature justifies Prohibitions is patently Un-libertarian and socialist!
The philosophical war they have declared is a Socialist Jihad against Individual Rights and Liberties!

call nanana

Richard’s last blog post attempts to be an argument for the government socialist interventions
He by passes the fundamental Libertarian principles which clearly define and articulate the legitimate function of government as being strictly limited to defending Rights and Liberties of individuals, and instead substitutes that with his bogus Pragmatist doctrine of ‘Harm minimisation’ which is pure Utilitarian Socialism … not Libertarianism.
To say that he is going ‘Back to basics’ could not be further from the truth

He attempts to smoke you readers by saying harm minimisation is a legitimate concern of Government with the bogus rationalisation that preventing ‘itself’ from putting people in Jail… which is harmful … as being a form of ‘Harm minimisation’ when in reality the principles involved are no such thing!
He has stitched up a sophistry which is in complete contradiction to Libertarian limited government.

The Legal and just principles against unjust imprisonment are keeping constitutional restraints forbidding the State from stepping outside it’s legitimate and just functions and encroaching upon our legitimate liberties, and violating our Rights which it has been instituted to protect!

This is black and white… lines not to crossed…. spheres of liberty, personal ethics, the pursuit of happiness, and self-responsibility… not to be encroached upon… not even for ‘harm minimisation’.

There are Powers never to be usurped… and they are not contingent upon whether or not Nanny State’s dictates are harmful or beneficial to either society or Individuals themselves.

It could very well be that some Laws could prevent idiots from harming themselves… yet to the Libertarian… that is no justification for passing oppressive laws…. which treat everyone like idiots… and gives the State paternalistic powers.
Harm minimisation is an endorsement of social interventions, not Libertarian self- ownership and responsibility.

Libertarians say that to allow the Government to legislate to protect people from themselves is to people the world with Fools.

Read my Blog post on this >>>Here<<< Richard... the Philosopher... no doubt assumes the Libertarian principle of having an arbitrary demarcation for being of Age of 'Adult consent and culpability' (in regards to being allowed to purchase alcohol without Parental permission) as being a form of 'Regulation' and 'Supply control'... which is again Bullshit. By that way of thinking All Laws are 'Regulations'... and that therefore the only 'Free market' can exist is under Anarchy. That R18 Principle of Law is necessary in regards to Legal parental rights and responsibilities, and custodianship , yet a young person ought to be able to apply for Adult Status earlier. Libertarianism is not Anarchy. It recognises a limited legitimate sphere for Government, yet these do not include 'Licensing products'... like alcohol, FDA approval, or Taxes, or 'Harm minimisation' etc. The only 'License' Libertarians would support is an R18 age restriction on the purchase and sale of liquor, etc with those whom violate this condition being criminally liable and negate their right to sell. If parents allow their own kids to enjoy alcohol, Pot, etc at a younger age, that is their own business. If Parents want to try alternative treatments on their sick infant children such as Cannabis... they have that fundamental right. I brew some booze yet I also buy Alcohol, and pay taxes on it. It does not mean I support the Status quo.... yet I still believe it is better... more Libertarian than outright prohibition. The same with proposals to 'Educate', 'Tax', and 'Regulate' Cannabis. Again I dont say that is the Libertarian Objective, yet it is better than current Prohibition. Richard and Mark have utterly abandoned Libertarianism and become Socialist Statist Prohibitionists. You have abandoned principles of Justice in favour of Socialist Utilitarian Pragmatism. To recover yourselves and to restore yourselves into the Libertarian fold is simple, and it does not require you to drop your opinion about the Safety of Synthetic Cannabis, or mean you must cease arguing that you think Real cannabis is safer. All it requires you to do is to stop arguing that 'Harm minimisation' is a legitimate concern of governments, and desist from supporting any prohibitions on drugs. If on the other hand you think the War on P, on H, and on Synthetics is justifiable, and legitimate, will them please desist from calling yourselves Libertarians. small gold guy_0

It has only been a few weeks since Synthetic cannabis was taken off the shelves, and yet My InLaws reported seeing a bunch of people sniffing glue in the Park.
So much for Harm reduction!

Tim Wikiriwhi.
Christian Libertarian.

Freedom, Jihad on Drugs™, Prohibition, Psychoactive Substances Act, Regulation

Back to basics

Friday 23 May 2014 Richard 9 Comments

This meme has been doing the rounds of drug law reform social networks. Regular readers may have seen it once or twice already.

In this post I want to consider the message that this meme is sending to young people. And what this meme means for drug law reformers in general and for libertarians in particular.

Drugs can ruin your life

For sure. Drugs can, and do, harm people. Drug harms can be measured. See, for example, the Nutt scale. And drug harms can be prevented.

so if I catch you with them I’m sending you to jail and ruining your life.

One way to prevent drug harms is to prevent people from taking drugs. One way to prevent people from taking drugs is to send them to jail. But being sent to jail ruins your life.

The harms caused by criminalising drug use can also be measured and it turns out that the cure is worse than the disease. Prohibition doesn’t work. The War on Drugs™ is an expensive, epic failure. The harms caused by criminalising drugs outweigh and/or add to and exacerbate the harms caused by the drugs themselves.

So say the majority of drug law reformers. In the interests of harm minimisation, we must abandon the failed policy of prohibition and try a new approach to preventing drug harms. The three pillars of harm minimisation are demand reduction, supply control and problem limitation. So we must educate (to reduce demand), regulate (to control supply) and treat (to limit problems).

But wait! Who’s being forced to pay for all this harm minimisation? Asks the libertarian. Since when was harm minimisation a proper role of government? The proper role of government is to uphold our rights, not to save us from ourselves.

Drugs can ruin your life

The stock libertarian response is, if you’re worried that drugs can ruin your life, don’t take them. In other words, so what?

so if I catch you with them I’m sending you to jail and ruining your life.

It’s the bottom bit of the message that ought to make libertarians sit up and take notice. The proper role of government is to uphold our rights, not to save us from ourselves, and certainly not to violate our rights by sending us to jail! Governments can and do catch people with drugs, send them to jail and ruin their lives. Governments harm people by doing that. Governments shouldn’t harm people. So it turns out that harm minimisation is a proper role of government, after all.

I briefly looked at the types of harms governments should try to minimise in a previous post.

The overarching goal of the [New Zealand government’s National Drug] Policy, to prevent and reduce the harms that are linked to drug use, is a noble one. However, we must distinguish between three main kinds of drug-related harms

1. Harms which individuals inflict upon themselves, or inflict upon others with their consent
2. Harms which individuals inflict upon others without their consent
3. Harms which governments inflict upon their citizens

Libertarianz says that the government should not seek to save people from themselves, and most certainly should not harm its own citizens. The government should seek to bring to justice those who commit thefts, assaults, rapes and murders, whether such criminal acts are drug-fuelled or not.

It’s by focussing on this third category that I believe we can, as libertarians, make a contribution to National Drug Policy while maintaining our philosophical integrity.

Harm minimisation is a proper role of government, but only the minimisation of certain harms and not others. Minimising the harms we inflict upon ourselves is not the legitimate business of the state. Minimising the harms the state inflicts on its own citizens is very much the legitimate business of the state. Governments ought to be forced to take the Hippocratic Oath! Above all, do no harm.

Last year, the New Zealand government did what seemed to be a very libertarian thing. It stood back and let us get on with the business of harming ourselves by smoking untested, unsafe, novel synthetic cannabinoids. This month, the New Zealand government apparently reverted to its authoritarian ways and banned the sale and use of all synthetic cannabinoids until further notice.

All is not as it seems. By allowing us to harm ourselves, the government was inflicting harm on us!

How so? What I just said is bound to sound paradoxical, or even duplicitous, unless you stand back and get the bigger picture. In my previous post, syndicated from Life Behind The IRon Drape, Mark Hubbard stands back and gets the bigger picture.

This is what the 119 that I declared a philosophical war upon, have done. They legalised a line of hardcore addictive drugs in the league of P or heroin, nothing similar to the non-toxic, non-addictive, medicinal cannabis that many other countries are sensibly legalising, and then by keeping cannabis criminalised they successfully addicted possibly thousands of mainly young Kiwis to the equivalent of heroin, because by taking the legal heroin they would not face the force of the law, or lose their jobs, unlike smoking cannabis for which they would be convicted in the government war on drugs. So government policy addicted them to heroin, and I’ll keep making this point …

Context is important. He who would trade safely implemented and lasting drug law reform for some temporary liberty, deserves neither. Sometimes, a little freedom is a dangerous thing.

I’m given to understand that this revised meme is what most of my fellow drug law reform activists are fighting for. Well, being sent to rehab is better than being sent to jail, isn’t it? I suppose so.

Toto, I’ve a feeling we’re not in Libertopia any more.

Footnote.

The police officer in the picture is Anthony DiPonzio of the Rochester Police Department in New York. DiPonzios is both a perpetrator and a victim in the War on Drugs™. In 2009

DiPonzio, 23, was shot in the back of the head on a city street after questioning a few people about alleged drug activity on Saturday, Jan. 31. Tyquan Rivera, 14, of 65 Dayton St., Rochester, turned himself in to Rochester police Tuesday, Feb. 3. He will be tried as a juvenile and could face up to 10 years in prison if convicted.

“We are pleased to share that officer DiPonzio continues to make significant progress in recovering from his serious wound. He is speaking this morning, and we are very pleased with his notably improving condition, which is far ahead of where we expected him to be at this point.”

“He has made such significant progress that – based on his current condition – we anticipate he will be able to transfer from Rochester General Hospital to Unity Health System’s Brain Injury Rehabilitation Unit early next week.”