IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Mexico, Uruguay nail drug Warz cold.
Apparently AP picked up on [link|http://wildcat.arizona.edu/papers/94/118/01_92_m.html|this], though I gather it hasn't won't? receive much coverage on any of the nightly newsfotainment.
By The Associated Press

MEXICO CITY - Struggling with the corruption and violence caused by drug trafficking, President Vicente Fox says the solution might be to eventually legalize drug use.

In an interview published by two newspapers Sunday, Fox said he agreed with a police official who suggested last week that the only way to win the war on drugs was to legalize drugs - eliminating the profits and violence caused by illegal trafficking.

"That's right, that's true, that's true," the newspaper Unomasuno quoted Fox as saying.

But the president quickly qualified that statement, saying Mexico could not move alone and indicating he did not expect such a step soon.

"When the day comes that it is time to adopt the alternative of lifting punishment for consumption of drugs, it would have to come all over the world, because we would gain nothing if Mexico did it but the production and traffic of drugs ... continued here," he said.

"So humanity some day will see that it is best in that sense," he said in remarks also reported by El Sol de Mexico.

Yesterday, Fox spokeswoman Martha Sahagun was asked to elaborate.

"The president was very clear in what he said, that drugs and drug smuggling is a serious affair not only for Mexico, it is an affair that affects many countries in the world," she said. "...We have to follow this problem closely, in a joint and global manner, taking solutions at the appropriate times."

Fox has vowed to cooperate closely with the United States against traffickers who have used Mexico both as a transit route and production site for narcotics.

On Jan. 24, the new president announced a "great crusade" against drugs, saying, "I pledge a war without mercy."

Fox promised to overhaul the nation's corrupt prison system and to follow a Mexican Supreme Court ruling last week that removed barriers to extradition of Mexicans for trial in the United States.

His government has announced record seizures of drugs since Fox took office on Dec. 1.

Yet some Mexican experts - including Fox's Foreign Secretary Jorge Castaneda - have long suggested that the drug war is being lost and that some drugs should be decriminalized.

"One thing is his (Fox's) personal attitude and another is pragmatism faced with the United States," said Luis Astorga, a sociologist at the National Autonomous University who studies the drug trade.

He said, "Fox has gone further than previous governments" in accepting U.S. demands to fight drugs - a battle which Astorga said has gone on for almost a century.

Astorga said he hoped the comments might encourage a debate on the problem. But he said that with the United States set against legalization, "the probability that this could have repercussions in practical terms is zero."

A U.S. expert, Frank Cilluffo of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said that suggesting legalizing drugs "sends the wrong message to our children."

"While some of the gang violence may be mitigated, the bad consequences of drug use would not," said Cilluffo, who heads a task force on the narcotics industry for the center.
{sigh}

The Murican view is expressed just as predictably: Save the cheeeldrun. [lockemup] [link|http://www.drugpolicy.org/lindesmith/news/LatinAmerica/12_22_00Batlle2.html| Uruguay] in similar utterly sane manner observes,
What if an elected president of an American nation called for the legalization of drugs and nobody in the English language press reported it?

That's what happened twice in the past month when Uruguay President Jorge Batlle called for other Latin American leaders to join him in opposing US-imposed drug policy.

"If this powder was worth only ten cents, there would not be organizations dedicated to make a billion dollars to fund armies in Colombia," said Batlle, speaking about cocaine policy on November 20th at the 10th Latin American Summit of Heads of State in Panama City.

Batlle (pronounced baht-yuh) said other countries must confront the question of legalization. "How do you create the money that sustains all of this? Do you believe that while this substance has this fantastic market value that there is any mechanism that can impede its trafficking? How do you make this product lose value so that nobody is interested anymore in this business?"

The 72-year-old Uruguay leader, elected in November of 1999 in his fifth run for the presidency, said that the countries of America "must stop playing games and treat the theme of drugs seriously at its root. And if I am wrong, then why are we afraid to ask ourselves the question?" In fact, the legalization proposal of Batlle has been percolating in Uruguay since June of this year.

According to the daily newspaper El Observador in Montevideo, the capital of Uruguay, the president's chief of staff, Leonarda Costa, floated the trial balloon on June 16th. He said, "a line of discussion will be opened among the Mercosur countries (Uruguay, Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Paraguay)" in relation to "the idea of legalizing the consumption of drugs."

"Obviously, Uruguay cannot take unilateral measures on this theme," said the presidential secretary to Latitud magazine, that "the coordination between nations" is necessary.

President Batlle told the weekly Brecha magazine that he is in favor of legalizing drug consumption. "When the president said what he said, he was expressing his personal philosophy," said Costa. "But it is viable to the extent that other countries also do it."

The chief of staff affirmed that there would have to be a "generalized agreement between nations," that, "the countries have to come to an agreement about this problem.... The first thing to do is to make an educational effort."

Then, on December 1st, Batlle traveled to Mexico City to attend the inauguration of President Vicente Fox.

There, according to El Observador in his home country, Batlle made his strongest challenge to US-imposed drug policy yet. "The day that it is legalized in the United States, it will lose value," said the president of Uruguay. "And if it loses value, there will be no profit. But as long as the US citizenry doesn't rise up to do something, they will pass this life fighting and fighting."

Batlle, in Mexico City early this month, compared the drug problem to that caused by alcohol prohibition in the United States (1918-1933), saying that the drug trafficking problem "will be resolved on the day that the consumers announce that this cannot be fixed by any other manner than changing this situation in the same way that was done with the 'Dry Laws'."
Puritanism keeps us babies for life, and armed-to-the teeth nasty-babies at that.

Anyone else see EITHER of the above 'reported' ? <<<


Ashton
New Well duh
Now if our stone-aged leaders could just grasp the concept and move from the moralist to the practical we might get somewhere. Only, as you note, the coverage doesn't seem to be getting much exposure.

Stupid asses.
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Expand Edited by tuberculosis Aug. 21, 2007, 05:56:59 AM EDT
New Re: Well duh
Hey, you're getting Frenchified. Good!

Care to file a report on your experience to date, so that those of us who are insanely jealous can have a vicarious thrill?
-drl
New OK - Check the WaterCooler
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
New Canadian Parliament questioning why marijuana is illegal
From the [link|http://www.chron.com/|Houston Chronicle] - [link|http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/world/1562021|Canadian Parliament committee calls for legalizing marijuana]
"There is no good reason to subject the consumers of cannabis to the application of criminal law," said Sen. Pierre Nolin of the Progressive Conservative party. "In a free society as ours, it's up to the individual to decide whether to consume cannabis or not."
...
"Scientific evidence overwhelmingly indicates that cannabis is substantially less harmful than alcohol and should be treated not as a criminal issue but as a social and public health issue," he said.

Wow, politians actually considering scientific evidence.

Darrell Spice, Jr.

[link|http://home.houston.rr.com/spiceware/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore

New Thanks. Breath of fresh air - however futile locally.
New Why not just legalize corruption and violence?
As long as we're "solving" problems by redefining them.
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Everything's a mystery until you figure out how it works.
We are here to go!
The nihilists and the liars have buried truth alive in a shallow grave.
New OK Clinton's government and the lapd :)
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/Resume.html|skill set]
[link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/index.html|boxley's home page]
qui mori didicit servire dedidicit
New What?!!? - and take all the fun out of it?
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New Add Canada to the list.
'Corruption' is a blab word. 'Redefine' is an adequate one: it is only *by legal definition* that ANY "drug" is deemed a 'corruption' - except for folks with that Absolute Morality\ufffd gene invading their immune system, that is. Our use of Rx and OTC drugs [forget the arbitrary illegals] exceeds the per-capita consumption of any identifiable group in history (larger than some cult, say - which lives to stay stoned, thus evade the whole lot of us).

I'd bet some amount of Cruzeiros that - the amount of official disinformation about *every* single 'drug' on the current US proscribed list: outweighs any accurate, known, competently cross-checked information by at least 10:1.

Why? - would vary from the terminally cynical right on up to the most common, plausible, virtually guaranteed major reason: sloth, pig-ignorance and that inbred Puritanism - the Murican virtual-albatross seemingly for all time.

Corruption my ass: you really get off on this digital black/white judgment stuff, doncha? Practicin for Pope, maybe?


Ashton

New I doubt he can speak Latin well enough to be qualified
After all, don't want any of the furrin' in-flew-enss there...might get infected with "moral equivalence" or sumpin' like that...
jb4
"About the use of language: it is impossible to sharpen a pencil with a blunt axe. It is equally vain to try to do it with ten blunt axes instead. "
-- Edsger W.Dijkstra (1930 - 2002)
(I wish more managers knew that...)
New The government hates competition, that's why.

Imric's Tips for Living
  • Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
  • Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
  • Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
     Mexico, Uruguay nail drug Warz cold. - (Ashton) - (11)
         Well duh - (tuberculosis) - (2)
             Re: Well duh - (deSitter) - (1)
                 OK - Check the WaterCooler -NT - (tuberculosis)
         Canadian Parliament questioning why marijuana is illegal - (SpiceWare) - (1)
             Thanks. Breath of fresh air - however futile locally. -NT - (Ashton)
         Why not just legalize corruption and violence? - (marlowe) - (5)
             OK Clinton's government and the lapd :) -NT - (boxley)
             What?!!? - and take all the fun out of it? -NT - (Andrew Grygus)
             Add Canada to the list. - (Ashton) - (1)
                 I doubt he can speak Latin well enough to be qualified - (jb4)
             The government hates competition, that's why. -NT - (imric)

Someone take over before I lose my dignity.
113 ms