Friday, May 31, 2013

California Assembly Bill 473 (Pro-Marijuana) Defeated

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano
Today, a bipartisan majority in the California Assembly voted to defeat California Assemblyman Ammiano's pro-marijuana bill AB-473.  Several Democratic Assembly members also chose to abstain from voting on the bill.

This is further evidence that exposes the truth to citizens across California, America, and the world that contrary to what the pro-marijuana lobby wants people to believe, marijuana is not popular in California.

This bipartisan vote is further clarification that the citizens of California are telling their elected officials, "Just say NO";  just like they did when Proposition 19 (to legalize marijuana) failed overwhelmingly at the ballot.

Today's vote compares with the huge majority of over 280-plus cities and counties across California that have imposed ban's, moratoriums, and ordinances that do not allow marijuana dispensaries to operate within their jurisdictions.

For Congressman Ammiano, this was his last opportunity before being termed out of office next year(California Assembly District 17 - San Francisco) to influence marijuana legislation, and, as usual, he failed; again.  The Citizens of California are awakened and are telling their elected leaders, "NO".

We are thankful to the both sides of the aisles that formed the majority for voting your conscience to protect our state, communities, and our children from the scourge of drug abuse and addiction.  And, sending the message loud and clear to the citizens across our nation; Californian's are against allowing the drug culture to contaminate our children and their futures.

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

BBC: Health Risks of Cannabis 'Underestimated', Experts Warn

BBC News Health

5 June 2012

Experts are warning that the public dangerously underestimates the health risks linked to smoking cannabis.

The British Lung Foundation carried out a survey of 1,000 adults and found a third wrongly believed cannabis did not harm health.

And 88% incorrectly thought tobacco cigarettes were more harmful than cannabis ones - when the risk of lung cancer is actually 20 times higher.

The BLF said the lack of awareness was "alarming."
Latest figures show that 30% of 16-59 year-olds in England and Wales have used cannabis in their lifetimes.

A new report from the BLF says there are established scientific links between smoking cannabis and tuberculosis, acute bronchitis and lung cancer.

Part of the reason for this, say the experts, is that people smoking cannabis take deeper puffs and hold them for longer than when smoking tobacco cigarettes.

"This is not a niche problem.” - Dame Helena Shovelton British Lung Foundation

This means that someone smoking a cannabis cigarette inhales four times as much tar as from a tobacco cigarette, and five times as much carbon monoxide, the BLF says.

Its survey found that young people are particularly unaware of the risks.

Some studies have also suggested cannabis increases the chances of developing mental health problems such as schizophrenia.

Almost 40% of the under-35s surveyed - the age group most likely to have smoked it - thought cannabis was not harmful.

However, the BLF report warned that smoking one cannabis cigarette every day for a year increases the chances of developing lung cancer by a similar amount as smoking 20 tobacco cigarettes each day for one year.

Its chief executive, Dame Helena Shovelton, said: "It is alarming that, while new research continues to reveal the multiple health consequences of smoking cannabis, there is still a dangerous lack of public awareness of quite how harmful this drug can be.

"This is not a niche problem - cannabis is one of the most widely-used recreational drugs in the UK, with almost a third of the population having tried it.

"We therefore need a serious public health campaign - of the kind that has helped raise awareness of the dangers of eating fatty foods or smoking tobacco - to finally dispel the myth that smoking cannabis is somehow a safe pastime."

The BLF's report says there should be a public education programme to raise awareness of the impact of smoking cannabis and increased investment in research into the health consequences of its use.

Peter Reynolds, leader of Clear, which used to be known as the Legalise Cannabis Alliance, suggested the BLF had been highly-selective in its use of research.

He added: "It is clear that this report was written not as a scientific document but as campaigning propaganda.

"As such it is misleading, inaccurate and dangerously irresponsible."

The British Lung Foundation said their report was based on sound research.

"The report references over 80 peer-reviewed research papers, is the most comprehensive report of its kind yet compiled, and has itself been peer-reviewed by a panel of independent experts."

Monday, May 27, 2013

Marijuana's Victims


Skill-testing question: how many people are serving time in jail for marijuana possession right now? Here's the surprising answer, in chart form:


American police departments long ago ceased sending people to prison for marijuana offenses. The third bar from the left, "crimes involving marijuana," refers to - for example - cases in which police arrest somebody for some other offense, then also found marijuana in the offender's possession.

If your impression of American drug policy is that lots and lots of young minority teenagers are being sentenced to prison merely for smoking marijuana, then your impression is sadly out of date.

And if your impression is that marijuana is harmless, then that impression is also out of date. The standard grade of marijuana sold today, authorities explain, contains more than 4x the intoxicants of the marijuana of the early 1980s.

Imagine that they suddenly replaced the chardonnay in your wine bottle with 80-proof rum - even as the standard pour remained the same.

The result: Let the National Institute on Drug Abuse explain, in a statement released just today.

* The proportion of high school students smoking marijuana every day - every day! - has increased over the past 5 years from 5.1% to 6.5%%.

* Perceptions of the harmfulness of marijuana among high schoolers are at their lowest levels since surveys of this age group began in 1991.

Why does this matter? Among other reasons, this:

A 38-year NIH-funded study, published this year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, showed that people who used cannabis heavily in their teens and continued through adulthood showed a significant drop in IQ between the ages of 13 and 38—an average of eight points for those who met criteria for cannabis dependence. Those who used marijuana heavily before age 18 (when the brain is still developing) showed impaired mental abilities even after they quit taking the drug. These findings are consistent with other studies showing a link between prolonged marijuana use and cognitive or neural impairment.

Yes, heavy drinking is bad for you too. But not like this. And anyway, our goal should be to reduce harms - not to maximize the array of harm choices on the harm buffet table.
I'll have more to say on this subject in the days ahead.

Parents Make a Difference in their Kids Abusing Pot, Alcohol, Drugs

A recent SAMHSA study confirms that kids are many times less likely to use drugs when they know that their parents would disapprove of that behavior.  Put another way, in terms of marijuana use alone, kids are 6 times more likely to use pot simply because of a parental attitude of indifference towards marijuana use.  Given the huge difference in outcomes, is there any other drug education program that can achieve this kind of result? Of course not. Parents are on the front lines of prevention and need to understand that their attitudes about drug use are a key factor in decisions made by their children. 

I am often approached by concerned parents who are desperately seeking the solution to keeping their kids drug-free in a drug-filled world. The answer is always the same: love your kids enough to take a strong stand against drug use, communicate your values consistently and regularly to your children, surround your children with other caring adults and youth who possess similar values, and live the way you teach. Does parental involvement guarantee that a child will not be influenced by a culture that is awash in drug propaganda? No, but it will give that child the best chance for a drug-free life.  - US Attorney (Ret.) Monte Stiles, Esq. - Idaho 

ROCKVILLE, Md., May 26, 2013 (UPI) -- More than 1-in-5 parents say they have little influence in preventing teens from using illicit substances, but surveys prove them wrong, a U.S. agency says.

A report by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration found 22 percent of U.S parents of children ages 12-17 said they had little influence on whether or not their child uses illicit substances, tobacco or alcohol.

The annual survey involved 67,500 Americans age 12 or older.

Pamela S. Hyde, administrator of SAMHSA, said national surveys of youths 12-17 show those who believe their parents would strongly disapprove of their substance use were less likely to use substances. For example, 5 percent of current marijuana users said their parents would strongly disapprove of their trying marijuana once or twice versus 31.5 percent of current marijuana who did not perceive this level of parental disapproval.

"Surveys of teens repeatedly show that parents can make an enormous difference in influencing their children's perceptions of tobacco, alcohol, or illicit drug use," Hyde said in a statement. "Although most parents are talking with their teens about the risks of tobacco, alcohol and other drugs, far too many are missing the vital opportunity these conversations provide in influencing their children's health and well-being. Parents need to initiate age-appropriate conversations about these issues with their children at all stages of their development in order to help ensure that their children make the right decisions."

The report, "1 in 5 Parents Think What They Say Has Little Impact on Their Child's Substance Use," is linked here for your consideration.


Sunday, May 26, 2013

Vincent Kituku: Idaho Lawmakers Take a Moral, Ethical Stand Against Legalizing Dangerous Drug

Everyone, I hope you enjoy this heartfelt story by my good friend Vincent Kituku published, May 19, 2013 - a wonderful storyteller and talented motivational speaker who now lives in Idaho. This article appeared in the Idaho Statesman on May 19, 2013. I highly recommend it.  Thank you Vincent.   US Attorney (Ret) Monte Stiles - Idaho


Joseph is dead. Boniface is a beggar. They started taking marijuana in 1974 as freshmen in high school. They were not only my classmates, but blood and humanitarian relatives. We shared food, shared clothes, worked together and slept on the same makeshift bed.

We traveled the same path until marijuana led to the wasted lives of my best friends. It is heartbreaking for me to watch state after state succumbing to those who want permission to use marijuana for whatever purpose.

I commend Idaho legislators for taking a firm stand against legalizing marijuana. It is ironic that there are people who think increased use of marijuana would not lead to abuse of other drugs when numerous studies have shown it to be the case.

Uncle Joseph, my age mate, was the last born of my grandfather's children. Tall and a fast runner, he was a great boy to listen to as he entertained and educated others with uncommon wisdom. A day after I learned he had been initiated to manhood, I walked three miles, one way, to be initiated, too.

Boniface was an orphan, five years older than I. I met him at lunchtime on the day a teacher with permission from my father forced me to repeat sixth grade in 1972. Our lives would be inextricable forever. I took him to my parents, who fed, clothed and paid for his high school education.

The chapter of my life with those two boys is rarely, if at all, featured in my writing or speeches. Undeniable feelings of hopelessness and guilt still overcome me. I wonder what more I might have done to save my uncle and adopted brother from destroying their lives and in the process wrecking the lives and families of those who loved them.

The three of us were in seventh grade in 1973. They were admitted to separate high schools that were started by Catholic missionaries. I had three Cs - not good for a public high school with better education opportunities.

I don't know when they started taking marijuana. I learned they were in my sophomore year when my uncle started skipping school, sleeping too much and behaving strangely. When school closed, I noticed the same behavior with Boniface. Their grades and desire to have me in their company declined.

Joseph's marijuana use increased after his father died in 1976. A year later, drugs controlled his life. He skipped some final high school exams and started undressing in public. He became homeless, with nothing to show for his promising academic and physical abilities.

Boniface's downfall was more gradual, but not better. He was recruited by the Kenya army and sent to Britain for training as a captain after graduating from high school. By the time he returned to Kenya, he was different. He got into fights and started talking back to my father - unheard of in my father's home. He married a prostitute with whom he changed our home - they fought with fists and chairs.

I was present in 1982 when that boy dishonored, in the presence of elders, the man who had fed, clothed and educated him - and I can say treated and favored him more than I because of his academic abilities. His soft voice endeared him to my family until marijuana pulled him away.

His wife and several children died young. He became a beggar. Marijuana is a proven destroyer of lives, families and communities.

Vincent Kituku is an author, speaker and founder of Caring Hearts and Hands of Hope. He can be reached at or by calling 376-8724.


Saturday, May 25, 2013

Dr. Ed Gogek, Psychiatrist: The Untold Story Behind Medical Marijuana's Success

Despite all the coverage of “medical” marijuana in Arizona, the news media’s own role in promoting this law has gone unreported. Yet it’s an important story.

In 2010, when Proposition 203 was on Arizona’s ballot, opponents predicted the pot would go mostly to drug abuse.
There was good evidence.

Colorado and Oregon had similar laws, and 94 percent of their medical marijuana patients claimed pain, which is easy to fake. Only 4 percent claimed cancer. Also, the patients were disproportionately young and male.

Supporters, on the other hand, insisted the law was only for serious illnesses like cancer.  Which side people believed mattered.
The public could be expected to vote for Prop. 203 if they believed it was compassionate care, and against the initiative if they thought it was mostly drug abuse.

So reporters should have presented both sides of the debate.
Instead, one TV station, ABC15, did one story about the drug abuse masquerading as medical care in California.

The rest of the Arizona’s news coverage was almost entirely about pot’s role in treating serious illnesses, especially cancer.
For example, Cronkite News ran a story that did quote the opposition — in the 15th paragraph.  But their headline, “Supporters: Ailing Arizonans would benefit from medical marijuana,” and the bulk of the story were about marijuana’s role in medical care.

Fox 10’s report on the initiative didn’t even mention the opposition; all they showed were interviews with two cancer survivors.  Voters can hardly be blamed for thinking that’s all Prop. 203 was about.  However, at least those stories attributed pro-marijuana statements to the people who made them.
Many news outlets actually took the pro-marijuana position and presented it as fact, despite evidence that it was factually wrong.
The Associated Press wrote: “This proposal would allow the use of the drug only for serious diseases including cancer.”

Phoenix Fox 10: “The question here is should it be legal here in Arizona for people who are seriously ill.”  The Arizona Republic: “Proposition 203 would legalize marijuana for medicinal use.”
Phoenix Business Journal: “Arizona’s Proposition 203, which would legalize marijuana for medical use.”  It’s as if the opposing argument didn’t even exist.

Also, reporters appeared to accept everything the marijuana lobby said.  The Marijuana Policy Project called its Arizona campaign, “Stop Arresting Patients.”   So in a live debate, I asked their lobbyist to name one genuine medical patient in jail or prison.
He couldn’t.  That’s because patients aren’t being arrested; the very name of their campaign was dishonest. But why didn’t reporters ask that question?

They seemed unwilling to ever speak ill of marijuana.
In its September 2010 newsletter, the Glaucoma Foundation warned patients against using pot because it could make their glaucoma worse.  That warning should have been newsworthy; the ballot measure listed glaucoma as a condition that can be treated with marijuana.

So Keep AZ Drug Free, the only registered opposition group, sent a press release to every media outlet in the state.
Not one reported it.  Three months after Arizona’s program kicked in, I wrote a guest op-ed for The Arizona Republic with evidence that the opposition was right.  Ninety percent of Arizona’s marijuana patients claimed pain, but were three-fourths male.
That’s statistically impossible; pain patients are mostly female.
But if our marijuana cardholders are really drug abusers who are faking or exaggerating their illnesses, it fits perfectly, because adult cannabis abusers are three-fourths male.

Reporters should have been interested in evidence that the pot was going almost entirely to recreational use, but no one contacted me.
Two reporters who were doing sympathetic stories about people helped by marijuana did call.  They wanted my comments to give the appearance of balance.

But neither one would report on the people faking illness to get “medical” marijuana; they would only write positive stories about pot. So there is no balance.  Proposition 203 squeaked by with 50.1 percent of the vote, and media bias clearly tipped the scales.
By emphasizing pro-marijuana arguments and downplaying opposing ones, reporters inappropriately influenced public opinion. 
When I asked one reporter why his colleagues were so one-sided about marijuana, he said they probably believe pot should be legal.
Maybe they do, but their allegiance to marijuana shouldn’t override their professional ethics.  They’re journalists, not cheerleaders.  Their job is to inform voters, not decide for them.

— Ed Gogek, M.D., is an addiction psychiatrist and board member of Keep AZ Drug Free, a group that opposes legalization and “medical” marijuana laws.

In addition to the information above, I have attached these three articles for the readers consideration:
UK: The Independent – Cannabis An Apology

UK: The Independent – were we out of our minds-no-but then cameskunk (Marijuana)

Aus: The Australian – Cannabis takes Toll on Aborigines

Friday, May 24, 2013

Dr. Ed Gogek Commentary: Voters Becoming Wise to Medical-Marijuana Ruse

Thursday May 23, 2013 5:40 AM

California voters passed the country’s first medical-marijuana law in 1996, but many are having second thoughts. Last year, five California cities voted on initiatives to allow marijuana dispensaries, and all five voted no. Oregon also voted down dispensaries. These liberal West Coast states have seen medical marijuana up close, and learned it’s barely medical at all.

That shouldn’t surprise anyone. The idea that smoking pot is medicine didn’t come from doctors or groups representing the seriously ill. Neither the American Cancer Society nor the National Multiple Sclerosis Society supports it, and the American Medical Association and American Academy of Pediatrics strongly oppose it.

The idea to call marijuana medicine came from the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws and the Marijuana Policy Project. These two organizations are part of a national marijuana lobby that represents drug users, growers and sellers. They’re behind every medical-marijuana law in the country.

They advertise these laws with an impassioned plea to allow suffering, terminally ill people access to medicine. However, once these laws pass, most medical-marijuana patients claim pain, not serious illness. In Arizona, 90 percent get their marijuana for pain. In Colorado and Oregon, it’s 94 percent. Pain is every drug addict’s favorite complaint; it’s easy to fake and impossible to disprove.

Good doctors try to screen out drug abusers, but medical-marijuana laws are designed to circumvent good medical care. Most marijuana patients get their prescriptions from a few unethical doctors who see patients one time only and hand out marijuana recommendations to anyone.

Pot-smokers know who these doctors are, and they line their waiting rooms. Before Montana tightened its law, eight doctors wrote three-fourths of all the recommendations. In Arizona, 24 doctors did the same.

That’s why there’s a backlash. People feel hoodwinked. They voted for compassionate care, not drug abuse.

I’m a partisan Democrat who supports most liberal causes, but I’m also an addiction psychiatrist. I work with drug abusers. They’re amazing con artists who will say anything to get their drugs. And the marijuana lobby is no different.
For example, based on scant evidence, advocates claimed for years that marijuana could treat glaucoma. Today, ophthalmologists believe marijuana can damage the optic nerve and make glaucoma worse. The Glaucoma Foundation now warns patients not to use the drug, yet no marijuana advocate has ever apologized for handing out bad medical advice.

The pot lobby paints the Drug Enforcement Agency and the Food and Drug Administration as blue meanies, depriving people of needed medicine. But science consistently proves these agencies right. For every illness possibly helped by marijuana, there are safer and more effective medications already available. There aren’t thousands of people suffering because they can’t use pot; that’s a fiction the marijuana lobby invented.

In Arizona, they actually called their campaign “Stop Arresting Patients.” They wanted us to picture grannies in prison, doing their knitting surrounded by tattooed gang-bangers. But in a live debate, the Marijuana Policy Project lobbyist could not name even one genuine medical patient who’d been arrested solely for possession. That’s because there aren’t any. Medical-marijuana laws protect drug dealers and drug users, not the seriously ill.

Even worse, these laws hurt innocent people. An analysis of several studies, published in the British Medical Journal, found that drivers under the influence of marijuana had nearly twice as many serious and fatal car wrecks as nonusers. California, Colorado and Montana all documented increased traffic fatalities caused by drivers with marijuana components in their bloodstreams, coinciding with increased use of medical marijuana.

The biggest damage, however, is done to our kids. The National Survey of Drug Use and Health shows that teenage marijuana use is 30 percent higher in medical-marijuana states. Teens who smoke pot do worse in school, do worse in their adult careers and have twice the school drop-out rate of nonsmokers. No parent wants that.

Last, these laws cost states money. The marijuana lobby promises that taxes on pot will fill state coffers, but it’s just another deception. States with these laws pay out of their general funds to regulate marijuana, and for the increased health care, substance-abuse treatment and law enforcement needed any time an addictive drug becomes more available.

So don’t be taken in; medical marijuana is a ruse. It’s bad medicine that helps hardly anyone and has serious social and economic side effects for all.

Dr. Ed Gogek is an addiction psychiatrist in Prescott, Ariz., and board member of Keep AZ Drug Free, a group that opposes legalization and medical-marijuana laws.

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

The Truth about the Popularity of Marijuana in the State of California: 85.5% of California Cities and Counties have Bans or Moratoriums on Marijuana Dispensaries

Pro-Marijuana Organizations like NORML, ASA, MPP, DPA (and others) have tried to convince the Citizens across America that marijuana is hugely popular in California as an example of why the other 49 states in our union should also find it acceptable.  They want you to believe the saying, “As goes California, so goes the Nation.” 

Since the recent California Supreme Court ruling allowing cities to ban marijuana dispensaries, even the ASA has had to come to grips with the truth that majority of Californians are saying “no”.  Yes, the "Truth" is now out and it is devastating for those whose desire is to create a legal culture of drug abuse in our nation.

On November 02, 2010, Californian’s had a choice to vote for the legalization of marijuana via Proposition 19.  The pot lobby tried to influence the vote by announcing what is called “Junk Science” polls, claiming that the voter polls strongly supported the legalization of marijuana.

Well, we all now know that the Citizens of California were not fooled by these false polls and instead voted to deny the legalization of marijuana by 53.5% to 46.5%.  So much for “Junk Science”; the Voters of California didn’t buy it.

Then, on the November 06, 2012, the citizens of five cities across California voted to ban marijuana dispensaries within their jurisdiction; Palo Alto, Del Mar, Solana Beach, Lemon Grove, and Imperial Beach.

Then, the Pro-Marijuana lobby along with the ACLU decided to sue the City of Riverside for “banning” marijuana dispensaries within its city limits; insisting that the marijuana laws of California overruled a city being able create ordinances banning dispensaries.

The case went all the way to the California Supreme Court when on May 6, 2013, in a unanimous decision (7 to 0) it ruled that the city of Riverside (vs. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center) can indeed ban marijuana dispensaries.  This ruling also allowed cities across California to ban marijuana dispensaries if they should choose to do so.

Since the ruling the Americans For Safe Access (ASA) has finally had to come to grips with the “Truth” that time is against their side of the debate and now realize that cities like San Jose and others may soon begin the process of shutting the dispensaries down in their jurisdiction.

In fact, since the California Supreme Court ruling on May 6, 2013, several cities have followed suit and have begun to impose their bans on dispensaries within their own jurisdictions; I.E., Riverside.

Other Californian cities are beginning the process of closing down the  illegal pot shops in their jurisdiction including; Palm Springs, Garden Grove, Maxwell, Beaumont, and Anaheim. And meanwhile, more cities, like San Pedro are just beginning the work to consider closing them down. 

It took less than 17-days after the court ruling for these five cities to begin shutting down marijuana dispensaries and more cities are also looking into closing down the pot shops in their jurisdictions.

When you add these cities to the overwhelming number of Cities across California (over 200+) that have either banned dispensaries, have moratoriums, or created ordinances that won’t allow them you can see that the “Truth” is, marijuana is “not” popular in the State of  California.

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano Campaign Contributions Exposed

California Assemblyman Tom Ammiano is amongst the strongest proponents of marijuana issues in our state and recently, the KCRA 3 discussion board shared the information below exposing political contributions from those in the Pot Lobby followed up by Assemblyman Ammiano using his position of authority in the California Legislature to create legislation for their interests. 

Here is a quote from the author,  "By posting these articles I am connecting Assemblyman Tom Ammiano directly to the marijuana lobby, and not only is he connected to them, they go hand in hand. He scratches their back, they ‘donate” to his campaign."

1. Dr. Milton Estes. $250.00 donation. Mr. Estes is a pot doctor. He hands out "recommendations" for marijuana to otherwise healthy individuals who simply want to get high, or anyone with cash. ......"Dr. Milton Estes, an ACLU client in the case, welcomed the ruling. "It is critical that I be able to advise my patients on the medical use of marijuana without fear of being criminally prosecuted or losing my license," he said. "I work with HIV-infected patients, and it is reassuring to feel that I can now freely speak to my patients."


Let me point out that HIV infected individuals have a very short window of time to attempt the use marijuana to potentially trigger an appetite. Quite often HIV patients end up developing serious lung disease from attempting this approach, including lung cancer, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)...HIV patients have severely compromised immune systems, the last thing they should be doing is smoking marijuana. The harms outweigh any possible benefit.

2. Kevin Reed. Owner of the Green Cross marijuana dispensary. Donated a total of $1,000.00. David Goldman, an employee of Green Cross also donated $100.00. Total coming from The Green Cross...$1,100.00.


The Green Cross get’s an award from the marijuana lobby group “American’s for Safe Access Now”…for their marijuana brownies.

Connection between Tom Ammiano and American's for Safe Access Now. (Ammiano introduced AB 2312, which he vowed would be back in January


Tom Ammiano introduces AB 473- Medical marijuana: state regulation and enforcement. 


Tom Ammiano's Medical Marijuana Bill Would Permit Sales Throughout The State.


Kevin Reed and The Green Cross Responds To Marijuana Dispensary Crackdown .....from the article:

"Medical marijuana advocacy organizations, including Americans for Safe Access and the Drug Policy Alliance, have denounced these threats and the use of tactics not seen since before President Obama took office," Reed said. "Senator Mark Leno and Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, the two Democrat state legislators who represent San Francisco, also criticized this attempt to circumvent state and local law in California." 


By posting these articles I am connecting Assemblyman Tom Ammiano directly to the marijuana lobby, and not only is he connected to them, they go hand in hand. He scratches their back, they ‘donate” to his campaign.

3.  Robert Raich. Attorney-Oakland $250.00 donation. And then another $100.00 donation. There are two more $100.00.

...from the article

"The San Francisco District Attorney's office stated in a court memo this month that sales of medical marijuana at dispensaries are illegal. It was news to us, and news to Oakland lawyer and cannabis law expert Robert Raich, who took a cannabis case to the U.S. Supreme Court."


Does the name RAICH sound familiar? ...his wife is ANGEL in Raich vs Ashcroft.

Angel Raich of Oakland and Diane Monson of Oroville, along with two "caregivers" were raided by DEA. They sued the federal government on October 9th 2002 in an attempt to prevent the federal government from taking their pot. This made National headlines.

This is what Angel had to say -13- years ago...  "I owe my survival and my ability to lead a relatively normal existence to medical marijuana, or cannabis as it is more properly known, my two caregivers John Doe Number one and John Doe Number two who grow over eight pounds of cannabis for me per year, and my children for standing by my side. If the armed DEA agents who have torn up medical cannabis gardens and arrested patients and caregivers up and down California come knocking on my door, I will very likely die.”

However, in January of 2008,  7 years after she testified before congress that she would die without marijuana…Angel Raich is working full time as a professor at Oaksterdam University in Oakland,  and Cannabis College.  How is that possible? 

Oaksterdam University owner and president is Richard Lee. Richard Lee also owned a marijuana dispensary attached to the “University”. He spent over 1 million dollars from the illegal sale of marijuana to put Prop 19 on the ballot. Prop 19 would have legalized marijuana outright. Drug money paid for Prop 19 to be placed on the ballot in 2010.

This may explain how Angel has was able to trick Congress. …Dr Frank Lucido, Angel’s doctor, is on the board of directors of the drug legalization group NORML. He’s a regular speaker at NORML conferences along with Tommy Chong. He's also listed on the Drug Policy Alliances website, The DPA are key proponents behind Prop 215-medical marijuana.  

Frank Lucido, MD - Member, NORML Advisory Board. 


Quote from Dr. Frank Lucido. “Angel will suffer immense harm without cannabis”


Raich vs Ashcroft...Robert A. Raich is one of the attorneys.


4. David Onek-San Francsico. $250.00 donation, and another $100.00 donation. Onek ran for District Attorney of San Francisco and lost to George Gascon. Gascon is the former Chief of Police. Onek loses to George Gascon, and then comes out publicly in support of Ammiano’s marijuana legislation…


George Gascon is now District Attorney. Within 6 months of taking office, he completely changes his position on medical marijuana.

George Gascon Flipflops on Medical Marijuana


5. Chris Cunnie. - Former undersheriff of San Francisco. $250.00 donation. He quits the department and is hired by Attorney General Kamala Harris…Kamala Harris is quoted as saying “I like Bob Marley and Chris Cunny”


And then Harris hires him….

“Retired undersheriff Christopher Cunnie - a former police union president and patrol officer who was long thought to be the heir apparent to Sheriff Mike Hennessey - is now a special adviser to Harris on labor and law enforcement. That caps a long list of law and order positions for Cunnie, who in addition to working for the sheriff's office and police department, has also served as chief investigator at the San Francisco's district attorney's office and director of the Emergency Communications Department.”


6. OSBORN ERICKSON chairman of Emerald Fund. $250.00 donation. This is a very interesting group. They claim to be a premiere real estate development company. They also donated to Mark Leno's campaign, and are connected to our Governor...they had some information about our Governor Jerry Brown on their website at one time but it disappeared. Yes, this is a very interesting group.


7.  Denise LaPointe. LaPointe Associates. Political Consultant. Lobbyist. Neighborhood Activist with political ambitions. $1,000.00 donation. Another $1,000.00 donation....

She was the Chief of staff to Senator, and High Speed Rain Authority Board Member Quentin Kopp. Quentin Kopp is a former liberal Judge, and reportedly liked to ‘take on’ republicans, such as former Senator Roy Ashburn, during a hearing on the High Speed Rail… He’s quoted in a video as saying he has an “impeccable reputation for honesty, integrity". Yet his former Chief of Staff, Denise LaPointe was paid over $350,000 by the High Speed Rail Authority, in ‘consultation’ fees, using tax payer money.

Here’s a link to the video:

There are serious questions regarding money spent by the High Speed Rail Authority on "consultants"...Denise LaPointe, Kopp’s former Chief of Staff was paid over $350,000 since 2009.


High Speed Rail consultant fees questioned. Denise LePointe


Denise LaPointe the Lobbyist: She is a top dollar lobbyist according to this article…receiving more then ($521,750).


Ethical questions abound…she only claims to have given away $250.00 on political contributions in 2009.


But in 2010 she gave away more then $6,000.


8. Marc Van Der Hout -Attorney- San Francisco. $250.00 donation. He's an immigration attorney that represents suspected terrorists, and connected to Stanley Cohen- Attorney At Law, New York -- Legal Defense Fund, who was indicted by the IRS Northern District of New York for ‘Impeding the administration of the federal tax code”

Stanley Cohen:


Judge Orders Islamic Fund-Raiser Deported

“Federal officials shut down the Holy Land Foundation and confiscated its assets shortly after the September 2001 terrorist attacks. The principal officers of the foundation, which was based in Dallas and was once the largest Islamic charity in the United States, were arrested last summer on terrorism-related charges.” 


Feds hold man linked to terrorist / Tehama pilot's friend plotted plane bombs

“Marc Van Der Hout, Mubarek’s lawyer said Mubarek freely admits knowing Murad”


One of the Los Angeles 8 that were defended by Marc Van Der Hout is Michel Shehadeh. Michel Shehadeh was a member of a group of Palestinian student activists arrested in 1987 in Los Angeles.

This is an event where Marc Van Der Hout and Michel Shehadeh were speakers and spoke about  “The war on terror.” Sounds like “The war on drugs”…doesn’t it?  If liberals don’t like what you have to say, or our laws,  they simply create the illusion of some sort of war. War on terror, War on drugs, ….


Marc Van Der Hout was appointed by Gloria Allred to defend Nicky Diaz- Meg Whitman’s former housekeeper and nanny. (Republican Meg Whitman ran for Governor of California in 2010 against Jerry Brown). Liberals claimed Whitman knowingly hired an illegal immigrant, Whitman exclaimed her housekeeper /nanny committed fraud by using forged documents. 


Here’s more on that:

Marc Van Der Hout was part of Lynne Stewarts defense team. Stewart was found guilty, in 2005,  on 5 felony counts of conspiracy to aid and abet terrorism, conspired to defraud the United States, and making false statements to the Government.

“Attorneys Marc Van Der Hout, Susan Jordon, Stephen Bingham, NLG Executive Director Carlos Villarreal and NLG President Noreen Farren detailed the legal stakes involved and the importance of the case to the legal profession.”

“San Francisco Bay Area Welcomes Lynne Stewart”


And guess who helped pay for Stewarts legal defense? George Soros. The primary funding source behind Prop 215 (medical marijuana), 36 (get out of jail free card) NORA, and Prop 19 (outright legalization of marijuana ).


Secretary of States website. Donation list.