Sunday, June 8, 2014

Letter from US Senator Mark Rubio to US President Barack Obama regarding the FARC negotiations in Havana, and potential prisoner release



US Senator Mark Rubio
June 3, 2014

The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States of America
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The outcome of the ongoing negotiations between the Government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) could have a serious and long lasting effect on the national security interests of the United States and Colombia.

Colombians have suffered for far too long as a result of the violence inflicted by the FARC, an organization considered a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States and the European Union.
 
We should do all we can to ensure the ongoing negotiations and any potential results do not weaken the integrity of our bilateral security efforts.

A hallmark of our security cooperation has been the extradition to the United States and conviction in U.S. courts of notorious drug traffickers and terrorists, including members of the FARC.


During his December 2013 ambassadorial nomination, U.S. Ambassador Kevin Whitaker reaffirmed these efforts when he said that the United States would continue to seek access to individuals who are wanted to stand trial in the United States for very serious crimes.

Unfortunately, amid the backdrop of the negotiations and the political debate in Colombia, reports persist about efforts to release and repatriate FARC members that are currently in U.S. custody.

Specifically, I continue to hear reports of potential petitions to repatriate:

·        Juvenal Ovidio Ricardo Palmera (a/k/a “Simon Trinidad”),

·        Anayibe Rojas (a/k/a “Sonia”), and

·        Jorge Enrique Rodriguez Mendieta (a/k/a “Ivan Vargas”).
 
These FARC members were tried and convicted in U.S. courts of offenses against the United States.

·        Ricardo Palmera was sentenced to 60 years in prison in relation to the hostage-taking of three Americans who were forced to spend years in captivity.

·        Anayibe Rojas was sentenced to over 16 years for overseeing a multi-million dollar drug trafficking ring.

·        Meanwhile, Jorge Enrique Mendieta was sentenced to over 20 years after admitting conspiracy to import large quantities of cocaine to the United States.
 
Any potential for the release of individuals such as these, who are serving sentences for crimes against U.S. law, is of grave concern.

I urge the Administration to respect the judicial process that led to the lawful incarceration of these dangerous individuals in the United States and ask that you firmly commit not to release or repatriate any FARC criminals in U.S. custody in relation to the ongoing negotiations in Cuba.

Sincerely,

Marco Rubio
United States Senator

Tuesday, June 3, 2014

[The TownHall] Enough White House Lies on Benghazi


Dear All,
This is the 2nd article posted on “The Truth and Nothing but the Truth” regarding the breaking news on the Benghazi tragedy when four Americans were killed including the 1st US Ambassador in 30 years, Chris Stevens.

As information continues to slowly trickle out of a reluctant White House, CIA, other intelligence organs, and other leaks, it is becoming crystal clear that President Obama’s behavior was extremely derelict while these brave men were being attacked and slaughtered over a nine hour period, and then followed up by a false White House narrative, to cover up his dereliction of duty by trying to blame the whole matter on a video.

This excellent article explains some of the facts leading up to the attack and why the president and his staff worked so hard to cover up the whole matter.  The denied requests for more protective support from the ambassador before going to Benghazi being one of their major concerns.

But most obnoxiously, it is now clear that while these men were being attacked, tortured, and killed, the president and his staff were more concerned about covering their political butts than they were about wanting to save these men’s lives by sending in the Calvary to try and rescue them, as often requested by the US Military [Brig. Gen. Robert Lovell]; an order "never given" by the president and a "never given order" he refuses to answer for; while former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton angrily shouted, "What difference does it make?"

During his testimony, an obviously incensed Brig. Gen. Lovell stated, "The fact is, we should have tried", but neither the president or Hillary Clinton will justify their decision not to and the president refuses to explain why he never went to the "Situation room" or for that matter where he was while the conflict was raging.
President Obama should seriously consider that what brought down President Nixon wasn't the break-in of the Water Gate Hotel, but instead it was the lying when trying to cover it up.  Something that Americans are now witnessing today through Obama's press secretary Jay Carney and is obviously orchestrated by the administration; from inside the closed doors of the Oval Office. 

Jay Carney and his  fellow White House associates would do well to consider what happened to John Daniel Ehrlichman, Howard Hunt, Charles Colson, Gordon Liddy, and others that were caught up in the Watergate lies to protect President Nixon. 

Here is a link for your consideration: CSPAN:Benghazi Consulate Attack Investigation
May 01, 2014
Brig. Gen. Lovell, USAF (Ret.) - had extremely important testimony to offer
Ms. Schake, Ph.D
Mr. Gartenstein-Ross, Ph.D
Mr. Frederic  Wehrey, Ph.D

 Ron Kirkish

Enough White House Lies on Benghazi


David Limbaugh | May 02, 2014

The Obama administration has no shred of integrity left concerning the Benghazi scandal. Caught in the act with the "loaded gun," those in the administration are telling us it is a toy pistol, but no honest observer can possibly believe them anymore.

It took a lawsuit to force the White House to release emails that reveal just how deliberate and fraudulent the plan was to deceive the press and the American public about the cause of the attack on our consulate in Libya.

The incident and a nearby attack a few hours later, in which four Americans were killed, occurred in September 2012, just a few short months before the November presidential election. Obama's foreign policy credibility was on the line, for he had long boasted that he had al-Qaida on the run, despite his efforts to relax our war on terror into a law enforcement matter (except for his precious drones, of course).

Reports emerged that there had been previous attempted attacks on the consulate and that our people there had asked for heightened security, which the administration callously rejected. Was this sheer indifference or a result of Obama's concern that enhancing security would signal a failure in his magical policy of appeasing terrorists? Either way, it was disgraceful.

It was obvious at the time but is now undeniable that with cold premeditation, the administration hatched a sinister ploy to blame the attacks on an anti-Islam video that had surfaced on the Internet. There was no evidence that this video had incited the Benghazi attacks or that the attacks were spontaneous but much evidence that they were preplanned by al-Qaida terrorists. But the entire White House spin machine immediately went into overdrive constructing and disseminating this false narrative, even to the point of having federal authorities arrest the hapless creator of the video, whom they nabbed on other charges. This was a horrifying abuse of government power starting at the very top, and it is not the America any of us should love.

Finally, after a year of withholding internal emails, the White House, under legal compulsion, turned them over to Judicial Watch. Included was an email from Ben Rhodes, an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, dated Sept. 14, 2012. Its subject heading was "RE: PREP CALL with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 pm ET," and the email was sent to about a dozen members of Obama's inner circle, including press secretary Jay Carney.

The thrust of the message was clear: Protect Obama's image (and re-election efforts) at all costs; American interests and the American public's right to know be damned. It contained four bullet points:

--"To convey that the United States is doing everything that we can to protect our people and facilities abroad;

--"To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy;

--"To show that we will be resolute in bringing people who harm Americans to justice, and standing steadfast through these protests;

--"To reinforce the President and Administration's strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges."

It was patently clear that the administration was not doing everything it could to protect its people and facilities in Benghazi. It had flat-out ignored or rejected their multiple requests for enhanced security and their expressed concerns about possible future attacks. The protests were not "rooted in an Internet video," as the CIA has made abundantly clear. In his congressional testimony, former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell said that then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice is the one who linked the video to the Benghazi attacks but that the video was not part of the CIA analysis. In other words, the administration made it up out of whole cloth to deflect blame for its policy failures in relaxing the war on terror, intervening in Libya to seek regime change with reckless disregard for whether more radical forces would emerge stronger as a result, and abandoning our people and facilities in Benghazi. Also, the administration has been anything but resolute in bringing the people and forces responsible for these attacks to justice.

An email on Sept. 12, 2012, to Rice from Payton Knopf, deputy spokesman at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, confirmed the attacks were "planned in advance" and "complex," not spontaneous in reaction to a video.

When reporters grilled Carney about the email from Rhodes, Carney disgraced himself by stating that the email was referring to the video's effect on all the protests in the Middle East, not just in Benghazi. Everyone knows that was a flat-out lie. The prepping of Rice concerned only Benghazi, and Rice's Sunday show lie-fest concerned only Benghazi because that was the only issue that might affect Obama's re-election.

These emails confirm what we already knew: that the White House wholly concocted this idea to scapegoat the video to save Obama's skin and that everyone who mattered in the White House, including Obama, knew about it. It is inconceivable that he didn't.

As the administration still won't come clean even in the face of these smoldering guns, it's time to convene a congressional select committee. No more games.

Monday, June 2, 2014

First Legalization, Then Lawsuits

Can marijuana retailers survive the tort bar?

May 26, 2014, Vol. 19, No. 35 • By JOHN P. WALTERS and TOM RILEY
 
John P. Walters, director of drug control policy for President George W. Bush, is chief operating officer of the Hudson Institute.


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tom Riley, director of public affairs in the Office of National Drug Control Policy for President George W. Bush, writes on public policy in Philadelphia.
 
 
 
 
Some clever attorneys might partner directly with treatment providers for referrals.
 
Others might advertise on billboards, buses, television, and radio.
 
They might find that YouTube and sites on the Internet are a vast repository of self-incrimination. 
 
In addition, the retailers of marijuana as medicine—whether for smoking or eating in baked goods, candy, and ice cream—should be easy targets of legal action.
 
There is scant evidence of legitimate medical efficacy and much evidence that “medical marijuana” is a calculated fraud producing large profits.
 
Far from approving it, the FDA has written a letter denying that smoked marijuana is medicine. 
 
If you think trial lawyers made a windfall on tobacco, just wait until they get a handle on marijuana.
 
The scientific and medical evidence against marijuana now dwarfs what we knew about tobacco at the time of the surgeon general’s report of 1964.
 
No warning label in the world could shield marijuana growers and sellers from the tsunami of tort liability they should face from distributing a product with so many known harmful effects. 
 
Everyone loves the tale of Robin Hood because it is a story of justice—taking from oppressors and giving to the oppressed.
 
That story is about to be reenacted with a drug-dealing-retailer near you.
 
The rule of law is a beautiful thing; it can protect our democracy in times of danger even when national leaders and government institutions fail. 

 

 

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

We Americans...Must Be Americans

By Robert Charles,

Robert B. Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, lawyer who has written widely on constitutional, legislative and policy issues and  former adjunct professor at the Harvard Extension School.  He currently leads a consulting firm in Washington DC.

As Memorial Day passes, pause with me to celebrate what We Americans have in common. 
There is a certain hypocrisy, if I may say so, enveloping us. 
You can see it in the most recent resuscitation of class warfare, adversarial race relations and visible efforts to turn Americans, one and all, against each other. 
I have had my fill of this hypocrisy. 
Interestingly, until liberals of all stripes began chastising America for being insufficiently sensitive toward each other, most Americans felt that we were imperfect, but a generally positive, hopeful, historically idealistic and upwardly mobile society, a group of rather unrepentant dreamers who wanted to make good things happen.

Oh yes, and we had an improving sense of perspective on each other, one in which differences of race, creed, age and station were secondary to being American, a defining quality. 

That is, we were doing a reasonably good job -- imperfect and subject to individual cases of utter failure -- but a reasonably good job all the same, of giving each other the benefit of the doubt, forgiving errors in judgment, accepting that achievement was hard work, hard work produced results, and wealth, or what we used to call “getting ahead” or “improving our lot,” was a good thing. 
It was a good thing for us, and for everyone. 

Indeed, we wished it upon each other and accepted with joy the notion that others, by working and making something of themselves, offered us ways to follow suit. 

Although we slipped, we collectively had the humility to see, in examples great and small, that “there by the Grace of God go I.”

We also had determination. 
 
We asked questions like, “If I can dream it, why not do it?”  
 
That is why, as a People -- not as a Government, but as a Sovereign People -- we grew stronger and faster than any Nation ever has in history. 
 
We invented more, trusted the individual, tried to limit our government, assumed personal risks, and gambled our lives for the sake of others more than any other People in world history.  
 
We did so without fear or self-consciousness. 
 
Our Constitution was, as we all know, the first of its kind in the world. 
 
Our Wright Brothers first to fly, Lindbergh first across the Atlantic, Americans first on the beaches of Normandy, and our footprints first and only on the Moon. 

We Americans, and please remind the next generation, are not an accident. 
We Americans were -- and still are -- the combination of unswerving human intent, uncontainable heart, and inexplicable Providence. 
We have aspired to do more, reach higher, and have a greater positive impact as individuals and as a Nation -- than most of humanity, living and dead. 
True, we have not always succeeded, but we have never gone at a mission half-heartedly. 
By and large, we have been blessed in our quests.  “Seek, and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened unto you,” that is what Saint Mathew says; we did and it has.     
On race, as on class, we were neither ashamed of who we were nor ignorant of how we came to be, as one Nation. 

We knew the history of the Civil War, as well as the Revolutionary War, and every other war. 

We were believers in truth, versed in the country’s history, good and bad, the permutations and perambulations that brought us, again by an historical miracle, to this day -- to each day. 

That is how we got up, and that is how we went to sleep, feeling lucky to be Americans.  

We knew that America’s progress -- and leadership of Mankind from the US Constitution to innate mutual respect -- were special, understood the world over, and marveled at. 

We liked that. 
Whether understood by others or not, our identity was dear to us. 
We appreciated what went before us, but also let go what was not useful to the soul, learned how to refocus on what was. 
We were a Nation of doers not stewers. 
That, too, was part of what made us Americans -- we had perspective, resilience and pluck.   
To a one, we had little interest in highlighting things that pulled us apart, no pride in victimhood. 

Instead we used our different personal stories to educate each other, and as a basis for proving the veracity of something else, a miracle in history -- the chance for an individual to improve his lot from one generation to the next, what we called “The American Dream.” 

We knew that here alone, if nowhere else in the world, we were safe. 

We were all the same because we were all different. 

And we knew that, if we set our sails right, read the wind right, worked the tiller, the far horizon was ours. 

We had pride in this miraculous place, America. 

Indeed, while we took strength from our individual stories, all different, some tortuous, we instinctively knew we had more in common than ever could separate us. 
Wound we had, but they were nursed together.  
Common wisdom -- and it was both wisdom and common -- was that America was proud of who She was; we were all proud of who we were. 
We were always aspiring, even if not yet a perfect “melting pot.”  
Not long ago, you could ask Americans anywhere what they felt that phrase meant, and you would have heard something along the lines of hope, opportunity, respect for one another -- and not just for our good behavior and our skin colors, cultural legacies and different beliefs, but for our tolerance of each other’s gaffs and mistakes, lifetime disagreements and unchanging opinions. 

There was respect for the art of showing respect, for the ability to keep each other’s foibles in perspective, laughing at absurdities without defaulting to anger.

Americans were proud of how they listened, not just what they said. 
They were proud of showing patience with those who did not yet see the light, might never see it. 
They were proud of empathy for ignorance, proud of tolerance for opinions eclectic, idiotic, odd and strident. 
In other words, you would have recognized in the words of all Americans an understanding that societies are never -- ever -- politically correct, unless overtaken by fear, which trades freedom to speak for the false promise of perfect speech and perfect harmony. 
That sort of harmony is the dark cloak of tyranny, an abuse of power so great that by suppressing individual opinions, it suppresses individuality. 

Nothing could be more un-American.

When honest and impassioned disagreements on issues from governance and economics to pride and prejudice, sexuality to personal faith, medical ethics to marriage are no longer germane in America’s public square, when the right to open disagreement is gone, freedom is in full retreat. 
Any society so scarred is destined for what Churchill said would be “a thousand years of darkness.” 
A society intolerant of the freedom to speak from the heart betrays the Founders, and all who follow. 
As an aside, it also does not prosper. 
Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and other Founders wrote us about this; just read their letters. 

Not long ago, all Americans knew this. 

That is why we sighed, bellowed, traded gritty arguments and tasteless jokes, always without taking much offense. 

We tolerated outlandish speech, correcting it, laughing at it, responding to it, educating by reference to it, but not outlawing it. 

Only “time, place and manner” limits were imposed, and those lightly, for example to bar “shouting ‘fire!’ in a crowded theater.” 

We knew we were all different by degrees, by talents and shapes, race and means, character and motivations, strength and lineage, health and heritage -- but we were all individuals, bound by pride in America’s promise that we could be individuals.
That was not so long ago. 

Tolerance of error and recourse to the remedy, corrective speech, were part of America’s paradoxical and permanent -- so we thought -- magic.  Without error, the chance for correction never comes -- and that correction, once made, never gets the chance to stick. 

Not long ago, we learned from, with, about and for each other, and ourselves, through unbridled public speech. 

Rather than the hypocrisy now afoot and the resurgence of this “political correctness” or government coerced conformity of thought, we had a very different way of getting at the truth, which the Founders thought worth preserving. 
Deep differences of opinion were understood to elicit further thought, compelling logic and restorative understandings, to lubricate civic dialogue, to teach us patience and how to understand each other better. 
Often, we disagreed about right and wrong, sometimes without resolution. 

But we were not afraid to be guided by our consciences and faiths. 

We had a sense of obligation to higher truths, as we saw them -- even if we saw them differently. 

We thought most people learned through candid conversation, not by government mandate. 

Even the most righteous government, if there was such a thing, could not replace this obligation, an obligation to listen and speak frankly while pursuing truth. 

Americans could genuinely “agree to disagree,” because we were at last all Americans.

Such simple understandings defined Americans, one and all. 
We learned through error and correction; the price of liberty was patience. 
Darned if it didn’t work, too!  
We saw humanity in each other, and corrected ourselves, no government needed. 
A free society nurtured humility, not judgment.  
Miracle of miracles, we tried to be better Americans, in this became better individuals. 
That was America.  
One American to another, we shared pride in the struggle, what De Tocqueville called Americans’ ability to embrace “the uncomfortable face to face” -- not always coming away friends, but always closer. 
As a Frenchman, he thought Americans exceptional. 
What about that? 
He thought we spoke with unvarnished candor, were sincere, purposeful and earnest in our associations, even when disagreeing.
He wrote a book about it, actually two.
Back then, and even more recently, we expected ourselves to speak civilly to our detractors, to labor with honor to bring them around, or at least to take comfort in trying. 

We strived for patience and tried to model it for our kids, peers and personal enemies. 

No loss of face in tolerance of that kind, listening to those who disdained us or had widely divergent opinions; in this way -- perhaps counter-intuitively -- we all got stronger. 

We discovered how to take a pass on pointless anger and soul-destroying resentment. 

No one -- not a single American -- would have admired a political “leader” who pushed the opposite behavior. 

And that brings us to today. 
Today, we find leaders not leading, often neither candid nor honest, not accountable or concerned about the hypocrisy they are modeling. 
What do I mean? 
I mean they are not seeking, as Ronald Reagan and many others did, to draw us to our moral height, to inspire us to be our best selves. 
They are not teaching honesty, good will, patience and cooperation from an open heart, not asking us to find and to follow our better angels. 
Instead, they are encouraging us to see one another as predatory or mean spirited. 
They are pointing out the failings and foibles in each other, and then making much of them.  
Such “leaders” are unworthy of their title or office.
They emphasize, at fundraisers and press conferences, how different we are from each another, We Americans, all of us. 
They drive wedges -- or try -- between us. 
They pitch the idea of taking up swords or placards, of trying to stake claims to resentment and victimhood, to grabbing a share of mythical entitlements -- all against each other, at the expense of each other, at the expense of America’s past, at the expense of … ourselves. 
Here is the candid truth:  This way is not America. 
We hear these “leaders” calling us “a house divided,” urging us to see ourselves as more different than the same. 

But that, we know, is not true.   

We are different, but more the same as Americans than ever were different. 

And no American becomes happier by falling for this ploy, embracing resentment and anger. 

Not one. 

Happiness is not to be found in jealousy, envy, retribution and punishment, nor a push for more money and wider condemnation, more effigies, apologies and agonists. 

Nor are we being true to our legacy by accepting conformity and dependency on the State.  

None of this is America, American or good for the soul. 

Abraham Lincoln, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan -- and even the Bible -- tell us that “A House Divided shall not stand.” 

It never has. 

We cannot let ours be divided by new promoters of division. 

In this political season, listen to the radio, read papers or blogs. 
This is what you hear -- more than any time in decades, a bizarre and misplaced “call to arms” for economic and racial warfare, a blur of recrimination, a call for condemning some other group of Americans with righteous indignation, as if our history somehow permitted that. 
It does not. 
This is all for political effect, all an effort to sew dissention that makes us to forget who we really are and what we come from. 
This is an attempt to distract us from the Nation’s unity, as well as our higher calling and common values. 
This is a bold attempt to divide Americans from each other by placing them in static, make-believe economic castes, separating us publicly by cultural background, profession, educational level, race, age, geographies or biographies. 
Do not fall for this political tactic. 
We are still “one Nation under God,” and that is -- the truth once again -- how we got here.
After all, what can mutual recrimination, pointing of fingers and seeking of advantages at each other’s expense do for us? 

Nothing. 

It is a trick, a foil to inflame, a tactic as old as “divide and conquer.” 

This is no more than a new set of “promises” to be broken, false hope, the notion that we should fight for a mythical society that perfectly mirrors our self-image, and is perfectly intolerant of everything else, except what we are. 

That is a flawed and manipulated vision, a political slight-of-hand. 

That world is a string of paper dolls, viral duplicates in one’s own self-image, not America. 

We should not want to become that mythical place and we should condemn those who, with knowing hypocrisy, encourage us to lower ourselves to it. 

We are one, with all our warts and differences.

In the end, there is only this -- and we should be proud of it. 
We are imperfect, but we are Americans, and that trumps all this class cataloguing, race pitching, societal division nonsense. 
We are the world’s “land of opportunity.” 
It is time we took stock of the fact, and pride in it.  
Why do you think the world flocks to our shores? 
As Americans we have a right to say and do what we want.  
Accordingly, with hundreds of millions of Americans behind me in time, I am going to say something -- loud and clear. 
This sort of anti-American hypocrisy has no place in our common American culture. 
This kind of intentional sowing of division has no place in political office, the political lexicon or our political leadership. 
This was, is and will be a country built on hope and sacrifice, courage and idealism, generosity and -- yes, common patience. 
Yep, we are pretty damn imperfect, one and all. 

But we are also Americans with heart, one and all. 

That binds most if not all wounds. 

That unity has more than once saved us and saved all the world. 

So, take a moment to feel the pride -- from whatever background or opinion set you hail. 

And do not forget it. 

Do not let the children forget it. 

Let’s get back to being Americans, We Americans, shall we. 

Together, we should begin again to celebrate our common ideals, as well as our natural differences, particularly on days like Memorial Day. 

Together, we can and should laugh, cry, love, live and die as proud, equally flawed and equally free … Americans.  

And that is good enough, at least for me.

POT HEADS, aka Drug Pushers/Addicts

VERACITY - Definition:  the truth, accuracy, or precision of something.

Americans [both young and old] across the nation are seriously questioning the veracity of those like NORML, ASA, DPA, MPP, and others who continue to use old, worn out talking points in the hopes of converting America from a  wholesome culture to a culture of drug abuse; in the likeness of the Latin American Narco-Nations in Central and South America.

Thanks to the great work of many scientist and research institutions across the world from France, England, New Zealand, America, and several other countries, the truth about the terrible and tragic damage marijuana is doing to the human is getting the attention of the Citizens across the United States; and the world.  The evidence is now overwhelming; with every new scientific publication showing marijuana is a dangerous drug.

Recent poll #1 and another poll #2, [CBS Poll]shows America and the world that the folks are now having second thoughts about marijuana for both medical and recreational use and the poll numbers supporting the legalization of marijuana are now beginning to decline.

We have already seen this in California when the ballot poll taken in November/2010 showed the Citizens of California were tired of the Pot Head lies and soundly defeated Proposition 19 to legalize marijuana.  Recently, the pro-pot lobby even failed miserably to gather enough signatures when trying to place four propositions to legalize marijuana on the November/2014 ballot.

Since that eventful day in 2010, even more cities and counties across California have banned marijuana dispensaries within their jurisdiction at the consternation of the Pro-Pot Lobby.  Well over 85% of the cities and counties of California have either banned marijuana, have moratorium in place, or have created ordinances that keep marijuana out of their city or county limits. 

The City of San Jose, the 3rd largest city in California, is currently creating an ordinance that has the pot-lobbyist up in arms and threatening the city officials that they will do what ever they can to stop the ordinance from ever taking effect.  At the recent San Jose City Council meeting, several citizens spoke before the council about all the damage that the pot stores and their customers are doing to their neighborhoods, and the businesses located nearby.  They are angry, they have had enough, and they want an ordinance to ban marijuana dispensaries within the jurisdiction of the city.  By my count, over 45 people went to the San Jose City Council meeting to express their desire to close the dispensaries down and far fewer spoke in favor of the dispensary's; yes, attitudes are changing in the 3rd largest City of California.

For those of you who want to know the truth about marijuana and the damage it does to the human brain, I have added some powerful scientific information for your consideration below.

You will find the first link, "People voting with out knowledge" by Dr. Nora Volkow, Director of the National Institute of Drugs (NIDA) of particular interest.

Best Regards,

Ronald L. Kirkish, CDFC/IFBC/CAlM

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> 

THE SCIENCE

TECHNOLOGY CONFIRMS MARIJUANA DAMAGES THE HUMAN BRAIN

 
PET - POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY

Link to video’s with NIDA’S Dr. Nora Volkow:

People are voting without knowledge (33:42 min): http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RSDnLSU3owc

Addiction is Much More than “Just Saying No” (10:32 min): http://brainsontrial.com/watch-videos/video/cocaine-addiction-and-the-brain/

Watch Dr. Nora Volkow Explain How Neuroscience Shapes Drug Policy (2:36 min): http://youtu.be/JH7zq0_VA9U


Interview with Dr. Nora D. Volkow Director, National Institute on Drug Abuse: http://www.yalemedlaw.com/2009/04/inerview-with-dr-nora-d-volkow-director-national-institute-on-drug-abuse/

NIDA - Drug Facts: Marijuana
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana

Population-based case-control study of recreational drug use and testis cancer risk confirms an association between marijuana use and nonseminoma risk.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22965656

New Scientist: Cannabis can kill without the influence of other drugs
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25092-cannabis-can-kill-without-the-influence-of-other-drugs.html#.UxEtYnmYaM9

The Cannabis-Psychosis Link: Mind Your Mind
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/schizophrenia/cannabis-psychosis-link-mind-your-mind

The Cannabis-Psychosis Link
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/schizophrenia/cannabis-psychosis-link

Schizophrenia, Neurocognitive Dysfunction, and Substance-Related Disorders: A Review
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/schizophrenia/schizophrenia-neurocognitive-dysfunction-and-substance-related-disorders-review

Adolescent pot use leaves lasting mental deficits; Developing brain susceptible to lasting damage from exposure to marijuana
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120827152039.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily%2Fmind_brain%2Fmarijuana+%28Marijuana+News+--+ScienceDaily%29

BRAIN CHANGES ARE ASSOCIATED WITH CASUAL MARIJUANA USE IN YOUNG ADULTS (Society for Neuroscience)
http://www.sfn.org/Press-Room/News-Release-Archives/2014/Brain-Changes-Are-Associated-with-Casual-Marijuana-Use-in-Young-Adults

For more information on marijuana and its health effects, visit http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana   

For information on marijuana research at NIDA, see
http://www.drugabuse.gov/marijuana-research-nida

For information on NIDA's role in providing marijuana for medical research,  
http://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/marijuana/nidas-role-in-providing-marijuana-research

For details on therapeutic cannabinoid research projects funded by NIDA http://www.drugabuse.gov/nida-research-therapeutic-benefits-cannabis-cannabinoids

More:  Independently Funded Studies Receiving Research Grade Marijuana - 1999 to present

>>>> more scientific links for consideration:







NIDA: Marijuana   (Research Report Series – Revised July, 2012 – NIH Publication # 12-3859)


 
About the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA)

NIDA Press Office
301-443-6245
media@nida.nih.gov

About the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA): NIDA is a component of the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIDA supports most of the world's research on the health aspects of drug abuse and addiction. The Institute carries out a large variety of programs to inform policy and improve practice. Fact sheets on the health effects of drugs of abuse and information on NIDA research and other activities can be found on the NIDA home page at www.drugabuse.gov. To order publications in English or Spanish, call NIDA's new DrugPubs research dissemination center at 1-877-NIDA-NIH or 240-645-0228 (TDD) or fax or email requests to 240-645-0227 or drugpubs@nida.nih.gov. Online ordering is available at drugpubs.drugabuse.gov. NIDA's media guide can be found at www.drugabuse.gov/publications/media-guide, and its new easy-to-read website can be found at www.easyread.drugabuse.gov.