babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » NDP DELEGATES hope to be out of jail for the convention

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: NDP DELEGATES hope to be out of jail for the convention
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 01 August 2006 08:00 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
yes that's right,,,after speaking with someone from the ndp it was suggested i post what i assumed all here already knew.
after our first eNDProhibition meeting here in Vancouver, 3 or 4 delegates from Hamilton were arrested for breaching the conditions of their bail,(for a butt of a cannabis joint found in an ashtray in their store)
they were brutalized the day after(9 man handled to the floor, handcuffed and arrested)after Hamilton's 4/20 cannabis celebration.
not one arrest happened the day of the so called offences as they gave away cannabis joints

its easier to cut and paste so here is what i sent to the post,

dear editors,


as I write this ,I am full of thoughts of my incarceration 13 years ago, 2 years of my life, wrecked for ever.
all over 2 seven gram bags of cannabis someone sold in my home.
I am a two time convicted drug trafficker.
my incarceration is still very fresh in my mind.
it was a terrible life changing event that no one else should have to go through.
right now Chris Goodwin , the owner of the up in smoke cafe in Hamilton,,sits in a jail cell,,over bail conditions ,, that just about everyone in this country would break.
the judge responsible for this travesty should be ashamed of himself,,,the conditions broken were,,don't see your lover and don't go to your business.
all Canadians should know about the games played by our so called judges in Canada.

since my incarceration I have been working to change the laws here in Canada ,most recently I have an approved resolution headed to jack Layton's NDP convention in Quebec city Sept 10 2006.
I will be traveling to this convention, with others to help it along.
this resolution was approved by 83 % of my riding association. it calls for the ndp to enter legislation to end the war on cannabis by introducing a regulated framework towards legalization and start treating drugs as a health issue,,rather than creating criminals out of our own children.
as no media dares even print the abuses given people like Mr. Goodwin I see we have a big job yet ahead of us.

I believe if you bother to check what is going on with this issue you would find the majority of Canadians agree with what I am proposing.

when will the insanity end?

john shavluk director juror.ca

9350a Alaska way
delta , BC
v4c4r8
604 9305059


i am curious what the members think as Mr Goodwin is on his Hamilton NDP executive association, worked on many NDP elections and 3 of 4 of Hamilton's members of Parliament sit as NDP .
you would think the ndp would finally say something about the ignoring of sane treatment and rights for cannabis users.
see you in Quebec City unless my number comes up and they need to make an example of me.

"""then they came for me and there was no one left to help,,,,,,""


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Ken Burch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8346

posted 01 August 2006 08:21 PM      Profile for Ken Burch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Free the Hamilton 3(or 4)?
From: A seedy truckstop on the Information Superhighway | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 01 August 2006 09:24 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Burch:
Free the Hamilton 3(or 4)?

i believe 9 people were charged eventually
most are out eating up your taxes as they wait to go through the legal money making/creating machine.


nothing has ever changed ,,we are all still serfs


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
No Ideology
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12996

posted 02 August 2006 12:55 PM      Profile for No Ideology        Edit/Delete Post
Why would the NDP have criminals as delegates? We may not agree that smoking pot is a good thing, and many of us don't want our kids to be exposed to it. This is why the majority of us want it to remain illegal.

Do we want druggies making decisions which are going to affect the rest of us? If the NDP wants to be a serious party it should think about criminal background checks.


From: Williamsville, NY | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Kinetix
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5296

posted 02 August 2006 01:02 PM      Profile for Kinetix     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Give me a break- we're all criminals for one reason or another, these days. I'm a two time convicted jaywalker and technically a felon copyright violator- amongst other things. I don't have to have a clean rap sheet to vote; I certainly shouldn't have to worry about one to be a part of the political process.
From: Montréal, Québec | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 02 August 2006 01:05 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Ideology:
This is why the majority of us want it to remain illegal.

The majority of who? Right-wing Americans from New York State?

[ 02 August 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
No Ideology
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12996

posted 02 August 2006 01:10 PM      Profile for No Ideology        Edit/Delete Post
I am not right wing. I have no ideology, as I think ideology is for morons. I have opinions about things, and as someone with children, I think drugs should be illegal. I don't want my children exposed to the drug culture, and possible mental health issues which can come up with usage of drugs.

By the way I am a dual citizen, and I vote in both countries. In the last Canadian election I voted Liberal.

Some of us are law-abiding citizens, and we are not 'all criminals'.


From: Williamsville, NY | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 02 August 2006 01:21 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Why would the NDP have criminals as delegates?

Oh, yes, the dread "marijuana criminal". Hide your daughters and break out "Reefer Madness".

I can advise Mr. No that marijuana has been smoked by members of all political parties.

I am hoping that the NDP is still in the lead in terms of raw numbers, though.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299

posted 02 August 2006 01:23 PM      Profile for Scott Piatkowski   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Ideology:
I am not right wing. I have no ideology, as I think ideology is for morons.

Hate to break it to you, but strongly believing that "ideology is for morons" is itself an ideology. Which, by your own definition...


From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
ouroboros
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9250

posted 02 August 2006 01:32 PM      Profile for ouroboros     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Ideology:
{snip}and as someone with children, I think drugs should be illegal. I don't want my children exposed to the drug culture, and possible mental health issues which can come up with usage of drugs.
{snip}

Some of us are law-abiding citizens, and we are not 'all criminals'.



So you would support outlawing alcohol and tobacco then? And how to you feel about all the drugs that doctors are giving kids for ADD? You agree that should be illegal as well due to the mental health issues.

And I bet you don't speed, run a yellow light, jay walk, photocopy any copyright material (books,mags, newspapers ect..) back up a CD or DVD (a grey area in law), tape a TV show and remove the ads or skip the ads with a PVR (people want this to be illegal). We all break the law. Some laws aren't just.

And as for the background checks for delegates to conventions. If all the parties did that, it may rule out more then a few liberal MPs.

If you think pot should remain illegal, fine. But back to your position with facts and get ready for people to call you on it.


From: Ottawa | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
farnival
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6452

posted 02 August 2006 01:32 PM      Profile for farnival     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Ideology:
... In the last Canadian election I voted Liberal.

Some of us are law-abiding citizens, and we are not 'all criminals'.



bwahahhahahahahahahaha! so how do you feel about all the Liberal criminals who have or are being investigated/prosecuted/serving time, with regards to the Sponsorship Scandal?

perhaps you don't think it's criminal that the leader of the Liberal Party when you voted last, ran a company called Canada Steamship Lines his whole life that flew flags of convienience from other countries to avoid Canadian taxes and canned his Canadian workers and replaced them with transient foreign workers, one flag being from Liberia, the president of which is now on trial for war crimes in Sierra Leon?

perhaps you should rethink your use of criminal and "druggie" sir, and get your drug-war mentality head out of your derriere. That cannabis is illegal is what is criminal, and if, and only if, you take no drugs, perscription included, can you go about calling people names like that. stay in america. i for one will escort you to the border if we should meet.


From: where private gain trumps public interest, and apparently that's just dandy. | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 02 August 2006 03:19 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Ideology:
Why would the NDP have criminals as delegates? We may not agree that smoking pot is a good thing, and many of us don't want our kids to be exposed to it. This is why the majority of us want it to remain illegal.

Do we want druggies making decisions which are going to affect the rest of us? If the NDP wants to be a serious party it should think about criminal background checks.


normally i would not respond to someone so stupid,,

your kids and you are, probably already addicted to the real bad things in life,,,sugar(the number 1 killing drug) wars fought over it
the world lost

meat(#2 killer)why isn't the government putting out commercials telling kids to not eat it because this is a big killer,
well even you must realize they only jail minorities and way too many are addicted here,
and it is a big money maker

alcohol #3 need i say anything see above

want to argue do you

any of your kids been diagnosed with ADD, guess what they give them for that(its totally over prescribed)its called Ritalin,,the street name for it is CRYSTAL METH.
its set us(society) up for a huge wave of cocaine and meth abuse in the next decade,,

remember this so you will know that the best thing to help them,,
(maybe your kids, as i am sure they know they cant talk to you about drugs)
recover from the psychosis has been found to be cannabis
ibogaine an African root is also valuable, but very expense and probably going to be illegal by then, the way things are going.

smoking sage(salvia) is the new kick,,imagine that one becoming illegal now,,try mint.
stay uneducated.

people experiment all the time, where do you think all the advances of man come from.
unfortunately enough didn't die discovering gun-power etc
only the wise man and the chief were allowed to do the drugs in the tribe except for special occasions
imagine the university of Saskatchewan saying evidence says using cannabis(as they have recently) MAKES YOU SMARTER.

cannabis is responsible ,every year,,
for this many deaths..0 ,,,zero

but we have millions in jail for it and we spend 32% of our taxes on the drug issue.
its way cheaper to not jail them and to help them find lives instead.
that's how Amsterdam has been able to get so many heroine addicts to decide to come clean.

even coffee and tea kill more a year

Author Conan Doyle is considered one of the greatest mystery writers of all time for his books ,,,,SHERLOCKE HOLMES,,,
guess what he did everyday for 30 years, while he wrote those books,,,,,,,
he did COCAINE

closet racist i bet,
kids are told lies about drugs and so they try them
the RCMP officer that ran DARE here in BC died and it took them 6 months to admit he was full of heroine and cocaine,,,he was a full blown addict,,but like some doctors are as well, you would never know because they had access to an unending, technically legal supply
check it out idiot wanna be

your stupid comments about what %of the population that wants drugs to stay illegal is pulled straight out of your ass like all your comments.
what a miserable excuse for a parent

and what a waste of flesh
its never to late to get educated
do your kids a favour and tell them its basically harmless but like smoking you would rather they didn't,,,or are you a smoker already

the lies they(police, government and DEA) tell do a lot of harm and prohibition will never work or enrich anyone except the ones working against repealing it,,think about that at least.


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 02 August 2006 06:03 PM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Let me just say that while I do not agree with wacky restrictions like not allowing people with criminal records to vote or participate in the NDP, I really think that the title of this thread and the language used in the posting is a little iffy.

Why do you need associate an NDP convention with your friends going to jail? If you think they should not be in jail because their crimes should not be criminal, why can't you make the argument on that basis alone? I think it is really, really sad that the author of this letter went to jail for having a few grams of weed. However, I can only imagine that a thread like this would be a wet dream to half the neo-con reporters in Canada. Jesus, "NDP delegates hope to be out of jail for the convention" - fuck it sounds like you have already written the National Post headline for yourself.

The jailing of your friends is crummy, but it has nothing to do with their affiliation to the NDP, and honestly, while I think the NDP can make calls to legalize marijuana and still retain its credibility, I have a hard time understanding how tying the NDP to people facing criminal charges will not weaken the party's credibility.


From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 02 August 2006 07:17 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
hey man where ya been ,,


wise up ,,i used to be that naive


i could give you a list of the headlines they haven't printed,,never gonna happen,,

we have hundreds of people posting hundreds of stories and letters to editors that never get picked up

if i believed it would help i would hand deliver them,,they have known of this storey for 8 days.
Mr Goodwin has been in cells for a week already,7 days in a tiny cement room with a toilet, some nights they have you in places with out a mattress(hey i know its Canada but try it sometime, you would think it cruel),they don't care,,there's a new sheriff in town don't ya know ,,
its the Harper holier than YOU gang and trust me,,the RCMP telling Vancouver newspapers they don't want all that crime reporting in their papers is just the tip of the ice-burg


if i cant get anyone to print the storey of Johnathan magbie ,, i certainly cant get anything else printed,,

D.C. Jail Stay Ends in Death For Quadriplegic Md. Man
Care Provided by Hospital, Corrections Dept. in Question


Jonathan Magbie, a 27-year-old Mitchellville man, was sent to jail in the
District last week for 10 days for marijuana possession.

He never made it home.

Paralyzed as a child and unable to even breathe on his own, Magbie died last
Friday after being shuttled between the D.C. jail complex and Greater
Southeast Community Hospital.

At the center of the many questions surrounding his death is whether D.C.
Superior Court and the D.C. Department of Corrections did enough to ensure
adequate care for the quadriplegic inmate.

An investigation is underway, but that is little solace to his family, which
marched on the courthouse this week with signs accusing the judge of killing
Magbie.

"I'm not saying that he shouldn't have been punished, because he did smoke
the marijuana," his mother, Mary Scott, said yesterday, a day after burying
her son. "I just don't think it should have cost him his life."

By the standards of D.C. Superior Court, the 10-day sentence rendered by
Judge Judith E. Retchin was unusually punitive for a first-time offender
such as Magbie. Along with his defense attorney, Boniface Cobbina, a
pre-sentence report had recommended probation, and the U.S. attorney's
office had not objected.

But Retchin rejected probation alone. A former federal prosecutor who became
a Superior Court judge in 1992, Retchin is known to dispense stiff
sentences.

Police, she pointed out, found a gun and cocaine in the vehicle in which
Magbie was stopped in April 2003. And, despite pleading guilty to the
marijuana charge, Magbie told pre-sentence investigators that he would
continue using the drug, which he said made him feel better.

"Mr. Magbie, I'm not giving you straight probation," the judge said,
according to a transcript of the Sept. 20 proceedings. "Although you did not
plead guilty to having this gun, it is just unacceptable to be riding around
in a car with a loaded gun in this city."

Details about Magbie's death were first reported by WJLA-TV (Channel 7).
Magbie was struck by a drunk driver when he was 4 years old; he was
paralyzed from the neck down, and his growth was stunted. Barely five feet
tall and 120 pounds, he moved around on a motorized wheelchair that he
operated with his chin.

For most everything else, from scratching an itch on his head to flushing
his lungs of accumulated fluid, he had to rely on others. Along with his
family, he had nursing care 20 hours a day.

"Jonathan was totally dependent," his mother said. "He couldn't do anything
for himself."

Asked how her son was able to inhale marijuana, Scott said only that "he
learned to do a lot of things."

Ahead of Magbie's sentencing, a staff member in Retchin's chambers contacted
the office of Chief Judge Rufus G. King III to find out whether the D.C.
Corrections Department would be able to house a paralyzed person in a
wheelchair. The answer from the chief judge's office, which is the liaison
with Corrections, was yes.

Leah Gurowitz, a court spokeswoman, said yesterday that the full extent of
Magbie's paralysis was inadvertently not relayed to the chief judge's
office.

Sandy Thomas and her great-nephew Anthony Smith are among several relatives
and friends of Jonathan Magbie at a candlelight vigil outside the D.C. jail.
(Photos Marvin Joseph -- The Washington Post)
In a statement yesterday, Retchin said she was led to believe "that Mr.
Magbie's medical needs could be met; this was such an unintended tragedy. I
would like to convey my deepest sympathy to Mr. Magbie's family."

Even the Correctional Treatment Facility, a jail annex that houses many
inmates with medical or security needs, would not have been able to readily
care for a prisoner such as Magbie, Philip Fornaci, executive director of
the D.C. Prisoners' Legal Services Project, said yesterday.

"I certainly would not say they killed him or any conclusion like that,"
Fornaci said. "But it certainly seems likely that he wouldn't have died if
he hadn't gone to jail."

The initial medical evaluation of Magbie after his arrival at the D.C. jail
on Sept. 20 found him in need of "acute medical attention," according to the
Corrections Department. Within hours, Magbie was moved to Greater Southeast
Community Hospital.

The nature of the medical problem was not specified in a chronology issued
by the Corrections Department, which declined to make officials available to
comment on the specifics of the case. The timeline shows that Magbie arrived
at the jail at 2 p.m. and that he was taken to the hospital at 9:40 p.m.
What happened in between is not explained.

The next day, Magbie was discharged and placed in the Correctional Treatment
Facility, the jail annex that is operated by Corrections Corporation of
America under a contract with the city. But almost from the moment Magbie
arrived there, a senior doctor was concerned that Magbie might not receive
the care he needed, according to his mother and a court official.

The court official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the doctor
believed that Magbie belonged at the hospital and pressed Greater Southeast,
which handles inmate hospitalizations, to take him back. But the hospital
rebuffed the request, the official said.

Hoping to change the hospital's mind, the physician asked Retchin to issue a
court order, the official said. But the judge declined, saying she lacked
the authority to issue any such order.

The hospital said in a statement that it could not comment because of
federal privacy regulations. It said that it provides "top-quality" care.

Apparently resigned to having him stay on at the jail annex, the medical
staff decided after a couple of days of back-and-forth with Magbie's mother
and attorney to allow Magbie's mother to bring his ventilator.

Told to bring the device down Friday morning, she did, showing up about 10
a.m. A half-hour earlier, she would later learn, her son had been taken by
ambulance back to Greater Southeast.

That night, she received a call from a warden telling her that her son was
dead.


hey if you know of a way ,,,trust me 3 million of us would love to hear it ,,,,

thank you in advance,,,,next

Michelle i took out the papers address,,i don't know what else to take out,,i have correspondence from all involved and took this from cannabis culture's web site or my own.
i have written about this case quit a bit
i don't think i am infringing on anyone, but if you want the whole thing removed let me know.
its been almost 2 years and i doubt anyone cares here anyway. look how it gets ignored.
i think maybe i came to the wrong site(good site don't get me wrong, i thought this was a site of compassionate political people)does anyone know of the site i am looking for
sorry to cause any grief ,let me know

john shavluk

[ 03 August 2006: Message edited by: shavluk ]


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 02 August 2006 07:19 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
shavluk, you're violating copyright by posting that entire article on babble. Would you please delete it except for a relevant paragraph or two and link to the rest. If a link is unavailable, that doesn't mean that the copyright is no longer in effect, and you still can't post it in its entirety here.

Thanks.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dana Larsen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10033

posted 04 August 2006 08:33 PM      Profile for Dana Larsen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Why would the NDP have criminals as delegates? We may not agree that smoking pot is a good thing, and many of us don't want our kids to be exposed to it. This is why the majority of us want it to remain illegal.

Hopefully there will be a chance to debate this issue at the NDP Convention, so that the party can decide what the majority of its members want the party to stand for: Criminal Prohibition, or Regulated Access?

I don't think a majority of Canadians support putting pot smokers in jail. You can check out a series of Canadian opinion polls on marijuana here.

Support for Decriminalization (*survey terms are shown in parenthesis)

2005: 59% Canada, 57% U.S. ("possession should not always result in a criminal record"

2003: 69% ("fines rather than jail sentences for marijuana possession") SES Research

2003: 58% ("reduced criminal implications") Decima Research

2003: 83% ("want pot prohibition to be less stringent")

2003: 65% ("decriminalization")

2002: 50% ("decriminalization")

2000: 65% ("decriminalization")

1997: 51% ("should not be a criminal offence")

1987: 39% ("decriminalization")

Support for Legalization (*survey terms are shown in parenthesis)

2004: 53% ("regulating and taxing")

2000: 47% ("legalization")


quote:
Do we want druggies making decisions which are going to affect the rest of us?

Well we do have quite a few alcoholics in Canadian politics, and most politicians drink alcohol even if not to excess.

Ralph Klein has had a very successful career despite being a serious alcoholic.

And John A MacDonald would often drink to excess, disappearing for days into alcoholic stupor. Yet he is the great Father of Confederation.

A majority of NDP events I have been to have involved alcohol consumption.

So some pot-smoking politicians might be a welcome change of pace.

quote:
Why do you need associate an NDP convention with your friends going to jail? If you think they should not be in jail because their crimes should not be criminal, why can't you make the argument on that basis alone?

quote:
I have a hard time understanding how tying the NDP to people facing criminal charges will not weaken the party's credibility.

The people involved are all NDP members who are active in the party, some of them hold executive positions, and some have been elected as delegates for the federal convention.

Although their activism is not officially endorsed by the party, it is consistent with the NDP view that marijuana smokers should not be punished and criminalized.

The owner, and most of the staff of Hamilton's Up in Smoke cafe, belong to an organized wing within the NDP called "End Prohibition" and we have members in every province.

So I think Shavluk posted this here because he wanted to find out what other NDPers might think about this, and to see what people here thought about their activism, and the issue in general.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 09 August 2006 11:11 AM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
Chris Goodwin celebrated his 27th birthday on Monday in a Hamilton's jail.
he gets another chance for release on Aug 22 2006.

had he done a serious crime he would probably
have been released.

sure hope he is out for the convention to help me be ignored by jack layton and the spin team.

it seems the

HARPER HOLY-ER THAN YOU TOUR
COMING TO A CITY NEAR YOU

has arrived in Hamilton.

i'm glad we can have all of these posts over some insecure mans use of his earned degree's during his indoctrination in academia,,i just pity people like that. its like """look someone says i have memorized enough of others opinions to put this here""",,big deal.
what do you know about life obviously not enough

and lots of speculation about which of the no names is going to resurrect the liberals and yet we have serious problems coming our way because
the media spoon feeds us the issues, instead of us raising them.

we have Canadians being secretly hidden in china awaiting execution and you hardly hear about it.

we have prisoners in Guantanamo killing them selves as they have waited 5 years for trial,,,, to see their kids,,be free,,, and no one cares.
doc Kevorkian,,,who, what where

g bush senior,,"if you take the first 10 miles of kuwait we could get oil up to 21 dollars a barrel"(5th estate from us embassy papers)
now what are we at 77 dollars hmm good job there fellas.
what memories of humans,,,what did you eat 2 days ago,,oh i see yes just the important stuff

well i hope gw bush's new surprise scheduled for the November elections makes you forget all that you are supposed to as it makes no difference anyway,find any lint there

yes Virginia the was a terrorist attack by foreigners on the world trade centers

no wonder no one cares about a few million in jail for cannabis world wide,,,they are so busy hording and looking in their navels

awaiting the next great topic from all of you enlightened minds


By way of illustration, on a recent trip, the Prime Minister was asked
by a flight attendant to turn off his cellphone and BlackBerry. Mr.
Harper declined. The pilot then made a request, saying it was for
safety purposes. The PM relented. But, at the end of the journey, one
of his staffers gave the pilot some news: His services would no longer
be required on prime ministerial trips.

The aviator should have known that this is the new Ottawa. In
Harpertown, you fall in line or fall from favour

[ 09 August 2006: Message edited by: shavluk ]


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 09 August 2006 03:51 PM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dana Larsen:

I don't think a majority of Canadians support putting pot smokers in jail. You can check out a series of Canadian opinion polls on marijuana...

I personally support legalizing pot...however I would like to point out that just because Canadians don't want to see pot smokers jailed, doesn't mean they approve of their activities. Many people don't want to see men who cheat on their wives jailed either, but they disapprove. Many of us who oppose the age of consent law coming in don't support 15 year olds and 21 years olds having sex, but we think that jailing people doesn't help.

Moreover, my point about dragging the NDP into the personal struggles of several NDP members does not look very savoury. If an NDP member goes to jail 6 months from now because they are 20 and they have sex with a 15 year old, while I might not support their imprisonment, I wouldn't want a press release being issued using my party's name and saying "NDP Delegates Hope to Be Out of Jail for Sex Crimes by Convention." I really feel that for many Canadians, they are going to be turned off by these jailhouse pleas...

It's hard for me to explain why...I think the public is more supportive of people who try to change laws in ways besides breaking them...and I somehow don't think these people going to jail is going to help the cause of marijuana decriminalization.


From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 09 August 2006 03:51 PM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dana Larsen:

I don't think a majority of Canadians support putting pot smokers in jail. You can check out a series of Canadian opinion polls on marijuana...

I personally support legalizing pot...however I would like to point out that just because Canadians don't want to see pot smokers jailed, doesn't mean they approve of their activities. Many people don't want to see men who cheat on their wives jailed either, but they disapprove. Many of us who oppose the age of consent law coming in don't support 15 year olds and 21 years olds having sex, but we think that jailing people doesn't help.

Moreover, my point about dragging the NDP into the personal struggles of several NDP members does not look very savoury. If an NDP member goes to jail 6 months from now because they are 20 and they have sex with a 15 year old, while I might not support their imprisonment, I wouldn't want a press release being issued using my party's name and saying "NDP Delegates Hope to Be Out of Jail for Sex Crimes by Convention." I really feel that for many Canadians, they are going to be turned off by these jailhouse pleas...

It's hard for me to explain why...I think the public is more supportive of people who try to change laws in ways besides breaking them...and I somehow don't think these people going to jail is going to help the cause of marijuana decriminalization.


From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 09 August 2006 05:17 PM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Excuse me? Smoking pot in your mind is the same as statutory rape and cheating of your spouse? Please!!!!

Jesus H Christ, why are some people so freaking obsessed with weed? Why not focus your moral outrage on real crimes, you know, like white collar crimes, corporate crimes, crimes against workers, you know, the crimes that actually affect people in our country. Instead me and other cannabis smokers are just like rapists and cheaters! How nice!

BTW, I smoked dope through my entire school career. I have an MA with an A average. What I am others chose to put in our bodies is our business. No one else's. The Drug War is bullshit meant to ensure enslavement of the people in this country. Nothing more...

Better go now though, I have to eat some Cheeto's and stare mindlessly into space while fantasizing about Ho Ho's. Then maybe I'll do some colouring in my colouring book. Hope I can stay between the lines!!


From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
EmmaG
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12605

posted 09 August 2006 07:15 PM      Profile for EmmaG        Edit/Delete Post
What stargazer said.

Pot is like a cigarette and prozac rolled into one. I have teenage relative who have anti-depressants and stuff pushed onto them by teachers and doctors, so how did this one little plant get so demonized?


I hope these delegates get out of jail and have renewed energy to bring the issues of legalization (not decriminalization) to the forefront.


From: nova scotia | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 09 August 2006 08:18 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
pencil-skirt,,

its already been expressed the disgust we feel towards your attitude,,makes me sometimes just want to forget what I'm trying to do,,

then i think about your kids or grand-kids getting arrested and jailed and going through what i have been through,,,because they chose a plant over fermented fruit for example(alcohol, kills cells and causes birth defects)

because you are right ,,,if you don't smoke/eat it who cares,,

if 75 year old people prefer it to man-made pharmaceuticals,,so what jail them too

so what if that's Canadians they are arresting its only 60thousand a year and don't forget now cops have given them selves judges credentials and the authority to only charge 1 in 10 as the liberals wanted a softer approach, doesnt mean they don't abuse all 10,,

so they are really shaking down and hassling and abusing about 600thousand annually,,i bet there is a hell of a lot more than most of you would realize

how about having your vehicle shaken down to find nothing,,,still costs us tax payers millions and little kids are getting picked off by pedophiles that get less time than cannabis users.

f ck man or woman you just stopped me in my tracks ,,,forgive me,,, but its because of your utter stupid comments,,i better stop before i get mad

[ 10 August 2006: Message edited by: shavluk ]


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 August 2006 08:34 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Okay, let's not call people stupid.

I don't think she was saying that smoking pot is like statutory rape or adultery. She was making an analogy between things people might disapprove of but not want to make illegal. I think it's a reach to claim that you honestly think pencil-skirt thinks smoking pot is as bad as statutory rape.

[ 09 August 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 10 August 2006 09:11 PM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by shavluk:
pencil-skirt,,

its already been expressed the disgust we feel towards your attitude.
[ 10 August 2006: Message edited by: shavluk ]


Shavluk, I don't know why you couldn't take the time to read my message. I do not support people going to jail for smoking marijuana. I believe the law should be overturned. I smoke marijuana. I think it is fine. I think some of its advocates - like yourself - do it a disservice. The NDP is, along with the Greens, one of the only parties advocating a progressive position on marijuana. I think that associating the NDP with people who have broken the law and are going to jail does a disservice to the goal that you and I share - repealing the sections of the criminal code related to marijuana.

Do not call me names or call me stupid. I wonder how your friends got sent to jail - because I have encountered police numerous times while smoking a joint. Perhaps they called them stupid and said "f ck you" to them and then ranted for 10 minutes. I could see how the cops would lose their patience and arrest them. I do not agree with their reaction, but I understand it.

I think this is the key that advocates for all causes need to learn: you need to see the perpsective of those who resist you and try to find a middle ground. How do you think we won the same-sex marriage battle? Most Canadians wouldn't be supportive of in your face radical activism. They would find it unsavoury. You have about 1/3 of Canadians who supported same sex marriage, about 1/3 dead set against it, and 1/3 in the mushy middle. You need to target the mushy middle. This middle was won over through language regarding equal marriage and equal rights, using images of families of same sex couples, and using calm, rational dialogue. I suspect that the Canadian public is similarly divided on marijuana. If you want to target that mushy middle, sending press releases from jail is not going to work. Using heated rhetoric is not going to be persuasive. *I* do not believe that smoking pot is equivalent to pedophilia (personally I don't think a 15 year old and a 20 year old having consensual sex is pedophilia and that was my point!) but I think there are many who regard pot use as a crime, and you are not softening their perceptions by promoting the cause the way you are.

And I also think you are reducing the chance for the NDP and other political parties to speak out vigorously on marijuana by associating the party with breaking the law.

I hope I have made myself clear. DO not attack me for approaching this goal differently than you.


From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 10 August 2006 11:50 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I wasn't aware that babblers are considered the "mushy middle" of Canadian politics.
From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 11 August 2006 07:03 AM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh was this press release merely sent to Babble? Seems to me that by writing "Dear Editors" this press release was meant to be sent to the Hamilton Spectator and other newspapers.
From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lazy Tony
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11598

posted 11 August 2006 07:17 AM      Profile for Lazy Tony   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Is marijuana use typically associated with an inability to use commas correctly?
From: Trinity-Spadina | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 11 August 2006 07:53 AM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Pencil skirt, marijuana's illegality is a moot issue, since it is arbitrary and part of a failed war on drugs. WE are also people who vote NDP and our voices should be heard. As part of my support for the NDP I expect them to advocate for us pot smokers as well. It is not going to taint anything election wise as a majority of the population believes in decriminalization or has no problem with people smoking pot. So while you think this shouldn't be an issue, I certainly do, as do other NDP supporters. Why should the NDP take a hard line of marijuana? Why would they wish to associate themselves with arcane and backwards drug laws? The NDP is a progressive party and Canada was (and still an be) a progressive country.

Your rights do not supersede mine.


From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 11 August 2006 08:05 AM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stargazer:
As part of my support for the NDP I expect them to advocate for us pot smokers as well.
...
Your rights do not supersede mine.


And should that advocacy involve lobbying for our jailed members? Hm, I don't think that is really going to gain as much public support. I never claimed "my rights" superceded yours, so I really don't get what you are suggesting. I am suggesting associating the NDP with individuals who are in jail is not the best way to be effective advocates.

[ 11 August 2006: Message edited by: pencil-skirt ]


From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Catchfire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4019

posted 11 August 2006 08:18 AM      Profile for Catchfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't really understand why people are villifying pencil-skirt here. It's absurd. She is pro-legalization, for chrissakes. And what's more, she's 100% right.

If you want to legalize pot and not just decriminalize it, you have to change your approach. Yes, jailing potsmokers is a punishment unfit for the crime. It is too expensive to implement, inefficient, and overly harsh. But this is no argument for legalization.

Pot smoking while innocuous, does not contribute anything to society. Since it is in opposition o the current status quo, we need to go over and above in order to legalize it. This means discussing the economic benefits of a hemp and taxable marijuana cigarette market. This means gathering a consensus from (retch) The Fraser Institute and the left wing. It does not mean swearing in court because fuck, man, I'ma just trying to get high. That might work to decriminalize it, but it might equally backfire (remember when pot was de facto decriminalized three years ago? And then suddenly there was a lot of public pot smoking and they re-tightened legislation and made pot crimes prosecutable again? Sound familiar?)

Pencil-Skirt is correct when she says marijuana legalization is on the brink of becoming a respectible policy-change initiative. A bunch of idjits calling themselves NDP and screaming about civil liberties (a term they clearly do not understand) is precisely a "disservice" to our cause.

-Signed,
A heavy potsmoker


From: On the heather | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 11 August 2006 08:23 AM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hmm, yes civil liberties be damned. Actually I don't think I was screaming or vilifying anyone. I just happen to disagree.
From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
lombar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12908

posted 11 August 2006 08:41 AM      Profile for lombar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
pencil-skirt

I personally support legalizing pot...however I would like to point out that just because Canadians don't want to see pot smokers jailed, doesn't mean they approve of their activities.


That's ok because your approval(or 'theirs') was niether solicited, desired, or even necessary. Just stop using the heavy hand of the injustice system to make people who chose cannabis over booze criminals arbitrarily.. in a drug DRENCHED society. It's prejudice and hypocrisy.


quote:
catchfire
Pot smoking while innocuous, does not contribute anything to society.

So when does something have to make 'contributions to society' in order to be legal? Besides this is just an opinion, many artists and scientists have used cannabis, how can you say that it did not benefit them? It is because of the prejudice in your sentence. The prohibiton of cannabis has been an absolute disaster and guess what? If your kids want crack, they'll get it... the only trouble is that if they get arrested they will be screwd for life. You can recover from an addiction but not a conviction.

People who depend upon prohibition to 'protect their children' increase their childrens chances of seeing a prison cell, being exposed to dealers who want to hook them on hard drugs, learn to distrust lying authorities, and leave kids having to 'trust' adults not to imprison them for drug abuse. Kids are not stupid, they have great hypocrisy detectors.


From: New Westminster, BC | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Catchfire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4019

posted 11 August 2006 09:03 AM      Profile for Catchfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Um, good work, lombar. I await your upcoming publication outlining how marijuana helped develop insulin. And read my post next time. I didn't say anything about people not able to get crack. So, I'm not sure where you're going with this.

Stargazer, I didn't say you were screaming, but I do feel pencil "your rights don't supercede mine" skirt has been unnecessarily targeted, especially since she's actually a pot advocate. Many in this thread keep bringin up arguments about how making pot illegal is pointless, and yet no one has disagreed with that point. Also, I didn't say anything about damning civil liberties--more evidence that you are not actually reading this thread rationally.

[ 11 August 2006: Message edited by: Catchfire ]


From: On the heather | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
lombar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12908

posted 11 August 2006 09:22 AM      Profile for lombar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Um, good work, lombar.

Mockery.


quote:
I await your upcoming publication outlining how marijuana helped develop insulin. And read my post next time.

And I hope you are holding your breath. Truly.

When insulin was discovered... there was no drug prohibition... so what?

quote:
So, I'm not sure where you're going with this.

That is not a surprise but I will spell it out for you. Prohibition does not work and it is carried on by prejudice like "Pot smoking while innocuous, does not contribute anything to society."


From: New Westminster, BC | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Catchfire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4019

posted 11 August 2006 09:32 AM      Profile for Catchfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If you don't want to be mocked, lombar, you should read my posts. Specifically the parts that say I am against pot prohibition and, in fact, pro-legalization. But if you do like mockery, keep lecturing me on the pitfalls of prohibition. And also if you like hearing yourself type.
From: On the heather | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Merowe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4020

posted 11 August 2006 09:57 AM      Profile for Merowe     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Catchfire:


Pot smoking while innocuous, does not contribute anything to society.

I'm an artist. A painter. I think the best work I've done so far in my career happened some 15 years ago and began with a long night walk with my brother and a spliff of very good hash. My subsequent perceptions, modified as they were by cannabinoids fascinating effects, were not ones I would have had in a normal waking mental state.

The actual production work followed in the weeks and months ahead, without aid of stimulants; but the kernel of the idea was born from a hashish high. I value that insight, and many others I have derived from the use of marijuana and would dispute the above contention.


From: Dresden, Germany | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 11 August 2006 11:59 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
so you believe Rosa Parks was wrong when she refused to go to the back of the bus,,

gays should be jailed and just wait for their freedoms,,,hmm,,ok,,,and what,, my rights will just be recognized,,i see others will just come to their senses ,,i see,,

yes virginia maybe dont smoke so much,,

I'm not really getting your reasons for your thoughts and to me activist means more than saying annonumously that you smoke a little cannabis
i will stick to my beliefs and those of any other person,
who in their breaking of unjust laws,, helped change them,,,,

you know when i was growing up we always had a so called media/cop problem with Asian crime gangs who were stealing all those husbands money by making them come running to their gambling dens
(the crack house of its day)

i don't see more than a few phycos blowing the wad for lottery tickets or blowing up the casinos

actually mostly old ladies being fleeced,in them now

should we all be denied gambling again?

lets go back to more cops on TV smashing one arm bandits
(now its hey i want that for the basement)
used to see that quite often and yet now theres no more shoot outs on a Saturday night cause the bookie was broke,,
they got the best bookies now
the government and they always pay.

we all can decide to be idiots,, to some,, and think those indians built those places to lose money thats right we are just luckier than others.

i dont spend a cent doing that and yet i don't think anyone should go to jail for it and if i was one of those people jailed for it i would sure understand the urgency of why it should change even if lots of cowardly people felt we should not rock the boat as they haven't been caught yet,,,,

all that changed to move the criminals into government jobs,,was changing a law


chris is in jail for political reasons no less that anyone else thats stood up to stupidity and ignorance in laws
they have bullied me and thousands of us in this country and even the ndp have had it on the back burner for 30 years


screw the back burner,,its time to not turn your head and hide,, its time to stand up collectively and get this party to do what it means to do /pretends to do / and will eventually do

if you still think one of my numerous letters to the editor is a press release that would ever get picked up and talked about in this country,,,you can take solace in the fact i know why you say the things you say,,,ignorance is bliss,,i miss it
if you now still dont realize that this is about more than anyones right to get high ,,this is about the wholesale abuse of citizens rights in this country for a whole bunch of stupidity that by the year 2006 ,,you'd think would be ridiculous
well than you must understand that you are brainwashed because this is the only way it happens as we must break the law everyday until average people are broken even financially from jail/cop/prison charges by this abuse of my rights and your taxes,,where the hell do you think the health care money went?//,,hmmm

when you figure it out then it will change


if any have a problem with comma's,,,get over it why would anyone with your attitude care about the proper ""anything""


and i hate to break it to some of you but there has been drug use since the first day man discovered his mouth and the second day after he discovered fire,,,always will be here,
if you still deny sugar is a drug dont respond,,if you think this is a health issue,,dont respond

the problem is when we pick a random substance and make it illegal as they are doing with sage and mint leaves right now,,,if you are someone that thinks they like dandelions and the majority make dandelions illegal,,well i got news for you it isn't pleasant if you were left behind


do your best to hide
and post comments annonumouslly
as the real people try to win your rights,,
care to help pay my way there i will keep your identity secret as if anyone doesnt know,,,
let me know when your # comes up

maybe if jack layton had said something in the 3 years i have been dogging him we would not have NDP delegates sitting in jail

and i would not displease the status quo

GET OVER IT


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
lombar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12908

posted 12 August 2006 10:58 AM      Profile for lombar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I do like the sound of typing! You still did not get it I suppose. The broad overgeneralisation that 'cannabis has made no contribution to society' is a baseless opinion. The fact that the NDP are so willing to allow cannabis users to be imprisoned and with the exception of a very few, not very vocal about opposing the injustice of prohibition... most likely because of mistaken ideas like 'dope makes no contribution to society"... "we are afraid of losing seats" so principles are traded for power and that makes the NDP better than the other two parties how exactly?

So yes, your off the cuff remark was very offensive, indicative of the lack of support drug law reforms really have within NDP. I woke up spitting tacks yesterday so sorry if I seemed to bite your head off. I am anti prohibition, pro legalisation and PO'ed about the backwards motion the conservatives are FORCING upon Canada.



From: New Westminster, BC | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Catchfire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4019

posted 12 August 2006 11:27 AM      Profile for Catchfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You dare comparing your right to smoke with racial segregation? Shameful.

I never, ever said that civil disobedience should not be part of activism. If people weren't getting arrested, the inequal burden of sentence wouldn't have been revealed. I, along with p-s, simply objected to these activists' association with the NDP. If for nothing else, then the terrible grammar and spelling. Not to mention the wild, bombastic and laughable rhetoric.

Ernest Hemingway wrote five great novels while plastered. Coleridge was a laudnum addict. Does this mean that alcohol and heroin contribute meaningfully to society? Sorry, it does not. Now, it is a form of pleasure, and pleasure has its place in society, but again, you are working against the status quo so you have to think bigger. This means pitching the economic benefits of hemp farming, taxation, slack to the legal system and health benefits. Not social smoking. You have a stigma to overturn, so the work needs to be far-reaching and broad-sighted. Sometimes it sounds like pot activists can't see beyond the end of their bong.

It's fucking weed, man. Not a wonder drug. Civil disobedience has taken you so far, but it won't do it alone. You need the NDP to give the campaign respectability.


From: On the heather | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 12 August 2006 12:12 PM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bullshit Catchfire. I dare you to go down to a compassion house and tell the people there, who rely on weed for aches and pains and various diseases, that weed is just weed. Weed has a lot of medicinal purpose and the fact that you are denouncing people who support the activism because of spelling and grammar makes you the one with the clear problem, not them.
From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 12 August 2006 12:29 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Catchfire:
You dare comparing your right to smoke with racial segregation? Shameful.

I never, ever said that civil disobedience should not be part of activism. If people weren't getting arrested, the inequal burden of sentence wouldn't have been revealed. I, along with p-s, simply objected to these activists' association with the NDP. If for nothing else, then the terrible grammar and spelling. Not to mention the wild, bombastic and laughable rhetoric.

Ernest Hemingway wrote five great novels while plastered. Coleridge was a laudnum addict. Does this mean that alcohol and heroin contribute meaningfully to society? Sorry, it does not. Now, it is a form of pleasure, and pleasure has its place in society, but again, you are working against the status quo so you have to think bigger. This means pitching the economic benefits of hemp farming, taxation, slack to the legal system and health benefits. Not social smoking. You have a stigma to overturn, so the work needs to be far-reaching and broad-sighted. Sometimes it sounds like pot activists can't see beyond the end of their bong.

It's fucking weed, man. Not a wonder drug. Civil disobedience has taken you so far, but it won't do it alone. You need the NDP to give the campaign respectability.


maybe someone like you who contributes nothing to society should be removed as well
your arguments are a joke and not worth responding to

go join the HARPER HOLY-ER THAN YOU TOUR

thats where you belong ,,

assholes gonna tell me what to do with my body and life,,,no wonder hitler could get away with what he did ,,as people like you allowed it
insecurity problems eh

my grammer is a problem for you,,,great comeback

are you even ndp or just a shit disturber

dont bother saying any more on my thread as you are just a fool


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Catchfire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4019

posted 12 August 2006 12:53 PM      Profile for Catchfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stargazer, I repeatedly referred to "social smoking" and not medicinal smoking, which is obviously useful for society, which is why it is currently legal. Why do most posters on this thread seem incapable of registering the nuance of this argument? Whatever I say, you seem to capitualte to calling me "holier-than-thou" and blind to the uses of pot. Again: I AM AN AVID AND HABITUAL POT SMOKER AND SUPPORT FULL LEGALIZATION OF SAID SUBSTANCE. Shit.

I don't usually resort to spelling flames, but since I am trying to assert that the pot legalization movement needs credibility and respectability, it seems poignant to me that a lack of effort to speak and write clearly is indicative of why these posters don't seem to get it. I don't want to tell you what to do with your own body, that's the bloody point.

I guess you guys really need a punching bag since no one against pot legalization has posted on this thread. If you really need to grind your axe, keep up your laughable accusations about calling me "holier-than-thou" while you continually miss the goddamn point.

quote:
assholes gonna tell me what to do with my body and life,,,no wonder hitler could get away with what he did ,,as people like you allowed it

Edited to add: What, Hitler? I'm Hitler now? Shit, now my advocation of a more focussed activist campaign has moved beyond casing segregation and is now being compared to the holocaust. If I wasn't laughing so hard, I'd complain to a moderator.

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: Catchfire ]


From: On the heather | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 August 2006 01:01 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
shavluk, maybe chill out a bit, okay? Namecalling is not okay. And, although I would think this would be pretty obvious, neither is this:

quote:
no wonder hitler could get away with what he did ,,as people like you allowed it

From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 12 August 2006 01:52 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
this is rediculous,,hitler, hitler,hitler,what we cant even say the name anymore
get a life ,,this political correctness

sorry but its not against anything to say
i understand why hitler got away with what he did

my opinion is my opinion it comes from dealing with prohibitionists,dont like that well we dont live in iran so get over it

and to you, we have a lot of room at the convention for you to come help

oh yeah ,,you are anonymous and just spouting off

never intented to come out of the closet and help,,i forgot


how many other languages can you type in?

why dont you go join that other insecure(my opinion)guy and add a few letters after your phoney name


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 13 August 2006 07:08 PM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by shavluk:

oh yeah ,,you are anonymous and just spouting off

never intented to come out of the closet and help,,i forgot


how many other languages can you type in?

why dont you go join that other insecure(my opinion)guy and add a few letters after your phoney name


What a crazy string of incoherent sentences!

Shavluk, no one here is a "prohibitionist." I seriously question your motives. I have been at the Million Marijuana March around a lot of stoned people but none of them sounded as angry and incoherent as you.

Coming on here and calling your fellow posters "fools", telling them to join Harper, saying people like us allowed Hitler to do what he did, saying that we are "hiding", suggesting we are "ignorant", and saying you are "disgusted" at my "attitude" (which is of course not even mine, but you didn't bother to read mine)...i wonder if you aren't in fact an anti-pot activist trying to show the world the damaging effects of smoking too much pot. Trying to scare us?!

Because why else would you be so hostile on a board of supporters? It seems to me that you must, in fact, be working for Vic Toews and just trying to change a few opinions on here by pretending to be a really, really, cracked out pothead.

I hope your friend gets out of jail. But I hope you don't go as a character witness or anything, because then he's going to be locked up for awhile.

I also hope one day you learn the #1 rule of all kinds of advocacy - LEARN YOUR AUDIENCE. Don't attack your audience. Unless of course you are actually working for Vic Toews, in which case you are doing a great job.


From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 13 August 2006 07:54 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
very good comeback ,,,pat yourself on the back,,


but here's the thing

jail is a very good educational tool,,
so is pain,,

don't like that i go get yours and my rights
don't like where i come from and that i lived in a car in high school and only have GED


who cares,,,

others with more skills can step up when i am finished .
in the mean time i plan to tell people about whats happening to ndp delegates in jail in a country that professes to support ending this ridiculous prohibition on cannabis ,,,a plant that to some,, the laws against it died a few years ago and no politician will or dare address that situation,,to the leader of this party being muzzled after recruiting people like me to address this situation
yes i know the environment has changed since the martin liberals shot them selves in the foot

so what?


you can resort to exploiting my obvious lack of skills,, by your standards,,,

as i am standing on the highway ,,revved/fully gassed and waiting to go make a fool of my self
(to people that think like you),
i understand that and then some,,

still don't care,,

what you/they or anyone else thinks of that fact is irrelovent by this time and that's for sure if its as sanctimonious as your written thoughts,,,

all i can do is use what i have to try to do this

i was in jail for hurting NO ONE
MR CHRIS GOODWIN is now,,he shouldn't be

don't like how this looks to the ndp(i am one)

then maybe they should stand up and join Harper to jail me again or help open the NDP's mouths,,
like they want to/should do

and help me make them take a huge leap of faith and be rewarded with a big surprise from the real voters,,there are at times up to 50% of the voters that we can draw from
human rights are important in today's environment i think jack would do just great with going the human rights strategic route,,,
he can not/should not be like the other 2 national leaders unless he doesn't mind always being last

if my style bothers you so much why do keep responding?


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Dana Larsen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10033

posted 13 August 2006 09:27 PM      Profile for Dana Larsen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Pot smoking while innocuous, does not contribute anything to society

There's millions of people around the world who believe that their use of marijuana contributes to their personal health, well-being and spiritual awareness.

Many writers, musicians, painters and other artists credit their use of marijuana with giving them inspiration and insight. Numerous scientists feel the same way about marijuana helping them achieve useful insights and perspective.

And there's many medicinal uses for marijuana, ranging from treatment for epilepsy, cancer, MS and other spasmodic ailments, pain management, appetite stimulation, and the list goes on.

quote:
How do you think we won the same-sex marriage battle? Most Canadians wouldn't be supportive of in your face radical activism. They would find it unsavoury.

So you're saying that members of the gay movement didn't break the anti-sodomy laws until after they had been changed? And that the gay movement disassociated itself from gay activists that had been imprisoned for their political actions and beliefs?

The gay movement continues to hold a pretty "in your face" Gay Pride Parade every year in many cities across North America. In Vancouver, there's lots of beautiful semi-naked people dancing lasciviously on the street.

This kind of openly sexual gay behaviour would have been considered outrageous and extreme a few decades ago, with some supporters like you saying "I think there are many who regard homosexuality as a crime, and you are not softening their perceptions by promoting the cause the way you are."

quote:
This means gathering a consensus from (retch) The Fraser Institute and the left wing.

The Fraser Institute alreadysupports legalization of marijuana. So does the Canadian Bar Association.

quote:
You dare comparing your right to smoke with racial segregation? Shameful.

This is a valid comparison, especially since the anti-marijuana laws came directly out of racism and targeting of black people. The anti-drug laws are very disproportionally targeted against minorities, especially in the USA.

The anti-drug laws were all originally against plants used by natives and minorities. Coca plants, marijuana plants, psilocybe mushrooms, these are all plants used by native and minority groups for religious and spiritual purposes. They were all banned originally as a means of destroying the culture and religions of these peoples.


quote:
It's fucking weed, man. Not a wonder drug.

Marijuana and all other plants should be allowed for anyone to grow. Regardless if they are a wonder drug or a weed.

But marijuana is a beautiful plant, revered by millions of people around the world as an ally, a spiritual benefactor, and a powerful medicine.


quote:
Civil disobedience has taken you so far, but it won't do it alone. You need the NDP to give the campaign respectability.

We need the NDP to introduce legislation to change Canada's drug policy and legalize marijuana. And we need either the Liberals and/or the Conservatives to also support this legislation in Parliament so it passes.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 15 August 2006 03:12 PM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dana Larsen:

We need the NDP to introduce legislation to change Canada's drug policy and legalize marijuana. And we need either the Liberals and/or the Conservatives to also support this legislation in Parliament so it passes.


I totally agree. In order to meet this goal, we need to not accuse others of "not liking" us, and "not liking where i come from and that i lived in a car in high school and only have GED." Attacking anyone is not going to get us to the point of legislation. Nor is associating our goals with jail.

Just my two cents. If you really think that doing those things brings Canada closer to decriminalization, or legalization, I'd like to hear why you think that.


From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
lombar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12908

posted 15 August 2006 03:39 PM      Profile for lombar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"Nor is associating our goals with jail."

Seems pretty difficult since the goal decrim or outright legalisation is to prevent people from going to jail for cannabis.

To be quite frank, it was Jack Layton on Pot tv that finally convinced me to get involved, imagine my dismay at the lack of any representation... So I liken politics to a cess pool and here I am swimming in the ^&%#! I went from having no faith in the system to having negative faith in the system... faith that it will never serve the little people, that the profits of the rich will always be the mill that grinds the human spirit into degradation and slavery. War, death, profit. The drug war is just one more aspect of the continuous circus, an injustice that could be easily fixed if not for the intransigence of some and the fear of others.


From: New Westminster, BC | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Catchfire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4019

posted 15 August 2006 03:46 PM      Profile for Catchfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dana, I addressed marijuana's alleged "artistic" contribution to society above. The case does not hold water, and you should see that. As for medicinal benefits, these are obvious, and I addressed those too: social smoking contributes nothing meaningful to society.

I know the Fraser Institute supports legalization, that's why I mentioned them. My point was that the NDP should point to the broad spectrum of support legalization has as a strategy.

And you won't get far comparing segregation or gay-rights to marijuana legalization. One is a simple habit of choice and leisure, harmless enough, and enjoyable enough, and not worth the effort to stop. The other people died for, and continue to die for, for no other reason except how they were born. Any attempt to connect the two to add weight to an already strong argument smacks of self-consciousness, and is, quite frankly, despicable, as it diminshes the cost of the millions of lives that racism and homophobia have caused. I would reckon that the number of people who have died because of marijuana precisely equals the number who have died from it.

Edited to add:

quote:
To be quite frank, it was Jack Layton on Pot tv that finally convinced me to get involved, imagine my dismay at the lack of any representation... So I liken politics to a cess pool and here I am swimming in the ^&%#!

I think this is a fair complaint, and I might sympathize with pot activists hurt feelings and frustrations at the way their pet issue has disappeared off the radar, despite the promises Layton made. Importantly, pot legalilzation isn't the only, nor even close to the most important issue that should be addressed on the left, but it is significant, and deserves more attention. Layton, perhaps, has got a too much of a taste of main stream politics—not in itself a bad thing, but some of his brokerage attempts (ie tougher criminal sentences, etc) have been questionable.

[ 15 August 2006: Message edited by: Catchfire ]


From: On the heather | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 15 August 2006 05:57 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by pencil-skirt:

I totally agree. In order to meet this goal, we need to not accuse others of "not liking" us, and "not liking where i come from and that i lived in a car in high school and only have GED." Attacking anyone is not going to get us to the point of legislation. Nor is associating our goals with jail.

Just my two cents. If you really think that doing those things brings Canada closer to decriminalization, or legalization, I'd like to hear why you think that.


i wasn't whining just telling some why my grammar may be less than theirs

and for your info,,,,


there is no US,,,,
get it

why didn't you raise the resolution,,,

i asked Dana the same question,,,

we are all free to get what ever resolutions we want at convention,,,so bite me

i could care less what some one like you thinks,,closet smoker,,get out of my way

if i thought embarrassing jack would get this thing on the radar, i would

he started this thing, came to us, i joined the next day
he can tell me he was lying or doesn't plan on doing anything,,that's fine,,at least he responded and i will go my own way,,no biggy

i kind of think it will be the conservative that eventually get the guts to do something anyway as they will be try to save the money we waste on people like me ,,not help people

no one can tell me how to operate with this resolution, how to say it,,what to do,,how to act
when i get to qcity i will be speaking for the people of newton north delta,,no one else,,,get it
next time you get off your but and put something forward if you are so concerned about my short comings

i could end up being successful you know,,,

wouldn't that gripe your ass

PS MR. Goodwin is still in jail and Hamilton's 3
NDP mp's have said squat,,great party

wish me luck in getting your rights,closet activists


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 15 August 2006 06:06 PM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
hey hey hey, I ain't in no closet
From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 16 August 2006 02:32 PM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ah Shavluk every successive post you make you convince me more and more you are a paid staffer of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Your inflammatory rhetoric is really over the top though. "There is no 'us' "? So you are only willing to be grouped with marijuana smokers who are offensive and incendiary?

Seriously, can a moderator please do something about comments like these?

quote:
Originally posted by shavluk:

so bite me
...
i could care less what some one like you thinks,,closet smoker,,get out of my way


From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
shavluk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12866

posted 16 August 2006 04:38 PM      Profile for shavluk        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by pencil-skirt:
Ah Shavluk every successive post you make you convince me more and more you are a paid staffer of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Your inflammatory rhetoric is really over the top though. "There is no 'us' "? So you are only willing to be grouped with marijuana smokers who are offensive and incendiary?

Seriously, can a moderator please do something about comments like these?


how about you just go away as you contribute nothing ,you've been asked to and you are just shit disturbing,,,

what a child

you cant group me with any one ,get over it,
you know squat about me,,
you sound like the cops that infiltrate cannabis culture's site to try to raise garbage with activists,,,a joke they are

now get a life

anyone want to talk about Mr Goodwin???
or the ndp and cannabis i will be civil to sanity


From: delta bc | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Catchfire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4019

posted 16 August 2006 05:02 PM      Profile for Catchfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Alas, poor shavluk! I knew him, Horatio
A pothead of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy!
And how abhorred in my imagination it is! My gorge rises at it...

Better get your digs in now, shavluk, because I reckon you won't be around much longer.

-Signed, Worse than hitler


From: On the heather | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 August 2006 05:03 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
shavluk, your obnoxious contributions outweigh your valuable ones on this forum. You've already been warned at least once, maybe more. Find another forum now.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 16 August 2006 05:57 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Before this ill-titled thread passes into history, here's the link to the story of the incredibly sad death of Jonathan Magbie. Although it's 23 months since he died, his story is worth knowing about. There are so many bizarre stories about justice in the USA that we can't possibly mourn all the Jonathan Magbies, but that's uniquely bizarre, or bizarrely unique.
From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 16 August 2006 06:46 PM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So not only is this man dead, as a direct result of the screwed up "war on drugs", he's also dying officially a criminal.

What kind of assholes arrest a disabled man for smoking dope? What is even more shocking is the quote from his mother.

quote:
"I'm not saying that he shouldn't have been punished, because he did smoke the marijuana," his mother, Mary Scott, said yesterday, a day after burying her son. "I just don't think it should have cost him his life."


Goes to show just how deeply brainwashed people have become when it comes to pot.

[ 17 August 2006: Message edited by: Stargazer ]


From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dana Larsen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10033

posted 17 August 2006 01:23 AM      Profile for Dana Larsen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Attacking anyone is not going to get us to the point of legislation. Nor is associating our goals with jail.

I have not attacked anyone.

In order to change a bad law it is usually necessary to break that law openly and publically, and repeatedly. Civil disobedience of this sort is usually a good tool for social change.

quote:
I would reckon that the number of people who have died because of marijuana precisely equals the number who have died from it.

People get executed for marijuana all the time. In Saudi Arabia, pot smugglers get beheaded in a public square. Marijuana people regularly get executed in China, Indonesia, and other asian countries.

Amnesty International estimates that around 500 people are executed in China each year for drug offences. How many are marijuana-related is unknown.

In the USA, many people get sentences of 10-20 years for marijuana offences, which is effectively a death sentence for many people.

Malaysian Death Sentence for 2 Kilos of Pot
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4672.html

Australian woman faces death penalty in Indonesia for marijuana
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4190.html

Another Australian woman faces death penalty in Indonesia for marijuana
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4748.html

Global executions for marijuana
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4124.html


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 17 August 2006 07:16 AM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dana Larsen:
I have not attacked anyone.


Right, so maybe you should tell your buddy Shavluk to stop. Telling us that innocent people are dying because of these harsh laws certainly will inspire much more public sympathy for this cause than his most recent comments, just to name a few:

"just go away"
"you contribute nothing"
"what a child"
"you cant group me"
"you know squat about me"
"you sound like the cops"
"get a life"

And that was just from one post. Anyways, there is a difference between advocating and attacking, and unfortunately every cause has the zealots which undermine and sabotage progress.


From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Dana Larsen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10033

posted 17 August 2006 10:53 AM      Profile for Dana Larsen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Right, so maybe you should tell your buddy Shavluk to stop.

Just because we're in agreement that marijuana prohibition is a scourge on humanity doesn't mean I am responsible for his words

Shavluk is not as eloquent as he could be, but certainly he is correct about the importance of this issue.


quote:
Telling us that innocent people are dying because of these harsh laws certainly will inspire much more public sympathy for this cause than his most recent comments, just to name a few:

And we have also had posts from people calling pot-smokers druggies and criminals, and comparing marijuana use to adultery and statutory rape.

So Shavluk isn't as polite in his writing as you'd like. But I don't think he's said anything too extreme. He donates his time and money to work to change these bad laws, and help keep pot-smokers like yourself out of prison. What have you done for your freedom lately?

quote:
I wonder how your friends got sent to jail - because I have encountered police numerous times while smoking a joint.

Actually the folks in question are the owners and employees of the Up In Smoke Cafe in Hamilton. And although they are definitely activists who regularly commit civil disobedience, they are always very polite to police.

Police have descended on the store over 200 occasions in 23 months to harass the "never-surrender" activists. Their store/cafe is a friendly place, but they definitely smoke a lot of pot in there.

On April 20th 2006, the Hamilton Hash Mob -the nickname of the activists who worked or volunteered at the Up In Smoke Cafe- distributed over one pound of marijuana for free in front of Hamilton City Hall to celebrate the international marijuana holiday 4/20.

Hamilton police, who did not interfere with the distribution, filmed this act.

The next day, April 21st, Hamilton police raided the Up In Smoke Cafe and seized all its contents. Goodwin, Spicer, Matt Mernagh, Lawson, and others were charged with numerous possession, trafficking, and paraphernalia offenses and given bail release conditions that forbade most from going to Up In Smoke Cafe and communicating with each other. Volunteers and new employees have kept the store going in the three months since that raid, and up to now.

Goodwin and Spicer were picked up near Toronto airport on Wednesday July 26, in breach of their bail conditions: either the one that forbid the two lovers from communicating or being with each other, or the ban on entering the Cafe to work.

Chris Goodwin is still in jail, where he will remain until at least Aug 22. He is only charged with possession of the few roaches in the cafe ashtray, and with selling marijuana seeds and bongs. But since he violated his bail by being caught with his girlfriend he is being held behind bars.


Up in Smoke Cafe in Hamilton Raided by Police (March 8, 2006)
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4690.html

Hamilton Cops Use Brute Force in Up In Smoke Cafe Raid (April 21 2006)
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4732.html

Up In Smoke Cafe and Arrests ... Cafe Closed For Now (July 27, 2006)
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4795.html

Chris Goodwin and his crew at the Up In Smoke Cafe are all longtime NDP members, many holding executive positions. They are smart, inspirational folks with a devoted local following and a passion for liberty, justice and fun. The NDP is lucky to have them on board.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 17 August 2006 10:56 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
The majority of who? Right-wing Americans from New York State?

Snerk.

This whole thread is just a bs trolling thread fand they keep on bringing it too the top so as to exploit the silly title of the thread!


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dana Larsen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10033

posted 17 August 2006 11:27 AM      Profile for Dana Larsen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Ernest Hemingway wrote five great novels while plastered. Coleridge was a laudnum addict. Does this mean that alcohol and heroin contribute meaningfully to society? Sorry, it does not

You think that alcohol and opium have not contributed to society?

There's been thousands of songs and poems praising alcohol and opium written over the past few thousand years. Many ancient (and modern) cultures have gods devoted to both alcohol and opium. Many christians drink wine as part of their worshipful rituals.

Both opium and alcohol are massive global industries which employ hundreds of thousands of people. They are both deeply entrenched in cultures all around the world!

quote:
As for medicinal benefits, these are obvious, and I addressed those too: social smoking contributes nothing meaningful to society.

That depends on how you define "society."

Social pot smoking can help people relax, lower stress, facilitate conversation, enhance sensual pleasures and gain personal insights. Those are all positive contributions to individual and society.

Also, if the medicinal benefits are so obvious, then why should pot smoking only benefit those already sick? Marijuana use can also act as a preventative medicine, so even if the user only sees themselves as a "social smoker" they can be experiencing a medicinal benefit.

Many people say that recreation is good medicine.

You neglected to mention the many scientists who have acheived great insights through the use of cannabis and other substances.

For example, the brilliant and influential late astronomer and popular science writer Carl Sagan was an ardent marijuana smoker who credited pot with helping him achieve great insights.

In an anonymous essay he wrote for Grinspoon's book Marihuana Reconsidered Sagan explained that he first tried pot around 1961, "a time of awakening of my social consciousness and amiability."

In the essay he describes a wide variety of experiences and observations he had under the influence of pot. He explains that marijuana increased his appreciation and understanding of art and music, as well as his sensitivity to tastes, aromas, and sexual pleasure. He also describes how marijuana led to insights "on a wide range of social, political, philosophical and human biological topics."

"There is a myth about such highs," wrote Sagan, "that the user has an illusion of great insight, but it does not survive scrutiny in the morning. I am convinced that this is an error, and that the devastating insights achieved when high are real insights; the main problem is putting those insights in a form acceptable to the quite different self that we are when we're down the next day. Some of the hardest work I've ever done has been to put such insights down on tape or in writing."

"I am convinced that there are genuine and valid levels of perception available with cannabis (and probably with other drugs)" added Sagan, "which are, through the defects of our society and our educational system, un-available to us without such drugs."

Sagan died of pneumonia in 1996. He was 62.

quote:
And you won't get far comparing segregation or gay-rights to marijuana legalization. One is a simple habit of choice and leisure, harmless enough, and enjoyable enough, and not worth the effort to stop. The other people died for, and continue to die for, for no other reason except how they were born. Any attempt to connect the two to add weight to an already strong argument smacks of self-consciousness, and is, quite frankly, despicable,

I see homosxual rights and pot-smoking rights to be very similar issues.

Both gay sex and smoking pot are things done at home, in private, with consenting adults. Both involve questions of control over your own body and what you put into it.

The difference is that pot smokers have it worse than gays do, at least in terms of public policy. There was a time when being openly gay, or committing sodomy, was considered a crime and people would go to jail for it. Homosexuals were considered deviant and/or morally weak, needing punishment and treatment to restore them to "normalicy." Happily that is no longer the case, at least not in most of the western world.

But smoking pot is still a crime, with official government policy being to exterminate marijuana and marijuana smoking. Pot smokers are officially considered deviant and morally weak, to be punished and then given treatment to bring them back to normalicy

The raids and harassment suffered by the Up In Smoke Cafe, and other pro-pot hangouts that allow toking, is the same kind of police harassment that was once suffered by gay-friendly bathhouses that allowed gay sex on the premises.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Dana Larsen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10033

posted 17 August 2006 06:24 PM      Profile for Dana Larsen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And you won't get far comparing segregation or gay-rights to marijuana legalization.

Interestingly, those who hate marijuana also see a connection between pot and homosexuality, but in the other direction.

America's first "drug czar", Carlton Turner, appointed by Reagan, argued against marijuana legalization by claiming that marijuana use leads to homomsexuality, and AIDS.

“Marijuana leads to homosexuality, the breakdown of the immune system, and therefore to AIDS.” — Carlton Turner, 1986.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Dana Larsen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10033

posted 17 August 2006 06:41 PM      Profile for Dana Larsen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
This whole thread is just a bs trolling thread fand they keep on bringing it too the top so as to exploit the silly title of the thread!

Chris Goodwin, founder and owner of Hamilton's Up In Smoke Cafe, is a devoted NDPer and pot activist who is currently in jail for minor marijuana offences. I would argue that he has been jailed largely as punishment for being an outspoken and effective marijuana legalizer.

Goodwin and many of his employees are delegates to the upcoming NDP convention, and they hope to be out of jail in time to attend!

Goodwin has been an active member and volunteer for NDP candidates for the last 5 years and 4 Elections. He was Executive Youth Officer for the NDP on Hamilton Mountain for over two years and Member of McMaster University NDP for 3 years.

He ran against David Christopherson for the NDP candidacy of Hamilton Centre, and he has signed up hundreds if not thousands of new NDP members.

He also organized two Marc Emery College/University Tours for the NDP, with co-operation from the Hamilton Mountain NDP Executive, MacNDP, McMaster University and Mohawk College.

He also helped fill two tables at the Jack Layton Victory Galla. He has even spent over $2,000 in printing costs over the last 4 years to promote the Repeal Of Prohibition within the NDP.

He and his ex-wife donated over $3,500 to city/provincial/federal NDP candidates in the last two years, and worked to help candidates win like Andrea Horwath, David Christopherson, Chris Charlton and Wayne Marysden. He also helped or donated money to 9 other NDP candidates during elections, like Alison Myrden and Tony DiPaulo.

He has also attended every All Candidates debate, and every Nomination Meeting in the last 3 years around Hamilton/Niagara/Toronto.

So given all this, I fail to see how this thread is a troll. Goodwin is an NDP activist and convention delegate who hopes to be out of jail for the convention!

[ 17 August 2006: Message edited by: Dana Larsen ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Dana Larsen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10033

posted 17 August 2006 06:56 PM      Profile for Dana Larsen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The raids and harassment suffered by the Up In Smoke Cafe, and other pro-pot hangouts that allow toking, is the same kind of police harassment that was once suffered by gay-friendly bathhouses that allowed gay sex on the premises.

Sorry if I appear to be having a monologue with myself, but after I posted the above I did a little research and found, to my surprise, that batthouse raids still sometimes occur in Canada. The following is from Wikipedia:

-----
In December 2002, Calgary police raided Goliath's, one of the city's oldest baths, resulting in charges against 19 men. Fifteen men were arrested in the raid. Thirteen customers were charged as "found-ins" (found in a common bawdy house without a legal excuse) and two staff members were charged with the more serious offense of keeping a common bawdy house. The customers face up to two years in prison.

In addition, the owners of the bathhouse and a third staff member were later charged with keeping a common bawdy house. The Canadian media has thus far declined to publish the names of the men.

Lawyers for the defense argue that since police are not alleging any prostitution took place at Goliath's, they are thus arguing that gay sex is by definition indecent.

Goliath's reopened a little more than a month after the raid and remains open.

In November of 2004, the Crown stayed the found-in charge against the last remaining patron, saying it is no longer in the public interest to pursue the case. The case against the owners and managers of Goliath's, however, was expected to come to trial in February of 2005, with the defendants having to prove that the activity that the police allegedly witnessed at Goliath's was not indecent.

Terry Haldane, the only "found-in" patron who was actively fighting the charge against him, has accused the Crown of dropping the charge because Haldane and his lawyers had given notice of their plan to challenge the bawdy house law all the way to the Supreme Court. Haldane has stated that he will continue his fight, though he will now have to mount a new legal challenge.

In February of 2005, all remaining charges in the case were dropped. The court cited a lack of community support and evidence (from a poll) that the community supported the existence of gay bathhouses by a small margin.

Hamilton's Warehouse Spa

On Tuesday, August 3rd, 2004, Hamilton's "Warehouse Spa and Bath" was "inspected" by a task force of officers from the police, public health, the city's building and licensing department, the fire department and the alcohol and gaming commission. Two men were arrested and charged with committing indecent acts.
-----

I still see the raids on these gay-friendly batthouses as similar to the raids on the pot-friendly cafes.

The fact that the most recent batthouse harassment cited took place in Hamilton, also home to the continually harassed Up In Smoke Cafe, is therefore not a surprise. Clearly Hamilton's police force considers both gay sex and pot smoking to be "indecent acts" which it is their duty to stamp out.

[ 17 August 2006: Message edited by: Dana Larsen ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
KanMan
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12374

posted 18 August 2006 06:20 AM      Profile for KanMan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Ideology:
Why would the NDP have criminals as delegates? We may not agree that smoking pot is a good thing, and many of us don't want our kids to be exposed to it. This is why the majority of us want it to remain illegal.

Do we want druggies making decisions which are going to affect the rest of us? If the NDP wants to be a serious party it should think about criminal background checks.


Can you imagine working for a company that has a little more than 300 employees and has the following stats:

30 have been accused of spousal abuse.

9 have been arrested for fraud.

14 have been accused of writing bad cheques.

95 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses.

4 have done time for assault.

55 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit.

12 have been arrested on drug related charges.

4 have been arrested for shoplifting.

16 are currently defendants in lawsuits.

62 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year.

Can you guess which organization this is?

It is the 301 elected MP"s in the Canadian Parliament. The same group that cranks out hundreds of laws designed to keep the rest of us in line.

Which one did you vote for?

Keith


From: Calgary, Alberta | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
KanMan
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12374

posted 18 August 2006 06:31 AM      Profile for KanMan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Ideology:
We may not agree that smoking pot is a good thing, and many of us don't want our kids to be exposed to it. This is why the majority of us want it to remain illegal.

Do a little reading ok....

The La Guardia Committee Report - 1944
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/lag/lagmenu.htm

Nixon's Shaffer Commission - 1972

Commissioned by President Richard M. Nixon, March, 1972
http://www.druglibrary.org/Schaffer/Library/studies/nc/ncmenu.htm

The Le Dain Commission Report - 1972
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/ledain/ldctoc.html

REPORT OF THE SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ILLEGAL DRUGS - 2002
CANNABIS UR POSITION FOR A CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY

http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/Committee_SenRep.asp?Language=E&parl=37&Ses=1&comm_id=85

Spewing the old 1930's reefer madness nonsense only makes a person look like they believe everything the Government and media tell them with out question. It is very well known and proven cannabis has many medical qualities. April 2006 the USA FDA still spews complete nonsense that cannabis has zero medical properties. If they really did believe this why does the USA "federal" government have a legal medical cannabis program in place to this very day. They grow and supply 300 pre rolled cannabis joints each month to federal USA medical cannabis needs people.

Keith


From: Calgary, Alberta | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
hamiltonhashmob
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13069

posted 18 August 2006 09:26 AM      Profile for hamiltonhashmob     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
http://www.cannabisculture.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1282875

Up In Smoke Cafe nemesis federal crown agent Jeffery A. Levy also defending embattled Liberal Hamilton Mayor Larry Di Ianni

Liberal Hamilton Mayor Larry Di Ianni is being represented in a case of alleged illegal campaign financing by Jeffery A. Levy, a lawyer in private practise, according to the Law Society of Upper Canada, Ontario's provincial bar.

In Canada, all drug law is Federal, and as a result, the Federal Department of Justice hires private lawyers to represent the Federal Crown at trial.

Jeffery A. Levy, for years a well known federal Crown agent in the Hamilton area, is prosecuting employees and volunteers of Hamiton's Up in Smoke Cafe, owned by NDP supporter and activist Chris Goodwin.

Chris Goodwin, of course, made no secret that he was a major supporter of David Christopherson, now a Hamilton NDP Member of Parliament.

David Christopherson was defeated in the last mayor's race by none other than Jeffery A. Levy's client, Larry Di Ianni, who is accused of election finance irregularities.

We can only wonder who and why Levy was chosen as the federal Crown agent.

To find out, contact the people responsible for Levy being assigned to this case:

Clare Beckton
Assistant Deputy Attorney General
(613) 948-8981
claire.beckton@justice.gc.ca

John H Sims
Deputy Minister of Justice
(613) 957-4998
john.sims@justice.gc.ca

You can also contact Levy himself:

Jeffery A. Levy:
(905) 521-2250
jlevy@bellnet.ca

Or the man who Levy's client beat in the mayor's race and Chris Goodwin supported, David Christopherson, might have some idea:

David Christopherson, MP
(613) 995-1757 or (905) 526-0770
christopherson.d@parl.gc.ca

---

Source: Hamilton Spectator (CN ON)
Contact: letters@thespec.com
Website: http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/
Address: 44 Frid Street, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 3G3
Fax: 905-526-3558
Copyright: 2006 The Hamilton Spectator
Author: Andrew Dreschel
Pubdate: August 16, 2006

http://tinyurl.com/rynhf

Di Ianni's case in the air while rivals huddle

It was over in seconds. The lawyer for Larry Di Ianni, Jeff Levy, simply told the justice of the peace there had been a pretrial conference yesterday and it was agreed that the case would now go before a judge next Thursday.

Outside of court, Levy said three things could happen regarding the mayor's election act charges next week: the case could be adjourned, a trial date could be set or the matter could be dealt with.

Yesterday's pretrial discussions involved Levy, Tim Wilkin, the special prosecutor hired by the city to press charges against Di ianni for allegedly accepting illegal campaign donations, and Ontario Court Justice Anton Zuraw, who will oversee the case next week.

Levy said he reads nothing into the fact Zuraw is now the presiding judge. But it's hard not to see some significance in his involvement.

Zuraw is the judge who handled preliminary issues involving Dundas bookseller Joanna Chapman's battle to have Di Ianni's 2003 campaign finances audited, including presiding over a pretrial agreement worked out between Chapman and several companies she privately charged with violating election donation laws.

At the very least, Zuraw must have a good feel for all the ins and outs of the case, and during the pretrial conference may have been in a position to gently nudge both parties to a widely anticipated settlement.

Levy said he's still discussing the case with Wilkin, but refused to speculate about a pending deal.

Wilkin, a municipal law expert, concurred talks are ongoing. "It may get resolved, it may not," he said.

Besides the possibility of paying a large financial penalty, the key issues at stake for Di Ianni are whether or not he'll go into the November election campaign with a trial hanging over his head or a guilty plea attached to his name, either of which would provide extra-rich fodder for his mayoral rivals.

So far, he's only facing low-voltage contenders Keith Beck, Diane Elms and Michael Baldasaro.

The big guns are still officially holding fire.

Neither former councillor and Port Authority chair Fred Eisenberger nor former Stoney Creek Conservative MPP Brad Clark has committed himself. Nor has Flamborough councillor Dave Braden, who lands somewhere between the snore and roar camps.

Eisenberger is sticking to his game plan of announcing his intentions at the end of the month. Clark refuses to say when he'll make a decision.

"I probably have a timetable in mind, but I'm not willing to talk about it," Clark said.

Interestingly, Eisenberger and Clark met last week to sound each other out.

"It was just a cordial meeting between potential candidates, that's all," said Clark.

Eisenberger declined to comment. Apparently neither man suggested that one should step aside for the other, but they must be acutely aware if both enter the fray, any serious threat to Di Ianni will all but go by the board.

As Clark notes, "The more candidates with high profiles that enter the match, if you will, the more the vote will split."

Since Eisenberger has given himself a deadline for making a decision, Clark may be waiting to see what he does. Clark readily admits that he doesn't know if Eisenberger's candidacy will impact his own verdict.

Eisenberger, who placed a respectable third in the hotly contested 2000 mayoral race, has no such qualms. He says what Clark does or doesn't do won't affect his decision one way or the other.

"If I'm going, I'm going on the basis that obviously I'd like to win. That's clearly the objective. But it's also because I have something to say.

"I think there are issues to be addressed and clearly that's going to be my focus on the decision-making side."

So: next week we may know how Di Ianni will fare before the courts; in two weeks we should know what Eisenberger is going to do.

And, like all other potential municipal candidates, Clark has until Sept. 29 to file his papers, though chances are we'll hear his call before then.

* * *

My mistake: In Friday's column I said the Lister Block's bricks are not a designated heritage feature.

That's inaccurate.

Designation for the facades on King William and James streets include the brickwork.

My apologies.

Andrew Dreschel's commentary appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. adreschel@thespec.com or

905-526-3495.

---

Source: Hamilton Spectator (CN ON)
Contact: letters@thespec.com
Website: http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/
Address: 44 Frid Street, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 3G3
Fax: 905-526-3558
Copyright: 2006 The Hamilton Spectator
Author: Andrew Dreschel
Pubdate: May 6, 2006

http://tinyurl.com/o27qo

Will Di Ianni's agony end today?

A judge ruled Joanna Chapman had reasonable grounds for believing they had contravened the act.

For almost two years now, Hamilton Mayor Larry Di Ianni has been embroiled in controversy about illegal contributions to his successful 2003 campaign. The law allows a maximum of $750 per individual or group of related companies. Dundas bookseller Joanna Chapman took Di Ianni to court and obtained an order for an audit. Di Ianni has returned thousands of dollars in overcontributions. Today, city council must decide if it will charge the mayor with violating the elections act.

The Issue

Should Mayor Larry Di Ianni be forced to answer to a judge for accepting $26,000 in illegal campaign donations he says were honest mistakes? Council decides today.

The players

Mayor Larry Di Ianni: elected in 2003 after more than two decades as a Stoney Creek councillor.

Joanna Chapman: a Dundas bookseller and former councillor.

John Best: a communications consultant who lost in Ward 3.

Marvin Caplan: former Ward 1 councillor defeated in 2003.

The rules

The Municipal Elections Act sets the rules for campaign donations. An individual or company cannot donate more than $750. It also stipulates how contributions must be documented.

The act has been widely criticized as confusing and vague. It states council can take legal action if an audit finds possible contraventions.

The history

July 2004: Chapman asks council to audit Di Ianni's mayoral campaign expenses after she found possible violations. She also fingers councillors Tom Jackson, Bill Kelly, Terry Whitehead and five failed candidates.

Council rejects her request. Chapman announces she is going to court. Di Ianni hires an auditor to examine his books, which are already under review by his team.

December 2004: Complaints against most of the candidates are dropped after they agree to play by the rules. Chapman continues to pursue Di Ianni, John Best and Marvin Caplan, who claim they've done nothing wrong.

May 2005: After months of arguments, Justice Timothy Culver makes history by ordering an audit of Di Ianni's books. Culver says Chapman had reasonable grounds to believe Di Ianni contravened the Municipal Elections Act. The judge chastises council for failing or refusing to exercise its jurisdiction and not considering the merits of Chapman's case.

Di Ianni has returned $19,500 in illegal donations after his own audit and investigation. The violations included companies making multiple donations which put them over the limit. He says any errors were unintentional.

Also, May 2005: Chapman lays charges against 18 companies for overcontributing to Di Ianni's campaign and violating the elections act.

Spokespersons for three of the companies -- J. Voortman and Associates, The Effort Trust Company and St. Lawrence Cement Inc. -- express surprise at the charges but acknowledge overcontributions. All suggest it resulted from simple error.

August 2005: Council hires Ken Froese, a chartered accountant with LECG Canada, to audit the books of Di Ianni, Best and Caplan.

October 2005: Froese's investigation finds five new violations worth $3,300 beyond those uncovered by Di Ianni.

Among the violations are donations from ineligible contributors including a charity, a Quebec-based company, an estate without the supporting will and two unincorporated companies. The auditor noted all contraventions, "were appropriately addressed by the candidate."

He asks to continue his audit to dig deeper. Froese finds three apparent contraventions and one reporting error in Best's books. Caplan can't find his records.

February 2006: Froese reports he's found another $3,100 in illegal donations to Di Ianni. He found three groups of connected companies that exceeded the $750 limit and donations from ineligible companies. In each violation, Froese notes his conclusions, "relied on information not otherwise provided to Di Ianni."

Caplan's audit finds a violation for not keeping his campaign finance records and two reporting errors. The auditor adds two reporting errors to Best's possible violations. Council hires a Kingston lawyer to advise on whether they should charge Di Ianni, Best and Caplan.

Today's decision

Council has two options:

* Charge Di Ianni for the violations.

* Accept the auditor's report and take no action.

The options are the same for Best and Caplan.

Council cannot refer the decision to court for advice.

The arguments

Chapman's lawyer maintains it should be a judge, not council, who decides whether the mayor intentionally broke the rules and should be punished.

The audits clearly showed multiple violations, so that's enough to lay charges and let the court decide, he argues. Di Ianni's lawyer counters that one only lays charges if they believe an offence has been committed with intent.

The audits have backed up Di Ianni's stance that any mistakes were in good faith, so council should take no action, he says.

The punishment

If found guilty, there are fines of up to $5,000 for an individual campaign contributor or candidate and up to $25,000 for a corporate donor. A judge could also order that Di Ianni be removed from office.

The cost to taxpayers

$60,000 and counting. Council still has to pay the bill for outside legal advice to be delivered today.

Compiled by Nicole MacIntyre nmacintyre@thespec.com

905-526-3299

Contributions prove to be divisive issue

"Council has lost the ability to deal with this objectively ... If they don't lay charges, it just makes the case
for legislative reform."
-- Municipal law expert Samuel Trosow

"Why are they fighting a little old lady in Dundas so hard?"
-- Joanna Chapman

"Congratulations to Ms. Chapman and too bad for the taxpayers who will have to pay (for the audit)."
-- Marvin Caplan on the court-ordered audits

"Wrongs were made in good faith and were fixed in good faith.''
-- Larry Di Ianni

"The only way to (clear the air) ... is an open, fair trial."
-- Chapman's lawyer, Eric Gillespie

"At what point does this become a witch hunt?"
-- Councillor Sam Merulla

"It's time to put this to bed."
--DiIanni's lawyer, Jeff Levy.

---
Source: Hamilton Spectator (CN ON)
Contact: letters@thespec.com
Website: http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/
Address: 44 Frid Street, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 3G3
Fax: 905-526-3558
Copyright: 2006 The Hamilton Spectator
Author: Daniel Nolan
Pubdate: March 24, 2006

http://tinyurl.com/gfyxj

Sheila Copps declared, 'I was always a Liberal and I will always be a Liberal.'

Sheila Copps has made peace with the Liberal Party and is back in its corner.

The one-time Liberal stalwart, who lost a bitter nomination battle to Tony Valeri in 2004 after a 20-year federal political career, said she was gratified at an event staged last night to welcome her back into the Liberal party fold and to try to forget the past.

"A friend told me to get ready to feel the love," Copps told a star-studded gathering at the King Edward Hotel in Toronto.

"I feel the love."

Later she proclaimed, "I am a Liberal. I was always a Liberal and I will always be a Liberal."

But her two political nemises, former prime minister Paul Martin and former MP Tony Valeri, were no-shows.

Valeri was dealing with a death in the family. Some said that, despite the evening being billed as a healing event, many Martin supporters were missing.

Copps entered the ballroom through a stream of hugs and good wishes into a crowd estimated at about 500.

Organizers of the evening -- former Toronto MP Dennis Mills and New Brunswick MP Paul Zed -- did not have a final tally on how many tickets were sold, but Zed said Wednesday the tally then stood at more than 600.

Tickets were $50 and the money is going into a fund to help encourage women to enter politics.

It was an eclectic mix that came out to honour Copps.

The gathering included fiddler Ashley MacIsaac, author Peter C. Newman, former Progressive Conservative and anti-free trade crusader David Orchard, former prime minister John Turner, former MP Bob Speller, former MP Beth Phinney, former cabinet minister Don Boudria, Senator Jim Munson, Hamilton Mayor Larry Di Ianni and Aline Chretien, wife of former prime minister Jean Chretien.

MacIsaac, who plans to run for the Liberal leadership, presented Copps with a silver dollar commemorating the 100th anniversary of the parliamentary library.

"I thought it was a fitting tribute to give to Sheila because the truth about Sheila will be in the library for a long time to come," MacIsaac told The Spectator. "I think she's done wonderful work."

Orchard said he has known Copps since 1988 and always thought highly of her. He said he joined the Liberal party before Christmas because "it's the only home left for progressive conservatives."

There was also a bevvy of leadership contenders, including Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff, Denis Coderre and Gerrard Kennedy.

"This is not about me," said Rae. "I think Sheila deserves to be recognized and I am delighted to be part of that celebration."

The evening also attracted the comics from the This Hour Has 22 Minutes.

Comic Mark Critch cornered Copps and told her the evening was "a coming-out party," and "that everyone likes you again."

He also compared the evening to the film Carrie, in which the heroine takes revenge on her tormenters by dumping pig's blood on them.

"They poured pig's blood all over you," Critch said. "The way the Liberal party has treated you."

Copps laughed. "I am just happy to be back."

The question remains: Just how much healing was accomplished?

Mills said he spoke to Valeri three weeks ago about coming and letting bygones be bygones. He said Valeri was upbeat, but said: "'Dennis, I've got some pain. I just lost the election.'"

He said Valeri did say some uncomplimentary things about Copps, but Mills said that is why the party has to have peace-making exercises.

"We're trying," Mills said. "We're not going to get it done tonight, but it's a start."

Copps told The Spectator she is through with running for politics after serving at Queen's Park and Ottawa between 1981 and 2004.

The former deputy prime minister is not going to run for the Liberal party leadership vacated by her political foe Paul Martin and she is not going to seek the Liberal nomination again for Hamilton East-Stoney Creek.

And she has already ruled out running for mayor of Hamilton this fall.

Copps lost the 2004 nomination contest by 308 ballots to Valeri, who went on to serve as Transportation Minister and government House leader in the two Paul Martin governments.

Copps always claimed Martin and Valeri conspired to steal the nomination from her, but they denied it.

Valeri lost his seat to NDP candidate Wayne Marston in January. That election saw Copps promote Marston and give political advice to Conservative candidate Frank Rukavina.

"I did 23 years," said Copps, while walking into the ballroom through a stream of hugs and good wishes. "I was back at Queen's Park recently. I think 23 years is enough in one profession."

Her husband, Austin Thorne, echoed his wife's comments.

"The kids have said 'If you are going back into politics, we'll do an intervention.'"

dnolan@thespec.com
905-526 3351


From: Ontario | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Sombrero Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6290

posted 18 August 2006 09:29 AM      Profile for Sombrero Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Originally posted by KanMan
quote:
62 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year.

I'm calling bullshit on this statistic.

Edited seconds later to note that my bullshit call was correct. See Snopes.

[ 18 August 2006: Message edited by: Sombrero Jack ]


From: PEI | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dana Larsen
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10033

posted 18 August 2006 10:59 AM      Profile for Dana Larsen   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Can you imagine working for a company that has a little more than 300 employees and has the following stats:

This isn't accurate. This is an internet spam thing that I have seen quoted before, but it's not true.

We may have some nasty folks in the legislature, but those figures were just made up and aren't based on reality.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
greyflannel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11130

posted 18 August 2006 11:16 AM      Profile for greyflannel        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Ideology:
If the NDP wants to be a serious party it should think about criminal background checks.

Absolutely. This works for me. And if we're REALLY gunning for credibility, let's also explore:

1) Mandatory GPS anklets on all citizens
2) Nation-wide curfew legislation
3) Sub-dermal ID tags
4) State-managed genetic screening


From: canada | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
johnpauljones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7554

posted 18 August 2006 11:25 AM      Profile for johnpauljones     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dana Larsen:

This isn't accurate. This is an internet spam thing that I have seen quoted before, but it's not true.

We may have some nasty folks in the legislature, but those figures were just made up and aren't based on reality.


especially since the first time I saw this it was 100 and the US Senate then it was 435 and the US House of Reps, then it was 301 and the House of Commons. Name of elected body and total number of legislators changed but breakdown never did.


From: City of Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
pencil-skirt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4612

posted 18 August 2006 11:31 AM      Profile for pencil-skirt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Also the majority of those charges were "accused of" or "charged with" and very few had the term "convicted of". You can be charged with child abuse and found 100% innocent. Or marijuana possession
From: Saturn | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
KanMan
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12374

posted 19 August 2006 10:32 AM      Profile for KanMan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dana Larsen:

We may have some nasty folks in the legislature,


Exactly the point.

From: Calgary, Alberta | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca