Category Archives: Op-Eds

DEA Declares (Kr)atomic War on Americans

Typical powdered commercial Kratom, Mitragyna ...
Typical powdered commercial Kratom, Mitragyna speciosa. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In early August, the US Drug Enforcement Administration announced that, contrary to expectations, it wouldn’t remove marijuana from “Schedule 1” (“no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse”).

At the end of the month, DEA made another announcement: It intends to add another herbal substance, kratom, to Schedule 1.

Why is the DEA picking on kratom? The agency offers numerous excuses — insufficient testing for the plant to have an approved medical use, its historical use as an opium substitute,  its increasing use “to self-treat chronic pain and opioid withdrawal symptoms, with users reporting its effects to be comparable to prescription opioids.”

DEA says that last bit like it’s a bad thing. It isn’t. Pain relief is a GOOD thing. I’ve tried kratom myself for chronic back pain. I used it once, and got several days of (admittedly subjective) pain relief. The next time, not as much. I assume there was a difference of purity/strength involved. My pain turned out to be neuropathic and treatable with non-opioid medication. Otherwise I’d probably have continued to experiment with kratom.

Every day we’re warned of an “epidemic” of “prescription drug abuse” — mostly of opioids. Along comes a fairly benign herbal substance that helps with withdrawal from such drugs and with the chronic pain that the patient was probably taking them for in the first place, and DEA wants to ban it.

Yes, I said “fairly benign.” DEA claims to have identified 15 “kratom-related” deaths in the US over the last two years, but doesn’t claim kratom as the actual CAUSE of those deaths. While my research has admittedly been minimal, I’ve yet to find so much as a single documented report of a “kratom-related” death in which other drugs were not also present.

When you have to ask why, the answer is usually “money.” The case of DEA versus kratom is no exception to the rule.

The Drug Enforcement Administration employs more than 10,000 people (nearly 5,000 of them “special agents”) and sports a budget of more than $2 billion per year. The organization’s mission statement is fairly long and convoluted and manages to leave out the real main mission: Keeping those jobs and increasing that budget.

How long has that been the mission? For a century or so. The Drug Enforcement Administration was once known as the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which in turn was a remnant of the Bureau of (alcohol) Prohibition, created for the express purpose of allowing former booze-busters to continue collecting government paychecks.

The only thing the DEA “protects” America from is the threat of having to compete with laid-off tax parasites for jobs in the productive sector.

With the war on marijuana winding down, DEA is on the lookout for new scary stories it can tell to taxpayers so we won’t object when politicians continue to throw money at DEA. Cue the kratom “threat.”

The real threat is DEA and other government agencies whose employees are willing to condemn Americans to pain, sickness, imprisonment, even death, rather than find real jobs.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

Hillary Clinton, Servergate, and the Steve Martin Defense

English: Hillary Clinton takes oath-of-office ...
English: Hillary Clinton takes oath-of-office as United States Secretary of State. Bill Clinton also pictured. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“Two simple words in the English language” should be a sufficient defense against charges of tax evasion or armed robbery, says Steve Martin in a routine captured on his 1979 standup album Comedy is Not Pretty! The two words? “I forgot.”

Some jokes are funny because they reveal uncomfortable truths. Other jokes, like the “I forgot” routine, tickle our funny bones because they’re absurd. Nobody could possibly get away with armed robbery by informing the judge “I forgot armed robbery was illegal” in the real world, right?

If Hillary Clinton worked in comedy instead of in politics, she’d probably be in court right now defending a suit for stealing Martin’s gag. But she’s no comedienne. She apparently put up the Steve Martin defense with a straight face when questioned by the FBI, as revealed in newly released documents.

The subject: Why, as US Secretary of state, she ignored the briefings she received on handling and safeguarding of classified information, choosing to illegally use a private server for transmission and storage of that information instead of following the rules.

The FBI reports:

“Clinton stated … she did not recall receiving any guidance from State regarding e-mail policies outlined in the State FAM [Foreign Affairs Manual].”

“When asked, Clinton recalled being briefed on [Special Access Programs] information but could not recall any specific briefing on how to handle SAP information.”

“Clinton could not recall any briefing or training by State related to the retention of federal records or handling of classified information.”

Why couldn’t she remember these things?

“[I]n December of 2012, Clinton suffered a concussion and then around the New Year had a blood clot …. Based on her doctor’s advice, she could only work at State for a few hours a day and could not recall every briefing she received.”

The “I forgot” defense is admittedly a new and novel explanation for Clinton’s actions. But I’m not sure it’s a very good one, given her specific personal situation. The possibilities break down to two:

One possibility is that Clinton is a lying felon who, either intentionally or with reckless negligence, compromised classified information which was entrusted to her care, and who knew she could successfully play the “I forgot card” to forestall prosecution because she is Hillary Clinton.

The other possibility is that Clinton suffers from a traumatic brain injury which negatively affects her ability to remember important things. Things like, say, “when meeting with the Russian ambassador, don’t let him play with the briefcase that contains the nuclear strike codes.”

Do either of these possibilities — and remember, they could BOTH be true! — strike you as a strong advertisement for Hillary Clinton’s credibility and qualifications as a candidate for president of the United States?

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

Marijuana Legalization: Give Peace a Chance

English: Medical Marijuana surrounding a vapor...
English: Medical Marijuana surrounding a vaporizer for healthy intake of the medicine. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

On November 8, voters in eight states will decide whether or not to legalize, to one degree or another, the possession, use and sale of marijuana.

If all of the measures pass, more than 86 million Americans will enjoy increased legal access to the plant: For medical use in Arkansas, Florida and Missouri, for recreational use in Arizona, California, Maine, Massachusetts and Nevada.

Earlier this month, the US Drug Enforcement Administration announced it wouldn’t reconsider marijuana’s ridiculous Schedule 1 status (“no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse”) — but the states seem to be leaving the federal government behind.  Medical marijuana is already legal in 25 states (and the District of Columbia), recreational use in four.

Soon, DEA may be running as fast as it can to get to the head of the parade, making a big show of ratifying what the country is doing without its permission and looking for new missions to replace its anti-cannabis campaigns.

It’s about time.

For at least 5,000 years, probably much longer, humans used marijuana without a great deal of fanfare. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were marijuana farmers. Queen Victoria, the living symbol of moral rectitude in an era obsessed with same, drank marijuana tea for her menstrual cramps.

That 5,000 years of uncontroversial and beneficial use have given way to nearly a century of war — characterized as a war on drugs in general, and often as a war on marijuana in particular, but in truth a war on people.

Initially, it was a war on people of color and people who spoke Spanish, and on industries without as many friends in government as William Randolph Hearst (whose paper mills were threatened by the advent of cheap paper made from hemp), but like so many wars it spun out of control, expanding far beyond the wildest expectations of those who declared it.

Tens of billions of dollars are spent, hundreds of thousands of Americans arrested, every year in prosecuting this war. Careers — and fortunes — depend on its continuation, and if the lives of people of all colors, classes and languages must be sacrificed in that cause, so be it.

But the end may be in sight, thanks to thousands of activists who have struggled for decades to bring the option of peace and freedom to your polling place. If you live in one of the states voting on marijuana this November, cast your ballot wisely.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY