Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Drug czar gives warning (Pot growers "dangerous terrorists")
Record Searchlight ^ | July 13, 2007 | Dylan Darling

Posted on 07/13/2007 6:25:51 PM PDT by SubGeniusX

The nation's top anti-drug official said people need to overcome their "reefer blindness" and see that illicit marijuana gardens are a terrorist threat to the public's health and safety, as well as to the environment.

John P. Walters, President Bush's drug czar, said the people who plant and tend the gardens are terrorists who wouldn't hesitate to help other terrorists get into the country with the aim of causing mass casualties. Walters made the comments at a Thursday press conference that provided an update on the "Operation Alesia" marijuana-eradication effort.

"Don't buy drugs. They fund violence and terror," he said.

After touring gardens raided this week in Shasta County, Walters said the officers who are destroying the gardens are performing hard, dangerous work in rough terrain. He said growers have been known to have weapons, including assault rifles.

"These people are armed; they're dangerous," he said. He called them "violent criminal terrorists."

Walters, whose official title is director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, said too many people write off marijuana as harmless. "We have kind of a reefer blindness,' " he said.

No arrests have been made so far in the four days of raids, the opening leg of what Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko has promised will be at least two straight weeks of daily raids.

He said suspects have been hard to find because their familiarity with their terrain makes it easy for them to flee quickly.

Although crews doing the raids are using Black Hawk and other helicopters to drop in on some of the gardens, Bosenko said they don't want to give the growers any warning of a raid.

"We try to move in under stealth," he said.

As of Thursday morning, Operation Alesia raids had resulted in the yanking of 68,237 young marijuana plants from public lands in Shasta County. Raids already have been conducted in Whiskeytown National Recreation Area, as well as on land managed by the U.S. Forest Service north of Lake Shasta and other public land near Manton.

The operation is being led by the sheriff's office and has involved 17 agencies, including the California National Guard and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. It's believed to be the largest campaign of its kind in the state, Bosenko said.

The operation is named after the last major battle between the Roman Empire and the Gauls in 52 B.C. That battle was won by the Romans.

With the blitz of marijuana gardens around Shasta County, Bosenko said officials hope to not only get rid of the pot, but also win back the land for the public that owns it.

"These organizations are destroying our lands and wildlife," he said.

Bernie Weingardt, regional forester for the Forest Service's Pacific Southwest Region, said the 28,000 acres believed to house illegal marijuana grows on national forest land throughout the state would cost more than $300 million to

revive.

"These lands must be cleaned and restored," he said.

His estimate is based on a National Park Service study that found it costs $11,000 per acre to pull the plants, clear irrigation systems, reshape any terracing and replant native vegetation, said Mike Odle, Forest Service spokesman.

While Walters didn't give specific goals for Operation Alesia, he said anti-drug agencies aim to cripple the organized crime groups that he said are behind the marijuana cultivation.

"This business we intend to put into recession, depression and put its leaders into jail," Walters said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: drugczar; govwatch; johnwalters; lpersgod; potheads; reefermadness; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-128 last
To: robertpaulsen
Now, what's more accurate -- comparing an old survey to a new survey or comparing an old survey to some modern, contrived formula?

That's going to depend entirely on the surveys and the formula, and without some comparative infomration about them, there is no basis to say one way or the other. But don't let that stop you.

121 posted on 07/16/2007 10:49:49 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

“It is this kind of BS that totally discredits the War on Terror.”

It’s not BS. We know Al Qaeda was involved with the Opium trade in Afghanistan, and that cocaine pays for a lot of South American terrorism. In the eyes of Islamists, vice industries are fine for raising funds if its in the service of Allah.


122 posted on 07/16/2007 10:51:30 AM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
I think it's a good assumption that it was a survey.

My understanding is that pre-prohibition estimates were based on data collected from druggists, physicians, police, opium import figures, etc. I've never heard of a self-reporting national household survey prior to the 1960's. Have you?

But YOU'RE the one comparing that number to a modern-day, mathematically generated number. I'm saying that's a no-no.

I'm comparing numbers that the people running the drug war have put forth as their best estimates. You are using numbers discredited by the same people.

123 posted on 07/16/2007 8:09:52 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
"I'm comparing numbers that the people running the drug war have put forth as their best estimates."

You refuse to compare your mathematical numbers to even modern-day surveys, yet you don't hesitate to compare them to 100-year-old surveys/interviews/statistics/inventories/whatever.

The NHSDA changed the design of their drug survey in 1999 and said that their survey data obtained after 1999 cannot be compared to their own survey data obtained before 1999. But that doesn't stop you from comparing your apples and oranges.

Claiming that a certain number of people use drugs is more accurate when obtained by a mathematical formula vs a survey is a separate argument. Taking your number and then comparing it to a century-old statistic is flat-out irresponsible.

124 posted on 07/17/2007 4:32:21 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
You refuse to compare your mathematical numbers to even modern-day surveys, yet you don't hesitate to compare them to 100-year-old surveys/interviews/statistics/inventories/whatever.

Like you did in post #90? -

The NSDUH survey shows 130,000 heroin users (at least once per month) in 2000 and 1.2 million cocaine users. If we assume 50% are addicts, that works out to .2% of the population, half the addicts of 1900.

_________________________________________

Claiming that a certain number of people use drugs is more accurate when obtained by a mathematical formula vs a survey is a separate argument. Taking your number and then comparing it to a century-old statistic is flat-out irresponsible.

Take it up with the people running the Drug War. Those are the numbers they are using. It's not my fault the numnuts made a case showing their own policy to be a failure.

125 posted on 07/17/2007 9:27:54 AM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: SubGeniusX

What a complete dumbass, of course they’re criminals, it’s illegal to grow the plant so only criminals grow it. If your prescious DEA would stop enforcing the black market monopoly criminals have on pot then you’d have no problem, the terrorists wouldn’t have a lucrative product to profit from and my taxes would be wasted on something slightly less fascist and stupid, maybe even something useful like repairing a road or the southern border fence.


126 posted on 07/17/2007 10:59:40 AM PDT by TheKidster (you can only trust government to grow, consolidate power and infringe upon your liberties.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

Me too. But I buy American, because American pot is the best pot.

Although according to the one idiot, we’re terrorists. He doesn’t know the other true, evil secret. After smoking, I like to listen to negro jazz music and rape white women!


127 posted on 07/17/2007 7:30:20 PM PDT by Nate505
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
1. Once again, you are taking your "guess" and assuming it as fact in your question. You can't do that.

My god, he does it all the time.....

128 posted on 07/17/2007 7:31:47 PM PDT by Nate505
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-128 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson