The Hemp Report

     I usually don't link to drug policy sites, but these really make you think. Below are a couple of blog posts that analyze the language of the ONDCP blog post that I blogged earlier this week. The second post links to the CNN Hemp Feature.

     The first is Drug WarRant.com's Drug Czar, Hemp, and Lies and the second is Stop the Drug War's Someone Tell the Drug Czar That Hemp Isn't a Drug.

     It's interesting to see that there are very similar twists in the language in DEA and ONDCP quotes in the CNN feature "Farmers sue DEA for right to grow industrial hemp":

The DEA says it's merely enforcing the law.

[snip]

The DEA claims the farmers' lawsuit is misguided because the agency is obligated to enforce the Controlled Substances Act.

"Hemp comes from cannabis. It's kind of a Catch 22 there," said DEA spokesman Michael Sanders. "Until Congress does something, we have to enforce the laws."

Asked if the DEA opposes the stalled House Resolution 1009, which would nix industrial hemp from the definition of marijuana, Sanders said the Justice Department and President Bush would make that call.

"When it comes to laws, we don't have a dog in that fight," he said.

The Justice Department has no position yet on the resolution, said spokesman Erik Ablin. The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, however, is skeptical because of the burden hemp would place on law enforcement resources. Also, hemp advocates are regularly backed -- sometimes surreptitiously -- by the pro-marijuana movement, the office alleges.

"ONDCP cautions that, historically, the hemp movement has been almost entirely funded by the well-organized and well-funded marijuana legalization lobby," said spokesman Tom Riley. "All we do is ask people not to be naive about what's really going on here."

     Vote Hemp exposed these lies and deceptions in the February 8, 2007 press release "Vote Hemp Exposes ONDCP and DEA Lies about Hemp Farming."


     ONDCP paints hemp advocacy groups, like Vote Hemp, with a broad brush as pro-drug and/or funded by pro-drug groups. Even though DEA has the power and authority to regulate hemp and an agricultural crop, they will deny it to the very end by saying that they are just a law enforcement agency and point to Congress as the answer - just as the courts seem to have done.

     Their policy on industrial hemp has remained unchanged since the Clinton administration "Countering Attempts to Legalize Marijuana."

     There were similar entries in the 2000 and 2001 National Drug Control Strategy as well.

     It is obvious that they will continue with these linguistic and semantic techniques - even when testifying to state legislative committees, and I have seen this first-hand. We need to point out that they are using them at every opportunity.