U.N. TO LEGALIZE ALL DRUGS

The UN may be about to call on the governments of all countries to end the "war on drugs" and decriminalise the use and possession of all illegal substances.

In an extraordinary post on his Virgin website, Richard Branson said he had been showed a report by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) which dramatically changed the organisation's stance on drug control.

He said the "as-yet unreleased statement" had been sent to some of the world's media under embargo - but that he has gone public with it early for fear the UN will "bow to pressure by not going ahead with this important move".

The UN was preparing to declare "unequivocally that criminalisation is harmful unnecessary and disproportionate", Branson wrote. A document changing the UN stance on drug control was supposed to be released at a conference in Malaysia on Sunday, he said, but that has now been delayed."

DAMAGE CONTROL, DAMAGE CONTROL, AND QUICKLY!
ENTER THE GOOD OLD NEW YORK TIMES, RESIDENT MADAM OF THE AMERICAN MEDIA BROTHEL THAT IS OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE SAME GUYS WHO BUY POLITICAL OFFICES FOR THEIR SWEETHEARTS IN WASHINGTON.

EXPLAIN IT AWAY, NEW YORK TIMES....GO!

"A briefing paper to be presented at a conference in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, by the head of the agency’s H.I.V. division was sent last week to a few journalists by conference organizers and misrepresented as a major policy change. 

But the paper had never been cleared by the agency’s executive director, the agency said, and was meant to describe only how legalization was permitted under existing international drug-control treaties and how it would benefit the fight against AIDS."

OHHHH, OKAY, THAT EXPLAINS EVERYTHING, RIGHT?

 "In fact, an agency spokesman said, a question about the paper posed to the White House Office of National Drug Policy by The New York Times last week had been passed to the agency, alerting officials that the paper was being presented as more important than it really was."

WHOA!

THE NYT ITSELF HAD TAKEN THE DOCUMENT SERIOUSLY AT FIRST, AS THEY SHOULD HAVE.

"By Monday morning, the U.N. announced it had no such intention and that the document merely reflected the author’s opinion. 

Even so, the BBC and Branson himself suggest the document was withdrawn following resistance from at least one country.

 "It's exciting that the UNODC has now unequivocally stated that criminalisation is harmful, unnecessary and disproportionate, echoing concerns about the immense human and economic costs of current drug policies voiced earlier by UNAIDS, the World Health Organisation, UNDP, The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Women, Kofi Annan and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.”

BUT THEN, THE U.N. disputed Branson’s announcement of the document. 

“The briefing paper on decriminalisation mentioned in many of today’s media reports, and intended for dissemination and discussion at a conference in Kuala Lumpur, is neither a final nor formal document … and cannot be read as a statement of UNODC policy,” a spokesperson announced.   

Regardless, the disputed two-page document was penned by Dr. Monica Beg, who chairs the HIV/AIDs section of the UNODC.   

The document concludes that the U.N. will not force member states to criminalize drug possession and use on a personal scale. 

Rather, it suggests that “Member states should consider the implementation of measures to promote the right to health and to reduce prison overcrowding, including by decriminalizing drug use and possession for personal use.”   

This type of policy has seen success in Portugal, where drugs were decriminalized in 2001 and rates of use decreased. At least one town in Massachusetts has opted to treat addiction to heroin rather than prosecute it.

The paper suggests several strategies like these, including investing in drug-prevention programs and treatment for drug dependency. It makes clear that it advocates decriminalization, in part, “as a key element of the HIV response among people who use drugs.”

IT CERTAINLY READS LIKE A MOVE TO DECRIMINALIZE ILLICIT DRUGS TO ME.
CALL IT A SUGGESTION OR A 'FIRST DRAFT' OR WHATEVER, IT'S A STANCE THE U.N. IS OBVIOUSLY NOT WILLING TO ADMIT TO JUST YET.

IT WAS NICE TO READ THIS IN MAJOR NEWS MEDIA,GET A CHANCE TO READ WHAT THE U.N. IS CONSIDERING, WASN'T IT?

ALMOST AS NICE AS READING ABOUT THE CIA JET THAT CRASHED IN 2007 WITH 4 TONS OF COCAINE INSIDE.

I ALWAYS WONDERED...HAD BUSH JUNIOR RUN LOW ON THE STUFF?

MAYBE BECAUSE THE BIGGEST DRUG-RUNNER ON EARTH JUST HAPPENS TO BE THE SAME GUYS WHO RULE OVER THE LAND THE OLD U.N. SITS ON IS WHAT MADE THE U.N. BACK DOWN AS PREDICTED?

WE CALL IT "OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT" AND IF AMERICA LOSES ITS DRUG TRADE, OUR ECONOMY WILL TANK FOR SURE!

BIG, REALLY BIG MONEY IN "ILLEGAL DRUGS".
READ A BIT ABOUT OUR DRUG-DEALING <HERE> (ESPECIALLY PAGES 247, 263), AS WELL AS <HERE> AND <HERE> AND ALSO <HERE>, EVEN A SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE'S FINDINGS  <HERE>, AND DON'T FORGET THE NICE VIDEOS AND PHOTOGRAPHS OF OUR OWN TROOPS GUARDING POPPY FIELDS IN AFGHANISTAN.

AND THEN THERE ARE THESE:
CIA transnational anti-crime and anti-drug activities § Southwest Asia,   

CIA activities in the Near East, North Africa, South and Southwest Asia § Afghanistan and  

Allegations of CIA drug trafficking

I'D BE WILLING TO MAKE A HEFTY WAGER THAT THE U.N. BACKED DOWN AFTER A FEW PHONE CALLS FROM SOME LARGE OFFICES IN WASHINGTON, AND MAYBE A FEW FROM THE NATIONS KNOWN TO PROVIDE THOSE DRUGS THAT OUR GUYS SMUGGLE IN.

SO, BOTTOM LINE, SURE, LEGALIZE ALL OF IT!

AT LEAST IF IT WAS LEGAL NOBODY IN CONGRESS OR THE OVAL OFFICE WOULD HAVE TO DENY USING DRUGS, SMOKING A LITTLE POT, WHATEVER THEIR PREFERENCES ARE.

I JUST WISH THE U.N. HAD STOOD ITS GROUND.
THE U.S. GETTING ANGRY ENOUGH AT THAT ABOMINATION TO RAZE THE OLD U.N. COMPLEX AND HORSEWHIP THE LOT OF THAT BUNCH OFF THE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT MAY BE THE ONLY WAY WE'LL EVER BE RID OF THAT "DOMINATRIX".

MAYBE THEY'LL PICK IT UP AGAIN AFTER MARCH OF NEXT YEAR, WHEN THEIR RULE OVER AMERICA BECOMES 'FACT FOR REAL' ?