Canadense

Uai...? gosta de musica folk, mucsica celta e musica classica. A cantora favorita é Mary Black. Ele tb gosta de ficção científica.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/21/meet-mark-kleiman-the-man-who-will-be-washington-state-s-pot-czar.html Meet Mark Kleiman, the Man Who Will Be Washington State’s Pot Czar The UCLA professor and blogger was officially named leader of Washington state’s lean, mean, pot-regulating machine Tuesday—the first job of its kind. He talks to Abby Haglage. How does it feel to be famous? The new “pot czar” of Washington state chuckles at the question. “Drug-policy analysts do not get groupies,” he says. But judging by the media storm surrounding Mark Kleiman—the professor, blogger, and drug-policy expert appointed to head the state’s marijuana legalization effort—he’s dead wrong. A vendor points out the variety of marijuana for sale at the grand opening of the Seattle location of the Northwest Cannabis Market, for sales of medical marijuana products. Inset: Mark Kleiman (Elaine Thompson/AP; Todd Cheney/UCLA) After a glowing write-up in the Seattle Times and a headline-grabbing on CNN, it looks as if the bearded Californian has caught the nation’s attention. When Washington state officials announced their decision to hire the UCLA professor and author of Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control, they were not simply choosing Kleiman—but also his hand-picked team of consultants, named BOTEC, for Kleiman’s company. The ruthless fight for the position had pitted Kleiman’s team against more than 100 others. He was sure his group of six was the strongest, and he was right. Nearly four months after the state of Washington legalized marijuana, Kleiman says he hopes to show the world what marijuana legalization—done right—can look like. From his poor eating habits to playing Wii Fit, the new pot boss tells The Daily Beast who he is—and how he landed the most enviable seat in the world of marijuana. Did you ever imagine that you’d take on this kind of role? Would you say this was a dream of yours? No, I can’t say that I ever imagined that a state would legalize marijuana while it remained illegal federally and then ask for advice about how to do it. [Laughs.] That was not on my list of dreams. So now that you’re in the spotlight, who is the real Mark Kleiman? Workaholic, family man, neither? Well, no. I have not gotten any cooperation in being a family man. When we got the notice that we were the apparent successful proposer [to be Washington state’s marijuana consultants], I told my team not to get overconfident. I was the apparent successful proposer to somebody once and she married someone else. So you’re single? I’m available and interested. But I must admit, not having a family, it does make assignments like this easier. According to the official announcement, you’re charging $292 an hour. That seems like such a specific number. What’s the story behind it? My sense was that if said $300, it would sound like we made it up. It’s a complicated calculation; obviously we couldn’t do it precisely. A blend of some fairly high-priced talent with some younger people who don't cost as much. We’re still working out exactly how the budget will work. I asked the guy, “Do we have to do some arithmetic that comes out to $292?” And he said, “No.” I said, “Well!” [Laughs.] A major factor of the decision process is how many people you will license to grow. Agreed? Yes. That will be a big decision. I don’t know if it’s going to be 10 or 500. Ninety percent of the beer market in Washington state is served by three firms, just to give you some perspective. There are some people who think that's the direction this industry will go in, and others who think that's the worst possible result. What are some specific examples of things you will deal with day to day? Well, packaging is one. Packaging will be hugely important and essentially determine what the market looks like. Should there be brand names? Can you put "mellow" on the label, or just give the chemical content? These aren't simple choices, and every option has disadvantages as well as advantages. From what I’ve seen, the effect this legal marijuana will have on alcohol consumption seems vital to you. True? whether you smoke pot, you said you’ll always answer this question with the same answer: “None of your business.” I understand why people ask the question. They’re trying to place you culturally. When's the last time someone hired to advise on AIDS prevention was asked, "How many sexual partners have you had"? We might be able to make better policy about marijuana if we giggled a little less. People would not be asking me if I used cocaine. It’s partly that about half of every age cohort uses pot. So it’s a pretty clear cultural divider. I was glad to see Erin Burnett was not offended when I didn’t answer. If you do drug policy, it’s foolish to answer that question. Why foolish? Well, because it allows people to categorize you, either as a pot smoker or a drug warrior. It refocuses the conversation away from the substance and onto the person. And it also assumes that this is basically an extension of the culture wars, rather than a practical policy problem. If there’s one thing that my team will bring to the table, it’s that we’re going to try to focus on advantages and disadvantages. Not on who’s winning and who’s losing. That’s part of what makes me sleep easy. When you’re not running the pot world, what will you be doing? I spend a lot of time blogging. I like folk music, Celtic music, and early music. My favorite singer is Mary Black. I’m also a big science-fiction fan. What about TV? I got rid of my TV in 1976. I have a computer, so I watch TV on Talking Points Memo. I bought a TV to watch the debates in 2008, thinking I would watch Netflix occasionally, but no. I’m out of the TV habit. I like to use Wii Fit and play video games on my computer instead. I’d much rather be reading history than watching television. What’s your favorite food? [Hesitates.] Hmm. I have to say brownies, but I don’t want you to get the wrong idea! I don’t have the world’s healthiest eating habits. Word on the street is that you won’t be moving to Washington and will remain in California to do this job. Emails are a really wonderful thing. I have a day job. I’m going to continue to teach at UCLA. I’ll obviously be up there from time to time, particularly over the summer. If I have to get up to Seattle, I won’t object. But why burn a lot of jet fuel if you don’t have to? You’ve stated in the past that you’re neither pro-legalization nor anti-. Can you explain that? Well, any opinions I have now are completely subject to change in the face of new facts. We’ve never seen this beast. Assuming that Washington comes up with a reasonably sensible solution and the federal government lets it operate—meaning we get a fair shot at a mostly legal regime in Washington—then come back at me in five years and ask what I think about legalizing marijuana, and I might have an opinion that’s worth something. What advice would you give to the younger generation aspiring to be the next pot czar? Same advice I’d give an aspiring musician: don’t quit your day job.

Tinha uma epoca que o The Union tb era toda semana... Recordar e viver

Y NOT BOTH?

num entendeu o que??

né não??? vai acontecer a msm coisa que acontecerá com traficantes. Parariam de existir, com um adendo, os traficantes [sic] teriam um emprego com carteira assinada no dia seguinte.

http://www.alternet.org/drugs/follow-money-how-former-anti-drug-officials-ridiculously-still-say-pot-dangerous-order-make?paging=off Follow the Money: How Former Anti-Drug Officials Ridiculously Still Say Pot Is Dangerous in Order to Make a Lot of Cash Former DEA agents and cops are lobbying for tougher drug laws that make them rich. March 25, 2013 When eight former DEA chiefs signed a letter to US Attorney General Eric Holder earlier this month, demanding that the feds crack down on Washington and Colorado, the states which voted last November to legalize marijuana, there was more than just drug-war ideology at stake. There was money. Twoof the elder drug warriors, Peter Bensinger (DEA chief, 1976–1981) and Robert DuPont (White House drug chief, 1973–1977), run a corporate drug-testing business. Their employee-assistance company, Bensinger, DuPont & Associates, the sixth largest in the nation, holds the pee stick for some 10 million employees around the US. Their clients have included the biggest players in industry and government: Kraft Foods, American Airlines, Johnson & Johnson, the Federal Aviation Administration and even the Justice Department itself. “These are not just old drug war architects pushing a drug war model they’ve pushed for 40 years,” says Brian Vicente, a Denver lawyer and co-author of Colorado’sProposition 64, which legalized marijuana for recreational use. “These guys are asking Eric Holder to pursue prohibition policies that line their own pockets.” Bensinger and DuPont both deny money is their motive. “It’s true we might benefit from keeping marijuana illegal, ”says DuPont. But he argues it's equally true that marijuana legalizationc ould benefit his bottom line, putting forth the old drug-war line that legalization would create more users. “The more success legalization has, the better it is for our business because they are creating a problem for employers,” he says. “That would be smart for us.” DuPont also points out that only 15% of their business is made up of training employers to detect the warning signs of drug and alcohol abuse and supplying third-party testing. But both men are involved in industry-controlled lobbying groups like the Drug & Alcohol Industry Testing Association, which backed the Drug Testing Integrity Act of 2008, outlawing products that help people beat drug tests and keeping their business healthy. By inserting themselves into the legal-pot debate, Bensinger, DuPont and other drug warriors benefit by promoting their own legacies and bolstering their own business, lobbying and consulting interests—even in the face of an increasingly skeptical public. A 2011 Gallup survey showed that half of Americans favor legalizing weed. “This letter that they signed is their attempt to once again become relevant within the public policy debate that has largely turned its back on such archaic viewpoints,” says Paul Armentano, deputy director of the pro-marijuana nonprofit, National Organization for theReform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). The time-honored revolving door between government and business swings fast and often. It can be straightforward, like the appointment of banking behemoth Goldman Sachs' alumni as economic policymakers by recent presidential administrations. But when it comes to the drug war, the family tree is more like a thicket of interests among law enforcement, federal and state prisons, pharmaceutical giants, drug testers and drug treatment programs—all with an economic stake in keeping pot illegal. Bensinger and DuPont are longtime allies of the marijuana prohibition group that sent the letter to Holder, Save Our Society from Drugs (SOS), which was founded by Mel Sembler, a Florida shopping-mall magnate, and his wife, Betty. The Semblers also founded Straight Inc.—a drug-treatment program that used sleep deprivation, beatings and psychological abuse to treat 10,000 teenage patients, in nine states, from 1976 to 1993, at $1,400 a month plus a $1,600 per patient evaluation fee, raking in millions. Straight was shutdown after investigations in state after state corroborated the hundreds of complaints. But the Semblers, longtime major Republican Party fundraisers, retain their influence as behind-the-scenes bankrollers of the anti-drug faction. The department of the White House drug czar, otherwise known as the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), is another arm of the government’s war on drugs that can be lucrative to incumbents. Andrea Barthwell, MD, former deputy drug czar during President George W. Bush’s first term and his point person against medical marijuana, has earned a living both treating drug addicts and lobbying against policies that weaken marijuana laws—and cut into her own bottom line. As a past president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM)—a group that opposes medical marijuana, and whose members’ business model could be threatened by legalized marijuana, since two-thirds of its clientele are court-ordered pot users trying to avoid jail time—Barthwell has been one of its fiercest attack dogs. In ASAM campaigns against Oregon and Illinois’ medical marijuana initiatives, she called those who favor medical marijuana “cruel” and “snake oil salesman.” She denounces this pain-relief and anti-nausea approach for patients with cancer and AIDS because, she claims, it is unregulated and unproven (the Institute of Medicine declared medical marijuana useful in 2003, and since then many studies, and many more users, attest to its benefits.) Yet Barthwell was happy to jump from the ONDCP to the payroll of GW Pharmaceutical in 2005, lobbying for the Canadian company’s Sativex—a liquefied marijuana spray, extracted from whole plant cannabis, for the same pain benefits. Even as the American Medical Association and federal lawmakers maintain that pot has no medicinal value, Big Pharma is applying for dozens of cannabis-based new medicines in order to take hold of of the $1.8 billion medical marijuana industry, as NORML’s Paul Armentano pointed out five years ago in the Huffington Post. Barthwell, like Bensinger and DuPoint, also has a financial stake in the prohibition treatment culture. She is founder and CEO of EMGlobal LLC, parent company of the Chicago-based Two Dreams Outer Banks drug treatment center, and is also a director of Catasys Inc., which provides substance abuse programs and behavioral health management services to companies, health plans and unions—a role for which she received $77,994 in compensation in 2011. When it comes to the drug war, money rolls into whichever corporate pockets are willing to play ball, whether it’s big-time lobbyists or broadcast TV networks. Barry McCaffrey—President Clinton’s second-term drug czar and a former Army general, who also signed the recent letter to Holder—was in charge of the purse strings at ONDCP. He oversaw a money-soaked, ham-handed propaganda campaign: In 1999, his office hired PR giant Fleishman-Hillard (at $10 million a year), which encouraged TV networks to slip anti-drug messages into sitcoms and dramas in exchange for ad time worth millions. The secret effort allowed networks to avoid running PSAs, freeing up airtime for paid ads. Networks also gave the ONCDP advance copies of scripts to review. It’s estimated that between 1998 and 2000, the networks received up to $25 million in benefits. At the same time, McCaffrey was sharpening his stick for the battle against medical marijuana, flatly denying that patients in pain could receive relief from pot. After he left the drug czar’s job, he went on the payroll of military contractors, promoting their interests in the Iraq war as a frequent talking head on national network TV, never disclosing his financial ties. Lobbying your former employer—whether it’s the government itself or taxpayers who foot the bill—is the No. 1 way one-time public servants can serve themselves. The same is true of current state-paid employees, like cops and other law enforcement personnel whose job it is to crack down on illegal weed smoking. As Armentano notes, federal grants that target illegal drug use are a major source of funding for local police coffers, paying for new hires, equipment and coveted overtime pay. John Lovell, a lobbyist for police associations in Sacramento, California, not only obtains those grants, he is a front-line fighter on behalf of the cops to keep pot illegal. When California weighed Proposition 19 to legalize marijuana in 2010, Lovell helped manage the opposition campaign. During the fight, according to a reviewof lobbying contracts by Republic Report, Lovell’s company received $386,350 from police groups, including the California Police Chiefs Association. The same report noted that Lovell helped local police departments apply for drug war money from President Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. In 2009 and 2010, state police groups sought some $75 million from the feds to conduct a Campaign Against Marijuana Planting. Lovell represented one such group. Indeed, law enforcement agencies around the country could lose as much as $11 billion in taxpayer money if marijuana prohibition is repealed, according to Harvard economics professor Jeff Myron. Weed arrests account for half of all drugs arrests in the US. The tangled money trail can seem at times like something from a smoke-filled Cheech and Chong plot. In 2009, the California Police Chiefs Association posted on their website a position paperagainst pot for pain, courtesy of a group called Friends of the DEA. “Requiring the DEA unequivocally to take a ‘hands-off’ approach, no matter how egregious the dispensary’s practices, will not serve the best interests of patients. Uncontrolled proliferation of dispensaries will seriously undercut our FDA drug approval system and deprive patients of important regulatory protections,” the group argued. What the paper didn’t note was that Friends was a lobbying group headed by Michael Barnes, a former Bush appointee to the drug czar’s office, as first pointed out by CounterPunch that year. The nine-page, heavily footnoted position paper was written by none other than Andrea Barthwell, MD, the promoter of Sativex, which is likely to receive FDA approval soon. Among the biggest financial winners from the war on pot are private prisons and the army of DEA agents, local deputies and SWAT teams who help fill them up. Since 1980, federal prisons have ballooned some 790% because of the war on drugs, which began in earnest the previous decade. Private prison companies have seen their business soar. Corrections Corporation of America (CAA), the largest operator in the US, with 60 facilities and a 90,000-bed capacity, had $1.7 billion in tax-payer-funded revenue last year. The GEO Group, a worldwide player with 53,000 beds, pulled in $1.6 billion in government-funneled revenue. In its 2010 annual report, CAA is fairly transparent about its stake in the anti-drug battle: “Any changes [in laws] with respect to drugs and controlled substances or illegal immigration could affect the number of persons arrested, convicted and sentenced, thereby potentially reducing demand for correctional facilities to house them.” Last year, both companies stuffed millions of dollars into the pockets of Washington lobbyists to pressure lawmakers to maintain the status quo, as revealed in an investigation by Laura Carlsen in March's Counter Punch magazine. “My most powerful adversity is the police-prison industry,” says former cop–turned–drug policy specialist Howard Woolridge, who lobbies lawmakers for marijuana reform for Citizens Opposing Prohibition. “They can say, ‘If you don’t vote for more prohibition, we will tell people you are soft on drugs on and soft on crime.’ The Fraternal Order of Police is looking out for their 326,000 members’ paychecks. If they say you’re soft on crime, they can move upward of 2% of the electorate. In a close election, that’s victory and defeat.” Vincente doesn’t doubt that the Bensingers, Bathwells and McCaffreys are fervent believers in their anti-pot mission, even as they earn their living on its front lines or flanks. The same people who wrote to Holder battled Vincente's initiative as well. “It’s what they do—they get together and sign letters,” he says. For the older fighters, says Paul Armentano of NORML, “Their motivation is the fact their failed polices have been proved wrong. All they have is the ability to try to intimidate a couple of high-ranking officials. Most of America has moved on.” Attorney General Eric Holder may recognize this. He has told members of the Senate that the Obama administration is still formulating its policy toward the states that legalized pot. “We are considering what the federal response to those new statutes will be,” Holder said at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this week. “We will have the ability to announce what our policy will be relatively soon.” So far he has not answered the drug warriors' letter. Kevin Gray is a New

hahahaha quero ver o dia que tiver 100 uma semana da faca e bate pulissa na tua goma... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA acho que me caguei todo... quero ver quem e macho nessas hr...

porra... acho q sou o unico com dreads naturais???

po, NUNCA que um papa seria argentino se deus fosse brazylero... Acho que agora ta mais que provado que pelo menos, deus se existir, num e brazylero nem fudendo

nao bro... so os amigos dele num sao traficantes... msm vendendo drogas... mas esse cara e por que ele num conhece o cara... burro pracaleo

CARA, num seja incoerente, vc compra TUDO de traficante... o comercio e ilegal, se eles te venderam ou passaram ou qualquer vebo vc quer usar, sao traficantes.

... disfarcados.... cara, reve teus conceitos ... e novato sempre quer cagar regras ne??? aqui DEVE ser isso. DEVE ser aquilo.... chegou ontem, nem sentar na janelinha vc quer, e ja quer pilotar o aviao...

sim, nos respeitamos sua cegueira, 100% só uma OBS plantar maconha, fumar maconha tb é crime... E passar o baseado aceso tb é trafico. Alias se uma vez tu rachou uma paranga, pela lei vc é traficante

Togo, ele ainda pensa no termo trafico como definido pelo datena... Eu sou contra o trafico [sic]. Olha o nivel. Pra esse tipo de pensamnto o buraco e mais em baixo.

Ficar sem num da. EDIT: EU SOU TRAFICANTE

entao vai la e cagueta seu traficante.... PQP quanta gente hipocrita no GR.. Ja falei... maconha cura um monte de coisa... só num cura miopia

uma vez eu apresentei meu bong a uma cabaca de maconha... a mina ficou aclamando por jesus a noite toda... gritando por deus... mina deu PT

PAREM DE USAR TRAFICO COMO SUBSTATIVO... isso e coisa de gente cabea pequena.... que assiste a globo/datena o teu problema é com violencia, nao a venda ilegal... se um truculento vender qualquer coisa legalmente eu seria contra tb. Pare, da um passo pra trz, e revê teus conceitos. agora, se um agricultor se envolve com facções criminosas armadas, a culpa é de quem??? DO ESTADO! que foi quem criou esses ganguesteres

muita??? subjetivo muita alvez pra vc, pra mim nao...

E tem mesmo!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA num aguenta bebe leite man

ele ta chapado pra caralho... poe algo bem gorduroso pra ele comer.... queijo ou algo assim... mas fique tranquilo, ele so vai ficar bem amanha

Eu chamo isso de balela principalmente quando falaram que o indice de cannabinoides no leite era inufiscientes para produzir efeitos colaterais...... KD a fonte??? Galera acredita tudo que le...