Sandra Kanck MP Stirring Them Up in the UK and WA!

[Dragonfan]

The supporters of the drug free approach are slowly but steadily losing the debate over medicinal and recreational cannabis . . . Dr Alex Wodak [23 December 2008]

I've received a few emails today regarding the fallout from Sandra's brilliant final speech in the South Australian Parliament [thanks Smokin' Moose] . . . if you've not read it, please do so here . . . it is rather enervating!

 

The nay-sayers are out in force though, read their villifications sent to Sandra . . .

 

Dear M/S Kanck,

I see from reading on the web that you have involved yourself in the debate around cannabis. I know you have been much engaged with so called medical cannabis issue, I will not dwell on that. You will know as I do, that "medicinal" raw cannabis, especially when smoked,is no medicine. You may also have by now become aware that the so called medical cannabis argument, has for a long time been used as a Trojan Horse for legalisation.

Some of the information in your speeches in Australia leads me to one of two conclusions, you are either a covert pro drugs legaliser yourself (in which case you should in my view state your position honestly) or you are being manipulated by the drug legalisation lobby. I base my remarks to you on the second explanation and hope you receive my information in the spirit it is intended. To help you make sense of conflicting lobby groups.

You have mentioned the Beckley Foundation. This is a pro drugs lobbying organisation run by disgraced ex UK Deputy Drugs Czar Mike Trace. He had to resign from his new post at the UN when he was exposed as being a fifth columnist (his words) working for the George Soros financed, "Open Society" world wide drug legalisation lobby. The work of the Beckley Foundation therefore has a bias, the people who carry out the research are handpicked. I suggest their work should most certainly not be quoted as authoritative or independent.

You may be aware that the UK downgraded cannabis four years ago and is just putting it back where it always was, Class B under our A to C system.

I have been heavily involved in the cannabis debate over the years, one of the people most quoted in the UK media. I /could/ easily be accused of being as partial as Mike Trace! A significant difference is that I have been watching the effects of cannabis for considerably longer than Trace and above all that I do not make my living from advocacy of any position

> on drugs nor am I, covertly or otherwise, linked with one of the richest men in the world. I am only focused on the public health issues and I take no moral position about "recreational" drugs.

The British Government is reclassifying cannabis because it has recognised that a mistake was made and that cannabis is much more harmful than thought. Even a principal of the UKs foremost legalisation lobbyists has agreed and said as much at the ACMD public hearing.

A very strong influence on the UK government has been the opinion of the UK National Director of Mental Health. In such important matters caution must be the responsible position and our government has been cautious.

Australia has a strong & well financed pro drugs legalisation lobby. There was an obvious attempt to use one of your pro pot lobbyists Simon Lenton, to affect the outcome of our UK Advisory Council debate which I successfully exposed. Lenton advocates legalised production of cannabis on an industrial scale and changes to the UN drug conventions. Again, like Trace and the Beckley Foundation he is hardly an independent scientific voice.

I urge you to read more and to be aware that you may be being manipulated. I attach for you my admittedly tongue in cheek and partial account, of the UK ACMD public hearing and some of the history of the debate in the UK. There are some serious points in there, some made by others, that you should perhaps pay attention to. Please do not be misled by these people. A particular issue is the ratio of THC to CBD.

If I can help you with any other information, please ask.

David Raynes

Pheon Management Services UK

pheon@cix.co.uk

 

On the above spiel, Sandra commented . . . "An interesting campaign is emerging!"

 

And then there's this! [reminds me of the old advertising catch-cry, but wait! There's more!]

 

From: Geraldine Mullins [mailto:geraldine_m_mullins@hotmail.com]

Sent: Monday, 22 December 2008 10:10 PM

To: mark.mallabone@wanews.com.au; David Raynes; Kanck, Sandra; anne.bressington@parliament.sa.gov.au; minister.jacobs@dpc.wa.gov.au

Subject: Illicit Drug Use - Australians speak out and what they think:

 

Mark Mallabone

The West Australian Newspapers

Osborne Park

 

Dear Mr. Mallabon, I wrote a letter of complaint to you in September re The West article representing Sandra Kanck's claims that the illicit drug ecstasy is being used by US therapists for the treatment of US war veterans diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The article was biased yet it was authorised by The West Editorial for publication. In light of the following email from UK expert on drug policy and treatment, David Raynes, which exposes Ms. Kanck's agenda I seek to again raise the awareness of The West Editorial. In future I trust that The West will take the utmost care to diligently scrutinise propaganda by the drug legalisation industry. At the end of this email there are 3 groups listed which should be consulted by a West journalist to present the opposing hard data re any illicit drug issue.

Because the article consisted of only 5 linesThe West did not declare the name of its journalist or Kanck's personal and political interest which is that she is an advocate for The Australian Parliamentary Group for Drug Law Reform (APGDLR) which is the 'sister' organisation of The Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation (ADLRF), President Dr. Alex Wodak. The Family and Friends for Drug Law Reform (FFDLR) is a member of the parent group ADLRF. The APGDLR and FFDLR adopt the Dr. Wodak's ADLRF Charter for Drug Law Reform (1994). The Charter is provided on the internet eg. Part A: Preamble and Part B: Urgent Reforms.

The Preamble claims that "national and international policies of prohibition have failed to suppress illicit drug supply notwithstanding enormous financial and legal esources expended in their implementation.......prohibition is a greater threat to personal and community health than a system of controlled availability...civil liberties are being eroded in attempts to stem the supply of illicit drugs....prohibition promotes corruption. The Preamble calls its members to "unequivocally oppose the policies of prohibition....we can no longer abrogate our responsibility to reform drug laws, policies and programs... we seek to establish policies and laws that will control production, manufacture and distribution of drugs of dependence and psychotropic substances".

To use the privilege of an Australian Parliament to claim that 'Prohibition' has failed in Australia is an outrageous act of betrayal. All Australian national and state parliaments and all Australian police sectors (except Federal Police) have failed to implement Australian drug laws as stated in the Misuse of Drugs Act meaning that prohibition has not existed in Australia for ar least 20 years. The Secretariat for the National Drug Strategy is the responsibility of the Dept of Health and Ageing Canberra. The Dept of H&A controls the operation of all Australian police sectors for illicit Drug Harm Reduction Memorandum of Understanding not according to Australian Law.

The 2007 Illicit Drug Strategy Household Survey of Australian attitudes to illicit drug use are as follows:

99% don't want use of hard drugs accepted

95% don't want 'hard' drugs legalised

94% don't want use of cannabis accepted

79% don't want cannabis legalised

Most Australians want tougher penalties for drug dealers.

It therefore behoves The West Australian to respect the innate wisdom of the majority of Australians rather than drive a hidden campaign by stealth and subterfuge which supports sociologists who are drug policy reformists.

Yours sincerely,

Mrs. G Mullins, 99 Brede Street, Geraldton. 6530. 08 99 214 515

Founding Member of the Family Council of WA; Australian Parent Movement of WA Inc. and Coalition Against Drugs WA,213A Belmont Ave, Cloverdale WA. 6105. 08 9277 1644

 

Dr Alex Wodak noted the following . . .

Many thanks for sharing the thoughts of Geraldine Mullins and David Raynes with me. The supporters of the drug free approach are slowly but steadily losing the debate over medicinal and recreational cannabis. Is there any action you (or Sandra) would like me to take over this?

On this, Sandra commented as follows,

I don't think there's anything to do, other than to be aware that these sorts of actions are occurring. I'm a little mystified that some relatively big British guns get trained on a small minnow like me. As the letter from Mullins is targetting WA media, then, if you have someone over there warn them to be on the lookout for any letters to the editor, editorials etc.

And Smokin' Moose noted . . .

Sandra, you may call yourself a minnow, but your rebuttal speech was profound and has gone around the world. Full credit to you for making such a HUGE impact prior to your retirement. If your words did not have such impact, it would not be generating this kind of global campaign. The word back to me is that the rebuttal was one of the best, if not the best, factual representations of medicinal cannabis on public record. Both you and Alex Wodak are shining lights to us here in the medicinal cannabis world. You both have our ultimate respect for your insight and compassion.

 

 

[interesting to note that Mr Raynes is a 'failed' former UK Customs Officer who was involved in a HUGE cockup by UK Customs . . . http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.politi...a1da4234384a41f]

Edited December 24, 2008 by Dragonfan

[Indycar]

Time i got some glasses.. Buggered if i can read that italic text..

 

Maybe next time..

 

[Dragonfan]

Wanna borrow mine?

 

I can change the text if you'd like . . . make it LARGER or EMBOLDEN it perhaps?

[Indycar]

Nah, not at all. It's my issue, not yours Dragonfan.

 

It just fucks with me eyes 'n in turn can't read it clearly. Least i now know how fucked my vision really is.

 

Back to the action..

 

[Naycha]

prohibition has not existed in Australia for at least 20 years

 

Mrs G Mullins, just because thousands of Australians choose to ignore prohibition does not mean that it does not exist.

 

What an uneducated propagandist assertion.

[Terry Wright]

Talking of David Raynes...

 

He lobbed onto my blog and made a comment with his usual distorted opinion of cannabis. It didn't occur to me that it was the David Raynes until I reread his comment and then it clicked.

 

Go to the link below and scroll down to comments.

 

Cannabis is a Hard Drug Too! - More DFA Deceit

 

 

BTW, this is my first post so hello to everyone here.

[freddie]

You have to ask what business David Raynes has in South Australian politics.

 

Australia has a strong & well financed pro drugs legalisation lobby

 

We do????? Thats great. Where are they?

 

Terry, nice blog. Welcome to OS.

[Terry Wright]

You have to ask what business David Raynes has in South Australian politics.

 

 

 

We do????? Thats great. Where are they?

 

Dr Alex Wodak is a well know reformist throughout the world and is infamous for taking on the prohibitionist using science and medical research. Dr David Calicot and Dr James Rowe also have some pull because they have PHDs. A few others are Tony Trimingham from Family Drug Support , Brian McConnell from Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform and of course, Sandra Kanck.

 

 

BTW, thanks for the welcome.

[mull]

Good reply in your blog Terry well done and welcome along mate.

 

Scuse the cross thread blog post, but this little bit here, might need some flexibility.

 

"That being said, anyone who has 40 puffs of cannabis a day, every day probably needs help."

 

Some folks use many more daily puffs than that - for their daily help bro

[Terry Wright]

Good reply in your blog Terry well done and welcome along mate.

 

Scuse the cross thread blog post, but this little bit here, might need some flexibility.

 

"That being said, anyone who has 40 puffs of cannabis a day, every day probably needs help."

 

Some folks use many more daily puffs than that - for their daily help bro

 

True maybe for medical use, but smoking 40 pipes a day, everyday would test most recreational users.

 

Thanks for the welcome.