Pollie Bothering

[luciddreaming]

Very true, I will continue, dont ya worry

[entheofarm]

lucid, that is the standard response, I have the exact same letter!

 

When you respond ask if the Government admits liability in refusing medicine.

 

After bieng fobbed off to the NDPSC they went silent when I asked them that.

[luciddreaming]

HA! I f'in knew it!

I will definitely ask them that. I'll say "we are gathering more and more people every day and we will let everyone know you are committing a crime by refusing to provide us with medicine, as outlined in the Conventions you stated"

Sound good?

 

Oh yeah and I just found a new site where we could attack a bit http://www.youth.gov.au/ayf/

It's sposed to be a way for youth (15-24) to talk to the government. Can't find one for adults , could just say you're 20 or something if you're too old.

Edited May 30, 2009 by luciddreaming

[luciddreaming]

Got an e-mail back from the Ombudsman regarding my complaint about where my letter was sent, complete load of shit.

 

We cannot help you with this matter. The Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office investigates complaints about the actions of Australian Government agencies. As the issues in which you raise are not related to an Australian Government agency, we cannot investigate your complaint.

 

How the fuck are they not a Government Agency?

[Smokin Moose]

I've been following this for some time and would like to wish you the best of luck!

[lightning]

They are not a government agency because they are the government itself, the ombudsman has No authority over the pollies only the bureacrats in govt departments. We the people have authority over the pollies by VOTING THEM OUT and getting in the bastards faces. If they duck shove you just keep nagging, keep confronting them with the treaty, keep DEMANDING they live up to their obligations, keep trying to get the debate on legalisation in this country on the front page, the more we squeak the more it will annoy them into doing something, hopefully positive. I would encourage all med users to write to their local member of parliament and DEMAND that they make adequate provision of cannabis available for medical and scientific purposes as recognised, agreed to and obliged by the signing of the single treaty.

Point them to the preamble where it is stated CLEARLY. Remind them that failing to provide adequate supply of essential pain relieving drugs is a breach of Human Rights as recently stated by the UN Commissioner for Human Rights. The main stream options of pharmaceuticals are not effective with all people and all types of pain so they MUST allow for Cannabis where it is shown to be the ONLY effective agent for relief or they are simply TORTURING the sick and dying. To call somebody a criminal for attempting to control there own medical treatment and relieve their own pain(a human RIGHT) is a unconscionable, bigoted act of a DESPOT/TYRANT

 

If you define Cannabis as a Narcotic Drug then by definition it is a medicinal substance which relieves pain and suffering and MUST be made available for those that need it, If you define Cannabis as NOT a Narcotic Drug then it is not appropriately included in the "Single Convention on Narcotics" simple.

As it IS included IT MUST be made AVAILABLE regardless of the Governments "opinion" on how best to fulfil the treaty obligations, Either we live by the "Rule of law" OR WE DON'T, their choice, they should chose wisely, as outcomes of choices may be messy.

 

keep up the good work, Do not take NO for an answer and take no prisoners, the jails are full enough!!!!

[luciddreaming]

And THAT is a big part of my argument lightning. You def need to use that in court. Said quite well really

[Smokin Moose]

You will find a heap of relevant info in the final presentation by Sandra Kanck in the SA Parliament. Not sure if you have seen this. http://cannabis.community.forums.ozstoners...st&p=209527 Edited June 2, 2009 by Smokin Moose

[littlbit]

Smokin Moose we were the ones who sent it to her.

[MongyMan]

Just a thought. There are alot of people in the same position as you atm littlebit and lightning. They are struggling just like you and although they would like to help they don't have the time or money to do so due to the fact they are having to center it on their own immediate legal predicament first understandably. Now if all these people fit under the case you are putting forward, is it possible to center what are now scattered resources over many different individual cases onto the high court challenge you are proposing by bringing them all under a class action? If I understand correctly if the high court challenge wins, most if not all the individual charges will be dropped anyway? United we stand, divided we fall is what is happening atm as far as I can see.

 

Peace MongyMan