Hemp FACT #71- Atl. Mthly-15

Date: 95-03-28 10:50:19 EDT

From: ADBryan

REEFER MADNESS -- Part 15

REEFER MADNESS by Eric Schlosser

Originally published in Atlantic Monthly, August 1994 issue.

Inside The Industry--cont.

Take a map of the United States and draw a circle, including within its circumference Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan, with portions of Ohio to the east, Kentucky and Tennessee to the south, and Missouri, Iowa, and Nebraska to the west. The region within that circle, Steve White believes, is producing the majority of the marijuana grown in the United States. The highest-quality marijuana is cultivated indoors on the West Coast, but for sheer volume, no other area surpasses the U.S. heartland. White does not find this surprising. During the Second World War the U.S. government encouraged farmers throughout the Corn Belt to plant almost 300,000 acres of marijuana, in the hopes of replacing fiber supplies from Asia which had been cut off by the Japanese. The program, whose slogan was "Hemp for Victory," turned out to be a financial disaster and left marijuana growing wild throughout the region. Known as ditchweed, this marijuana now blankets tens of thousands of acres. For years it had a negligible delta-9-THC content, and was used mainly as filler by drug dealers, but there is evidence that the ditchweed may be cross-pollinating with the potent marijuana now cultivated outdoors. The same growing conditions and soil that are ideal for corn are also ideal for marijuana. Most local sheriff's departments employ only three to five officers, with more important things to do than hunt for marijuana. And over the past fifteen years there have been a lot of people with strong agricultural skills who have badly needed money--or have wanted more of it than almost any other job in the region could provide. A bushel of corn sells for roughly $2.50, a bushel of manicured marijuana for about $70,000. White thinks that marijuana is the largest cash crop in the United States, and if not the largest in Indiana, then right up there with corn and soybeans. Though he is proud of what his office has accomplished, White has no illusions: "There's more than we think."

During the 1960s and early 1970s nearly all the marijuana smoked in the United States was imported, mainly from Mexico, Colombia, and Jamaica. Domestic production rose in reaction to a number of events. The spraying of an herbicide, paraquat, over Mexican marijuana fields, begun in 1975, created uneasiness about that nation's product. Successful interdiction efforts by the U.S. Border Patrol and the Coast Guard made smuggling marijuana more difficult. And the tougher legal sanctions against trafficking led some foreign drug dealers to switch from marijuana, a bulk agricultural good with a strong smell, to cocaine, which is easier to conceal and brings a far higher return per pound. As marijuana prices rose, American growers responded to consumer demand. Mark A.R. Kleiman, an associate professor at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, finds this to be a rare instance in which protectionism actually worked. The anti-drug movement and the burgeoning American marijuana crop led the DEA to devote more of its resources to marijuana investigations. Kleiman estimates that by 1988 federal anti-marijuana efforts totaled approximately $970 million--about 20 to 25 percent of all federal drug-enforcement expenditures. By 1992 federal convictions for marijuana outnumbered those for heroin, crack cocaine, and LSD combined. The DEA's Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program began in 1979 in two states, California and Hawaii; it now looks for marijuana-farming operations--called "grows" or "gardens" by members of the trade--in all fifty states.

Hemp FACT #71- Atl. Mthly-16

Date: 95-03-29 11:14:36 EDT

From: ADBryan

REEFER MADNESS -- Part 16

REEFER MADNESS by Eric Schlosser

Originally published in Atlantic Monthly, August 1994 issue.

Inside The Industry--cont.

No one knows exactly how much marijuana is cultivated in the United States. The numbers published by the government--or anyone else--are largely speculative. In 1992 the DEA eradicated 3,405 metric tons of cultivated marijuana in the United States, an amount the DEA says represents more than half the total domestic output. Critics believe that the DEA actually finds only 10 to 20 percent of the marijuana being grown in this country. With prices ranging from $500 a pound, for low-quality New Mexican marijuana, to more than $5,000 a pound for "boutique" strains like Northern Lights and Afghan Kush, it can be confidently stated that the black market for American marijuana, whatever the actual tonnage, is immense.

Growers are increasingly moving their crops indoors, using artificial light and hydroponics, to avoid theft, reduce the risk of detection, control the growing process, and profit from up to six harvests a year. Thirty mature plants can easily be grown in an area the size of a bathtub. I asked Steve White to list some of the places where he has discovered indoor grow operations. He laughed. "It would be tough for me to say places we haven't found them." Often a false wall hides a grow room in a house, or a house's foundation doesn't match its basement, which seems oddly smaller, or there are second stories with no stairwells, or crawl spaces are hidden beneath floors. Once White rummaged through a child's closet and found the entrance to a grow area behind the toys. Without need of a search warrant, the DEA employs thermal-imaging devices, mounted on helicopters and low-flying airplanes, to detect abnormal heat sources that may indicate the presence of an indoor growing operation--or a pottery kiln, or a Jacuzzi. What is found depends upon the skill of the technician. White has learned that one of the best ways to find an indoor grow area is with his nose: no matter how well-vented the operation, and despite electronic devices that can neutralize odors in the air, marijuana will exude a powerful scent. A few years ago indoor grows were often huge. A group of janitors in Anderson, Indiana, who had traveled to Israel to study hydroponics, were caught with 8,100 plants in a building with walls constructed a foot thick to thwart infrared detection. Nowadays growers rent storage units and apartments, using phony names and paying in cash, and build small grow operations at different locations, with timing devices and automatic controls. The authorities may find one or two--a loss anticipated in the grower's business plan--without being able to trace ownership.

White has smoked marijuana once, while working undercover, and did not enjoy the experience. He chain-smokes cigarettes, regrets it, and sees no need to add marijuana to the nation's list of legal drugs. "We've got tobacco, we've got alcohol," he said. "Jesus Christ, do we need another hallucinogenic, carcinogenic substance on the market?" What disturbs him most about marijuana is the phenomenal sums of money it funnels into an underground economy, and the great resulting potential for corruption among public officials. I asked whether a sense of futility ever creeps into his work, given the extent of cultivation in his state. "I'm not such a fool as to sit here and tell you that we're going to wipe out marijuana," he replied. But there is no doubt in his mind that the DEA exerts a deterrent effect. "Every time we have a helicopter go up on a mission," White said, "there's someone down below who sees it and thinks, 'Maybe I better not.'"

Part 17 tommorow. Anyone wishing entire text of article, email. Request Word or Text format.

Hemp FACT #72- Atl. Mthly-17

Date: 95-03-30 10:55:19 EDT

From: ADBryan

REEFER MADNESS -- Part 17

REEFER MADNESS by Eric Schlosser

Originally published in Atlantic Monthly, August 1994 issue.

Inside The Industry--cont.

Ralph Weisheit, a professor of criminal justice at Illinois State University, does not know Steve White but has come to many of the same conclusions about marijuana cultivation in the Midwest. Weisheit first became interested in the subject eight years ago, when he saw, on the television news, an old Illinois farmer being arrested for cultivating marijuana. The farmer and his son never smoked marijuana; they grew it to save their farm from foreclosure. Weisheit was intrigued. With a grant from the research arm of the U.S. Justice Department, he conducted a two-year study of marijuana cultivation, interviewing law-enforcement officials in five states and dozens of Illinois growers who had been caught and convicted. The book based on that study, Domestic Marijuana: A Neglected Industry (1992), chronicles the rise of marijuana production in the United States and offers a fascinating portrait of the growers. Weisheit agrees that the majority of marijuana grown in America probably originates in the nine-state region described by Steve White. He also thinks that marijuana is the nation's largest cash crop, by a very wide margin.

Estimates of how many Americans grow marijuana range from one to three million, of which anywhere from 100,000 to 200,000 are commercial growers. Weisheit found that aside from being predominantly white and male, marijuana growers generally do not fit any common stereotypes. Some are pragmatists, growing the drug purely for the money; during the farm crisis of the 1980s many farmers in the Marijuana Belt started cultivating marijuana out of desperation. They found it not only easy money but also easy work. As one farmer told Weisheit, "You know, I spent most of my life trying to kill weeds, so trying to keep one alive was hardly a challenge." Other growers are hustlers by nature, classic American entrepreneurs; they might as well be selling time-shares in a vacation condominium. They try to build marijuana empires. The risks of the trade only add to its appeal. Other growers are less competitive, giving away marijuana to friends or selling it at slightly above cost, sharing agricultural techniques, comparing their crops the way neighbors might compare homegrown tomatoes. Marijuana growers are educated and uneducated, liberal and conservative. They are extremely secretive, worrying more about thieves than about the police. Few belong to NORML (the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws) and few read High Times magazine or add their names to any list that might arouse suspicion. Indoor growing often attracts people who love gizmos. There are endless contraptions that can be added to a grow room, from computer-controlled watering systems to electric tables that distribute nutrients evenly by tilting back and forth. Some growers become connoisseurs, producing high-quality marijuana in small quantities, manipulating not only the level of delta-9-THC through cross-breeding but also the proportions of all the other cannabinoids to subtly--or not so subtly--affect the nature of the high. Weisheit met growers and law-enforcement officers alike who were extraordinarily passionate about marijuana, eager to discuss its arcane details for hours. He was surprised, after the publication of his book, by how little controversy it generated in either camp. His mother was disturbed, however, by one of its central implications: "She's very anti-drug," Weisheit says, "and her comment was, 'The thing I don't like about this book is that it makes these people seem so normal.'"

Hemp FACT #73- Atl. Mthly-18

Date: 95-03-31 10:40:47 EDT

From: ADBryan

REEFER MADNESS -- Part 18

REEFER MADNESS by Eric Schlosser

Originally published in Atlantic Monthly, August 1994 issue.

Inside The Industry--cont.

Late one night I met a commercial marijuana grower who introduced himself as "Dave." He has been growing marijuana on and off for more than a decade, beginning outdoors and graduating to a series of increasingly complex indoor grow systems. Understandably paranoid and suspicious, Dave is also quite proud of his work and regrets being unable to discuss it with friends. His grow operation had to be built surreptitiously, over a period of weeks, like a factory assembled by hand. It utilizes about $50,000 worth of high-tech hydroponic equipment. When the construction was complete, the whole thing looked so beautiful that Dave wanted to throw an opening-night party, but he decided that would not be a good idea. Though he always hated gardening and never passed a science class in his life, he now has a grasp of marijuana botany, plant biology, and advanced greenhouse-management techniques which only Special Agent White could fully appreciate. As he smoked some of his most recent harvest, Dave shared with me some of the pleasures, risks, rewards, and bizarre phenomena associated with his profession.

Hidden behind a fake wall, entered through a secret door, in a neighborhood where you would never, ever, expect to find it, Dave's operation is much larger than most. There are hundreds of marijuana plants in long rows, growing from cubes of rock wool, a soil-less medium spun from synthetic fibers, connected through an intricate system of white plastic pipes. Suspended above them are extremely bright high-pressure sodium lights, which require a surge of power from special ballasts to start up. On the ceiling is the bluish flame of a carbon-dioxide generator burning natural gas. The windows have been sealed and blacked out. The room is quite warm, the air thick and humid, the whole place filled with a pungent smell reminiscent of fresh hay. Like a greenhouse without glass, it feels very still and quiet, except for the sound of water rushing through narrow pipes.

When everything is running smoothly, Dave controls the elements necessary for his plants: air, light, heat, and water. In a closed chamber there is no wind; here a ventilation system provides it, circulating air rich in carbon dioxide. When outdoor temperatures drop too low, Dave uses the CO2 generator on the ceiling--in effect "fertilizing the air." Pumps and timers automatically water the plants, also delivering nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, which would normally be derived from soil. One of the critical factors in growing marijuana is the proportion of darkness to light. Sometimes Dave's high-pressure sodium lights burn eighteen hours a day, raising the temperature in the grow room to as high as 110 degrees. During the female plant's reproductive stage there must be long periods of total, uninterrupted darkness. As little as two footcandles of light can disrupt the delicate process by which delta-9-THC accumulates in the buds. Turning on a flashlight at the wrong moment, Dave says, is enough to ruin his plants.

He is truly a connoisseur, growing an expensive strain of marijuana from the northern Hindu Kush. As he describes how some outdoor growers stuff marijuana into plastic garbage bags while it is still wet, he grimaces, like a master vintner appalled by the improper handling of grapes. The buds are very fragile, he says: "You're trying to coax this mature flower to retain its essence--and then store it and seal it at that instant in time." His finished product is deep green and aromatic, like some rare, exotic spice.

Hemp FACT #74- Atl. Mthly-19

Date: 95-04-01 11:03:34 EDT

From: ADBryan

REEFER MADNESS -- Part 19

REEFER MADNESS by Eric Schlosser

Originally published in Atlantic Monthly, August 1994 issue.

Inside The Industry--cont.

Growing marijuana indoors requires much more work than cultivating it outdoors. There is also more potential for disaster. A splash of liquid on a hot light will cause it to explode. A broken pipe can flood the room with hundreds of gallons of water. A power outage shuts the whole system down. The nutrient solution, if improperly monitored, can quickly turn too acidic and, as Dave puts it, "give the plants a heart attack." More common, and yet somehow more surreal, are insect infestations that can harm valuable young plants. Dave has battled spider mites, greenhouse whiteflies, and aphids. Insecticides are not an option in an enclosed room, with a crop that will be smoked. Dave uses biological controls, unleashing hungry young predators upon unwanted bugs. Recently he released thousands of miniature wasps. This is insanity, he thought; but it worked. Inside a nearby refrigerator he always keeps 500 ladybug eggs, next to the soda, in case of an emergency. At the moment Dave is contending with gnats, who leave his plants alone but swarm and bite him as he walks about the grow room in the dark.

Someone At The Door

On March 18, 1990, a pair of deputy sheriffs in Johnson County, Indiana, spotted a red Jeep being driven erratically and signaled for its driver to pull off the road. Behind the wheel they found Jerry Montgomery, obviously intoxicated; littering the truck were three empty vodka bottles, a five-gallon bucket full of marijuana, and a gray box containing more than $13,000 in cash. After obtaining a warrant, sheriffs searched Montgomery's house, finding more marijuana and a locked briefcase hidden under his bed. Deputy John Myers pried it open with a screwdriver. In the briefcase were receipts for farm equipment; documents mentioning R.P.Z. Investments, Claude Atkinson, and Ernest Montgomery; an option to buy a property owned by Martha Brummett; and a number of books suggesting that this arrest was the beginning, not the end, of a trail: Indoor Marijuana Horticulture, The Primo Plant, and How to Grow Marijuana Indoors Under Lights.

The investigation eventually led authorities to a 500-acre farm close to Solsberry, in Greene County, owned by Arno Zepp, of Investment Holdings, Inc. On August 22 federal, state, and local law-enforcement agents arrested Claude Atkinson, raided the farm, and, with the help of volunteers from the Indiana National Guard, destroyed 10,000 marijuana plants. Atkinson soon began to talk. In May of 1991 Ernest Montgomery was arrested at his Gosport cabin, where 7,000 marijuana seedlings sat in little pots, ready for planting. Early that same morning Mark Young was awakened by someone at the front door. Unlike his former business associates, Young was not growing anything. He and his girlfriend, Patricia, were in the process of moving to Florida. When he saw a man with a badge and a gun, Young had no idea what was happening, but assumed that it must have something to do with unpaid taxes.

Tomorrow (or Mon.) will be the final part of this article, but don't worry I have more :-)

Hemp FACT #75- Atl. Mthly-Finale

Date: 95-04-03 10:40:31 EDT

From: ADBryan

REEFER MADNESS -- Finale

REEFER MADNESS by Eric Schlosser

Originally published in Atlantic Monthly, August 1994 issue.

More than a dozen law-enforcement officers surrounded the house. Their commander, a DEA agent, treated Young politely, allowing him to get dressed and agreeing not to handcuff him in front of the neighbors. At the station Young read his indictment. He was being charged, under federal law, not only for his role in distributing 700 pounds of marijuana but also for conspiring to manufacture all 12,500 marijuana plants grown on Martha Brummett's farm. Young was unaware of the punishment he might face until later that day. John Hollywood, a bail bondsman in Indianapolis, arrived in the afternoon to secure his release. But the government refused to set bail. Under Indiana's strict state law, the same charges would bring a maximum sentence of twenty-eight years--at most, fourteen years served in prison, and probably much less. But under federal law Young's two prior state felony convictions, one of them more than seventeen years old, classified him as a career drug offender. This arrest could prove his third strike. At the U.S. attorney's discretion, he faced a possible mandatory-minimum sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole.

Hemp FACT #76- A True Story

Date: 95-04-04 11:19:51 EDT

From: ADBryan

This next series of posts will be a sad, but true story. It's not near as long as the Atlantic Monthly article.

From: delisle@eskimo.com (Ben Delisle)

Date: Thu, 27 May 1993 05:19:52 GMT

[Forwarded]

"Justice Goes To Pot"

by B. J. Oppenheimer

As you read this, I'll probably be behind bars, serving a possible five to 40 years in federal prison with no hope of parole. My house will have been confiscated by the government, and a fine of $340,000 will have been levied against me.

I'm a nonviolent offender with no prior record. Married for 20 years with two small children, I'm a college graduate and published writer. I have a good reputation in the community and have been involved in many charitable organizations. My only crime was planting a handful of marijuana seeds...

When I was first arrested for growing pot last August, I freely admitted my guilt, fully expecting to receive the relatively minor sentence usually meted out in marijuana cases. Until recently, marijuana use and cultivation was decriminalized in many places, and even now it's only a misdemeanor in most states (including my own). It usually warrants nothing more than a suspended sentence and a small fine when prosecuted at the state level. Last year a man in Upstate New York was convicted of growing 154 plants - many more than I am charged with - and his only punishment was a $100 fine - less than a dollar a plant.

My penalty probably would have been similar - if I'd been tried in state court. But more and more, these cases are being turned over to the federal government for prosecution, where penalties are much stiffer. What would've earned me, at most, a fine and probation in state court carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years (and a maximum of 40) when prosecuted at the federal level.

It's all because of recently enacted mandatory minimum-sentencing laws. They impose statutory minimums for all drug crimes and prohibit the judge from any exercise of judicial discretion in arriving at a sentence. The judge is enjoined against taking into account things like my reputation in the community, charitable works, or lack of prior record. Since there's no such thing as parole in federal prison anymore, if I'm sentenced to five years (assuming I lose my case), that's how many I'll serve.

Chalk it up to the government's "get tough on crime" policy: So what if a few undeserving people serve inflated sentences? It's worth it to keep the streets free from crime. The problem is, rather on being tough on crime, the net effect of mandatory minimums is to be soft on crime - violent crime. Since the are no mandatory minimum sentences for offenses like rape, child molestation, murder, aggravated assault, et cetera, violent criminals are often released early to make room for nonviolent first offenders like me. The average murderer now serves only six and a half years in jail (versus the five years minimum I'll serve). But if our jail terms are similar, there's one important difference between the murderer and me: He doesn't lose his house.

Even though my house was bought with legitimate earnings, and there was no marijuana grown on my property, it was confiscated by the police shortly after I was arrested. The primary reason given was that fertilizer was found in my basement. My house was thus considered a "facilitator" of the crime, which justifies its forfeiture. When I learned that the government had seized my property on such flimsy pretenses, it infuriated me, but what bothered me even more was that they did it without even trying me first.

cont. Tomorrow.

Hemp FACT #77- A True Story-2

Date: 95-04-05 10:34:53 EDT

From: ADBryan

Part 2. of the sad story

From: delisle@eskimo.com (Ben Delisle)

Date: Thu, 27 May 1993 05:19:52 GMT

[Forwarded]

"Justice Goes To Pot"

by B. J. Oppenheimer

Since passage of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, property can be seized if one is merely suspected of using it in a crime. It's not even necessary to be charged, much less convicted. It's up to the individual to prove that he didn't use it illegally. And since this is a civil forfeiture, and public defenders are only provided in criminal cases, he's forced to foot the bill for a lawyer. Often he also must put up a bond, sometimes as much as $10,000, which usually makes fighting the forfeiture cost-prohibitive.

In the majority of cases, the government simply steps in and takes the property without even bothering to charge anyone with a crime, and there's not a thing to be done about it. Since 1984 almost two and a half billion dollars in property has been seized this way. There's another difference between the murderer and me. He isn't subject to penalties for tax-stamp violation. Even though marijuana is illegal, in many states you're required by law to buy tax stamps for its cultivation - at a cost of $1,000 per plant - something that's virtually impossible to do without incriminating yourself. Yet even if you are somehow able to purchase the stamps without getting arrested but don't actually affix the stamps to the plants - in the wind and rain - you're still liable for a heavy fine. And they don't just count the living, growing plants. They count the dead ones and even the cutoff stems from plants that were thinned from the garden and thrown away earlier.

Even though the total weight of marijuana in my case was under five pounds, with all these other factors added in, the fine was $340,000. When I asked my lawyer how the government expected me to pay such an astronomical fine, he said, "They don't. They want to wipe out your assets. Then when - and if - you get out of jail, they intend to garnish your wages for the remainder. Of course, by that time there'll be all that interest...."

But the fine is just part of my penalty for tax-stamp violation. It also carries criminal (versus civil) penalties of up to five years in state prison. That's on top of the five to 40 years I'll already be serving in

federal prison. All for the crime of putting a handful of marijuana seeds in the ground. If this seems like a violation of the Eighth Amendment ("Let the punishment fit the crime"), it's not the only time the Constitution's been ignored when it comes to drug law. Confiscation of property without due process is a violation of the Fifth Amendment. Police can now obtain search warrants based on anonymous tips, which is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. And a defense attorney's legal fees can be seized in drug cases, a violation of the Sixth Amendment.

But if drug laws are chipping away at the Constitution, they're wreaking havoc on our prison system. Federal prisons are currently at 146 percent of capacity, and drug offenders serving mandatory minimum sentences make up 57 percent of the population (more than half had no prior arrests). At the current rate of incarceration, nearly 70 percent of all federal inmates will be drug offenders serving mandatory minimums by 1995.

The United States now imprisons more of its citizens per capita than any other country in the world (455 per 100,000 people). That's compared to the No. 2 country, South Africa, with 311 per 100,000. As stated earlier, violent offenders often must be granted early release to make room for this influx. In a recent four-year period in Florida more than 130,000 inmates (including muggers, armed robbers, et cetera) were released, and one out of three went on to commit new crimes. The F.B.I. reports that the rate of violent crimes in America increased by 24 percent from 1987 to 1991, and many people feel that mandatory minimums have a lot to do with it.

cont. tomorrow

Hemp FACT #78- A True Story-3

Date: 95-04-06 10:40:59 EDT

From: ADBryan

The final part of the "Sad Story". What a waste!!!!! What a disgrace!!!! Don't it make you proud to be an American? My family came to this land in 1637. They would probably turn around and go home if they saw the travesty of the American injustice system today.

From: delisle@eskimo.com (Ben Delisle)

Date: Thu, 27 May 1993 05:19:52 GMT

[Forwarded]

"Justice Goes To Pot"

by B. J. Oppenheimer

But apart from the hypothetical increase in violent crime due to mandatory minimums, there's the undeniable increase in taxpayer costs. The National Institute of Corrections estimates that in 1992, the United States built facilities for 2,000 cells (at a cost of $100 million) per week to accommodate the exploding prison population - and construction costs were only a part of the total. It's been estimated that in five years, the financial obligations incurred by U.S. corrections could be double the current national deficit. On top of that, it costs on average over $20,000 a year to house, feed, clothe, and guard each of the 81,426 federal prisoners.

And this is to say nothing of the increased cost of social services of inmates' families, which were previously being provided for by the inmates themselves. Over 30 million Americans regularly smoke marijuana, so it's not surprising that a lot of people in this country feel that it should be decriminalized. I'm sure that many people would disagree, but I doubt they'd dispute the fact that the penalties for marijuana use are not only unjust and illogical, but make an unconscionable waste of taxpayer dollars. With violent crime making us all live like prisoners, it's time to stop freeing murders to make room for marijuana users.

Stayed tuned tomorrow as I search the vastness of the Internet for more info.

Hemp FACT #79- G. Washington

Date: 95-04-07 10:53:57 EDT

From: ADBryan

Way to go ABC!!. A very good show. I thought it might be appropriate to go back to the Father of Our Country for this post. Looks like old George may not have grown all of his hemp for fiber. ;-)

From _Licit & Illicit Drugs_, by Consumer Reports, p. 403:

...In 1762, "Virginia awarded bounties for hempculture and manufacture, and imposed penalties upon those who did not produce it."

George Washington was growing hemp at Mount Vernon three years later--presumably for its fiber, though it has been argued that Washington was also concerned to increase the medicinal or intoxicating potency of his marijuana plants.*

The asterisk footnote:

* The argument depends on a curious tradition, which may or may not be sound, that the quality or quantity of marijuana resin (hashish) is enhanced if the male and female plants are separated *before* the females are pollinated. There can be no doubt that Washington separated the males and the females. Two entries in his diary supply the evidence:

May 12-13 1765: "Sowed Hemp at Muddy hole by Swamp."

August 7, 1765: "--began to seperate (sic) the Male from the Female Hemp at Do--rather too late."

George Andrews has argued, in _The Book of Grass: An Anthology of Indian Hemp_ (1967), that Washington's August 7 diary entry "clearly indiactes that he was cultivating the plant for medicinal purposes as well for its fiber." [7] He might have separated the males from the females to get better fiber, Andrew concedes--but his phrase "rather too late" suggests that he wanted to complete the separation *before the female plants were fertilized*--and this was a practice related to drug potency rather that to fiber culture.

----------------------------------------------------------------

That's all for today. A nice short one parter. I might go out of town this weekend and if so, I'll be back Monday. Same hemp time...Same hemp station..

--

Hemp FACT #80- D. Miller pt.1

Date: 95-04-10 11:47:27 EDT

From: ADBryan

Wow, what alot of catching up on all the boards. Mucho good talk, especially in the ABC news area. Had a wonderful trip to Austin. The fields all looked like they were painted blue , red and yellow. No, I wasn't doing drugs, it was the wildflowers in bloom and man were they bloomin'. My wife was amazed.

Here's an old standby I've had saved for a time when I didn't have time to search the net for more useful info.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Part 1.

From "Dennis Miller Live" on HBO, Friday, Nov. 11, 1994, 10:00 pm

[ After joking about recent DC Mayoral elect Marion Barry]

"Maybe he deserves a second chance, I mean who did he really hurt besides himself? Maybe it's time that we as a nation start staying out of people's personal problems and vices. What are we doing spending billions of dollars trying to keep people's private lives in order? And I'm talking about legal age consenting adults here, not kids, we obviously have to take special precautions to protect kids. But what is this Orwellian hang-up of ours of sticking our nose into other grown-up's affairs? What concern is it of ours if some mindless stoner wants to spend his his life hooked up to a Turkish skull bong? Now, I'm not pro-drug, they obviously cause a lot of damage, but I am pro-logic and you're never going to stop the human need for release through altered consciousness. The government can take away all the drugs in the world and people will just spin around on their lawn until they fell down and saw God.

"Now I don't want to get off on a rant here, but it seems to really enrage the vast cheese dog and beer quaffing nation out there when someone decides to waste his own life chasing down chemical euphoria and I'm not sure why. Our displeasure with someone hell-bent on self-ruination through drug use seems really disproportionate to its direct impact on us. And as a matter of fact, I believe we amplify that impact when we attempt to enforce unenforceable laws. It not only costs us billions of dollars, but it puts us in harms way as addicts are driven to crime as a means to an end. Why do we chase druggies down like villagers after Karlov? Let them legally have what they already have and defuse the bomb. You know, I think the hysteria about drugs is often times baseless. And this comes from me, a man who has never done cocaine in his life, although I did smoke dope upon occasion during my stint as a student at Oxford in the late 60s. And you know, the war on drugs is more often than not fruitless and patently hypocritical, be honest with yourselves now. What drugs are the most dangerous to the most Americans? Its a no brainer: cigarettes and alcohol. Those are the statistical champions by hundreds of thousands of deaths. And wouldn't you rather shoot a game of pool with a guy smoking a joint than a guy drinking whisky and beer?

Someone smoking a joint doesn't all of the sudden rear back and stab his partner in the eye socket with a cue stick, ok? He's too busy laughing at the balls.

"And you know as far as harder drugs go, if somebody wants to shoot up and die right in front of you, more power to him, you know? It's his call. And you know the herd always has a way of thinning itself out. We aren't stupid people here in America, no more than anyone else in the world, so why are we obsessing on habits that harm no one but the habitual, while we let real problems slip ever further out of reach. We seem to be willfully turning away from reality, and from logic might I add, to punish people, who in many instances are doing an extremely fine job of punishing themselves, thank you. And in some cases they're not even punishing themselves, but rather just following age old spawning instincts that are as woven as deeply into their brain as their need to watch Home Improvement.