Drones, Killings & Drugs - What a Mix-up

Targeted killings - the policy of assassinating people you don't like rather than say, trying to bring them to justice. Israel does it with fighter jets. The US does it with drone-strikes. Does that actually work? Perhaps not. In the context of a previous post about how targeted killings can make a counter-insurgency situation worse...... now we see the remit of the policy being extended to drug-lords, as Transform notes - and that not only might it not work, but it is illegal:

In 2009, the United States announced that it had placed fifty Afghan drug traffickers with links to the Taliban on a ‘kill list.’ This controversial proposal essentially weds the counter-narcotics effort with the mission to defeat the Taliban, and challenges a cornerstone of international humanitarian law, the principle of distinction. This article argues that drug traffickers, even those who support the Taliban, are not legitimate targets according to the rules applicable to non-international armed conflict. It explores the notions of membership in armed groups, civilian status and acts that result in the loss of protection, and argues that the US plan violates international humanitarian law.

In the US, the debate is beginning around if this policy works or is making the situation worse - after all the fall out of many drone strikes, including those that kill the intended target (and many don't) is civilian casualties.

Danny Speaks! "Lets Talks Drugs"

Candidate Danny Kushlick has a press release out. Danny is the officially supported candidate of the Anarchist606 2010 Election Scrutiny Committee (i.e. me.):

"Parties must discuss drug legalisation and regulation", says Parliamentary Candidate

Danny Kushlick is standing as an independent prospective parliamentary candidate for Bristol West because the major parties will not engage on one of the most important issues of our time - the failure of the war on drugs. As a representative of the People's Manifesto he will stand on the single issue of the need to legalise and regulate drugs.

In 2002 David Cameron sat on a key Parliamentary Select Committee and backed a call for the UK Government to discuss legalisation and regulation of drugs, but he refuses to discuss this now. In 2003 the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit produced a report showing that supply side enforcement was the major driver of global harms related to heroin and cocaine. It was buried, forgotten and denied.

Danny Kushlick said: Our major party leaders are effectively duping voters into supporting a policy of drug criminalisation that claims to protect when it actually makes things worse the world over, including in my home constituency of Bristol West. Drug prohibition is based on the fantasy of ending the production, supply and use of illicit drugs, when in fact it does precisely the opposite. By gifting the trade to organised criminals and unregulated dealers, all that we have done is create the largest untaxed commodity trade on earth. The UK crime costs alone of operating the policy of prohibition amount to between £15 billion and £20 billion a year. We have thrown away £100 billion over the last ten years and will throw away closer to £200 billion if we continue it for another ten.

As shown by the report published yesterday by the International Centre for Science in Drug Policy, it is the enforcement of prohibition that has spawned extreme violence worldwide. Successive Conservative and Labour administrations have supported a policy that has failed to protect children, has fuelled property crime and recreated the gang wars that US Alcohol Prohibition did in the 1920s and 30s right here in the UK. Meanwhile both parties have even gone so far as to ridicule the debate.

All the major parties are in full possession of the facts that show that prohibition is the significant cause of what is commonly known as 'the drug problem'. The Conservatives and Labour have succumbed to populist fear mongering and have actively kept the debate out of sight of the UK electorate. Even the Lib Dems and Greens have kept their more anti-prohibitionist positions out of public view, and failed to give the debate the prominence it deserves. I am standing in Bristol West to give a voice to those voters who want to see this issue firmly on the political agenda and to challenge the major parties to take this on as a serious policy issue during the next term of Government.

We cannot forget that the crack and heroin used in Bristol West originates as opium and coca in Afghanistan and Colombia. It is the UK's support for global drug prohibition that is fuelling conflict in Afghanistan, Colombia, Mexico and West Africa and providing cover for unnecessary military intervention by the United States.

Fifty years of failed prohibition shows that we cannot stop the residents of Bristol West, or anywhere else, using drugs and this demand will be met by illicit production and supply. The simple solution to the failure of prohibition is to end it; to take over the illicit trade, by legally regulating drugs through doctors, pharmacists and licensed retailers. It is precisely because drugs are dangerous, not because they're safe, that today I call on all the candidates in Bristol West, and the parties they represent, to raise the issue of drug law reform up the political agenda. To join with me in encouraging an open and healthy discussion on alternatives to prohibition, to end the war on drugs and replace it with a system of tax, control and regulation that is effective, just and humane. The people demand a genuine debate on drugs.

ENDS

Notes
Danny Kushlick is a former drugs counsellor in the criminal justice system. He founded the Transform Drug policy Foundation as a result of his experience.
Three weeks ago he was selected by Mark Thomas to stand as prospective parliamentary candidate for the People's Manifesto. The policies in the Manifesto range from the sublime to the hilarious:
http://www.thepeoplesmanifesto.co.uk/

Why I am going to Vote Danny!

Hot on the heels of Ian Bone's suggestion that; "unlike most anarchists I think standing in elections can be a useful tactic in the armoury of the revolutionary..." - I agree that it is worth voting as it's a great way to make a bit of mischief and also if you don't vote scum like the BNP get in - who rely on apathy to win.

In Bristol West, a guy Called Danny Kushlick is standing for the People's Manifesto - which has some fun and some serious stuff on it...

1. The introduction of a Tobin tax (Robin Hood tax) on foreign financial transactions.

2. The Daily Mail should be forced to print on the front of every edition the words: "This is a fictionalised account of the news and any resemblance to the truth is entirely coincidental."

3. There should be a referendum before going to war.

4. MPs should have to wear tabards displaying the names and logos of the companies with which they have a financial relationship, like a racing driver.

Now given that the local rag, the Evening Pest, is owned by the Daily Mail, I can't see them giving him much coverage. But they are the past and I am voting for the future. Given that the Daily Mail is a hot-bed of anti-science, drugs & immigration hysteria - I can't see them giving him much coverage.

So it is going to be down to us. Bug given that social media gives us a scope that we've not had before; witness the toppling of the carefully orchestrated Christmas No1. by Rage Against the Machine, and you can see that winning is possible. This is not a protest vote; this a real vote. But also given the media/government hysteria on drugs of late, it is time for a bit of rationality into the debate. So yes, I'm voting Danny.

I've got nothing against the LibDem MP, hell, I even voted for him 2005 to send a message to Labour over the war. But if we elect another LibDem MP, then it's all a bit meh. If we elected Danny - that would cause some ructions for the powers that be: that would not be the end of it - far from it - but it is a step in the right direction of getting of real, grassroots democracy going.

But it is also important because Danny is the policy director of Transform - who campaign for sane drug laws. The media-friendly 'ban it all' approach we're been taking for the last 50 years or so costs us over £1.2 billion per year and yet drugs are cheaper and more freely available than ever before. I want to see policy change to something that works. People are going to use drugs, whatever, so lets deal with that and move on... I live in St.Pauls and see the fallout of the failed policy regime day-in and day-out. Enough.

So, c'mon fellow Bristolains - lets Vote for Danny! If the Daily Mail hate him, you know he's worth your support!



PS.

You can hear him on the GoatLab radio show playing tunes and talking about his work on drug law reform. http://www.thegoatlab.com/2009/12/goatlab-radio-drugs-special/

There is a facebook group started: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=111518488868657

Drugs: Does spending £1.2 billion a year help? Who knows? Who cares?

Here's a classic from Transform's blog:

The Government spends £1.2 billion a year on measures aimed at tackling problem drug use, yet does not know what overall effect this spending is having.

Get that? The government spends £1.2 billion a year and they have no idea the effect it is having. This means that it might not be very effective. It means that it might be really effective. But it also means that it might have the opposite effect - that the government spends £1.2 billion a year to make the UK's drug problems worse.

What kind of a way is that to run a policy?

I noted before that the director of Transform, Danny Kushlick, is standing in the Bristol West seat - his election would be an amazing victory for a common sense approach to drugs.

You've got my vote, Danny!

Drugs! Danger! Evil! Think of the Kids! Eeek!

The media has once again failed us on the issue of drugs. This seeing account gives an image that goes beyond the bounds of reality...

In November last year, the Sun published a story under the headline: "Legal drug teen ripped his scrotum off". Quoting a police report, the paper said an unnamed teenager from Durham needed hospital treatment after mephedrone made him him "rip off his own scrotum". An internal police report had said: "One individual states that after using it for 18 hours his hallucinations led him to believe that centipedes were crawling over him and biting him, and this led him to receive hospital treatment after he ripped his own scrotum off." However, it carried on: "This information was taken from an internet blog and as such it should be treated with the credence such information deserves." The officer said he took the story from a website that sells mephedrone, and that his warning was not printed. The owner of the website that hosted this blog, mephedrone.com, says the posting was a joke.

How could the media fail us so? The banning of a drug does not mean that we are safer as a results. The war of drugs has failed and yet the media pushes the same failed ideas and policies over and over. Still there was one bright spot in this article:

The media's coverage has angered some who work in the drugs policy field. "The misreporting of mephedrone deaths is a crass example of the potentially lethal alliance between press and politicians that by default ends in a ban that often creates far greater harms than those caused by use," said Danny Kushlick, of the drugs charity Transform, which opposes prohibition.

Danny is standing in the election for Bristol West - where I live! He's a great bloke - smart, funny and he genuinely cares. He's got my vote and I'll be blogging more about him as time goes on...

Detriot: the first post-industrial US city

Brilliant, brilliant documentary about the US city of Detroit; famous for car production and Motown and now the first post-industrial US city. The city was built for 2 million people and run by the motor-Oligarchs like Henry Ford as a monoculture city. But when the motor industry failed, so the city failed - economic crashes, globalisation and dugs wars creating a 'slow motion Katrina'. Haunting images of factories being reclaimed by natures, burning cities and people turning the former factories back into farmland as the land goes into full circle:

Julien Temple's new film is a vivid evocation of an apocalyptic vision: a slow-motion Katrina that has had many more victims. Detroit was once America's fourth largest city.

Built by the car for the car, with its groundbreaking suburbs, freeways and shopping centres, it was the embodiment of the American dream.

But its intense race riots brought the army into the city. With violent union struggles against the fierce resistance of Henry Ford and the Big Three, it was also the scene of American nightmares.

Now it is truly a dystopic post-industrial city, in which 40 per cent of the land in the centre is returning to prairie. Greenery grows up through abandoned office blocks, houses and collapsing car plants, and swallows up street lights.

Police stations and post offices have been left with papers on the desks like the Marie Celeste. There is no more rush hour on what were the first freeways in America. Crime, vandalism, arson and dog fighting are the main activities in once the largest building in North America. But it's also a source of hope.

Goatlab Drugs Special!

Check out the latest Goatlab radio - we had a special guest, Danny Kushlick of the Transfom Drug Policy Foundation. TDPF is the UK’s leading centre of expertise on drug policy and law reform based here in Bristol. Danny founded Transform in 1997 and has since been an active voice for the regulation and control of drugs to promote sustainable health and wellbeing. As well as interesting debate we get to hear a selection of Danny’s favorite records from his personal collection.

Check it out!

More on Bristol's Neo-Labour Hope

I posted a short article about the new guy from the Neo-Labour party and how hollow his rhetoric sounds. I wrote;

Would this be the same Labour government who for the last eight years allied itself to the most significant anti-Climate Change activists in the world, the Bu$h regime. The same government who approved the third runway at Heathrow and who – via its proxy in SWRDA has, until recently, been using public funds to subsidise airport development in the region.

Then Paul (or at least a poster claiming to be Paul) appeared on the blog to comment;

Yes these are the reasons I want to take the debate to the heart of Government...

and:

and there was me expecting a endorsement from the anarchists of Bristol. I am standing to change and improve the Labour Government not to endorse everything they have done. Indeed I was partly motivated to put myself forward to the local Labour Party to ensure that a robotic yes person politician was not selected.

I will be publishing a fuller political statement on my website soon to set out where I stand on a range of issues.

So at least he has a sense of humour. But seriously - how bankrupt is Labour? Totally. It is staggeringly simplistic (or simply propaganda to us voting masses) that Paul thinks he can 'take the debate to the heart of Government' - a government who don't give a shit about what you or I think.

At a local level; the ongoing debacle over cycling city and Red Trousergate shows the lack of environmental will-power of the local Labour party; they they had wanted the enviroment to count - they could have made it so. But no, it's spin and developers first.

At a national level; Heathrow - no clearer demonstration of climate first could be shown, but not - its developers and spin first. The recent account of the twists and turns of the official reports and consultation in such a way to favour the polluters is staggering. (examples 1 ,2 & 3)

At an international level; Former Neo-Labour leader, friend of big oil, Tony 'War Crimes' Bliar is going to be raking in even more ca$h as an advisor to the Colombian government of Álvaro Uribe. Yes, Bliar is helping out with a government of death squads, big oil and environmental degradation thanks to the failed coca spraying.

Face it if environmentalism is a left turn on the political road-map, then the Labour party is a right.
-

The Drugs Wars: The Killing that Politics Won't Stop

I don't like to cite the Telegraph much as it's global-warming denialism (amongst other things) annoys me muchly. However in the 7th March Magazine they had a good article about the drug wars in Mexico. I can't seem to find a link to it on their website. Anyway, the article covers familiar territory - the killings, rampant police corruption, the decent into chaos. The article claims that more people are dying in Mexico's drug wars than in Iraq. It is a nightmare for the people living there. This article giving a flavour of events, 'Mexican drug wars create demand for hitman and acid baths'.

The article had a very interesting paragraph as part of a section on how the problems might be solved;

"So what about legalisation? Presumably it would have the same effect as repealing prohibition against alcohol in the 1930s; the end of the black market, the withering away of organised crime and violence associated with bootlegging. By removing the profits from drug trafficking, legalisation would remove the lion's share of Mexico's ailing economy, but all of this is moot because legalising drugs in America is a political impossibility."

Sadly also here in the UK. Witness the mess over simply changing cannabis from class B to class C and back again: Lots of comment from the political elite and zero difference on the street.

Perhaps it is no surprise that drugs are often found linked to black-ops and covert intelligence? Witness the Iran-Contra affair - the US intelligence trading drugs for money for hostages for weapons to support their flawed foreign policy;

[Iran-Contra] began as an operation to improve U.S.-Iranian relations, wherein Israel would ship weapons to a relatively moderate, politically influential group of Iranians; the U.S. would then resupply Israel and receive the Israeli payment. The Iranian recipients promised to do everything in their power to achieve the release of six U.S. hostages, who were being held by the Lebanese Shia Islamist group Hezbollah. The plan eventually deteriorated into an arms-for-hostages scheme, in which members of the executive branch sold weapons to Iran in exchange for the release of the American hostages. Large modifications to the plan were conjured by Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North of the National Security Council in late 1985, in which a portion of the proceeds from the weapon sales was diverted to fund anti-Sandinista and anti-communist rebels, or Contras, in Nicaragua.

Given legalisation/decriminalisation would solve the problems prettily easily - but deprive the political class of a powerful tool of fear and money - is that why such an obvious solution to such a major problem is never tried?

Some News Updates: Afganistan, Bristol, So-Called 'Eco-Terror' and Bristol

A few quick links that might be of interest updating some news I have been blogging about;

I blogged about the drug-wars of Mexico: things have got even worse since then. Recently the severed heads of 8 soldiers were found in a bag with a warning. A former DEA agent is claiming that elements in the US law enforcement are on the cartel's payroll;

One of Celerino [“Cele” Castillo III is a former DEA agent]'s discoveries, in particular, likely incurred the wrath of a particular federal agency, the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Tobacco (ATF), Castillo claims. As part of his part-time work as a consultant on criminal cases, Castillo contends that he uncovered evidence that two ATF agents “were on the payroll of a Mexican cartel.” That “cartel,” Castillo asserts, is a paramilitary offshoot of the Mexican military that is being supplied with U.S. weapons, some only available through the U.S. military, by operatives on the U.S. side of the border.

Now the Guardian article above claims the army are seen as 'cleaner' than the corrupted and compromised cops. But are they?

But several other federal law enforcers who spoke with Narco News, on the condition their names not be used, don’t find his analysis to be far-fetched. “The Mexican military and government are corrupt,” one law enforcer says. “The Military escorts smugglers to the border. It’s a daily occurrence. The video cameras at the El Paso Intelligence Center have it all on video, filed away. If we report the suspicious activity to our superiors, nothing ever happens. It’s just covered up. “The Mexican military cartel has taken over Juarez. Our government knows it; they’re not stupid, but they’ve made some backroom deal with the Mexican government.”

It's a fuck-up. And from one fuck up to another: Afghanistan. Check this quote:

"The problem is the British. They support the Taliban." Why? "Because they want to control Afghanistan. They want us to stay fighting forever. The British only kill the innocent, they don't kill the Taliban."

And that's from a fucking police man! Yes, there are Afgan coppers who think the UK military are there to facilitate the drugs trade. Here's another one;

Crossing his long fingers, and speaking quietly, the uncle explained his trade. "If we smuggle 40kg, we give the Taliban 4kg. We pay the 10% as a zikat [Islamic tax] to the Taliban. And we pay another 10% to the government officials and the police.

Yup - both the Taliban and the cops are on the take. While the government, police and army of Afghanistan are so corrupt - and they are - the war there can never be won. UK soliders and cash are being used to prop-up a dysfunctional, corrupt and dead-end narco-state (like Mexico?).

And from one dead-end to another - so-called Eco Terrorism; Monbiot has weighed into the issue that us bloggers have been on for a while now;

Just as the misleading claims of the security services were used to launch an illegal and unnecessary war against Iraq, [National Extremism Tactical Co-ordination Unit]'s exaggerations will be used to justify the heavy-handed treatment of peaceful protesters. In both cases police and spies are distracted from dealing with genuine threats of terrorism and violence.

And while NETCU were busy helping out polluters and corporations under the guide of 'fighting terrorism' this is what they should be doing;

A right-wing extremist who wanted to "secure a future for white children" and kept explosives at his Yorkshire flat was convicted on terrorism charges on Tuesday. Martyn Gilleard, 31, from Goole in East Yorkshire, was found guilty at Leeds Crown Court of the preparation of terrorist acts and of collecting information useful for an act of terrorism. He had pleaded guilty at earlier hearings to possessing live ammunition and 39,000 indecent images of children. Police conducting a child pornography raid last October had discovered racist literature, home-made bombs, knives and a rifle at Gilleard's flat.

Finally another shout-out to the protesters in Bristol taking on Raytheon. Great work people!
-

The Drug Wars in Mexico

A shocking and very interesting read is 'Day of the Dead' about the drug-wars in Mexico;

The cartels, meanwhile, 'have replaced the old pyramidical chain of command with the same concession or franchising system as any other commodity,' he says. 'Drug trafficking has become more democratic in the modern, capitalist sense, outsourced and opportunistic.' It takes a moment to realise how disdainfully funny Alvarado is being about the 'legal' economy, as well as the killers: 'The cartels don't need to control the streets, because they cannot, so they franchise them, get other people to kill and die, and collect the taxes and commissions. All they need to control is the corridors across the border, because Juárez is the one place from which you can reach any part of the United States.' This 'outsourcing' has been a speciality of the Sinaloa cartel: to franchise use of its corrupted officials and even tunnels under the border equipped with ventilation, lights and rails, in return for 'taxes' and commissions from sub-contracted traffickers.

It mentions the 'House of the Dead' scandal, which has been excellently covered by NacroNews;

The House of Death murders took place more than four years ago, before Mexican President Felipe Calderon escalated the drug war by ordering the military into Juarez, before the U.S. government authorized millions of dollars to further arm the hunters via Plan Mexico and before the narco-traffickers lost control of the killing fields.

But even four years ago, as a U.S. government informant assisted narco-traffickers and Mexican cops in carrying out the torture and vicious murders of a dozen people, the signs of the break down of civil society — on both sides of the border — were all there in front of us.

The informant, Guillermo Ramirez Peyro, was employed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — and was paid more than $200,000 for his work via U.S. taxpayers. The narco-trafficker who ordered the murders, Heriberto Santillan Tabares, employed a goon squad composed of Mexican cops led by a Mexican state police commander named Miguel Loya.

Worth reading.
-

Pick of the Day, 4th Feb 08

A few links and articles that might be of interest...

First, Welcome to the Petrocalypse:

The economic bubble that lifted the stock market to dizzying heights was sustained as much by cheap oil as by cheap (often fraudulent) mortgages. Likewise, the collapse of the bubble was caused as much by costly (often imported) oil as by record defaults on those improvident mortgages. Oil, in fact, has played a critical, if little commented upon, role in America’s current economic enfeeblement — and it will continue to drain the economy of wealth and vigor for years to come.

Second, air-power in Iraq; How the U$A can drop a staggering 100,000 lbs of bombs on a small community and the media relegate it to a footnote:

But the major bombing story of these last days - those 100,000 pounds of explosives that U.S. planes dropped in a small area south of Baghdad - simply dangled unexplained off the far end of the Los Angeles Times piece; while, in the New York Times, it was buried inside a single sentence....For those who know something about the history of air power, which, since World War II, has been lodged at the heart of the American Way of War, that 100,000 figure might have rung a small bell...On April 27, 1937, in the midst of the Spanish Civil War (a prelude to World War II), the planes of the German Condor Legion attacked the ancient Basque town of Guernica...The Germans reputedly dropped about 50 tons or 100,000 pounds of explosives on the town.

Third, U$A vs U$A as the CIA takes on the Drug Enforcement Agency:

The DEA and its predecessor federal drug law enforcement organizations have always been infiltrated and, to varying degrees, managed by America's intelligence agencies. The reason is simple enough: the US Government has been protecting its drug smuggling allies, especially in organized crime, since trafficking was first criminalized in 1914.

Finally, the Bristol Indymedia site has been re-vamped! Check it out...
-

The Evening Post's Wrong Headed Drugs Ranting

There was a big two page spread in the Evening Post recently given over to the question of if the Bristol Drugs Project and its aim to set up a 'Shooting Gallery' in Bristol for addicts to use. This is not an unusual project and there have many many similar project in the UK and world wide. What was depressing to read alongside this was the Post's editorial with their emotive language and ramblings on the evils of drugs. It was rubbish and unhelpful hyperbole from a newspaper with a right-wing ideological stance. It was also wrong on a number of counts. It advocated a tougher line on dugs – tougher penalties for dealing etc – the usual right-wing rant;

"So what should we make of the suggestion for a so called 'shooting gallery' - a place where drug addicts can inject their poison overlooked by people who can help them if something goes wrong."

Now I'm no bleeding-heart-liberal on this issue – I live in St.Pauls, so see the results of drug addiction every day, have family who have been impacted by addiction – I am well aware of its problems, so when I read the post's resistance to the 'Shooting Gallery' on the grounds that;

"Those who work with drug-users say it is better than leaving addicts to inject themselves in squalid alleys, public toilets or or under flyovers. But what of the rest of us who surely have no contact with drug users? Surly man will view this proposal as a vision from hell, a place where, effectively, society is turning a blind eye to an illegal practice that endangers life?...Some may even say that such an establishment could be an encouragement to them to continue using drugs."

It makes me angry. This kind of sub-'reefer-madness' view of drug policy is wrong headed and dangerous. The Post are living in a dreamworld if they think that drug policy should be dictated by those who 'have no contact with drug users' – perhaps that is the problem, the way we live our lives is hostage to the views of newspaper editors in their plush homes in affluent areas who have no idea of reality. To them the 'message we send' via policy matters more than the practicality. Well here is where I stand – I am sick of seeing the problems created by drugs, I want something to be done that WORKS. We have been pushing prohibition for over 50 years and drugs are easier and cheaper than ever before. Don't take may word for it, ask the people on the frontline. Here is what the Colombian Vice President had to say;

"After a five-year frontal attack against drug trafficking, the results aren't the most successful or the ones we hoped for...at the end of the day, the benchmark is whether the street price of cocaine in New York, London or Madrid rises or the quality falls. So far, we haven't found any statistics that bear this out."

Now this is a country who benefits via the millions of dollars pumped into the military to fight the 'War on Drugs' and if they are saying it is not working – what would? How bad is it really? We have troops on the ground in Afghanistan and has this impacted the supply of drugs (Bliar gave this as one of the reasons to intervene there) – not a bit. Here's Steve Rolles of the Bristol based Transform Drug Policy Foundation;

“This week's alarming UN reports on the Afghan opium crop, showing that it now accounts for over 93% of global illicit production, prompted much debate. A Guardian leader (The drugs don't work, August 27) acknowledged the futility of eradication efforts...The government has spent billions trying achieve this through supply-side enforcement and coerced treatment. And yet UK heroin use rose from 1997 to 2001 before stabilising at its current historic high.”

The war on drugs was lost a long, long time ago. For a newspaper that claims to be the 'voice of the city' pushing the same tired old line is doing us, especially those of us who live the areas most effected by drug abuse, a massive disservice. I'd like to end on a quote;

"So, what can you say about a policy that has cost about a trillion dollars, resulted in the deaths of numerous law enforcement officers, and countless citizens? I say it has failed. I also say that it is time for the Congress of the United States to acknowledge that the war on drugs is a disaster and to bring it to a swift halt."

Who wrote that? A hippy pot-smoker, an ivory tower professor? No, a cop wrote it. He's part of LEAP – Law Enforcement Against Prohibition – a US based group of former and serving police types, and if the Post's comment writers did some real journalism they might learn a thing or two beyond wrong-headed hyperbole.