UN to Obama Regime: Punish Washington and Colorado for Undermining Global Drug War

[BucEyedPea]

Didn't know if this should have had an International Issues prefix or just U.S.—only 'cause of the UN sticking it's nose in our internal affairs. Thought they weren't suppose to do that.


Washington and Colorado approved measures decriminalizing recreational use of marijuana in their states.

In response, Raymond Yans, head of the UN’s International Narcotics Control Board, has called for Attorney General Eric Holder to ignore the law and continue cracking down on marijuana use and possession. Decriminalizing marijuana use, Yans insists, sends the “wrong message to the rest of the nation and it sends a wrong message abroad."

So are we a sovereign nation that was founded under a system of federalism or are we not? I find this outrageous. Wtf is the UN a wannabe govt in waiting?

Some things I never knew before:

The “war on drugs” didn’t begin with Richard Nixon. It is an outgrowth of a 1961 United Nations document called the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, which created the framework for a global drug prohibition jihad.

In that same year, the JFK administration published a proposal called “Freedom from War: The United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World,” also known as State Department Document 7277. That proposal, which remains the operational framework for U.S. arms control policy, called for the creation of a nationalized, militarized “homeland security force” – in other words, exactly the kind of overtly militarized law enforcement bodies that have been prosecuting the “war on drugs.”

Origin of the War on Drugs

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by listopencil

Cannabis use among Europeans:
[/IMG]

Your map shows that places where its legal has the most use.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Your map shows that places where its legal has the most use.

Not really. It's more convoluted than that.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Not really. It's more convoluted than that.

I was just about to delete when looking at it again to check. That's true.
I should learn to proof in preview but I'm lazy about that.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by Literature

I take it then that you think they don't have enough power? It's not like the world's policeman. It's a large forum for every sovereign country to come together.

Except that NATO is under the UN. Obama bombed Libya under the UN then. Obama authorized the UN to invade Mali. It's usually our troops that get used to enforce their resolutions, whether it's done under a unilateral or multilateral decision. Even if our troops are used in conjunction with other nations. So it is more and more acting like a cop. It's even wanted to pass global taxes.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

UN: Butt the **** out.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

I was just about to delete when looking at it again to check. That's true.
I should learn to proof in preview but I'm lazy about that.

I understand. I post and then notice I said something wrong and revise it too.

[whoman69]

First drug laws in the US were the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by whoman69

First drug laws in the US were the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914.

The Harrison Act did not prohibit any drugs outright.
Congress wasn't sure of its authority to do so under the Commerce Clause at that time.
That had to do with distribution for medical purposes and required recordkeeping—something pharmaceutical companies could afford to do over their competitors.

[Amnorix]

Your entire post makes no sense. Not that that is unusual for you, of course....

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Didn't know if this should have had an International Issues prefix or just U.S.—only 'cause of the UN sticking it's nose in our internal affairs. Thought they weren't suppose to do that.

You didn't? Is the US somehow exempt or excluded from the things the UN deals with? Is there something in the UN charter about this? Or is there anything about our federalist form of government that the UN must honor when it comes to criticizing our policies?

So are we a sovereign nation that was founded under a system of federalism or are we not?

We are, but what does that have to do with anything? The UN is saying that the federal government, using its own powers, should continue to enforce ITS (the federal government's) laws in those states that have decriminalized certain types of drug use. There's nothing inappropriate about the federal government doing that, nor in the UN asking that the federal government do that as part of the global "war on drugs." (a war I disagree with, btw).

I find this outrageous. Wtf is the UN a wannabe govt in waiting?

This makes so little sense it isn't worth discussing.

Some things I never knew before:

FYP.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Except that NATO is under the UN.

No it isn't you batshit crazy loon.

Obama bombed Libya under the UN then. Obama authorized the UN to invade Mali. It's usually our troops that get used to enforce their resolutions, whether it's done under a unilateral or multilateral decision. Even if our troops are used in conjunction with other nations. So it is more and more acting like a cop. It's even wanted to pass global taxes.

Think of what you're saying when you're saying that "Obama authorized the UN to invade Mali". It makes no sense. Par for the course for you, but still.

The second part of your post is true, but ignores the fact that the US and/or NATO must WILLINGLY AGREE to use its troops to do these things, working cooperatively with the UN. The UN has no independent military power.

Get a grip.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

The Harrison Act did not prohibit any drugs outright.
Congress wasn't sure of its authority to do so under the Commerce Clause at that time.
That had to do with distribution for medical purposes and required recordkeeping—something pharmaceutical companies could afford to do over their competitors.

Prohibition sure as hell did, and that was essentially a drug prohibition law.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

I don't think you understand. Those states are nullifying those federal laws—which they should. It's another check and balance on the federal govt. Real ID was nullified. States just did not implement it.

States that legalize drugs are overturning/changing their OWN INTERNAL laws. Federal law remains because under our FEDERAL system, the federal government can pass laws and regulations under its SEPARATE powers.

Where states are required/requested by the federal government to enforce federal laws, they can "nullify" of a sort by inaction or by refusing to cooperate. That's fine. The feds can't force the states to enforce federal laws, though they can try to strong arm them through withholding of federal dollars, but that doesn't prevent the fed from independently enforcing its laws.

However, this is not a thread about our federal govt or the supremacy clause. It's about an international body thinking they can stick their noses in our internal affairs. And how too many treaties could result in more erosion.

Wherever the UN "sticks its nose", it's in the internal affairs of some country or another, right? Why should we be exempt? Of course, we can ignore them just as many other countries do.