Pat
Registered on
Feb-20-2000
More User Info
|
Message #3122 posted by Pat (Info) July 21, 2000 13:48:49 ET
In Reply to: Re: US CA: OPED: Cannabis Is Medicine by D. Bearman MD posted by Dooby July 20, 2000 05:33:15 ET
Hi Dooby and All,
I'm sorry that I wasn't able to get back to you before now. Yes, I did notice that Harry Anslinger played upon the widespread bigotry that was in our country in his testimony before Congress, etc. (Now... let's see if I can quickly dig up some more "gems" by Anslinger....) Thanks....
Harry Anslinger gems (quotes) --
There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others. -- Harry Anslinger, 1937 testimony to Congress in support of the Marijuana Tax Act.
Quotes re: Methadone & the War on Drugs
http://www.tir.com/~yourtype/bklist.htm
[snip] "...Anslinger's crusade appears to have been the ravings of a madman. Using the mass media as his forum, Anslinger described marijuana as a Frankenstein drug that was stalking American youth" (Inciardi, 1986, p. 22).
In a magazine, he wrote: "The sprawled body of a young girl lay crushed on the sidewalk the other day after a plunge from the fifth story of a Chicago apartment house. Everyone called it suicide, but actually it was murder. The killer was a narcotic known to America as marijuana, and to history as hashish. It is a narcotic used in the form of cigarettes, comparatively new to the United States and as dangerous as a coiled rattlesnake...(Inciardi, 1986, p. 22).
The same magazine, American Magazine, ran this from Anslinger: "An entire family was murdered by a youthful addict in Florida. When officers arrived at the home, they found the youth staggering about in a human slaughterhouse. With an ax he had killed his father, mother, two brothers, and a sister. He seemed to be in a daze....He had no recollection of having committed the multiple crime. The officers knew him ordinarily as a sane, rather quiet young man; now he was pitifully crazed. They sought the reason. The boy said that he had been in the habit of smoking something which youthful friends called "muggles," a childish name for marihuana [sic]" (Inciardi, 1986, p. 22). [snip] (This file has many historical facts and quotes about the US "War on Drugs", such as the following clipping that is about Anslinger, etc.)
"The first federal control enactment, the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914...relied upon a then extraordinary extension of the federal tax power to require manufacturers, distributors, and dispensers of opiates and coca products to register with the Treasury Department and to keep records of transactions involving these substances" (King, 1974, p. 19). This is how Congress intended to fulfill their obligation to the Hague Opium Convention.
"And it bears stressing again that in that day federal intervention into matters of local choice and personal concern was virtually unprecedented" (King, 1974, p. 21).
"...it was even possible for addicted persons of sufficient prominence and good connections to be 'treated' with tacit Bureau protection. The payoff for this was what Commissioner Anslinger wanted in the way of appropriations for his forces, and new federal legislation he usually got virtually for the asking" (King, 1974, p. 24).
Re: Marijuana Tax Act of 1937--"So the result was merely another nationwide enforcement empire and new categories of federal crime" (King, 1974, p. 25). [snip]
Toward the middle of the century, Harry Anslinger, the first Commissioner of the Bureau of Narcotics arranged for Senator McCarthy to have his narcotics supplied to him by a Washington pharmacy without the interference of narcotic officers (Oakley & Ksir, 1987, p. 42). However, he was opposed to any treatment which supplied narcotics to addicts on the street and rigorously enforced laws against them.
In the 1800's, drug use was thought of as "laissez-faire". If a person wanted to use a substance and another wanted to sell it, what difference did it make? (Oakley, & Ksir, 1987, p. 22). [snip]
The Invisible Prohibition @ http://www.sumeria.net/politics/invpro.html
[snip] The Marijuana Tax Act was prepared during two years of secret meetings, held by Treasury Department officials between 1935 and 1937. At no time was the American Medical Association consulted for an opinion on the health effects of Marijuana smoking and were not even informed that the meetings were taking place. (3)
Harry J. Anslinger, head of the Treasury Department's Federal Bureau of Narcotics (and former Assistant Commissioner of Alcohol Prohibition), personally led the debate for passage of the bill through Congress. No expert medical or scientific evidence was introduced to establish that Marijuana represented a threat to its users or to society. Anslinger's testimony consisted mainly of reading sensational articles from tabloids which, for years, had fanned the flames of "Reefer Madness" to sell more newspapers. (4)
Dr. William C. Woodward, who represented the AMA during the hearings, dismissed Anslinger's testimony as being "factually inaccurate" and complained that the AMA had not been consulted earlier. Woodward stated for the record that the AMA opposed passage of the Marijuana Tax Act and would have done so earlier but the medical community was not aware "until two days" before the hearings that the "killer weed from Mexico" that the Government was planning to outlaw was actually Cannabis, which had been safely prescribed by doctors for over 100 years. (5)
Ralph Loziers, general counsel for the National Oil Seed Institute, also opposed the Marijuana Tax Act. Speaking before the House Ways and Means Committee Loziers stated that "this bill brings the activities - the crushing of this great industry under the supervision of a bureau - which may mean its suppression." (6)
Loziers' statement raises a very important point. Historically and legally, the Marijuana Tax Act did not authorize any Federal regulation or restriction of the Cannabis Hemp industry. When Senator Prentiss M. Brown, chairman of the subcommittee, asked "what dangers, if any, does this bill have for persons engaged in the legitimate uses of the Hemp plant?" Anslinger replied "I would say that they are not only amply protected under this Act, but that they can go ahead and raise Hemp just as they have always done it." This assurance was also given by C.M. Hester, Assistant General Counsel for the Treasury Department, who testified for the record that "the production and sale of Hemp and its products for industrial purposes will not be adversely affected by this bill." (7)
Brown, Anslinger and Hester knew these assurances were critical to the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937. Why? Because, just a few months earlier, on January 6, 1936, the Supreme Court had ruled the Agricultural Adjustment Act unconstitutional because agriculture was "not a matter of interstate commerce and beyond the powers of Congress to regulate, even under the General Welfare clause" (United States vs Butler). (8)
Clearly, the policy to create a Marijuana Prohibition based on the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, and extend its provisions to restrict all cultivation of Cannabis Hemp, was outside the Constitutional authority of the Federal Government. Congress could not regulate agriculture. Alcohol Prohibition required a Constitutional Amendment (18th) and, even then, applied only to the improper use of grains, etc. It did not criminalize the cultivation or possession of corn or barley. To have done so would have been not only illegal, but ridiculous.
The deceptions involved in the creation of our present Marijuana Prohibition indicate that Anslinger and other Federal officials knew that this policy was illegal and improper, otherwise, such deceptions would have been unnecessary. Herer's charges cannot be dismissed. [snip]
``He killed the old man. . . That’s marijuana!'' -- Harry Anslinger http://www.redhousebooks.com/galleries/assassin.htm
Portland NORML News, Saturday October 3, 1998: Subpage Title: Destroying Propaganda - Anslingerisms.
http://www.pdxnorml.org/981003.html#dpa [snip]
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 09:49:48 -0700
To: mattalk@islandnet.com, maptalk@mapinc.org, drctalk@drcnet.org
From: R Givens (rgivens@sirius.com)
Subject: Destroying Propaganda: Anslingerisms
A while back I got a call from the editor of a major Texas newspaper
verifying a letter. Whenever members of an editorial team call, I always try
to give them a witness about the insanity of drug prohibition.
Imagine my shock when I learned that this fellow had no idea of who Harry
Anslinger was or how the marijuana laws got enacted in the first place.
Naturally I told him a few things about Anslinger's Reefer Madness claims
and how they were the ONLY basis for marijuana prohibition. A lot of people
think there's scientific evidence to support a marijuana ban, but Anslinger
and the Treasury Department never presented a single piece of documented
primary evidence to support their absurd claims and no factual support for
Reefer Madness has EVER been found!
In other words, an intelligent investigator soon concludes that marijuana
prohibition is a complete fraud without the slightest basis in truth.
The fact that any member of the editorial staff of a major paper, including
letter readers, is ignorant of Harry Anslinger and his Reefer Madness is
totally unacceptable. We have to educate these people about the origins of
these drug laws because in every case the narcomaniacs failed to prove the
necessity of prohibition.
Anslinger cut such an absurd figure with his over the top damnation of
marijuana that modern drug warriors shudder when a repealer begins talking
about Anslinger. They simply cannot deal with the absurd claims Anslinger
made. Starting off a debate by conceding that the main protagonist of your
prohibition law was a complete liar makes it pretty tough to convince an
audience.
Even case-hardened narcs run for cover when you bring Anslinger into the
conversation.
Spice up your letters with an Anslingerism or two and knock the bottom out
of bombastic Reefer Maniacs. Defy them to come up with something better than
Anslinger's propaganda. After 70 years the narcs still haven't come up with
a good reason to outlaw marijuana, but what do you expect from people who
lie for a living.
R Givens
PS: If anybody has some hot Anslingerisms not in this list, please post.
***
Here are some examples of Anslinger's lies, dissembling and propaganda to
help in educating the media.
Anslinger stops research!
The response to that project was reminiscent of an incident that occurred
nearly half a century ago. In 1950, when he found out that the Navy was
investigating the use of coca to prevent muscular fatigue, Harry Anslinger,
director of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, wrote to the principal
researcher. "The fact that a domestic scientific project was in progress in
the United States, involving the study of the effect of chewing of coca
leaves on fatigue, would have a most unfortunate effect on our efforts to
achieve international agreement on limitation of production of the leaves,"
Anslinger said in a letter uncovered by historian Paul Gootenberg. "I
therefore must strongly urge that that part of the project involving the use
of coca leaves be abandoned." It was.
***
During the hearings on the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act, Harry J. Anslinger read
this letter into the official record, "I wish I could show you what a small
marijuana cigarette can do to one of our degenerate Spanish-speaking
residents. That's why our problem is so great; the greatest percentage of
our population is composed of Spanish-speaking persons, most of who are low
mentally, because of social and racial conditions."
Discriminatory intent was not limited to the Federal level. In Texas, the
anti-marijuana proponents included this statement in the official records;
"All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff (referring to marijuana) is what
makes them crazy." Perhaps even more disturbing is the testimony of Dr. Fred
Fulsher during Montana's prohibition; "Marijuana is Mexican opium, a plant
used by Mexicans and cultivated for sale by Indians. When some beet field
peon takes a few rares of this stuff, he thinks he has just been elected
president of Mexico so he starts out to execute all his political enemies. I
understand that over in Butte where the Mexicans often go for the winter
they stage imaginary bullfights in the "Bower of Roses" or put on
tournaments for the favor of "Spanish Rose" after a couple whiffs of
Marijuana. The Silver Bow and Yellowstone delegations both deplore these
international complications."
***
UNITED STATES PHARMACOPEIA listed cannabis until 1942 [4], after which it
was removed under political pressure. The U.S. PHARMACOPEIA recommended
cannabis for the treatment of over 100 illnesses, such as:
fatigue, fits of coughing, rheumatism, asthma, delirium tremens, migraine
headaches, and the cramps and depression associated with menstruation [3].
UNITED STATES DISPENSATORY [5] also listed cannabis as a useful medicine.
The 1851 edition states:
The complaints in which it [cannabis] has been specially recommended are
neuralgia, gout, rheumatism, tetanus, hydrophobia, epidemic cholera,
convulsions, chorea, hysteria, mental depression, delirium tremens, insanity
and uterine hemorrhage.
Cannabis was removed from the US Pharmacopeia in 1942 because of political
pressure from Harry Anslinger and the U S Treasury Department.
***
Little Known Fact
The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 (MTA) permitted the medical use of cannabis
until 1969! That's right folks. Medical marijuana was legal in the US until
the Controlled Substance Act went into force in the early 1970s after the
MTA had been declared unConstitutional. The new law "neglected" to make
provision for industrial hemp or medical cannabis, so these uses became
illegal by default.
Many people think that "medical marijuana" is a new idea, but the fact is
that cannabis was used medically in both the US and Britain for well over
150 years.
The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 also permitted industrial HEMP until 1969.
There was never any specific legislation outlawing medical cannabis or
industrial HEMP. The new laws merely neglected to make any provision for
these uses, so they became illegal by (deliberate) omission.
These facts show that the debate about cannabis's medical utility and the
arguments about industrial HEMP are pure hypocrisy and ignorance.
The fact that HEMP and medical marijuana were legal for over 30 years
without any law enforcement problems while recreational use was forbidden
proves that the Reefer Maniacs are lying about so-called problems
distinguishing licensed crops from outlaw grows.
The fact that the MTA was in force for so long without causing any special
problems proves that the Reefer Madness crowd is purely lying.
***
"If the hideous monster Frankenstein came face to face with the monster
marijuana he would drop dead of fright."
***
"But here we have drug that is not like opium. Opium has all of the good of
Dr. Jekyll and all the evil of Mr. Hyde. This drug is entirely the monster
Hyde, the harmful effect of which cannot be measured."
***
"Some people will fly into a delirious rage, and they are temporarily
irresponsible and may commit violent crimes. Other people will laugh
uncontrollably. It is impossible to say what the effect will be on any
individual."
***
SENATOR DAVIS: How many [marihuana] cigarettes would you have to smoke
before you got this vicious mental attitude toward your neighbor?
MR. ANSLINGER: I believe in some cases one [marihuana] cigarette might
develop a homicidal mania, probably to kill his brother. It depends on the
physical characteristics of the individual. Every individual reacts
differently to the drug. It stimulates some and others it depresses. It is
impossible to say just what the action of the drug will be on a given
individual, of the amount. Probably some people could smoke five before it
would take that effect, but all the experts agree that the continued use
leads to insanity. There are many cases of insanity. Sworn Congressional
testimony 1937
***
"Those who are habitually accustomed to use of the drug are said to develop
a delirious rage after its administration, during which they are
temporarily, at least, irresponsible and liable to commit violent crimes.
The prolonged use of this narcotic is said to produce mental deterioration.
It apparently releases inhibitions of an antisocial nature which dwell
within the individual."
Sworn Congressional testimony 1937
***
"In many respects, the action of cannabis sativa is similar to that of
alcohol or morphine. Its toxic effects are ecstasy, merriment,
uncontrollable laughter, self-satisfaction, bizarre ideas lacking in
continuity, and its results are extreme hyperacidity, with occasional
attacks of nausea and vomiting. It has also been described as producing, in
moderate doses, from a mild intoxication to a dead drunk, a drowsy and
semicomatose condition, lapsing into a dreamy state, with a rapid flow of
ideas of a sexual nature and ending in a deep sleep, interrupted by dreams.
On awakening, there is a feeling of great dejection and prostration."
Sworn Congressional testimony 1937
***
MR. DINGELL: I am just wondering whether the marihuana addict graduates into
a heroin, an opium, or a cocaine user.
MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir; I have not heard of a case of that kind. I think it
is an entirely different class. The marihuana addict does not go in that
direction. Sworn Congressional testimony 1937
***
By 1951, Anslinger changed his tune and invented the "steppingstone theory"
claiming that pot inevitably lead to HEROIN addiction. Commissioner
Anslinger told a Senate committee that "eventually if used over a long
period, [marijuana] does lead to heroin addiction."
Mr. Boggs. From just what little I saw in that demonstration, I have
forgotten the figure Dr. Isbell gave, but my recollection is that only a
small percentage of those marijuana cases was anything more than a temporary
degree of exhilaration ....
Mr. Anslinger. The danger is this: Over 50 percent of those young addicts
started on marijuana smoking. They started there and graduated to heroin;
they took the needle when the thrill of marijuana was gone.45
Congressional testimony for Boggs Act 1951
***
Obviously Anslinger was not one to concern himself with differences in
correlation and causality. He also didn't mind perjuring himself whenever
necessary.
***
Often repeated accusation
"How many murders, suicides, robberies, criminal assaults, holdups,
burglaries, and deeds of maniacal insanity it (marijuana) causes each year,
especially among the young, can only be conjectured." Harry Anslinger
These things could only be "conjectured" because they never happened.
Anslinger's claims were all based on yellow journalism which he himself had
inspired. For instance, Anslinger would attend a conference of newspaper
editors and then the papers would print the Reefer Madness stories he had
told them. Then Anslinger used the newspaper articles as EVIDENCE that he
was right. Anslinger did this again and again. However, never once in his
lying career did Anslinger ever present one shred of scientific evidence to
support any of his Reefer Madness accusations.
***
"As a matter of fact the staminate leaves are about as harmless as a
rattlesnake."
***
MR. REED: Is there any cure for a person who becomes an addict?
MR. ANSLINGER: I do not think there is such a thing as not being able to
cure an addict. Marihuana addicts may go to a Federal narcotic farm. But I
have not seen many addicts who could not be cured. An addict could drop it
and he will not experience any ill effects. Sworn Congressional testimony 1937
***
"This drug is as old as civilization itself. Homer wrote about, as a drug
that made men forget their homes, and that turned them into swine. In
Persia, a thousand years before Christ, there was a religious and military
order founded which was called the Assassins and they derived their name
from the drug called hashish which is now known in this country as
marihuana. They were noted for their acts of cruelty, and the word
"assassin" very aptly describes the drug."
***
"Inasmuch as the harmful effects of the use of the drug is becoming more
widely known each day, and it has been classed as a narcotic by the
statutory laws of 17 American states, England, and Mexico, and persons
addicted to its use have been made eligible for treatment in the United
States narcotics farms, the United States Government, unquestionably, will
be compelled to adopt a consistent attitude toward this drug, and include it
in the Harrison antinarcotic law, so as to give Federal aid to the States in
their effort to suppress a traffic as deadly and as destructive to society
as the traffic in the other forms of narcotics now prohibited by the
Harrison Act."
from statement Anslinger submitted to Congress for The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
***
MR. MCCORMACK: Is it used by the criminal class?
MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, it is. It is dangerous to the mind and body, and
particularly dangerous to the criminal type, because it releases all of the
inhibitions.
I have here statements by the foremost expert in the world talking on this
subject, and by Dr. Cutter a noted and distinguished medical man in this
Those who are habitually accustomed to use of the drug are said to develop a
delirious rage after its administration, during which they are temporarily,
at least, irresponsible and liable to commit violent crimes. The prolonged
use of this narcotic is said to produce mental deterioration. It apparently
releases inhibitions of an antisocial nature which dwell within the individual.
***
MR. MCCORMACK: What are its first manifestations, a feeling of grandeur and
self-exaltation, and things of that sort?
MR. ANSLINGER: It affects different individuals in different ways. Some
individuals have a complete loss of sense of time or a sense of value. They
lose their sense of place. They have an increased feeling of physical
strength and power.
Some people will fly into a delirious rage, and they are temporarily
irresponsible and may commit violent crimes. Other people will laugh
uncontrollably. It is impossible to say what the effect will be on any
individual. Those research men who have tried it have always been under
control. They have always insisted upon that.
***
In 1909, the importation of smoking opium was prohibited altogether.l5 This
law was successful in the sense that smoking opium imported through the
customhouses fell to zero, but it did not solve the opium-smoking problem.
Congress in January 1914 found it necessary to amend the 1909 law 16 and to
pass an additional statute imposing a prohibitive tax ($300 per pound) on
opium prepared for smoking within the United States.7 In December 1914
Congress passed the Harrison Narcotic Act, with far broader provisional~
(see Chapter 8). Yet as late as 1930, according to Federal Narcotics
Commissioner Harry J. Anslinger and United States Attorney William F.
Tompkins, "opium dens could be found in almost any American city." 19
19. Harry J. Anslinger and William F. Tompkins, The Traffic in Narcotics
(New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1953), p. 54. [snip]
100 YEARS OF "JUST SAY NO" VERSUS "JUST SAY KNOW": Reevaluating Drug Education Goals for the Coming Century
by Jerome E. Beck, Dr. P.H. [This is a LONG, historical article.] @ http://www.drugsense.org/jnr/Beck1.html [snip]
A particularly notorious example of this was the time Anslinger began to issue frequent press releases in 1935 that documented the horrible crimes committed by marijuana-intoxicated youth and/or addicts. With headlines announcing "The New Narcotic Menace" and the "Crusade Against Marijuana," articles that contained remarkably similar accounts appeared in major newspapers and national magazines. This was hardly surprising, in that mainstream media relied almost solely on the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) for their facts, figures, and requisite horror stories (Becker 1963). The success of Anslinger’s efforts in this particular instance was found in the smooth passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 by Congress (Dickson 1968; Morgan 1981).
Anslinger’s media campaigns were primarily focused on influencing public opinion to garner necessary support for his own personal bureaucratic objectives. Throughout his lengthy tenure, he actively discouraged most efforts at educating youth about illicit drugs. Regardless of the "fear quotient" conveyed by any particular approach, Anslinger contended that intensive or informational forms of school-based drug education merely served to arouse unnecessary curiosity among impressionable youth (Anslinger and Tompkins 1953; Finlator 1973). Nevertheless, as Wallack (1980) observes: The efforts of the FBN in the 1930’s, in what could probably roughly be characterized as the first federally sponsored drug education campaign, established a trend that was to be followed through the 1960’s—the use of sensationalism and scare tactics and the avoidance, repression, or minimization of scientific information. (P 57) [snip]
MarijuanaNews.Com....
http://www.marijuananews.com/marijuana_and_the_media_by_jeff_.htm
January 23, 1998
The federal government's primary witness at the 1937 Marijuana Hearings was a Treasury Department bureaucrat named Harry Anslinger, the nation's first drug czar. Anslinger testified that all the world's marijuana experts agreed: this "vicious drug" could induce a murderous rage. And damn quick. "One cigarette would develop a homicidal mania," Anslinger told the House Ways and Means Committee. "Probably some people could smoke five before it would take effect …. it's entirely the monster Hyde."
As absurd as Anslinger's statements sound today -- they were taken as Biblical truth 60 years ago, enabling Pot Prohibition to sail through Congress. Despite opposition by the AMA -- which saw great promise in cannabis -- the bill was passed unanimously in both houses, deliberation lasting a scant 92 seconds. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed it into law on Aug. 3, 1937. Pot was outlawed. Medical research was banned. It was now legal to hunt down and imprison pot-smokers. Specifically, Negro musicians and Mexican immigrants. Most white people hadn't even heard of marijuana. It wasn't until the '60s that they turned on and got arrested in mass numbers. In just the last 30 years, over 11 million people of all races and creeds have been arrested on marijuana charges.
Like Congress in 1937, the media of the day swallowed Anslinger's rendition of "Reefer Madness." Not one newspaper bothered to investigate his sources or check his dubious facts. If anything, big city papers embraced his fiction and even embellished it, terrifying Middle America with lurid, and patently false, horror stories. While Hearst's San Francisco Examiner sounded the alarm for parents with headlines like "Marijuana Makes Fiends of Boys in 30 Days," other papers fanned the flames of racism with similarly outlandish tales of pot-crazed Mexicans committing acts of depravity.
For six decades, mainstream media continued to shape the public's perception of marijuana by promoting every myth and scare tactic supplied by the government. Pot leads to violence. Pot leads to lethargy. Pot leads to hard drugs and death. Pot is a hard drug. Pot kills brain cells. Pot hooks our children. Pot grows breasts on boys. Pot has no known medical use. [snip]
Quotes on Prohibition: People and Prohibition.
http://www.taima.org/en/quotes.htm#anslinger1 [snip]
"Dear Agent ...,
please prepare all cases in your jurisdiction involving musicians in violation of the marijuana laws. We will have a great national round-up arrest of all such persons on a single day. I will let you know what day."
Harry J. Anslinger
Federal Bureau of Narcotics,
1947 [snip]
"I wish I could show you what a small marihuana cigarette can do to one of our degenerate Spanish-speaking residents. That's why our problem is so great; the greatest percentage of our population is composed of Spanish-speaking persons, most of who are low mentally, because of social and racial conditions."
Floyd K. Baskette
Alamosa, Colorado
quoted by Harry J. Anslinger,
Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics
during the hearings on the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act [snip]
History of Cannabis: How Cannabis Was Criminilized
http://www.idmu.co.uk/historical.htm
[snip] In 1931 former Prohibition Commissioner Harry J Anslinger was appointed head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. At first he was reluctant to extend his national powers over marijuana, although he thought it was an evil, because it seemed a localised problem, and impossible to enforce prohibition of a plant which had some legitimate uses and grew wild 'like dandelions.' For a Federal law to work, all uses of the plant had to be controlled together. Instead, he encouraged State laws and anti-drug propaganda.
By the 1930's Depression, mechanised hemp production was a potential threat to paper and cellulose producers. The supposed wickedness of job and woman-stealing dope-crazed foreigners was a vote winner. So the herb had new enemies. Malicious, racist press stories, pseudo-scientific reports, and political pressure multiplied. By 1935 Anslinger was promoting a federal law which his FBN could enforce. In Congressional hearings to plan it, all positive evidence was suppressed. The American Medical Association and the Oil Seed Institute opposed the law, but were ignored. Anslinger quoted press cuttings as proof that cannabis was 'the most violence-creating drug on this planet'. From October 1st 1937, the Marijuana Tax Act made it illegal to grow or transfer any form of cannabis without a tax-paid stamp - which were never made available to private citizens. Possession laws varied between States until 1970.
Anslinger used the new law to expand his Bureau. He began an ugly campaign against 'demon dope' using films and posters, associating it with jazz ['voodoo music'], inter-racial sex, madness and death. The FBN suppressed or abused any research showing that marijuana was not an extreme danger, notably the 1944 'LaGuardia Report' commissioned by the Mayor of New York. He led US delegations to every international drug control body until sacked by President Kennedy in 1961. Most countries didn't think they had a problem with cannabis until the 1960's. Anslinger did his best to persuade them otherwise.
In 1945 there were only 4 prosecutions for cannabis offences in the UK, and 206 for opium. In 1950 for the first time ever there were more prosecutions for cannabis than for opium and manufactured drugs put together - 86 against 41 opium and 42 others. That year a series of police raids on jazz clubs produced a fresh crop of British news stories about black men with drugs and white women. Cannabis had finally got into the local shock horror league, but it wasn't to become the world's favourite illegality for a few more years.
Three events abroad had long term effects. In 1961 a new treaty was organised, the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotics Drugs. It updated all previous drugs treaties, and set up classifications of drugs according to their supposed harmfulness. Cannabis went into the same list as the opiates and cocaine, 'having strong addictive properties' and/or 'a risk to public health.' Only medical or scientific uses were permitted, and the World Health Organisation [advised by Anslinger] considered cannabis to have no modern medical value. Traditional and non-drug uses were to be closely controlled by governments. It was resolved that 'use of cannabis is to be discontinued within 25 years'. The USA actively joined in creating and enforcing the Single Convention, guided by Harry Anslinger. His sacking and the identification of 'active ingredient' tetrahydrocannabinol [THC] in 1964 made serious research possible again, but too late for more realistic laws to be passed. [snip]
Post script. Many thanks to Ron Bennett for providing these fine Cannabis.Com Message Boards... where we can post nice, l-o-n-g posts...:)
|
