PM Harper on YouTube - Anti Drug Message
Mr. Prime Minister, we have to work on your anti-drug message.
Today on the YouTube video you said that "drug user's money is going to viscious drug dealers", but that idea plays right into the anti-prohibition side's argument - ending prohibiton would also end the gravy train for illegal drug dealers. It would be a serious blow to the dealers.
So lets talk about drug prohibition, Mr. Prime Minister.
Ending illegal drug prohibition would bring the prices down, and much of the violence in the drug trade would end.
Another point Mr. Prime Minister, is that the budget deficit could be erased, and then some, by taxing the sales of all the drugs that are sold or produced in Canada. That could easily happen by ending prohibition and regulating the sales of these drugs, making it much safer for Canadians too.
Ending the underground culture of illegal drugs would reduce the feared "erosion of society" that you mentioned in this video - we have been consuming illegal drugs in mass quantities since the 1960s, and I think it is obvious by now that if there is an erosion of society, it has not come from drug use. Prohibition, on the other hand, causes people to think of the law "as an ass", and that really hurts our social contract with law enforcement people.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper: "The government is not going to get into the illegal drug business."
Harper claimed he's led a "drug-free" life. Which would mean no caffeine, no alcohol, no aspirin, no antibiotics. If that's really true, he must be the only "drug-free" guy on the continent.
Either he's a fool or he takes Canadians to be fools. Or both.
"Either he's a fool or he takes Canadians to be fools. Or both"
I'm gonna go with the former. Pure garbage unworthy of a national leader. I wouldn't follow this guy in a cafeteria line.
Here is a picture of Stephen Harper drinking a coffee:
http://theviennacafe.wordpress.com/2009/09/29/harpers-tim-bit/
Photo of Harper drinking wine:
http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/EXID26284/images/resized_091205_harper_china_flags.jpg
Harper uses alcohol to bet with: “Team Canada came out on top, so Obama will have to pick up a 24-pack of Molson Canadian for the prime minister.”
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/...y-85784877.html
Did Harper just fall of the turnip truck?
Did Harper just fall of the turnip truck?
Yeah, he strikes me as that kind of guy.
I'm pretty sure you guys are bringing this to semantics. When people preach against drugs, they're not referring to caffeine or the occassional alcoholic beverage.
Harper probably has not done any 'drugs' (marijuana, coccaine, DMT, heroin, etc.) in his life. You guys are going to criticize the guy for pushing an anti-drug agenda? Kind of pathetic, in my opinion.
Dude, is alcohol a drug? Are prescribed meds a drug? Is caffeine a drug? In case you are wondering the answer to this question is yes.
What is kind of pathetic is your inability to determine what "drugs" are.
OFFS another CON propagandists appears......
heads up Dillion, alcohol is a drug, and 1 drink is worse for you than one joint.
oops...cross posted with stargazer, and you are absolutely correct stargazer.
How come most Con supporters are sort of...not so bright?
I'm pretty sure most everyone understood he meant illegal drugs. Even if did toke up once, it's probably not in his best interest to admit it.
I say legalize it.
How come most Con supporters are sort of...not so bright?
... cuz they didn't suck enough j's in their youth ... too much booze'll do that to you too.
Like many words in the english language - The word "drugs' has many meanings - most commonly it is used to refer to illegal narcotics. Most people don't go to Timmy's to get a cup of drugs or pick up a six pack of drugs at the beer store.
Is is this a meeting of the temperance movement or a discussion of currently illegal drugs and their possible legalization
Close VGE, it's a discussion of the hypocrisy of "I don't do any drugs" Harper.
Legalize it.
Well I do have an answer for that question Stargazer, I will just say some supporters are there because of their personal greed and they will exploit whomever to get what they want. While others abhore anything challenging the status quo, so they will iupport whoever assures them well enough they can have status quo.
Still more are not paying attention and thus vote like their mom and dad did. And others have a 'religious" agenda they believe can be attained through the CONS.
Then there are those who pretend stupidity in order to foster propaganda.
attitudes to different drugs evolve over time, people were once strongly against drinking coffee ;
"Coffee leads men to trifle away their time, scald their chops, and spend their money, all for a little base, black, thick, nasty, bitter, stinking nauseous puddle water." ~The Women's Petition Against Coffee, 1674
and a drink of tobbaco smoke was once considered a cure for most ailments.
One day marijuana will be legal and there will be a few cases of permanent pychosis for those who shouldn't have tried it.
Coke actually had cocaine. Freud liked to dally in coke.
Yes it truly was an elixir at that time and now is just a sugary caffeinated drink
So if he doesn't want people doing illegal drugs the answer is make them legal in a regulated regime. All drugs cause some problems. What you will never see is the comparison to actual incidents between pot and other prescription drugs. If pot had the side effects that the legit drugs it would be one thing but since it has less side effects than most legit drugs like alcohol or tobacco and especially prescription drugs for depression that cause people to kill themselves why is it singled out.
Harpo is merely signing the imperial tune as he does on every issue. Sycophants always suck up to their masters by loudly pronouncing their belief in the same things as the master.
I don't think it's that complicated - legalizing has more political risk than any possible reward - so for a politician on the fence on this issue - it's no choice at all.
What does that have to do with actively being on one side of the fence. He didn't shut his mouth instead he spouted War on Drugs bullshit. He had a choice and he choose his side. I merely pointed out who else is clearly on that side of the fence and not sitting on it.
Something makes me think he's not true believer in the Just say No to Drugs - he doesn't have any courage and picked the easy way to position himself - make it a moral thing - violent drug dealers, think of the children, ect.
This is a You Tube video promoting his policy of getting tough on drugs. He didn't have to post there on that particular subject but he did. I will admit there is a slim possibility the fact that his views and emphasis on jailing people mirrors the empire's views is merely serendipity and not a sign of his being a sycophant.
Look what targeting violent dealers with state violence has done for America, Columbia and Mexico. Want to end the violence then treat drug problems as medical issues. If the drugs don't addict you [the majority response to any drug] and you want to have fun then it is no different than alcohol and it needs to be regulated so that minors don't have access to it. if you become addicted and it is affecting your life then there should be services to help you kick the habit. I think that approach is needed for all potentially addicting substances like alcohol. tobacco, gambling and the drugs that are currently illegal.
Stats show that illegal substances are easier for children to get than state regulated ones. That in itself is a good reason to legalize and regulate.
Harper claimed he's led a "drug-free" life. Which would mean no caffeine, no alcohol, no aspirin, no antibiotics. If that's really true, he must be the only "drug-free" guy on the continent.
This is the same defense my girlfriends meth addicted boyfriend comes up with when anyone suggests drugs are harmful.
It's a great defense if you ask me Reefermadness. A can of coke and some advil are no different than putting junk in your veins.
Something makes me think he's not true believer in the Just say No to Drugs - he doesn't have any courage and picked the easy way to position himself - make it a moral thing - violent drug dealers, think of the children, ect.
It also fits in with his 'Law and Order' agenda.
"It's a great defense if you ask me Reefermadness. A can of coke and some advil are no different than putting junk in your veins."
it's certainly much worse thank smoking pot, which was the drug he was talking about.
he should have been honest and said "until the americans say it's ok, you can forget it!"
FYI, rabble's editor just put a poll about Harper's latest foray onto youtube. You can take it here:
http://rabble.ca/polls/stephen-harpers-youtube-moment
Good poll I even had an answer I could tick. No I will not boast the number of hits on Youtube by watching this lame attempt at propaganda.
kropotkin1951, I still cannot get over the fact that on the evening the YouTube video aired, it only got 305 views. And that with all the $, marketing, and media tuning in.
Like you, I didn't watch it, but I did check out the youtube page that night. The video started to play immediately so I quickly closed it -but I may have counted for one of those views.
Yes, anyone who even lands on the YouTube page, even if it doesn't play, counts as a view.
It's okay, Kim, you're a journalist. Probably the majority of those hits were journalists wondering if anyone would come out to play. The answer apparently being: no. :D
...guess this means Harper was /is publically admiting to ties to evil international drug cartels, given the fact that one of his cabinet ministers can be linked to having illegal drugs in their family vehicle.
Is it true that Harper's video synchs perfectly to "Dark Side of the Moon" by Pink Floyd?
I thought that was Wizard of Oz, but then again, Harper may be the man behind the curtain...
Chris Arsenault interviews MALALAI JOYA, author and Afghan parliamentarian
MJ: People know very well. Many others, including Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, who ran for president in the election, their bums are on the lap of the CIA. Gulbuddin Hekmatyar [another warlord] is said to be using his old CIA-generated [drug] trafficking network to fund the current insurgency.
If [Canadian Prime Minister Stephen] Harper is honest, why is he silent in supporting this mafia system? These people are criminals; but with suits and ties they are in power.
If this [CIA funding war-lords] isn't bad enough, [President Karzai] appointed Izzatullah Wasifi as Afghanistan's anti-corruption chief [in 2007]. Wasifi is a convicted drug trafficker who spent almost four years in Nevada state prison for selling heroin, but he was an old friend of the Karzai family. As Afghans often say, "Karzai assigned a rabbit to take care of the carrot."
Perhaps the Harpers should be investigated for supporting CIA-sponsored dope dealers in Afghanistan. I thought Harper was looking a little dopier than usual.
I thought that was Wizard of Oz, but then again, Harper may be the man behind the curtain...
Harper is definitely the man behind the curtain, along with someone I call "Torturegate". The (smoke and mirrors) Wizard of Oz are Canada's troops in Afghanistan ("of whom there is no substantive evidence that they tortured or abused any Afghans"), the recent Winter Olympics and the Cons' "much considered and finely calibrated" budget.
Don't forget their "tough on crime" bill