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

CIA Sued For Not Reporting Drug Trade (The San Francisco Chronicle says two
Oakland women filed a class-action lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Oakland
against the Central Intelligence Agency Monday, alleging that the agency's
decision not to report drug smuggling to other authorities in the 1980s
caused the crack epidemic to spread in inner-city communities. A similar suit
was filed in Los Angeles.)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:45:57 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US CA: CIA Sued For Not Reporting Drug Trade
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Tuesday, March 16, 1999
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Copyright: 1999 San Francisco Chronicle
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Forum: http://www.sfgate.com/conferences/
Page: A14
Author: Benjamin Pimentel, Chronicle Staff Writer

CIA SUED FOR NOT REPORTING DRUG TRADE

Plaintiffs say failure caused crack epidemic

Two Oakland women filed a class-action lawsuit against the Central
Intelligence Agency yesterday, alleging that the agency's decision not
to report drug smuggling to other authorities in the 1980s caused the
crack epidemic to spread in inner-city communities.

The suit, filed by Rosemary Lyons and Olivia Woods in U.S. District
Court in Oakland, claims the CIA's policy to ignore reports of drug
smuggling from Central America to the United States destroyed many
lives, including those of their family members.

``They knew about it, and they didn't respond to the call for help
from the community,'' said Woods, 71, who said her son died of a crack
cocaine overdose. ``They looked the other way.''

The suit, and one like it filed in Los Angeles, seeks unspecified
damages, attorney William Simpich said.

Simpich said he is seeking a court order requiring the CIA to disclose
immediately to other law enforcement agencies any knowledge of illegal
activities, including drug smuggling, in the future.

The lawsuit springs from allegations, some of them published in
newspapers, that the CIA was involved in the smuggling of crack
cocaine as part of covert operations in support of Nicaraguan Contras.

Separate investigations by the CIA and the U.S. Justice Department
later cleared the agency of wrongdoing, but uncovered a CIA policy to
ignore reports of drug smuggling, Simpich said.

According to the lawsuit, CIA Inspector General Frederick Hitz
admitted in March 1998 testimony before the House Intelligence
Committee that beginning in 1982, the agency and the U.S. Department
of Justice agreed that the CIA was not required to report drug
trafficking by its agents and assets.

The agency dropped the policy in 1995, Simpich said.

``We're not accusing them (the CIA) of smuggling,'' he said. ``We're
not accusing them of targeting the African American community. But
we're saying that because of this dynamic, this happened.''

CIA Spokesman Tom Crispell said the agency does not comment on pending
litigation. However, he reiterated that the CIA has been cleared by
government investigations.

Lyons said the crack epidemic had a tremendous impact on poor
communities and put an enormous burden on social services.

``We have kids who have been raised in these crime-infested
environments,'' she said. ``It's a shame. We want to protect kids from
suffering.''

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

Drug Crimes Allegation Leads To CIA, Justice Suit (The San Francisco Examiner
version)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 20:23:44 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US CA: Drug Crimes Allegation Leads To CIA, Justice Suit
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Tue, 16 Mar 1999
Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA)
Page: A6
Copyright: 1999 San Francisco Examiner
Contact: letters@examiner.com
Website: http://www.examiner.com/
Forum: http://examiner.com/cgi-bin/WebX
Author: Robert Selna

DRUG CRIMES ALLEGATION LEADS TO CIA, JUSTICE SUIT

Policy To Not Report Suspicions Had Role In Crack Epidemic, Lawyer Contends

OAKLAND - Civil rights attorneys have filed lawsuits in Oakland and
Los Angeles claiming the CIA's policy to not report drug crimes to the
U.S. Department of Justice played a significant role in the crack
epidemic of the 1980s.

Oakland lawyer William Simpich filed a class action suit in federal
court, and attorneys filed a similar suit in Los Angeles Monday. Both
suits seek an acknowledgment that the 1982 agreement that said the CIA
had no duty to report drug crimes to the Justice department was
illegal; an injunction requiring the CIA to report all possible drug
crimes to the Department of Justice; and an unspecified amount of
money to "rebuild community and fund drug treatment."

"Cocaine was used as a tool in the counter-intelligence game and
because of the agreement between the CIA and the DOJ, and the special
access the CIA had to information and sources, a lot of cocaine ended
up in this country that could have been stopped," Simpich said.

Simpich said he believed the CIA policy had been a "key component" in
the crack epidemic of the 1980s.

Simpich likens his case to recent suits against tobacco companies and
gun manufacturers. He said it was the CIA's responsibility to protect
U.S. citizens from the intrusion of drugs into their communities and
that the agency needed to take responsibility for at least part of the
devastation caused by crack cocaine.

"This (case) is based on a social policy nuisance theory," Simpich
said. "What the CIA did is similar to a city police force saying,
"We're not going to try to enforce laws against prostitution in our
city.' "

The named plaintiffs in the case are two longtime East Bay residents
who say their families have been destroyed because of crack cocaine.

Olivia Woods, 71, said her son and grandson had both died of crack
cocaine overdoses.

"I have two granddaughters and grandsons who are victims now, and I
need to do something for my people who are suffering," Woods said in
reference to her involvement in the case.

Rosemary Lyons, 43, said her sister has been a crack addict for 13
years and was unable to take care of her own children.

"In this country the number of children going into foster care has
gone way up," Lyons said. "It is a terrible shame that this (crack)
has come into our communities and destroyed families."

Simpich said some details of his case were related to San Jose Mercury
News reporter Gary Webb's 1996 series "Dark Alliance." In that series,
Webb suggested that a Bay Area drug ring had sold crack in Los Angeles
in the 1980s, then funneled profits to the contras, the CIA-backed
rebel force in Nicaragua.

Webb implied that high-level CIA officials had known of the
connection. However, other newspapers disputed his findings, and
sheriff's investigators found no evidence the CIA was involved in
cocaine dealing in Los Angeles.

Simpich emphasized that his claim in no way insinuated that CIA agents
were involved in drug smuggling, but said that he and others might not
have been aware of the CIA's agreement with the Department of Justice
without the article.

The Department of Justice and the CIA could not be reached for comment
regarding the lawsuit.

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

Communities Sue U.S. Agencies Over Lack Of Drug Interdiction (The Orange
County Register version)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:24:39 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US CA: Communities Sue U.S. Agencies Over Lack Of Drug
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John W. Black
Pubdate: 16 Mar 1999
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Copyright: 1999 The Orange County Register
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/
Section: Metro page, 5

COMMUNITIES SUE U.S. AGENCIES OVER LACK OF DRUG INTERDICTION

San Francisco-City residents who claim the federal government did nothing
to stop crack cocaine sales in their neighborhoods in the 1980s sued the
CIA and Justice Department on Monday.

The complaints were filed on behalf of residents - most of them black -
whose babies were born addicted to crack, whose relatives died in
drug-related drive-by shootings and whose communities were affected by
crowded emergency rooms and gutted business districts, the lawsuit said.

"This is not some sort of litigation lottery ticket," attorney Katya
Komisaruk said. "The government contributed to what happened to us, so now
we need the government to come and help us."

The federal civil-rights lawsuits, filed in Oakland and Los Angeles, were
partially prompted by last year's disclosure of a 1982 agreement between
the late CIA Director William Casey and former Attorney General William
French Smith that the spy agency had no duty to report drug crimes to the
Justice Department.

Komisaruk said she wants a judge to declare the agreement illegal, order
the CIA and Justice Department to report crimes they are aware of and issue
reparations to cities affected by cocaine sales.

The complaints are the latest result of a 1996 San Jose Mercury News series
that alleged that a drug ring funneled profits to the Nicaraguan Contra
rebels for the better part of a decade.

The executive editor of the Mercury News later acknowledged in a letter to
readers that the series had shortcomings.

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

CIA, Justice Department Sued Over Cocaine Damage (The Seattle Times version
combines accounts from Knight Ridder Newspapers and the Associated Press.)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:22:43 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US CA: CIA, Justice Department Sued Over Cocaine Damage
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John Smith
Pubdate: Tue, 16 Mar 1999
Source: Seattle Times (WA)
Copyright: 1999 The Seattle Times Company
Contact: opinion@seatimes.com
Website: http://www.seattletimes.com/
Author: Knight Ridder Newspapers and The Associated Press

CIA, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SUED OVER COCAINE DAMAGE

OAKLAND, Calif. - Two class-action lawsuits were filed yesterday in U.S.
District Court accusing the Central Intelligence Agency of refusing to
report drug trafficking in the 1980s by supporters of the Nicaraguan contra
rebels.

The suits claim the CIA ignored the criminal acts of contra operatives who
helped introduce crack cocaine to Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay
Area, resulting in the "death of men, women and children . . . and the
collapse of whole neighborhoods."

The suit also accuses the Justice Department of failing to demand that the
CIA report drug trafficking to federal prosecutors.

Justice Department officials said they had not seen the suit and refused to
comment. CIA officials were unavailable for comment.

The suits seek damages for residents of the Bay Area and Los Angeles whose
lives were ravaged by crack and for taxpayers forced to shoulder the costs
of the epidemic.

"This is not some sort of litigation lottery ticket," attorney Katya
Komisaruk said. "The government contributed to what happened to us, so now
we need the government to come and help us."

The lawsuits were prompted in part by last year's disclosure of a 1982
agreement between the late CIA Director William Casey and former Attorney
General William French Smith that the spy agency had no duty to report drug
crimes to the Justice Department.

The contras waged a U.S.-funded guerrilla war in the 1980s to unseat the
leftist government in Nicaragua.

The complaints are the latest result of a 1996 San Jose Mercury News series
that claimed a drug ring funneled profits to the contras for the better part
of a decade.

The executive editor of the Mercury News, Jerry Ceppos, later acknowledged
in a letter to readers that the series had shortcomings.

Last summer, an 800-page internal Justice Department report exonerated the
department and the CIA.

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

Officials working out details on medical marijuana bill (The Minneapolis
Star-Tribune says a medical marijuana bill proposed by Minnesota state
senator Pat Piper faced an uncertain future Tuesday after a senate panel
hearing.)

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 00:23:25 -0600
From: "Frank S. World" (compassion23@geocities.com)
Reply-To: compassion23@geocities.com
Organization: Rx Cannabis Now!
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7417/
To: DRCNet Medical Marijuana Forum (medmj@drcnet.org)
Subject: US MN WIRE: Officials working out details on medical marijuana bill
Minneapolis Star-Tribune
Website http://www.startribune.com/
Feedback http://www.startribune.com/stonline/html/userguide/letform.html
Forum http://talk.startribune.com/cgi-bin/WebX.cgi
Published Tuesday, March 16, 1999

OFFICIALS WORKING OUT DETAILS ON MEDICAL MARIJUANA BILL

By ASHLEY H. GRANT / Associated Press Writer

ST. PAUL (AP) -- A proposal to allow marijuana to be smoked for some medical
conditions faced an uncertain future Tuesday after a Senate panel considered
the bill proposed by Sen. Pat Piper.

"When people are suffering, I think we need to find a way to alleviate
their suffering," said Piper, DFL-Austin.

Public Safety Commissioner Charlie Weaver and Gov. Jesse Ventura support the
limited medical use of marijuana, but they don't want the state to be at
odds with federal law.

"The biggest problem with the bill now is that it forces people to commit
felonies," Weaver told the Senate Health and Family Security Committee.

He suggested applying for a federal waiver and then running a pilot program
through the University of Minnesota or the University of Mississippi, where
a program has begun. The state Pharmacy Board would oversee the project.

But Piper wasn't sure a pilot program would reach enough people fast
enough. Her bill would give qualified patients legal protection if they used
marijuana and give their doctors legal protection if they suggest it.

The bill doesn't address who would produce or sell the drug, or whether
they could be prosecuted under state law.

Piper acknowledged that the federal law is a stumbling block.

Although six states have enacted laws that protect marijuana users with a
demonstrated medical need, they still face possible federal prosecution.

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., has proposed lifting the federal ban on the
medical use of marijuana in those states where it is approved as a treatment
for pain, nausea or other problems.

Frank's bill would reclassify marijuana as a Schedule II drug, meaning that
it could be prescribed by doctors under certain conditions, just as cocaine
and other controlled substances are. Prescriptions for such drugs are
subject to federal and state review.

His bill would affect only states that have allowed medicinal marijuana.

"The issue does need a better, more informed debate at the federal level,"
Health Commissioner Jan Malcolm said.

Malcolm said Ventura wants Minnesota to push the federal debate.

Piper' s bill was held over until Wednesday to give Weaver, Malcolm and
Piper time to work on it.

"As commissioner of public safety, the concern is, how do you do this
without creating a nightmare for law enforcement?" Weaver said.

Even if the three can reach a compromise, it' s unclear how the bill would
fare. Some lawmakers oppose making marijuana more accessible for any reason.

"It's terrible," said Sen. Dan Stevens, R-Mora.

The New England Journal of Medicine has editorialized in favor of medical
marijuana, and the American Medical Association has urged the National
Institutes of Health to support more research on the subject.

Earlier this month, Canada's health minister authorized clinical trials to
determine if marijuana is useful for some terminal illnesses and other
painful conditions.

Copyright 1999 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not
be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

(c) Copyright 1999. All rights reserved.

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

Stealing By The State (According to a staff editorial in the Cincinnati Post,
prosecutors in Hamilton County, Ohio, spent hours last January convincing a
jury that Michael Nieman was an innocent victim, a jeweler murdered in his
bed by a stripper girlfriend who just wanted his money. But as soon as the
trial was over, federal prosecutors turned around and launched legal
proceedings to seize Nieman's house, vehicles, cash, jewelry and other
assets, arguing that he had really been a drug dealer, even though he had no
record of drug crimes. The Hamilton County sheriff helped seize Nieman's
estate. An attorney for Nieman's daughter called it legalized stealing. The
attorney is right. Congress and states such as Ohio should sharply curb their
pre-conviction asset forfeiture laws.)

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 10:00:57 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US OH: Stealing By The State
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: General Pulaski
Pubdate: Tues, 16 Mar 1999
Source: Cincinnati Post (OH)
Copyright: 1999 The Cincinnati Post
Contact: postedits@cincypost.com
Website: http://www.cincypost.com/

STEALING BY THE STATE

In January Hamilton County prosecutors spent hours convincing a jury that
Michael Nieman was an innocent victim, a jeweler murdered in his own bed by
a stripper girlfriend who just wanted his money.

As soon as the trial was over, federal prosecutors turned around and
launched legal proceedings to seize Nieman's house, vehicles, cash, jewelry
and other assets, arguing that he had really been a drug dealer, even though
he had absolutely no record of drug crimes. The Hamilton County sheriff
helped seize Nieman's estate.

An attorney for Nieman's daughter called it legalized stealing. The attorney
is right.

On Christmas Eve Corie Blount, a University of Cincinnati basketball star
who now plays in the NBA, was stopped along I-71 near Wilmington, ostensibly
because his 1995 Mercedes had tinted windows and did not have a license
plate on the front.

Blount was not charged with any crime (cynics say his crime was driving
while black) nor even arrested. But police nonetheless confiscated $19,435
in cash he happened to have in the car, on the basis of signals from a K-9
trained to smell drug residue on currency.

There were no drugs in the car. Blount, by all accounts one of the good guys
in pro sports, doesn't have even a minor arrest on his record.

Moreover, a K-9 drug dog could walk into any bank in the nation and detect
drug residue on 30 percent to 90 percent of the bills in the vault.

Yet Blount had to spend his own money on attorneys to prove a negative: that
the money wasn't from a drug transaction, and that the government should
give it back to him.

That's outrageous.

In New York City, the police have started to confiscate the cars of people
charged with drunk driving. They keep them, even though the person hasn't
been convicted of anything.

These are but a few examples of how local, state and federal asset
forfeiture laws have gotten out of control.

Fortunately, their overdue reform has a powerful advocate, House Judiciary
Committee Chairman Henry Hyde, of impeachment fame. Hyde has compiled a long
list of abuses and horror stories of people whose property was summarily
confiscated and returned damaged if it was returned at all.

Asset forfeiture was originally intended as a tool in the war on drugs. The
idea was that drug traffickers should lose the cars, planes or boats they
used for smuggling and that they should not be allowed to retain houses and
other property they acquired with drug money.

But the scope of forfeiture quickly broadened.

Says Hyde, "Federal and state officials now have the power to seize your
business, home, bank account, records and personal property - all without
indictment, hearing or trial."

And often without even being charged. One Detroit woman lost her car because
her husband used it - without her knowledge - to pick up a prostitute.

Another insidious feature of forfeiture is that law enforcement agencies use
the proceeds to fund their operations. New York even plans to hand over
seized cars for city officials to drive. The opportunity for conflict of
interest, let alone real corruption, is too great.

Getting the property back can be an expensive battle. The Justice Department
claims that only 15 percent of 60,000 annual forfeitures are contested, but
many victims cannot afford the attorneys and protracted court battles to
regain their possessions.

Hyde's reform bill would retain asset forfeiture as a useful law enforcement
technique but add a critical protection: The government would have to
justify the seizure with clear and convincing evidence.

Other provisions would allow the courts to release property to its owners
pending disposition of the case; allow owners to sue for damage to property
while in government custody, and provide lawyers for poor people caught up
in forfeiture proceedings.

The property of innocent owners, like the Detroit woman with the straying
husband, would be protected.

The Supreme Court has upheld forfeiture laws, but even so, those laws
violate fundamental American precepts of fairness and innocence until proven
guilty.

Congress and states such as Ohio should sharply curb their pre-conviction
asset forfeiture laws. And if the abuse continues, legislators or the courts
should get rid of them entirely.

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

Prison Population: 18 Million, Growing (A staff edtitorial in the Daily
Herald, in Arlington Heights, Illinois, suggests the latest U.S. prison
population figures are a good thing because they have reduced crime. The
editors express fleeting concern about mandatory minimum sentences and the
fact that the prison population includes a "disproportionately large number
of black men," which has "serious implications" for urban black communities.
Failure to find ways to improve the situation "could carry devastating
economic and cultural consequences," as if they weren't happening already.)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 15:14:40 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US IL: Editorial: Prison Population: 18 Million, Growing
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Steve Young
Pubdate: Tues, 16 Mar 1999
Source: Daily Herald (IL)
Copyright: 1999 The Daily Herald Company
Contact: fencepost@dailyherald.com
Website: http://www.dailyherald.com/

PRISON POPULATION: 1.8 MILLION, GROWING

The United States is not only the world's leading economic and military
power, it is rapidly closing in on No. 1 in another category: number of
citizens incarcerated.

Justice Department officials say the nation's prison population has doubled
in only 12 years, and the United States, with 1.8 million people behind
bars, now has higher rate of incarceration than any other nation for which
such statistics are kept - except Russia.

With twice as many people locked up, are we twice as safe as we were 12
years ago? Clearly, law-abiding Americans have less to worry about these
days by virtually any statistical measure available. Crime rates have been
declining in almost every major category and in every region of the country.

The improvement is almost certainly due, in part, to tough sentences and the
kind of truth-in-sentencing reforms the Daily Herald has strongly supported.
If violent offenders are serving longer sentences, fewer of them are on the
streets, where they can do harm.

But reports of such a large prison population prompt questions and doubts in
other ways.

For one thing, the prison population includes a disproportionately large
number of black men, which carries serious implications for urban black
communities. Failure to find ways to improve that situation could carry
devastating economic and cultural consequences.

And it's worth asking: Would every inmate pose a serious threat if he were
out? Probably not. For instance, tough mandatory drug sentencing laws, while
having limited success in stemming drug traffic, do result in keeping
non-violent offenders behind bars for a long time.

Moreover, the troubling message behind the growing use of mandatory
sentences is that judges can't be trusted to make discretionary calls. Yes,
judges sometimes err and occasionally with tragic results. But unless
there's more evidence than we've seen on judges giving inappropriate
sentences, we'd like to see judges retain greater discretion about when to
throw away the cell key and when to go a little lighter.

Here in Illinois, Gov. George Ryan is expected to win legislative approval
of his proposal to automatically tack 15, 20 or 25 years onto the sentence
of anyone who uses a gun in the commission of a crime.

We favor additional time for those who use guns to commit crime. But surely
the circumstances vary sufficiently from crime to crime that judges should
be able to determine whether use of a gun is worth another two years or 20
when it comes to sentencing. Making such long sentence additions mandatory
further increases the prison population and related expenses. It's fair to
ask whether that's always necessary.

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

The 'War On Drugs' Cannot Be Won (A letter to the editor of the
Standard-Times, in New Bedford, Massachusetts, says the drug war is not, as
advertised, a war "against drugs." Like all wars, it is a war against people.
It may be "excused" by shouting the talismanic word "drugs," but drugs are
just inanimate objects. The war is against the people of America and, now,
all the peoples of the world.)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:22:37 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US MA: PUB LTE: The 'War On Drugs' Cannot Be Won
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John Smith
Pubdate: Tue, 16 Mar 1999
Source: Standard-Times (MA)
Copyright: 1999 The Standard-Times
Contact: YourView@S-T.com
Website: http://www.s-t.com/
Author: PATRICK L. LILLY

THE 'WAR ON DRUGS' CANNOT BE WON

Fall River Mayor Edward Lambert displays his abysmal ignorance when he says
that "I don't know if you ever win a war on drugs." Wake up, mayor. You can
never win.

Part of the reason (but only part) is that the drug war is not, as
advertised, a war "against drugs." Like all wars, it is a war against
people. It may be "excused" by shouting the talismanic word "drugs," but
drugs are just inanimate objects. The war is against the people of America
and, now, all the peoples of the world. And it cannot be "won."

It is, instead a permanent state of siege, which will go on as long as the
drug warriors are allowed to operate. Then, when humanity finally has had
enough of it, or when society is totally destroyed by their violence, the
only end which can ever happen will come: The legalizers will win. How many
people's lives are you willing to trash first, mayor?

PATRICK L. LILLY, Colorado Springs, CO

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

They Are Humans, Not 'Cockroaches' (Another letter to the editor of the
Standard-Times responds to a New Bedford resident who likened neighborhood
drug dealers to "cockroaches," explaining why "we could get a lot further on
this problem if we could remind ourselves that drug dealers, hard-core
addicts and others whom we don't approve of are human beings and fellow
citizens in need of help and education, and not cockroaches to be
exterminated.")

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:24:35 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US MA: PUB LTE: They Are Humans, Not 'Cockroaches'
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John Smith
Pubdate: 16 Mar 1999
Source: Standard-Times (MA)
Copyright: 1999 The Standard-Times
Contact: YourView@S-T.com
Website: http://www.s-t.com/
Author: Larry A. Stevens, Springfield, IL

THEY ARE HUMANS, NOT 'COCKROACHES'

You quoted a New Bedford resident likening neighborhood drug dealers to
"cockroaches." I suppose it's still considered OK to hate drug dealers even
though we know how unproductive hatred is. The person quoted in the story
should know that there are many, many places in this country where he
himself would be likened to a cockroach merely because of his Latino name.

Hatred drives the war on drugs, and the prohibition of drugs drives the
very markets that negatively impact our communities. The raid that was
supposed to end the drug-dealing merely created an opportunity for other
drug dealers. I believe we could get a lot further on this problem if we
could remind ourselves that drug dealers, hard-core addicts and others whom
we don't approve of are human beings and fellow citizens in need of help
and education, and not cockroaches to be exterminated.

LARRY A. STEVENS, Springfield, IL

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

Incarceration Rates A Victory For Prisons (An op-ed in the Standard-Times, in
New Bedford, Massachusetts, by Marc Mauer of the Sentencing Project, in
Washington, D.C., says the United States' latest prison-population figure,
1.8 million, is six times the number of people incarcerated just 25 years
ago. Since the 1980s, every state has adopted some form of mandatory
sentencing, most often for drug offenses. Half the states have also enacted a
"three strikes and you're out" law, requiring a sentence of up to life
without parole for a third felony. To divert money to education and other
needed services, Mauer recommends several reforms lawmakers should embrace:
Divert drug offenders to treatment. Reconsider mandatory sentencing. And
divert low-level property offenders to community-based supervision.)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:46:47 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US: Incarceration Rates A Victory For Prisons
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John Smith
Pubdate: Tue, 16 Mar 1999
Source: Standard-Times (MA)
Copyright: 1999 The Standard-Times
Contact: YourView@S-T.com
Website: http://www.s-t.com/
Author: Marc Mauer
Note: is the assistant director of The Sentencing Project, a
Washington-based research and advocacy group concerned with
criminal justice policy

INCARCERATION RATES A VICTORY FOR PRISONS

WASHINGTON, D.C. The Department of Justice has just released new
figures on the national prison and jail population. There are now more
than 1.8 million Americans behind bars, nearly six times the number of
25 years ago. At the current rate of growth, more than two million
people will be incarcerated by the year 2000.

In recent years, the United States has been second only to Russia
among industrialized nations in its rate of incarceration, with both
nations imprisoning their citizens at rates five to eight times those
of the rest of the developed world. The new U.S. figures now place the
two nations in a virtual dead heat for the top spot.

In Russia, however, officials have determined that the high cost of
prisons has become untenable at a time of economic crisis. The
Ministry of Justice has proposed an amnesty of 100,000 inmates (about
10 percent of the prison population) who were originally sentenced to
unreasonably long terms, or who suffer from tuberculosis or other
health problems.

In the United States, where the economy is strong, there's been no
call to reconsider the policies that are bringing us our record rates
of incarceration. And so the post-Cold War race to imprison the most
citizens is one America will probably "win" pretty soon.

But how wise is that? Since the 1980s, every state has adopted some
form of mandatory sentencing, most often for drug offenses. Half the
states have also enacted a "three strikes and you're out" law,
requiring a sentence of up to life without parole for a third felony.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld a California three-strikes
sentence of 25 years to life for a man convicted of stealing a $20
bottle of vitamins from a supermarket. These laws are filling our
prisons to overflow. And at an annual cost of $20,000 per inmate, they
also rob our treasuries of funds sorely needed for education and
economic development.

An examination of America's prison population demonstrates how
sensible it would be to reduce it. Here's how that could be achieved:

-- Divert drug offenders to treatment. Nearly a quarter of all prison
and jail inmates in this country are locked up for drug offenses,
about 400,000 people.

Many of them -- more than a third of the drug offenders in federal
prison and presumably at least as many in state facilities -- were
low-level players in the drug trade and were not involved in any
violent activity. Locking them up achieves little in terms of crime
control.

Such substance abusers should be diverted to treatment programs, which
are not only cheaper than prison, but can also address the underlying
drug addiction that leads to their crimes. A 1997 Rand study found
that a million dollars spent on drug treatment is eight times more
effective in reducing cocaine use than a million dollars spent on
incarceration -- and 15 times more effective in reducing serious crime.

-- Reconsider mandatory sentencing. In Michigan, a 20-year-old state
law required a sentence of life without parole for the sale of 650
grams of cocaine, a little over a pound. The penalty was the same as
for first-degree murder, and it even applied to first-time offenders.
After more than 200 offenders were sentenced under this law, many of
them young and non-violent, the Republican-controlled legislature
changed the law last year to allow for parole after serving 15 years.

-- Divert low-level property offenders. A study of inmates in
California by a University of California criminologist estimated that
a quarter of the offenders sentenced to prison could be diverted to
structured community-based supervision without any negative impact on
public safety. This group consists of offenders sent to prison for
technical violations of parole, minor drug use, and non-violent
property offenses. Nationally, more than half the prison population is
locked up for non-violent drug or property offenses.

Options for such offenders in the community include electronic house
arrest, intensive probation supervision, and substance abuse treatment
programs. Not only are these less costly than incarceration, but
studies have found that among people convicted of comparable crimes,
recidivism rates are no worse for those sentenced to community
programs than for those sent to prison.

In Russia, the government is undertaking its campaign to reduce the
prison population largely because it is running out of money. In the
United States we are not, but our economic strength shouldn't make us
less clear-eyed about our policies. If there's to be a competition
with Russia over crime, let's win it by being more effective, not by
locking up more prisoners.

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

Property Seizures Trample the Constitution (A staff editorial in the
Greensboro News & Record, in North Carolina, says in America, no one can take
your property except through a legal process involving a finding of guilt. So
says the Constitution of the United States in Articles IV, V and XIV. But
don't kid yourself. Administrative actions based on nothing more than
allegations of criminality, and not court trials, are taking property from
people who many times are set free and not even prosecuted. The spreading of
the practice and the piling up of evidence of abuses and injustices has
coalesced civil rights advocates and politicians such as Rep. Henry Hyde,
R-Ill., who are pushing for reforms of the forfeiture laws, mainly by
mandating that government has to show "clear and convincing evidence" for
taking the property.)

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:02:36 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US NC: Property Seizures Trample The Constitution
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: General Pulaski
Pubdate: Tue, 16 Mar 1999
Source: Greensboro News & Record (NC)
Copyright: 1999 Greensboro News & Record, Inc.
Contact: edpage@nr.infi.net
Website: http://www.greensboro.com/

PROPERTY SEIZURES TRAMPLE THE CONSTITUTION

In America, no one can take your property except through a legal
process involving a finding of guilt. So says the Constitution of the
United States in Articles IV, V and XIV.

But don't kid yourself. Today these words all too often ring hollow as
the federal government, the states, counties and cities across the
land avail themselves of the opportunity to sequester private property
- cash, houses, boats - under laws enacted by the Congress in the
1980s as a way to combat the power of major drug lords.

It seemed a good idea at the time to deny the chieftains of the drug
trade the weaponry of their ill-gotten wealth to keep them out of the
law's clutches. The Supreme Court has upheld the legality of these
forfeiture laws, which also had precedent in English common law, even
though the Constitution's language would have you believe that a
person is innocent until proven guilty.

What is happening is that administrative actions, based on nothing
more than allegations of criminality, and not court trials, are taking
property from people who many times are set free and not even prosecuted.

Over the years, the forfeiture has become attractive to law
enforcement ostensibly because it helps to discourage crime by showing
potential lawbreakers the kind of personal penalties they face. At the
same time, the police and municipal authorities have enriched their
operations with the forfeited money. As a result, the police have been
provided with an incentive to find excuses to seize property.

One sheriff went so far as to use such money to buy himself a
camouflage shirt. Others acquire state-of-the-art crime-fighting
equipment that they don't need and which no right-minded municipal
authority would agree to pay for.

But even when abuses are not apparent, there are few accountability
procedures in place anywhere to monitor how the forfeited money is
spent. Horror stories abound across the expanse of the nation of how
people falsely accused or tangentially involved in alleged crimes are
deprived of their property without ever having been charged, or tried,
never mind convicted of a crime. The net of forfeiture has ensnared a
lot more people than the intended mobster drug kingpins.

According to a report by the Omaha, Neb., World Herald, a
Californian's 200-acre scenic estate in Malibu was raided in 1992 by
the police on the theory that he was growing marijuana. "Brandishing a
gun to stave off what he thought were criminal intruders," the owner
was shot to death. The account went on to say that investigation
showed "the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department was motivated, at
least in part, by a desire to seize and forfeit the ranch for the
government," which was coveted by the National Park Service.

These days, forfeiture laws are being extended to apply to those
accused, but not tried and convicted, of drunken driving. The
rationale is that an auto in the control of a drunken driver is as
much an illegal weapon as a gun used in a holdup. Never mind that the
car might not be the property of the person behind the wheel.

In New York City, even if drivers are found innocent, their cars won't
necessarily be returned to them. And this appears to be legal, under
the reasoning that civil forfeiture is governed by different rules
than apply in a criminal case.

The spreading of the practice and the piling up of evidence of abuses
and injustices has coalesced civil rights advocates and politicians
such as Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., who are pushing for reforms of the
forfeiture laws, mainly by mandating that government has to show
"clear and convincing evidence" for taking the property.

The Supreme Court, in a recent decision, limited the scope of its
approval of the laws, declaring that the forfeiture must not be
"grossly disproportional" to whatever law is alleged to have been violated.

As compelling as is the need to quash the drug trade and drunken
driving, surrendering precious civil rights is not the way to do it.
Constitutional strictures exist precisely to constrain government
from wielding arbitrary powers.

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

Marijuana Report Expected Next Week (A UPI brief inaccurately says the
Institute of Medicine report reviewing the research on marijuana as medicine
will be released "next Wednesday," though in fact the release date is
tomorrow.)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:16:11 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US: MMJ: Wire: Marijuana Report Expected Next Week
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: General Pulaski
Pubdate: 16 Mar 1999
Source: United Press International
Copyright: 1999 United Press International

MARIJUANA REPORT EXPECTED NEXT WEEK

(WASHINGTON) - The Institute of Medicine says it will release a report next
Wednesday reviewing the latest research on the medical use of marijuana.
Federal drug czar Barry McCaffrey ordered the report after 1996 elections
in Arizona and California legalized the drug's use in select medical
applications. Supporters on both sides of the medical marijuana controversy
expect the report to be significant, unbiased and virtually meaningless.

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

NORML Special News Bulletin - Politics, Science Clash In IOM Medical
Marijuana Report (NORML says the Institute of Medicine's review of the
scientific literature on medical marijuana is a political rather than a
scientific document, finding that cannabinoids hold value as medicine to
treat a number of serious ailments, but should not be used by most patients
until a non-smoked, rapid onset delivery system becomes available. Allen St.
Pierre of NORML said, "It is nothing less than an act of political
cowardliness for the IOM to admit that inhaled marijuana benefits some
patients, while at the same time recommending to those patients that their
only alternative is to suffer." The IOM report did dismiss allegations that
marijuana is causally linked to the subsequent use of other illicit drugs,
that the drug has a high potential for addiction, or that it holds short term
immunosuppressive effects. The researchers also concluded that "the adverse
effects of marijuana use are within the range tolerated for other
medications.")

From: NORMLFNDTN@aol.com (NORMLFNDTN@aol.com)
Date: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 5:02 PM
Subject: NORML News Bulletin 3/16/99 (I)

NORML Special News Bulletin

1001 Connecticut Ave., NW
Ste. 710
Washington, DC 20036
202-483-8751 (p)
202-483-0057 (f)
www.norml.org
norml@norml.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 16, 1999
Contacts: Allen St. Pierre; Paul Armentano, (202) 483-8751

Politics, Science Clash In IOM Medical Marijuana Report

* Committee Praises Therapeutic Value Of Marijuana, But Offers "No Clear
Alternative For People Suffering From Chronic Conditions ... Relieved By
Smoking Marijuana"

March 16, 1999: Washington, D.C.: Marijuana constituents, known as
cannabinoids, hold value as medicines to treat a number of serious
ailments, but should not be used by most patients until a non-smoked,
rapid onset delivery system becomes available, a National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) Institute of Medicine report concluded.

Allen St. Pierre, Executive Director of The NORML Foundation, dubbed
the report a "political, rather than a scientific" document.

"This report ignores the testimony of hundreds of patients who gave
first hand accounts before the IOM in praise of marijuana's medical
value, and holds marijuana to a higher scientific standard than that
applied to other medications or required by law," he said. St. Pierre
noted that the IOM researchers recommended some patients engage in the
short term use of smoked marijuana only after their use of all other
conventional medications has failed. The Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
does not require a drug to demonstrate "superiority" over all existing
medicines before receiving federal approval, and no such hurdle exists
for any other drug.

Dr. Lester Grinspoon of Harvard Medical School and a peer reviewer of
the IOM report, called the document a "compromise."

"This report tries to find a middle ground between the political
exigencies of an Administration that wants to deny marijuana's medical
value, and the reality that a growing body of the American public are
using it successfully as a medicine," he said. Grinspoon called the
report "tepid" in its support for the use of inhaled marijuana, and said
that researchers diminished the importance of "mountains" of anecdotal
evidence demonstrating marijuana's medical benefit in the treatment of
movement disorders like Multiple Sclerosis and several other serious
ailments.

Grinspoon also criticized the report for omitting any discussion of
marijuana vaporizers as an alternative delivery device for cannabinoids.
He said that such devices already exist and deliver marijuana's
therapeutic compounds safely to human patients while eliminating other
unnecessary carcinogenic constituents.

The IOM report, commissioned two years ago by the Office of National
Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), follows a 1982 report by the agency that
determined, "Cannabis and its derivatives have shown promise in the
treatment of a variety of disorders, [including] glaucoma, ... asthma,
... and in the nausea and vomiting of cancer chemotherapy."

The new report praises the medical value of compounds found in
marijuana such as THC and cannabidiol (CBD). "The accumulated data
indicate a potential therapeutic value for cannabinoid drugs,
particularly for symptoms such as pain relief, control of nausea and
vomiting, and appetite stimulation," it states. The evidence "suggests
that cannabinoids would be moderately well suited for certain conditions,
such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and AIDS wasting."

However, the report fails to recommend most patients seek medical
relief from whole smoked marijuana, despite its admission that "there are
patients with debilitating symptoms for whom smoked marijuana might
provide relief." Instead, researchers argue that, "There is no clear
alternative for people suffering from chronic conditions that might be
relieved by smoking marijuana, such as pain or AIDS wasting."

St. Pierre criticized that assertion. "It is nothing less than an
act of political cowardliness for the IOM to admit that inhaled marijuana
benefits some patients, while at the same time recommending to those
patients that their only alternative is to suffer," he said. "Clearly,
the time has come for this Administration to amend federal law to allow
seriously ill patients immediate legal access to medical marijuana."

The IOM report did dismiss allegations that marijuana is causally
linked to the subsequent use of other illicit drugs, that the drug has a
high potential for addiction, or that it holds short term
immunosuppressive effects. The researchers also concluded that "the
adverse effects of marijuana use are within the range tolerated for other
medications."

				- END -

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

IOM and the Drug Free America Foundation, Inc. Agree: Smoking Marijuana is
Not Medicine (A press release on Business Wire from the Drug Free America
Foundation, in St. Petersburg, Florida, mischaracterizes the Institute of
Medicine report on medical marijuana to be released tomorrow.)

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 08:20:02 -0500
To: "DRCTalk Reformers' Forum" (drctalk@drcnet.org)
From: Mike Gogulski (mike-map@cat.net)
Subject: warriors: IOM and the Drug Free America Foundation, Inc....
Reply-To: mike-map@cat.net
Sender: owner-drctalk@drcnet.org

IOM and the Drug Free America Foundation, Inc. Agree: Smoking Marijuana is
Not Medicine

(Business Wire; 03/16/99)

ST. PETERSBURG, FLA. (March 16) BW HEALTHWIRE -March 16, 1999--The battle
over "medical" marijuana is heating up with a key Institute of Medicine (IOM)
report due out of Washington D.C. tomorrow.

The study was commissioned by Clinton's anti-drug chief, General Barry
McCaffrey to review claims that smoking marijuana can be therapeutic in the
treatment of AIDS, cancer, glaucoma and other illnesses.

The Drug Free America Foundation Inc., based in St. Petersburg, Florida is a
non-profit organization committed to educating voters about initiatives to
medicalize and legalize Schedule I drugs (including heroin, methamphetamine,
marijuana, heroin, LSD, PCP, and over 110 other dangerous substances).

The following experts from the Drug Free America Foundation, Inc. are
available to comment on this report:

Terry Hensley, Executive Director of Drug Free America Foundation. Inc., has
extensive experience in law enforcement, public service and drug
treatment/prevention. He is a former Chief of Police in Florida and Texas.
Mr. Hensley is also a former director of Operation PAR, a large substance
abuse treatment and prevention organization based in St. Petersburg, Florida.

Calvina Fay, Deputy Executive Director of the Drug Free America Foundation,
Inc., is an expert on drugs in the workplace and has written several books,
including The Supervisor's Handbook for Preventing Drug Abuse in the
Workplace and Starting a Drug-Free Business Initiative. She also writes for
several newsletters and periodicals published regionally and nationally.

Ms. Fay is also the director of the International Scientific and Medical
Forum on Drug Abuse, an association of scientists and physicians dedicated
to promoting prevention and treatment of drug abuse and evaluating related
scientific studies.

-0-

pp/mi

CONTACT: Drug Free America Foundation, Inc., St. Petersburg
Katherine Ford, 727/893-2616

KEYWORD: FLORIDA INDUSTRY KEYWORD: MEDICINE Today's News On The Net -
Business

Wire's full file on the Internet
with Hyperlinks to your home page.

URL: http://www.businesswire.com

{BusinessWire:Healthcare-0316.02061} 03/16/99

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

U.S. Said To End Mexico Drug Probe (According to the Associated Press, the
New York Times reported today that an undercover U.S. probe into Mexican drug
trafficking was shut down by the Clinton Administration even as U.S. Customs
agents were looking at Mexico's defense minister, Gen. Enrique Cervantes, as
a suspect.)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 20:18:18 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US Said To End Mexico Drug Probe
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: General Pulaski
Pubdate: Tue, 16 Mar 1999
Source: Associated Press
Copyright: 1999 Associated Press

U.S. Said To End Mexico Drug Probe

NEW YORK (AP) An undercover probe into Mexican drug trafficking was
shut down by the Clinton Administration even as U.S. Customs agents
were looking at Mexico's defense minister as a suspect, The New York
Times reported today.

The agents were mystified by the decision to end the investigation on
schedule rather than extend it to explore information involving the
top-level official, particularly in view of intelligence reports
"pointing to corruption at the highest levels of the Mexican
military," the Times said.

According to The Times, the agents had learned from drug-trade bankers
in early 1998 that certain "clients" wanted to launder $1.15 billion
in illegal funds, and "the most important" of them was Mexico's
defense minister, Gen. Enrique Cervantes.

Although the information was passed to Washington, "no further effort
was ever made" to investigate Cervantes' alleged role, and prosecutors
did not even raise the subject with traffickers who had pleaded guilty
and were cooperating with the government in the case, the Times said.

The decision was sharply questioned by William F. Gately, identified
by The Times as a former senior Customs agent, now retired, who ran
the undercover operation.

"Why are we sitting on this type of information? It's either because
we're lazy, we're stupid or the political will doesn't exist to engage
in the kind of investigation where our law enforcement efforts might
damage our foreign policy," Gately said.

President Clinton certified last month that Mexico is a fully
cooperating partner in the drug war despite a decline in narcotics
seizures. The decision drew criticism from lawmakers who contend the
administration is not doing enough to stop drug trafficking.

Senior administration officials maintained the decision to end the
inquiry was based on security, not concern about foreign policy, the
Times said.

And they said the undercover agents had not been able to verify the
claims implicating Cervantes, the newspaper said.

Customs Commissioner Raymond Kelley told the Times that the report
"obviously... was a significant allegation," but said, "There was
skepticism about it. Was it puffing? It was just not seen as being... I
won't use the word credible but it wasn't verified."

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

Top Mexican Off-Limits To U.S. Drug Agents (The original New York Times
version)

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:02:53 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US: Top Mexican Off-Limits To U.S. Drug Agents
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Jim Galasyn
Pubdate: Mar 16, 1999
Source: New York Times (NY)
Copyright: 1999 The New York Times Company
Contact: letters@nytimes.com
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Forum: http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/
Author: Tim Golden

TOP MEXICAN OFF-LIMITS TO U.S. DRUG AGENTS

WASHINGTON - Early last year, as undercover U.S. Customs agents
neared the end of the biggest investigation ever conducted into the
illegal movement of drug money, bankers working with Mexico's most
powerful cocaine cartel approached them with a stunning offer.

The agents, posing as money launderers from Colombia, had insinuated
themselves deeply into the Mexican underworld, helping the traffickers
hide more than $60 million. Now, money men working with the cartel
said they had clients who needed to launder $1.15 billion more. The
most important of those clients, they said, was Mexico's powerful
defense minister.

The customs agents didn't know whether the money really existed or if
any of it belonged to the minister, Gen. Enrique Cervantes, officials
said. But having heard about American intelligence reports pointing to
corruption at high levels of the Mexican military, the agents were
mystified by what happened next.

Rather than continue the undercover operation to pursue the deal,
Clinton administration officials ordered to shut it down on schedule
several weeks later. No further effort was ever made to investigate
the offer, and officials said prosecutors have not even raised the
matter with the suspects in the case, who have pleaded guilty and are
cooperating with the authorities.

"Why are we sitting on this kind of information?" asked the former
senior customs agent who led the undercover probe, William F. Gately.
"It's either because we're lazy, we're stupid, or the political will
doesn't exist to engage in the kind of investigation where our
law-enforcement efforts might damage our foreign policy."

Senior administration officials denied that foreign policy influenced
their decision to end the operation, saying they were moved primarily
by concerns for its security. They also emphasized that the agents
were unable to verify the Mexican traffickers' claims.

Other officials of the administration, which has based much of its
Mexican drug strategy on collaboration with Cervantes, said they are
confident that he is above reproach. A spokesman for the Mexican
Defense Ministry, Lt. Col. Francisco Aguilar Hernandez, dismissed the
traffickers' proposal as self-serving lies.

But a detailed account of the case -- based on confidential government
documents, court records and dozens of interviews -- suggests that
U.S. officials walked away from an extraordinary opportunity to
examine allegations of the official corruption that is considered the
main obstacle to anti-drug efforts in Mexico.

For nearly a decade, American officials have been haunted by the
spectacle of Mexican officials being linked to illicit activities soon
after they are embraced in Washington. And just weeks before the
customs investigation, known as Operation Casablanca, ended last year,
administration officials received intelligence reports indicating that
the Mexican military's ties to the drug trade were more serious than
had been previously thought.

But when faced with the possibility that one of Washington's critical
Mexican allies might be linked to the traffickers, the officials gave
the matter little consideration. They said they opted for a sure
thing, arresting mid-level traffickers and their financial associates
and at least disrupting the money laundering system that drug gangs
had set up. To reach for a general, they said, would have added to
their risks with no certainty of success.

"Obviously it was a significant allegation," Customs Commissioner
Raymond W. Kelly said in an interview. But he added: "There was
skepticism about it. Was it puffing? It just was not seen as being --
I won't use the word credible -- but it wasn't verified."

Taking Stock: Arrests, Indictments and Drug Money

When senior administration officials announced the sting last May 18,
they took a triumphant inventory: the indictments of three big Mexican
banks and bankers from a dozen foreign banks; the arrests of 142
suspects; the confiscation of $35 million in drug profits and the
freezing of accounts holding $66 million more.

The officials claimed the success as the result of a longstanding
administration fight against money laundering. But Gately, who retired
from the Customs Service on Dec. 31, said his investigation ran a
gantlet of resistance from the start.

The Justice Department, uncomfortable with cases in which undercover
agents laundered more money for drug traffickers than they ultimately
seized, were imposing new limits on the time that such operations
could run and the money they could launder, officials said. And though
the restrictions did not apply to Customs, a branch of the Treasury,
Justice Department officials continued to play strong, skeptical roles
in supervising cases throughout the government.

One federal official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity,
admitted that he initially dismissed Gately's plan as a nonstarter.
"You're out of your mind," the official remembered saying.

Several colleagues said it was the sort of response that Gately, 49,
tended to see as a challenge. A decorated former Marine who enlisted
for service in Vietnam at the age of 17, he had already been at the
center of several cases that mixed internal struggle and public
success. Friends and critics described him in similar terms: driven,
sometimes abrasive and unusually creative.

After leading an investigation that revealed ties between the Italian
mafia and Colombian cocaine cartels, Gately co-wrote a 1994 book about
the case, "Dead Ringer," that cast him as a lonely crusader surrounded
by small-minded bureaucrats. "It is the story of one man who refused
to succumb to corruption," the prologue reads, "who believed in his
oath and mission, and the consequences he paid for believing in what
he was doing."

As the senior customs drug investigator in Los Angeles, Gately said,
he first heard from an informant in 1993 about an important shift in
the way that Mexican and Colombian drug traffickers were converting
their cash into funds that could be freely spent.

The informant said traffickers were depositing their money with
corrupt Mexican bankers, who sent it back to them in almost
untraceable cashier's checks drawn on the American accounts that the
Mexican banks used to do business in the United States.

Gately hoped his informant could infiltrate that system -- collecting
illicit cash from drug wholesalers in the United States and then
wiring it to corrupt bankers in Mexico. The bankers would issue drafts
for the money, and customs would develop evidence against suspects on
both ends of the transaction.

Many customs officials, however, were skeptical that the ruse would
work. Drug-enforcement agents wanted to use the informant in another
case. One federal prosecutor opposed using him at all because he had a
criminal past and threatened to indict him in a 10-year-old case.

Even when Gately was eventually able to recruit another informant, a
Colombian known by the pseudonym "Javier Ramirez," a senior Justice
Department official, Mary Lee Warren, pressed him to limit the
operation's scope, Gately and others said.

"What she wanted to know was, when was this going to be over?" he
recalled. "What was our endgame?"

Getting Involved: U.S. Operatives Meet a Kingpin

In November 1995, Colombian drug contacts introduced the undercover
agents to Victor Alcala Navarro, a representative of Mexico's biggest
drug mafia, the so-called Juarez cartel.

The customs agents, posing as money launderers from a dummy company
called Emerald Empire Corp., began picking up the Mexican's profits
and laundering them as planned.

In February 1997, at meetings in Mexico, Ramirez was introduced to
Alcala's boss. A few months later, the customs informant found himself
chatting by phone with the head of the cartel, Amado Carrillo Fuentes.

Over scores of meetings and million-dollar deals, the traffickers grew
more open about the official protection they enjoyed in Mexico,
law-enforcement officials and government documents indicate.

At one meeting in Mexico City on May 16, 1997, the traffickers brought
along 16 federal police agents as bodyguards. At another meeting, a
man who identified himself as an official of the Mexican attorney
general's office picked up $1.7 million in cash, including $415,000
that the undercover agents had brought for the cartel boss himself.

During a later meeting in New York, Alcala told the agents that like
Mexico's drug-enforcement chief, who had been arrested for
collaborating with the Juarez cartel, the defense minister, Cervantes,
was in league with the competing Tijuana cartel.

Customs officials said they remained skeptical of what the agents
heard, including the traffickers' claim that Carrillo Fuentes had
actually faked his own death in 1997. But in December 1997, Ramirez
invited Alcala to Colombia for an elaborately staged meeting that
seemed to raise their partnership to a new level.

At a heavily guarded hacienda overlooking Bogota, an informant acting
as Ramirez's Colombian boss, Carlos, said he and his partners had $500
million of their own to launder. They wanted to know whether the
Mexican bankers used by Alcala's boss, Juan Jose Castellanos
Alvarez-Tostado, could help.

"Alvarez called us right back," Gately recalled. "He said, 'Let me
send you my very best people, and we will get it done.' "

On March 6, 1998, Alcala arrived with several businessmen at the
tastefully furnished offices of Emerald Empire in an industrial suburb
of Los Angeles. This time the businessmen brought a big deal of their
own.

One of the men, David Loera, said he knew "a general" who had $150
million in Mexico City to invest. Would Ramirez -- who had told the
traffickers he owned part of a Nevada casino used to launder money --
care to help?

Over the next six weeks, according to government documents and the
accounts of Gately and several officials, the deal was discussed in
three more meetings and three telephone conversations between Ramirez,
the undercover agents and the traffickers. All of the contacts were
secretly tape-recorded and transcribed, officials said.

In one call, two senior investment managers at Mexico's second-largest
bank told the customs operatives that the money belonged not just to
"a general" but to the minister of defense. Later, the two Mexicans
advised Ramirez that the minister was sending "his daughter" (a woman
later said to be a friend) to meet with them, along with an army
colonel and a third person.

However, the investment managers said, the amount to be laundered was
much more than they had discussed: the minister had $500 million in
cash in New York and another $500 million in the Netherlands, in
addition to the $150 million in Mexico City.

Customs officials said they queried the CIA, which works closely with
the Mexican military on drug-control and other programs. The CIA
responded tersely that they had no such information about Cervantes,
an assessment that other officials have since reiterated.

But while Cervantes has not been a focus of suspicion, Mexican and
American officials said several senior generals close to him have been
under scrutiny by investigators from both the Mexican attorney
general's office and a special military intelligence unit.

On Feb. 6, analysts at the Drug Enforcement Administration briefed
Attorney General Janet Reno on intelligence indicating that senior
Mexican generals might indeed be cooperating with Carrillo Fuentes'
organization, officials said. And in a separate customs case in
Houston, undercover agents had been approached about laundering
millions of dollars for an unnamed Mexican army general, officials
said.

On April 9, Alcala visited Emerald Empire with a cousin, who had just
returned from Mexico with a message. "He was very nervous about the
deal," Gately said. "He said it could be very dangerous if it got
screwed up, because the money belonged to 'all of them, including the
president,' " Ernesto Zedillo. (A spokesman for Zedillo, David Najera,
dismissed the claim as baseless.)

Later that month, Gately went to Washington to brief officials
including Kelly -- who was then about to take over the Customs Service
after overseeing it as the Treasury Undersecretary for
Enforcement.

"Kelly said, 'How do we know it's really him?' " Gately recalled,
referring to Cervantes.

"I told him, 'We don't know,' " Gately said. " 'We can't substantiate
it. But we have no reason to believe they're telling us anything other
than what they know.'

"They weren't trying to impress us, they were trying to make deals
with us," Gately added. "So whoever had this money, I thought it was
worth pursuing -- whether it was the defense minister of Mexico or
somebody we'd never heard of."

People familiar with the discussions said they did not go much
further. The general's supposed emissaries were to meet Ramirez in Las
Vegas on April 22. They did not arrive, and the traffickers reported
that they had gotten nervous.

Kelly acknowledged that he had been pressing for months to wrap up the
investigation; he said he had grown increasingly concerned that
information about it might leak out, endangering the undercover
agents. The final sting had already been postponed twice because
federal prosecutors were still preparing indictments.

James E. Johnson, who succeeded Kelly as undersecretary and has
closely supervised Treasury's relationship with Mexico on enforcement
issues, added a cautionary note that several officials said seemed to
underscore his concern for the political stakes. Unless the agents had
proof of Cervantes' role, several officials quoted him as warning,
they should not bandy his name about in connection with the case.

"We need to be very careful about how we talk about this sort of
thing," a senior law-enforcement official, who would not speak for
attribution, quoted him as saying. "If we don't have the goods, it
makes us look like we're overreaching."

Avoiding Pitfalls: U.S. Agents Begin Fretting Over Leaks

The operation had already navigated a series of sizable
obstacles.

Gately and some other agents were worried that their boss in Los
Angeles, John Hensley, had leaked information about the secret
operation to congressional aides and others; Hensley had also pressed
hard to bring the operation to an end, officials said.

For his part, officials said Hensley had accused his strong-willed
subordinate of transgressions ranging from traveling without
authorization to stealing millions of dollars. Kelly acknowledged that
the charges were investigated and found baseless; Hensley declined any
comment.

As discussions about the supposed $1.15 billion were going on, the
undercover operation also suffered a serious setback with the capture
of a key Juarez operative in Chicago. The arrest brought money
deliveries to a halt while the cartel hunted for a mole.

On Saturday, May 16, more than two dozen Mexican traffickers, bankers
and other operatives who had been invited to the United States by the
undercover team were rounded up in San Diego and at the Casablanca
Casino Resort in Mesquite, Nev. And officials said whatever thoughts
they had that the allegations about Cervantes might be pursued were
dropped in the diplomatic backlash that followed.

While the Mexican authorities were asked to arrest about 20 suspects
indicted in the case, they initially located only six. One was the
partner of Loera, the fugitive businessman who first proposed the deal
with "the general." The partner was found dead in a Mexican jail from
injuries that the police described as self-inflicted. Alvarez-Tostado
has never been found; his deputy, Alcala, awaits trial in Los Angeles.

Soon after the operation, American officials said, they showed the
Mexican government some of their information on apparent corruption in
the case. They said they kept silent about more explosive evidence to
avoid exacerbating the furor that had broken out over their decision
not to warn Mexico about the operation.

Still, the officials said that none of the information was ever
pursued, and the Mexican attorney general, Jorge Madrazo Cuellar,
obliquely dismissed the allegations in a little noticed statement
issued last July.

Madrazo said in an interview that the Americans told him only about
unnamed federal agents and a money laundering scheme involving "a
general who had a daughter." He said the name of Cervantes, who has no
daughter, was never mentioned.

"With the information that they gave me, what could I possibly have
done?" Madrazo asked. "Gone and looked for a general with a daughter?"

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

U.S. Reportedly Closed Cash-Laundering Probe That Implicated Official (The
Chicago Tribune version)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:46:06 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Mexico: U.S. Reportedly Closed Cash-Laundering Probe That
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Steve Young (theyoungfamily@worldnet.att.net)
Pubdate: 16 March 1999
Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Copyright: 1999 Chicago Tribune Company
Contact: tribletter@aol.com
Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/
Forum: http://www.chicagotribune.com/interact/boards/
Section: Sec. 1

U.S. REPORTEDLY CLOSED CASH-LAUNDERING PROBE THAT IMPLICATED OFFICIAL

MEXICO - Foreign policy concerns may have led Clinton administration
officials to end an investigation into the movement of money by drug
traffickers in Mexico, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

Early last year, as undercover U.S. Customs agents posing as money
launderers from Colombia neared the end of an undercover
investigation, bankers for Mexico's largest cocaine cartel said they
needed to launder another $1.15 billion for clients who, they said,
included Mexico's Defense Minister, Gen. Enrique Cervantes, The Times
said.

Before agents could determine whether the money existed or if any of
it belonged to Cervantes, U.S. officials ordered the operations shut
down as scheduled several weeks later. No further effort was made to
investigate the offer, The Times said.

"Why are we sitting on this kind of information?" asked the former
senior customs agent who led the undercover investigation, William F.
Gately. "It's either because we're lazy, we're stupid, or the
political will doesn't exist to engage in the kind of investigation
where our law-enforcement efforts might damage our foreign policy."

Administration officials denied that foreign policy influenced their
decision, saying it was based primarily on security concerns. They
also emphasized that agents never verified the traffickers' claims.
The administration bases much of its Mexican drug strategy on
collaboration with Cervantes. Administration officials said they
believe he is above reproach.

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

U.S. May End Mexico Drug Probe (The Associated Press says the Mexican embassy
formally asked the Clinton administration Tuesday to respond to charges from
a former U.S. customs official that his undercover probe into Mexican drug
trafficking was shut down after the name of Mexico's defense minister
surfaced in it.)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:36:07 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US: WIRE: US May End Mexico Drug Probe
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Marcus/Mermelstein Family (mmfamily@ix.netcom.com)
Pubdate: Tue, 16 Mar 1999
Source: Associated Press
Copyright: 1999 Associated Press

U.S. MAY END MEXICO DRUG PROBE

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Mexican embassy formally asked the Clinton
administration Tuesday to respond to charges from a former U.S. customs
official that his undercover probe into Mexican drug trafficking was shut
down after the name of Mexico's defense minister surfaced in it.

The New York Times reported Tuesday that the administration ended the probe
several weeks after undercover Customs agents were told by bankers working
with Mexico's most powerful cocaine cartel that General Enrique Cervantes
was a client who wanted money laundered.

The Customs agents were mystified by the decision to end the investigation
on schedule rather than extend it to explore information involving
Cervantes, particularly in view of intelligence reports ``pointing to
corruption at the highest levels of the Mexican military,'' the Times said.

In a formal letter Tuesday to the State Department, the Mexican government
denounced ``unsubstantiated allegations'' against Cervantes, and said the
Times article ``gives prominence to misleading, biased and slanderous
information against Mexican officials.''

Through its embassy here, Mexico also questioned the credibility of William
F. Gately, identified by The Times as a former senior Customs agent, now
retired, who ran the undercover operation. The embassy said the former
Customs agent had been the subject of internal affairs investigation by his
superiors.

New York Times foreign editor Andrew Rosenthal denied Mexico's claim that
Gately was the single source of the allegations in the story and said the
paper ``had no problem with the credibility in the areas we quoted him.''

The story acknowledges that Gately was investigated, but also that he was
later cleared, Rosenthal said. He also denied that story was misleading or
slanderous or that it had been timed to any event in Congress.

According to The Times, the agents had learned from drug-trade bankers in
early 1998 that certain ``clients'' wanted to launder $1.15 billion in
illegal funds, ``the most important'' being Cervantes.

Although the information was passed to Washington, ``no further effort was
ever made'' to investigate Cervantes' alleged role, and prosecutors did not
even raise the subject with traffickers who had pleaded guilty and were
cooperating with the government in the case, the Times said.

State Department spokesman James P. Rubin said the administration is well
aware of the problem of corruption of government officials by drug
traffickers.

``We have close cooperation with the government of Mexico to combat such
corruption,'' he said.

``Concerning the highly speculative allegations against General Cervantes,
we note that it is common for drug traffickers to falsely claim high level
connections in the Mexican government. We continue to work closely with
General Cervantes in the fight against narcotics trafficking.''

The decision to shut down the probe was sharply questioned by Gately.

``Why are we sitting on this type of information? It's either because we're
lazy, we're stupid or the political will doesn't exist to engage in the kind
of investigation where our law enforcement efforts might damage our foreign
policy,'' Gately said.

Customs Commissioner Raymond Kelley told the Times that the report
``obviously... was a significant allegation,'' but said, ``There was
skepticism about it. Was it puffing? It was just not seen as being -- I
won't use the word credible -- but it wasn't verified.''

A Treasury Department spokesman, who asked not to be identified, said the
investigation was shut down because of concerns about the safety of
undercover Customs agents and informants.

The concerns were heightened by increasing news media attention to the
investigation, the spokesman said, adding that the timing of the shut down
had nothing to do with politics and international pressure.

According to the spokesman, the investigation netted 168 arrests and more
than $100 million in drug money seized.

President Clinton certified last month that Mexico is a fully cooperating
partner in the drug war despite a decline in narcotics seizures. The
decision drew criticism from some lawmakers who contend the administration
is not doing enough to stop drug trafficking.

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

US Has 1.8 Million In Prison (The version in Britain's Independent notes
America's prison population is so large that it distorts US unemployment
figures and skews the voting register. Texas and Louisiana both have more
than 700 per 100,000 of their populations in jail, well over the Russian
figure of 685 per 100,000.)

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 20:18:08 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US: US Has 18 Million In Prison
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Martin Cooke (mjc1947@cyberclub.iol.ie)
Pubdate: Tue, 16 Mar 1999
Source: Independent, The (UK)
Copyright: Independent Newspapers (UK) Ltd.
Contact: letters@independent.co.uk
Website: http://www.independent.co.uk/
Author: Andrew Marshall in Washington

US HAS 1.8 MILLION IN PRISON

The United States is heading for an unenviable record, as the nation
which puts more of its people behind bars than any other.

The latest figures on US prisons show a population equivalent to that
of a large city is in jail. "At mid-year 1998 the nation's prisons and
jails incarcerated an estimated 1,802,496 persons," said the survey
from the US Justice Department.

"It is unique in a democratic society," said Mark Mauer of the
Sentencing Project, a group which questions American judicial policy.

That figure represents a rate of incarceration of 668 inmates per
100,000 residents, a doubling since 1985. By contrast, in England and
Wales - which have one of the highest rates of incarceration in Europe
- the figure is around 120 per 100,000. Only Russia, at 685 per
100,000, has a higher proportion of the population in jail, and the US
may overtake it. The total cost of the US prison programme is about
$40bn (UKP25bn).

The staggering increase in the US prison population over the past 20
years has come about because of mandatory minimum sentences, the
policy of "three strikes and you're out", and "truth in sentencing",
which mean that inmates serve more of their sentences and are less
likely to get parole.

The prison population has slowed its rate of growth as the crime rate
falls in the US to 30-year lows, but it still increased by 4.4 per
cent from 1997 to 1998, the survey showed.

The number of prisoners first hit a million in 1990, and even though
the increase has slowed it seems set to hit 2 million within two
years. Nearly 90 per cent of prisoners are men, but the adult female
prison population is growing faster than the male.

The prison system is filled over capacity, and it is adding more
prison beds every two years than there are prisoners in total in Britain.

The prison population is disproportionately black and Hispanic.

"Relative to their number of US residents, black non-Hispanics were
six times more likely than white non-Hispanics, nearly two times as
likely as Hispanics, and almost 7.5 times more likely than persons of
other races to have been held in a local jail on 30 June1998," the
Justice Department stated.

A growing proportion of prisoners are doing time for drugs offences,
but there are some anomalies in sentencing. The penalties for crack
cocaine, a cheap but powerful high, are significantly harsher than
those for powder cocaine, which is largely the preserve of the
middle-class drug abuser.

The prison population is so large that it distorts US unemployment
figures and skews the voting register.

The Sentencing Project says that nearly 4 million Americans are denied
the right to vote because they have a felony conviction, and nearly
1.4 million of them are black males.

The highest rates of incarceration are in the neighbouring southern
states Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Mississippi. Texas and Louisiana
both have more than 700 per 100,000 of their populations in jail, well
over the Russian figure.

LINK: US Department of Justice:

http://www.usdoj.gov/index.html

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

[End]