(OT) Re: [ibogaine] Ah--but it's not about pot...

Preston Peet ptpeet at nyc.rr.com
Thu Sep 25 00:41:41 EDT 2003


Ah--but it's not about pot...>Thanks to the efforts of yours truly, for
which I took a lot of shit, largely cause I ran into nn initial gatekeeper
at H.T. (Dean Latimer) whose reaction to ibo was "Why would anyone want to
quit heroin." <

I have to pipe up here and just say that I consider both Dana Beal and Dean
Latimer as friends.
Hmmm.
What does that mean?
What does that say?
Does it matter?
Who cares?
Just had to say it. I agree that inner-movement politics suck, and seem to
have lead to fractures impeding real reform for a long time. (Shades of
cointelpro?) Dean Latimer, coincidentally enough, warned me about these
politics and the loads of meanie people in the movement I'd stumble across
and he was right. But anyway, since Dean is a friend, I had to speak up and
say something. He taught me a lot about honing my writing.
    Haven't seen him in months and I think about him sometimes.
Peace,
Preston

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Dana Beal
To: ibogaine at mindvox.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:57 PM
Subject: [ibogaine] Ah--but it's not about pot...


It's about legalization. Ibogaine IS illegal, y'know. Ethan Nadelman runs
the Drug Policy Alliance, which is mainly about legalizing heroin and
promoting methadone/buprenorphin.  Not legalizing pot so much-- maybe
medical marijuana. The big mystery is why they're stand-offish toward ibo,
when in theory they're for legalizing psychedelics. (Big MDMA supporters,
they are).


Getting this little panel represents a big development with them, but it'll
be at the same time as twelve other panels. It's not one of the plenary
presentations.



From:
Carla Barnes <carlambarnes at yahoo.com>

Date:
2003/09/24 Wed PM 06:05:58 CDT

To:
ibogaine at mindvox.com

Subject:
Re: [ibogaine] The irony of it....




I understand that you guys are mostly joking here
between yourselves. What I wanted to bring up is that
after years of reading this from the outside it
doesn't make any more sense to me now then it did back
then. I am in no way putting down the cannabis
movement, I am only saying that I don't understand
what all the problems between all of you are or why
they're so big that you look like you spend a lot of
your time and energy fighting each other instead of
agreeing to do something.


The problem is that they've been ignoring ibo, so I had to do a little
protest at their conference 2 years ago, which produced a commitment from
Ethan to do this workshop. Ethan works for Soros, BTW.


I do understand that a lot of you have relationships
that have nothing to do with the list and a lot
happens in the background but for instance I liked the
libertarian party blog when I first heard about it,
but I understand exactly zilch about who any of the
involved people are, why Patrick is spending his time
rewriting what Dana Beal meant to say or why so many
people link to this one blog which is a great letter
but why why why is so much time spent with all the
factions of the cannabis movement which I admit I do
not understand as I said when I started this message,
fighting about??

http://billstclair.com/blog/020723.html
http://billstclair.com/blog/stories/ibogaine.html

I am in no way putting down any of the positive things
anyone does. I am only saying that the internal
politics of the cannabis reform movement make
absolutely no sense to anybody except all of you who
are involved with it and I guess Patrick who is
rewriting who meant to say what ;-) And that is not a
dis! You realy should run for office Patrick ;-)


The thing is, the biggest portion of the legalization movement is grassroots
cannabis activists, most of whom by now know about and support ibo. Thanks
to the efforts of yours truly, for which I took a lot of shit, largely cause
I ran into nn initial gatekeeper at H.T. (Dean Latimer) whose reaction to
ibo was "Why would anyone want to quit heroin." (He was their house opiate
afficianado--most of the rest of them being into pot and coke.)




I don't know who Ethan is, who Keith Stroup is



Head of NORML--very down on the association of pot with LSD. (But he lost
his job in 1978 because of coke). Says Ibogaine is crazy,  and tries to
discredit the idea of activists promoting ibo as a way of protecting  the
counter-cultural opposition from going down the vortex of addiction.


who the
Kennedys are,


Big players in both the DPA and NORML--plus they have the money and contacts
that could have moved Ibo forward thru clinical trials anytime they really
tried. Keep in mind that the second article about Lotsof and his discovery
to appear in the whole world was written by Steve Hager of High Times. (The
first was in the Yippie paper OVERTHROW.)


 who Steve Bloom is,

Once refused to fund a mailing because it would also contain something on
ibo...


 who anybody
mentioned in these messages is other then some people
involved with selling pot, selling pot magazines or
??????

Carla B


 But H.T., as I said, was not intended by its founder Tom Forcade to be a
pot magazine, and that's what the argument is about. Hager became
editor-in-chief & turned it into one two or three years  after that initial
ibo article. (Which was an improvement on centerfolds of coke). In the past
10 years they've kinda stopped writing about ibo, cause DPA, NORML and the
Kennedys circled the wagons in support of the status quo, which included
methadone, clean needles, and heroin trials...but not Ibogaine.




Dana/cnw




More information about the Ibogaine mailing list