Lou Dobbs= paranoid,schizophrenic,government lacky. And a total waste of good air.

Forgetting the tunnel for a minute... Dobbs' mission does expose a trait of large corporations: They don't give a flying f*** about a single consequence of their actions beyond how it affects the bottom line.
They have no sense of allegience to their country,its inhabitants, or to the companies'workers of that country.
So, corps. are indifferent to job loss (Dobbs' pet peeve), environmental degradation, health risks associated with co. products or practises. They are concerned with image because image affects profits. They like to create an image of being good corporate citizens, environmental stewards, who care about people's welfare and health, and honest in their corp. accounting practises.But whether these things are true in reality or not is immaterial to them. So long as they can create "good guy" corp. personas and keep the population ignorant of true intentions and true consequences of their actions, they don't care...
One small recent example: CIBC just agreed to pay $2BILLION+ to settle claims by former Enron shareholders against CIBC for knowingly aiding and abetting Enron in misleading shareholders and the public about the dire financial state of the co. Many people, worst hit being Enron workers who owned shares, lost their life savings. Royal Bank and TD bank, among others,
were also (allegedly)directly involved in Enron's frauds, are being sued, and also will likely settle.
The corporate world in the last few years has been rife with similar patterns of fraudulent behaviour as common practise across a range of industries.As I say, they don't give a flying f***. Thank Goddess for NY A.G.,Eliot Spitzer!

Awww. My heart bleeds for shareholders bilked by the very machine they hoped would feather their SUV-ridden, Disneyland/Maui-vacation taking, greedy shit-on-the-planet-for-profit lives. Why is the outrage at dishonest CEO's, the Kenny-boy Lays so vehement, while the anger we should all share at the ravaging of our planet shelved as "enviro-freakedness", merely a faintly guilty remorse shared mostly by David Suzuki urbanite types?

Bob999 seems the type to find "The Corporation" illuminating, kinda like the guy who looks up in a clear summer sky and notices it is blue, then tells all his friends.

Now I'm curious. Just what did Bobb999 do or say to deserve that shot across the bow?

Thanks Frank. Maybe somebody peed in Tommy's Wheaties this A.M., or the girlfriend maybe is
headachie these days...
He seems to have missed my point where I noted
that corps. are indifferent to...environmental degradation, which appears to be his pet peeve.
Some of the Enron employees who lost life savings testified before Congress. They were mostly "little people" including secretaries, janitors.They had been led to believe Enron's employee shareholder plan was a good thing for retirement planning. They were hung out to dry. Sure, we now know that Enron was one of the slimiest companies around, with their racket
designed to arificially inflate electricity rates, not to mention their books cooking.
But most employees likely believed they were working for an ethical, upstanding co. that sold electricity. I'll bet even "greenneck"(I think I just coined a word) Tommy uses a little electricity now and then. He seems to think these little people "deserved it" for owning shares in their "satanic" co.
Who knows, maybe Enron ran some dirty coal power plants, I don't know, but I don't think
this implies that the employees who got the shaft had it coming signed,
-"Green, not greenneck"

Come on Burgess. It may be the dog days and all, but at least get something that's relevant.

So Lou Dobbs blathers on so intelligently, yet he doesn't even get a direct quote?

Obviously, it wasn't really too enlightening or it would have got a replay here.

I'd prefer to hear a little explanation as to the subtleties of Emery's bust by US military/drug squads with the assistance of our ceremonial horse people.

Frankly, who gives a bucket of it about what Lou Dobbs says? Didn't he promote the hell out of Enron?

Please don't take offence Bob999, I am merely pointing out that the coporate paradigm is that of a pysychopath, and those who got burned were naive not to expect it. No slur was intended. What I do take exception to is the idea that somehow a corporation, with it's raison d'etre of growth and profit above all else, can be considered sustainable. Ever. I believe that the only hope for our future involves the dissolution of corporate existence as a citizen.

I agree with you on the corporate thing tommymoore, both before and after watching The Corporation.

There`s a definite trend in bashing Canada partly based on the fact that we have weaknesses like drug smuggling, lax immigration policies, a reluctance to join in on their ugly little wars and our refusal to spend billions of dollars on pie-in-the-sky military programs like star wars. Perhaps the easiest explanation is just the fact that we`re an easy target.

The real question is; what do they really want from us? Not our manufactured goods that`s for sure. Not our cattle or our wood. I do find the Terasen takeover rather troubling. From a crown corporation to a Canadian publicly owned company to a publicly owned American corporation. Almost the same scenario with the CNR. Corporate America is very powerful in dictating US policy and they won`t be happy until they own us lock, stock and barrel and begger us in the process. Can we do anything about it? Probably not.

Tommy: I don't detect much disagreement in our views. I used the Enron example and mentioned other financial frauds only as one glaring example. An example demonstrating my main point, which is that corps. are unconcerned about consequences of their actions beyond how they affect profits.
I also agree that the model of ever increasing economic growth is unsustainable. It's the model of a disease, namely cancer.
I've never yet seen "The Corporation". I'd read enough reviews about the film to suspect there were likely no major new revelations contained in it for me. I had come to the "corporation resembles psychopath" conclusion on my own years previous. I was well aware that the prevailing economic model has too many serious faults. An economic system should serve "the greater good". In too many ways, ours does not, and it too often nurtures the worst of human traits, instead of the best.

asvelte: Only the right wing and the hawks among Americans are big on bashing Canada.
I love former Nixon speechwriter and social conservative, Pat Buchanan's description of Canada as "Soviet Canuckistan"!
There is a flip side too, of liberal Americans who not only are pro-Canada but even idealize Canada as a kind of "promised land" or a model for what America should resemble.Michael Moores's "Bowling for Columbine" idealizes Canada, and Moore likes to wear a "Made in Canada" logoed ball cap. Ralph Nader wrote a book in praise of our Canadian system.
A few years ago when Medical reform was in the air, many Democrats talked about adopting the "Canadian model".
Many US liberals love our public medical system, our gun controls,our lower incidence of violence and other crime (property crime in Vancouver a sad exeption), saner drug laws, opposition to the Iraq war, our supposedly more pro-environment policies (Kyoto), a less aggressive foreign policy...

The US right wingers "love" our oil, and maybe our base metals and gold, and are happy to invest in our companies and even to buy controlling interests, as you mention.
I'm guessing American "Canada bashers" are a minority, though a loud one.

C'mon guys, that tunnel was cool. There was one in Mexico a few years ago, from a warehouse to another warehouse, huge trucks coming and going from both. Went on for months or maybe years before anybody twigged. I read about it in the news.

I want one of them. That would be really cool. Maybe a railroad tunnel; we could send them cows and lumber and refugees. And Cuban cigars. Prescription drugs. Feed the poor ripped off American public despite the shills and bullies like Dobbs who don't give a short spit about any of this stuff.

They only want two things: To make us afraid. And to take our money for promising to save us from these imaginary fears.

OK Mr. Burgess ... You ridicule Lou Dobbs for what? Being a protectionist and concerned about shifting American jobs out of the country like 90% of Americans are, both democrats and republicans? That he reported a story of an absolute intricately made tunnel to smuggle stuff into the US that was the top story on every major news broadcast here in Canada?

I am no big fan of Lou Dobbs, but I wouldn't put him near the top of the list of biased and unprofessional TV commentators (not in the US anyway). He is what he is; an American with a very strong protectionist stance when it comes to jobs and the economy. If he truly is so bad then where are the outlandish quotes? That CNN seems to ignore Canadian issues to such a degree should not come as a surprise. CNN is an American network afterall. The article would have made much more sense if you had targeted CNN and the entire American television media instead of focusing on one man who hardly deserves our attention.

The Tyee contributors, almost without fail, criticize any American who is even remotely patriotic. In fact it's an automatic. Dobbs has identified a problem and is speaking out against it. Americans are increasingly perceiving Canadians as being soft on crime. Can anyone actually deny that it's true? Yesterday's announcement of a 'no-fly list' by Lapierre is an absolute joke b/c it will be quickly challenged by the 'friendly to crime and criminals' Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which will make the list virtually meaningless in no time. Americans have every right to be sticking their noses into our business, considering that they are the targets of terrorists and that they have a massive drug problem in their country. The irony is that we are also a target, and our drug problem is no less severe, but the federal Liberals are living in denial of both issues.

"Americans have every right to be sticking their noses into our business, considering that they are the targets of terrorists and that they have a massive drug problem in their country."

Because Canadians are terrorists? Because Canadians caused their drug problems? You should read that book, Ignorance is Bliss. The author claims one of the first steps to stupidity is to stop blaming yourself for your problems and blame others.

i think it's written into larry king's contract that cnn can only hire assholes that make larry seem like the voice of reason.

billy pilgrim good one
Allan I agree with you 100%, Burgess should have brought up the mark Emery situation, I feel his case is of much greater concern than the discussing of CNN's Lou Dobbs, who gives a rats *** if some yank bought pot seeds, why don't they deal with the consumer on their side of the line, it's got diddly squat to do with the seller on our side of the line, are the yanks going to pursue the canadian taxation people for accepting tax revenue from mark, I guess that's what the yanks are inferring to when they claim that money laundering took place, as far as Im concerned were being annexed by the yanks, the judges, RCMP, fed gov't are all rolling over on their backs and letting the yanks bury the stiff to them all. com on folks we have back up Mark or we will all end up on our backs that or doing the Loinski prayer.

geez Woody I hear ya but can I go to the wall for something cute and cuddly like cows instead of Marc Emery?

I agree arresting a guy in a foreign country for selling marijauna seeds to US customers that sought him out is ridiculous but I don't want a pot plant on my regimental colours when we draw our line in the sand :)

nemesis,
Canadians soft on crime?

A few days ago it was reported that two Asian women had two houses confiscated by the courts because the property had been used to grow marijuana. The two homes were valued at about $1 million. Not justice but theft by the courts, I believe!

In my opinion, this fascist excess might be expected in a police state. Certainly no softness was evident here as many acknowledge marijuana to be a benign medicinal herb.

Chris H.; Because the terrorists are organizing and fundraising freely in Canada, and because the pot is coming from Canada. How hard is that to understand? And Skeptikool; many think it's benign and many don't. Do you have children, and, if so, do you want them smoking pot when they're in their teen years? In my opinion that is an extremely counterproductive activity for a young person to be engaging in. Not everyone thinks that pot is okay. Claiming that it's less harmful than alcohol doesn't convince me that it's harmless. Alcohol is deadly and affects society negatively in many ways.

"Because the terrorists are organizing and fundraising freely in Canada, and because the pot is coming from Canada."

Terrorists are organizing and fundraising freely in Canada? Where? Who? Do you watch Foxnews where they claimed that the 9/11 terrorists came from Canada? I've got to wonder where you are getting your information. And for the pot, I'm sure BC does export a large amount of the stuff across the border. The Americans pay us back with their soft views on guns that are smuggled across the border and into the hands of organized crime. I'd rather have my neighbour in possession of a ton of pot then a ton of firearms. I wonder who is getting the better deal here? I like you, would never encourage anyone to smoke pot, but the fact is that many Canadians and Americans do. Unless you want to lock up 15% of the population in both countries, you'd better rethink your position on drugs. You are advocating a return to alcohol prohibition? Wow!

Chris H I couldn't have said it better myself, [ I'd rather have my neighbour in possession of a ton of pot then a ton of firearms.] and thats the way it's going to stay here in Canada, come hell or high water, I guess us old farts will have to come out of retirement and help take on the real Evil Doers

We ARE in a period of prohibition. And I totally agree: get yanqui-made guns out of Canada and keep them out. This is a ready made excuse for the police to "inform" the public as to how dangerous marijuana is. And steal property with the consent of the state.
It is the purposeless illegality of marijuana that makes it dangerous, not the product itself.

The hypocricy of the US War on Drugs is a marvel to behold.
There is good evidence that when it suits their geopolitical interests, the US gov't is fully prepared to not only tolerate large scale drug trafficking, but also to AID AND ABET some of those traffickers, so long as they are also helping the US extend its global power.
This was true during the Viet Nam war when Opium/heroin producing hill tribes of Laos were
not only tolerated, but actively aided while the tribes helped fight the Viet Cong. It even got to the point of CIA planes being used to help transport drugs!
Same thing in Afghanistan, when the Mujahadeen,
including Osama, were aided, armed and trained by CIA in their fight to oust the Russians.
Osama was likely anti-drug, but much of the Mujahadeen was not. They were very active in the opium/heroin trade as it helped finance their war against the Ruskies. Guess who was there again, not just to tolerate but to aid in the trade. Yes, Uncle Sam was there to ensure the drug trade ran smoothly. After all, it was for a "good cause"... Of course, much of the mujahadeen morphed into Al Qaida which is now
biting, like a rabid dog, the hand that once fed it.
The US gov't is a drug prosecutor by day and a drug trafficker by night.
...By the way, I view the Emery case as important enough that a non-letter writer like myself has turned into a prolific e-mailer of powers that be. If you too are appalled by the Emery story,you might cosider voicing your concerns by writing Justice Minister Irwin Cotler ( who signed off on the search warrants), the PM, the VPD, the VP Board, Jack Layton (the NDP's policy is decriminalization), your local MP, and anyone else you think should be contacted. DEA OUT of Canada!

A very simplistic and inaccurate analysis of the complex Afghan situation, Bobb. Read some Christina Lamb or the Ariana news website, and you'll see the holes in your posting. It's easy to blame it all on the American war on drugs, but it's not really fair and it certainly doen't solve the problems.

As for Emery (I've spoken with him and do have respect for his reasoning) let's see if he has the strength of character to carry through with his campaign to change the laws. The laws won't be changed by having the police ignore transgressions here or in the US. The laws will only be changed by leadership, from the public and politicians.

My point about of Afghanistan was simply to show Afghanistan as one example of the US tolerating and even aiding drug trafficking when it suits their purposes, and therefore US hypocricy. It wasn't intended as an analysis of the Afghan situation, as such.

Chris H.; Who said anything about the prohibition of alcohol? You're also not making any sense re; the gun situation. If we clamped down on grow-ops, which have destroyed many a family and neighbourhood, there wouldn't be a commodity to trade the guns for. Also most of the guns are being smuggled through the Toronto area, and they are not being traded for pot. Try to stay on topic and connect the dots once in a while.

Nemesis:

I think the dots you are connecting are purple microdot, nudge, nudge. wink, wink.
Where are the MANY families and neighbourhoods destroyed? It is not the product, it is the irrational illegality of it.

Camgra: Oddly enough,nemesis is correct in stating that families of grow-op operators are often destroyed.
This is because, if a grow-op is found in your home, and if you have your children living there with you, the BC gov't will force you to give up your children to the state's custody. Some BS about endangering the welfare of children or some such crap. It's really just an added punishment to inflict since the judges are handing out light sentences, a worse punishment for most parents, having the BC gov't "kidnap" your children and hold them hostage till you've served your debt to society.
However, I don't place the blame with the ma and pa growers. The blame rests with a gov't that permits a draconian policy like this to remain.
I agree it's the illegality of drugs that causes much of the problems the general public experiences stemming from drugs. Legalizing would reduce the associated problems.

nemesis has made an excellent point, if we clamp down on pot there won't be any pot to trade for the guns that aren't traded for pot. Your mastery of logic and the english language is second only to that of GW, your parents must be proud.

Nemesis:

"Not everyone thinks that pot is okay. Claiming that it's less harmful than alcohol doesn't convince me that it's harmless. Alcohol is deadly and affects society negatively in many ways."

So you advocate putting people in jail for 20 years for using pot and are content with the alcohol laws the way they are? Who isn't be consistent here?

"Also most of the guns are being smuggled through the Toronto area, and they are not being traded for pot."

Who cares if they are being traded for pot or not, or which city in Canada they are coming into. The fact of the matter is that the US couldn't care less whether or not guns are being smuggled into Canada or not.

The US would have a drug problem and terrorist threats with or without a shared border with Canada. Instead of actually doing something that would help solve their problem, they need to blame someone else. Pretty easy to follow the dots from what I see. It's called logic.

Bobb999:

Any parent that would allow their children to live in a grow-op is guilty of child abuse. The mold and crap that infest a grow-op make for some very sick children.

nemisis you say

Americans have every right to be sticking their noses into our business

"Americans have every right to be sticking their noses into our business"

bullshit we are a sovereign state and they can stay the hell out!!!

you really want to get into the drug scene in north america read mike ruppert or watch his video the truth and lies about 911 for a different take on who is bringing the drugs into north america.

Just for a moment think about the logistics of bringing tons of concaine into the u.s. alone, do you think it could be done by a few cartels without them getting caught? Tons of dope hitting the streets and no one is being busted, why?

http://copvcia.com/

How many of you free-thinking pot enthusiasts will encourage your teenage children to smoke it? Please quit telling me it's harmless.

Nemesis;

I'd certainly tell my kids to give it a try if this will prevent them from supporting an illogical, ineffective, human-rights violating, crime-creating war on a plant and the people that use it.

This could be followed up with a fatherly discussion on the horrors of lung cancer and the importance of a healthy mind and body.

Then is is a matter of trusting your child's intelligence to make good informed choices.

Nem: I like your persistance but check your preconceptions at the door. 5 years of a criminology honours degree and I did not hear one expert back up any of your claims. We did learn about the American incarceration rates being the highest in the world; we did hear about minorities being imprisoned at an 800% higher rate than 'whites' even though drug use rates are the same; we did learn about the effects of prohibition on the price of drugs and the crime this spawns; we did learn about American adiction rates - despite the 'war' - being higher than countries with liberal drug policies; we did learn about the conversion of a victimless crime(smoking dope) into crimes of violence; we did learn about the remarkably expansive carceral archipeligo created as a result; we did learn about the exporting of violence in the war on drugs to the point where ALL parties in Colombia (paramil, FARC, Uribe and crowd) get their money from the US; and we did learn that ridiculous run-on sentences - perhaps like smoking anything - should be generally avoided.

But those are choices for informed citizens to make. And I - as you can see - sometimes choose the run-on sentences.

Of course pot isn't harmless; it's a drug afterall. Alcohol, nicotine, caffiene, and even aspirin have harmful side effects. There are documented cases where people have died from the longterm effects of aspirin. That doesn't mean that we should create a police state and encourage organized crime over marijuana however.

I, for one, cannot stand the smell or smoke of pot, and consider anyone who smokes in my presence to be inconsiderate in the very least. If they do it in their own home? Who am I to judge? Children should be educated about all drugs and how they can affect their body, and not preached to in the same vain as "Reefer Madness." I wouldn't be happy to see my child smoke marijuana unless, of course, it was prescribed by a doctor to help battle some disease. Are you so short-sighted, Nemesis, that if marijuana helped ease the pain of a loved one, you'd report them to the police?

keep running on, cosmo... great piece.

I'd rather struggle with the short term paranoia induced by good BC Bud than to listen to another Canadian spewing his or her America-doesn't-like-what-we-are-doing routine.

Actually, at least for me, the paranoia is a myth, just like the connections between Canadian pot and terrorists.

America is the world's leading consumer of recreational drugs. It is the world's leading incarcerator of it's own citizens, especially for recreational drug possession and, by far, the most prolific manufacturer, supplier and user of handguns.

Currently, America is also the most beligerant nation on earth and the country most likely to break or ignore trade agreements with other nations.

Canada is about as likely to be attacked by terrorists as is Cuba. Unfortunately, both western nations are most in danger of illegal internal interference by the same country.

I am beginning to suspect the terrorists I should fear the most will speak and look quite like myself, although they just might have a bit of an accent.

Chris: I'd like to see some evidence to back up your claim that grow ops are so dangerous to children , causing illness. It's more likely this is propaganda put out there by the police.
In all the frequent news reports of grow-op busts, I have yet to see a story like "300 pot plants confiscated from Surrey home along with 3 very ill children afflicted with acute grow-op syndrome, rushed to hospital Emergency!"
If this was a real health issue we would have heard a lot about specific stories of it. But we haven't, cause it's BS.
Anyway, growers typically designate a basement or an area separate from living quarters. They don't use children's bedrooms as grow areas!
If mould is such a threat to children, parents should be warned not to take children camping, because our forests are so full of a multitude of dangerous moulds, especially on our wet coast!
There IS a higher incidence of child injury and death in certain growing operations - specifically on family farms. Farm machinery can be very dangerous, the kind of machinery NOT found in people's basements.
Perhaps child abusing farmers should have their children removed to state custody for "reckless endangerment"?
The risk from grow ops is not to people's but to houses' "health". Houses not properly constructed for or altered to accomodate moist conditions in basements.
I second Lynn's praise for Cosmo's informed piece. Unfortunately the likes of Nemesis prefer to cling to uninformed, illogical,unjust, hypocritical positions. And demonizing one drug while tolerating other more dangerous drugs (eg. tobacco) makes no sense.
A push for decriminalizing or legalizing drugs
sometimes comes from seemingly unexpected sources. Republican former Secretary of State George Schultz. for instance,
has stated publicly that the US war on drugs
is a failure and that he is for legalizing and taxing drugs, and treating addiction as a health, not a criminal issue. Some right wing think tanks have sponsored reports calling for the legalize & tax route. I could be mistaken, but I believe the Fraser Institute has published such a report. Some fiscal conservatives apparently see that it's a waste of taxpayers money to police and prosecute, instead of to tax and tolerate. A push to moderate our drug laws is not a leftie position only.

Apart from the Vancouver teachers that have had children in their class with bad respiratoy problems and later had their home busted for a grow-op, here is a recent story in The Vancouver Sun:

http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/features/nna/story.html?id=3d4c6098-8c72-4852-ac3b-540a91831d97

And here is a good one from a year ago where even Marc Emery agrees with the safety issues revolved around having a grow-op where you sleep.

http://www.vancourier.com/issues02/073102/news/073102nn1.html

Thanks Chris for posting those article links.
There may be safety issues, but I maintain they become issues only when the grow operator acts irresponsibly. I don't believe growing plants indoors is "unsafe" by definition. My Mom had a room full of indoor plants! I believe she even used some of the "dangerous chemicals" one of the quotes from an article mentions, those deadly plant foods and fertilizers! Sure, maybe you don't want your kid eating fertilizer, nor do you want them drinking laundry bleach... I am sure a responsible parent grower would be able to educate himself about safe wiring, and how to lock and seal the basement, if necessary. CO2 gas isn't CO (carbon monoxide). But sure, I can see you'd want to seal off your grow area if you're using CO2.
I maintain family farms pose a greater danger to children than indoor grow ops. Every year many children are mangled by farm machinery.
Or how about drunk Parents who drive their children around. I would say a parent who feeds or allows his child McDonalds food 5 times+ a week, and allows the child to become obese is endangering that child's health much more than grow ops.
Childhood obesity causes changes in the body/brain that can make obesity a life long tendency and health problem. There is evidence that greasy sugary fast food even has addictive qualities. And the trans fat used in frying is associated with much increased cardio vascular disease and cancer.It's really a slow poison.
Grow ops aren't the safety issue. The safety issue is people acting irresponsibly - in any endeavor in life.

Houses were not built to contain large scale grow-operations. Sure, someone could safely grow a couple of plants in their basemant, but that is not how you make money in the marijuana trade. A grow-op is all about economics, and there are a lot of ignorant people out there trying to make a fast buck. The promise of thousands and thousands of dollars drives desperate people to grow pot in their homes next to their children. As I stated before, that is child abuse, plain and simple. There is no way you can compare Macdonalds to living in a grow-op. Although I believe that we must change the way we look at marijuana and regulate it in a different way, Pot activists are just silly with their claims of how wonderful their chosen drug is. Why would someone advocate using marijuana during pregnancy for instance. You have to give your head a shake. Marijuana is not the devil its made out to be, but neither is it a saint.

Chris: I say grow ops aren't the devil you make them out to be with regard to children.
The Canadian gov't is set to severely restrict the presence of trans fat allowed in food. Finally, after a couple of decades worth of evidence that trans fat is much more dangerous than animal fat, something is being done.
If you think McDonald's type food is a minor health issue, I urge you to do a little research on childhood obesity, its life long health effects, the role fast food plays, and the dangers of trans fat that fast food restaurants still drench their fried foods in.
(This will thankfully change within a year or two, with new regulations).
I'd like to see evidence. A name of one specific child who has become seriously ill as a direct result of grow-ops. I know there have been fires, but even in those cases I don't recall reports of injured children.And I still say fires are due to an irresponsible persons, not to marijuana.
I agree with you that marijuana does not deserve the saint status Emery bestows on it. I'm not a user. I no longer enjoy the effect. I don't believe inhaling any kind of burning plant material is harmless to lungs. There is evidence that in a tiny susceptible number of persons marijuana can help set off episodes of serious mental illness. On the other hand many ill people find that marijuana reduces their sypmptoms better than any prescription medicine. And for many others, marijuana bestows only beneficial mental effects conducive, not detrimental, to living.
There are dangers to many tolerated aspects of life: alcohol, tobacco, driving a car, mountain climbing, sailing... We should not prohibit marijuana just because it has some negative effects for some.
Poorly designed grow ops can harm houses. I don't envy landlords who have to put up with damaged houses by irresponsible growers.
But it's not marijuana that causes these problems. PROHIBITION, the illegality causes the "epidemic" of grow ops. As you say a grow op is all about economics, (economics derived from contraband prices). If pot was legalized, the grow op problems would be solved practically overnight. The profit motive would disappear. There would be little more incentive
to grow marijuana indoors than to grow tobacco, or tomatoes, because it would become
available relatively cheaply to users at retail Liquor Stores, perhaps. Large players would become legal producers. People who wanted to continue growing as a hobby might begin setting up small greenhouses in their backyards instead of having to hide their ops in basements.

Let me ask you this: Would any house meet the building code for a commercial hydroponic/greenhouse operation? What would you have to do to meet the building code? Do any grow-ops meet these requirements? I would suggest that anyone who is growing marijuana in their home (a three lamp set-up or more) is guilty of being "irresponsible". As Marc Emery suggests, the only proper place to cultivate marijuana is a commercial greenhouse. Period.

I agree with you that prohibition is the big problem. If we regulated it, like alcohol or nicotine, it would solve a lot of problems without encouraging people to use it more than it already is.

It is difficult to name a child that has suffered illness due to a grow-op because of the privacy rights that children, inparticular, enjoy. I have talked to a teacher in Vancouver who had such a case among her students. It is up to you whether or not you believe in the professionals that claim that increased humidity, inadequate venting, etc. that is evident in pretty much every grow-op is detrimental to children. Do you believe that living with chain smokers is detrimental to children? I once lived in a co-op that had a leak in the floor from outside. The mold that accumulated in the two bedrooms was enormous, and my wife got very, very sick. I know one of the families that was uprooted from their home with the Riverside/Berkley slide in North Vancouver. You should have seen the amount of mold that accumulated just because the hydro was turned off for a few months. Believe me, you don't want to live in a moldy environment for any length of time. Outside, where there is great air circulation, mold is less of a concern (i.e. I'm not scared of camping).

I would also suggest that you forget your "ma and pa" operation thinking. There really is no such thing. With a small three lamp set-up in a one bedroom apartment reportedly netting you $80,000 a year, I think the average grow-op to be a big money concern.

Chris H [ Believe me, you don't want to live in a moldy environment for any length of time.]
you can't make it any plainer than that Chris H that pretty well sums it up.

Chris:
I'm wondering if you are a landlord, because you seem focussed on the house damage aspect of pot and its ramifications such as mold and health, over other aspects.
It's possible organized crime runs a greater number of city grow ops compared to some of the boonies.
My sometimes roommate worked out of Port Hardy at various times and she got to know a lot of Island and coast dwellers up there. One her friends had a grow op in his attic which netted him $60,000 a year with 3 crops a year. He had his attic sealed off with a secret door in a closet. No one was breathing mold, to my knowledge. As resource jobs decreased some years back, more and more locals took up growing, as ma and pa operations. She was told a statistic she found believable, that 10% of folks on the Island and coast around there derived income from pot growing. Another one of her friends lives on a sailboat moored off a Gulf Island. She has at times occasionally worked as a "pruner", trimming leaves of outdoor pot plants for some island growers. It's my impression there's a culture of tolerance for growing in certain BC communities, more so than in the city, where folks often think "organized crime" first.
This was in the news a year or two back that the RCMP launched a fairly large scale operation in a Sept., harvest time for outdoor pot plantations, on Lesqueti Island. The police viewing Lesqueti as a kind of hot bed for pot,
I guess they were doing major reconnaisance and raids. I recall a woman identified as a community spokesperson saying the Islanders very much resented the police targetting their island and residents. The implication seemed to be that the police were likely right. It may be a hot bed , as it's an activity tolerated by much of the community, apparently.
I'm sure Marc Emery's websites or the books he sells can provide instructions on how to set up a grow op that minimizes house damage, mold, etc. People, I'm sure, have worked on this and figured it out, as the ideal situation of using greenhouses is a bit too risky at this time. Part of the problem is irresponsible renters who don't care, and don't bother.
I wonder if some people are vulnerable to mold simply because of allergies, just as some people get very "sick" from cats 'cause they're allergic to cat fur.
Hey, I'm glad we can agree on some points!
-that prohibition causes many problems, and that pot is not harmless.
I wonder if you were a Lesqueti (or other)Islander if you might possibly develop a different view about pot growing, assuming they have an "outlaw" community there that otherwise is a responsible group of people trying to make a living.

I own my house, but I took out my basement suite years ago.

So, I've got to ask, who was the "distributor" for the Lesqueti Islanders and your friend's friend in Port Hardy? I've always wondered about that part of the operation.

You'd better believe that the majority of grow-ops are rentals nowadays. If a grow-op is found in your home, the potential is there for your house to be siezed and sold off by the police as proceeds of crime. Some people, like the guy with the attic, might feel that $60,000 a year is worth the risk, but in the Lower Mainland, houses are just too expensive to risk losing.

'I wonder if you were a Lesqueti (or other)Islander if you might possibly develop a different view about pot growing, assuming they have an "outlaw" community there that otherwise is a responsible group of people trying to make a living'. How about getting jobs? Not anti-establishment enough for them? Oh wait, I know. There's not much of an economy on Lasqueti so they have a right to engage in illegal activities. Welcome to Canada. Check your common sense at the border and come on in.

Actually, Chris H, the "growing business" began moving into owned not rented properties a while back. No pesky landlords to come around checking up, you know. As for the mold problems from what I understand there are alot of newly built homes having commercial grade ventilation/ dehumidifer systems put in to combat the associated problems. These homes are also wired to higher standards. If given the choice do you not think the people who have invested the money into these homes wouldn't prefer to purchase a greenhouse?

Chris:
I don't know about Lesqueti, but the guy with the attic had a regular indendent buyer in the Q. Charlottes.
My roommate has another friend who moved from Vancouver to the Okanagen and was dealing pot out there for a while before going legit with a Safeway job! He was knowledgable about the pot business. The Hell's Angels, although they have a significant minority presence, by no means dominate the trade. The reputation of the Angel's is such that a common view is if you want to be in the pot biz, do NOT get involved with the H.A.. It's not necessary , and since non-Angels are viewed as lesser beings by Angels, they are liable to treat you very badly even if you are a supposed "ally" (or "sucker").
So, I would guess Lesqueti Islanders have the "common sense" (to quote nemesis) to avoid dealing with groups known for lying, cheating, extorting, beating, and murdering! Commercial Drive area is the hub for the pot trade (not for growing necessarily)in Vancouver and likely for BC to a degree. Many (non H.A.)wholesalers and dealers live and operate there.
I recall once administering interviews/questionnaires with residents of the Commercial area as part of a research study.
I was amazed at the large number of young men who gave their occupation as "self employed courier", but I could tell - and some were even up front about it -that they meant couriering pot!
There was some push, I think spearheaded by that Surrey mayor, to start holding landlords responsible financially, in part, for grow ops found in houses owned by them - even if the landlord is not complicit with the growers. This sounds totally unfair.I read it may very well violate the charter of rights. I haven't heard anything lately. Hopefully the idea got shelved. I can see why it's safer for growers to rent rather than own and risk losing their house. It's too bad the laws encourage this.
nemesis: "Illegal" does not necessarily mean "immoral" or even "lacking in common sense". Big Brother's long list of rules is often hypocritical and lacks "common sense".
eg. Our legally tolerated drugs (alcohol, tobacco) are often more damaging than many of the illegal ones some people insist on demonizing.
It's amusing that some of the "finest, most respected" of successful North American families derived much of their initial "success" from the illegal large scale trade in contraband: In the '20s and '30s, the Kennedys and Bronfmans were both big time bootlegger families and allies of the Italian mafia. Sam Bronfman could have been extradited to the US for offences similar to what Marc Emery is being charged for today!... Today's outlaws: tomorrow's Order of Canada members?? Considering the high profits and low penalties , I'd say the risk/reward of pot growing has a good deal of "common sense" attached to it.

How do you really know what happens to your pot after you give it to your distributor though? He/she might be a really great guy to you, but what if your pot is being used to trade for guns? Most of the pot grown in BC is for export, and any conscientous grower would want to know that it wasn't being used to foster organized crime and violence.

The grow-op guy that phoned into Ms. Mather's show on CKNW a few months ago, stated that growers were looking more at rental properties that had lame duck landlords. It is far less risker to set up numerous grow-ops in rental properties with assumed names then to grow your stuff in your own registered and owned residence. If one gets busted, no big deal. You still have a number on the go. Accordingly, most of these properties are older, and do not even have the updated ventilation of newer homes (although they way some builders build homes today, I'm suspicious that many are even a hair better than min. code). Many are now even being set up in apartment buildings!

I believe that the $60,000 + a year that is being made from these "Ma and Pa" operations is buying off a lot of people's consciences. They don't know what happens to their stuff after they give it to the middleman and they don't care. All they want is their money. They don't even contribute their "hard-earned" money to our schools and hospitals because they commit tax fraud by not declaring their illicit income. I guess I might be a boy scout, but I expect better from people. they need to look at themselves and decide if they are being socially responsible adults and abiding by the global social contract.

Do I think that pot should be decriminalized ... sure, but those who are making society unsafe by growing pot in unacceptable environments are short-sided, selfish, and ignorant individuals.

If by magic the Cdn. pot supply available to the US suddenly disappeared overnight, there would still be an endless supply of easily acquired guns available in the US for the unscrupulous to smuggle and supply to the violent criminal element and foolhardy youth gangs of Canada. If the medium of exchange was strictly the old fashioned one of cash,and no drugs, I doubt that would slow or impede the gun flow.
The use of drugs as currency for guns by the
unscrupulous is a matter of convenience, not necessity.Convenient 'cause it makes profits accumulate faster, that's all, for the sleaziest element.
I don't think pot growers deserve the blame for growing gun violence in Canada.And I'm certain someone like Emery, and those thousands who support him, have no sympathy whatever for or dealings with the gun trader/Hell's Angels types. I'm told the view towards the H.A. is that they move in a different circle with a different "philosophy", one to steer clear of.

I see the new Tyee article on Emery mentions he himself is actually "pro-gun" in the sense that as a libertarian he believes it's an individual's right to own a gun if they so choose. But it also mentions that most of his followers disagree with his pro-gun stance.

Allan (3 days ago)

I am beginning to suspect the terrorists I should fear the most will speak and look quite like myself, although they just might have a bit of an accent.

Aside: Who dug up such a flattering photo of Lou?
It depicts him as approx. 75 pounds and 25 years lighter than reality! Where are the walrus jowls?

...And further more, what's with the halo effect,
emanating from behind Lou?
The article depicts Lou as a fool while the photo depicts him a saint!.. Will the real Lou Dobbs please stand up!

Lou = looser. The guy should shut up. Lou you are too old let go nobody listens no more, and besides your hair is ugly.