Connect with us

Wire

State Bans Word ‘Marijuana’ From All Laws, Citing its ‘Racist’ Origins

Western Journal

Published

on

Maybe they can call it the “Don’t Say Marijuana” law.

Last month, the state of Washington — certainly not a place where there’s any shortage of users of the psychoactive plant Cannabis sativa — decided to do away with the word “marijuana” from all of its laws, according to KIRO-TV.

Because the word is “pejorative and racist,” lawmakers say, it will be replaced.

(At The Western Journal, we’ve chronicled how marijuana legalization — whatever you want to call the drug — has led to poor outcomes, both in terms of public and mental health. The mainstream media, however, isn’t willing to bring you the facts about what cannabis use does. We’ll continue to bring America the truth, no matter how unpopular it may be. You can help us by subscribing.)

Yes, Washington state may have a massive homelessness problem, particularly in Seattle. It may be unaffordable and obnoxiously woke. But, at least it doesn’t have the word “marijuana” besmirching any of the laws on its books.

According to KIRO, legislators passed a bill that would change every reference to it in the Revised Code of Washington to “cannabis.”

“The term ‘marijuana’ itself is pejorative and racist,” said Washington state Democrat Rep. Melanie Morgan, the bill’s sponsor, during 2021 testimony.

Really, now? Yes, true story — apparently, Morgan said, because “marijuana” is a word of Spanish origin.

“As recreational marijuana use became more popular, it was negatively associated with Mexican immigrants,” she said.

This is silly logic, but Morgan’s House Bill 1210, which excised word “marijuana” from state code, passed unanimously. It was signed into law by Democrat Gov. Jay Inslee on March 11.

“Even though it seems simple because it’s just one word, the reality is we’re healing the wrongs that were committed against black and brown people around cannabis,” Morgan said.

And here I would have thought the drug-word jihad would have been declared against “crack” — a term which is often accused of having racial undertones behind it. But, nope, “marijuana” it is.

To burnish this logic, Morgan quoted the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, Harry Anslinger, during her testimony. Anslinger was key in getting the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 passed, a law that banned the possession or sale of the drug.

“It was … Anslinger that said and I quote, ‘Marijuana is the most violent causing drug in the history of mankind. And most marijuana users are Negroes, Hispanic, Caribbean, and entertainers. Their satanic music, jazz and swing results from marijuana usage,’” Morgan said.

All this means, however, is that Harry Anslinger sounds like a racist jerk in 2022. This does little to heal any damage the word “marijuana” caused minorities. What it does do, however, is assure progressives they’re doing something by changing “marijuana” to “cannabis.”

Of course, if those who advocate the prohibition of the drug start being good little linguistic sheep and start referring to it only as “cannabis,” in another decade or two another Melanie Morgan — or, heck, perhaps Morgan herself, should she hang around state politics long enough — will come along and say the word has become polluted and the laws should be changed to something even more neutral in the name of equity. “THC-carrying plant-based enlightenment-enhancing substance,” say.

Meanwhile, a marijuana entrepreneur named Joy Hollingsworth talked to KIRO about how “the word ‘marijuana’ comes with a burden.”

“It had been talked about for a long time in our community about how that word demonizes the cannabis plant,” Hollingsworth said.

I’d like to point out that Washington is the state that ran a so-called “Joints for Jabs” program last year in which individuals could receive a free joint of marijuana if they received a COVID-19 vaccine “at an in-store vaccination clinic.”

The implication behind such a program is that marijuana users could be bribed to take a freely available (and free) medical treatment they either didn’t want to take or hadn’t yet decided to avail themselves of simply by giving them a joint. The implicit statement the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis board was making about the self-control of potheads by that gesture is far more “demonizing” than the word “marijuana” — a term used in some way by most Americans, almost always without any degree of racial judgment, to refer to the drug.

But thank heavens: By changing one word in the state code, state Rep. Melanie Morgan, Gov. Jay Inslee and the legislators of Washington have fixed a problem they didn’t have. Imagine what they could accomplish if they focused on all the problems Washington is faced with.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Wire

Parents’ Group Speaks Out After Reportedly Being Targeted by FBI, Merrick Garland as Terrorist ‘Threats’

Western Journal

Published

on

The head of a parents’ organization — consisting mostly of concerned mothers — that was reportedly targeted by Attorney General Merrick Garland’s FBI said Garland himself is “the terrorist.”

Moms for Liberty co-founder Tiffany Justice told the Daily Caller she was concerned investigations into the group’s members might “intimate our moms” in a piece published Friday.

The remarks came two days after House Republicans said they’d found smoking-gun evidence the FBI was investigating parents’ groups that had engaged in protests at school board meetings, despite Garland’s protestations to the contrary.

(Here at The Western Journal, we’ve proudly supported parents standing up to woke ideology like critical race theory — and we’ve decried the interference at the federal level by President Joe Biden’s administration. We’ll continue fighting for parental rights. You can help us by subscribing.)

The letter to the Department of Justice, authored by Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan and signed by other Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee, noted the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division had created a threat tag for investigations into parents’ groups — EDUOFFICIALS.

“We have learned from brave whistleblowers that the FBI has opened investigations with the EDUOFFICIALS threat tag in almost every region of the country and relating to all types of educational settings,” the letter noted.

“The information we have received shows how, as a direct result of your directive, federal law enforcement is using counterterrorism resources to investigate protected First Amendment activity.”

Garland had come under fire after an Oct. 4, 2021 memo directed the FBI to look into “threats” against school personnel.

Should critical race theory be removed from the classroom?

The memo came after a wave of parental protests and contentious school board meetings — particularly in Loudoun and Fairfax counties in Virginia — over critical race theory in the classroom.

“In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools,” the memo read.

“The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate.”

During testimony later that month, Garland insisted the directive only involved “concerns about violence, threats of violence, other criminal conduct.”

That doesn’t seem to be the case. The House Judiciary Committee’s letter notes the FBI interviewed a Moms for Liberty member after an investigation that began when a tip submitted to the bureau through the National Threat Operations Center hotline, claimed she told a local school board “we are coming for you.”

The snitch said the mother was a threat because she was part of a “right wing mom’s group” and “is a gun owner.”

Jordan then noted that when the FBI interviewed the mom, they discovered she only meant Moms for Liberty sought “to replace the school board with new members through the electoral process” because of their stance on mask mandates.

Justice told the Daily Caller that she was “sad to see” the FBI investigations “happening to people that care most about this country.”

The mothers who show up at school board meetings, she said, were “genuinely concerned about their children’s education” — but Garland’s DOJ sees them as “the enemy.”

“This should not be happening and we are going to do everything we can to ensure that it stops,” she told the Daily Caller.

In a statement, Justice and her fellow Moms for Liberty co-founder Tina Descovich said this was “proof of what many of us suspected and some of us knew: that the Department of Justice was using counter-terrorism authority under the PATRIOT Act to investigate parents of schoolchildren.”

“We at Moms for Liberty knew first hand of the first example Jim Jordan cited, because she was – as the whistleblower letter says – one of our members,” the statement read.

“The mother was terrified. She had been contacted by the FBI. She had been told by the FBI not to say anything about that call. She had also been told that there were many other mothers being investigated.”

The letter was more confirmation of what Garland has strenuously denied: that FBI resources are being used to treat parents as potential domestic terror suspects without any specific threat.

The House Judiciary GOP had already blown the whistle on the EDUOFFICIAL tag last November. We now have a rough idea of how promiscuously it’s being applied and how little threat there actually is.

While no sinister, violent, far-right threat against school boards has, as of yet, been uncovered, we now have credible reports of the FBI harassing a member of a conservative mothers’ group based off of a cardboard-flimsy rationale.

When Garland’s memo was released, it seemed clear the FBI was being weaponized against a widespread parents’ revolt in which wholly rational anger was being unleashed — in a constitutionally protected manner — against school boards that were adopting woke ideology or prolonging mask mandates beyond reasonable limits. This anger led to, among other things, a Republican sweep of statewide offices in off-year elections in increasingly blue Virginia, including for governor.

Perhaps when Garland was talking about investigating “threats,” he wasn’t talking about any hazard to the well-being of school-board members or educational employees. Instead, it was about the Democrats’ 2022 electoral chances.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The head of a parents’ organization — consisting mostly of concerned mothers — that was reportedly targeted by Attorney General Merrick Garland’s FBI said Garland himself is “the terrorist.” Moms for Liberty co-founder Tiffany Justice told the Daily Caller she was concerned investigations into the group’s members might “intimate our moms” in a piece published Friday. The remarks came two days after House Republicans said they’d found smoking-gun evidence the FBI was investigating parents’ groups that had engaged in protests at school board meetings, despite Garland’s protestations to the contrary. (Here at The Western Journal, we’ve proudly supported parents standing up to woke ideology like critical race theory — and we’ve decried the interference at the federal level by President Joe Biden’s administration. We’ll continue fighting for parental rights. You can help us by subscribing.) The letter to the Department of Justice, authored by Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan and signed by other Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee, noted the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division had created a threat tag for investigations into parents’ groups — EDUOFFICIALS. “We have learned from brave whistleblowers that the FBI has opened investigations with the EDUOFFICIALS threat tag in almost every region of the country and relating to all types of educational settings,” the letter noted. “The information we have received shows how, as a direct result of your directive, federal law enforcement is using counterterrorism resources to investigate protected First Amendment activity.” BREAKING: The Biden Administration has mobilized FBI counterterrorism resources to investigate parents, including at least one member of @Moms4Liberty, for expressing protected political speech at local school board meetings. This is a grave abuse of power. pic.twitter.com/MdK0vm51VN — Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) May 12, 2022 Garland had come under fire after an Oct. 4, 2021 memo directed the FBI to look…

Continue Reading

Wire

Private Jet Owned by Climate Alarmist Elon Musk Takes Flight of Just 31 Miles

Western Journal

Published

on

Stop it! Stop the climate change!

So says offbeat entrepreneur Elon Musk. Bill Gates, too — he’s so alarmed about the climate that he says we need to get rid of cows and eat plastic meat. Or something.

But why believe these guys? Both indulge in what Gates calls a “guilty pleasure.” Despite what they preach, Musk and Gates travel in private jets.

Last week, Musk’s jet was tracked — on Twitter, no less — flying from San Jose, California, to San Francisco. That’s about 31 miles, a flight lasting nine minutes, The Byte reported.

To be fair, there’s no record Musk was on that flight — it might have been moved for maintenance or something. But Gates’ guilty pleasure is extreme — he has four “business jets,” according to Simple Flying.

So while you save the planet chewing on a vegan burger, Gates gets to pollute the skies more than you and I probably will in several lifetimes.

Then there’s John Kerry, President Joe Biden’s go-to guy to fix the climate. He jetted aloft at least 16 times last year, and not in a government plane, but in a jet belonging to his family.

What is it with these people?

Musk’s brilliance is off the charts. And while he has some oddball ideas, Gates, of course, is also smart. But when it comes to hypocrisy and the optics of what they are doing, both are clueless.

To Musk, one of the world’s greatest threats is climate change. A carbon tax will solve that, he once told podcaster Joe Rogan.

We should tax behavior that produces carbon emissions and “the market will react in a sensible way,” Musk said, according to CNBC. “But because we don’t have a price on it, it is behaving badly.”

So rich guys like Musk can freely engage in their climate sins by offsetting their guilt with taxes? If that sounds familiar, you might recall Martin Luther and his thoughts on church sales of indulgences.

Unlike the growing number of neo-feudalists, Musk at least recognizes the potential carbon tax burdens on those who are not wealthy, who inevitably impact the climate in their little ways by heating their homes and by breathing.

Low-income users of large amounts of gas would get a carbon tax rebate, he said. And, by paying the tax, Musk is free to ride his jet. And of course, he’s one of the Good Guys since he’s saving the planet with his electric cars.

Gates, when not pushing to vaccinate everything that moves, worries about climate change, as outlined in his book “How to Avoid Climate Disaster.” Despite dumping 1,600 tons of CO2 in the atmosphere during his 59 private jet flights in 2017, he takes care of his conscience by buying clean aviation fuel and funding carbon-capture technology.

Carbon capture draws carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and then stores it until needed for some kind of beneficial economic project. Apparently, no one considers carbon dioxide being converted into oxygen by plants as having economic value.

So the Musks and Gates and Kerrys continue to fly and to buy all their cool stuff. I don’t begrudge them that.

It’s just that some of us are skeptical about human-caused climate change. What we believe has been called “fraud” by Musk, according to Futurism.

But what do you call it when the rich guys get to pour filth in the skies while preaching cleanliness to us?

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Stop it! Stop the climate change! So says offbeat entrepreneur Elon Musk. Bill Gates, too — he’s so alarmed about the climate that he says we need to get rid of cows and eat plastic meat. Or something. But why believe these guys? Both indulge in what Gates calls a “guilty pleasure.” Despite what they preach, Musk and Gates travel in private jets. Last week, Musk’s jet was tracked — on Twitter, no less — flying from San Jose, California, to San Francisco. That’s about 31 miles, a flight lasting nine minutes, The Byte reported. Landed in San Francisco, California, US. Apx. flt. time 9 Mins. pic.twitter.com/8vWvODLEOL — ElonJet (@ElonJet) May 6, 2022 To be fair, there’s no record Musk was on that flight — it might have been moved for maintenance or something. But Gates’ guilty pleasure is extreme — he has four “business jets,” according to Simple Flying. So while you save the planet chewing on a vegan burger, Gates gets to pollute the skies more than you and I probably will in several lifetimes. Then there’s John Kerry, President Joe Biden’s go-to guy to fix the climate. He jetted aloft at least 16 times last year, and not in a government plane, but in a jet belonging to his family. What is it with these people? Musk’s brilliance is off the charts. And while he has some oddball ideas, Gates, of course, is also smart. But when it comes to hypocrisy and the optics of what they are doing, both are clueless. To Musk, one of the world’s greatest threats is climate change. A carbon tax will solve that, he once told podcaster Joe Rogan. We should tax behavior that produces carbon emissions and “the market will react in a sensible way,” Musk said, according to CNBC.…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week