You'll remember in my last general post on censorship, I
had written

>JCT: Imagine, Richard Lake and his kennel crew got
"parentsendingprohibition" to ban my posts and I'm the only
politician that I know of arguing kids have a right to the
best relief sedation too. Listen in to my 2-hours on CFRA at
http://www.cfra.com tonight at 5pm to hear what you've
probably never heard argued before and then consider that
the moderator of parentsendingprohibition@yahoogroups.com
silenced me without telling his members what he did and
now they're missing it. Of course, that's the whole purpose
of Richard and his crew of complainers and it often works.
Especially when moderators censor and then are so ashamed
they have to continue to censor the discussion of their
censorship.

JCT: That elicited a response from the moderator:

>Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 06:44:03 -0700 (PDT)
>From: hbmama1999@... (Erin)
>Subject: Hello again, Mr. Turmel
>To: parentsendingprohibition@yahoogroups.com
>Cc: rlake@..., TURMEL@...

JCT: In it, Erin mentioned:

E: On March 13, Richard Lake posted this to the PEP list,
"Oh, and finally, no need to worry about wearing out your
delete key! John Turmel is history on this list. If you
really like to read his stuff, sign up for his discussion
list, a yahoogroups list called medpot-discuss."

Basically, Richard approached me and offered to help with
PEP. I gratefully accepted, and turned over control of the
list to him. At the same time, I had written Mr. Turmel,
asking that he not post attacks on other reformers to my
list, but before he did so again, Richard banned him.

I was not comfortable with this, but Richard explained that
once the list is moved to the DrugSense servers, it would be
impossible for Mr. Turmel to post, anyway, as he's banned
from their servers. Over what was to be a few posts, I
wasn't about to argue.

JCT: So I was invited back and rejoined and resend my intro.

>Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 19:13:01 -0400 (EDT)
>From: TURMEL@... (John Turmel)
>Subject: TURMEL: Intro to "The Engineer"
>To: parentsendingprobition@yahoogroups.com

[... With special focus on parents giving their kids
marijuana muffins instead of Prozac and Ritalin, I refer you
to a CFRA radio debate between me and two RCMP who were
shocked at the thought of depriving youth of their Prozac
and Ritalin.
http://yahoogroups.com/group/medpot-discuss/messages/2221

>Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 17:24:58 +0000
>From: ParentsEndingProhibition-owner@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Welcome to the ParentsEndingProhibition group
>To: TURMEL@...

Welcome to Parents Ending Prohibition. This forum is open to
anyone with an opinion about whether or not pot prohibition
should continue in North America. My personal opinion is
that it's time for it to end, but I will try not to be so
arrogant as to believe I have all of the answers, or even
all of the questions. I ask that all members try to do the
same. That said, my emphasis here is to try to unite parents
to call for an end to prohibition. More than half of our
kids *will* experiment at some time, just as many of us did.
There are better ways to guide them toward becoming
responsible adults than by turning them into criminals and
incarcerating them. Let's explore some of them as well as
discuss how to safely, sanely, and effectively end
prohibition.

>Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 10:57:57 -0700 (PDT)
>From: hbmama1999@... (Erin)
>Subject: reply to your post
>To: TURMEL@...

E: Mr. Turmel, I do appreciate you keeping this off PEP.
Thank you. I don't know if you read posts from Stoner Times,
so I am forwarding my reply to your post on there, to you.
Can't you please just leave PEP and me out of it? From your
posts, I'd guess you have plenty of other ammunition ready
to lob in his direction, so please just end my involvement
here. Erin
Give me a break! I am no more convinced Richard has been
helping me, to somehow get at you, than I am that you're
purposely trying to sabotage reform!
You two snipe at each other like you have nothing better to
do. Well, I do. In the time it's taken to write these
emails, I could've written and submitted two lte's and baked
cookies with the kids! :-P

JCT: Yes, but I always snipe in public, Richard snipes
behind my back.

E: If anyone mistakenly sees anything I'm saying as trying
to take one side or the other in this debate, I apologize
for the misunderstanding. I want PEP to be open to anyone
who wants to post on-topic and who can do so civily. Period.
Erin

JCT: So what did I do wrong to be banned without any
discussion other than "Richard did it." Regardless, the
group was now back on my distribution list and I thought
everything was okay. Guess the backroom boys were at work:

>Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 18:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
>From: hbmama1999@... (Erin)
>Subject: [ParentsEndingProhibition] Taking a longer break
>To: parentsendingprohibition@yahoogroups.com

Hi everyone. Sorry for the confusion lately. I've reached a
difficult decision. As of tomorrow, this list will be
deleted. It stopped being fun or informative awhile ago, and
that's why it was started. I can't do this anymore.

JCT: Notice that it has to be deleted right away.

E: I'm so tired of trying to figure out alliances and camps
and moles and spies! I'm so fed up with worrying about any
of this shit.

JCT: I guess a lot of pressure suddenly happened. Bet I get
equally blamed, just to be fair.

E: It's just not worth the time or effort to keep a PEP
forum going right now, and I honestly just don't plan on
posting for a long time. I appreciate the input from
everyone over the months! It's been wonderful to get to know
so many of you through this list. I'm sorry I can't keep it
going and bring new life to it right now. As I develop my
site, and I have a better focus, I'll consider starting a
new group. All of you will be the first ones invited, and at
that time I'll be able to devote much more of myself to it.
I'm very sorry for any of my recent comments which any
members found offensive. This certainly was never my
intention. I wish you all great success in your efforts to
end mj prohibition!
>p.s. Please save any archived messages or files that you
want before 6pm tomorrow. I'll have some saved to my hard
drive after that, but not all.

JCT: I had to comment:

>Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 02:24:13 +0000
>From: TURMEL@... ("John C. Turmel")
>Subject: [ParentsEndingProhibition] Re: Taking a longer break

JCT: There is no reason for you to kill the group because
you are busy. It's not as if there's a lot of traffic. Open
it up and we'll skip any spam.
I know you're discouraged over Richard Lake trying to censor
me, and me trying to get back in the group, NOT me censoring
Richard\Lake. If you kill the group, then he will have won
in killing my input to your members.
There is no reason to kill your group. Please don't.

>Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 19:40:06 -0700 (PDT)
>From: hbmama1999@... (Erin)
>Subject: Re: [PEP] Re: Taking a longer break

No, Mr. Turmel... I am not "discouraged over Richard Lake
trying to censor" you. I'm discouraged because I'm sick and
tired of being put in the middle of this.

JCT: You're caught in the middle of Turmel wanting to post
articles in favor invalidating prohibition and Richard Lake
wanting to stop me. Being impartial over this issue is no
cause for pride.

E: When a stranger googles "Parents Ending Prohibition", I'd
rather they not get long, rambling emails about he said she
said.

JCT: I can understand how the story of the background hurts
and how you'd prefer to have the archives deleted but the
story of Richard's using you and then you pulling the plug
instead of letting it be free again will remain the story.
Forever.

E: I've tried to be fair.

JCT: Shame on you for being fair to the ones who want to
censor as the ones who want to post.

E: Even to you, the same man who refused to answer my tough
questions when I replied to your ridicule of me awhile back,
before you ever joined PEP.

JCT: I have no idea what you're talking about but you must
have given me something of substance to ridicule you with.

E: Still, if you chose to actually keep posts on topic and
not flame anyone, I felt that was reason enough to let you
stay. But here we are again... you couldn't resist the dig
at Richard, could you?

JCT: I couldn't resist exposing that Richard got control
over your group so he could ban me? You call that exposure a
dig. Sure, he should be ashamed but hiding shameful acts
does not construe improper digs. Your parents deserve to
know why their feed from me was cut without stated reason.

E: I have had it with message boards too! Now I'm beginning
to understand why some people avoid them like the plague! So
you go ahead and attack....flame away, and try to get it all
out of your system for once, because it will all be deleted.

JCT: Your destroying your group to hide what Richard tricked
you into doing won't go away. Just your cowardice to stay
true. You did right in permitting my on-topic posts back and
now you're doing wrong in bending to Richard's back-room
pressures. And as I said, destroying your archives won't
help, the shameful stuff is already published everywhere

E: There are too many more important things I should be
doing with my time. This has become the cyber equivalent of
a soap opera, and accomplishes about as much in mj reform as
sitting on our asses and watching one!

JCT: The cyber-opera over me trying end prohibition and
Richard talking parents ending prohibition into banning me.
You permitted it and now want to duck the consequences?

E: So, please, Mr. Turmel... spare me your "sympathy" over
what I have to endure from Richard! Erin

JCT: I only had sympathy for the pressure he's putting you
under to complete his censorship job by killing your group.
I don't have any sympathy for your weakness in allowing him
to wear you down into doing it.

So I had to make a quick response:

>Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 08:27:53 -0400 (EDT)
>From: TURMEL@...
>Subject: Re: [PEP] Re: Taking a longer break
>To: parentsendingprohibition@yahoogroups.com

Jct: And what have had you to endure from me? All I ever did
wrong was post to the group. You permitted me to be banned.
So what did I do?

RICHARD LAKE responds:

>Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 10:08:38 -0400
>From: rlake@... (Richard Lake)
>Subject: On civil discussions, PEP,
>To: ParentsEndingProhibition@yahoogroups.com

Erin and Friends,

RL: It is sad that you feel you must back away from Parents
Ending Prohibition's current email discussion list for a
while and regroup, Erin. But it is understandable.

JCT: Right Erin. He's sad that YOU feel that YOU should back
away. He calls destroying your list an understandable re-
grouping.

RL: Know that you have many friends who believe in the
vision you had, and I believe still have, when you wrote
your purpose to introduce this list:

"to unite parents to call for an end to prohibition. More
than half of our kids *will* experiment at some time, just
as many of us did. There are better ways to guide them
toward becoming responsible adults than by turning them into
criminals and incarcerating them."

JCT: Erin, why don't you ask Richard why he supported Alan
Young who said "I went to Parker's hearing to ensure
Turmel's motion to invalidate the law would not proceed?" As
far as I'll tell, you supported them too if you kill this
list as they desire. You way you're a parent ending
prohibition but support guys who oppose my ending
prohibition. How do you explain that contradiction unless
you're a mole too. The only other possibility is friendly
dupe. But that's what Young said and now you know why
Richard opposes me. And you say you don't want to take sides
with those wanting to end the law and those opposing me.

RL:We know you have tried hard to be fair to all the list
members.

JCT: Yes, even the Judases to the cause like you, Richard
Lake. That's the indictment of Erin. She did not oppose you
as you opposed her groups aim to end prohibition. Here you
are overtly opposing invalidating the law and she doesn't
know who her friends are nor her enemies. Sorry, but she
deserves whatever emotion is generated by her failure to
recognise you for the government traitor that you are.

RL: However, not all are willing to engage in civil
discussions, to attempt to be on topic, to not engage in
personal attacks against other list members or reformers, to
not lower the standard of discussion to name calling, to not
make private email messages public. Just common sense
standards that weall should expect for civil discussions in
any discussion list or forum.

JCT: And of course, Richard is not willing to debate at all
when he can ban his opponent. Erin, go to the
http://yahoogroups.com/group/medpot-discuss/messages and
search for Richard Lake to see that he ran away from debate
there and is doing the only thing he can do over here,
censor it. And you let him. And kill it. And you let him.

RL: These goals or rules for civil discussion are expressed
in various ways by various listowners. I find how they are
expressed by Gary Storck, listmaster of the very large and
successful Drug Policy Forum of Wisconsin (as well as
webmaster for Is My Medicine Legal YET? http://www.immly.org
) list at http://www.drugsense.org/dpfwi/list_guidelines.htm
to be good common sense rules for civil discussion, as I am
sure most of us do:

JCT: Forget that he opposes invalidating prohibition and
reduce it all down to a question of Netiquette.
-----

Please stay on topic. Drug policy issues only. Post
privately when appropriate - keep the volume down. Always
ask yourself if this will benefit the list before posting a
message.
No personal attacks or put-downs. If you must correct the
rule should be criticize in private praise in public.

JCT: Don't traitors and saboteurs like this rule. No
criticisms allowed of Richard's traitorous opposition to
invalidating the law.

RL: No Personal Attacks On Drug Policy Reform Individuals Or
Organizations.

JCT: Ditto. No personal attacks on the traitors and
saboteurs. Who wrote these rules, the saboteurs?

RL: No soliciting of funds or advertising without the
permission of the list owner.
Do not post a private message from someone else to the list
without their express knowledge and approval.
Private e mail threats and harassment may be reviewed and
dealt with in serious situations.
When posting to the list, please post your message to the
list in text only, since file attachments and graphics
cannot be processed by this list's software and html-based
e-mail is sent with coding that may be distracting to many
subscribers that receive text-only e-mail service.
The consequences for violating these guidelines may range
from a simple private reminder, to censure or suspension or
removal from the list depending upon the severity of the
offense.

JCT: Sounds like a betrayer's paradise. No criticisms
allowed. Even of saboteurs who would kill the list.
-----

RL: Of course those who can not live by such simple rules
for civil discussions will scream censorship if they are
taken to task, or pretend not to understand by asking "So
what did I do?" as if they had not a clue.

JCT: So those are the rules we must all obey, directly from
the Newsgroup Fuhrer. These are the grounds for censorship
on the net. I guess that this should make Erin feel better.
Turmel broke a lot of Richard's rules so censoring me must
be okay.

RL; But we know that among those who join reform community
discussion lists folks who are unable, for whatever reasons,
to abide by common sense rules for civil discussions are a
very, very tiny handful. Erin, it is unfortunate that you
have had to experience this kind of a problem, but it
happens to listowners from time to time.

JCT: Moderators just keep facing problems like Turmel having
to be censored.

RL: Some will say that I personally have been no better,
responding to the name calling and outright lies. Of course
this is true, and I regret it. It is hard not to react when
you slandered, or even when you see so many other good
activists slandered. I apologize for when I have reacted in
anger, and ask you all to forgive me. I should never let any
one person who wishes to turn civil discussion into a free
for all get under my skin. I must learn to recognize that
lowering myself to their standards accomplishes nothing, and
is exactly what those who are unwilling to engage in civil
discussions wish for.

JCT: You ran away from discussion with Michael Muirhead and
he never made fun of you like I do. He just kept proving
your allegations false until you unsubscribed in a huff to
them keep your opposition behind the scenes.

RL: Erin, know that we support you in your decision to close
down the yahoogroups discussion now. It has served it's
purpose well and we have learned much, even if what we have
learned has not always been exactly what you had hoped for
at the start.

JCT: Of course they support you in closing down my lines of
communication to your group. That's was the intention
from the start. Do you think Richard and his kennel of
Bitchcrafts join these groups I post to to read the chit
chat? And they come to the conclusion that they'll ask the
moderator to ban me or let them be moderators so they can do
it for them?

RL:Your activism, Erin, has inspired us all! Your stand in
Maryland for cannabis patients makes all of us who know
about it proud to say we know of you and your work!

JCT: All your activism will be permanently smeared and
you'll never be able to hold your head up high about it
again if you let Richard stress you into killing your group.
Sad but true. This is your real test, not your support in
the past. Just as Richard's real test came when he chose to
oppose my motion to end prohibition.

RL:We look forward to the rebirth of Parents Ending
Prohibition discussion list - and know that all who are
currently on the list, and all who have left because they
were not ready to handle less than civil discussions, will
be invited back to the new discussion list (without
thosepesky ads) and the new website.

JCT: And how about any who left because they don't like not
knowing what they didn't get to see because it was censored?

RL: In due time we are sure Parents Ending Prohibition will
take it's place among the great organizations of reform
which center their efforts towards supporting specific
communities, like the many state organizations, and groups
like Students for a Sensible Drug Policy
http://www.ssdp.orgTeachers Against Prohibition
http://www.teachersagainstprohibition.org/ LawEnforcement
Against Prohibition http://www.leap.cc and others.

JCT: With traitor Richard Lake at the helm making sure to
oppose Turmel's motion to end prohibition does not succeed,
I doubt parents ending prohibition will get very far.

RL: Parents is your idea, Erin. Nobody can ever take that
away from you. We parents, who live in fear, because of the
harm of prohibition, need theorganization that has been, and
will continue to be, your vision.

JCT: It was a great idea. Parents demanding the right to
choose mari-muffins instead of Prozac and Ritalin for
their kids are the strongest advocates possible. Sad to see
such a group die just because Richard needs to have me
censored.

RL: Personally, Erin and friends, I must spend the next few
weeks with somewhat lowered activity, as my wife and I
support my son, a long time medical cannabis patient who
will next week undergo a serious operation, neurosurgery, in
the hope that it can prevent him from becoming paralyzed
from the waist down slowly over the next few years - but
with a smallchance that the operation may even result in him
becoming paralyzed now. It is truly frightening for his
parents and grandparents to think about -- such an active
and successful young man facing these prospects. But we live
in hope, and thank everyone who has sent their kind wishes.

JCT: Wow. He opposes my motion to invalidate the law with
his own child to suffer for his success. What a rat to have
for a father.

Richard Lake
p.s. Erin, please hang in there! I will give you a call as
soon as I am able. We do love you!

JCT: A brown-nosing rat too.

>Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 07:20:27 -0700 (PDT)
>From: nickdabear@... (Morgan DragonStar)
>Subject: So Long, and thanks for all the fish...
>To: ParentsEndingProhibition@yahoogroups.com

MD: As this list wraps up it's current incarnation, I just
wanted to tell everyone thanks. Almost everyone. Mr. Turmel,
I am another moderator on this list. I am not Richard Lake,
nor have we ever chatted, phoned, or as much as exchanged
emails. Bottom line, I wanted to ban you from the list back
when the concept was first giving Erin torment.

JCT: Thanks for admitting your instincts. The only torment I
ever gave Erin was posting my medpot articles. Then
again, what's so tormenting about that? Oh right. When
Richar started complaining, that's when my stuff became
tormenting for her.

MD: I believe you need mental health help.

JCT: One of us must.

MD: As for the rest of us, I'll miss you, and hope to see
you all again when this re-incarnates. Hugs and Clean Cool
Water, Morgan

JCT: Boy are you quick to plan the funeral. No chance you
want the group to survive, is there.

=====
MD: "Evil? No, it's only evil if I don't care.
Wait a minute...
I don't."
Cap

JCT: Thanks for admitting it. I don't think I could have
indicted you any better than your own words. You don't care
who's evil and who's not, do you? Says it all.

So goodbye to a good idea. A forum for parents ending
prohibition. And remember, everything was just fine only
yesterday until, mysteriously, Erin felt under a great deal
of pressure to kill her baby. Everyone expresses their
understanding at how her baby must be deleted, except me,
and since they've been brown-nosing for quite a while, and I
don't, I guess the association of concerned parents dies
with Erin's capitulation to the supporters of prohibition.

What a failing note to end parentsendingprohibition on.
Banning the true Abolitionist at the urgings of the secret
Prohibitionists. I only did a whole post on this because
it's so amazing and instructive as to how the government
moles do their dirty work to make sure the groups they work
with don't ever succeed at actually doing anything positive
but talk.

I'll count the death of parentsendingprohibition as a
victory of me even though he's never managed to beat by
debate, just by censorship.

And keep in mind, these kinds of moles working against the
real purposes of groups are everywhere. I've exposed the 50
Years is Enough crew in Washington who suppressed every
mention of the UNILETS interest-free banking system to the
anti-bank protesters, the Mobilisation for Justice group who
censor every post, even the Bernard Lietaers of the
community currency world, the invited speakers who have it
all wrong, just go to show how the innocent are being
misled. Lietaer is supposed to be a community currency
champion and his latest post advocates staying with the
government's interest-bearing money.

As Fletcher Prouty's book Secret Team points out, the
government has their Judas agents posted everywhere. Lietaer
never responded to my charges. How could he? But everyone at
the International Journal of Community Currencies (IJCCR)
don't care. That is what I indict them of. Not caring who is
right and only caring about being as fair to the moles as to
the patriots.

For anyone who'd like to see or grab the archives before
Erin destroys them, they're at
http://yahoogroups.com/group/parentsendingprohibition/messages


--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel / http://www.medpot.net 613-562-0669