Talk:Marc Emery/Archive 1

Order of articles

first it should read biography then early career and personal life then all the others so its well done please debate before i start organizing.Vjiced (talk) 01:03, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Seeds and Bibles

Here is a story about bibles in China, a crime under Chinese law punishable by death, yet at times getting some culprits a slap on the wrist. Imagine if an American minister were smuggling illegal bibles into China (while remaining in the US), and the Chinese government were to seek his extradition to China to face criminal charges, and a lengthy sentence (or death) in a Chinese prison. Imagine a Canadian minister in the same position (in Canada).

Imagine how hysterical the request would seem to ordinary Westerners. Now, try to imagine either the Canadian or the US government arresting the minister and seriously considering the request.

-SM 14:06, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Marc Emery is no minister. He has fueled a lavish lifestyle from the proceeds of his sales to Americans. He has interfered with every single attempt at legalizing cannabis in Canada, hoping to put off the inevitable monetary loss once prohibition ends. By "helping" activists in Canada he contends to lead everyone and everything cannabis related. Emery has often protected his business interests by threatening those who oppose him with exposure to the police authorities. That has earned him the nickname "Marc the Narc" amongst earnest activists.

Imagine how hysterical it seems for him to claim protection from prosecution because he paid taxes.

-Alien Threat 11:42, 16 October 2005

The comment above is complete nonsense and slander. Marc is opposed to cannabis prohibition and has worked hard to bring about the end of it rather that trying to prolong it! And what "lavish" lifestyle is he talking about? This writer has been to Marc's home and has seen first-hand how he and Jodie live in a very Spartan apartment. Marc is no narc and never has been. How could one believe such nonsense and still realize that Marc has sponsored the Toker's Bowls with the assistance of BC's best cannabis growers (who have NOT been "ratted out" and have every reason to trust him and his magazine)?! The most well-known activists in Canada support Marc: Chris Bennett, David Malmo-Levine, Dana Larsen, Chris Goodwin, Tim Meehan, Alan Young, etc. Legalization activists outside of Canada also support Marc: Tommy Chong, Ed Rosenthal, Jason King, Jason Green, etc. Any questions on this issue? Contact me: Reverend Christopher Lawson, potpoetry@hotmail.com

I'd like to see well-sourced comment on either his alleged lavish lifestyle (and why it might be relevant), or evidence of any actual detrimental effect he has had on the legalization movement, or his secret desire to maintain a lock on the cannabis economy (which last assertion seems to bear no understanding of the history of the Netherlands). So far, it has mostly been anonymous, unsourced slander. I commend you on actually signing in before weighing in, now please show me some evidence.

But that would be a different discussion, irrelevant to my point. The above comment was intended to draw attention parallel, to the hysterical reaction by one country (US or China) to what it perceives as a threat, but more reasonable people- Canadians- might see as either a minor matter or a bold stand for an important truth, as well as the implicit hypocrisy of the US not respecting China's perception of its own interests, and yet prevailing upon Canada to join in its own hysteria.

-SM 18:51, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

PS Since when does a lavish lifestyle disqualify one as a high-profile minister, anyway?

Or indeed as a cannabis activist. It is unfortunate IMO that legitimate businessmen/women are unable to make healthy profits from the legal cultivation and sale of good quality cannabis becauser the law demands that only criminals engage in this trade. Emery sells seeds not cannabis, and it is hard to see how someone like him could other than gain from the legalisation of this product, SqueakBox 19:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Supporters of Marc Emery frequently try to find out who his opponents are then attempt to silence them. I personally don't give a damn about that, as far as I'm concerned M.E is a giant fraud and he knows it. He also knows me very well. You are children playing a grown-ups game, careful you don't get bruised. But soon this idiot will be in the hands of the americans...need I say more? As for my comments on the character of Mr.Emery you only need to search his comments to find the answer to the questions you pretend to be interested in. By lavish I mean being blitzed on narcotics, not wearing a suit. With seeds at $1 for a hundred( if legalized) Mr.Emery stood to lose everything...as if you didn't aleadry know that.

Alien Threat

Again, the Netherlands experience does not bear you out as to his business prospects- who better poised after prohibition than Marc to start the Vancouver equivalent of The Buldog, if he wanted (not Marc's style, really). Seed banks and coffehouses flourish in the Netherlands. It is about quality and volume. Producing seeds is low-cost, the number (10, 100, whatever) is only the quantity useful to one grower. The price will not change. Canada's seed banks already compete with the Netherlands.

Your contention that he has played the narcs against business rivals is most grave. You should either substantiate it, or withdraw it. As for the questions you raise, I pretend to be interested out of politeness, until you can substantiate them. There is much anonymous gossip trying to make it's way into the article. Again, I commend you for discussing here. Now, I'd like to see some proof.

Finally, I don't care about his private life, nor do I care about his non-cannabis views. I am supporting him, not canonizing him. I care that he has taken a unique public position, at no small cost to himself, so that someday we may be free of the broad evil that is prohibition. On that day, who would not owe him a debt of gratitude?

-SM 05:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

The idea that herb will be legalised and then everyone will be growing there own isn't credible. Who grows their own tobacco or coffee? Brews their own beer? etc. Almost nobody, any more than people make their own bread. I have read that if it were legalised in the UK ex dealers would be prohibited from participating in the market. This wouldn't apply to Emery as he has only been selling the seeds. Peter Tosh got it right. Legalise it and I will advertise it. There is a potential massive legal business in cultivating and marketing cannabis that would lead to legal profits (infinitely better than illegal ones!) so his advocacy of legalising marijuana would only be illogical were he to be personally barred from partaking in a legalised business. Otherwise he could only gain. The criminals who do fear losing their profits (those scared to do a hard day's work in order to make a decent profit) do not call for it to be legalised, they are too busy (in the UK at least) mixing good hash with tar, henna and other dubious substances, and have no desire to see cannabis legalised. Emery, as an advocate, is clearly not in this class. We don't know what he or any famous person is like as a person without a level of personal experience not relevant to an encyclopedia, but what you are saying about Emery's views on marijuana is not credible, and would only be so in a situation where he was personally barred or if legalisation meant a state monopoly (not credible in the developed 1st world). SqueakBox 15:59, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I have lived in Amsterdam for 10 years. cannabis is illegal, especially in the places where people buy the seeds for cultivation. Legal seeds are available in Holland for let's say tomatos. They are expensive which pisses off the farmers, but you still get a couple of hundred for under 10 guilders(now the €). The bulldog does not sell seeds, it sells pot and booze. Pot bars would work on par with bars and pay taxes as well. It is a different business, and can prosper with or without prohibition.

Emery says he never sold pot. It's a mute issue. There are many individuals in Vancouver who have already operated Pot Bars for years, I am one of them. So far I have had 3 such locations, which are known, a few more they have no idea of. Emery has sought to take advantage of the sort term gains and has gotten himself screwed, he should of remebered he lives in a house of glass before he started throwing stones at the devil! As for links to the information, you're the scholar, look them up or stop pretending they don't exist. If you persist in mouthing about it I will spend a few hours getting them together and posting them here, but I'm an old man now, you can do the running around.if If you really can't find them at mapinc.org and cc forum search function I'll send them in gladly.

Also how can you say you don't care about his non-cannabis views when this is an encyclopedia and examines every aspect of the subject exhaustively? This site is hardcore public freedom of informed speech , not cannabis culture...as Mr.Emery himself likes to say " you don't pay for this site, I do and I also do what I please". Hmm! Maybe I'll post the links on the main page, maybe the list of quotes where he threatens publicly and in the most vicious way. Cotler was only one of his many targets over the years. He just didin't expect all the publicity( and scrutiny- small dead animals blog-) over an arrest he didn't know was coming. Now the shit has hit the fan. A number of parady sites haved opened recently such as Cannabis Culture Cult at blogger

Alien Threat

Ten years in A'dam, I am most envious. So, are you now in A'dam, or V'dam? I am well aware of what the Bulldog is, I cited it not a seedbank, but only as a very commercial cannabiz play (which would suffer under enforced prohibition, as would the city, as you know). I don't care about his non-cannabis views only insofar as I support him in his current situation. As an editor of an article on Emery, I contextualise them as one would for any biographical subject, according to the biographical drivers motivating the article.

Tomatoes are not a good analogy here, as to the price of seeds. The care that has gone into the breeding of cannabis varieties will continue to reflected in the price, regardless of prohibition. It is not so much "ten seeds", as it is a certified, viable copy of a quality genome for use by one grower. The big issue, I think, is whether one enforces copyrights (or protects in the public domain), what is fair use of a seed (make crosses, or inbreed for more seeds and sell them). Here we drift towards Monsanto territory, be very afraid. However, a three month grow is too big a risk for dubious seed. Grower confidence in reputations made during prohibition will continue as brand equity into legalisation.

As for your allegations, it is to you to do the research- when you hit the edit button on an article, you are a scholar too, with the responsibilities to objective truth that come with it. If you like, please post the links here on the talk page, and we'll discuss how it should shape the article. I ask this not to be difficult, nor out of disinterest, but because that it is how Wiki works. Alternatively, if you'd like to gossip, rant, opine, jeer and comment, you're welcome to do it here— God knows it's therapeutic sometimes.

-SM 00:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Re UK baring past dealers from legal sales, so petty, they just don't get it! -SM

We know where Alien threat is because he hasn't opened an account and so his IP address is in the history. Link is http://cannabisculturecult.blogspot.com/, SqueakBox 01:17, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes I will indeed post the links! I never say anything I can't prove. And for the predictable squeakbox, I have a changing IP as if it should make any difference anyway? Also if it was my blog I would have said so. You should check out the MLF marijuana liberation front blog, that one is mine.

Alien Threat

Discussion of the morals of marijuana selling simply has no place here.

ThVa (talk) 02:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't give a fuck. FUCK SEATTLE. I hope people "don't" do anything horrible to the local police and prison workers.(read: slaver/kidnappers)

2 pics

We have the same pic twice. i cannot find more thanm 1 image at the top image:Marcemery.jpg|right|Marc Emery? Any ideas. otherwise it is a technmical issue that needs to be taken to the village pump, SqueakBox 15:59, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Sorted. Someone sneaked another image in at the bottom, SqueakBox 20:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Cannabis Culture Cult?!

Feel free to post your point of view, I will be very shortly.

Alien Threat

We can't have blogs in the external links section. TYo be honest your blog mostly just told me who you (presumably?) are. Is your problem with cannabis? are you against it? SqueakBox 20:03, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Blogs serve a source for journalistic research and are regulary published, remember the "nazi-jew" remark! It all started from the small dead animals blog. Anyway what's your problem with allowing information? You seem very protective of your version of the truth?! My point all along is that your "opinions" will be challenged. The question is are you big enough or mature enough to handle it?

Alien Threat aka piece of shit

"seeds— seedlings in prohibition logic" too anti-legalisation

I changed the wording in the article because it seemed unneccessarily anti-legalisation. revert back if anyone has a problem and post here. -matt

Perhaps you misread: that the feds would equate a mere seed in an envelope with a seedling plant shows how intent they are to exagerate cannabis activity. See also the linked table, wherein you find,

Under the 1994 Crime Act, the threshold for sentencing a death penalty in relation to marijuana is the involvement with the cultivation or distribution of 60,000 marijuana plants (or seedlings) or 60,000 kilograms of marijuana.

...or you would have found it, had I not broken my own link to the comment at the far end yesterday. =0

All fixed, =D

-SM 14:20, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

The DEA has offcially said they will not nor did they ever consider seeking the death penalty in marc emery's case.

that notion was started by marc's propagandist sycophants. here is a snippet from the dea site.

EMERY and co-defendants GREGORY KEITH WILLIAMS, 50, of Vancouver, BC and MICHELLE RAINEY-FENKAREK, 34, of Vancouver, BC are charged with Conspiracy to Distribute Marijuana, Conspiracy to Distribute Marijuana Seeds

and Conspiracy to Engage in Money Laundering. The charges carry penalties of 10 years to life in prison.

http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/states/newsrel/seattle072905.html

i edited the page to reflect facts, not inferences.

Hey guess what? the FACT is the he is eligible for the death penalty, that has nothing to do with inferences or anything to do with whether they will charge him or not, so dont try to be a smart-ass. -matt

Emery and the NDP

Actually, Emery did endorse the NDP in the last election (he had Layton on this television show and also explicitly encouraged an NDP vote). I read something in the media that he's supporting Svend Robinson in his campaign this election.

NDP Leader Jack Layton is calling for the full legalization of marijuana. He made the comments in an interview on the website Pot TV and they're causing a bit of a rift in his caucus. The party currently supports decriminalization...but stops short of calling for full legalization. That may soon change. Marijuana Party members are seeking NDP nominations in a number of federal ridings. And in a 20-minute gushing interview with Jack Layton, Marc Emery, the founder of Pot TV urged pot activists to support the NDP. We end the show with some highlights. CBC The Current November 2004

VANCOUVER/CKNW(AM980) - NDP Vancouver Centre candidate Svend Robinson says he welcomes any support for his campaign - including that of BC Marijuana Party Leader Marc Emery.

Emery was granted permission by a judge to get involved with the federal election on one condition, that he didn't advocate the selling of pot seed.

However, Emery is clear he won't be running. Rather he'll be throwing his support behind NDP candidate Svend Robinson. In fact, he says, Robinson approached him for help with his campaign.

Robinson says any support is welcomed, "If Marc Emery chooses to get out there and bang on doors and phone constituents in Vancouver Centre in support of New Democrats and my candidacy, certainly he's free to do that."

Robinson says he'll do anything he can to prevent Emery from being extradited to the U-S to face prison time.

CKNW news item

• I stand corrected, in that case. CJCurrie 00:24, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

---

Timeshifter 23:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC): CC forum thread URLs can be greatly shortened. I changed this: http://www.cannabisculture.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=prince&Number=1185216&Main=1185216 to this: http://www.cannabisculture.com/forums/showflat.php?Number=1185216

It links to the same forum thread. And the URL is easier to pass on in email, forums, etc. without wordwrapping to 2 lines. Which can often make a URL not work right.

Bias

This page seems very biased toward pro-marijuana usage. From the lack of sources pointing toward how Marc broke the law to the wording of the document itself (i.e., "'laundering' the profits"?), this article presents a wholly one-sided point of view. Yes, smoking pot is fun, but do some political research.

As was stated earlier (in a hypocritical manner), this is NOT a forum (this applies to BOTH sides of this discussion!). Research both sides of the argument and provide objective statements. If you're right, there's no need for cheap slander or opponent bashing. Be reasonable, provide for-and-against arguments, and let the reader decide. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.210.193.198 (talk • contribs) .

It doesn't appear biased to me as his problems with the US authorities have been fully discussed. The US claim a lot of non-United States people are breaking their laws but for us to then claim that he has broken US law without an extradition or trial having taken place would be an extreme pro-US POV that has no place in this article or this encyclopedia. The US gov activities have been described and have not been condemned, so what is the problem exactly? (please bring specific details to this page). Perhaps you would care to allude to the alleged hypocricy, keeping civil and avoiding engaging in personal attacks (which your allegations of hypocrisy , wrong IMO, are), SqueakBox 16:01, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

"us to then claim that he has broken US law without an extradition or trial "

marc emery himself does not dispute the charge of him sending cannabis seeds into the US in violation of its laws, he has freely admitted to it many times, the latest being in a 60 minutes segment. he is fighting the extradition, not the charge that he violated US law. lenny zelig

Okay, that can go in the article. Unfortunately we don't get Canadian tv here (though we get an abundance of US tv) so I didn't get to see the programme but I am sure it was a good source of information for the article. What we must not do is imply US law is either right or democratic (another way of saying it is right). This is an international encyclopedia and cannabis seds are not universally illegal, eg they are legal in the UK. I guess the moral, as with that of The Enron Three, is not to do business with the States. Of course if the US spook enough non-US people no-one will want to do any business with the country, with predictable consequences. I haven't reached that point myself, of course, or I would not be contributiong to this American-based encyclopedia, SqueakBox 14:02, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

something you might want to include

you should mention the letter by the head of the DEA which really show one of their main motivations for going after him, his financing of legalization.

Quote:

Karen Tandy, Adminitrator for the DEA, admits the truth

The US Drug Enforcement Administration admitted on the day of Marc Emery's arrest that his investigation and extradition were politically motivated, designed to target the Marijuana Legalization organization that Emery spearheaded and ran for over a decade in Canada.

Here is the original text of DEA Administrator Karen Tandy's statement released on July 29th, 2005:

Today's DEA arrest of Marc Scott Emery, publisher of Cannabis Culture Magazine, and the founder of a marijuana legalization group -- is a signficant blow not only to the marijuana trafficking trade in the U.S. and Canada, but also to the marijuana legalization movement.

His marijuana trade and propagandist marijuana magazine have generated nearly $5 million a year in profits that bolstered his trafficking efforts, but those have gone up in smoke today.

Emery and his organization had been designated as one of the Attorney General's most wanted international drug trafficking organizational targets -- one of only 46 in the world and the only one from Canada.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars of Emery's illicit profits are known to have been channeled to marijuana legalization groups active in the United States and Canda. Drug legalization lobbyists now have one less pot of money to rely on.

Here is a link to the actual image of the letter http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4685.html

Looks from this that he is more of a political prisoner than a big drug king pin.

This is true. The U.S. have gone after no other seed company (there are many based in Europe, Africa, and all over the world) because they do not donate to political causes to help marijuana related causes. What is even more scary is that if Marc is extradited to the United States he can get life in prision or get put to death because under Drug Kingpin legislation in the United States, selling over 60,000 seeds qualifies for the death penalty. The trial starts today and lasts five days, unless longer time in needed—Christopher Mann McKay 15:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Need clairification on what laws were used

This article needs clear clarification on exactly what law(s) are involved that allow a canadien citizen to be arrested and taken into custody by a forien government police force, taken out of the country and tried in a forien court of law. Someone needs to explain how in the hell is that even possible? That just blows my mind, that we here in canada will actually allow this to happen. Since when did canada become the 51st state? - Dean

I agree, there are issues of sovereignty that must be addressed. There is absolutely no warrant for a government to arrest a foreign citizen for breaking ITS laws while on an other's state's soil. Under the apparent logic of this case, the KSA can have us all extradited for lashing for downing a beer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.12.203.97 (talk) 22:22, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect statement

"He currently faces extradition to the United States where he faces a possible life sentence on charges of selling marijuana seeds and using the profits to fund pro-cannabis legalization activities, neither of which activities are against Canadian law"

Selling marijuana seeds in Canada is illegal; however, the Canadian government has allowed Emery Seeds to operate as a valid business because the chief of police says they need to focus their resources towards more serious crimes, such as cocaine and firearms. The fact that the Canadian government has allowed Emery Seeds to operate for a number of years, even though it is technically illegal to sell marijuana seeds, and the fact that Emery Seeds pays taxes on all their profits, are some of Marc's main arguments against the extradition. —Christopher Mann McKay^talk 23:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

poor sources

This article is very poorly sourced. Per WP:BLP major trimming is needed. I'll start with the whole libertarian thing. Note, I'm saying I know the information is wrong. It seems very plausable. It's just not sourced to the standards required by WP:BLP. --Rob 02:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Note to self

Return "Libertarian" section when I have the sources at hand. CJCurrie 03:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Note to ALL

May I remind all of you that this is a discussion page for improvements to the article, not a moral debate, or a debate as to whether or not Marc Emery is a greedy little narc. Keep your personal fights to yourself for Christs sake, and state the facts with discernible evidence and sources, or not at all. Last I heard, we dont allow hearsay on wikipedia without completely explaining it as such. You know who you are. Thesetrixaintforkids 19:56, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Early Career

The Early Career section states "In July, 1992, Emery sold City Lights Book Store and moved to Sumatra with his wife and two children".
Was he married then, and does he have children? According to the Globe and Mail, he claimed to have had a vasectomy at age 19. Can anyone verify this statement is correct? Discotraxx 18:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

He has had a few marriages, he does claim he had a vasectomy at the age of 19, and his children are adopted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.180.67.209 (talk) 07:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Jodie Emery

Her age, especially in relation to Marc Emerys, is quite relevant. If the article's going to mention her at all it should have her age. Greg343 20:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Based on our policy on biographies of living people, we can't mention this sort of thing, if it's not covered independently. MySpace is an invalid source. --Rob 01:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright, my apologies. I'll look a little harder for a source. Thanks for the explanation though. Greg343 19:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding "Drug Dealer" Remark at beginning

Calling him a 'drug dealer' has no place in an unbiased encyclopedia article, in fact, slander and libel laws in the United States could be used to proesecute anyone who calls anyone who has either not admitted to dealing drugs or not been convicted of dealing drugs, a 'drug dealer'. I can't stand Narc Lamery personally, but get this 'drug dealer' crap out of this article NOW, and don't let it come back until/unless he is convicted.

Whoever keeps editing the opening line to read that Emery is a drug dealer who became an activist is either biased against the man or ignorant of his life events. He was a bookstore owner in London, Ontario with a healthy predilection for pot, and a longtime activist before his seed-selling operation in Vancouver. Follow the facts. Whoever is making these edits has a personal bone to pick. That is not what Wikipedia is about!

Response: There is both evidence in the media and on file by lawmakers that Emery did, indeed sell cannabis seeds which are to all accounts drugs. He was a merchant of marijuana seeds by way of the Internet, and made millions of dollars. All personal thoughts are aside from this issue, and I will merge your edit with mine. There are no personal matters to this... please remember to keep neutrality on Wikipedia with your contributions, otherwise you will be blocked.

"Drug dealing" is not an example or slanted text. Even the Wikipedia article of drug dealing acknowledges dealing cannabis as a controlled substance or contraband. Please, anybody with the intention of vandalizing this page to remove the drug dealer title, should remember to keep neutrality on Wikipedia with your contributions - otherwise an administrator shall have to intervene.

---

Above edits have had signatures removed --------

Responses:

• Please sign your contributions by adding four tilde's (the little squiggly, at the top left on your keyboard).
• Please don't return to this page and remove SineBot's additions showing who has made posts.

These two actions will help everyone to understand the conversation.

• Cannabis seeds do not have sufficient THC content to qualify as drugs. They may certainly be used to grow drugs. They may also qualify as "prohibited substances" and selling them may indeed be illegal. That does not equate to being a "drug dealer".
• If there is evidence in the media and on file by lawmakers, it should be very simple to add these references to this article. Rather than add text to the article simply stating that Emery was a drug dealer, instead provide your reference to a reliable source which states that Emery was a drug dealer. Then no-one can complain.

Remember the important policies, WP:RS, WP:V, WP:NPOV and we can all get along fine! Franamax (talk) 07:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Cannabis seeds are the product of, and the regenerating factor to marijuana and they are by all accounts that I know of very valid drugs, and they are illegal as well. To be a drug dealer means to be a merchant or seller of drugs, and this would be a prime example of drug dealing, as the DEA and other worldwide law abiding citizens would attest. I've merged the term with other edits, but after reviewing WP:RS, WP:V and WP:NPOV, I've seen nothing to constitute the removal of this term. I did verify this with a credible newspaper, the Washington Post with a direct letter from the DEA. The Canadian AM news station CKNW acknowledged that Emery saw marijuana sellers as drug dealers in an unrelated story about new government drug policy. I included the reference to that story. Thanks for your help, Franamax. I'm glad nobody can complain now. :) --75.68.207.136 (talk) 10:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)e1foley

If you know an account that says a cannabis seed is a drug, please provide the reference. The DEA is not the same thing as "worldwide law". You have supplied a letter to the editor, from the DEA - this is not NPOV.

You might also look at WP:BLP, which applies to this living person. Unless you can supply a very firm reference that this person is noted specifically as a "drug dealer", we can't have it there. The fact that Emery has sold cannabis seeds is noted directly below the spot where you are trying to insert your POV. That fact is uncontroversial and well-established. What more needs to be put into this biography? Franamax (talk) 10:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I've supplied three outside sources, one being from Emery's concern for drug dealers going to jail, sympathetically for their marketing position on marijuana. I'm going to go out on a whim and say that you might be a fan of this subject, and that may lead to some biased judgment or conflict-of-interest. Please take this moment to review the WP:NPOV, so that this mistake doesn't happen again. After three solid accounts of public official commentary through credible news agencies, any attempt to remove this article will be considered an act of vandalism. Please remember to keep your contributions neutral, and I will in return, as I have.

Mr Emery and his supporters say he is a pot crusader, not just a regular drug dealer. -Jared Ferrie, The Age; August 31, 2005

Hi e1foley, again, please sign and date your posts separately and try to keep them in order, it helps people to follow the conversation. You've now put four [e/c'd, now there's five] references in - the letter from the DEA, two references to the US charges Emery is facing with quotes from US enforcement officials asserting that selling seeds is drug-dealing, and a reference correctly noting that marijuana sellers are drug dealers. You still haven't established any NPOV that seeds are drugs. Thus it is still not correct to call Emery a drug dealer, a seed dealer yes, a prohibited-substance dealer yes, but not a drug dealer. You could change the wording to say "considered by some to be a former drug-dealer" and we can decide whether that is appropriate in the first sentence. The reference to selling seeds is already in the article, there's no need to add the wording you desire, plesae reconsider. Franamax (talk) 10:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

There are scientific references which state that seeds contain plenty of cannabinoids, although not identical to the type of a matured plant, but just as present, and often more potent. I encourage you to read up on this topic through the article above, and through this reference. I don't know what time zone it is where you are, but here, it's bed time. We'll continue to split hairs tomorrow. Until then, deletion of any legitimate and verified information would be considered an act of vandalism. I've reviewed and respected all rules and guidelines, and I ask the same be done likewise.e1foley (talk) 10:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.207.136 (talk)

I've seen the latest revision. Fair enough. --75.68.207.136 (talk) 07:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I thought it was a good compromise too, but now you're edging it up a sentence at a time, almost as though you want the article to start "Marc Emery is a drug dealer!". Let's keep the negative sentence at the end of the first paragraph, it's in good balance there and gets the point across. Franamax (talk) 07:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Those of you who are on a crusade to keep the 'drug dealer' reference in this article are MORONS. Unless you can prove that at least one of Emery's customers crushed up the expensive seeds he bought from Emery to extract cannibinoids from them, rather than grow potent cannabis plants with them, you cannot call him a 'drug dealer' any more than you can call an owner of a chemical company which sells the various highly-controlled chemicals needed to make crystal meth, to an unauthorized buyer, a 'drug dealer'. You can call him a 'facillitator of drug dealers' if you insist, but you cannot call him a drug dealer, PERIOD. GET OVER IT. It's also irrelevant that 'media and government sources call him a drug dealer'. I call him an asshole and a jerk, and that is not relevent in an encyclopedia article, either. The exact nature of his legal problems is clearly spelled out in this article and that is what is appropriate for an encyclopedia.

Unsigned anonymous editor above, please keep it civil.

e1foley, you said "fair enough" above then went on to change things. Convention is to place the neutral statements first, followed by other views. You've got your drug-dealer reference in the first paragraph and I haven't yet put a cite tag on "made millions of dollars". It works well at the end of the paragraph, lets leave it there. When you last reverted, you also removed my content addition clarifying which government was making statements, so you contradicted your own references. I'm going to put the article back to the state where I think the three of us involved here can best agree. If that's still not enough, maybe we should go looking for more opinions? Franamax (talk) 09:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Franamax, the manner in which I expressed the facts I expressed has no bearing on the validity of those facts. Wikipedia is not a democracy or a place where facts must take a back seat to opinions in order to make a 'compromise' for these narco-nazi twits, whether they represent a majority opinion or not. I mean, look at the twit who claims this is a 'pro-drug' article because of the word 'laundering', which is in fact part of the US govt's case against him and 'money laundering' is a common accusation made against gangsters by lawmakers. So these twits can't even recognize their own narco-nazi buzzword propoganda, instead their paranoid minds attribute it to the 'pro-legalization' faction. See, that's the problem with the popularity of Wikipedia. It was great when it started and only smart people wrote it. Now everyone tries to edit it, and the fact is, a vast majority of people in any population are stupid, and even worse, they don't know they're stupid. And as long as people act as if Wikipedia is a democracy, and that facts are less important than 'making everyone happy', it's going to turn into a cesspool of useless nonsense quicker than it became the useful respository of information it originally was.

You know what, you could be absolutely right on that, or a bit right and a bit wrong, or completely wrong, but you do have the chance to express your opinions here. However we are all trying our best to do what we each think is right and it doesn't help to throw around insults, "moron" and "twit" are insulting words, please don't use them, we all have to try hard to comment on the content, not the contributor. When you start insulting people, you get on the train to permanent-block-town and then anyone else who might be using that same IP address some other time get blocked too.

Please sign your posts with 4 tilde's, keep them all in order, watch the language and hopefully sign up with a user id, we need lots of help! We're all stupid in our own ways, that's why it's important to talk quietly and work it out. Cheers! Franamax (talk) 10:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Since when marijuana seeds contains any THC? How retarted one can be to say that? He can be called "Drug dealer" ONLY if marijuana seeds are sheduled as drugs in USA or Canada but THEY ARE NOT. Ok, i agree that selling seeds in USA (maybe in Canada too) is illegal but not because they are considered drugs because you can describe something as drug only if it contains ANY sheduled substance. So all those who are selling spoons are heroin dealers? Or all those who are selling bongs and pipes are marijuana dealers? Be reasonable! For example in eastern europe where i live there are a lot of industrial hemp growing in gardens and it does contain some THC but the amount is SO small that no one can imagine to call someone a drug dealer or pot grower if you are having them in harden. And i dont think that seed of marijuana can contain even as that much unless you show me the exact reference that could prove your claim that seed contains ANY THC.--81.198.240.220 (talk) 20:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that they contain THC when they are grown whereas other seeds don't, so seeds are useless to smoke but cultivate them for a few months and you have a potent product, hence the regulations. Thanks, SqueakBox 20:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, i know that PLANTS may contain THC but this guy was selling SEEDS. Can you catch the difference? I know that from the seed you can grow maybe the most potent marijuana but seed itself is without any THC and 'this guy was selling seeds!!!. One can be called drug dealer only if he is caught selling any scheduled substance but what scheduled substance is present in seed? If he had sold some THC containing marijuana plants through his internet shop than he could be called drug dealer but he was not because he was selling seeds on his shop that do not contain any THC. As i said he can be called marijuana seed seller and thus involved in criminal activity because it is not allowed. He can be called Marijuana seeds dealer but not drug dealer. All the fuss here is about the term Drug dealer and i am not saying that he is not guilty in crime because it may be that in Canada or USA its illegal to sell seeds but he is not guilty as Drug dealer but as marijuana seed seller--81.198.240.220 (talk) 20:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

My thinking is that the drug dealer part in the beginning of the article should state: "He has been a labeled a drug dealer and drug kingpin by various federal officials in the USA" I think saying "he has been called" in poor phrasing - "you can call me anything, just not late for dinner" and all that. Sherpajohn (talk) 20:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Section has been reworded into better context, no longer uses "called" jason76 (talk) 11:22, 1 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.33.242.15 (talk)

Franamax, please keep this article neutral. Your vandalisms are not helping, and we need to keep vandalisms away. If you are interested in modifying this article, please test it in the sandbox first. --216.66.107.38 (talk) 03:17, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks anonymous IP editor for your advice. Can you look over my 5,547 other edits to English Wikipedia to spot any other "vandalisms"? If you look over this talk page, you'll see that we've extensively covered the subject of what weight to put on the characterization of Emery as a "drug dealer". Yourself, and several other anonymous editors, seem to feel a need to see "many" people making this characterization, and to feel a need to repeat as often as possible that ZOMG He's a drug-dealer! In fact, if you carefully inspect the references, including the redundant ones you yourself have provided, you will see that the reliable sources are reporting that agents of the US government characterize Emery as a drug-dealer.

Rather than making spurious accusations of vandalism, I would suggest that you study our policies on neutral point of view and attribution among others. This is not the place for your anti-drug soapboxing - we report the bald facts, as reported by verifiable and reliable sources.

Your recent edit introduces redundant sources re-stating independently verifiable facts and re-introduces the problematic usage of "many", implying a plurality. As such, I will once again revert it. The onus is on you to introduce sources to justify your use of the term "many". Franamax (talk) 03:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Opinion noted. However, as there is a general opinion of this person as a drug dealer for selling marijuana products (not just by US officials), there is a grammatical obligation to pluralize. We've seen examples of this in Canadian newscasts, American newscasts, amongst conversations in the Mothers Against Drug Dealers, as well as a copious overall consensus, although not one that everyone agrees with. Therefore, instead of pointing out one organization being his sworn enemy, we can fairly say that he's described as a drug dealer by many people. Your removing of these sources is characteristic of a vandal, and while I can understand that you hold yourself in high regard for spending a wealthy amount of time in front of your computer, this is not your sandbox. We have a different page for that in which you may experiment with your opinions on. PLEASE refer to the NPOV policy so that you may re-evaluate your purpose, or possibly emotional attachment for this page, and that we may continue to make this article constructive. It would please you if I found more sources? --216.66.107.38 (talk) 06:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, please do find RS to back up your claims. I'm not sure how to proceed here, you keep using the "sandbox" term, one of the first things a new editor becomes familiar with. On the other hand, you're displaying many of the signs of a subtle POV-warrior. Do you have a registered account? You have an amazing grasp for all of nine edits - though you do seem to have a fixation on "drugs". So yeah, you know the score - bring it. OR, RS, V, N, BLP, ATT - what's your wiki-point? What's your source for "conversations in the Mothers Against Drug Dealers"? Franamax (talk) 07:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello I'm not surre if I have the right discussion... I just wanted to know why my additions were blocked. Did I do something wrong>? --Macmedia71 (talk) 06:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

It appears to me that the only one crusading to keep a halo over Emery's head is Franamax... this guy sits in front of his computer and picks through all of his edits repetedly, sadly probably neglecting the other aspects of his life. Smart thing for you guys to do is let it go... I did a while back. I just sleep easy knowing that Emery is bound for a good amount of time in jail. So let Franamax do his thing while smoking his bong. --E1foley (talk) 06:38, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Macmedia71, I started a new thread at the bottom of this page to re-summarize these issues. We can discuss the fine points of your edits and my reverts there - I didn't want the discussion to get lost mid-page, since I take reversions seriously.

E1foley - how's it goin', you old POV-warrior you? Nice to see how much you've added to the 'cyclo since last time we talked. Keep throwin' that dirt around... Franamax (talk) 09:29, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

He 'dubbed' HIMSELF the 'Prince of Pot'

Can whoever wrote the text that claims the media 'dubbed' him the Prince of Pot, a nickname he heartily embraces please point to the source of this claim. Anyone who spent time on his Cannabis Culture webforums knows he arrogantly called himself the Prince of Pot for years, and slapped it on all of his press releases, which is the only reason the media picked up on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.180.67.209 (talk) 07:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Name of Prison: Source?

Is there a source for this? "Should Marc Emery fail in his fight against (sic) extradtion to the USA, he will serve his time at United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum Facility (ADX) in Florence, CO." Sherpajohn (talk) 20:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I beleive this was a hoax. It seems, Emery only became aware of this "story" from reading Wikipedia. --Rob (talk) 21:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Typos

Just spotted and corrected a few typos. 63.88.67.230 (talk) 22:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Not surprising; written by stoners no doubt.

Once again on the "drug dealer" topic

Hello to the relentless stream of new editors determined to plaster "drug dealer, drug dealer, drug dealer" all over this article. This article is about a living person, not about ideological viewpoints on drug use. It is for neither encouragement nor condemnation of drug use, it is to describe the notable and reliable facts concerning Marc Emery.

The "drug dealer" issue has been extensively discussed here already and has been resolved. The claims of US government (i.e. drug enforcement) officials are given a prominent position in the lead section and are well-sourced. There is no value in loading up the article with repetitions of the fact that the US government claims that Emery is a drug dealer. Especially with selective quoting of sources, such as the recent use of a CBS News story - which somehow overlooked the quotes in that story from a member of the Canadian Senate, ridiculing those claims.

Please strive for neutral weighting and reliable sourcing here. Franamax (talk) 04:38, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, the cycle of adding "international members of the media" to the list of those labelling him a drug dealer is not accurate. Merely reporting what an offical states is not "labelling". None of the linked articles indicate the media is making a point of labelling him anything. sherpajohn (talk) 09:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Why is marijuana illegal

Soapboxing hidden

   *  Racism
   * Fear
   * Protection of Corporate Profits
   * Yellow Journalism
   * Ignorant, Incompetent, and/or Corrupt Legislators
   * Personal Career Advancement and Greed

These are the actual reasons marijuana is illegal.

Anslinger was an extremely ambitious man, and he recognized the Bureau of Narcotics as an amazing career opportunity -- a new government agency with the opportunity to define both the problem and the solution. He immediately realized that opiates and cocaine wouldn't be enough to help build his agency, so he latched on to marijuana and started to work on making it illegal at the federal level.

Anslinger immediately drew upon the themes of racism and violence to draw national attention to the problem he wanted to create. He also promoted and frequently read from "Gore Files" -- wild reefer-madness-style exploitation tales of ax murderers on marijuana and sex and... Negroes. Here are some quotes that have been widely attributed to Anslinger and his Gore Files:

   "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."

   "...the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."

   "Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death."

   "Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."

   "Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing"

   "You smoke a joint and you're likely to kill your brother."

   "Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind."

And he loved to pull out his own version of the "assassin" definition:

   "In the year 1090, there was founded in Persia the religious and military order of the Assassins, whose history is one of cruelty, barbarity, and murder, and for good reason: the members were confirmed users of hashish, or marihuana, and it is from the Arabs' 'hashashin' that we have the English word 'assassin.'"

A picture named hearst.jpg Yellow Journalism

Harry Anslinger got some additional help from William Randolf Hearst, owner of a huge chain of newspapers. Hearst had lots of reasons to help. First, he hated Mexicans. Second, he had invested heavily in the timber industry to support his newspaper chain and didn't want to see the development of hemp paper in competition. Third, he had lost 800,000 acres of timberland to Pancho Villa, so he hated Mexicans. Fourth, telling lurid lies about Mexicans (and the devil marijuana weed causing violence) sold newspapers, making him rich.

Some samples from the San Francisco Examiner:

   "Marihuana makes fiends of boys in thirty days -- Hashish goads users to bloodlust."

   "By the tons it is coming into this country -- the deadly, dreadful poison that racks and tears not only the body, but the very heart and soul of every human being who once becomes a slave to it in any of its cruel and devastating forms.... Marihuana is a short cut to the insane asylum. Smoke marihuana cigarettes for a month and what was once your brain will be nothing but a storehouse of horrid specters. Hasheesh makes a murderer who kills for the love of killing out of the mildest mannered man who ever laughed at the idea that any habit could ever get him...."

And other nationwide columns...

   "Users of marijuana become STIMULATED as they inhale the drug and are LIKELY TO DO ANYTHING. Most crimes of violence in this section, especially in country districts are laid to users of that drug."

   "Was it marijuana, the new Mexican drug, that nerved the murderous arm of Clara Phillips when she hammered out her victim's life in Los Angeles?... THREE-FOURTHS OF THE CRIMES of violence in this country today are committed by DOPE SLAVES -- that is a matter of cold record."

Hearst and Anslinger were then supported by Dupont chemical company and various pharmaceutical companies in the effort to outlaw cannabis. Dupont had patented nylon, and wanted hemp removed as competition. The pharmaceutical companies could neither identify nor standardize cannabis dosages, and besides, with cannabis, folks could grow their own medicine and not have to purchase it from large companies —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.34.152.198 (talk) 16:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

This talk page is for discussing improvements to the Marc Emery article, not for soapboxing. As Wikipedia is not a discussion forum, I have collapsed the original post and will remove this thread in a few days. Franamax (talk) 20:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

History channel appearence

This guy has MAJOR black circles under his eyes? Is it because of the cannabis smoking he does or something else? Im guessing its because of the pot he smokes....

Who the hell wrote this67.171.77.202 (talk) 01:14, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Other appearences

It might be worth noting that he appeared in the documentary Super High Me.

Legality of Seeds in Canada

Please stop editing in the line that says "...despite seeds being legal in Canada". Marijuana seeds are NOT legal in Canada. Please see this source: R. v. Hunter, 2000 BCCA 363 (CanLII) http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2000/2000bcca363/2000bcca363.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.51.47.60 (talk) 04:17, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Messing up the System 1992 documentary

In 1992, when Chris Doty produced his doc "Marc Emery: Messing up the System", Doty was the SOLE scriptwriter. Jason Rip was not involved in the production of the video documentary in 1992Charliedavids (talk) 16:26, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Fine but next time you edit take care with the grammar, it said London writers and there was only one after your edit and I had to come in and tidy it up. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 18:10, 26 July 2013 (UTC)