Vision Vancouver Puppetmaster Joel Solomon Has a Sister Who Wants You to Know She Says ‘No’ to Drugs: Spotlight Please, On Ms. Linda Solomon
So there I was last Friday, having lunch with my old pal Tony Parsons–celebrating the Italian festival of Ferragosto, when the whirring of my iPhone interrupted another slow pour of grappa.
There it was, a splendid afternoon with a great friend, yet interrupted by work. Argh!
I ignored the buzzing beacon as much as I could, but a few hours later, I finally got around to giving the lone message from that afternoon a quick read.
It was from Linda Solomon.
Don’t know who she is? Let me help.
Ms. Solomon is the sister of Vision Vancouver godfather Joel Solomon. She runs something called, ‘Vancouver Observer’, which, judging from a lengthy perusal, I assume is meant to be taken seriously as an online news source.
It appears that Ms. Solomon is extremely upset with me, and for, according to her, good reason. On August the 12th I wrote, this post, which apparently provided Ms. Solomon with unending indigestion among other disturbances.
Here, below, is Ms.Solomon’s note to me, unedited and in its entirety:
Dear Mr. Tsakumis,
Please consider removing your description of me as a “dope heroine” from your Gregor Robertson post. As the mother of two boys, one a teenager, I have to ask you to be more considerate and factual. I do enjoy a glass of wine with dinner, but when it comes to marijuana, I’m simply not a fan nor am I an advocate in any sense.This is a well-known fact about me. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter and i look forward to you correcting the error.
Regards,
Linda Solomon
Now, in her objection, Ms. Solomon uses the phrase, “dope heroine” and requests that I remove it, because, among other reasons, she prefers wine, isn’t a fan (of dope) and this is “well-known.”
Linda Solomon doesn’t smoke marijuana because she doesn’t like it and Heaven forbid that her strapping young lads have a read of Mommie being ridiculed on the internet.
But what’s the real story behind Ms. Solomon’s objection?
Let’s have a look.
Here, below, is the EXACT quote I used in the story when I referred to Ms. Solomon. Read it carefully.
“Oh, but Vision (Vancouver) has Linda Solomon (in the media), sister of Joel Solomon and dope legalization (emphasis added) heroine, who routinely runs pro-dope articles (emphasis added) in her ‘Vancouver Observer’. (More like, ‘Vancouver Occupation’!)”
You’ll notice the word LEGALIZATION, which Ms. Solomon omitted in her objection. You’ll also notice I NEVER ONCE suggested that she’s even been in the same room as many of her brother’s Hollyhock pals, who routinely smoke dope. Nothing, nada.
I never suggested she’s taken a bloody Advil. Zip.
But she read it (because she’s such a proficient “journalist”?) as my suggesting she was a consumer.
No, Linda darling, I was simply making the TRUE statement, that you routinely publish pro-dope articles in the ‘Vancouver Observer’ (and have only ONCE allowed a piece to go forward about the perils of legalization) so I concluded (without a huge stretch) that while you may not consume the wretched weed (who really cares?) that you are considered by many in the blogosphere to be an editor that favours the (insane) legalization of dope.
In fact, your publication, is often cited by other dope LEGALIZATION publications as being favorable in this regard.
Can’t imagine why that would be?
No?
How ’bout because of this? Oh, and what about this? And this? How ’bout this beaut? Don’t forget this!
Oops, definitely can’t forget this…
So, you have no idea, Ms. Solomon, of how one might arrive at the conclusion, that regardless of your preference for Chablis or Merlot, and despite that you don’t toke (I really couldn’t care less), that your publication (as dope hero pedestal), and by extension, YOU, are a “dope LEGALIZATION heroine”???
I’m sorry if that offended either of your fine lads, but the evidence is sitting there on the pages of you own publication.
But while were at it, maybe YOU could answer some questions for me.
1) Are you an advocate of legalizing any or all drugs?
2) Why would earth-loving New Ageists like your brother, Joel, think that their beloved Hollyhock–a holistic, mystical, (allegedly) energy-positive Xanadu–should be located on an island where, in case you weren’t aware, a major local economy is marijuana grow-ops? Cortes Island is loaded with them. I saw evidence of some myself when I was on the island two weeks ago. Marijuana grow-ops are a very dangerous proposition and there are some pretty prominent people that still regularly vacation on the island, like your brother Joel’s hand-picked puppet, the current Mayor of Vancouver–he lived on Cortes Island, full-time, for years–and still maintains a sprawling (former?) farming estate there.
No judgements, just wondering…
Any comment, Ms. Solomon?
I have known more than 10 people who have suffered from Psychosis brought on by smoking Marijuana and it is not a pretty sight. Marijuana is anything but harmless.
I have only lived in Vancouver for a couple of years so I just looked up the Vancouver seed bank and see that their third best seller is Opium Poppy seeds with links how to extract opium from from the plant. They are also based in the DTES. What a fine contribution to the community they are making!.
[Translate]
When I worked on the DTES I knew of NO ONE who took marijuana that didn’t suffer from some sort of serious problem. And not because of previous mental health issues–I still volunteer and nothing’s changed in that regard. Marijuana is very harmful, without question. I completely agree with you.
[Translate]
I don’t know where I stand yet on the legalization issues (I am for a positive outcome however achieved), but I know from seeing a loved one loose several productive years of his adolescence and young manhood (and perhaps still) to the effects of marijuana to understand that it is not harmless.
I saw a personality turn negative and motivation dissolve to the point where video games and the drug were everything. Some may think this is funny or even a worthwhile way to spend time – but this is an otherwise intelligent, motivated ambitious person with POTENTIAL that was (and I suspect is) being stripped and taken by this drug. Taking a valuable persons potential at that time in their life is criminal.
To those that claim it is not addictive and if you have any knowledge of this drug AT ALL – you are lying! Why would a person be motivated to use a substance several times a day and get unstable without it?
I’m not claiming alcohol is any better or that there are not strange misguided drug related issues in our culture.
But marijuana is dangerous.
[Translate]
A very thoughtful comment. Much appreciated.
[Translate]
Fine and true, it’s hardly a no-negatives narcotic, but what, exactly, does keeping the stuff illegal actually *do*? Does it stop people from using? Not that I’ve seen. Does it stamp out the trade and cultivation? No. Does it drive up the price, fund organized crime, and waste the (expensive) efforts of law enforcement agencies, endangering policemen in the process? Um…
Prohibition doesn’t actually stop people from doing something.
By all means, object to the stuff on moral, medical and social grounds. Stigmatize its use and the users. But don’t pretend that you can stop adults with money from putting things in their own bodies. It didn’t work with alcohol, it doesn’t work with the towering variety of drugs available today.
Legalization may well be “insane” as Alex says. But the status quo is stupid.
[Translate]
Simply put, you are drawing uneven parallels. Drugs, in general, are not good for you. Meaning that legalizing them only creates an opportunity for more addiction and deeper problems associated with decrim or legalization.
Making the govt the drug competition bureau is pure stupidity. Dealers laugh at this prospect. Time and again, when I’ve interviewed any of them, the sentiment is identical–longer sentences scare them, but won’t dissuade them. However, it’s a proven fact: Longer sentences, less crime. Educate the young ones who could be attracted by easy lucre and they are less likely to participate.
I don’t need to object to it on moral grounds. I have many friends who use drugs recreationally–I’m a Libertarian in many ways, I don’t judge as long as it’s not around my home, kids and wife (She hates drugs). From a medical perspective, why would you want to make more available a drug that is linked to schizophrenia in the young? Where would YOU draw the line? Starting to see the problem. Likely not…
[Translate]
The Thought of The Day
“’Linda Linda’… I lost my virginity on this tune on one rocky beach in Ramsgate.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3eNcb_8vK4&feature=related“
Aah, the Isle of Thanet in East Kent. An Oasis of aerosols.
What’s the story ‘Morning Glory’?
I remember it, as if it was ‘Yesterday’. John, Paul, George and Ringo were still getting chased.
My landlady demanded cash; Frank tried telling me, ‘The Lady is a Tramp’ but to no avail.
Some people believe that ‘Love is Blind’. Not me. Being a pragmatic and old school, I say that love is a Queen thing, ‘Crazy Little Thing Called Love’ and always blame Alcohol for it. Without it, let’s face it, we would have no imaginary friends, no future prospects and for sure we’d never get married. Some BC Budding politicians cannot even get an ‘Election’ right.
That was then. Now, it’s a Blackboard Jungle out here. Every Solo Man for himself. It says so, inside the pages of the Vision Tabloid Inc. Under the headline ‘Life’s a Bowl of Effing Cherries’
We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.
[Translate]
Way to go Alex hope you don’t “correct the error”
[Translate]
Believe me, I won’t. She misread (my charity is on display here) the comment and demands that I retract something I never wrote.
Some editor she is… LOL
[Translate]
Pretty good marijuana piece from the Left’s hero (David Suzuki) last night.
I wonder if they will embrace like they embrace every global warming piece?
Or is it not convenient?
[Translate]
Yeah, I’d seen it before–about the direct correlation between dope smoking and schizophrenia. But they all walk over it. Good on Suzuki (and the CBC!) for doing the piece. I must give credit where credit is due.
[Translate]
Would you or someone who has it please post a link to the piece?
[Translate]
Sure. I’ll try and get a link up next week. Or you can go directly to CBC’s website. It’s there.
[Translate]
got it:
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Shows/The_Nature_of_Things
Still waiting for the real estate piece…
[Translate]
This week…I’ll give you an analysis of the current market.
[Translate]
Legal drugs (i.e. prescribed by doctors, approved by Health Canada) are everywhere in our society. They kill 10,000 Canadians every year.
1 in 5 is taking an anti-depressant or anti-psychotic.
Don’t get me started on alcohol and the carnage it inflicts.
Crack cocaine and meth users (and the continuing failure to effectively address the problem) have destroyed the heart of downtown Vancouver, turning it into an open-air taxpayer-subsidized asylum.
The marijuana industry brings at least $5 Billion into the BC economy every year. That makes it the second or third biggest business in the province, far bigger than legal pharmaceuticals.
Marijuana users giggle at inappropriate moments, spend a fortune on really bad music, and then take a nap. Throw the book at them.
[Translate]
This argument is akin to: “we’re not in a recession look at Uganda now there’s a recession”
In other words just because alcohol is harmful AS WELL does not imply that marijuana is somehow OK. All that it implies is that marijuana is harmful as well.
We need to think harder and frankly we need to be a lot more selfish.
[Translate]
Where is laid the Lord arisen?
In the light we walk in gloom;
Though the Sun has burst his prison,
We know not his biding-room.
Tell us where the Lord sojourneth,
For we find an empty tomb.
‘Whence He sprung, there he returneth,
Mystic Sun, – the Virgin’s Womb.’
Assumpta Maria – Francis Thompson
[Translate]
Beautiful..
[Translate]
I am disgusted by the argument that the marijuana business must be good for BC, because it generates 5 billion dollars.
Great, So that the UNTAXED weed profits can go towards buying a nice split level in Abbotsford, a clutch of hospital lottery tickets (the better to launder, my dear) some bling from a reputable jewellwe (*cough) or a Hummer (the car AND t’other kind!).
And for landlord who will say “tax it, then!”, no mobbed up punk is going to do that, honey. They love the underground economy.
[Translate]
The argument to legalize and tax marijuana is presumptive of long-standing babble that promotes cannabis as a cultural and medicinal wonder herb. It’s nonsense. I will soon do an extensive post to show you why marijuana must never be legalized.
[Translate]
PS. If that’s the best “economic stimulas” we can come up with, I’m moving to Saskatchewan.
[Translate]
Rosetown is really quite lovely in the winter…
[Translate]
Who said tax it? Drop the criminal sanctions and the problems solve themselves.
Drug warriors (like Alex) perpetuate the black market whose huge profits sustain criminal organizations. There are two ways to look at this : they get a percentage of the profits (and thus work for the growers/dealers) or they’re just doctrinaire busy-bodies doing it for free, and therefore suckers.
With no profit there is no industry. Allow those who wish to grow as much as they wish, resulting in zero commercial value.
[Translate]
And that’s precisely the problem (read: fatal flaw) with your argument.
If you drop the criminal sanctions, then what? Decriminalization is effectively the same as legalizing it. The taxpayer, through govt participation, becomes the competition bureau for the dealer. Bump the THC in marijuana, increase the cut factor in cocaine. Results? More money for the dealer. Greater and widespread addiction issues and increase in crime. Holland is reversing course. As is Spain. But you don’t hear about that from the harm seductionists.
What broke the Cali and Medellin cartels? Harm reduction? NO. Decriminalization? NO. One word, go on landlord, you can write it: ENFORCEMENT.
The only answer, the only thing the “criminal organizations” as you put them, fear, is a long stretch in the can where their acolytes cannot wear a diamond encrusted Breitling or drive a Ferrari. And they’re fine with that. When I was working at 24Hours we interviewed quite a few higher level dealers, who readily admitted that the risk was worth it to them, because the laws were so lax.
And tell me…you NEVER address the demand issue? Why is there such a huge demand for drugs? Answer: We, as society, have watered down the importance of the family unit, and are doing less talking in our schools to young people about the perils of drugs.
The way forward should not be to go backwards.
We’ve NEVER had a war of drugs. If we did, we’d be a lot better off. There isn’t a single drug dealer who does it because they love it. They do it for the money. I increase the competition, and they’ll beat you every time.
[Translate]
No. The US Drug War has been going on, in one way or another, for a HUNDRED YEARS, and can only be considered an economic, political and social failure. It costs billions of dollars every year for no visible reduction in drug use. The limits on supply it creates provides easy money for organized crime (and, potentially, terrorist organizations. I cringe at myself for breaking out the T-Word, but there you go). The best thing I can say about it is that it creates jobs for prison guards, police and DEA officers, and labour for those who cultivate the crops.
I’ll say it again: you cannot stop consenting adults from putting things in their bodies. It’s sort of an inverse of the problem with stopping prostitution (if you get my meaning). The only possible benefit that moralizers like yourself could possibly get from the ENFORCEMENT argument is that the state is, through its laws, tut-tutting the use of the substance.
Think carefully about this for a moment, AGT: do you really want to live in a country where the government is the sole decider on what you can and cannot do with your own body? We’re already headed toward illegal tobacco, alcohol will likely be next under the gavel (despite Prohibition being shown, hugely, obviously, to be a total failure). Do you really put so much trust in those in power?
As for the family unit mumbo-jumbo… well, you’re entitled to your opinion about family values, but if you think that telling your kids that governments are NEVER WRONG is valuable, you’re even more authoritarian than I believed. On the other hand, your breathless fawning over the word “ENFORCEMENT” should have been my first clue, no?
[Translate]
The drug war you claim has been going on has not. You have deluded yourself into thinking that most states in the US have tough sentences for drugs. They did not until the last ten years.
In fact, there is a correlation in states with the toughest sentences and drug use in the young–its drops.
Who wants to stop consenting adults from killing themselves. I just want to make it harder for young kids to grow up and be so goddamned stupid as those adults. Ther eis a way and you don’t want to see it.
Enforcement works when it’s done right with all the proper assists.
As for your govt is better argument, that’s utterly inane. WE make the laws. WE vote in the govts who have the guts to do what’s right. The govt is and extension of US. To try to make your argument fluid, you extracted OUR participation. Sneaky and a little cheap. But nothing I haven’t seen before.
Illegal tobacco and booze. WTH are you talking about??? We don’t all live on a reserve.
You have drawn the govt into this like I’m going to talk to George, Gina or Giulia about drugs and tell them Mr. Harper thinks it’s bad? Give your pea a rattle.
I’m going to show them pictures of friends before and after drugs. I’ll show them places on the DTES I found dead colleagues and pals who threw their lives away. I’ll show them a video of a buddy who we buried last year. He died in rehab beause his body had taken more than in could in 42 yrs.
And I’ll be right there, EVERY step of the way to teach them right from wrong. My family values are what I will leave behind to my children. The buildings and sticks mean nothing.
Just watch me. I’ve saved more lives than you’ll ever appreciate, simply by spreading the word. I’m dangerous to secularists like you who think we can compartmentalize our problems and they will go away. They won’t.
This stream is about a political issue which does not have anything to do with legalization or decriminalization.
IF you want to debate me, no problem, but no more on this stream.
agtsakumis@shaw.ca
Take care.
[Translate]
Nice try, but if you drop the legal sanction suddenly there is no dealer, there is no dangerous grow-op, there are no pointless criminal records imposed. The police can go back to doing what they do best, ignoring serial killers, watching prisoners have sex and electrocuting immigrants.
Anyone who wants to could grow more then they could ever smoke in one summer in a container on their balcony for free. Then the Hell’s Angels can go screw themselves. It’s not like they’re not already making a fortune in the other illegal substances, Besides, weed is so bulky that transporting it is almost more trouble than it’s worth.
Enforcement (a proven policy failure) : try it on the drugs that destroy “family units” and neighbourhoods, like alcohol, oxycontin, crack and meth. Get serious about treatment (30% succes rate under the best conditions). Understand that an addict will do anything for the next hit and provide it while they’re in custody (NAOMI).
Let’s go ask Phillip Owen again just what the thinking was behind the 4 Pillars. Remember the 4 Pillars and how it was working until Harper and Vision pulled the funding?
Two quick last points : 1. You think the Colombian cartels are broken? and 2. Save the family values rap for your guest spot on the Glenn Beck show.
[Translate]
No, wrong again. If you drop the legal there is no spending??? What are you talking about? The dealer will always be there. If you turn the govt into drug dealers, you’re simply competing with him. He’ll have all the expertise necessary and beat you every time.
The notion that people will start growing for free is idiotic. There are a multiplicity of factors that would lead even dope smokers away from that: Social status, possible thefts, increased crime, children, work status etc. You are dreaming in technicolour.
And enforcement is NOT a proven policy failure. What did we learn today about criminals being held for longer in jail? Crime rate goes down. Drugs in the States is a different matter because there are both the ports of LA and Miami AND (!) the endless border with Mexico. Plus, many of the states have lax sentences. No real war on drugs ever happened.
As for treatment, you are preaching to the choir. I still volunteer at two facilities on the DTES. I’ve seen addiction first hand with friends and relatives. The 30% is higher than any other treatment by a huge percentage. When it’s done right, and there is FOLLOW-UP, treatment works. Philip Owen got lost on harm seduction. I have asked him and he’s defiant. And get your bloody facts straight, Insite is still fully funded. Vision had nothing to do with pulling funding. It’s a shooting gallery that facilitates people most of the time. There is no shortage of overdoses. And the HIV rate on the DTES climbs with active addicts. Nothing had changed. It’s only gotten worse.
And yes, the Columbian cartels are significantly broken. Former RCMP undercover agent Bill Majher is a friend of mine. He infiltrated the cartels and you should talk to him. His opinion is not one iota different from mine.
Finally, I have no idea why you consider it a slight to be on Glenn Beck. I’ve exchanged emails a few times and think the world of him. He just attracted almost 150,000 in Washington at a rally. I don;’t think there is anyone in America who could do that right now. He’s a terrific commentator and although far more conservative than I’ll ever be, family values matter. The erosion of family values is why we have such a rotten society.
[Translate]