Sep 23, 2024, 1:06 AM

Rev F. Dean Becker: (00:00)
I am the Reverend Dean Becker keeper of the moral high ground in the drug war for the world. And this is cultural baggage. Hello, friends. I am Dean Becker, the Reverend Most High. This is cultural baggage broadcasting on Pacifica Radio and the Drug Truth Network as part of my video production seeking. And then now claiming the moral high ground, I got a chance to speak to a lot of good folks, including some, uh, top dogs, if you will, over in Europe. Well, it gives me a great deal of satisfaction and pride actually, to be speaking with Kalil Ti. I believe I got that name right. He's the Executive Secretary with the Global Commission on Drugs, and I wanna welcome him to the show. Hello Kalil. 

Khalid Tinasti: (00:50)
Thank you, Dean. I'm very happy to be here with you. 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (00:52)
Well, I, uh, I've been following you guys, uh, for, well, I guess the 10 years or so that the Global Commission has been, uh, uh, in place. And I, if you will tell us a bit about the Global Commission on Drug Policy. What is it about? 

Khalid Tinasti: (01:08)
Thank you very much, Dean. Actually, you're very right. The Global Commission has come out with its first report and has come out to the world in, uh, June, 2011 with its report called The War on Drugs, and also the documentary movie that was going with it, breaking the Taboo. But if we really look into the origins of the Global Commission, they go back to 2000 to the end of 2007 when President Fernando Henrique Cardoso of Brazil with President Za Zio, former President Zio from Mexico, and Cezar Gia from Columbia, came together to create the Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy because of the risks that the response given to drugs has been put in on the institutions on democratization and empowering criminal organizations and in violence in cities in Latin and Central America. And so these, these former presidents came together with a group of other intellectuals and office, former office holders and writers from Latin America to look into what are the issues and what recommendations they can come up with. 

Khalid Tinasti: (02:07)
And that's when they looked out into Europe. And so that Europe, by implementing harm reduction responses, decriminalization models for personal use and possession, uh, have been more successful in, in managing basically the presence and the consumption of drugs among society, although it was banned to some, basically. And so this is how the Global Commission came together. And, uh, it was the meeting between the Latin Americans who have really were behind, you know, given that leadership to this discussion. And the Europeans have came in as well and joined them as well, other people with also Mr. Coan from Africa, et cetera. The Global Commission has came up with this first analysis report in 2011, of course was not the first to say we have a problem with drugs. And that problem is also related to the policies, to the control policies we put in place. But it was the first time that such high level people that were themselves for many in office back at the United Nations General Assembly special session in 1998, who had said that by 2008 we'll have the world free of drugs. 

Khalid Tinasti: (03:09)
So many of them were signatories, and were in that meeting as representative of their countries as head sub states. And they have come up together for some of them who had done very good policies, and for some others who had really believed in prohibition to be able to help people came together to say, we have something that is wrong with the way we do it because we, first of all, not achieving any of the results. Consumption, trafficking, violence, um, production, you know, um, lack of rule of law, corruption, uh, all sorts of, you know, infectious diseases, et cetera, are going up and really high up while we spend more and more on enforcement, et cetera. So there is a problem with maybe the use of drugs, and that is something to be discussed in another area, but there is also huge, huge consequences that add up in the way we do control policies. 

Khalid Tinasti: (03:59)
And so, just very, to finish up on the Global Commission, because we're very fortunate, it has been renewed for the last nine years. We had many, many new people joining from former president, uh, Ramos Hotta from Tim Leste. We had Mr. Ade from the, uh, uh, atomic Agency that, uh, the former director that has joined us from Egypt. We had Mrs. Helen Clark from New Zealand. So it really took this big global, um, trend. And so it is people coming up from every part of the world and coming to the same conclusion that the war on drugs and the way we try to control drugs through repression alone and a law enforcement focus is adding up a lot of harms. Well, so this is in a nutshell, I mean, I can go way beyond on this, on what we do, et cetera, Well, 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (04:43)
No, no, that, that, uh, touched a lot of the bases. I I probably would've inquired about, uh, uh, a good, um, summation, if you will. And, and thank you for that. Now, I don't know if you had a chance to look at my website, the, uh, conscientious objector page. 

Khalid Tinasti: (04:56)
Mm-Hmm, , did you have a chance to look at it? Yes, yes, I did. Well, 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (04:59)
Your, your response to what I put forward there, just, uh, in general. 

Khalid Tinasti: (05:04)
Yeah. I mean, well, in general, I mean, you have, I mean, when, when it is something, I mean, it is very difficult to object to the way you have looked into the issues and saying, what are the impacts of the way we look into, or the way we try to control drugs or we, the way we control to make them disappear from society. I mean, we all agree, of course, that there is a demand and there's a demand for psycho psychoactive substances through all over the world, the legal ones and the illegal ones. I mean, the whole system of saying what is legal and illegal is based on the potential of addictiveness of a, of a substance. Why do we live alcohol and tobacco outside of that and not have the same levels of control? So it is for sure to say that people look for psychoactive substances, and there is a demand. 

Khalid Tinasti: (05:47)
So the supply will always follow because it's also a sustained demand. And the fact of trying to cons to hide that reality and trying to break that reality and, and trying to live in a parallel world, does create many, many issues. First of all, I mean, everyone, even the United Nations recognized, recognizes this since 2008. And as you said, it, one of the, what we call the unintended consequences of the regime of control, which are, I mean, they've been recognized since 2008, and they still consider considered unintended . So tho what the first of them is, is, is the black market itself and the illegal market, and the fact that the policy choice was to leave it in the hand of, of criminals and not have authorities or regulators taking that market and regulating, its regulating its access, limiting it, depending on the substance, et cetera, et cetera. So all the impact you speak about what is going on in Latin America, what is going on in terms of funding of different groups, of different criminal groups, those also sometimes engaged in terror, although the, the, the evidence there is less clear. It's also more about opportunistic relationships in certain areas of the world, et cetera. So that is a clear vision of the real impacts, actually, and the big, big impacts of what is going on in the world. So thank you. 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (07:00)
Well, th thank you for that. Uh, and, and yeah, I, I've devoted 20 years of my life, uh, 60 hours a week, really, I, I've, I've, uh, reached the age of 50 and decided I wanted to leave something more positive behind for future generations. And if I can help move this equation, this situation, to one of less harm, to one of, to quit empowering the cartels, at least, uh, I, I think the terrorists, they grow marijuana and opium over there in Afghanistan, Lebanon, and I'm sure Isis and, uh, Taliban get a cut now and then if, if not, uh, uh, billions outright. But, um, we have in these United States, we have led the way. We were the ones who insisted the United Nations take up this banner two march with this war on drugs. And for, uh, years, we, um, for foreign aid, we had a requirement that they had to join forces with the drug war. It was the United Nations, excuse me. It was the US that, that forced this drug war, uh, at least to such a degree on the rest of the world. And, uh, it is my hope that the United States can begin to undo that process to, uh, demand less of other nations and, and to, uh, create a situation where logic and common sense can get back into this rather than paranoia and delusion. Your response there, Kaleen? 

Khalid Tinasti: (08:24)
Yeah, I mean, it is for certain, I mean, the United States has been the biggest. I mean, we cannot limit the contribution. I mean, the, the contribution of the United States to, to the multilateral system and to the world and into spread in democracy, et cetera, is a huge one. But it goes in the war on drugs in the bad side. But I mean, it is a, to, it is everything. So maybe just to be less harsh from the perspective of an international person, and not to be less harsh, but just to nuance the bit, it's, I mean, the, the international drug system was built really, I mean, it is the, the conventions of drug policy are the very, are the almost the only ones that speak about an evil, an evil of addiction. And so it was really built up in the sixties around when, when, when social hygienists as a movement among doctors and politicians. 

Khalid Tinasti: (09:13)
Now, when you say about the United States, that's a change. And to change at the global level, that would be fantastic, because the problem that is now existing at the multilateral level is that the five countries with a permanent seat in the security council do agree altogether on the prohibition as the way to go. And no one of them is carrying the ideas of the reform or the discussion of the reform. That changes a lot because those countries not only have a financial power and do have, you know, a, a, a very strong political power within the system, but it is also countries that do have real diplomatic network around the world that can work on their priorities. And that can work on this change little by little. I mean, this is something that will never happen overnight. We do have 50 years of something where everybody agreed, where it was given to people as granted that this is evil, that people who use drugs are bad people, et cetera, et cetera. 

Khalid Tinasti: (10:06)
That elimination is the only way just say no to drugs, et cetera. So to undo all of that, to have a, it's almost a cultural shift that is needed to some extent. So it will take the time, and hopefully, of course, when the reforms at the national level in the United States will evolve. We see it in different states trying so many different things to address the situations of the opioid crisis, but also the cannabis prohibition, and also sometimes, I mean, other substances being looked at, et cetera, on that, we will have also given the evidence on its function and et cetera, the performs will have to move up the latter and hopefully until the international level. Yes. Well, thank you. Thank you for 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (10:46)
That. I interrupt to, uh, inform you. You are listening to cultural baggage on Pacifica Radio and the Drug Truth Network. I am your host, Dean Becker. We are speaking with Dr. Khalid tei. He is the Executive Secretary of the Global Commission on Drugs. Now, I, uh, a couple years back, I was able to, uh, go to Europe. I, uh, uh, in, in Lisbon, Portugal, I was able to sit down with, uh, Dr. Gula the, uh, the, the drug czar. And, uh, he and I had a great discussion. We just had another one, um, last week as well for this production of, uh, seeking the moral high ground. And he has done something that is being emulated, that is being copied around the world, that is the decriminalization of drugs, that there are no longer arrests for minor amounts of drugs that, uh, maybe you go for treatment, maybe you go for a, a good talking to, uh, but, but nobody is arrested. 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (11:42)
And, and Canada is, the police chiefs of Canada are wanting to copy that. Now, the, uh, the head of the Canadian Police Chiefs came out and called for decriminalization of all drugs, uh, to follow suit to what Portugal has done. And, uh, another topic that, uh, I, I went to Switzerland, I there met, uh, Dr. Christophe Burke. He was one of the pioneers who designed their, uh, heroin injection program. They're now at I approaching 20 million injections of pure heroin. And, uh, they have had zero overdose deaths, which, which I think undoes the logic that, that we were talking about what was created 50 years ago. Drug users are bad and deserving of punishment. And, and I guess what I'm saying here, Khalil, is that changes, afoot change is, is being, um, recognized as, as being of benefit, uh, and, and to do away with these old, uh, hysteria, um, you know, situations. Uh, I don't know if there's a question there other than it's a sign of progress, is it not? 

Khalid Tinasti: (12:49)
It is, it is. I mean, just think about it. This is, I mean, if you look at the policy area, even the discussion, the discussions that are becoming now very much mainstream, I mean, I would just give two examples. The first one is that, I mean, really it is about one of the areas of policy, areas where, where the wrongs are being repaired very quickly. I mean, it's very difficult. It's very hard. But if we look at it, I mean, really with disabilities, to some extent, it is the issue that it has moved so much in the last 10, 15 years. It did be it on the number of debates on the fact that we can speak about it. I mean, who could have seen, uh, marijuana legalized in so many US states for recreational use, et cetera, and growing, and in a country like Canada, the federal level, et cetera. 

Khalid Tinasti: (13:28)
So that is one that has really, really very much evolved. Now, um, I mean, the decriminalization is a way to move because there is absolutely no, um, how do I say it? Yeah, I mean, sorry, lemme come back to the next second example, because that was what, what was in my mind, I said two, I mean, the second one, if you compare now the coverage of the opioid crisis in the United States and the coverage of the crack crisis in the 1980s, I mean, the coverage is very different even in the language in trying to look into what are the issues, et cetera. So it has indeed evolved. People start understanding that addiction, I mean, we say dependence because we use the terminology of WHO, but addiction is the word in the United States that is still used. But here in Europe we don't. So for US, addiction slash dependence is a chronic disease that includes, uh, that includes a relapse. 

Khalid Tinasti: (14:22)
So to some extent, that's why the Global Commission on Drug Policy does not agree with the drug courts that send people into rehabilitation treatment, because that does not take into account the fact that people do relapse and they would go to prison otherwise if they do relapse instead. And also the fact that of course, no judge should be taking a decision of a doctor to some extent. So I wanted, yeah, I mean, to say these two example, they do really evolve. And in Switzerland, the program of dia morphine that you were speaking about is a program that is extremely controlled. It is a health approach. It is. But the idea there was to say, we have, I mean, the, the, the very pragmatic discussion was, first of all, let's put in place all the services and to save people, and let's evaluate them and see if they work or not. 

Khalid Tinasti: (15:08)
And of course, as you've said, there is very strict monitoring and evaluation. That program is very difficult even to access, because people have to have really a need of diamorphine and not be able to have buprenorphine or methadone or other substitution treatments. Then that's how they get there. But of course, now we have evaluation. You've spoken about Portugal, but there are so many different countries that have different models of, of decriminalization. Those commissions of dis persuasion in Portugal are a very, very interesting model because people still have to face somehow, you know, to talk to someone, to talk to many people and say, you know, and, and so they are conscious that this is not something that is easy, for example, in the Czech Republic is different. It's only a misdemeanor, and you just get a fine. So there are many different models, but of course, they have been proven. And I mean, there's evidence and there's evaluation. 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (15:55)
Now, um, the other news coming out of Canada, uh, a Dr. Perry Kendall, uh, he has 20 years experience as the British Columbia, uh, commissioner on substance abuse, some something to the title to that effect. And he's now retiring, but he wants to start up a company to acquire heroin cheaply and to provide it cheaply to the users in Canada, uh, to kind of parallel, I guess, what they've done in Switzerland. It, it's another sign of intelligence from my perspective, because in the US I, I don't know, I think it was just over 70,000 people died last year. Mm-Hmm. from drug overdoses. Mm-Hmm. , because I, I closed my radio show with this thought because of prohibition. You don't know what's in that bag. Please be careful. And there's just so much truth. And I think heart in that phrase, you, your response there, klio. 

Khalid Tinasti: (16:48)
Yeah, I mean, for us, I mean, those are two really. I mean, just to be, again, Dean, I think that you are, of course this is, I mean, I haven't heard specifically about this idea of opening, I mean, they do have a heroin program that is not really, uh, diamorphine programs. One Canada is not working very well. But nevertheless, I mean, those are two issues. So as far as the Global Commission is really concerned, I mean, diamorphine, if we take the example here in Switzerland, it is a very medical program. I mean, this is with very much rules, regulations, people have to try at least twice another substitution treatment. And it's really for people that are heavily dependent on the substance. So just for the, uh, people listening to know that this is something that is very medical and it is a medical procedure. So people go to a day clinic, you know, to get the diamorphine, et cetera, which was fantastic because during Covid, since people who inject drugs were considered as people that are vulnerable to covid infection, I mean, there were some very exceptions to deliver to their homes. 

Khalid Tinasti: (17:35)
The diamorphine, it was a, a great innovation to keep people alive here during the Covid lockdowns. Um, now on, when we say, and, and you touch up on something that is so important, which is about the quality of what people buy or even knowing what they buy, right? If they're buying the right substance or not. But that is for us, this is the difficulty with this ideological difficulty against, uh, harm reduction, because I mean, drug testing, et cetera, do exist. And the, those need to be allowed to be implemented at all levels at state level, at state level, at the federal level. Now, there is also the issues of, um, I mean a, a city like Amsterdam, or even here in Geneva, for example, where people who inject drugs and are dependent on drugs that go to services like safe injection facilities that go into, you know, different services. Those people, they, if there is a problem, they can be caught very quickly and they could report what substance, what they bought it. And so the analysis goes very quickly. And the services of the city, even in Amsterdam, they even put like, uh, ads in the street saying something is going on in the black market. Do not buy this substance. 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (18:40)
Right? 

Khalid Tinasti: (18:41)
And even here in Switzerland, for example, in Geneva and the communities, because they see what is going on in the safe injection room, and they see people arriving because, but this is because people are not afraid to come forward because the cops are not gonna be called because they're considered patients, because they're given the services of harm reduction services, which allow people then to be sent to the doctors if they have problems, to see also the factors or to go into treatment. You know, people send them, so they do testing also for infectious diseases, et cetera, to send them afterwards to the hospital to have a regular treatment regimen. Uh, I mean, not for drugs, but if there's any other issue or if they wanna enter into a cycle of treatment. Because here we also have the fact that everything is offered. People have to, they could choose a substitution treatment as maintenance for forever. 

Khalid Tinasti: (19:22)
If they cannot get out of it, they could use it for a certain period. They can go to rehabilitation and abstinence. I mean, it really is about a therapeutic contract between the doctor and the patient. It's not about imposing to people what they have to do. It's to help them choose how they get out of their difficult situation. And here again, we're talking only about people with heavy dependence that go to the services, et cetera. We're not talking about the vast majority, which is recreational, which has no issues. And we don't see. So yeah, I mean, this is the fact of, that's why decriminalization is very interesting, so that people can come forward so that the authorities have the information of what is going on in the market. And for example, some cities can just be in the United States saying like, we have a, we have so many fentanyl on the streets, be careful of not buying this, et cetera, et cetera. And those are messages of prevention, of course, and of, of keeping people alive. Yeah. But that, that's very hard to do in a repressive environment where people are afraid of law enforcement everywhere in the world. 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (20:12)
Yeah. And I, well, I, I think it's more, uh, uh, more powerful the, the, the stigma here in the United States that, uh, I mean, you probably heard the phrase, you, if you get busted for drugs, uh, you can no longer get a job. Credit, housing, and education. Uh, there are so many roadblocks put in your way, so many court fees and fines and, and other obstacles to, to creating a new life, a new, new process. And, and I guess what I'm saying here is that what you guys are doing in Europe and elsewhere, it shows intelligence. It shows that this is still a human being. It's still a life worthy of respect and second chances, third chances, more chances. And, and here in the us, uh, you know, once you get that stigma of a druggie, you know, uh, your life is, uh, well facing a lot of obstacles. Your thought there, sir? 

Khalid Tinasti: (21:08)
Well, I guess that's also about, I mean, that is, I, I, I, I, I totally agree with you. And there is no way, no way, no way to minimize the impact of stigma and discrimination on people's lives, and most certainly on people that are in the most difficult situation to start with. Right? But I mean, and that stigma is more related. It's not only about drugs. I mean, let's be honest, it's about a lot of things. Drugs are a cross-cutting issue. They touch upon so many wrong things in our societies. It also falls, I mean, the, even the implementation of drug laws is so arbitrary. People that can afford to do it behind high walls that no one sees, they do, and they don't, they're not impacted to get arrested, et cetera. They get people to deliver to their homes, et cetera, whatever they need. 

Khalid Tinasti: (21:46)
So it is also that nature of arbitrary that makes it very difficult. And it goes also, again, to all the populations. But I mean, people are starting to get a grasp of that. And we are getting out of marijuana because, um, I don't know if this is positive or negative, but I saw the, um, uh, author of The Wire, you know, the TV show, and he was speaking about Colorado and the experiment of the marijuana legalization. He was saying that he was worried because in an interview, and he was saying he was worried to some extent, because we are getting out the people that have the political voice, the college, white college students, were getting them out of this, of, of the prohibition. If we legalize cannabis because they're marijuana, because that's their substance, and what is gonna be the issue with other people that use other drugs and do not have that same voice, that do not have that same social status in class, and that do not have that same presence in the public debate. 

Khalid Tinasti: (22:32)
So it is, so drugs are used a lot as upon for a lot of things as well. But those are also issues that are related to the socioeconomic, to the ethnic et cetera issues. And that is not only in the United States, that is the case in the United Kingdom. That is the case in France. That is the case in the Russian Federation, where more people that are arrested do not have Slavic names. They have other names. This is the case in everywhere, you know, I mean, you can look at it in every perspective in countries of the south countries, of the north, the rich countries, et cetera, when you have something that is, that has been so stigmatized and built, being built. That's why I said the conventions speak about addiction as evil. So this is the state of spirit that we have put since the very beginning into this discussion at the time. 

Khalid Tinasti: (23:11)
Also, to remember that, of course, as I said, maybe the intentions were good, maybe not. But to some extent, at the time, Europe was in reconstruction. Um, the many countries in the South were getting their, getting their decolonized. This is where thinking about the sixties, I mean, most of Africa has been getting it's independence in 1960s, et cetera. And of course, the United States was becoming the cultural hegemon around the world, et cetera. And so that was what the, the kind of spirit that went everywhere. That went everywhere, which is really funny because at the same time, alcohol and tobacco were glorified and we're sold and pushed through marketing, et cetera. So, and this is the spirit that we still find today, almost everywhere. It is the case in the United States, which is very sad because the United States, of course, I mean, people have more access to education, to information more easily, et cetera, and they should get a little bit more informed on the issues to understand also, I mean, I mean, problematic drug use is not far away from anyone's life. 

Khalid Tinasti: (24:08)
Anyone can fall into different circumstances, you know, and, and so people have to look at it into a perspective, from a societal, societal perspective. What kind of societies do we want is these injustices that are not very far from anyone. And the opioid crisis shows it. I mean, people from all social classes die, people suffer from everywhere, et cetera. So it is about getting informed and about what kind of societies we want together. This is why the Global Commission has always called since the very beginning for, um, na for local national stay, you know, consultations, getting people around the table talking, getting parents of children, getting the police, getting, uh, uh, school teachers, getting people who use drugs, getting, uh, uh, uh, health workers, social workers, uh, prosecutors, everyone around the table so that everyone can hear the concerns of everyone. I mean, this is a one society, people had to sit together and find the issue. 

Khalid Tinasti: (24:58)
And this is what happened in Switzerland, actually, to prepare the national policy of the four pillars, which is, uh, prevention, treatment, harm, reduction, repression. So this is how drug policy is handled here. It's the four pillars. And so that was based on many, many, many federal cantonal, because it's also here a federal country, cantonal and local, uh, uh, consultations and discussions where people would come in and say, there are issues about like, you know, the neighborhoods with, with the syringes in the street, uh, people being afraid because the syringes are near the parks where the children play, the perspective of the police, the perspective of the prosecutors, and, you know, so everyone has to come together to find a consensus to some extent and advance the issues little by little. But I mean, again, just to say it's been 50 years of, you know, making the same nod. And it's so big now that it has to be undone little by little, by little by little. Because whenever you try to do something so quick, the unintended consequences become very big because drug policy is so crosscut into so many other issues to health, to housing, to employment, you know, it is with a person. So , it touches upon everything. 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (26:06)
Well, what you bring forward there, I want to kind of delve into, and that is, uh, the cantons, I guess are sub-goal agencies and whatever, but we have in the United States states, we, we have the 50 states. We've got, uh, cities, counties, uh, and then, then we have, uh, governors versus, uh, state congresses, et cetera. People battling on this issue. But what, what, uh, where the changes are being made are on the local level cities. Mm-Hmm. deciding they're not going to enforce a law as vigorously or in the same way as they did before. My city of Houston being a, a prime example. Um, you can have up to four ounces of marijuana now and, uh, not be arrested. You get a ticket, you gotta take a class. And that's in essence, uh, contrary to state law or I don't know, skirts the state law in some fashion. 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (27:01)
And I guess what I, I'm wanting to, um, uh, bring forward is that at the national level, the federal level, we have just a handful of people. The, the US Attorney General, the head of the DEA, the head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, a few others who have this quote authority, whose pronouncements ensure that these drug laws continue forever because they, they quote, have the moral authority. They know what in the heck they're doing. And I would love the opportunity to have five minutes to show they don't have a clue what they're doing, because they, they, they don't care how many people die. How, how many kids have access, how many gangs and terrorists are funded. They just do not care about that. They have a mandate that's, as you say, that started out 50 years ago as being, you know, sanctified and pure. But it has been shown to be nothing but madness from my perspective. Your response, Phil? Mm-Hmm. 

Khalid Tinasti: (27:59)
. Well, I mean, the impacts are, the impacts of the prohibition and the war on drugs and being very repressive cannot be concealed. 

Rev F. Dean Becker: (28:07)
Once again, we've been speaking with Dr. Khalid Tenas. He is the Executive Secretary of the Global Commission on Drugs. I urge you to tune in next week. We'll have part two of my discussion with Dr. 10. I would urge you to go to Moral High Ground World, and there you can access the hour and 30 minute video claiming the moral high ground, which features Dr. 10. The drugs are a Portugal and 17 others, high echelon officials. Again, I remind you, because of prohibition, you do not know what is in that bag, and I urge you to please be careful. Drug Truth Network transcripts are stored at the JJ Baker II Institute. More than 7,000 radio programs are@drugtruth.net, and we are all still tap dancing on the edge of an abyss.