EU - The Grainne Kenny dossier

[Abrad]

A quick glance at her EURAD site lets us know what we're in for. Describing drug use as a "modern black death" surely this woman could educate herself about the very thing she wants to rid Ireland of. She had a hand in the mushroom ban and is now trying to have all headshops closed and their products banned.

Please discuss.

[Nature Boy]

She's an extremist. She doesn't hold any credibility with informed politicians but she seems to be glorified by the tabloid media which produces dangerous results. Many of her facts are twisted and a lot of people buy into her bullshit because the opposing voice isn't strong enough. She must be ridiculed in an article in a national newspaper. She's made so many blundering errors that such a slandering article would be child's play to write.

[Lunar Loops]

Unfortunately there are a lot of people in this country who believe what they want to believe and she is preaching from their hymn sheet. All drugs are bad, all drugs are bad.

She was on the last word again tonight on Today FM. They had a piece on the current cannabis 'drought' in this country and Europe in general. She was her usual restrained and well informed self as you can imagine. 'All praise the wonderful Irish drug squad, for they must be the very reason for this drought. However, we must all be ever vigilant in our fight to rid the country of this scourge.'

"I'm the Daddy" McTool is right up her clean street and although you say she is not taken seriously in all quarters Natureboy, she is taken seriously enough by enough people (and some of them in power) to be a real threat to personal choice and freedom.

Perhaps, I'm just feeling a little down today, but the future does not look green and pleasant from where I'm sitting.

The sun'll come out tomorra........

[Nagognog2]

Can't you find some little girl she raped while watching her overnight? You know - pull a Michael Jackson on her?

[Psych0naut]

It's very hypocrytic that she tries to ban every single drug in Ireland, while alcoholism is a relatively big problem in this country.
Alcohol causes a lot more damage and problems than mushrooms, marijuana or most other drugs, but ofcourse the government collects huge amounts of cash on the alcohol taxes.
It's a shame for all the Irish folks who have a drought and might not get any drugs for a while.

[Alfa]

I'd love to see articles and facts on her.

[Abrad]

Here's a link to her site if anyone is interested. I broke the link rather than risk having her come here.
www .eurad. net
When SWIM was in school she came around one day to spread bullshit, although SWIM was too young to realise this at the time. She then held a meeting for all the parents to tell them how to catch their kids if they smoke dope.

[Lunar Loops]

Unfortunately the alcohol argument will cut no ice with this particular crusader. She may appear unhinged to anyone who knows anything about the subject matter that she pontificates upon, but she's cute enough when it comes to a debate.

She does not approve of alcohol either as many would quite rightly point out (and she agrees) it has caused a lot of damage in this country (and others). She uses that as an argument for not legaliising any other drugs as she says their use will also spiral out of control.......yes, yes, I know, but enough people DO listen to this and think she is talking sense.

During the brief piece on the 'drought' on Today FM they had a journalist from Hotpress (Irish music and culture magazine) on the show who was pro-cannabis and openly admitted to smoking for all of his adult life (some 18 years). He said it had done him no harm. She was quick enough to jump down his throat stating that she had heard him on the radio in the past talking about his episodes of depression (which of course she put down to cannabis usage). This woman is usually well prepared and knows what political buttons to press.

I would love to see her on a decent length (ahemmm....steady readers) discussion show on the TV with pro-cannabis debators who are given a decent chance to counter her posturing.

Failing that I like Nag's idea.

[Nature Boy]

Oh the horror. If we unleash pot on these wreckless demons who knows how much more vandalism and public disorder we'll see?!

Cannabis consumption is no significant threat to society besides the black market which it strengthens by the revenue it produces. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either ill-informed or biased. The alcohol vs. cannabis debate should be used to pro-cannabis activists' advantage. The argument doesn't apply to the legalisation of all drugs but it draws a very good comparison in that case at least.

[Trebor]

She's a bitch, a bitch a bitch. She knows nothing about what she's talking about and is only survinving becuase she would bitch about being a failure. I could say to her "The sky is blue." She'd say "It's not." SHe is a pain in the ass and I despise her with every fiber of my being that isn't reserved for Michael McDowell.

Reputation Comments on this post:

a post without info or intelligent remarks. You can do better.

[Alfa]

Please post quotes by the hysterical wench with references and other information about her here.

[Trebor]

www.eurad.net is her organization.

[Mona Lisa]

Interesting that there are no photographs of her anywhere on that site.

[Abrad]

Originally Posted by Mona Lisa

Interesting that there are no photographs of her anywhere on that site.

Google has one.

[Nicaine]

Best way to deal with people like this is to ignore them completely. Drives 'em crazy, they get hysterical & are revealed as the hysterics they really are.

No one's gonna remember this one even existed, once her 15 minutes are up...

[Alfa]

We'd wish. Can we send her to you? lol.

[Nicaine]

She looks like me dear sainted mother... already got one of those, please don't send her this way.

[Alfa]

We are talking about an overactive mad women which commenicates and influences several UN bodies, governments, a vast anti-drugs organistation network and the media. Although her arguments are mostly bullshit, she is good at retoric and a favorite of the media. She is laughed at as well. But I think that is deminishing after her victory with the Irish mushroom ban
and her ongoing crusade against headshops and any kind of drug reform. The coördination and organisation of many anti-drug organisation is a power the anti drug movement has and the pro-drug organisation seriously lacks.

[Nicaine]

The anti's are clearly far nuttier than the pro's. Copied from another thread:

The Senior Advisor for Demand Reduction, White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) went on a tirade about the dangers of, get this, persons who use drugs without problems. She went out of her way to state that getting non-dependent users arrested was the “key to stopping drug abuse” because “non-dependence fuels epidemics.” She made an argument, not unlike one previously put forward by Bill Bennett, that people who can use drugs w/o problems are like plague carriers who infect others. She made it clear that since these persons are “not responsive to prevention” they need to be addressed through criminal justice options!

SWIM can only sit there shaking his head...

P.S. the problem with the pro's is that they don't have the money, and no (self) righteousness behind their cause. The arguments/rationale for legalization are fine & always have been, IMO.

[Trebor]

Found this:

GRAINNE KENNY

IRELAND
Grainne Kenny is a trained counselor and drug educator who has campaigned against drugs for many years. She was a member of the Government Coordinating Committee on Drugs and was instrumental in the founding of CAD (Community Action on Drugs) in 1980. In 1987 she co-founded EURAD (Europe Against Drugs), a voluntary organization of which she is the chairman. EURAD now has a consultative status with the Council of Europe, and is a member of the NGO Committee on Narcotics in Vienna. In 1997 she was appointed to the Dublin Lord Mayors’ Commission on Drugs. She lectures extensively throughout Europe and the U.S.A., and her papers have been published in many countries. Ms. Kenny has twice been nominated for the ‘European of the Year Award’. Among her international honors are the Woman of Europe Award, Medaille du Marie de Strasbourg, Medaille du Maire de Paris, Swedish Parents Award, and the Dublin Lord Mayors’ Award. Grainne Kenny is a member of the Board of Directors of Drug Watch International.

on http://www.drugwatch.org/Board%20SUMMARY%20BIOS.htm It's a site that gives us a klist of those who oppose peoples rights to liberty.

[Nagognog2]

I knew a woman that looked just like her! But she was a Head-Nurse in an alcoholic-ward in a state hospital. She came home after work everyday and drank tumblers of cheap Scotch. She blamed it on her former husband.

Turns out Nurse Bitch came home one afternoon and found her husband in their bed with another man - doing the dance. She exploded and beat him up and threw him out of the house.

Do you wonder why he was having marital bliss with someone other than her?? But it had it's downside. He became a Gay Republican.

Thanks, Lady!


(edit) www.eurad.net is her organization.

Don't just sit there! Tell them about the "evil drug: Bananadine! Destroyer of blind youth!"

on http://www.drugwatch.org/Board%20SUMMARY%20BIOS.htm It's a site that gives us a klist of those who oppose peoples rights to liberty. - Want to bet they all get arrested for taking "little girls and boys camping?"

[Abrad]

Here' an article on her.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl.../ai_n8852662My views on the smoking of cannabis have generally been neutral, or indifferent. Hash-smokers are bores - even William Burroughs thought that - and the French word stupefiant describes the condition aptly. Yet I am no zealot either for decriminalisation or prosecution. But I did have a very alarming tutorial last weekend from a drugs expert in Dublin about the effects of cannabis. Grainne Kenny is no kin, and her name is pronounced Grania, and it is the Irish for Grace. She is an energetic, buxom blonde in her sixties, and she has been working on the drugs problem since the late 1970s. She runs a small organisation called Eurad, an education forum with links in other European countries, though unassociated with the European Community. I have been looking at heroin issue, but Grainne thinks that cannabis is in some ways worse than heroin. You urinate heroin out of your system in a matter of hours, she explained. Cannabis, being fatsoluble rather than water-soluble, takes between four and six weeks to leave your body. If you smoke hash occasionally at weekends, you are never drug-free. And cannabis is ten to twenty times stronger than the tobacco with which it is smoked: it contains 2,000 chemicals and can lead to cancer of the tongue, mouth, throat and lungs, to chromosome damage and to the early onset of senility. Grainne showed me slides of the brains of cannabis smokers - their vessels and synaptic clefts darkened and broken - in contrast to the clear brains of non-smokers. `And these fellas were smoking very mild stuff -- about 2 per cent, which is what the Beatles were smoking in the 1960s. You couldn't buy it today.' Dutch skunk (a cannabis much favoured today) is apparently 40 per cent narcotic and stronger than a hit of heroin. It is widely used as `the gateway drug' to all the others. I am still not sure of the political answer to the regulation of cannabis. I would favour a genuinely independentminded Royal Commission to consider it. But I certainly felt I had been given an arresting health education lesson.

Here's what she thinks about cannabis...

http://drugandhealthinfo.org/page03.php?ID=18
Why Cannabis Must Remain Illegal

Cannabis is a narcotic drug, which means it is a substance that is damaging to health and habit forming (Swiss Association of Doctors Against drugs)

There has been mounting pressure in recent times to “re classify,” decriminalise, or legalise cannabis. Sources include the UK based Police Federation (no connection to the Police), Paul McCartney (ex Beatle and along with his late wife Linda, also a cannabis user), Anita Roddick (Body Shop selling Hemp products), Richard Branson (Virgin Megastores who admitted that he would sell the products in his shops), and the American multi-billionaire George Soros, who claims to have invested in excess of 90m US Dollars (Soros on Soros) in the campaign. He recently handed over 1m US Dollars to the UK campaign. In Ireland there are similar self-interest groups.

The UK Government is presently capitulating to this pressure under Mr. Blair's leadership. It seems there is no energy for this debate coming from the Conservative Party.

As if there is not enough confusion around the issue, these people will argue for decriminalisation as an option in the face of resistance. They say that this is not the same as legalisation. This sounds plausible, but it is blatantly false. The term decriminalisation means to bring the drug problem out of the scope of penal (criminal) law. Law enforcement would then no longer be provided for the export, import, manufacture, distribution, sale, possession or use of drugs. Society would, as a result, have no law or lever to direct addicts towards treatment or to suppress trafficking. Legalisation means that the government would have to arrange a more or less free distribution of drugs (as for tobacco and alcohol products).

These facts must raise the question, what kind of society do we want? Do we want teachers, nurses, doctors, public service drivers, airline pilots etc., etc., stupefied while on duty? Lloyds of London will not insure people who are narcotic dependent. How do we check?
If cannabis is legalised/decriminalised, who will be responsible for the quality and strength of the drug? Will there be any age restrictions? How will the drug prices be set? Where will they be sold? Will there be State drugstores, or will drugs be available through your local supermarket? Will certain groups with sensitive professions be governed by special restrictions? Are there to be any kind of restrictions at all? These questions are never answered by the drug legalisation lobby. The most smuggled drugs on the black market are cigarettes, yet they are legal. Together with alcohol, they account for more deaths and diseases than the illegal substances. Because of their legality they are socially acceptable and readily available and cannot be kept away from teenagers, the “underage” population.

WHAT IS CANNABIS?

This so-called soft drug is a toxic narcotic (UN 1961 Single Convention Amended in 1972). It has no medical benefits (see www eurad.com...Research). A single joint is composed of more than 400 different chemicals, all of them toxic. On combustion these multiply into about 2,000 equally poisonous chemicals. Cannabis is different from alcohol, heroin or other drugs because it is fat-soluble. This causes it to be absorbed into the brain and other fatty organs of the body where it is stored for months in both the chronic and so-called recreational user, resulting in the person becoming stupefied. It is only very slowly released from the body, which explains the absence of severe withdrawals. This lulls the person into believing that he or she is not addicted. While in the body the toxins are attacking every cell, system, and organ present, with the brain sustaining the most damage, as it is one-third fat.

People with asthma, epilepsy, heart problems, depression, or mental illness are especially at risk. Medical studies in Sweden have shown marijuana to trigger latent schizophrenia, an incurable mental illness. The tragedy of cannabis is that the harm is so subtle that it is not realised by the user or his/her family until it is too late. Frequently, it is only when a young person has been apprehended by the police and judicial system for anti-social behaviour that his or her cannabis addiction is discovered. Police intervention can be a life saving exercise in all its forms.

The chemicals in cannabis adversely affect the central nervous system, cardiovascular, respiratory, and immune systems. Foetal damage is incurred in pregnant women, and a rare form of leukemia can be caused in infants.

Cannabis is a highly carcinogenic drug. American studies have shown cellular damage to the lungs of cannabis smokers, who smoke two joints of cannabis a day, to be as harmful as the damage caused by 28 tobacco cigarettes. Since the 1970's, more than 12,000 scientific studies have been conducted on cannabis. None of them give it a clean bill of health. Scientists and medical experts warn that the term “soft” has no medical, scientific, or pharmacological basis. New cultivation methods by the Dutch (Hydroponics) have resulted in cannabis being many times stronger than the so-called “hard” drugs.

There is not a shred of evidence to support the theory of medical benefits. The American Medical Association, Cancer Society, and the MS Society among others (see wwweurad.com....Research) have gone on record to state that they do not support these spurious claims. Crude cannabis does not have the medical benefits the legalizers state. Physicians should no more lend support to the use of a drug that had to be smoked by a patient whose immune system is already impaired than they would prescribe cigarettes to a patient suffering from stress or obesity.




APOPTOSIS.

Decreases in sperm production and increases in abnormal forms caused by THC have been recently attributed to a biological phenomenon known as "apoptosis" of the cell. Apoptosis is the process of programmed cell death occurring over hours and days, in successive stages, resulting in the fragmentation of DNA and the disintegration of the cell. It is a fundamental process emphasized in the first report on the human genome (2001). Apoptosis is controlled by an important cluster (home box) of genes, which order the self-destruction, or suicide of the cell. (Nahas)

An incorrect assumption of some scientists was that recreational usage of cannabis would not produce apoptosis. They failed to take into account the distribution of THC throughout the body and it's lengthy storage in fat depots and subsequent slow release in the same active form as when first ingested. After a single cannabis cigarette, 50% of its THC is stored in fat depots for five days. It will take 30 days for it's complete elimination. If one smokes one joint every two days, one will store ten times more than the initial dose of THC after ten days and 30 times more after 30 days. Such amounts have been scientifically proven to induce apoptosis of sperm cells and of lymphocytes. (Nahas)

PSEUDO ARGUEMENTS IN FAVOUR.

Armchair Generals will go on to argue that it is wrong to criminalise cannabis users. However, just like larceny, smuggling, or murder, cannabis use and dealing (whether to support the personal habit or not) is prohibited for good reason. We might as well argue that mugging or larceny should be legalised because it involves too much paperwork, is taking up too much of police time, and clogging up the court system.

It is argued that the money saved could be spent on apprehending the big dealers and providing more treatment facilities. They conveniently forget that although alcohol and cigarettes are taxed to the hilt, the taxes gathered do not cover the cost of their medical treatment. Nor is appropriate policing provided.

Another argument put forward is that State controlled and taxed sale of drugs would unseat the International Mafia. Where is the evidence for this? For example, in 1988, The Netherlands had three organised crime groups, but by 1993 that number had risen to 93. (Source: Dutch National Committee on Prevention) The Mafia are only interested in making money. When drugs are no longer illegal, they will move into the legitimate market. Because of the addictive nature of cannabis, the Mafia would have access to a growing market as with alcohol and cigarettes. They can also “undercut” the legal suppliers and provide a stronger variety without it being challenged. Who will police the underage market?

In the Netherlands, where de facto decriminalisation is practised (the Dutch Government calls it separation of the market), there has been a 49 percent rise in registered cannabis addicts between 1991-93. In 1988, there were three organised crime groups in that country. By 1993, there were 93. Seventy-three percent of Dutch people think that their drug laws are too tolerant. Cannabis use among students in Holland has increased by 250 percent since 1984. (Source: K.F.Gunning MD. Drug Legalisation, Harm Reduction and Drug Policy). Shootings have increased by 4 percent, car thefts by 6 percent and hold-ups by 69 percent. (Gunning) The consequences of these lax policies prove clearly that, far from freeing up the judicial system, they are grinding the system to a halt. The murder rate in Amsterdam is greater than Newark in New Jersey, a city of similar size. Recent figures released by the Brixton Police in the UK show a rise in crime since the local police chief took it upon himself to reclassify cannabis possession for personal use as a misdemeanour.

The argument that legalisation will mean that addicts will no longer have to commit crimes in order to obtain money for drugs was put to the test in the 1960's in Sweden. During that time the Swedish Government decided to “medicalise” their drug problem. However, an evaluation of the legal prescription of narcotics in Sweden demonstrated that criminality increased despite the fact that narcotics (i.e. cannabis) were then freely available. Similarly, The Netherlands gained the reputation of the crime capital of Europe in 1990.

Many train, plane, and road fatalities are directly associated with the use of cannabis. Hospital A&E Departments report treating many such victims.( Source: Drug Watch International) In Ireland, many brutal murders and violent acts, as well as road fatalities, are directly attributed to cannabis use among the factors.

UNITED NATIONS CONVENTIONS ON NARCOTICS AND THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD.

Since 1961, cannabis has been included in the U.N. Single Convention (Amended in 1972) on Narcotic Drugs. It is also included in Article 33 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child. These Conventions have been ratified by 150 countries. Can they all be wrong?
The reason for the inclusion of cannabis was the evidence of the damage being caused to the individual and to society by the use of this poisonous and addictive intoxicant.

During the past century, physicians and public health officials from countries where cannabis and hashish had been widely used reported on the damaging effects of these drugs on their people and their society. These reports, based on close observation but without the benefit of biochemistry, were at the origin of the U.N. Single Convention of 1960, held in New York City.
The U.N. Convention is a mandate from the people of the world to achieve a global interdiction of drugs of abuse in order to protect public health and safeguard man. These Conventions were unanimously adopted by all U.N. member nations.

Laws of interdiction against cannabis are enforced in Sweden and Scandinavia with firmness, but according to seriousness of individual offences. In Sweden, it is against the law to ingest cannabis or other illegal drugs. Sweden has the best rates of success against drug abuse in Europe. Prevention, intervention and treatment are priorities. The parent movement is very strong and effective in that country.

At the other end of the scale, the Netherlands has long opted for the decriminalisation of cannabis, and now their open coffee shops are controlled by criminal organisations that supply a variety of drugs through the “back door.” Illegal drug traffic in The Netherlands accounts for close to 1 percent of its Gross National Product. As a result of being contaminated by it's neighbour with drug trafficking, the Belgium Government has now decriminalised cannabis.

THE RIGHTS OF THE ORDINARY CITIZEN.

To suggest changing the law is to advocate chemical warfare on our most vulnerable citizens — our youngsters and the socially and emotionally deprived, who seek it out as a means of escapism. In the United States, children who smoke cannabis are 85 times more likely to use cocaine than those who do not use cannabis. Sick people are being manipulated as guinea pigs to promote medical pot. To change the laws will not change the proven medical and scientific facts on cannabis. It will not alter its toxicity.

Cannabis users do not have the right to destabilise democracy. The majority of citizens do not want cannabis laws weakened. Democracy means that one cannot do as one may like always, but must subject him/herself to limitations for the collective good.

If the judicial system is being overloaded with cannabis cases and the police are complaining about the paperwork, then we should be looking at special courts that will direct these people towards treatment in the case of non-violent offences. Treatment must be readily available, especially in the case of young teenagers, to avert serious addiction and cannabis psychoses. Support must be offered to parents and schools. Police Juvenile Diversion Programmes should be strengthened. This will have a knock on effect in reducing road accidents that occur as a result of cannabis stupification.

The opposite to all of these humane approaches would be to develop a banana republic.

The fat-soluble smoke in cannabis damages the brain, respiratory tract, immune system and the unborn foetus. Users cause damage to society through family breakdown, road accidents, and violent acts.

WHEN ARE THE UNITED NATIONS GOING TO SIT UP AND DEFEND THEIR CONVENTIONS ON NARCOTICS AND THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN?

Grainne Kenny,
International President -Europe Against Drugs

[Nicaine]

Jesus, the hyperbole and unsubstantiated claims are just sickening...

[Mr. Giraffe]

Grainne Kenny is no oddity - she may be mad, but she's 'cute' as shroomonger put it - she does know what points to make and has a rather brilliant way with propeganda, as the articles on her site demonstrate. The article posted above by Abrad demonstrates this very well. If you didn't know any better and visited her site, you would come away with the impression that cannabis was the most dangerous pastime in world history, and that use of the drug inevitably led to violence, madness and death.

There's no doubt that she's a liar. She makes outrageous claims (like that cannabis is more addictive than tobacco and valium, or that it causes cancer - both of which are the opposite of the truth), but I'm genuinely divided about whether she lies knowingly. I tend to think she believes her propeganda at least to some degree.

It's clear that most of her sensational and highly selective statistics come from fanatical US and Swedish organisations, but we ignore her at our peril, for this sort of reefer madness is on the rise again. Witness the reaction to George Micheal's recent pronouncements: anti-drug groups condemning him for promoting a 'harmful' drug; mental health organisations damning him for leading children to schizophrenia.

Our problem is that most people simply aren't interested enough to inform themselves on the subject, so labyrinth scientific arguments aren't going to hold their interest. They will listen to Kenny because they see her as a respectable, well-meaning old bean with the best interests of all at heart. Maybe if we started thinking of her this way too, it might be easier to beat her with sympathy than indignant rage. Just a thought.

[Nagognog2]

The liars expect your silence. They are used to getting their way by following the Hitler Plan: Tell a lie so huge that everyone just goes into shock rather than refute it. Falsely believing that bo one else could believe it, either.

That's when you have to stand up and denounce such. If you don't - they win.