Top fropster Chong freed from prison

From: Baldin Pramer <baldin@mailtoworld.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 16, 2004

http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5746

NEWSFLASH: Tommy Chong Freed!
by Ellen Komp
www.veryimportantpotheads.com

Tommy Chong appeared on NBC Tonight Show with Jay Leno on Friday, July
9, fresh from his release from prison after serving 9 months at Taft
Correctional Facility in Bakersfield, California on charges of selling
paraphernalia over the internet.

In his monologue, Leno announced, "Tommy Chong is here. He flew in on
the red eye." Next he said that he felt Chong had been unjustly
imprisoned. "In Hollywood, you sell a bong, you go to jail, you kill
your wife, so what [he gestured]."

Looking relaxed and healthy, the health-conscious Chong, 66, said it was
good to be out and gave a greeting to his fellow Taft inmates, who he
called some of the funniest guys he'd ever met. When asked how prison
conditions were, Chong joked, "It was hell, man, one day I had to wait
two hours for a tennis court," then said more seriously that the aim of
the prison experience seems to be to humiliate the inmate.

Leno asked how Chong had been busted, and Tommy replied his company sold
bongs to a fake "head shop" in Pennsylvania that was a DEA front. "But
isn't that entrapment?" Jay asked. "Hey, this is America," replied
Chong. It was also revealed during the interview that Chong pleaded
guilty so that charges would not be filed against his wife and son.
Chong was the only one of 55 people rounded up during "Operation Pipe
Dreams" who served time.

Jay asked why Chong's bongs were deemed illegal when such items are
available for purchase on Santa Monica Blvd. in LA. "I guess because
they had my picture on it," joked Chong, who is famous for portraying a
pothead in his many successful Cheech and Chong movies. Chong said when
police came to his door, they asked if he had pot. "Of course I do. I'm
Tommy Chong," was the reply. However, Chong had no arrest record
whatsoever until that day.

And the end of the two-segment interview, Leno asked Chong whether or
not his comedy partner Cheech Marin had visited him in prison. "He came
once, but that was always Cheech's problem," said Chong, and at that
point Cheech appeared on stage. The pair announced they are working on a
new film, to the cheers of the already receptive audience.

Look for an interview with Chong in an upcoming GQ magazine.

What Can I Do To Help?
There are three things you can do right now that will greatly help NORML
fight bad paraphernalia laws:

1.) Join Or Donate to NORML
2.) Keep Informed: Subscribe To NORML's Free Weekly E-zine and
Legislative Alerts
3.) Buy NORML Products (e.g., shirts, hats, stickers)

We need your help so we can stop the arrests. So you can buy a pipe or
an ounce, pay your sales tax, and be left alone. So suffering patients
will have access to a drug that is legal in other countries because it
relieves pain when nothing else works.

And, so we can offer hope to thousands now in jail, like Tommy Chong.

Don't you agree that now is the time to lend your voice of opposition
against the government's policy of arresting and jailing adults,
including sick and dying medical patients, who use marijuana responsibly?

Please support NORML's long-standing law reform work.

Thanks in advance,

Keith Stroup, Esq.
Founder and Executive Director

p.s. Be it for principle or product, please support NORML's important
advocacy work.

--
Baldin Pramer, Ph.D.

Associate Dean of Narcotics
Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Study

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Cardinal Vertigo <vertigo@alexandria.cc>

Baldin Pramer wrote:
> http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5746
[snip]
> Chong said when
> police came to his door, they asked if he had pot. "Of course I do. I'm
> Tommy Chong," was the reply.

I hereby nominate Tommy Chong for sainthood.

--
"I would defend the liberty of consenting adult creationists to
practice whatever intellectual perversions they like in the privacy
of their own homes; but it is also necessary to protect the young and
innocent."
- Arthur C. Clarke

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Starrett <jstarret@nmt.edu>

I second it. The council will now convene.

--
John Starrett

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Rich Clark, aka The Left Reverend Egg Plant, ULC, CotSG" <spammers_lie@rrclark.net>

Aye, I say.

Rich

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Paul Jamison" <pjamison2@cox.net>

It surprises me that he isn't a saint already.

I say Aye.

Paul

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Cardinal Vertigo <vertigo@alexandria.cc>

Without objection, the motion passes.

--
"Pot is illegal because it's the only drug that gives you great
ideas and makes you realize that 90% of everything isn't worth
even doing."
- Bill Hicks

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Artemia Salina <y2k@sheayright.com>

I object.

Marijuana is a POISONOUS WEED which has destroyed the lives
of many young persons. Did you know that the vast majority of
people in drug rehabilitation clinics are youthful marijuana
smokers? Thank goodness the judicial system is able to get
these young people the help they so desperately need!

I might also point out that Tommy Chong played an ADEL-BRAINED
DRUGGED-OUT IDIOT in his movies. That's very appropriate if
you ask me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer" <SeventhSqueal@SlowOnTheUptake.edu>

"Artemia Salina" <y2k@sheayright.com> wrote:
> I might also point out that Tommy Chong played an ADEL-BRAINED
> DRUGGED-OUT IDIOT in his movies. That's very appropriate if
> you ask me.

Overruled. I agree that judicial system is overrun with innocents seduced by
this pernicious and stinky weed, however, addle brained drugged out idiots
are funny and endearing in a clowny kind of way.

Plus, his brutal honesty to the fine police officers who wanted to bust him
and put him in prison should serve as a role model to all young people who
would otherwise lie to those whose job it is to protect and serve the public
from addle brained drugged out endearing clowns instead of assisting them
with their investigative work.

Aye, he's a good citizen.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Baldin Pramer <baldin@mailtoworld.com>

Aye.

--
Baldin Pramer, L.S.M.F.T.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "nu-monet v7.0" <nothing@succeeds.com>

Baldin Pramer wrote:
> What Can I Do To Help?
> There are three things you can do right now
> that will greatly help NORML fight bad
> paraphernalia laws:

There are three BETTER things you can do right
now that will NOT ONLY help NORML fight bad
paraphernalia laws, but bad drug laws as well:

1) The California Correctional Peace Officers
Association is the largest union in the State of
California. It is also the strongest lobbyist for
mandatory minimum sentences, harsh drug laws and
anything that will result in more people being
put in prison for longer periods. It needs to be
reminded that people are not products, and that
earning a livelihood to the detriment of many
otherwise productive citizens is not only anti-
social, but harmful to the long term interests of
their communities and State.

2) Individuals who support harsh drug laws
cannot be ignored. They must feel the full social
sanction against their authoritarian beliefs, and
not be "given a pass" in polite society, any more
than if they were an avowed racist or pedophile.
It is the social responsibility of everyone to
publicly condemn and stigmatize them for their
hateful attitudes, and to let them know that they
will personally have to suffer rejection for their
beliefs.

3) Demand of politicians that they clearly state
whether they are for or against medical marijuana.
When asked of them, you should have their voting
record on the subject available.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: beefjerkyisgood@hotmail.com (Paul Casino)

Although I totally agree that the 'frop should be legalized, it never
will be. My reason is twofold.

1.)Americans couldn't handle it. We're irresponsible in general and
can barely handle our freedom when it comes to things like booze and
guns. We'd somehow fuck it up. And it would be taxed so heavily that I
can get it now, whenever I want it, a lot cheaper than they'd ever
dare sell it to me. A "dime bag" would have to change it's name to
"Ancient Treasure Chest Full of Aztec Gold Bag".

2.)Too many idiots in this country equate illegal with "bad". It often
is, but not all the time. People, and when I say that I mean morons,
think that it was made illegal to "protect" us from it's "mind
altering halucenigenic effects" that makes 'froppers go crazy and kill
people or some such shit like that, when in reality, anybody who has
ever read a book knows that it was made illegal for political reasons.

Bill Hicks said that pot is illegal because it's the only drug that
gives you great ideas ("Bob" forbid we're a country of people with all
sorts of crazy ideas!) and makes you realize that 90% of everything
isn't worth even doing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Cardinal Vertigo <vertigo@alexandria.cc>

.sig. Do you have the exact context?

--
"Pot is illegal because it's the only drug that gives you great
and makes you realize that 90% of everything isn't worth even
doing."
- Bill Hicks

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Cosby <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl>

beefjerkyisgood@hotmail.com (Paul Casino) wrote:
>Although I totally agree that the 'frop should be legalized, it never
>will be. My reason is twofold.
>
>1.)Americans couldn't handle it. We're irresponsible in general and
>can barely handle our freedom when it comes to things like booze and
>guns. We'd somehow fuck it up. And it would be taxed so heavily that I
>can get it now, whenever I want it, a lot cheaper than they'd ever
>dare sell it to me. A "dime bag" would have to change it's name to
>"Ancient Treasure Chest Full of Aztec Gold Bag".
>
>2.)Too many idiots in this country equate illegal with "bad". It often
>is, but not all the time. People, and when I say that I mean morons,
>think that it was made illegal to "protect" us from it's "mind
>altering halucenigenic effects" that makes 'froppers go crazy and kill
>people or some such shit like that, when in reality, anybody who has
>ever read a book knows that it was made illegal for political reasons.
>
>Bill Hicks said that pot is illegal because it's the only drug that
>gives you great ideas ("Bob" forbid we're a country of people with all
>sorts of crazy ideas!) and makes you realize that 90% of everything
>isn't worth even doing.

I think that's all true ... I think beyond that though, grass is the
ultimate political issue. Or better the ultimately political issue.

Some political issues are decided by a process of rational examination
and decision-making. The rest are decided by "camp", conservative vs.
liberal. Most politics through history has a thread of conservative
vs. liberal running through it, under whatever name. In the 18th
century the Republicans were the liberals. The names change but the
two camps remain basically the same.

It's really more of a primitive tribal thing than anything else.

Those are the more "purely political" issues. You take your tribe's
side and all your decisions follow from that, rather than the other
way around.

I can't imagine any way anybody could truly think rationally that
whether some goofball up the street smokes grass in his living room
affects him in any way. I mean, like smoking or other thinly-veiled
tribal issues, there certainly are conceivable social impacts, but
most of them are noteably arbitrary. I.e. somebody will argue
"smoking grass might have a negative health impact, and that would
impact society at large". But then you start to wonder why the person
saying that is not concerned at all with any of dozens of more
significant problems relating to health.

It's transparently a case of the tail wagging the dog. The health
impact argument, or whatever arbitrary argument, is just a way of
justifying the decision the person has already made. Usually though,
in practice, the argument will bog down in whether there is or isn't a
health impact and if so how significant, and so on ad nauseum.

So the fact that the person didn't choose their stance based on any
kind of rational thought process in the first place gets forgotten.

That's why "purely political" issues go on forever. People -invent-
both sides of the argument. It's no longer even a real argument, it's
a pretend argument.

Underneath it, it's really about -tribal- standards. Not only is it
tribal in how it's "politicked", but it's basically tribal politics.
In a primitive, tribal society, what other people did in privacy -was-
the tribe's concern. It's instinct, xenophobia.

That's what all politics is, to me. Politics-as-politics. I mean,
whether the city fixes the potholes is a political issue, but it's not
really politics.

IMO though, politics in general is the struggle of people to advance
from a tribal society to a free society. Thousands of years invested
in it and they have only advanced by inches.

We are on the verge of reelecting a president who claims that he is
instructed by God to invade foreign countries and has appointed
nearly-mental religious loonies to dictate the nation's morality.

George Bush should just wear a wolf's skull on his head and dance
naked around a campfire shaking a Magic Bone Rattle, when he does his
State of the Union addresses.

Personally I don't think I'd notice the difference.

Oh wait, I forgot, he doesn't do State of the Union addresses anymore,
does he?

He got tired of people disagreeing with him.

--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
I can take a lot but a mailbox full of dead babies with "YOU COULD
WIN!" magic markered on their foreheads would be a little much for me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: glassgnost <glassgnost@nospam.sbcglobal.net>

Joe Cosby wrote:
> George Bush should just wear a wolf's skull on his head and dance
> naked around a campfire shaking a Magic Bone Rattle

Bonesman. NEXT!

--
the Mystical RevvedErrand Doktor glassnost

God.

The world is full of Kings and Queens
Who blind your eyes and steal your dreams
It's Heaven and Hell -- Black Sabbath

If there's a new way I'll be the first in line
It better work this time -- Megadeth

Stick around while the clown who is sick
does the trick of disaster -- Neil Young

http://www.subgenius.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Cardinal Vertigo <vertigo@alexandria.cc>

Joe Cosby wrote:
> I think that's all true ... I think beyond that though, grass is the
> ultimate political issue. Or better the ultimately political issue.
>
> Some political issues are decided by a process of rational examination
> and decision-making. The rest are decided by "camp", conservative vs.
> liberal. Most politics through history has a thread of conservative
> vs. liberal running through it, under whatever name. In the 18th
> century the Republicans were the liberals. The names change but the
> two camps remain basically the same.
>
> It's really more of a primitive tribal thing than anything else.
>
> Those are the more "purely political" issues. You take your tribe's
> side and all your decisions follow from that, rather than the other
> way around.
>
> I can't imagine any way anybody could truly think rationally that
> whether some goofball up the street smokes grass in his living room
> affects him in any way. I mean, like smoking or other thinly-veiled
> tribal issues, there certainly are conceivable social impacts, but
> most of them are noteably arbitrary. I.e. somebody will argue
> "smoking grass might have a negative health impact, and that would
> impact society at large". But then you start to wonder why the person
> saying that is not concerned at all with any of dozens of more
> significant problems relating to health.
>
> It's transparently a case of the tail wagging the dog. The health
> impact argument, or whatever arbitrary argument, is just a way of
> justifying the decision the person has already made. Usually though,
> in practice, the argument will bog down in whether there is or isn't a
> health impact and if so how significant, and so on ad nauseum.
>
> So the fact that the person didn't choose their stance based on any
> kind of rational thought process in the first place gets forgotten.
>
> That's why "purely political" issues go on forever. People -invent-
> both sides of the argument. It's no longer even a real argument, it's
> a pretend argument.
>
> Underneath it, it's really about -tribal- standards. Not only is it
> tribal in how it's "politicked", but it's basically tribal politics.
> In a primitive, tribal society, what other people did in privacy -was-
> the tribe's concern. It's instinct, xenophobia.
>
> That's what all politics is, to me. Politics-as-politics. I mean,
> whether the city fixes the potholes is a political issue, but it's not
> really politics.
>
> IMO though, politics in general is the struggle of people to advance
> from a tribal society to a free society. Thousands of years invested
> in it and they have only advanced by inches.
>
> We are on the verge of reelecting a president who claims that he is
> instructed by God to invade foreign countries and has appointed
> nearly-mental religious loonies to dictate the nation's morality.
>
> George Bush should just wear a wolf's skull on his head and dance
> naked around a campfire shaking a Magic Bone Rattle, when he does his
> State of the Union addresses.
>
> Personally I don't think I'd notice the difference.
>
> Oh wait, I forgot, he doesn't do State of the Union addresses anymore,
> does he?
>
> He got tired of people disagreeing with him.

He hasn't ditched a State of the Union address yet, though the last one
was such unbelievable fluff it was almost funny but not quite.

He never sees protestors, though. The "free speech zone" at his
appearances is always out of sight and earshot these days. Word around
the campfire says it's because he's so out of control his handlers are
afraid his reaction to protestors might be catastrophic.

This, despite several courts ruling that demonstrators must be allowed
within sight and hearing of the target of their demonstration.

--
"Here was buried Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of
American Independence, of the Statute of Virginia for Religious
Freedom, and Father of the University of Virginia."
- Thomas Jefferson, who wrote his own epitaph deliberately omitting
the fact that he was President of the United States

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: polar bear <bear@pole.com>

> He never sees protestors, though.

He sees enough of them to flip them off. Nothing really new though.
Pierre Trudeau was way ahead of him on that one.

pb

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: polar bear <bear@pole.com>

Up until the 1930's nobody gave a shit about pot as long as it was only
negroes smoking it. Once white kids caught on, and started hanging out
in black clubs and listening to their music, well, that was it.
Something had to be done about the terrible menace to our (white)
youth.

pb


Up one level
Back to document index

Original file name: Top fropster Chong f#1AD115.txt - converted on Saturday, 25 September 2004, 02:05

This page was created using TextToHTML. TextToHTML is a free software for Macintosh and is (c) 1995,1996 by Kris Coppieters