From dali.cs.montana.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!stanford.edu!neon.Stanford.EDU!news Thu Apr 25 11:43:42 PDT 1991

If you've heard anything about the instructor that the government is trying to
get Stanford to fire because of his advocacy of drug use and his refusal to
obey campus drug policy, that's me.  My life has been unbelievably hectic since
then.

Several people have asked that I post my story to various newsgroups.  I don't
read these groups very often (I'm a local bboard person mostly), so I'm not
sure what rules of etiquette apply.  I'm going to make a guess that the
following is acceptable.  I have been advised that readers of alt.drugs,
talk.politics.drugs and alt.privacy all might be interested in my case.  I'm
posting this message to all of the groups.  I have two lengthy files that I'm
going to post afterwards to alt.drugs.  The first is an editorial that I wrote
for The Stanford Daily back in November expressing my intentions and th second
is an article I wrote for the Daily this week describing events since then.

These are lengthy files, so I apologize in advance if this action is offensive.
In my defense, I'll say that at least I posted to only one of the groups.  In
case I've misjudged and actually people are angry at me for not posting the
files to all three boards, I'll again apologize in advance and suggest that
readers of the two ignored groups can repost my articles.  In fact, I'll
actually state in case anyone is worried about it that anyone can distribute my
articles and messages as widely as they want to anyone and everyone and through
any and all media (what a blank check!).

Let me again apologize in advance, but the rest of this message is an unedited
repeat of a message I sent to Stanford's su.etc newsgroup.  I have a million
messages to respond to an I just don't have the time to write something new or
to edit this one so as to be more comprehensible to people outside Stanford.

Here's the story in brief.  Back in October I wrote an article to The Daily
outlining my objections to drug laws in general and to Stanford's new policy in
particular.  Since then, I have been writing to many government officials.  One
of them finally answered.  Bob Martinez, the new federal drug czar, sent a
letter to Don Kennedy basically demanding that Kennedy deal with me or Stanford
was in jeopardy of losing federal funds (just what Don wanted to here right
now!).  Three major violations are the basis of the case:

	o the fact that I have stated publicly that I carry illegal drugs in
	  my backpack while on campus

	o the fact that I allowed two sophomores who were under 21 to order a
	  before-dinner alcholic beverage at a dinner I hosted and that I will
	  pay for out of my unrestricted funds

	o an incident around Thanksgiving where I advised a student to
	  experiment with MDA

Bob Martinez and Ken Down (the Associate Dean who suspended me) seem most
concerned about the third item above.  Oddly enough, I am convinced that the
third item is protected free speech, but Martinez and Ken Down don't see it
that way.

I regret now having said anything about the alcohol incident.  I have no
particular desire to become a significant advocate for underage drinking.  I do
feel that those over 18 should be allowed to drink alcohol if they want to, but
it's not as big an issue to me as the issues of violation of privacy and
limitation of free speech.

I'm kind of exhausted from a long day of talking to reporters and dealing with
this situation, so I'm not going to say anything more for now.  I will,
however, mention that my October daily article can be found in the file
daily9.txt and that I have written a statement of my view of the current
situation that can be found in the file daily10.txt.  These files are stored on
my various computer accounts ([n nutrasweet] at [macbeth], [r--g--s] at [leland],
[s--ua--t] at [sunburn]) and are publicly readable.  Macbeth supports anonymous login if
you are on a different machine.  In addition, I've made a packet with a
hardcopy of both of those articles along with the letters from Martinez to
Kennedy and Ken Down to me and I've left copies of that packet outside my
office in Tresidder (room A-208 on the second floor, near the AIRPort).

p.s. I will end just by noting something about press coverage.  The article in
     the Chron this morning makes me sound like some kind of devil who is
     spending university money to give alcohol to kids while the article in the
     Times Tribune made me sound like a valued member of the Stanford community
     who was standing up for his beliefs about drug laws.  It's amazing what a
     contrast there is in the tone of the articles.  I have no idea of what to
     expect tomorrow.  The Washington Post has talked to me for over two hours
     on the phone and paid to have a photographer spend an hour with me today
     taking pictures of me, Hoover Tower, and the backpack (I thought it was
     very funny when they asked me, "Do you have any objection to having the
     backpack in the picture?").  They sound like they're going to write an
     article that is sympathetic to me, but that's the way a good reporter
     always sounds, so that you tell him more than you should (and I probably
     did).  Oh well, we'll see...