Under violations you will find:
1 ‘‘(iii) producing Cannabis sativa L.
2 with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol con3
centration of more than 0.3 percent on a
4 dry weight basis.
Testing AFTER decarboxylation, so the THCA is all converted to THC (The biggest trick of this whole thing)
Cannabis Sativa L. does not make THC, but testing converts this with heat. This will make you a criminal.
PAGE 4 Line 3
‘(ii) a procedure for testing, using
4 post-decarboxylation or other similarly reli5
able methods, delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol
6 concentration levels of hemp produced in
7 the State or territory of the Indian tribe;
This is adding a VIOLATION which we didn’t have, while it also masks the ORIGINAL DEFINITION. This “other” definition is what GW Pharmaceuticals is currently operating under. This is a penalty to We The People, but a corporation who is aware of the UNODC definition can afford to prove this in court, if they needed to. Now that this is being pushed, there is an indication that we will see Monsanto, now Bayer, will acquire GW Pharmaceuticals shortly.
Then take a look at the other document that shows the older definition.
When looked at from a different perspective, a scientific view, another picture appears. Taking the view through the definition of hemp and over laying it with the data set of so called “certified” cultivars versus the data set of all hemp defined by the National Labs. There are products such as Satvex from GW Pharmaceuticals which have Cannabinoids and are in a ratio of 1:1 to 1:20 (THC:CBD). This is exactly within the National Laboratories definition. These are over the so called 0.3%.
The National Laboratories “Recommended methods for the identification and analysis of cannabis and cannabis products”
Learn more on “Where Did 0.3% THC So Called Hemp Definition Come From? CANADA!“