Well the other side was right--and it was wrong, unfortunately dead wrong. Mandatory sentencing for even non-violent drug offenders is necessary if the message on drug use is to be clear. At the same time, that practice does take up space in prisons which should be reserved for those violent wretches who prey so mercilessly upon our citizenry.
And so, on abandoned military bases which are crying out for use, we are finally going to establish the chain of drug offender camps that Dr. Bennett and many other right-thinking people have been calling for so long. These camps are for punishment, yes, and well-deserved punishment for the crime of drugs. But in the new spirit of redemption which is sweeping across our land, moral rehabilitation of these lost souls will be high on the agenda of the camps' educational program. In fact, the camps will be called "Moral Rehabilitation Centers."
3. Finally, we are going to formalize in legislation the "drug exception" to our valued and traditional American protection of civil liberties, that "drug exception" which the Supreme Court, even when it was of that now-discredited liberal persuasion, has been developing so assiduously in case law over so many years.
I should note that, determined to make our great country once again safe for right-thinking Americans, our predecessors in the 104th Congress attempted to significantly weaken the so-called "exclusionary rule" that had let so many criminals go scot-free.  Like them, we cannot and will not allow slavish devotion to the discredited liberal interpretation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution to interfere with our efforts to once again make our streets safe for the true Americans among us.
Thus, once and for all we are going to put the "drug exception" to the Fourth Amendment into the law. And if those liberal opponents of everything that is right and good about God's America somehow succeed in getting that just law overturned in the courts, we will amend the Constitution as necessary. 
4. Now, we have every confidence that these measures, none of them extreme, all of them measured to the need, will work. But if by some chance they do not, we will go further. I want everyone within the borders of our great country and beyond who is any way connected with trafficking in or using the poisonous drugs of which we speak to be very clear about what I am about to say.
If the need arises, we will give very serious consideration to implementing a proposal that our esteemed colleague, Paul Weyrich, made back in 1990 when he spoke to Washington's University Club on this subject (Stan). At that time he "advised Congress to declare an official war on drugs, so that drug users and dealers, once apprehended, could be denied their right of habeas corpus and held as prisoners of war, allowing for their indeterminate incarceration under the provisions of the Geneva Convention."
My friends, I am making The Real Drug War my first order of business, even as we begin the mammoth job of reordering the disorder that has been dumped on our country during the last eight years. I will be making the Real Drug War my first order of business with the Congress because this drug problem is indeed the most serious one our country faces today.
We can solve it, we must solve it, and we will solve it, with God's help and with His blessing. And God's blessing we shall receive because He will know that in fighting the mortal sin of drug use we are doing the Lord's work. We can only hope that the Lord will see this effort as the first step we are taking on the long road to national redemption.
Good night, and may the God of Christ Bless you.
It may interest the reader to know that as far as "Drug War" strategy was concerned, there was not a single original thought in the Pine speech. (As we will see, this was a phenomenon that characterized both the thinking and the speeches of most of the fascist leadership throughout the Period.) All of his program components could be found in all or in part in the work of such leading Right-Wing Reactionaries and "Drug Warriors" as the ones to which he referred, Newton Gingrich and William Bennett, and less well-known ones such as Peter Bensinger, Robert Bonner, Herbert Kleber, David Musto, William Olson, and John Walters (Schumer).
The Supreme Court's "drug exception" mentioned by Pine is discussed by Alex Poughton in his letter reproduced below. Also as mentioned by Pine, in 1995 the House of Representatives had passed a bill which would have significantly undercut the provisions of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution by allowing warrantless searches in certain circumstances (Seelye). Due to various legislative and judicial developments over the years, the measure had never been fully implemented. Of course, as noted the controversy was ultimately brought to closure by repeal of the Fourth Amendment in its entirety in 2006.
Following is the first of the series of letters by the English journalist Alex Poughton that appear throughout this book. You may recall from the Preface that for the London Sunday Times, throughout the Fascist Period Poughton reported on it under the heading "American Democracy." Consistent with the politics of the paper's owner, Poughton's published pieces tended to be more puffy than penetrating presentation and analysis. His private views however, contained in letters to a mysterious "Karl" and preserved in his library, were something else again. And so we turn to the first of those re-produced in this book, written shortly after the Pine Inaugural. For a journalist, Poughton reveals a fairly sophisticated understanding of the drug issue, among others.
An Alex Poughton letter
February 13, 2001