Is No Men’s Rae “The plea to SET US FREE” ?

 

Image result for pot leaf

April 12, 2017

The debate over whether or not to use “no mens rae” when facing a Cannabis charge in a Court of Law has been brought to the forefront with Thorne Peters who is facing charges for Marijuana and paraphernalia possession which begins on July 31, 2017 in a Memphis, TN Court of Law.

There is always two sides to every story and multiple opinions, therefore I will attempt to present both opinions that I have been offered, as far as the use of no “mens rae” in a Court of Law.

In the first scenario Thorne Peters feels that no “mens rae” or having no guilty mind at the time the charge was incurred, is of itself enough to render a not guilty verdict if given the chance in a trial by jury.

In the second scenario Rev. Mary Thomas Spears differs in opinion as she states that no “mens rae” plead as a defense from the beginning of a trial is not in anyone’s best interest because this plea is meant to establish the fact the the defendant did not, in fact, know that they were guilty of a crime at the time.  It does not mean that you feel you were not guilty at the time because of your beliefs.

In a Facebook message today, Thorne Peters sent the following to me:

Image may contain: 4 people, people standing and outdoor

Judge Neil Gorsuch, of Denver, Colorado, a Supreme Court Justice nominee, (now confirmed) defends the lawful right of people using drugs and cannabis, as well as a variety of consensual acts currently prohibited.

In his 2006 book, “Assisted Suicide and the Right to Euthanasia”, Gorsuch claims that people have the right to die, kill themselves or join suicide pacts. He also supports the rights of citizens to use drugs, commit prostitution and even sell their body parts.

“If a person has the right to die, they also have the right to use drugs.”

Gorsuch claims the legal standard of “mens rea” (the guilty mind) does not apply to consensual acts.

In Memphis, since February 2015, CANNABIS Proactivist THORNE PETERS, known as “THE KINGPIN”, has been using a “no mens rea” defense against Possession for sales of CANNABIS charges . . . a case that has been set off for trial on two different occasions and is currently reset for trial in Division 1 on July 31, 2017 . . . 29 months after the arrest.

Judge Paula Skahan explained to Peters that “no mens rea” is a matter for the jury to decide. Peters claims the State is reluctant to go to trial because there are no legal grounds to proceed because he had “no mens rea.”

“When I make my case to the jury at THE TRIAL OF THE MILLENNIUM, I will prove my rights are being violated and we will have the legal mantra to end CANNABIS Prohibition. “NO MENS REA!”

Peters notoriously ran a “420 Friendly Nightclub” in Millington, TN which was closed as a Public Nuisance in 2009. He spent 19 months in jail fighting drug trafficking charges that were dropped. Peters was arrested for toking POT from an apple at the courthouse on 4/20/2011. In 2014, he spent a year dealing POT on Facebook; making YouTube videos that he posted to the walls of the local authorities seeking to be arrested. “The only way to make our case is to make the jury understand there is no mens rea. We must follow the law; not seek to change it.”

Once again Peters will represent himself, only this time he claims his case will represent all of CANNABIS Universe.

A case for NO MENS REA cannot be defeated in court, because we have no accuser and we have consent. Like it was in the JIM CROW south, we are being violated by political policies enforced with criminal codes that oppress us.

We will be following this trial till its conclusion, so stay tuned.


MOTION TO DISMISS POT BUST

Thorne Peters·Sunday, November 15, 2015

snapshot

“It is not against the LAW to grow deal and toke POT! It is against an unjust Political Policy known as PROHIBITION, which is as UNCONSTITUTIONAL as JIM CROW!”~ THE KINGPIN THORNE PETERS!
“ILLEGAL v. UNLAWFUL” . . . a distinction with the greatest difference. LINK


JUDGE PAULA SKAHAN (TN),

“….As far as “Mens Rae”, those are issues for a trial in front of a jury…” 


Now comes a differing opinion from Rev. Mary Thomas-Spears and the group of “Americans for Cannabis” which is also a repeal organization.

407802_10150588781162994_1598323166_n
Mary Thomas-Spears shared Constitutional Cannabis‘s post to the group: Kentucky for Cannabis™.

From another educational page of mine here on FB… –

Constitutional Cannabis

First Lesson to remember in Law is – That despite what you believe all the words mean… That those words are translated back to their Latin Definitions by the Courts = like Doctors

The Judges, Lawyers,… Use Latin Words and Terms to communicate and do their business!

“Where being a good Catholic boy pays off!” ~ Gatewood Galbraith

So your first lesson is? They do not want you to know what they are saying as they hide the true meanings of the words… While they taught you to read a Webster’s Dictionary….

They use Black’s Law Dictionary or West Business Law for the most part.

It is very important to note that both of these Dictionaries quote Cannon Law.

As the Law is an extension of the Law of G-d handed down or Canonized by the Roman Catholic Church and or Mosaic Law.

Just as Government is the extension of, incorporation or Corporation, Corpse = Dead Body of the Administration or Ministry established by the Church for Control and Profit = why the Church is Tax Exempt and why Courtrooms look like churches with pews…

Any questions??? About any of this?

Continuing on…

Bernard Lucas

I have a question for you Mary. I see a number of cannabis activist’s promoting a #NoMensRea (No Guilty Mind) To be used as a cannabis defense when charged with cannabis possession in a court of law. I have not seen any documentation or court cases, or defendants having their cannabis case dismissed by using the plea #NoMensRea? I don’t think activist’s should be promoting this defense when courts may be most likely to ignore this defense? Would you please be able to clear up this possible misconception and set us straight on this defense?

Mary Thomas-Spears

TY! Bernard Lucas for asking a question that I have asked myself, as it is a good question!

The question is #NoMensRea ?
No!!! I do not promote the use of this defense
http://nationalparalegal.edu/public_documents/courseware_asp_files/criminalLaw/basicElements/CommonLawMensRea.asp

Why???
I am not an Attorney so you can not construe this as Legal Advise as I share my understanding from research and experience only.

Making that your Defense is like making an Insanity Defense in my opinion.

Which is nearly impossible for most conscious people to pull off…

Why? It has to be proven or established to at least what?  Cast doubt upon a Jury…
I can see more than one problem with this defense in any Court in any case where it may be proven that the defendant was aware of the Laws in Question? Or the Charges brought before them… Or where they did anything covertly = any attempt to hide what they was doing… Or was not out open and upfront with their actions on….

Why? Because all the Prosecution has to prove at this point is, were you aware of the Law(s) and did you knowingly intend to break the Law = you intended to commit harm upon the State or Feds… As they are claiming to be the victim at this point.

It opens a can of worms that is hard to keep alive in the Courtroom without addressing their unconstitutional over reach… Like their claiming to be the victim!

Common Law Mens Rea

nationalparalegal.edu

Bernard Lucas

“Excellent answer Mary. Just as I had thought about it from my research. Kentucky for Cannabis™ and all Americans For Cannabis groups, pages etc. Will not be promoting anything like this defense. Which may send a defendant the wrong message.”

In another post on Facebook Mary states the following in response to a discussion with Thorne Peters,

I CHALLENGE ANYONE ATTACKING ME AND DEFENDING #ThornePeters to document ONE CASE where his Motion for #NoMansRae has ever worked in a Courtroom when filed in the ORDER of Process in which he had ADVISED OTHERS to FILE it

As I have already stated – IN MY OPINION- THE PROPER ORDER OF LEGAL PROCESS IS,

One friend wrote – “Her point is you have to be Arrested first!”  That isn’t my point at all but it is true.  No and Yes! Yes, you must first be arrested,

No,

HE IS OUT OF ORDER IN THAT  you have to first be willing TO ACCEPT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT YOU KNOW, =  the current LAW WHICH YOU CHOSE TO BREAK.  You know you chose to break an Unconstitutional Act of Congress!  An Unconstitutional Act that is an Evil Lie! = ADMIT YOUR GUILT = START BY FILING A PLEA OF GUILTY BUT INNOCENT BASED ON A MOTION OF “LESSOR of EVILS” as YOUR DEFENSE  IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH  #NoMansRea. Otherwise you are pleading insanity in these cases.   I am just saying  that they know that you knew you were choosing to break the law = commit evil according to them! The next comment I have later added for clarity fact is – Unless you follow the Order of Process given above how will you be able to prove your case?  Because unless you first admit you knowingly broke an Unconstitutional Law,  how will you ever get to introduce the evidence that it is in fact, an unconstitutional, evil law? You can’t.

Common Law Mens Rea:

Mens rea, or “guilty” intent, deals with what the defendant needs to have been thinking at the time he or she committed the actus reus* for criminal liability to attach. In order to be guilty of most crimes, the defendant must have had the mens rea required for the crime he was committing at the time he committed the criminal act. As with the actus reus, there is no single mens rea that is required for all crimes. Rather, it will be different for each specific crime. LINK

*(ac·tus re·us /ˌaktəs ˈrēəs,ˈrāəs/ noun  / Law noun: actus reus / action or conduct that is a constituent element of a crime, as opposed to the mental state of the accused)


Mens Rea:
The state of mind that the prosecution, to secure a conviction, must prove that a defendant had when committing a crime.


In conclusion, first of all I do not think it is in anyone’s best interest to go into a Court of Law as a defendant and a defense attorney!  It is not a great idea to represent yourself in any circumstance, especially in trial.  Secondly, I would never try to use No mens rae because I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the statutes will deem me guilty as charged if I tried to say I did not know marijuana was illegal!  I definitely know that Marijuana is illegal – according to the statutes which the Government now have in place to regulate commerce – it makes it an offense to the Government that I was using, possessing or giving away Marijuana.  And I KNOW this.

Rather, if I were to pursue a trial by jury I would make a guilty plea and then use a “lesser of two evils” defense.  Because of the fact that I have a disability for which Marijuana is  “the lesser of two evils” versus a strong pharmaceutical pain reliever, I may be able to convince the jury to nullify my verdict.  Mind you that this is just an example but I think it explains the concept.

It will be interesting to see how the trial proceeds in July.  I think it goes without saying that we all wish #ThornePeters the best of luck in his endeavor!  I hope that when it’s over Thorne can walk out of the Courtroom a free man and we can all get together and light up a big fat joint and celebrate the fact that we no longer have to feel guilty for breaking the Law to smoke a damn joint! 

sk

 

Notes, Links, and definitions of interest:

Mens rea (/ˈmɛnz ˈriːə/; Latin for “guilty mind”[1][2][3]) is the mental element of a crime. It is a necessary element of many crimes.  The standard common law test of criminal liability is expressed in the Latin phrase actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, i.e. “the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty”. In jurisdictions with due process, there must be both actus reus (“guilty act”) and mens rea for a defendant to be guilty of a crime (see concurrence). As a general rule, someone who acted without mental fault is not liable in criminal law. Exceptions are known as strict liability crimes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_Penal_Code#Mens_rea_or_culpability

https://www.facebook.com/thorne.peters/videos/1293329740747368/

http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/petersthorneopn.pdf

http://wreg.com/2015/02/05/man-known-for-marijuana-advocacy-in-jail-again/

http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/sites/default/files/petersthorneopn.pdf

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8317.html

https://www.facebook.com/MaryL.Thomas.Spears

https://www.facebook.com/MaryL.Thomas.Spears/posts/1755983124714577

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1756018908044332&id=100009087183261&ref=m_notif&notif_t=like

 

Advertisements

Kentucky Cannabis Hemp Health Initiative

Kentucky Cannabis Hemp Health Initiative 2013-2014-2015

 

 

 

 

Framework taken from the Jack Herer Initiative aka CCHI1013. An initiative I had the honor of having a personal hand helping to word, redefining the cannabis/marijuana/hemp movement through selective wording. While attempting to protect and free the plant, the farmers, the prisoners, and the people from validating and mandating over regulation and enslavement through the legal lies = legalize = “common words used”  commonly leading us to Corporate G.M.O.’s = {genetic mutated organisms} which “equal genetically modified crops”, seed ownership through patent, small farmers being sued or enslaved,… While they continue to build their Military Industrial Complex with our tax dollars, lives…  So it seems only appropriate I use it as a base to follow and put it forth here within the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

THIS IS A DRAFT, PLEASE DO MAKE ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR ANY PROTECTIONS YOU FEEL HAVE BEEN OVER LOOKED AND ARE NEEDED HERE > https://www.facebook.com/notes/kentucky-cannaibis-hemp-health-initiative-2014/kentucky-cannabis-hemp-health-initiative-2014/284385848356111

AN ACT TO AMEND THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY:

 

I. Add Section ________ to the Health and Safety Code of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, to amend, nullify, restore through repeal of any and all unconstitutional laws or policies to the contrary, including those on the Federal and U.N. Levels, notwithstanding,:

1. No person, individual, or corporate entity shall be arrested or prosecuted, be denied any right or privilege, nor be subject to any criminal or civil penalties for the possession, cultivation, transportation, distribution, or consumption of cannabis hemp marijuana, including:

 
         (a) Cannabis hemp industrial products.
         (b) Cannabis hemp medicinal preparations.
         (c) Cannabis hemp nutritional products.
         (d) Cannabis hemp religious and spiritual products.
         (e) Cannabis hemp recreational and euphoric use and products.

   2. Definition of terms:

    (a) The terms “cannabis hemp” and “cannabis hemp marijuana” mean the natural, non-genetically modified plant hemp, cannabis, marihuana, marijuana, cannabis sativa L, cannabis Americana, cannabis chinensis, cannabis indica, cannabis ruderalis, cannabis sativa, or any variety of cannabis, including any derivative, concentrate, extract, flower, leaf, particle, preparation, resin, root, salt, seed, stalk, stem, or any product thereof.

    (b) The term “cannabis hemp industrial products” means all products made from cannabis hemp that are not designed or intended for human consumption, including, but not limited to: clothing, building materials, paper, fiber, fuel, lubricants, plastics, paint, seed for cultivation, animal feed, veterinary medicine, oil, or any other product that is not designed for internal human consumption; as well as cannabis hemp plants used for crop rotation, erosion control, pest control, weed control, or any other horticultural or environmental purposes, for example, the reversal of the Greenhouse Effect and toxic soil reclamation.

    (c) The term “cannabis hemp medicinal preparations” means all products made from cannabis hemp that are designed, intended, or used for human consumption for the treatment of any human disease or condition, for pain relief, or for any healing purpose, including but not limited to the treatment or relief of: Alzheimer’s and pre-Alzheimer’s disease, stroke, arthritis, asthma, cramps, epilepsy, glaucoma, migraine, multiple sclerosis, nausea, premenstrual syndrome, side effects of cancer chemotherapy, fibromyalgia, sickle cell anemia, spasticity, spinal injury, stress, easement of post-traumatic stress disorder, Tourette syndrome, attention deficit disorder, immunodeficiency, wasting syndrome from AIDS or anorexia; use as an antibiotic, antibacterial, anti-viral, or anti-emetic; as a healing agent, or as an adjunct to any medical or herbal treatment. Mental conditions not limited to bipolar, depression, attention deficit disorder, or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, shall be conditions considered for medical use.
     

   (d) The term “cannabis hemp nutritional products” means cannabis hemp for consumption by humans and animals as food, including but not limited to: seed, seed protein, seed oil, essential fatty acids, seed cake, dietary fiber, or any preparation or extract thereof. Not Taxable
      

  (e) The term “cannabis hemp euphoric products” means cannabis hemp intended for personal recreational or religious use, other than cannabis hemp industrial products, cannabis hemp medicinal preparations, or cannabis hemp nutritional products.
   

(f) The term “personal use” means the internal consumption of cannabis hemp by people 18 years of age or older for any relaxational, meditative, religious, spiritual, recreational, or other purpose other than sale.
       

(g) The term “commercial production” means the production of cannabis hemp products for sale or profit under the conditions of these provisions.
     

  (h) The term “non-genetically modified ” is used to define or establish the Prohibition of any and all Unnatural “genetically modified organism (GMO)” is used to refer to any microorganism, plant, or animal in which genetic engineering techniques have been used to introduce, remove, or modify specific parts of its genome of any and all cannabis, cannabis sativa L, marijuana, hemp,…. Examples include plants being modified for pest resistance; lab animals being manipulated to exhibit human diseases, such as sickle cell anemia; and even glowing jellyfish genes inserted in a rabbit for an art piece.
Ref: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Genetically-modified+organism
As Apposed To =  To Clarify that there is a Recognized Difference between G.M.O. and Genetically Engineered
    

  (i) The term “genetic engineering” involves isolating individual DNA fragments, coupling them with other genetic material, and causing the genes to replicate themselves. Introducing this created complex to a host cell causes it to multiply and produce clones that can later be harvested and used for a variety of purposes. Current applications of the technology include medical investigations of gene structure for the control of genetic disease, particularly through antenatal diagnosis. The synthesis of hormones and other proteins (e.g., growth hormone and insulin), which are otherwise obtainable only in their natural state, is also of interest to scientists. Applications for genetic engineering include disease control, hormone and protein synthesis, and animal research.
Ref: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Genetically-modified

3. Industrial cannabis hemp farmers, manufacturers, processors, and distributors shall not be subject to any special zoning requirement, licensing fee, tax that is excessive, discriminatory, double taxation or prohibitive.

4. Cannabis hemp medicinal preparations are hereby restored to the list of available medicines in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Licensed physicians shall not be penalized for, nor restricted from, prescribing or recommending cannabis hemp for medical purposes to any patient, regardless of age. No tax shall be applied to prescribed cannabis hemp medicinal preparations. Medical research shall be encouraged. No recommending physician shall be subject to any professional licensing review or hearing as a result of recommending or approving medical use of cannabis hemp marijuana. Cannabis hemp nutritious foods are medicine and therefore are subject to current Commonwealth Food & Drug Tax Code Exemptions

5. Personal use of cannabis hemp euphoric products.
      

  (a) No permit, license, or tax shall be required for the non-commercial cultivation, transportation, distribution, or consumption of cannabis hemp.
 

(b) No unconstitutional Testing for inactive and/or inert residual cannabis metabolites shall not be allowed for employment or insurance, nor be considered in determining employment, other impairment, or intoxication, or qualifications for benefits, programs or education,…  Including Protections of Families, against Unconstitutional Testing for Cannabis residual,… and/or Cannabis Use shall not/can not be used to take Custody of children from their families, parents or legal guardians.
     

(c) When a person falls within the conditions of these exceptions, the offense laws do not apply and only the exception laws apply.

6. Use of cannabis hemp products for religious or spiritual purposes shall be considered an inalienable right; and shall be protected by the full force of the State and Federal Constitutions.
 

7. Commerce in cannabis hemp euphoric products shall be limited to adults, 18 years of age and older, and shall be regulated in a manner analogous to the Commonwealth of Kentucky’s tobacco industry model. For the purpose of distinguishing personal from commercial production, 99 flowering female plants and 12 pounds of dried, cured cannabis hemp flowers, bud, not leaf, produced per adult, 18 years of age and older, per year shall be considered as being for personal use.
 

8. The manufacture, marketing, distribution, or sales between adults of equipment or accessories designed to assist in the planting, cultivation, harvesting, curing, processing, packaging, storage, analysis, consumption, or transportation of cannabis hemp plants, industrial cannabis hemp products, cannabis hemp medicinal preparations, cannabis hemp nutritional products, cannabis hemp euphoric products, or any cannabis hemp product shall not be prohibited.
 

9. No Commonwealth of Kentucky law enforcement personnel or funds shall be used to assist or aid and abet in the enforcement of Federal cannabis hemp marijuana laws involving acts which are hereby declared unconstitutional, therefore no longer illegal, as they are considered repealed and nullified in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
 

10. Any person who threatens the enjoyment of these provisions is guilty of a misdemeanor. The maximum penalties and fines of a misdemeanor may be imposed.

II. Nullify, Repeal, delete, and expunge any and all existing statutory laws that conflict with the provisions of this initiative.
  

1. Enactment of this initiative shall include: amnesty, immediate release of custody from prison, jail, parole, and probation, and clearing, expungement, and deletion of all criminal records and/or all social/family service records/cases for all persons currently charged with, or convicted of any non-violent cannabis hemp marijuana offenses included in this initiative which are hereby no longer illegal in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. People who fall within this category that triggered an original sentence are included within this provision.

2. Within 60 days of the passage of this Act, the Commonwealth Attorney General shall develop and distribute a one-page application, providing for the destruction of all cannabis hemp marijuana criminal records in the Commonwealth of Kentucky for any such offense covered by this Act. Such forms shall be distributed to district and city commonwealth attorneys and made available at all police departments in the Commonwealth to persons hereby affected. Upon filing such form with any Superior Court and a payment of a fee of $10.00, the Court shall liberally construe these provisions to benefit the defendant in furtherance of the amnesty and dismissal provision of this section. Upon the Court’s ruling under this provision the arrest record shall be set aside and be destroyed. Such persons may then truthfully state that they have never been arrested or convicted of any cannabis hemp marijuana related offense which is hereby no longer illegal in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. This shall be deemed to be a finding of factual innocence under Kentucky Penal Code Section 218A.010, et seq.
 

3. Law abiding Cannabis Growers and Consumers retain the Right to possess Firearms as granted to them by the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. For the use of their protection and prosperity which includes hunting.

III. The legislature is authorized upon thorough investigation, to enact legislation using reasonable standards to:
  

1. License concessionary establishments to distribute cannabis hemp euphoric products in a manner analogous to the Commonwealth of Kentucky’s tobacco industry model. Sufficient community outlets shall be licensed to provide reasonable commercial access to persons of legal age, so as to discourage and prevent the misuse of, and illicit traffic in, such products. Any license or permit fee required by the Commonwealth for commercial production, distribution or use shall not exceed $1,000.00 and not more than $500.00 per small farmer or small business.
 

2. Place an excise tax on commercial and corporate sale of cannabis hemp euphoric products, analogous to the Commonwealth’s tobacco industry model, so long as no excise tax or combination of excise taxes shall exceed $10.00 per ounce.
  

3. Regulate the personal use of cannabis hemp euphoric products in enclosed and/or restricted public places.

4. Exempt cannabis marijuana hemp from any and all farming tobacco “Base” laws, regulations, codes, statutes, which “restricted” or “limit” number of licenses,… based on science that “does not apply” to the agricultural cultivation, propagation, growth or farming of cannabis marijuana hemp which has been scientifically proven to reclaim, remove toxins and restore soil, ground water and our ozone.  

IV. Pursuant to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky hereby nullify, repudiate and challenge Federal cannabis hemp marijuana prohibitions that are in conflict with this Act and our Constitutions, both Federal and our Commonwealth’s.

V. Severability: If any provision of this Act, or the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid by any court, the remainder of this Act, to the extent it can be given effect, or the application of such provisions to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid, shall not be affected thereby, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.

VI. Construction: If any rival or conflicting initiative regulating any matter addressed by this act receives the higher affirmative vote, then all non-conflicting parts shall become operative.

VII. Purpose of Act: This Act is an exercise of the police powers of the Commonwealth for the protection of the safety, welfare, health, and peace of the people and the environment of the Commonwealth, to protect the industrial and medicinal uses of cannabis hemp, to eliminate the unlicensed and unlawful cultivation, selling, and dispensing of cannabis hemp; and to encourage temperance in the consumption of cannabis hemp euphoric products. It is hereby declared that the subject matter of this Act involves, in the highest degree, the ecological, economic, social, and moral well-being and safety of the Commonwealth and of all its people. All provisions of this Act shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of these purposes: to respect human rights, to promote tolerance, to uphold the Constitutions both Federal and the Commonwealth’s and to end cannabis hemp prohibition. To nullify, repeal and challenge the U.N. to end cannabis marijuana hemp prohibition which is half of the worldwide so-called “War on Drugs”created to uphold the interest of Big Chema, Big Pharma, Big Corps and their Synthetic Military Industrial Prison Complex and to uphold the interest of the people and it’s own Universal Declaration of Human Rights for the reasons already stated with-in it.

 

***************
Due to the fact that the Commonwealth of Kentucky doesn’t allow you to simply petition your State Government as in most states. We ask that you Please print or copy, Sign, and forward copies to your local Representative in Congress and our State Senators here with-in the Commonwealth with a note attached reminding them they are paid to represent your interest regardless of whether they agree with them or not. Thank You!
Written in Honor of the Great Spirit, the universe, the planet and good friends, colleagues, mentors, leaders,… Jack Herer, Gatewood Galbraith, and all who have gone before me and those who will come after us.
Sincerely,
Mary Thomas-Spears aka Rev. Mary

 

PLEASE SIGN PETITION BELOW!  REPEAL CANNABIS PROHIBITION NOW!

 

Petition2Congress Logo

Fear and loading in Kentucky

by Andy Kopsa@andykopsa

September 19, 2013 9:00AM ET

$350 buys you a bump fire stock to turn a semiautomatic rifle into a machine gun

Barrel assemblies for weapons on sale during the semi-annual Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot at the Knob Creek Gun Range in West Point, Kentucky.

My first night in Louisville, Jim showed me his guns. The born-and-bred Kentucky boy stores them in a hulking safe with a keypad lock, hidden inside a walk-in closet. Over 5 feet tall and almost 4 feet wide, it easily holds Jim’s collection of pistols, rifles and handguns, with room to spare. Lining the back of the door is a leather organizer with more guns snugly tucked in its pockets.

One by one, Jim pulled out gun after gun, explaining the provenance of each one. There was his grandfather’s Browning SA .22, an antique handgun of gray polished metal. I could tell by the way he handled it that it was heavy. His grandpa “kept it on his nightstand,” Jim said, and called it a “squirrel shooter.” There was the precision Anschutz target rifle of the finest craftsmanship. And the semiautomatic AR-15, bought prior to the 1994 federal assault-weapon ban (which expired a decade later). Jim’s AR-15 looked like a cheap plastic toy, but he assured me his gun was far superior to the ones made now.

In the gun-friendly culture prevalent in Kentucky, Jim’s multigenerational collection of guns isn’t unusual. What makes him stand out in the community, however, is his stance on gun control. (In fact, his views on background checks and waiting periods — he’s for them — are so contentious that he asked me not to use his real name so he wouldn’t be recognized at the gun ranges where he is a regular.)

During a phone conversation with him this January, with the shadow of the Sandy Hook shooting massacre in the background, he told me that the variety of guns and gun accessories readily available in his state should frighten me. Within a 20-minute drive of his house, he said, he could legally purchase everything he needed to convert an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, or SAR (which, each time the trigger is pulled, fires once, ejects the empty casing and immediately loads another round), into a fully automatic weapon capable of shooting 100 rounds a pop. All Jim needed was a device known as a bump fire stock, available for purchase online and at gun retailers, gun shows and ranges for $350 to $500.

“I betcha didn’t know [you could do that],” Jim said. He was right. I didn’t. That’s how I found myself in Louisville, Ky., handling Jim’s AR-15 — the weapon I would modify with a bump fire.

Jim instructed me to handle the rifle and familiarize myself with the different parts and the sequence of actions required to shoot it. I was surprised how quickly I became proficient at flipping the safety, sliding the bolt open and closed and clicking the ammunition chamber shut with my right index finger. Within 15 minutes I was running through the pre-firing routine smoothly.

A good state for gun owners

The magazine Guns & Ammo ranks Kentucky as No. 5 on its list of best states for gun owners because of its lax gun laws. The state’s concealed-carry laws cover all kinds of guns, not just handguns. There is no permit needed to carry a weapon in public (called open carry) and no waiting period to purchase a gun. (Kentucky used to have a wait, also known as a cooling-off period to protect against impulsive acts of violence, but it was abolished recently, along with other restrictions.) And Kentucky has a “stand your ground” law — as made infamous by the Trayvon Martin case in Florida — and there are no restrictions on purchasing SARs or on magazine capacity.

Unsurprisingly then, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence puts Kentucky near the bottom in its 2011 survey of states’ regulation policies. It scored just 2 out of a possible 100 points. Only Arizona, Utah and Alaska scored lower, coming in at zero.

In Kentucky, it is entirely legal to purchase a machine gun, which spits out bullets for as long as the trigger is pressed and there is ammunition in the chamber, allowing hundreds of rounds to be fired in a matter of minutes — as opposed to single-shot or semiautomatic weapons, which only fire one bullet each time the trigger is pulled.

The buyer has to clear a background check by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives: disqualifiers include a felony conviction, a dishonorable discharge from the military or a record of domestic violence. Then a $200 tax stamp is all that separates the buyer from the machine gun, which typically ranges in price from $12,000 to $16,000 for a new model.

In recent months, gun-control laws have become even looser. In March, Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear signed into law Senate Bill 150, which repeals the six-month state residency requirement to acquire a concealed carry permit. The National Rifle Association praised its passage, saying it was “critical” to one’s inherent right to self-defense and that the residency requirement was in fact “discriminatory.”

The next day, Jim and I headed out to Knob Creek shooting range, about a 25-minute ride from Louisville. We arrived around noon and went inside to pay our $20 range fee. The Knob, as it is known, is featured in the Country Music Television reality series “Guntucky,” about the family-owned and -operated outdoor range famous for letting a person shoot almost any object. If you can drag it out onto the 350-yard range, you can shoot it. The rules have changed slightly over the years because some items, for example, an old toilet, once destroyed, spewed shrapnel that pierced the tires of the range’s maintenance vehicles.

The office is in a large aluminum outbuilding with a snack shop, with several lunchroom-style tables where customers can order a hot dog or popcorn, and the main office area in the back, which is more gun store than office.

The Knob’s walls are lined with long guns (firearms with long barrels such as rifles and shotguns) and draped with flags — American and Confederate and those of the armed-services branches — and glass cases filled with handguns pack the room’s perimeter. Customers can rent a .50-caliber machine gun like ones mounted on armored vehicles for use in war. Pay the $100 fee and, under the close supervision of Knob staff, you can squeeze off 10 rounds from this tremendous weapon.

But the gun range isn’t only for serious shooters. Several gun ranges in and around Louisville have family memberships, family-centric events and classes for young shooters. Other ranges host ladies’ nights and lunchtime shooting specials with reduced fees. According to its website, the Knob “strives to provide a safe, friendly atmosphere for families to enjoy firearms.”

After paying our range fee, we set up on one of the 20 or so shooting tables facing downrange. The range master, an older man with a revolver on his hip, cautioned us to make sure that all gun barrels were pointed downrange and that we had chamber flags (small plastic orange flags inserted in the firing chamber of a gun to show it is unloaded) in and the safety on when not shooting.

The Knob is an outdoor range not far from Louisville famous for letting a person shoot almost any object. If you can drag it out onto the range, you can shoot it.

Jim placed the AR-15 on our table, balancing the barrel on a sandbag for support. I laid out magazines of 20 and 30 rounds next to me; my thumb and forefinger were stained black from loading more than 600 rounds the night before.

I looked through the laser sight, which Jim called a doughnut sight because a red “doughnut” appears on the glass screen to zero in on the target. The first shot I took was maybe 50 yards out: a soda can we set up to watch it blow. I don’t remember if it was the first or second shot that sent the can spraying in the air, but it was a rush. I wanted to shoot more things — watermelons, pineapples, proper targets set up farther out.

After the AR-15, I tried a larger-caliber SAR called a .302 and a couple of single-shot rifles. Jim and I shot until our clothes were ringed with sweat and most of our ammo spent. In the 96-degree Kentucky heat, four hours had passed in what seemed like an instant.

At the close of that first day, I asked one of the range workers where I could buy a bump fire. He disappeared from the cash register for a few minutes and returned to present us with small, dusty box containing a bump fire, manufactured by a company called Slide Fire. I paid the $350, slipped the box into my shoulder bag, and Jim and I were on our way.

3 minutes to a machine gun

The only reason to own a Slide Fire or any bump fire stock is for the pleasure of shooting 20 or 30 rounds in mere seconds. No one attaches a Slide Fire to a gun to go deer hunting. Not only is it considered a breach of hunting etiquette; the modified weapon is inaccurate. Someone who is not properly trained or very familiar with its firing style could spray bullets everywhere.

Modifying Jim’s AR-15 with my Slide Fire took all of 10 minutes the first time we tried it. The Slide Fire box contained only three objects: a plastic Slide Fire stock (or butt, which is placed against the shoulder when firing), a small square adapter to join the Slide Fire to the body of the weapon and an Allen wrench. We didn’t need the wrench. The only tool we required was a long-handled flat-head screwdriver to remove the original pistol grip.

I slid the original stock off by lifting a simple lever, unscrewed and removed the pistol grip, put the Slide Fire adapter where the pistol grip had been, slid the Slide Fire stock into place on the gun, screwed the pistol-grip screw back in and was done. After a couple of tries, following the simple directions on the box, I could make the switch effortlessly in about 3 minutes.

The next day we took the modified SAR back to the range. I asked Jim to try it first, and in a few short bursts Jim emptied a 20-round clip into the dirt 30 yards away.

He turned to me with a surprised smile and yelled, “Well, goddamn!” Clearly, the device didn’t disappoint.

It was my turn. The shooting, I found, started in short bursts. Firing the weapon was counterintuitive. Instead of pulling the trigger with my right finger, I had to hold my right hand steady on the pistol grip. My left hand, which was holding up the barrel, became my trigger finger. The movement felt like drawing an arrow back in a bow; the left hand, with pressure, pushed forward while the right hand pulled back.

I got the hang of it in short order. I emptied two 20-round magazines in about a minute, including the time I took to change out the magazines. The power I felt shooting it and the fear of the damage it could do were the recipe for an overwhelming adrenaline rush. It was at once one of the most terrifying and exhilarating experiences of my life.

The modified SAR looks almost exactly like an unmodified SAR, with only a slight difference in the stock profile. Unless someone knows what to look for, the difference isn’t obvious. But the sound is different; it doesn’t make the familiar pop-pop-pop of an SAR. A few people approached us on the gun range to tell us they had heard us shooting our “toy,” and man, that sounded like fun.

The camaraderie on the range was evident when I took a break from shooting in the snack bar and was approached by Rose, an elderly woman who had come out to the Knob with her son-in-law and grandson. The boys had come to shoot, she said, but Rose just wanted some advice from the range shop’s guys about her new .12-gauge shotgun.

Rose also owns a .38-caliber handgun. Both of her guns she keeps for protection, she said. To stay sharp, she practices at home. “I have a little target range set up in my basement,” she said. All you need is a bullet trap, she explained, a metal box about 2 feet square that a target is affixed to for shooting practice. The device captures, or traps, the bullets, preventing them from ripping into walls. But the new gun had been giving her trouble, she said.

“I wanted to hold [the shotgun] like this,” she said, as she motioned an invisible gun into her armpit, “but they told me I can’t hold a gun like that,” as it was too big for her. They suggested she get a smaller-caliber gun, one she could hold properly with the butt against her shoulder.

I asked her if she could return the gun. She couldn’t, but she wasn’t worried about getting her money back, she said, since “there is always someone willing to buy it from you.”

The gun show loophole

Rose may not have specifically had gun shows in mind when she spoke about selling her shotgun, but they are notorious for person-to-person sales in which gun owners sell their weapons. Because the guns are considered their property, they are not legally required to perform a background check as licensed dealers must to sell weapons. This is commonly known as the gun-show loophole.

Gun shows are an integral part of the gun culture of the South. They provide meeting places where gun enthusiasts and die-hard Second Amendment supporters gather. A single gun-show aisle might showcase weapons, ammunition, black powder to make your own ammunition and literature as well as supplies to prepare for end-times such as water purifiers, meals ready to eat and a 40-gallon drums of beef jerky.

While I was in Kentucky, there was a gun show at the Indiana State Fairgrounds in Indianapolis, only an hour and a half away by car. It used to fill five exhibition halls but this year filled only one at the south edge of the grounds. There was a modest line to get in when I arrived on the opening day, and a huge orange sign out front instructed people to “unload weapons now.” A woman staffed a plexiglass ticket booth; the cost of entry was $12. A row of Indianapolis police officers sat at a folding table, checking weapons to ensure they weren’t loaded. They also ran zip ties through firing mechanisms to guard against accidental discharge.

The licensed gun dealers there came in all sizes. Some booths consisted of just a folding table set up on the concrete floor, while others had elaborate exhibition spaces to show off their products. Each booth I saw was outfitted with a laptop to run instant background checks so people could legally purchase firearms on the spot.

But if I had wanted to evade a background check, I could just as easily have purchased someone else’s gun, checked and zip-tied by a policeman, if the price was right, no questions asked.

It took only about 10 minutes at the show before a private seller, an SAR slung over one shoulder, approached me about his weapon. I stood at a booth reading a book on how to modify an SAR into a fully automatic weapon with some minor machine work. “I’m asking $1,000 for this one,” he said, gesturing to his rifle. “I built it myself.”

And he wasn’t alone. Scores of people (the ones I saw were men and mostly white) were walking up and down the aisles, selling their guns. Some would-be sellers even put handwritten flags with an asking price “or best offer” in the barrels of their guns. These were cash-only transactions, I was told, but if I didn’t have that much on me, there were ATMs conveniently flanking each of the hall’s entrances.

But according to the NRA and other gun-rights advocates, the gun-show loophole — sellers offloading their guns informally in the aisles of guns shows like the one at I attended in Indiana — is a myth. (The NRA didn’t respond to my request for interview or comment.)

John Malcolm, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Edward Meese Center, a conservative think tank, said in a phone interview that what was a so-called loophole to some could as easily be seen by others as the right of a person to sell his or her personal property, a right that must not be infringed. In a February blog post for the foundation website, he wrote that the data that the gun-show loophole argument is based on — that roughly 40 percent of gun purchases are made at gun shows in private sales — is outdated and unreliable, akin to “citing data about current seat belt usage that is derived from a limited sample taken years before a mandatory seat belt law went into effect or before cars were even required to have seat belts.”

If I had wanted to evade a background check, I could have easily purchased a firearm from a private seller at the gun show, no questions asked.

The night before I left Kentucky, Jim removed the bump fire from his AR-15 and replaced it with the original stock. “I could try and sell this for you, if you want,” he said, putting it back in its box. But it was just as likely to end up in the corner of his gun closet. He wouldn’t be using it again.

I won’t be shooting one again either. As this story was being put to bed, the news broke about this week’s mass shooting at the Washington Navy Yard. Twelve people dead, eight injured.

CONTINUE READING…

Supreme Court strikes down section of Voting Rights Act

 

 

Updated at 11:10 a.m. ET

The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down a section of the Voting Rights Act, weakening a tool the federal government has used for nearly five decades to block discriminatory voting laws.

In a five-to-four ruling, the court ruled that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional. That section of the landmark 1965 law provides the formula for determining which states must have any changes to their voting laws pre-approved by the Justice Department’s civil rights division or the D.C. federal court. Nine states are required to get pre-clearance, as are certain jurisdictions in seven other states.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority that Section 4 is unconstitutional because the standards by which states are judged are “based on decades-old data and eradicated practices.”

“Nearly 50 years later, things have changed dramatically,” Roberts wrote. “The tests and devices that blocked ballot access have been forbidden nationwide for over 40 years. Yet the Act has not eased [Section 5’s] restrictions or narrowed the scope of [Section 4’s] coverage formula along the way. Instead those extraordinary and unprecedented features have been reauthorized as if nothing has changed, and they have grown even stronger.”

The court could have made a much broader ruling by striking down Section 5, which dictates that those states must get pre-clearance. However, the court decided that the Justice Department still has a role in overseeing voting laws — if Congress is willing to rewrite Section 4.

Nevertheless, civil rights advocates called the ruling a huge blow to democracy.

“The Supreme Court has failed minority voters today,” Sherrilyn Ifill of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund said Tuesday outside of the court.

The ruling underscores the Supreme Court’s lawmaking powers, challenging Congress’ overwhelmingly bipartisan decision in 2006 to renew the Voting Rights Act for another 25 years. Ifill pointed out that the court renewed the law after holding 52 hearings over nine months and amassing 15,000 pages of evidence of the state of civil rights across the nation.

Play Video

It’s now up to Congress to change the coverage rules so that Section 5 — the section requiring pre-clearance of voting laws in certain states — can continue to be enforced.

“The ball has been thrown not only in Congress’ court, but in our court,” Ifill said, calling on the public to mobilize behind an update to the law.

Wade Henderson, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, he expressed optimism the Voting Rights Act could be fully restored with adjustments in the legislative branch.

“We are very confident that members of both houses of Congress who helped lead the effort in 2006, many of whom are still there, will respond to those challenges,” he said on the steps of the court.

While Section 5 may be effectively nullified, now that Section 4 has been struck down, the court’s ruling will certainly renew discussion of what tools the federal government should have at its disposal to ensure voting rights. President Obama noted earlier this year that Section 5 is “not the only tool” available to fight discriminatory voting laws, and he has attempted to start a new dialogue on the issue by forming a bipartisan commission to draft a plan for reforming national voting laws.

CONTINUE READING…

The Nullification Door can Swing Both Ways

By Bruce Johnson  June 24, 2013

Patrick Henry, John Calhoun, and George Mason would be delighted that States are showing some backbone after 220 years of Federal power encroachment. States are again beginning to question Federal authority by, in effect, nullifying some Federal mandates. But the “nullification door” is swinging both ways. Is it not nullification of law by the Federal Government itself when they who hold the federal reins refuse to enforce the laws currently on the books? And when no enforcement of the law is at the whim of an administration, what recourse exists for the citizenry? For the States?

Both ends of the political spectrum have engaged in nullification, the rejection of Federal law. As noted in this piece by David Leib, the current focal points of dissonance between State and Federal revolve around a strange mix of topics; healthcare, guns, illegal immigration, citizen identification, and marijuana. We can clearly identify both ends of the sociopolitical spectrum and note they have become strange bedfellows in disobeying the federal government. Coloradans thumb their nose at federal marijuana laws while Montanans do the same with federal gun laws.

Mr. Leib in his article ” Federal Nullification Efforts Mounting in States”, lists a few of today’ de facto nullifications:

“About 20 states now have medical marijuana laws allowing people to use pot to treat chronic pain and other ailments — despite a federal law that still criminalizes marijuana distribution and possession. Ceding ground to the states, President Barack Obama’s administration has made it known to federal prosecutors that it wasn’t worth their time to target those people…

Federal authorities have repeatedly delayed implementation of the 2005 Real ID Act… about half the state legislatures have opposed its implementation, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

About 20 states have enacted measures challenging Obama’s 2010 health care laws…

After Montana passed a 2009 law declaring that federal firearms regulations don’t apply to guns made and kept in that state, eight other states have enacted similar laws…”

But the nullification door swings both ways. As States issue an affront to select federal law, the federal authorities elected and appointed seem also to have some issues themselves with federal law. Even though they have pledged via their oaths of office to enforce these laws, when it serves their political purposes we often get nonenforcement. Despite vowing diligence there is a steady record that is in effect “legislation via non action” by federal agencies and apparently done so at the direction of the Executive and Judicial branches.

In some instances the federal authorities reject any local, police, or State assistance in enforcing federal law as in the Arizona illegal immigration situation. In many marijuana cases, the federal government seems uninterested that State law conflicts with the law on the federal books. Illinois and Chicago in particular drag out a federal mandate to comply with the Second Amendment. Yet most assuredly those same federal authorities will expect local enforcement of new gun laws in Montana.

When polling place violations go unprosecuted, when sanctuary cities invite illegal immigrants and guarantee no pursuit, when immigration agents are told to ease up, and when the War Powers Act that requires the president to consult with Congress but the president only delivers mere notification… are these not de facto nullifications of law?

When States detect that they are being harmed by new federal law, it is more justifiable for them to act than those oath obligated federal office holders channeling their political wishes by choosing which laws to enforce and which to ignore.

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”

As Madison noted in his Federalist Paper #45,

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”.

Article I, sect 8 of the Constitution clearly delineates that which the Federal Government “can” do, and section 10 of the same Article clearly states what the States “can’t” do. State governments preceded the “federal experiment” and it was from these 13 States the powers so delegated to the “federal experiment” originated. But now add in the Supremacy Clause noting State law can not be in conflict with Federal Law, and if such occurrence arise, Federal law will be “supreme’. More complications arise when the powers of Article I, sect 8 are deemed unbound by how activists interpret the “necessary and proper” clause. All of this sets before us a cauldron of countervailing double- entendre laden documents that often seem internal contradictory. Is it a ‘mish mash’ or a brilliant work of governance?

The Federal Papers lend guidance to the Constitution. These papers fill in the gaps and clarify instances in which the English language within the Constitution sometimes falls short. In Federalist #32 and #33, Hamilton, a devout federalist, points to a certain sovereignty status retained by the States.

32nd:

As the plan of the convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, exclusively delegated to the United States.

Today’s resurgence of nullification of federal law by the States is perhaps the greatest since 1861. John C. Calhoun led a nullification movement in South Carolina in 1832 regarding the collection of federal tariffs on imports. Prior to that, there were the instances of opposition to a National Bank, New England’s opposition to the War of 1812 voiced in the Hartford Convention and also New England’s opposition to the Mexican War and their sending of troops to that effort. Thomas Jefferson himself led nullification efforts in 1798 with the Kentucky Resolution in which “the states had the right and the duty to declare unconstitutional any acts of Congress that were not authorized by the Constitution”. Madison followed with the Virginia Resolution in the same spirit.

“If prudently limited and wisely directed, almost any government can be a blessing; yet unless firmly constrained, any government of whatever form will tend to augment its powers in excess, going beyond even the plainest legal limits on its just authority, and will sooner or later become dangerous.” Thomas Jefferson (A Constitutional History of Secession, Graham)

Nullification has three stages. (as noted by Graham pp. 108, 109)

Interposition: This involves the identification of the grievances by the offended party (State), adopted by the legislator of that State, and noting the unconstitutional nature of the proposed act by the Federal Government or by other States as being injurious to the offended State. A demand for “appropriate redress” is included.

State Declaration of Nullification: The State will call for assemblies and authorities within the State to then empower such bodies to then craft an ordinance of nullification.

Ordinance of Secession: If the ordinance of nullification should fail to restore proper balance between the Federal Government and the State, by act of sovereign power and ordinance of secession will be adopted.

Secession is unlikely today, but the concept was unresolved in 1861. State sovereignty was a more justifiable position. Virginia, Rhode Island, and New York all ratified the Constitution with the proviso that if they became harmed by the “federal experiment”, they retained the powers to withdraw. To extrapolate, and because these ratifications were unconditionally accepted at the convention in which all States were equal partners, these rights to ‘withdraw’ radiated to all the States ratifying at that time.

State resistance to harmful federal legislation is an important component to our federal system. Nullification must be promoted cautiously but once committed, States must hold firm even if it draws an extortion such as the withholding of Federal highway funds. Turnabout is fair play, and as an administration selectively ignores passed law, States gain traction in challenging new Federal law. Principle must trump financial consideration and the promise that is our form of government must not be whittled away.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/06/the_nullification_door_can_swing_both_ways.html#ixzz2XB1xZEFz

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Rabbi Accused Of Posing As Police Officer During Road Rage Episode

CBS New York

[worldnow id=9014042 width=420 height=266 type=video]

MAMARONECK, N.Y. (CBSNewYork) — Road rage … from a rabbi?

A holy man is accused of getting so mad at another driver, that he pulled her over as if he was a police officer, CBS 2’s Jessica Schneider reported Thursday.

He’s a rabbi at the Congregation Sulam Yaakov in Larchmont, but on Wednesday morning police say he was pretending to be a cop.

Attorney Richard Clifford said it all started when Rabbi Alfredo Borodowski exploded in a road rage incident with a 24-year-old woman on Mamaroneck Avenue.

“The man was acting extremely aggressively and started shouting out his car window at her,” Clifford said.

The woman said she was driving 20 mph — the posted speed limit in the school zone. The rabbi allegedly got mad at her slow speed and then is accused of flashing a fake police badge.

“Driver pulled alongside her, had…

View original post 172 more words

Anger swells after NSA phone records collection revelations

 

outrage

 

Senior politicians reveal that US counter-terrorism efforts have swept up personal data from American citizens for years


NSA taps in to internet giants’ systems to mine user data, secret files reveal

 

The scale of America’s surveillance state was laid bare on Thursday as senior politicians revealed that the US counter-terrorism effort had swept up swaths of personal data from the phone calls of millions of citizens for years.

After the revelation by the Guardian of a sweeping secret court order that authorised the FBI to seize all call records from a subsidiary of Verizon, the Obama administration sought to defuse mounting anger over what critics described as the broadest surveillance ruling ever issued.

A White House spokesman said that laws governing such orders “are something that have been in place for a number of years now” and were vital for protecting national security. Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, said the Verizon court order had been in place for seven years. “People want the homeland kept safe,” Feinstein said.

But as the implications of the blanket approval for obtaining phone data reverberated around Washington and beyond, anger grew among other politicians.

Intelligence committee member Mark Udall, who has previously warned in broad terms about the scale of government snooping, said: “This sort of widescale surveillance should concern all of us and is the kind of government overreach I’ve said Americans would find shocking.” Former vice-president Al Gore described the “secret blanket surveillance” as “obscenely outrageous”.

The Verizon order was made under the provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa) as amended by the Patriot Act of 2001, passed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. But one of the authors of the Patriot Act, Republican congressman Jim Sensenbrenner, said he was troubled by the Guardian revelations. He said that he had written to the attorney general, Eric Holder, questioning whether “US constitutional rights were secure”.

He said: “I do not believe the broadly drafted Fisa order is consistent with the requirements of the Patriot Act. Seizing phone records of millions of innocent people is excessive and un-American.”

The White House sought to defend what it called “a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats”. White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Fisa orders were used to “support important and highly sensitive intelligence collection operations” on which members of Congress were fully briefed.

“The intelligence community is conducting court-authorized intelligence activities pursuant to a public statute with the knowledge and oversight of Congress and the intelligence community in both houses of Congress,” Earnest said.

He pointed out that the order only relates to the so-called metadata surrounding phone calls rather than the content of the calls themselves. “The order reprinted overnight does not allow the government to listen in on anyone’s telephone calls,” Earnest said.

“The information acquired does not include the content of any communications or the name of any subscriber. It relates exclusively to call details, such as a telephone number or the length of a telephone call.”

But such metadata can provide authorities with vast knowledge about a caller’s identity. Particularly when cross-checked against other public records, the metadata can reveal someone’s name, address, driver’s licence, credit history, social security number and more. Government analysts would be able to work out whether the relationship between two people was ongoing, occasional or a one-off.

The disclosure has reignited longstanding debates in the US over the proper extent of the government’s domestic spying powers.

Ron Wyden of Oregon, a member of the Senate intelligence committee who, along with Udell, has expressed concern about the extent of US government surveillance, warned of “sweeping, dragnet surveillance”. He said: “I am barred by Senate rules from commenting on some of the details at this time, However, I believe that when law-abiding Americans call their friends, who they call, when they call, and where they call from is private information.

“Collecting this data about every single phone call that every American makes every day would be a massive invasion of Americans’ privacy.”

‘Beyond Orwellian’

Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union, said: “From a civil liberties perspective, the program could hardly be any more alarming. It’s a program in which some untold number of innocent people have been put under the constant surveillance of government agents.

“It is beyond Orwellian, and it provides further evidence of the extent to which basic democratic rights are being surrendered in secret to the demands of unaccountable intelligence agencies.”

Under the Bush administration, officials in security agencies had disclosed to reporters the large-scale collection of call records data by the NSA, but this is the first time significant and top-secret documents have revealed the continuation of the practice under President Obama.

The order names Verizon Business Services, a division of Verizon Communications. In its first-quarter earnings report, published in April, Verizon Communications listed about 10 million commercial lines out of a total of 121 million customers. The court order, which lasts for three months from 25 April, does not specify what type of lines are being tracked. It is not clear whether any additional orders exist to cover Verizon’s wireless and residential customers, or those of other phone carriers.

Fisa court orders typically direct the production of records pertaining to a specific, named target suspected of being an agent of a terrorist group or foreign state, or a finite set of individually named targets. The unlimited nature of the records being handed over to the NSA is extremely unusual.

Senators Dianne Feinstein, chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, and Saxby Chambliss, the vice chairman, speak to reporters about the NSA cull of phone records.

Senators Dianne Feinstein, chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, and Saxby Chambliss, the vice chairman, speak to reporters about the NSA cull of phone records. Photograph: Alex Wong/Getty Images

Feinstein said she believed the order had been in place for some time. She said: “As far as I know this is the exact three-month renewal of what has been the case for the past seven years. This renewal is carried out by the [foreign intelligence surveillance] court under the business records section of the Patriot Act. Therefore it is lawful. It has been briefed to Congress.”

The Center for Constitutional Rights said in a statement that the secret court order was unprecedented. “As far as we know this order from the Fisa court is the broadest surveillance order to ever have been issued: it requires no level of suspicion and applies to all Verizon [business services] subscribers anywhere in the US.

“The Patriot Act’s incredibly broad surveillance provision purportedly authorizes an order of this sort, though its constitutionality is in question and several senators have complained about it.”

Russell Tice, a retired National Security Agency intelligence analyst and whistleblower, said: “What is going on is much larger and more systemic than anything anyone has ever suspected or imagined.”

Although an anonymous senior Obama administration official said that “on its face” the court order revealed by the Guardian did not authorise the government to listen in on people’s phone calls, Tice now believes the NSA has constructed such a capability.

“I figured it would probably be about 2015” before the NSA had “the computer capacity … to collect all digital communications word for word,” Tice said. “But I think I’m wrong. I think they have it right now.”

Daily Email

Get the Guardian’s daily US email

Our editors’ picks for the day’s top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.

Sign up for the daily email

Continue Reading…

Why Are We Testing Newborns for Pot?

 

 

 

The science is alarmingly inconclusive, but the punishment for mothers is severe.

November 23, 2012  |  

Employees at US hospitals are testing more and more newborns for cannabis exposure. And, with alarming frequency, they are getting the wrong results. So say a pair of recent studies documenting the unreliability of infant drug testing.

 

 

In the most recent trial, published in the September edition of the Journal of Clinical Chemistry , investigators at the University of Utah School of Medicine evaluated the rate of unconfirmed “positive” immunoassay test results in infant and non-infant urine samples over a 52-week period. Shockingly, authors found that positive tests for carboxy THC, a byproduct of THC screened for in immunoassay urine tests, were 59 times less likely to be confirmed in infant urine specimens as compared to non-infant urine samples. Overall, 47 percent of the infant positive immunoassay urine samples evaluated did not test for the presence of carboxy THC when confirmatory assay measures were later performed.
Immunoassay testing – the standard technology used in workplace drug testing – relies on the use of antibodies (proteins that will react to a particular substance or a group of very similar substances) to document whether a specific reaction occurs. Therefore, a positive result on an immunoassay test presumes that a certain quantity of a particular substance may be present in the sample, but it does not actually identify the presence of the substance itself. A more specific chemical test, known as chromatography, must be performed in order to confirm any preliminary analytical test results. Samples that test positive on the presumptive immunoassay test, but then later test negative on the confirmatory test are known as false positives.
False positive test results for cannabis’ carboxy THC metabolite are relatively uncommon in adult specimens. Among newborns’ specimens, however, false positive results for alleged cannabis exposure are disturbingly prevalent.
In April, researchers at the University of North Carolina reported in the journal Clinical Biochemistry that various chemicals present in various baby wash products, such as Johnson’s Head-to-Toe Baby Wash and CVS Baby Wash, frequently cross-react with the immunoassay test to cause false positive results for carboxy THC.

“[The] addition of Head-to-Toe Baby Wash to drug-free urine produced a dose dependent measureable response in the THC immunoassay,” the investigators concluded . “Addition of other commercially available baby soaps gave similar results, and subsequent testing identified specific chemical surfactants that reacted with the THC immunoassay. … Given these consequences, it is important for laboratories and providers to be aware of this potential source for false positive screening results and to consider confirmation before initiating interventions.”

Following the publication of the UNC study, researchers at the University of Utah screened for the presence of baby soap contaminants in infant urine. Surprisingly, they didn’t find any . Rather, they concluded that the disproportionately high rate of false positive test results discovered among their samples were the result of a cross-reaction with some other yet-to-be determined constituent. They cautioned: “Until the compounds contributing to positive urine screen results in infants are identified, we encourage the use of alternative specimens for the detection and investigation of neonatal exposure to cannabinoids. Screen-positive cannabinoid results from infant samples should not be reported without confirmation or appropriate consultation, because they cannot currently be interpreted.”
Yet despite these warnings, in many instances, hospitals fail to confirm the results of presumptive drug tests prior to reporting them to state authorities. (Because confirmatory testing is more expensive the immunoassay testing, many hospitals neglect to send such presumptive positive urine samples to outside labs for follow-up analysis.) Ironically, such confirmatory tests are required for all hospital employees who test positive for illicit substances. But presently, no such guidelines stipulate that similar precautions be taken for newborns or pregnant mothers. Explains Lynn Paltrow, executive director of National Advocates for Pregnant Women : “NAPW has had calls from numerous parents who were subjected to intrusive, threatening, and counterproductive child welfare interventions based on false or innocent positive test results for marijuana. We have learned that pregnant patients receive fewer guarantees of accuracy than do job applicants at that same hospital.” 

Regardless of whether or not the drug screen results are confirmed, the sanctions for those subjects who test positive are often swift and severe. Typically, any report of alleged infant exposure to cannabis will trigger a host of serious consequences ranging from the involvement of social services to accusations of child endangerment or neglect. In some instances, mothers whose infants test positive for carboxy THC will lose temporary child custody rights and be mandated to attend a drug treatment program. In other instances they may be civilly prosecuted. At least 18 states address the issue of pregnant women’s drug use in their civil child neglect laws; in 12 states prenatal exposure to any illegal drug is defined by statute as civil child abuse. (One state, South Carolina, authorizes the criminal prosecution of mothers who are alleged to have consumed cannabis, or any other illicit substance, during pregnancy and carry their baby to term.) 
Of further concern is the reality that the hospital staff’s decision to drug test infants or pregnant mothers appears to be largely a subjective one. There are no national standards delineating specific criteria for the drug testing of pregnant women, new mothers, or their infants. In fact, the only federal government panel ever convened to advise on the practice urged against its adoption. As a result, race and class largely influence who is tested and who isn’t. A study published in the  Journal of Women’s Health reported that “black women and their newborns were 1.5 times more likely to be tested for illicit drugs as non-black women,” after controlling for obstetrical conditions and socio-demographic factors, such as single marital status or a lack of health insurance. A separate study published in the New England Journal of Medicine reported similar rates of illicit drug consumption during pregnancy among both black and white women, but found that “black women were reported [to health authorities] at approximately 10 times the rate for white women.”
How many mothers have been accused of child neglect or abuse because of false positive drug test results? Nobody knows for sure. But no doubt some mothers have been penalized solely as a result of the test’s inherent fallibility – and many more are likely to face similar sanctions in the future. That’s because the practice of drug testing infants for cannabis exposure remains a relatively popular even though there exists limited, if any, evidence to justify it.
“No child-health expert would characterize recreational drug use during pregnancy as a good idea,” writes Time.com columnist Maia Szalavitz. “But it’s not at all clear that the benefits, if any, of newborn marijuana screening – particularly given how selectively the tests are administered – justify the potential harm it can cause to families.”
Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform agrees, telling Time.com that the emotional damage caused by removing an infant child from their mothers, as well as the risk of abuse inherent to foster care, far outweigh any risks to the child that may be caused by maternal marijuana use during pregnancy. 
In fact, the potential health effects of maternal marijuana use on infant birth weight and early development have been subject to scientific scrutiny for several decades. One of the earliest and most often cited studies on the topic comes from Dr. Melanie Dreher and colleagues, who assessed neonatal outcomes in Jamaica, where it is customary for many women to ingest cannabis, often in tea, during pregnancy to combat symptoms of morning sickness. Writing in the journal  Pediatrics in 1994, Dreher and colleagues reported no significant physical or psychological differences in newborns of heavy marijuana-using mothers at three days old, and found that exposed children performed better on a variety of physiological and autonomic tests than non-exposed children at 30 days. (This latter trend was suggested to have been a result of the socio-economic status of the mothers rather than a result of pre-natal pot exposure.)
Separate population studies have reported similar results. A 2002 survey of 12,060 British women reported, “[C]annabis use during pregnancy was unrelated to risk of perinatal death or need for special care.” Researchers added that “frequent or regular use” of cannabis throughout pregnancy may be associated with “small but statistically detectable decrements in birthweight.” However, the association between cannabis use and birthweight failed to be statistically significant after investigators adjusted for confounding factors such as the mothers’ age, pre-pregnancy weight, and the self-reported use of tobacco, alcohol, caffeine, and other illicit drugs.”

THIS STORY CONTINUES THRU THIS LINK….PLEASE CONTINUE READING

Cherokee County teen shot by police sniper, parents speak out (GEORGIA)

By Wendy Saltzman

Oct 26, 2012 9:13 a.m.

story image +

Andrew Messina in 2010

CHEROKEE COUNTY, GA (CBS ATLANTA) – The parents of a 16-year-old suicidal boy spoke only with CBS Atlanta News’ Wendy Saltzman after their son was gunned down by a police sniper in Cherokee County.

Lisa and Nick Messina said their son was killed at the hands of the officers they called for help.

According to his parents, Andrew Messina had a bad day at school and the pressure was so overwhelming, he grabbed a gun and threatened to kill himself.

Lisa Messina called the cops in desperation, hoping an officer would come talk to him. But what arrived was an army of deputies, an armored tank and a sniper.

“We would still be sitting there today if it weren’t for that very, very aggressive act that he made of ramming the gun and a pistol straight through a glass door at our officers,” said Cherokee County Sheriff Roger Garrison, on the day after the shooting.

Garrison painted a picture of a dangerous gunman taking aim at his officers, and defended his sniper’s fire.

“Had that officer not taken the action, there is a good chance one of those negotiators that was there who also has a family, also would not be going home today,” Garrison said.

But the other side of this story has never been told before, a story about a boy described as a pacifist who some say was needlessly killed.

“Would you have ever called the police if you had known this could have happened?” Chief Investigative Reporter Wendy Saltzman asked Lisa Messina.

“That’s the one thing I would have done different today. I would not have called 911,” she said.

Andrew Messina’s parents are speaking out for the first time to tell what they say really happened to their son on May 1, 2012. They say their son had just gotten a bad grade at school.

“He just got sad and kind of down on himself and talked about running away. And that discussion turned to ending his life. And I wasn’t home,” Nick Messina said.

“It just happened so fast, and then he went upstairs. He has the gun in his hand, and he had bullets in the other hand,” Lisa Messina continued.

Andrew Messina picked up the phone and called 911.

“I need you to get away from him if you think he is going to shoot you,” the 911 operator said on the call.

“I think he is going to shoot himself,” Lisa Messina replied.

The operator told her to get out of the home, and Lisa Messina asked, “How many cars are coming? Just one, right?”

“I’m not sure,” the operator replied.

But next thing they knew a slew of officers arrived.

“They brought an army to take out a 16-year-old boy. To kill a 16-year-old boy,” Nick Messina said.

The teen was inside his home alone with no hostages. He had a 357 Magnum in his hand and was drinking and threatening to kill himself. He took a video of the events inside the home, including this conversation speaking to his father on the phone just minutes before he died.

“You can’t find anything worth living for with me?” Nick Messina asked his son.

“I don’t know,” Andrew Messina replied.

“Really?” Nick Messina asked.

“I do know personally I really don’t want to live. So you should just let this happen if you really love me,” his son said.

Law enforcement negotiators soon cut off that call and put their negotiator on the phone with the teen.

“They are still standing out there,” Andrew said. “Go away or do something, the tension is killing me.”

Deputies in combat gear surrounded the home, with the frightened teen inside.

“We thought that they would (be) experts in being able to diffuse the situation. And that was not what happened. Instead of the fire being put out, they brought gasoline,” Nick Messina said.

On the negotiation call, Andrew Messina said he wasn’t involved in a riot, rather he was angry.

“Is that a riot shield? Yeah, that’s a riot shield,” he said. “This isn’t a riot, this is one person who is pissed off.”

On the call, Andrew Messina also begged negotiators several times to speak with his father.

“Hey, where’s my dad? Isn’t he supposed to be here?” he said.

At the time, Lisa and Nick Messina were down the street, just a few feet away.

“That just bothers me more to think that my son was in here, by himself, minutes before his death, asking for me,” Nick Messina said, crying.

About 15 minutes before the fatal shot, Andrew Messina’s parents saw sniper Jason Yarbrough walk past them in camouflage, with his riffle over his shoulder.

“I couldn’t believe the gun he had,” Lisa Messina said. “I said, ‘Whoa, where is he going with that gun?'”

Yarbrough set up across the street in a neighbor’s yard, which he estimated to be 65 yards from his target. The sniper scope, focused on the front door, helped him to see clearly as if he was holding a gun from just five feet away.

“A minute later we heard this horrendous cannon shot and he was dead,” Nick Messina said.

“It was absolute shock and numbness, like no, there is no way they shot him. But they did,” Lisa Messina continued.

The sheriff said the teen made an “aggressive gesture” that caused a sniper to fire his weapon to protect law enforcement officers.

But new evidence presented only to CBS Atlanta News by the Nick and Lisa Messina’s attorney may tell a different story.

“We have not been able to find any justification whatsoever for that Cherokee County Sheriff sniper to shoot Andrew Messina. Zero,” said attorney Chuck Pekor.

Pekor is a former federal prosecutor and a former cop who has been scouring through the case to uncover evidence that Andrew Messina didn’t need to die.

“There is nobody in there with him. There is nobody at risk except himself. You just give it time, just wait,” Pekor said.

The standoff had gone on a little more than an hour when Andrew Messina was killed. The sheriff justified the fatal shot, saying the teen threatened his officers.

Andrew Messina was inside the house holding the gun, and hit the top pane of glass with the gun. Negotiators were standing outside the house behind a wall around the corner from the door.

In the Georgia Bureau of Investigation report, Yarbrough said he heard a “pop” that sounded like a gunshot and he observed Messina through his riffle scope pointing the pistol at deputies.

“Not a single officer out there, not a one, ever saw the gun come through the hole where the break was,” Pekor said, citing the GBI report.

Pekor argues that any trained law enforcement officer would know the difference between breaking glass and a 357 Magnum being fired. And not a single shot was ever fired from Andrew Messina’s weapon.

And Pekor says there’s another problem.

“He pretty much had his back to the negotiation team when he was shot. How could he possibly have been threatening them?” Pekor questioned.

The bullet came through the door while Andrew Messina was inside the home. The autopsy report says Andrew was shot in the right side of his abdomen, and the bullet exited the left side. According to that description, the teen was facing the opposite direction from where negotiators were outside the home.

Yarbrough was on the scene less than 20 minutes before he pulled the trigger and admitted he didn’t even know if there was a hostage inside.

Pekor and others are concerned the sniper acted in haste, without being properly briefed that Andrew Messina was a suicidal teen, not a hardened criminal.

“Obviously it was an act of aggression against him. And my perception of the situation was that he was not, himself, being aggressive,” said Susan Ehtesham, one of Andrew Messina’s former teachers.

“Would this make you hesitate to call the police?” Saltzman asked neighbor Leeanna Tucker.

“I would never call them for help now,” she replied.

An internal investigation by the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office and the district attorney both found there was no criminal wrongdoing by Yarbrough.

Saltzman made numerous attempts to interview the sheriff, the sniper and the commander on the scene, but the sheriff’s office refused, saying “The case is closed.”

But it’s far from closed for the family who has filed notice of their intent to file a lawsuit against the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office.

CONTINUE READING…

Making Communities Safer By Abolishing The Death Penalty: Live Internet Video

 

 

Former Executioners Tour Central Valley – Available for Comment

Watch Live: http://abolition2012.ncadp.org/
Join the Conversation on Twitter: #abolition2012

BAKERSFIELD, Calif., Oct. 22, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — As Californians prepare to vote on a measure to repeal the death penalty, the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty will present a live online conference exploring how communities will be safer without the death penalty starting at 11 a.m. Pacific time on Thursday, October 25, 2012. The event will be moderated by Professor Charles Ogletree, founder of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at Harvard University.

“This is a conversation that all Californians need to be a part of,” said Diann Rust-Tierney, Executive Director of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. “Especially with the election coming up, we want to help people look at the resources that go into maintaining capital punishment and explore how those resources can be better spent to make our communities safer.”

Joining the conversation will be Kirk Bloodsworth, the first person exonerated from death row using DNA technology, Ron McAndrew, former warden of Florida State Prison who conducted that state’s final electrocutions, and Jerry Givens, former corrections officer from Virginia who put 62 men to death during his 17 years as an executioner.

The interactive conference may be seen on the website http://abolition2012.ncadp.org/ and viewers are invited to submit questions to the panelists using the hashtag #abolition2012.

Former Executioners Tour Central Valley – Available for Comment

Givens and McAndrew are participating in the on-line conference as they traverse the Central Valley on a speaking tour in support of Proposition 34. The Proposition 34 ballot initiative will end the death penalty in California and redirect some of the savings to law enforcement efforts to solve unresolved homicides and rapes. The two are among eight former corrections officials who participated in executions across the country who have signed an open letter to the voters of California urging passage Proposition 34. Details may be found here: http://bit.ly/executionersyes34

SOURCE National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty

RELATED LINKS
http://www.ncadp.org/
PR Newswire (http://s.tt/1qHz1)

OIG releases an audit of DEA adoptive seizure process and equitable sharing requests. On September 27, 2012, in Drug War, federal, states, by Scott Alexander Meiner

 

image

 

The Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) released an audit of Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) adoptive seizure process and equitable sharing requests. A couple of quick notes:

1.) Of instances involving federal adoption of assets seized, 65% of reported samples [41 of the 63 examined samples] required DEA headquarter approval to adopt the seizure because the instance lacked all of the following criteria:

  1. the seizure was based on a federal or state judicial seizure warrant;
  2. an arrest was made for a felony violation of the Controlled Substances Act or an equivalent state felony charge that would be a felony if pursued under federal law; and/or
  3. drugs or other contraband associated with a federal felony drug offense were also confiscated at the time of seizure.

2.) The OIG report notes “for the period of October 1, 2000, through September 30, 2011, the DEA and other federal agencies processed over 150,644 seized assets valued at about $9.2 billion of which $5.5 billion (60 percent) originated from seizures processed by the DEA and $3.7 billion (40 percent) originated from seizures processed by other federal agencies.” [Another $522 million in DEA seizured assets was noted but omitted from analysis for a lack of equitable sharing requests.]

3.) The OIG report features a disturbing trend line and reproduces a misguided–but revealing–definition of forfeiture:

The DOJ Criminal Division defines forfeiture as “the taking of property derived from a crime, involved in a crime, or that which makes a crime easier to commit or harder to detect without compensating the owner.”

THIS LINK TO PDF PUBLICATION

THIS LINK TO WEBSITE

New Hampshire Jury Nullifies Major Felony Marijuana Case

Marijuana

 

Written by  Alex Newman

Following the adoption of a new state law on jury nullification in June, a New Hampshire jury nullified its first major felony marijuana case on September 14 when jurors decided to free Doug Darrell, a 59-year-old father of four grown children who was growing illegal plants in his backyard. Activists hailed the decision as a significant victory for the jury nullification movement, which aims to revive awareness about the power inherent in juries to protect citizens from overzealous prosecutors and bad laws by nullifying cases.  
Darrell, a Rastafarian piano tuner and woodworker who has been married for almost four decades, was arrested after a National Guard helicopter spotted some marijuana plants on his property in Barnstead. State prosecutors charged him with cultivation, a felony that could have carried up to seven years in prison.
It was clear that he had been growing the marijuana — nobody disputed that. Eventually Darrell was offered a deal that would have allowed him to avoid jail time and fines in exchange for a misdemeanor guilty plea. He refused, however, citing his religion and its view that marijuana is a sacrament. So the case went to trial.
Jurors, led by liberty-minded activist Cathleen Converse of the Free State Project, decided Darrell should be set free. “Mr. Darrell is a peaceful man, he never deals with the darker elements of society and he grows for his own personal religious and medicinal use,” Converse said during an exclusive interview with Free Talk Live, a freedom-oriented talk-radio program. “I knew that my community would be poorer rather than better off had he been convicted.”
So, to prevent that, she helped convince other jurors to do as the defense suggested: vote their conscience and declare Darrell a free man. “Many of us wondered what kind of precedent this would set,” Converse continued. “But after chewing on all of the possibilities and re-reading the definition of nullification, we all decided that the only fair thing to do was to vote with our consciences and acquit the defendant of all charges.”
Jury nullification, of course, is a time-tested practice that goes back to before the American Declaration of Independence. Essentially, it occurs when members of a jury decide to free somebody even though prosecutors prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused did indeed violate a criminal statute.
Juries have historically relied on nullification for various reasons including to reject unjust or unconstitutional laws, to free defendants in cases where laws have been misapplied by overzealous officials, and more. During alcohol prohibition it became commonplace as jurors refused en masse to convict their compatriots for drinking illegal substances.
Before that, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay informed a jury in 1794 that jurors have “a right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy.” Numerous other Supreme Court justices and Founding Fathers have touted the practice, too. And despite being largely overlooked today, activists across America are trying hard to build awareness about it.   
In June, those nullification advocates secured a major victory. New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch signed HB 146 into law allowing defendants to inform jurors about the jury’s “right to judge the application of the law in relationship to the facts in controversy.” That law does not officially take effect until January, but it has already made waves throughout the state’s judiciary system.
“It’s a really important development,” Darrell’s defense attorney Mark Sisti told the New Hampshire Union Leader, adding that most state residents have no problem with moderate marijuana use by adults and that legislatures across America are rethinking their laws on the controversial plant. “We’re moving along a path we should have been on years ago.”
Sisti acknowledged, though, that the judge’s decision to instruct the jury about nullification was crucial to the victory. Judge James O’Neill, following the state’s model jury instruction on nullification, told jurors that “even if you find that the State has proven each and every element of the offense charged beyond a reasonable doubt, you may still find the defendant not guilty if you have a conscientious feeling that a not guilty verdict would be a fair result in this case.”
While warning that jury nullification is not a “get-out-of-jail-free card,” Sisti celebrated the ruling and the clearing of his client. “Cases like this shouldn’t be brought,” he was quoted as saying. “And when they are brought, I think that safety valve, that nullification safety valve, is very important. Other states had better start waking up, because without it, people are going to be convicted of very serious charges through hypocrisy. The jury’s going to think they can’t do anything else, and that’s wrong.”
The prosecutor who brought charges against Darrell for his illegal plants also admitted that the judge’s decision to instruct the jury on nullification was key to the government’s defeat, but she tried to downplay its effect going forward. “I don’t see it as being that significant in changing our practice and the practice of the court,” the prosecutor told the Union Leader
Cathleen Converse, the juror who reportedly helped push the case for nullification, however, is among a growing number of Americans who believe that there should be a victim for something to be considered a crime. “Mr. Darrell seemed to be the only victim here,” she explained after the acquittal. “Almost everyone said this just shouldn’t have happened to these peaceful people.”
In New Hampshire — the official state motto is “Live Free or Die” — such views have become increasingly influential. That’s in part due to the birth of the Free State Project, an ongoing plan to have thousands of liberty-minded people from across America move to the Granite State to build a more libertarian society. FSP activists have already elected more than a few lawmakers, and their influence continued to grow.
“So far, over 12,750 participants have pledged to relocate to the state, and more than 1,000 have already moved, over a dozen of which are currently elected members of the New Hampshire House of Representatives,” said Free State Project President Carla Gericke in a press release touting the acquittal. “Once here, participants are free to pursue their own causes and I’m excited to see that progress is being made.”
While the Darrell case probably will not be shutting down the unconstitutional, trillion-dollar federal drug war anytime soon, analysts said it was an important milestone in several respects. For one, it illustrates the growing opposition to imprisoning people for drug use, which has been a key contributor to the fact that the United States has far more prisoners per capita than any other nation in the world. Well over a dozen states have already nullified federal marijuana laws
More importantly, perhaps, the acquittal of Doug Darrell represents a significant revival of jury nullification. The centuries-old practice has always been a critical tool in the fight against government tyranny. So, with the victory in New Hampshire and many more anticipated in the near future, liberty-minded activists across America are hoping the trend spreads quickly to other states.
Related articles:
New Hampshire Passes Jury Nullification Law
Former Drug Warrior Persecuted for Activism Uses Arrest to Push Jury Nullification
Judge Sentences Politically Incorrect Juror to More Jury Duty
State Lawmakers Blast Obama’s War on Medical Marijuana
A Brilliant Exposition on the Effectiveness of Nullification
Drug War a “Failure,” Says N.J. GOP Gov. Chris Christie
The Other Unconstitutional War

CONTINUE READING…

List of FEMA Camps

 

 

by Trinity on January 4, 2012 at 12:38 AM

Posted In: CALL TO ACTION, World News

We have a call to action!!!  Do you live near a FEMA Camp?

Here is what we have found so far, and we will continue to update this list, for now, check out your state. We have reports of SEVERAL brand new facilities throughout the US and if you have photos of these facilities, please be sure to send them toinfo@thetruthdenied.com

Be sure to include the address of the facility!  The photos in this article were submitted by Jerry Neimen from Nebraska.  Jerry reported to us that this facility is brand new, built less than 6 months ago.

ALABAMA
Opelika – Military compound either in or very near town.
Aliceville – WWII German POW camp – capacity 15,000
Ft. McClellan (Anniston) – Opposite side of town from Army Depot;
Maxwell AFB (Montgomery) – Civilian prison camp established under Operation Garden Plot, currently operating with support staff and small inmate population.
Talladega – Federal prison “satellite” camp.

ALASKA
Wilderness – East of Anchorage. No roads, Air & Railroad access only. Estimated capacity of 500,000 Elmendorf AFB – Northeast area of Anchorage – far end of base. Garden Plot facility.
Eielson AFB – Southeast of Fairbanks. Operation Garden Plot facility.
Ft. Wainwright – East of Fairbanks

ARIZONA
Ft. Huachuca – 20 miles from Mexican border, 30 miles from Nogales Rex ’84 facility.
Pinal County – on the Gila River – WWII Japanese detention camp. May be renovated.
Yuma County – Colorado River – Site of former Japanese detention camp (near proving grounds). This site was completely removed in 1990 according to some reports.
Phoenix – Federal Prison Satellite Camp. Main federal facility expanded.
Florence – WWII prison camp NOW RENOVATED, OPERATIONAL with staff & 400 prisoners, operational capacity of 3,500.
Wickenburg – Airport is ready for conversion; total capacity unknown. Davis-Monthan AFB (Tucson) – Fully staffed and presently holding prisoners!!
Sedona – site of possible UN base.

ARKANSAS
Ft. Chaffee (near Fort Smith, Arkansas) – Has new runway for aircraft, new camp facility with cap of 40,000 prisoners Pine Bluff Arsenal – This location also is the repository for B-Z nerve agent, which causes sleepiness, dizziness, stupor; admitted use is for civilian control. Jerome – Chicot/Drew Counties – site of WWII Japanese camps Rohwer – Descha County – site of WWII Japanese camps Blythville AFB – Closed airbase now being used as camp. New wooden barracks have been constructed at this location. Classic decorations – guard towers, barbed wire, high fences. Berryville – FEMA facility located east of Eureka Springs off Hwy. 62. Omaha – Northeast of Berryville near Missouri state line, on Hwy 65 south of old wood processing plant. Possible crematory facility.

CALIFORNIA
Vandenburg AFB – Rex 84 facility, located near Lompoc & Santa Maria. Internment facility is located near the oceanside, close to Space Launch Complex #6, also called “Slick Six”. The launch site has had “a flawless failure record” and is rarely used. Norton AFB – (closed base) now staffed with UN according to some sources. Tule Lake – area of “wildlife refuge”, accessible by unpaved road, just inside Modoc County. Fort Ord – Closed in 1994, this facility is now an urban warfare training center for US and foreign troops, and may have some “P.O.W. – C.I.” enclosures. Twentynine Palms Marine Base – Birthplace of the infamous “Would you shoot American citizens?” Quiz. New camps being built on “back 40″. Oakdale – Rex 84 camp capable of holding at least 20,000 people. 90 mi. East of San Francisco. Terminal Island – (Long Beach) located next to naval shipyards operated by ChiCom shipping interests. Federal prison facility located here. Possible deportation point. Ft. Irwin – FEMA facility near Barstow. Base is designated inactive but has staffed camp. McClellan AFB – facility capable for 30,000 – 35,000 Sacramento – Army Depot – No specific information at this time. Mather AFB – Road to facility is blocked off by cement barriers and a stop sign. Sign states area is restricted; as of 1997 there were barbed wire fences pointing inward, a row of stadium lights pointed toward an empty field, etc. Black boxes on poles may have been cameras.

COLORADO
Trinidad – WWII German/Italian camp being renovated. Granada – Prowers County – WWII Japanese internment camp Ft. Carson – Along route 115 near Canon City

CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE
No data available.

FLORIDA
Avon Park – Air Force gunnery range, Avon Park has an on-base “correctional facility” which was a former WWII detention camp. Camp Krome – DoJ detention/interrogation center, Rex 84 facility Eglin AFB – This base is over 30 miles long, from Pensacola to Hwy 331 in De Funiak Springs. High capacity facility, presently manned and populated with some prisoners. Pensacola – Federal Prison Camp Everglades – It is believed that a facility may be carved out of the wilds here.

GEORGIA
Ft. Benning – Located east of Columbus near Alabama state line. Rex 84 site – Prisoners brought in via Lawson Army airfield. Ft. Mc Pherson – US Force Command – Multiple reports that this will be the national headquarters and coordinating center for foreign/UN troop movement and detainee collection. Ft. Gordon – West of Augusta – No information at this time. Unadilla – Dooly County – Manned, staffed FEMA prison on route 230, no prisoners. Oglethorpe – Macon County; facility is located five miles from Montezuma, three miles from Oglethorpe. This FEMA prison has no staff and no prisoners. Morgan – Calhoun County, FEMA facility is fully manned & staffed – no prisoners. Camilla – Mitchell County, south of Albany. This FEMA facility is located on Mt. Zion Rd approximately 5.7 miles south of Camilla. Unmanned – no prisoners, no staff. Hawkinsville – Wilcox County; Five miles east of town, fully manned and staffed but no prisoners. Located on fire road 100/Upper River Road Abbeville – South of Hawkinsville on US route 129; south of town off route 280 near Ocmulgee River. FEMA facility is staffed but without prisoners. McRae – Telfair County – 1.5 miles west of McRae on Hwy 134 (8th St). Facility is on Irwinton Avenue off 8th St., manned & staffed – no prisoners. Fort Gillem – South side of Atlanta – FEMA designated detention facility. Fort Stewart – Savannah area – FEMA designated detention facility

HAWAII
Halawa Heights area – Crematory facility located in hills above city. Area is marked as a state department of health laboratory. Barbers Point NAS – There are several military areas that could be equipped for detention / deportation. Honolulu – Detention transfer facility at the Honolulu airport similar in construction to the one in.Oklahoma (pentagon-shaped building where airplanes can taxi up to).

IDAHO
Minidoka/Jerome Counties – WWII Japanese-American internment facility possibly under renovation. Clearwater National Forest – Near Lolo Pass – Just miles from the Montana state line near Moose Creek, this unmanned facility is reported to have a nearby airfield. Wilderness areas – Possible location. No data.

ILLINOIS
Marseilles – Located on the Illinois River off Interstate 80 on Hwy 6. It is a relatively small facility with a cap of 1400 prisoners. Though it is small it is designed like prison facilities with barred windows, but the real smoking gun is the presence of military vehicles. Being located on the Illinois River it is possible that prisoners will be brought in by water as well as by road and air. This facility is approximately 75 miles west of Chicago. National Guard training area nearby. Scott AFB – Barbed wire prisoner enclosure reported to exist just off-base. More info needed, as another facility on-base is beieved to exist. Pekin – This Federal satellite prison camp is also on the Illinois River, just south of Peoria. It supplements the federal penitentiary in Marion, which is equipped to handle additional population outside on the grounds. Chanute AFB – Rantoul, near Champaign/Urbana – This closed base had WWII – era barracks that were condemned and torn down, but the medical facility was upgraded and additional fencing put up in the area. More info needed. Marion – Federal Penitentiary and satellite prison camp inside Crab Orchard Nat’l Wildlife Refuge. Manned, staffed, populated fully. Greenfield – Two federal correctional “satellite prison camps” serving Marion – populated as above. Shawnee National Forest – Pope County – This area has seen heavy traffic of foreign military equipment and troops via Illinois Central Railroad, which runs through the area. Suspected location is unknown, but may be close to Vienna and Shawnee correctional centers, located 6 mi. west of Dixon Springs. Savanna Army Depot – NW area of state on Mississippi River. Lincoln, Sheridan, Menard, Pontiac, Galesburg – State prison facilities equipped for major expansion and close or adjacent to highways & railroad tracks. Kankakee – Abandoned industrial area on west side of town (Rt.17 & Main) designated as FEMA detention site. Equipped with water tower, incinerator, a small train yard behind it and the rear of the facility is surrounded by barbed wire facing inwards.

INDIANA
Indianapolis / Marion County – Amtrak railcar repair facility (closed); controversial site of a major alleged detention / processing center. Although some sources state that this site is a “red herring”, photographic and video evidence suggests otherwise. This large facility contains large 3-4 inch gas mains to large furnaces (crematoria??), helicopter landing pads, railheads for prisoners, Red/Blue/Green zones for classifying/processing incoming personnel, one-way turnstiles, barracks, towers, high fences with razor wire, etc. Personnel with government clearance who are friendly to the patriot movement took a guided tour of the facility to confirm this site. This site is located next to a closed refrigeration plant facility. Ft. Benjamin Harrison – Located in the northeast part of Indianapolis, this base has been decomissioned from “active” use but portions are still ideally converted to hold detainees. Helicopter landing areas still exist for prisoners to be brought in by air, land & rail. Crown Point – Across street from county jail, former hospital. One wing presently being used for county work-release program, 80% of facility still unused. Possible FEMA detention center or holding facility. Camp Atterbury – Facility is converted to hold prisoners and boasts two active compounds presently configured for minumum security detainees. Located just west of Interstate 65 near Edinburgh, south of Indianapolis. Terre Haute – Federal Correctional Institution, Satellite prison camp and death facility. Equipped with crematoria reported to have a capacity of 3,000 people a day. FEMA designated facility located here. Fort Wayne – This city located in Northeast Indiana has a FEMA designated detention facility, accessible by air, road and nearby rail. Kingsbury – This “closed” military base is adjacent to a state fish & wildlife preserve. Part of the base is converted to an industrial park, but the southern portion of this property is still used. It is bordered on the south by railroad, and is staffed with some foreign-speaking UN troops. A local police officer who was hunting and camping close to the base in the game preserve was accosted, roughed up, and warned by the English-speaking unit commander to stay away from the area. It was suggested to the officer that the welfare of his family would depend on his “silence”. Located just southeast of LaPorte. Jasper-Pulaski Wildlife Area – Youth Corrections farm located here. Facility is “closed”, but is still staffed and being “renovated”. Total capacity unknown. Grissom AFB – This closed airbase still handles a lot of traffic, and has a “state-owned” prison compound on the southern part of the facility.

UNICOR
. Jefferson Proving Grounds – Southern Indiana – This facility was an active base with test firing occuring daily. Portions of the base have been opened to create an industrial park, but other areas are still highly restricted. A camp is believed to be located “downrange”. Facility is equipped with an airfield and has a nearby rail line. Newport – Army Depot – VX nerve gas storage facility. Secret meetings were held here in 1998 regarding the addition of the Kankakee River watershed to the Heritage Rivers Initiative. Hammond – large enclosure identified in FEMA-designated city.

IOWA
No data available.

KANSAS
Leavenworth – US Marshal’s Fed Holding Facility, US Penitentiary, Federal Prison Camp, McConnell Air Force Base. Federal death penalty facility. Concordia – WWII German POW camp used to exist at this location but there is no facility there at this time. Ft. Riley – Just north of Interstate 70, airport, near city of Manhattan. El Dorado – Federal prison converted into forced-labor camp, UNICOR industries. Topeka – 80 acres has been converted into a temporary holding camp.

KENTUCKY
Ashland – Federal prison camp in Eastern Kentucky near the Ohio River. Louisville – FEMA detention facility, located near restricted area US naval ordnance plant. Military airfield located at facility, which is on south side of city. Lexington – FEMA detention facility, National Guard base with adjacent airport facility. Manchester – Federal prison camp located inside Dan Boone National Forest. Ft. Knox – Detention center, possibly located near Salt River, in restricted area of base. Local patriots advise that black Special Forces & UN gray helicopters are occasionally seen in area. Land Between the Lakes – This area was declared a UN biosphere and is an ideal geographic location for detention facilities. Area is an isthmus extending out from Tennessee, between Lake Barkley on the east and Kentucky Lake on the west. Just scant miles from Fort Campbell in Tennessee.

LOUISIANA
Ft. Polk – This is a main base for UN troops & personnel, and a training center for the disarmament of America. Livingston – WWII German/Italian internment camp being renovated?; halfway between Baton Rouge and Hammond, several miles north of Interstate 12. Oakdale – Located on US route 165 about 50 miles south of Alexandria; two federal detention centers just southeast of Fort Polk.

MAINE
Houlton – WWII German internment camp in Northern Maine, off US Route 1.

MARYLAND, and DC
Ft. Meade – Halfway between the District of Criminals and Baltimore. Data needed. Ft. Detrick – Biological warfare center for the NWO, located in Frederick.

MASSACHUSETTS
Camp Edwards / Otis AFB – Cape Cod – This “inactive” base is being converted to hold many New Englander patriots. Capacity unknown. Ft. Devens – Active detention facility. More data needed.

MICHIGAN
Camp Grayling – Michigan Nat’l Guard base has several confirmed detention camps, classic setup with high fences, razor wire, etc. Guard towers are very well-built, sturdy. Multiple compounds within larger enclosures. Facility deep within forest area. Sawyer AFB – Upper Peninsula – south of Marquette – No data available. Bay City – Classic enclosure with guard towers, high fence, and close to shipping port on Saginaw Bay, which connects to Lake Huron. Could be a deportation point to overseas via St. Lawrence Seaway. Southwest – possibly Berrien County – FEMA detention center. Lansing – FEMA detention facility.

MINNESOTA
Duluth – Federal prison camp facility. Camp Ripley – new prison facility.

MISSISSIPPI
These sites are confirmed hoaxes. Hancock County – NASA test site De Soto National Forest. “These two supposed camps in Mississippi do not exist. Members of the Mississippi Militia have checked these out on more than one occasion beginning back when they first appeared on the Internet and throughout the Patriot Movement.” – Commander D. Rayner, Mississippi Militia

MISSOURI
Richards-Gebaur AFB – located in Grandview, near K.C.MO. A very large internment facility has been built on this base, and all base personnel are restricted from coming near it. Ft. Leonard Wood – Situated in the middle of Mark Twain National Forest in Pulaski County. This site has been known for some UN training, also home to the US Army Urban Warfare Training school “Stem Village”. Warsaw – Unconfirmed report of a large concentration camp facility.

MONTANA
Malmstrom AFB – UN aircraft groups stationed here, and possibly a detention facility.

NEBRASKA
Scottsbluff – WWII German POW camp (renovated?). Northwest, Northeast corners of state – FEMA detention facilities – more data needed. South Central part of state – Many old WWII sites – some may be renovated.

McCook NE Photo

NEVADA
Elko – Ten miles south of town. Wells – Camp is located in the O’Niel basin area, 40 miles north of Wells, past Thousand Springs, west off Hwy 93 for 25 miles. Pershing County – Camp is located at I-80 mile marker 112, south side of the highway, about a mile back on the county road and then just off the road about 3/4mi. Winnemucca – Battle Mountain area – at the base of the mountains. Nellis Air Force Range – Northwest from Las Vegas on Route 95. Nellis AFB is just north of Las Vegas on Hwy 604. Stillwater Naval Air Station – east of Reno . No additional data.

NEW HAMPSHIRE / VERMONT
Northern New Hampshire – near Lake Francis. No additional data.

NEW JERSEY
Ft. Dix / McGuire AFB – Possible deportation point for detainees. Lots of pictures taken of detention compounds and posted on Internet, this camp is well-known. Facility is now complete and ready for occupancy.

NEW MEXICO
Ft. Bliss – This base actually straddles Texas state line. Just south of Alomogordo, Ft. Bliss has thousands of acres for people who refuse to go with the “New Order”. Holloman AFB (Alomogordo)- Home of the German Luftwaffe in Amerika; major UN base. New facility being built on this base, according to recent visitors. Many former USAF buildings have been torn down by the busy and rapidly growing German military force located here. Fort Stanton – currently being used as a youth detention facility approximately 35 miles north of Ruidoso, New Mexico. Not a great deal of information concerning the Lordsburg location. White Sands Missile Range – Currently being used as a storage facility for United Nations vehicles and equipment. Observers have seen this material brought in on the Whitesands rail spur in Oro Grande New Mexico about thirty miles from the Texas, New Mexico Border.

NEW YORK
Ft. Drum – two compounds: Rex 84 detention camp and FEMA detention facility. Albany – FEMA detention facility. Otisville – Federal correctional facility, near Middletown. Buffalo – FEMA detention facility.

NORTH CAROLINA
Camp Lejeune / New River Marine Airfield – facility has renovated, occupied WWII detention compounds and “mock city” that closely resembles Anytown, USA. Fort Bragg – Special Warfare Training Center. Renovated WWII detention facility. Andrews – Federal experiment in putting a small town under siege. Began with the search/ hunt for survivalist Eric Rudolph. No persons were allowed in or out of town without federal permission and travel through town was highly restricted. Most residents compelled to stay in their homes. Unregistered Baptist pastor from Indiana visiting Andrews affirmed these facts.

NORTH DAKOTA
Minot AFB – Home of UN air group. More data needed on facility.

OHIO
Camp Perry – Site renovated; once used as a POW camp to house German and Italian prisoners of WWII. Some tar paper covered huts built for housing these prisoners are still standing. Recently, the construction of multiple 200-man barracks have replaced most of the huts. Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus – FEMA detention facilities. Data needed. Lima – FEMA detention facility. Another facility located in/near old stone quarry near Interstate 75. Railroad access to property, fences etc.

OKLAHOMA
Tinker AFB (OKC) – All base personnel are prohibited from going near civilian detention area, which is under constant guard. Will Rogers World Airport – FEMA’s main processing center for west of the Mississippi. All personnel are kept out of the security zone. Federal prisoner transfer center located here (A pentagon-shaped building where airplanes can taxi up to). Photos have been taken and this site will try to post soon! El Reno – Renovated federal internment facility with CURRENT population of 12,000 on Route 66. McAlester – near Army Munitions Plant property – former WWII German / Italian POW camp designated for future use. Ft. Sill (Lawton) – Former WWII detention camps. More data still needed.

OREGON
Sheridan – Federal prison satellite camp northwest of Salem. Josephine County – WWII Japanese internment camp ready for renovation. Sheridan – FEMA detention center. Umatilla – New prison spotted.

PENNSYLVANIA
Allenwood – Federal prison camp located south of Williamsport on the Susquehanna River. It has a current inmate population of 300, and is identified by William Pabst as having a capacity in excess of 15,000 on 400 acres.
Indiantown Gap Military Reservation – located north of Harrisburg. Used for WWII POW camp and renovated by Jimmy Carter. Was used to hold Cubans during Mariel boat lift.
Camp Hill – State prison close to Army depot. Lots of room, located in Camp Hill, Pa. New Cumberland Army Depot – on the Susquehanna River, located off Interstate 83 and Interstate 76.
Schuylkill Haven – Federal prison camp, north of Reading.

SOUTH CAROLINA
Greenville – Unoccupied youth prison camp; total capacity unknown.
Charleston – Naval Reserve & Air Force base, restricted area on naval base.

SOUTH DAKOTA
Yankton – Federal prison camp
Black Hills Nat’l Forest – north of Edgemont, southwest part of state. WWII internment camp being renovated.

McCook, NE Photo

TENNESSEE
Ft. Campbell – Next to Land Between the Lakes; adjacent to airfield and US Alt. 41.
Millington – Federal prison camp next door to Memphis Naval Air Station.
Crossville – Site of WWII German / Italian prison camp is renovated; completed barracks and behind the camp in the woods is a training facility with high tight ropes and a rappelling deck.
Nashville – There are two buildings built on State property that are definitely built to hold prisoners. They are identical buildings – side by side on Old Briley Parkway. High barbed wire fence that curves inward.

TEXAS
Austin – Robert Mueller Municipal airport has detenion areas inside hangars.
Bastrop – Prison and military vehicle motor pool.
Eden – 1500 bed privately run federal center. Currently holds illegal aliens.
Ft. Hood (Killeen) – Newly built concentration camp, with towers, barbed wire etc., just like the one featured in the movie Amerika. Mock city for NWO shock- force training. Some footage of this area was used in “Waco: A New Revelation” Reese AFB (Lubbock) – FEMA designated detention facility.
Sheppard AFB – in Wichita Falls just south of Ft. Sill, OK. FEMA designated detention facility.
North Dallas – near Carrolton – water treatment plant, close to interstate and railroad.
Mexia – East of Waco 33mi.; WWII German facility may be renovated.
Amarillo – FEMA designated detention facility
Ft. Bliss (El Paso) – Extensive renovation of buildings and from what patriots have been able to see, many of these buildings that are being renovated are being surrounded by razor wire.
Beaumont / Port Arthur area – hundreds of acres of federal camps already built on large-scale detention camp design, complete with the double rows of chain link fencing with razor type concertina wire on top of each row. Some (but not all) of these facilities are currently being used for low-risk state prisoners who require a minimum of supervision.
Ft. Worth – Federal prison under construction on the site of Carswell AFB.

UTAH
Millard County – Central Utah – WWII Japanese camp. (Renovated?)
Ft. Douglas – This “inactive” military reservation has a renovated WWII concentration camp.
Migratory Bird Refuge – West of Brigham City – contains a WWII internment camp that was built before the game preserve was established.
Cedar City – east of city – no data available. Wendover – WWII internment camp may be renovated.
Skull Valley – southwestern Camp William property – east of the old bombing range. Camp was accidentally discovered by a man and his son who were rabbit hunting; they were discovered and apprehended. SW of Tooele.

VIRGINIA
Ft. A.P. Hill (Fredericksburg) – Rex 84 / FEMA facility. Estimated capacity 45,000.
Petersburg – Federal satellite prison camp, south of Richmond.

WEST VIRGINIA
Beckley – Alderson – Lewisburg – Former WWII detention camps that are now converted into active federal prison complexes capable of holding several times their current populations. Alderson is presently a women’s federal reformatory.
Morgantown – Federal prison camp located in northern WV; just north of Kingwood.
Mill Creek – FEMA detention facility.
Kingwood – Newly built detention camp at Camp Dawson Army Reservation. More data needed on Camp Dawson.

WASHINGTON
Seattle/Tacoma – SeaTac Airport: fully operational federal transfer center
Okanogan County – Borders Canada and is a site for a massive concentration camp capable of holding hundreds of thousands of people for slave labor. This is probably one of the locations that will be used to hold hard core patriots who will be held captive for the rest of their lives.
Sand Point Naval Station – Seattle – FEMA detention center used actively during the 1999 WTO protests to classify prisoners.
Ft. Lewis / McChord AFB – near Tacoma – This is one of several sites that may be used to ship prisoners overseas for slave labor.

WISCONSIN
Ft. McCoy – Rex 84 facility with several complete interment compounds.
Oxford – Central part of state – Federal prison & staellite camp and FEMA detention facility.

WYOMING
Heart Mountain – Park County N. of Cody – WWII Japanese interment camp ready for renovation.
Laramie – FEMA detention facility
Southwest – near Lyman – FEMA detention facility
East Yellowstone – Manned internment facility – Investigating patriots were apprehended by European soldiers speaking in an unknown language. Federal government assumed custody of the persons and arranged their release.

OTHER LOCATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
There are many other locations not listed above that are worthy of consideration as a possible detention camp site, but due to space limitations and the time needed to verify, could not be included here. Virtually all military reservations, posts, bases, stations, & depots can be considered highly suspect (because it is “federal” land). Also fitting this category are “Regional Airports” and “International Airports” which also fall under federal jurisdiction and have limited-access areas. Mental hospitals, closed hospitals & nursing homes, closed military bases, wildlife refuges, state prisons, toxic waste dumps, hotels and other areas all have varying degrees of potential for being a detention camp area. The likelihood of a site being suspect increases with transportation access to the site, including airports/airstrips, railheads, navigable waterways & ports, interstate and US highways. Some facilities are “disguised” as industrial or commercial properties, camouflaged or even wholly contained inside large buildings (Indianapolis) or factories. Many inner-city buildings left vacant during the de-industrialization of America have been quietly acquired and held, sometimes retrofitted for their new uses.

CANADA
Our Canadian friends tell us that virtually all Canadian military bases, especially those north of the 50th Parallel, are all set up with concentration camps. Not even half of these can be listed, but here are a few sites with the massive land space to handle any population:
Suffield CFB – just north of Medicine Hat, less than 60 miles from the USA.
Primrose Lake Air Range – 70 miles northeast of Edmonton.
Wainwright CFB – halfway between Medicine Hat and Primrose Lake.
Ft. Nelson – Northernmost point on the BC Railway line.
Ft. McPherson – Very cold territory ~ NW Territories. Ft. Providence – Located on Great Slave Lake. Halifax – Nova Scotia. Dept. of National Defense reserve…. And others.

OVERSEAS LOCATIONS
Guayanabo, Puerto Rico – Federal prison camp facility. Capacity unknown.
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba – US Marine Corps Base – Presently home to 30,000 Mariel Cubans and 40,000 Albanians. Total capacity unknown.

Source: http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1062 9-3-04

Check out some other interesting news regarding Fema camps as well at FriendsOfLiberty/SiaNews archives

The Truth Denied

Staff Writer

CONTINUE READING AND FOR MORE INFORMATION HERE….

Richard Flor died on Wednesday after suffering heart attacks and kidney failure about six months into his five-year federal sentence…

alert_header_08.31.12.png

 

Dear Supporter,

Five years ago, Montana’s most outspoken medical marijuana patient — Robin Prosser — committed suicide after the DEA seized her medicine, making her life unbearable.
Now flash forward to this past Wednesday night, when the feds’ war on medical marijuana claimed another Montana citizen’s life …
Former medical marijuana provider Richard Flor died on Wednesday after suffering heart attacks and kidney failure about six months into his five-year federal sentence. Richard was sentenced despite suffering from diabetes, Hepatitis C, and osteoarthritis.
For months, the federal government failed to place him in a facility that could give him the medical care he needed — and that the judge recommended.
Let your Congress member know that it’s past time to end this carnage.
Richard was Montana’s first registered caregiver, under a law that MPP passed via voter initiative in November 2004. He was assisting his wife Sherry — who suffers from chronic pain and is allergic to pain medications — as well as other patients.
Richard believed President Obama and his Justice Department when they said that medical marijuana providers would not be a federal enforcement priority. So, in 2009, Richard co-founded Montana Cannabis, where patients could get reliable, safe access to their medicine. But then the feds suddenly shifted their policy in March 2011, targeting Montana Cannabis and several other providers without warning. 
The feds didn’t spare Sherry, either: She is serving a two-year sentence.
Please email your U.S. House representative to ask them to pass legislation to give legal protection to medical marijuana patients, caregivers, and businesses in the 17 (and soon to be more) states and the District of Columbia, where medical marijuana is legal.

Rob Kampia signature (master)

Rob Kampia thumbnail (master)Rob Kampia
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.

P.S.  If you’d like to send Sherry a sympathy card, please mail it to:
    Sherry Flor #11358046
    Federal Prison Camp
    37930 North 45th Avenue
    Phoenix, AZ 85086

Ask your U.S. Representative to stand up for medical marijuana patients and providers

Is Texas dad who killed man to protect his 5-year-old daughter a criminal?

 

A Texas grand jury must decide whether to charge a father who killed a man after finding the man molesting his 5-year-old daughter. Does deadly force extend to a father protecting his daughter?

By Patrik Jonsson, Staff writer / June 16, 2012

ATLANTA

In Shiner, Texas, there’s little doubt among residents that a 23-year-old man who reportedly killed a man he found molesting his 5-year-old daughter in a horse barn should be hailed as a hero, not denounced as a criminal.

Related stories

Yet some legal experts question why the father hasn’t yet been arrested and charged with murder, saying vigilante justice, no matter how the circumstances come about, can’t be tolerated in a civil society.

A Texas grand jury will have to deal with those questions next week as it takes a deeper look at the circumstances of the killing, and whether the father was justified in hitting the man so hard with his fists that he died.

In most jurisdictions, according to “Criminal Law,” a widely used textbook, the use of fists in defense if there are no other weapons present is automatically an example of reasonable force. But in this case, were emotions an extenuating circumstance that caused the angry dad to go too far? More broadly, when is a person in a defensive fight required to stop?

“Assuming it’s true that this guy was molesting the daughter … he would then have the right to defend her and hit him enough to have him stop,” James Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, told Foxnews.com. “But you cannot summarily execute him, even though I can understand the anger he would have.”

He added: “The question is: When does it move beyond self-defense?”

And there’s another quirk to the case, suggests radio talk show host Geraldo Rivera, a lawyer.

“If he had a weapon and he used it to stop a sexual assault, he would not be indicted, but, ironically, the fact that he didn’t have a weapon leaves him more legally vulnerable than otherwise he would be,” Mr. Rivera told Bill O’Reilly Friday on Fox News. “In this case, you grab him off, now you’ve stopped the sexual assault, but now what are you doing? At what point does prevention of the sex assault become revenge, the implementation of vigilante justice?”

So far, the court of public opinion has stood steadfastly behind the father. 

“Any father would have done that,” Michael James Veit, a neighbor, told CNN on Thursday. “Everybody is saying the father is justified.”

The killing happened last Saturday, according to Lacava County Sheriff Micah Harmon, after the man’s daughter had gone to a barn to feed the family’s chickens, and then began screaming.

When the father ran to investigate, he found a man described as a family acquaintance, a horse groomer, sexually abusing the girl. Police have not released any names, in part to protect the girl’s identity, and, in the case of the man who was killed, because they have not yet located his relatives in Mexico.

According to the county coroner, the man died of blunt force trauma to the head and neck. Eyewitnesses arrived to see the alleged molester already on the ground, not moving. The girl was taken to a hospital, where she was treated and released for minor injuries.

While police continue to investigate, they have so far found no reason to disbelieve the man’s story. The dad “had remorse,” says Sheriff Harmon. “It wasn’t his intent [to kill anybody]. He was protecting his daughter and doing what he thought he had to do to protect his daughter.”

Despite the dad’s potential legal liability, Rivera said, most American jurors – given the facts as known at the moment – would agree with Harmon.

Marijuana and the U.S. Attorney

[A] drug which takes away grief and passion and brings a forgetfulness of all ills. ~ Homer, The Iliad

Two events took place in June that suggested a primer on how medical marijuana laws are working in Colorado might be appropriate. The first was an appellate court decision that the state Supreme Court declined to review. The holding was that if an employer has a zero-tolerance drug policy and an employee who uses medical marijuana tests positive and is discharged, the employee is not entitled to unemployment benefits even though the use of medical marijuana is not proscribed by state law.

The second event of note was a newspaper announcement that the Sunday night CBS news program 60 Minutes had interviewed Stan Garnett, Boulder, Colorado’s District Attorney, with respect to medical marijuana dispensaries operating in Colorado. Since the interview will not be broadcast until fall, an update might help those who wonder what is happening in the world of medical marijuana in Colorado. Although only applicable to Colorado, readers elsewhere can see how the Obama administration has lived up to promises made during the 2008 campaign.

During the 2008 campaign Mr. Obama said, with respect to medical marijuana laws, that if elected: “What I’m not going to be doing is using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue simply because I want folks to be investigating violent crimes and potential terrorism.” In February 2009 Attorney General Eric Holder said what the president said during the campaign “is now American policy” and in a subsequent press conference said the policy is to “go after those people who violate both federal and state law…” The administration did not rely on those statements to let people know what official policy was. David Ogden, then the Deputy Attorney General of the United States, put it in writing so everyone would understand.

October 19, 2009, Mr. Ogden, sent a memorandum to the U.S. attorneys in states that authorized the sale and use of medical marijuana. Its stated purpose was to provide “clarification and guidance to federal prosecutors.” Mr. Ogden began by saying: “Congress has determined that marijuana is a dangerous drug, and the illegal distribution and sale of marijuana is a serious crime…” However, he went on to say that “selected U.S. attorneys” to whom he sent his memorandum should “not focus federal resources in your states on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana.” Mr. Ogden and Colorado’s U.S. Attorney, John Walsh, would have been well served had Mr. Ogden stopped there since it was clear what he meant.

He didn’t. After explaining the meaning of “clear and unambiguous” as used in his memorandum he went on to say that “no State can authorize violations of federal law” which is, of course, exactly what medical marijuana legislation does. If a U.S. attorney decides to prosecute someone, Mr. Ogden continued, it is not necessary to prove that a state law was violated. The memorandum, he said, does not “‘legalize’ marijuana or provide a legal defense to a violation of federal law… Nor does clear and unambiguous compliance with state law… provide a legal defense to a violation of the Controlled Substances Act.” He repeats that in the penultimate paragraph of his memorandum saying the memorandum is not intended to preclude investigation, “in particular circumstances where investigation or prosecution otherwise serves important federal interests.” The foregoing, as all but the dullest reader can immediately see, is a crystal clear roadmap for U.S. Attorneys who wonder whom to prosecute. And that brings the curious to Colorado and to the even curiouser John Walsh.

Colorado citizens amended their state constitution in 2000 to permit the medical use of marijuana effective June 1, 2001. In 2010 a law was enacted that regulates medical marijuana dispensaries. John Walsh, apparently confused by the Ogden memo, has concluded that he can prosecute those who are in “clear and unambiguous compliance” with Colorado law as stated in the Ogden memorandum. In January, March and May, he sent waves of letters to dispensaries within 1,000 feet of schools telling them they must close and describing in great detail the draconian penalties that may be imposed if they do not. Mr. Walsh was not concerned about whether local governments were content to have dispensaries closer than 1,000 feet to schools as Colorado law permits.

Mr. Garnett wrote Mr. Walsh in March expressing his opinion that the U.S. Attorney’s office could, instead of going after dispensaries, better use its efforts dealing with “terrorism, serious economic crime, organized crime and serious drug dealing…” In response, Mr. Walsh said, in effect, that his views about how far dispensaries should be from schools overrode local governments’ views. He did not say how his actions comported with Mr. Ogden’s memorandum.

What the Colorado court ruled does not run afoul of what Mr. Obama promised during the 2008 campaign. What Mr. Walsh has done, does. That is more than a pity. It is a travesty.

Christopher Brauchli can be emailed at brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu. For political commentary see his web page at http://humanraceandothersports.com

FOLLOW POLITICS

Entire second printing of Kentucky author James Higdon’s ‘Cornbread Mafia’ stolen

 

A semi trailer containing 1,600 copies of “The Cornbread Mafia” by Kentucky author James Higdon was stolen from a storage lot in Elgin, Ill., on the night of April 28, according to police in the town, located about 40 miles west of Chicago.

The trailer contained the book’s entire second printing, as well as shipments of hardware fasteners, sheet steel, copper wire and 10 pallets of electric coffee makers.

Higdon’s book tells the story of the rise and fall of a Marion County-based group of marijuana growers and smugglers that federal prosecutors called the largest domestic pot syndicate ever uncovered.

Among the crimes described in the book is the 1956 hijacking of a shipment of bowling alley machinery in Danville, Ky.

According to Lt. Sean Rafferty of the Elgin police department, three other semi trailers were stolen from the same lot in the days before the one containing the book shipment disappeared. The other stolen trailers were empty.

At 1 a.m. last Friday, Elgin police caught two men who pulled a semi tractor onto the unfenced lot, hitched an empty trailer to it and began driving away. The driver, Perica Todorovic, was charged with aggravated possession of a stolen vehicle, receiving or possessing a stolen motor vehicle, and one count of theft. The passenger was not charged.

According to Rafferty, Todorovic worked for the shipping company that operated the lot, Nationwide Freight Systems, until three months ago.

Police have not charged Todorovic with the previous thefts, nor have they recovered the other trailers. The books remain missing.

According to Rafferty, the person responsible for the thefts likely either sold the trailers or used them to haul their own cargo. “If they didn’t have a purpose for the empty trailer, we would have recovered it,” he said. “Chances are they found a use for it or to scrap it for the metal.”

Rafferty said police did not consider the books to be the target of the theft.

According to Bill Flavin, vice president of Lake Book Manufacturing of Melrose Park, Ill., the company that printed the copies of “Cornbread Mafia,” a replacement print run was already under way.

CONTINUE READING…

Reporter Matt Frassica can be reached at (502) 582-4502.