“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.” HOW THE UNITED NATIONS IS STEALING OUR “UNALIENABLE RIGHTS” TO GROW FOOD AND MEDICINE THROUGH THE U.N. CONVENTION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS AND AGENDA 21.



Sheree Krider

Because of the nature of the Beasts which we are dealing with in regards to the “War on Drugs” in general, but additionally because the Beasts are taking control of plants, food, medications and plant medicines worldwide at will, I feel it is imperative that we confront this issue now.

WHILE READING THIS KEEP IN MIND THAT THE U.S. HAS HAD A PATENT ON MARIJUANA SINCE 2003: #6,630,507 October 7, 2003 Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants.

This control is being achieved thru the United Nations which officially began on October 24, 1945, with the victors of World War II — China, the U.S.S.R., France, United Kingdom, and the United States — ratified the U.N. charter, creating the U.N. Security Council and establishing themselves as its five permanent members with the unique ability to veto resolutions. This ability keeps them in control of the U.N.

To date More than six in ten Americans have a favorable opinion of the U.N. as reported on the “Better World Campaign” website which is the funding source for the U.N.

The U.N. 1961 convention on narcotic drugs essentially set into motion the drug war as we know it today.

The United Nations Conference to consider amendments to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, met at the United Nations Office at Geneva Switzerland from 6 to 24 March 1972. 97 States were represented.

On November 7, 1972 President Richard Nixon was re-elected to office. It was on his watch that the amendments to the U.N. were enacted with an establishment of a “United Nations Fund for Drug Abuse Control.”

They readily admit that many of the drugs included have a useful and legitimate medical purpose and are necessary to maintain the health and general welfare of the American people.

The term ”addict” means any individual who habitually uses any narcotic drug. Who will determine when a narcotic has become habitual? The “Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 .

The Parties, recognizing the competence of the United Nations with respect to the international control of drugs, agree to entrust to the Commission on Narcotic Drugs of the Economic and Social Council, and to the International Narcotics Control Board, the functions respectively assigned to them under this Convention.”

The “Parties shall maintain a Special administration for the purpose of applying the Provisions of this Convention.” in the U.S. this was the Drug Enforcement Administration or DEA.

Article 28 control of cannabis states that if a party permits cultivation that the system of control is the same as for opium poppy in article 23 which requires licensing by the “agency” which in the case of the U.S. would be the DEA. The number of acres planted and harvested must be recorded and “the agency must purchase and take physical possession of” it. The agency has exclusive rights to importing, exporting, and wholesale trading. It is also subject to limitations on production.

This is total control of the plant by the U.N. and effectively eliminates any chance of personal growing.

Natural growing plants which are included in Schedule 1 are marijuana, mescaline (peyote), psilocybin, and Khat. Other drugs are also included in this list.

More common opiates such as hydrocodone are included in Schedule II. These are regulated and handed out at the will of the government thru the medical industrial complex. How many people have been refused a prescription for Valium or Xanax in the past year because of a positive drug screening for Marijuana? How many people who do not consume Marijuana have been cut off as well because the DEA has, for all practical purposes, threatened the physician’s livelihood thru Statutes and “Bills” which have cut people off from their medications with no warning in the past year or two?

Title 21 states that the rules shall not apply to the cultivation of cannabis/hemp plant for industrial purposes only – however, it also does not say that hemp may be used for medicine without restriction.

Article 33 states that the parties shall not permit the possession of drugs without legal authority.

In the 1972 Protocol Amending The Single Convention On Narcotic Drugs 1961 Article 49 states that:

f) The use of Cannabis for other than medical and scientific purposes must be discontinued as soon as possible but in any case within twenty-five years from the coming into force of this Convention as provided in paragraph 1 of article 41.

1972 + 25 = 1997

Ironically enough the first medical cannabis law was enacted by California in 1996 – just in time to meet the 25 year deadline for ending all use of cannabis except for medical and scientific purposes…

Proposition 215, or the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, is a California law allowing the use of medical cannabis despite marijuana’s lack of the normal Food and Drug Administration testing for safety and efficacy. It was enacted, on November 5, 1996, by means of the initiative process, and passed with 5,382,915 (55.6%) votes in favor and 4,301,960 (44.4%) against.

As I stated previously, in the U.S. the governing agency would be the DEA and on July 1, 1973 this agency officially came into existence in accordance with the U.N. Treaties which the U.S. government created and implemented. THE DEA HAS AN Annual Budget of $2.4 billion.


States that:

“(1) If control is required by United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on October 27, 1970, the Attorney General shall issue an order controlling such drug under the schedule he deems most appropriate to carry out such obligations, without regard to the findings required by subsection (a) of this section or section 812(b) of this title and without regard to the procedures prescribed by subsections (a) and (b) of this section.”

Meaning, it does not matter what the U.S. Citizens (or any other country for that matter) has to say about Cannabis or any other drug or plant on the list of U.N. control we are bound by the U.N. Treaty first and foremost, which was set into place by our own government.

“In 1986, the Reagan Administration began recommending a drug testing program for employers as part of the War on Drugs program. In 1988, Drug Free Workplace regulations required that any company with a contract over $25,000 with the Federal government provide a Drug-Free Workplace. This program must include drug testing.”

Manfred Donike, in 1966, the German biochemist demonstrated that an Agilent (then Hewlett-Packard) gas chromatograph could be used to detect anabolic steroids and other prohibited substances in athletes’ urine samples. Donike began the first full-scale testing of athletes at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, using eight HP gas chromatographs linked to an HP computer.

YEP, HP IS HEWLETT PACKARD…His method reduced the screening process from 15 steps to three, and was considered so scientifically accurate that no outside challenges to his findings were allowed.

HP has laboratories around the globe in three major locations, one of which happens to be in Israel. Late Republican Senator Jesse Helms used to call Israel “America’s aircraft carrier in the Middle East”, when explaining why the United States viewed Israel as such a strategic ally, saying that the military foothold in the region offered by the Jewish State alone justified the military aid that the United States grants Israel every year.

Most everybody thinks that the Cannabis issue is a U.S. issue and an issue unto itself, not encompassed within the issue of control of the masses, and at least as far as our own laws/statutes are concerned. “ALL WE NEED TO DO IS GET OUR STATE TO LEGALIZE IT”. This couldn’t be farther from the truth.

We are all rolled up into the UN by virtue of our own Country which used this as a means to control worldwide, the people, without ever having to answer for or take responsibility for it again. Why? Because it is now a UN issue. And WE ARE BOUND by the UN treaties, as one of 5 founding members, who now rule the world.

Welcome to “THE NEW WORLD ORDER”. Yep, it’s been around a long time, we just didn’t notice it in time. Our men had just gone through a horrific war (WWII) and were too beat down and TOO sick to fight again and most likely didn’t even notice or worse yet thought the U.N. was a good thing that would prevent another WWII….. WELL, WELCOME TO WWIII AKA THE “DRUG WAR”.

I don’t care which State you reside in it is NOT legal to possess or use Marijuana in any form or fashion. You are living in an “Illusion.

As long as the U.N. has control over all narcotics in any form, we as a people will not legally be able to grow cannabis or any other plant that they categorize as narcotic.

What they will do for us is to use us like Guinea pigs in a testing environment to accumulate enough information whereby cannabis can be deemed a potentially useful drug from a pharmacological standpoint and then they can turn it over to the pharmaceutical companies to sell to us through commerce as a prescription. This is happening as we speak.

The drug war was created for us, and the prison industrial complex which they set up for control of us is the holding center for the Guinea pigs which are “us”.

They make sure enough of it gets out there that we can continue to use it illegally and they can study it at the same time they are locking us up for doing just that — using and studying marijuana. This in effect creates a double paycheck for them as they are keeping the prisons full and instituting private prisons for commerce and at the same time they are collecting information about the beneficial uses of cannabis thru drug testing patients. As well, those who seek employment or who are already employed with are targeted by random testing, and they collect our medical records for research at the same time the physicians are tagging us as cannabis abusers for reference via the ICD-10 codes used on medical claim forms submitted to the Insurance companies by our doctors’ offices. Essentially anyone who is a marijuana user is rounded up by the legal and medical system. If you use marijuana you cannot hide the fact unless you are part of the drug cartel itself and do not seek employment or medical care anywhere in the U.S. The marijuana cartel remains intact because they are “self-employed”.

Additionally, HIPPA states that In the course of conducting research, researchers may obtain, create, use, and/or disclose individually identifiable health information. Under the (HIPPA) Privacy Rule, covered entities are permitted to use and disclose protected health information for research with individual authorization, or without individual authorization under limited circumstances set forth in the Privacy Rule.

As far as Pharma Drugs are concerned, I must quote from Ms. Cris Ericson of the Vermont Marijuana Party, who stated, “People can no longer afford the pharmaceutical industry. The U.S. Congress votes to give research money to the pharmaceutical companies who invent new prescription drugs by synthesizing natural herbs, and then the pharmaceutical companies claim ownership of the new Rx patent, but it was the taxpayers who paid for the research. The taxpayers, under the patent law which states that “work made for hire, should own 50% of the patent” should rightfully be paid. The pharmaceutical companies not only profit wrongfully, by taking ownership of the patent that the taxpayers paid the research for, but then they take their huge profits and donate millions of dollars to PAC’s political action committees and Super PAC’s and then the PAC’s donate money to the U.S. Congress, so your taxpayer dollars have come full circle, and that looks just like money laundering, because millions of your taxpayer dollars end up in the campaign war chests of the elected officials.”

To that I must add that even if you obtain your medications for a $0 copay, you have paid for them already via taxation of the general public. Even those persons on disability or other government subsidy pay tax every time they make a purchase.

The U.N. Convention and the CSA both state that, “No prescriptions may be written for Schedule I substances, and they are not readily available for clinical use. NOTE: Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC, marijuana) is still considered a Schedule 1 drug by the DEA, even though some U.S. states have legalized marijuana for personal, recreational use or for medical use. May 4, 2014”

This issue gains even more momentum when you understand that it is not just about cannabis/hemp/marijuana. It also involves all food and plants which are coming under their jurisdiction.

It is entirely possible that just as they can use drug testing to determine what drugs you put into your body they could develop testing to determine what foods you are eating. Imagine being “food tested” to see if you ingested beef or broccoli that was illegal to be in possession of! It seems an exaggeration but entirely within the realm of possibility.


The national focal point in the United States is the Division Chief for Sustainable Development and Multilateral Affairs, Office of Environmental Policy, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of State.

A June 2012 poll of 1,300 United States voters by the American Planning Association found that 9% supported Agenda 21, 6% opposed it, and 85% thought they didn’t have enough information to form an opinion.

The United States is a signatory country to Agenda 21, but because Agenda 21 is a legally non-binding statement of intent and not a treaty, the United States Senate was not required to hold a formal debate or vote on it. It is therefore not considered to be law under Article Six of the United States Constitution. President George H. W. Bush was one of the 178 heads of government who signed the final text of the agreement at the Earth Summit in 1992, and in the same year Representatives Nancy Pelosi, Eliot Engel and William Broomfield spoke in support of United States House of Representatives Concurrent Resolution 353, supporting implementation of Agenda 21 in the United States. In the United States, over 528 cities are members of ICLEI, an international sustainability organization that helps to implement the Agenda 21 and Local Agenda 21 concepts across the world.

During the last decade, opposition to Agenda 21 has increased within the United States at the local, state, and federal levels. The Republican National Committee has adopted a resolution opposing Agenda 21, and the Republican Party platform stated that “We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty.” Several state and local governments have considered or passed motions and legislation opposing Agenda 21. Alabama became the first state to prohibit government participation in Agenda 21. Many other states, including Arizona, are drafting, and close to passing legislation to ban Agenda 21.

The Committee on World Food Security (CFS) was established in 1974 as an intergovernmental body to serve as a forum in the United Nations System for review and follow-up of policies concerning world food security including production and physical and economic access to food. The CFS Bureau and Advisory Group-The Bureau is the executive arm of the CFS . It is made up of a Chairperson and twelve member countries. The Advisory group is made up of representatives from the 5 different categories of CFS Participants. These are: 1 UN agencies and other UN bodies; 2 Civil society and non-governmental organizations particularly organizations representing smallholder family farmers, fisherfolks, herders, landless, urban poor, agricultural and food workers, women, youth, consumers and indigenous people; 3 International agricultural research institutions; 4 International and regional financial institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, regional development banks and the World Trade Organization; 5 Private sector associations and philanthropic foundations.


“Even the term “sustainable” must be defined, since on the surface it appears to be inherently positive. In reality, Sustainable Development has become a “buzz” term that refers to a political agenda, rather than an objectively sustainable form of development. Specifically, it refers to an initiative of the United Nations (U.N.) called Sustainable Development Agenda 21. Sustainable Development Agenda 21 is a comprehensive statement of a political ideology that is being progressively infused into every level of government in America.”

Webster’s 1828 dictionary defines unalienable as “not alienable; that cannot be alienated; that may not be transferred; as in unalienable rights” and inalienable as “cannot be legally or justly alienated or transferred to another.”

The Declaration of Independence reads:

“That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…”

This means that human beings are imbued with unalienable rights which cannot be altered by law whereas inalienable rights are subject to remaking or revocation in accordance with man-made law. Inalienable rights are subject to changes in the law such as when property rights are given a back seat to emerging environmental law or free speech rights give way to political correctness. In these situations no violation has occurred by way of the application of inalienable rights – a mere change in the law changes the nature of the right. Whereas under the original doctrine of unalienable rights the right to the use and enjoyment of private property cannot be abridged (other than under the doctrine of “nuisance” including pollution of the public water or air or property of another). The policies behind Sustainable Development work to obliterate the recognition of unalienable rights. For instance, Article 29 subsection 3 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights applies the “inalienable rights” concept of human rights:

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

Read that phrase again, carefully! “Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

It suffices to say that the “war on drugs” is a war on us as a people. It is entwined with the United Nations and agenda 21. It is control of the masses through the illusion of a better world and offers peace and harmony to all people. It sounds really good on the surface until you start analyzing the issues at hand. The problem is that its intent is ultimately to control everything and everybody.

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the united nation”…there you have it in one sentence, straight out of the horse’s mouth. The new world order is now. If we continue down this path, sooner rather than later we will be told that we can no longer grow our own food, or meat, eggs, cheese, etc. It must be purchased through a reputable source – the grocery stores and the pharmacy so it can be “regulated”.

Our rights to the cannabis/marijuana plant has all but been lost at this point and if we do not do something immediately to regain it and continue passing illegal statutes (by virtue of the U.N.) state to state is not going to hold up in the long run because, first of all, federally it remains illegal and they can squash those legalization antics at any time, and most of all the U.N. owns it. And who owns the U.N.? The United States and five other countries which are china, Russia, France and the U.K.

It seems to me that the placing of these plants (including marijuana, and peyote) into a “U.N. Convention of Narcotic Drugs” was just the first step in their taking total control of all people throughout the world through their access to food and medication, and was and still is a test case to see if it would work in their favor. So far it seems it is working in their favor because we are losing the ability to fight back on a political basis and their guns are bigger than ours.

The fact that for years we have blamed the eradication of marijuana on Harry Anslinger even though the LaGuardia commission refuted his findings and Harry Anslinger himself later admitted his testimony wasn’t true and in fact marijuana was relatively harmless, only proves that the rhetoric remained in place for ulterior motives.

When the 1937 tax act was repealed in 1969 in Timothy Leary v. United States, the Controlled Substance Act of 1970 picked up and took over keeping the plant from us yet again. To this day it remains illegal although individual states within the U.S. are attempting to change that, the fact still remains that legally it is still a schedule 1 at the federal level and since federal law trumps state law we are getting next to nowhere.

The only thing that state legalization does do, is keep the state authorities from prosecuting except within the realm of the individual state statutes. At least we are fighting back and gaining momentum in that we are letting them know how we feel about it! Other than that at any time everything gained could be lost at the whim of the federal government.

If we do not focus on regaining the freedom of cannabis from the U.N. now, not only will it be forever lost to pharma, all of our food, medicines and plants are going right along with it and we will not ever be able to get them back. And if you think the prison industrial complex is a monstrosity now just wait till we are being locked up for growing a tomato or hiding a laying hen in our closet just to have access to an egg. Yes, I believe that it will get that bad in the not so far future.

So if you are not worried about it because you do not smoke marijuana, you might ought to worry about it because your grandkids will still need to eat whether or not they have cannabis as a medication through the pharmaceutical industrial complex. And to top it all off, what happens when you “break the law” by planting food and they find out and take away your right to obtain food much the same way they have taken away our rights to obtain scheduled medications because you tested positive for marijuana? (Don’t worry too much I am sure they will let you “something” to eat!)

We must have access to our own gardens and herbal plants because virtually every “drug” made comes from a plant and both prescription drugs and over the counter medications are at risk and could disappear rapidly. Remember over-the-counter pseudoephedrine? Every time they want to take something out of our hands they make it illegal and claim it is for the greater good. You may very well need to grow your own medicine too because if you do not meet their requirements they won’t let you have any of theirs.

It is a fact that cannabis/hemp is a food and a medicine. By withholding it from us they have effectively made many of us weaker through endocanabinoid deficiency and people are becoming sicker in general from the foods that we ingest as well as the ones that we do not have access to. Our ability to stand up to an enemy of any kind on a physical scale has been dramatically affected by both nutrition and the chemicals we are exposed to in our food and in our air and water as well as required inoculations against various diseases. Our children are having the worse reactions to all this which can be seen by the rise in not only autism but other birth defects as well.

The most important thing to note is that cannabis, food and medicine is something that everyone needs to have access to in various forms for various reasons. If it is only available thru a controlled environment then we will be subjected to probable malnutrition and genocide. Our health has become bad enough already due to corporate food and medicine. We certainly do not need it to get any worse. Is this going to be total population control via food and medicine? I am afraid so.

“People who don’t get enough food often experience and over the long term this can lead to malnutrition. But someone can become malnourished for reasons that have nothing to do with hunger. Even people who have plenty to eat may be malnourished if they don’t eat foods that provide the right nutrients, vitamins, and minerals.”


Probably the best thing we can do right is to demand cannabis sativa and any naturally growing plant removed from United Nations control and the Controlled Substance Act in the U.S.

Additionally, Agenda 21 needs to be eliminated as it stands now. No entity should be allowed total control over plants and food, especially those grown in our own garden.

However, it is a fact that any type of food or medicine created and/or sold by a corporate entity has to be governed. Their entire purpose is to make money and they will do anything to accomplish that including selling us pink slime for meat. That is what should be governed.

It seems to me that the FDA is not doing its job correctly. Protect the people, not the corporations. The fact that a corporation has its own “personhood” is just totally ridiculous and must end.

The United Nations itself could be modified into an agency that protects the unalienable rights of the people throughout the world. It cannot police the world however. And it cannot rule the people as a government does. For this reason any policing agencies that are international such as Interpol must be eliminated. This would throw the policing back to the people’s own respective countries and the people of those countries will have to police their own governments to ensure that they keep the will of their people as top priority while governing.

Will this mean that war will continue to be a fixture in our world? Yes, of course it does. War always has been and always will be. It is the next closest thing to “God” that exists in that aspect. But if each country’s government has jurisdiction over its own people then the citizens can decide who will be ‘in charge’. If they need help during a crisis then other countries can step in to help where needed at the time and as they choose to do so. If the whole world comes under the rule of one governing body then we would have no control anymore at all. And this is what it seems to be leading up to – one governing body ruling virtually the entire planet with the ‘head’ of that governing body being the five original victors of WWII: the United States, Russia (U.S.S.R), France, China and the U.K.

World War II never really ended, it just changed it course. We have to put an end to this global war against all God’s people and the time is now! If you do not believe in god then you can say we have to put an end to the war against world humanity. It means basically the same thing – at least to me.

Just say no!



Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6 (1969), is a U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with the constitutionality of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937. Timothy Leary, a professor and activist, was arrested for the possession of marijuana in violation of the Marihuana Tax Act. Leary challenged the act on the ground that the act required self-incrimination, which violated the Fifth Amendment. The unanimous opinion of the court was penned by Justice John Marshall Harlan II and declared the Marihuana Tax Act unconstitutional. Thus, Leary’s conviction was overturned. Congress responded shortly thereafter by repealing the Marihuana Tax Act and passing the Controlled Substances Act to continue the prohibition of certain drugs in the United States.

“By 2020, 30 billion connected devices will generate unprecedented amounts of data. The infrastructure required to collect, process, store, and analyze this data requires transformational changes in the foundations of computing. Bottom line: current systems can’t handle where we are headed and we need a new solution. HP has that solution in The Machine. ”

Ban Ki-moon (Hangul: ???; hanja: ???; born 13 June 1944) is a South Korean statesman and politician who is the eighth and current Secretary-General of the United Nations. Before becoming Secretary-General, Ban was a career diplomat in South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and in the United Nations.

































Titles II and III Of The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act Of 1970 (Pub-Lic Law 91–513) https://legcounsel.house.gov/Comps/91-513.pdf

“You are being watched” H.R. 4310: National Defense Authorization Act


The link hereto is a direct link to the PDF Document of the new “Patriot Act”, revised effective June 19, 2012 for the fiscal year of 2013.

There is much discussion about what is happening with this legislation.

H.R. 4310: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013

112th Congress, 2011–2012

To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2013 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction,

and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.


Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon [R-CA25]

Passed House


Here’s the added clause in question:

“Nothing in the AUMF or the 2012 NDAA shall be construed to deny the availability of the writ of habeas corpus or to deny any Constitutional rights in a court ordained or established by or under Article III of the Constitution for any person who is lawfully in the United States when detained pursuant to the AUMF and who is otherwise entitled to the availability of such writ or such rights.”

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-americans-indefinite-detention2012-11#ixzz2DfrztPqV



Use the above link to Twitter your Congressman and tell them to end indefinite detention.  It could be you!

Sheree Krider, ‘et al’….

Monday, March 14, 2011

Coming of Age in the NWO

Coming of Age in the NWO
I remember the day, 9/11/2001, when our lives changed forever.
I was awoken by a phone call from a friend at about 9:05 am.
Her voice was franctic as she screamed in the phone, “We are being
attacked!”…. As I tried to wake up, she said “Just turn on the New’s”, “NOW!”
I scurried out of bed and held on to the walls to get to the Den where my
Mother was sitting in her rocking chair and as I looked at the TV I see
NYC and smoke billowing everywhere.  Chaos was breaking out all around.
My Mom, Bless her Heart, was “watching a movie”, or so she thought.
She had Alzheimer’s and was not able to catch on to what was happening
just by viewing the TV.  As I started to explain what I thought had happened,
here came the next plane….right into the Trade Center…again.  At that point
I KNEW we were under attack.
Dazed and confused, a thought came to mind.  My Father had
said right before his death in June of 2001, that “He didn’t know what else to do,
except to just leave and watch everything go to Hell”…
Now I was beginning to see what He was talking about.  I was glad He was not
here to see it, (or maybe he was).
He was a WWII Veteran. A Medic.  He had been around the World
from 1941-1945, from the Philippines to Italy, Germany and beyond. He had definitely
seen his share of War and misery in his lifetime.  A child of the Great Depression of
1929, he had lost his Mother at age 2, in 1919 to the Avian Flu.  They lived in
Stephensport, KY a small town on the Ohio River.
~The first memory that really sticks to my mind of my Father was when I
was about 5 years old.  He taught me how to “turn over a dead body”…..
“Just cross the ankles and twist, and they will turn right over”, he said.
We practiced this, playfully, on the living room floor.~
Then, my thoughts turned to what would happen in our immediate future.
O.K., I thought.  I’ve got Mom, myself, my husband (who was at work and probably did
not know about what had just happened), my two daughter’s, two grandson’s and their father
who lived with us, and my Aunt who was my Father’s sister who lived a block away.
What do I do first?
I picked up my cell phone and called my husband.  I explained what I could at the time
and told him to “get his ass home!”.  He responded and was home in a short time.
Fortunately for us, there was some cash in the house and a checkbook with funds
available.  By eleven o’clock that morning I was at “Sam’s Club” purchasing a
generator, plenty of canned and dry food supplies, water and household needs.
I brought home over a thousand dollars worth of supplies and placed them in plastic
tubs and put them in the center of the basement in a closet.  To this day, I still
have some supplies there.
By late that afternoon we were all perched in front of “FOX News” watching the
devastation that our Country had succumb to.  This went on for days, weeks and even
A lot has happened in all of our lives since that fateful day in September of 2001.
I learned, as my Father had before me, to “read between the lines”.  Don’t believe
anything you hear, and only half of what you actually see, and when a crisis happens,
analyze the situation, adapt to it and overcome the hardship.
The lessons learned from 9-11-01 have been magnificent to say the least.
The New World Order had begun to take hold.
The first thing I learned is to not trust the Government.  No matter what they say or do
for us there will always be an underlying reason for their “compassion”.
Whether it be the Patriot Act, which effectively overturned the Bill of Rights, the right to pain relief, which resulted in the death and/or addiction of many people to narcotics, including Oxycontin,  the Cannabis/Hemp conspiracy, which controls how we can legally use (or not use) the Marijuana/Hemp plant for personal, health or religious purposes, the Health Care Bill which is now in the process of being initiated which will pre-determine what care each of us will or can receive, and the RFID (Radio Frequency Identification Device) which was originally designed by the IBM Corporation for use in Hitler’s regime during WWII and HAARP which has yet to be discovered by the common people just what it may be capable of doing to us or on our planet Earth.
These are just a few of the high profile NWO discoveries.  The NWO continues to and will continue to encompass much, much more than “we the people” will be advised of prior to the
execution of their plans.
THE TIME IS NOW! To begin the fight for our God given right to survive on this planet.

For if we wait another year, It will be to late

If California Legalizes Marijuana, How Will Obama React?


California will vote in a few weeks on Proposition 19, which would (if it passes) effectively legalize the recreational use of marijuana in the state. Chances of it passing seem to be growing, if you’ll excuse the metaphor, like a weed. Right now, the poll numbers for Proposition 19 are better than the numbers for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown or Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer against their respective Republican opponents, for instance. Meaning California could become a "test-case" state in challenging federal laws on the matter. But what would this mean, practically? Well, a lot of it hinges on how President Barack Obama reacts. Which is impossible to say right now, but at least we can examine the possibilities, now that California legalizing marijuana seems to have moved from the "pipe dream" category (sorry about that, I couldn’t resist) to a very real political possibility, if the polling trend continues.

The polling on Proposition 19 still does fluctuate, but appears to be getting better on average. Eight of the last nine polls have shown Yes on Prop. 19 with a 4-11 point lead (average lead: 7.1 percent). The best of these is less than a week old and showed a 52-41 split. In four of these, Yes on Prop. 19 scored at 50 percent or better. Now, this doesn’t mean passage is a sure thing at this point. Seasoned supporters of state propositions don’t really begin to breathe easily until the polling for the proposition hits 55 percent or better (which is usually seen as pretty much unbeatable). The highest poll yet in favor of Prop. 19 has been 53 percent, in comparison. And, although probably an aberration, the most recent poll showed a stunningly different story, with Prop. 19 losing 43-53. Measuring it against the other polling, though, this latest poll is likely an outlier. Polling on the proposition is in itself questionable, for the simple reason that after 100 years of the "Drug War," most citizens may have problems answering questions about drugs honestly when an absolute stranger calls them up and asks them. But, overall, the polling is much better than it was even a few months ago, and the movement seems to be towards the Yes side. The battle’s far from won, but it is looking more and more winnable, to put it another way.

If California does go ahead and legalize marijuana, the entire Proposition 19 campaign could bear some very interesting offspring as soon as 2012. Even the staid Wall Street Journal just pointed out the fact that a whole bunch of Democratic strategists are watching this race very, very closely. This is because it could become a dandy "hot button" issue on the Left, in much the same way that banning gay marriage has been a successful political tool on the Right. These hot buttons on both sides energize the base of the party and increase voter turnout among some normally-apathetic groups. The way this thinking goes is: California’s youth may surprise everyone and buck the general trend for any midterm election (where young voters mostly skip voting), and vote in droves precisely because a pet issue of theirs is on the ballot. This means it may behoove Democrats to put marijuana legalization initiatives on state ballots in order to drive up turnout in 2012, and beyond. Democratic politicians, however, are going to be a lot more reluctant to join this bandwagon, but one assumes they’ll certainly be thankful for the benefits of a bigger Democratic turnout. Both Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer are officially against Proposition 19, but I bet in private they’re thanking their lucky stars that it made the ballot this year.

"Yes on 19" spokesman Tom Angell, when contacted about this possibility, was optimistic about the prospect of Democrats having a change of heart politically, if Proposition 19 wins in November: "The pervasive political thought among Democrats is that supporting marijuana reform is politically dangerous — but eventually they’ll realize that supporting such reform means that they won’t be punished at the polls as a result, but that they may in fact be rewarded." Angell is currently "on loan" to the Yes on 19 group, and is normally Media Director for a group which has endorsed Proposition 19, "Law Enforcement Against Prohibition" (or L.E.A.P.), which is made up of current and former police officers, judges, and others from the law enforcement field.

Turning back to my main point, though, let’s just assume for the sake of argument that Proposition 19 passes on Election Day California (which, for those of you on the East Coast, will happen three hours later than you expect it to… ). Glassfuls of bubbles will be raised across the state in victory salutes; although these won’t be the traditional Dom Pérignon champagne served in Waterford flutes, but rather glass bongs bubbling merrily away. Marijuana legalization is approved by the voters 54-46, and everyone lives happily ever after, right?

Well, no. Marijuana is still quite illegal under federal law. And federal law always trumps state law. At least, unless the United States Supreme Court rules against the federal law or Congress decides to change it. So what would the passage of Proposition 19 actually mean for Californians?

It depends. It all depends on President Barack Obama, at least for now. Because Obama has a number of choices open to him as to how the federal government is going to react to this development. And it’s impossible to say exactly what form this reaction would take. But we can at least outline the possibilities at this point. From worst to best, here’s how I see these possible options:

Crackdown / escalate
Obama could instruct his Justice Department to crack down unmercifully. This includes both the "law" and "order" parts of the Justice Department, to borrow a television metaphor. Federal agents (such as, but not limited to, the D.E.A. and the F.B.I., just for starters) could be mobilized, and the feds could start busting everyone in sight for blatantly violating the federal Controlled Substances Act (with a Schedule I narcotic, no less), and the federal prosecutors could start jamming these cases through with a passion.

Remember, even though President Obama admits he smoked a little weed in his own day, he has been consistently against any and all hints of legalization. In fact, it was one of the first Lefty issues he not only dismissed, but actually ridiculed (Obama was forced to address the issue because it wildly outpolled all other questions for his first "online town hall" meeting, very early in his term, and he turned the whole thing into a joke).

This is probably pretty far-fetched, though, I have to admit. Such an overreaction would require an immense amount of manpower and court time and likely wind up being pretty futile in the end. But you never know. This could also be an option later on, after Obama leaves office, but we’ll get to that in a bit.

Make some examples
The second route the Obama administration could take is to "make an example" of a few people. Crack the whip on some high-profile arrests and court cases, but leave the low-level stuff alone. This could go a number of different directions, depending on which scapegoats the feds choose to go after. The Obama team has, for instance, said that they will not target medical marijuana shops that "are legal under state law" but will continue to bust those that fall afoul of the law (mostly by not checking the paperwork of who they sell to). Which they indeed have continued to do.

But that kind of all goes out the window if it’s legal for everyone. Assumably, the Obama people would refrain from sending in thousands of new D.E.A. agents to the state, but also go after some big-time busts, just to make a legal point. Which leads us to the next option.

Fight it out in the courts
Whether the Obama folks use a test case via a big bust, or they just sue the state directly, this battle may get fought out in the court system. Which doesn’t exactly bode well for Proposition 19, for the exact same reason Obama is suing Arizona over their recent immigration law — federal law always trumps state law. Unless California can convince the Supremes that there is a constitutional right to smoke pot, which should be seen as somewhat of a longshot, at least in the legal realm.

Blackmail the state
This one may come from Congress, but it may also get Obama’s support (again, Obama himself is on record as being against legalization). Congress could cut off a whole bunch of money for the state of California. This would not be limited to "funds to fight the Drug War," most likely. There are all sorts of things in the federal budget that could be used to make California pay a serious price for legalizing marijuana. This sort of congressional "blackmail" happens all the time, I should point out, and was the mechanism used in the 1980s (with highway funding) to force all the states to raise their drinking age to 21. Again, though, this would likely come from Congress itself, rather than the White House.

Do nothing
There’s a long history of standing back and letting states be the "laboratories of democracy" in situations like this, which Obama could indeed take. Call it the laissez-faire option. Or, if you prefer non-French terminology, call it the free-market option.

This option would consist of sitting back, and then waiting to see what happens. Obama could tell the Justice Department to only enforce the federal marijuana laws in 49 states, since California has shown it wants to try something new. There is lots of precedent for doing so, most notably up in Oregon, where they have an assisted-suicide law. This law was passed by Oregon residents, and at first the feds were very heavy-handed and threatened doctors with the loss of their D.E.A. approval to write prescriptions, but has since calmed down (since Obama took office, at least) into the feds "looking the other way." Civilization in Oregon has not noticeably collapsed in the meantime.

This would be the thing Californians are likely to hope for from Obama. If Obama came out and gave a speech on "the will of the voters" and that sort of thing, and then announced a new "hands off CA" policy, then we would have a little laboratory-of-democracy experiment, which could be very instructive to the rest of the country. I have no idea what the chances of this outcome happening are, though, I freely admit.

Jump on the bandwagon
And I have to put this last one as just as unlikely as the first one. President Obama could see the error of his ways, not only announce his "hands off CA" federal policy, but also become an advocate for full legalization of marijuana nationwide.

As I said, I really don’t expect or even hope for this to happen, because it seems so far-fetched, but I mention it here for completeness’ sake.