Archive for November, 2011

Stop Indefinite Detention of U.S. Citizens Without Due Process

NOTE FROM STEWART RHODES: Below is an urgent alert from the John Birch society regarding Senate Bill 1867, the Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which will give clear congressional support and authorization for indefinite military detention and military trial of American citizens. If passed, this will amount to a declaration of war against the American people, authorizing the Obama Administration and all future administrations to treat Americans the same as citizens of occupied Iraq or Afghanistan, subjecting us all to military jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of the international laws of war, rather than our Bill of Rights and our domestic criminal laws, upon the mere say so of Obama or one of his minions.

There is a great deal of confusion about this bill, with some incorrectly interpreting it as not affecting American citizens. There is also confusion about the very dangerous legal precedents that this bill seeks to codify and bolster. I am writing an in-depth article where I will do my best to clarify both what this bill does, how all three branches of the federal government have worked to impose the international laws of war on the American people, and just how close we are to losing our Bill of Rights forever. I will send that article out shortly, but please act now to put some serious pressure on your Senators to stop the detention provisions in S. 1867.

We are now very nearly at the point where all that will save liberty in America is another American Revolution. This bill, if it becomes law, will shove us across that line, placing us in almost exactly the same position our forefathers were in when they were forced to take up arms in defense of their liberty in 1775. If you wish to avoid that, you must stop this bill from becoming law, right now.

- Stewart Rhodes, Founder of Oath Keepers

Stop Indefinite Detention of U.S. Citizens Without Due Process

Immediate action required!

Deep inside the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1867) that the Senate is currently considering is a dangerous and unconstitutional portion that needs to be stripped out. Congress would grant the President the power to use the military in order to detain certain individuals, including American citizens, without trial or due process, indefinitely.

Section 1031 of the National Defense Authorization Act reads: “Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force … includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons…. [including] [d]etention under the law of war without trial….” This “indefinite detention” section hands over to the Executive Branch the power to have the military arrest U.S. citizens.  No trial needed.  Simple suspicion would suffice.

This could be quite reminiscent of Stalinist Russia where a knock on the door in the middle of the night meant that the person taken by the military was often never seen again, perhaps having been imprisoned in Siberia or executed. The Japanese American Citizens League has warned that this measure’s detention principles are similar to the ones that sent innocent Japanese-Americans into concentration camps during WW II.

Sadly, this bill has already been passed in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives with nary a whimper by a 322-96 vote. The excuse given for such an egregious disregard for the Constitution by supporters of the bill including authors Senators John McCain (R- Ariz.)  and Carl Levin (D-Mich.) is that the provision would strengthen and codify the legal framework necessary for dealing with “terrorists.” Other supporters insist that the language doesn’t necessarily include American citizens.

U.S. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) who voted against the bill in the House, thinks differently. Amash says the act would indeed “permit the federal government to indefinitely detain American citizens on American soil, without charge or trial, at the discretion of the President.” He notes that the language “does not preclude U.S. citizens from being detained indefinitely, without charge or trial, it simply makes such detention discretionary,” therefore it is misleading and outrageous.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is speaking out in opposition to the “indefinite detainment” provision of S. 1867. He is also offering an amendment that would simply strike out Section 1031 of the bill. As this alert is being written on November 29, the Senate is debating S. 1867 and could vote on the Paul amendment this evening or tomorrow, November 30. A related amendment by Senator Udall to revise the detainee provisions of S. 1867 has already been defeated today by a vote of 37 yeas and 61 nays.

Indefinite detention without due process leaves citizens without the legal protection of the Constitution and strikes at the heart of the essence of U.S. law. It is positively shameful that any elected representative would even consider voting for such an assault on so sacred a fundamental value as the right to due process.

Far too much power has already been either usurped or given over to the Executive Branch under the guise of national security. Contact your Senators immediately and demand that they safeguard individual freedom and liberty by upholding the protections guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Have them support the Rand Paul amendment that would completely strike Section 1031 from S. 1867, or any other amendment that would accomplish the same purpose.

If one or more amendments are added to S. 1867, it will likely go to a conference committee and then return to both the House and the Senate for a final vote.  So, a word to your Representative on this issue is also advised. Make sure you find out how he or she voted on the NDAA before getting in touch.

Thanks.

Your friends at The John Birch Society

1 Comment

Stewart Rhodes Speaks of Daily Bell’s Internet Reformation on Infowars

Article originally published at The Daily Bell, with their customary Dominant Social Theme lead-in, followed by their Free-Market Analysis -

http://www.thedailybell.com/3285/Stewart-Rhodes-Speaks-of-Daily-Bells-Internet-Reformation-on-Infowars

New video, Stewart Rhodes on Infowars, is below.

-

Stewart RhodesStewart Rhodes

-

Stewart Rhodes Speaks of Daily Bell’s Internet Reformation on Infowars

Thursday, November 24, 2011 – by Staff Report

-

Adding a new wrinkle to the phrase, “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not taking it anymore,” several California sheriffs, as well as one from Oregon, say they aren’t cow-towing to the federal leviathan anymore. Last month, at the Yreka fairgrounds in northern California, the sheriffs — who, of course, are elected by the people — gathered with a large group to discuss what to do about Big Brother and his consistent meddling in state and local affairs. Speaking of the federal bureaucracy, Plumas County (California) Sheriff Greg Hagwood declared, “A giant has been awakened, and they didn’t count on that.” Natural News

Dominant Social Theme: The Feds have the answers and anyone else is racist or a crook.

Free-Market Analysis: Stewart Rhodes appeared recently on the Alex Jones Infowars channel to explain the growing resistance to unconstitutional Fedgov activities. In the process, he pointed out that the modern-day “printing press” – the Internet – is providing people with information they simply hadn’t had access to before.

This is a fundamental meme that we have been expressing for nearly a decade now and modern events seem to be bearing it out. We have labeled the ongoing awakening that is taking place the “Internet Reformation.”

It is occurring in front of our eyes, as Rhodes realizes and explains. The power elite virtually controlled the flow of information in the 20th century and in the 21st they’ve lost this ability. They have lost their information monopoly thanks to the Internet. This is a devastating blow.

The elites did not merely control history in the 20th century; they MADE it. What we believe we’ve discovered is that “directed history” was prevalent in the 20th century. There are simply too many inexplicable occurrences. What were the REAL causes of World War 1? Why did the New York Fed deliberately overprint money during the Roaring 20s? Why did the West accept Stalin’s demands at Yalta, thus setting up yet ANOTHER war (the so-called Cold War).

Yes, it seems everything from the Great Depression to the “Great War” was somehow manipulated by the power elite of the era, especially once they were able to set up central banks around the world and had access to the enormous amounts of funds they needed. The idea was to create first chaos and then “order” – a one-world order.

Out of every war came a renewed emphasis on globalism. Out of every recession and depression came expanded powers for the IMF, World Bank and UN. But now in our view this era is coming to an end. Central banks are under attack; the Fed is having a great deal of trouble defending itself; the UN is not the force it once was. Most importantly, the elite’s dominant social themes are under attack.

These fear-based promotions are simply not working as planned. Global warming is challenged; central banking itself is seen as ineffective and even part of the economic ruin under which the West currently labors; even the European Union is in increasing danger of splitting up as the euro continues to founder and fail.

Of course, one can argue that the dissolution of these memes will only create MORE chaos, which is what the Anglosphere power elite seeks. But we don’t believe this is true. We think the primary plan is always to strengthen globalist institutions. To create chaos out of their downfall is a distinctly SECONDARY preference.

A defeat is a defeat. On so many fronts, in our view, globalism is foundering. The DOHA trade talks have proven unfeasible in many ways; the UN itself only makes news for scandals; there is resistance even to Peak Oil and the “smart-meter” technology it has spawned.

Increasingly, the elites are falling back on intimidation and brute force. And yet in the recent past they have always resisted option as the odds are not good: There are many billions who are NOT elites versus a few who are.

Additionally, many of those who the elites will depend on to enforce their noxious globalist system have begun to become awake themselves. Chief among them is Stewart Rhodes. We interviewed him about his increasingly influential organization, the Oath Keepers. You can see the interview here:

Oath-Keeper Stewart Rhodes on the Rise of Authoritarianism and How US Law Enforcement Can Take a Stand for Freedom

E. Stewart Rhodes is the founder and President of the growing, national non-profit organization Oath Keepers. The group supports members (current and former U.S. military and law enforcement) in efforts to uphold the Constitution of the United States should they be ordered to violate it. The Oath Keepers’ motto is “Not On Our Watch!” Both sides of his family have a long tradition of military service. Nearly all of his uncles on both sides of the family served in the Army or Marine Corps during WWII, Korea, and Vietnam, and his father served as a Marine. After the Army, Stewart graduated Summa Cum Laude from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, where his honor thesis focused on the political theory of James Madison. After college he worked on Rep. Ron Paul’s (R, TX) DC staff. Stewart graduated from Yale Law School in 2004, where his paper, “Solving the Puzzle of Enemy Combatant Status” won Yale’s Judge William E. Miller Prize for best paper on the Bill of Rights.

Stewart Rhodes is helping to spark a revolution in the thinking of US civil police. All over the country, sheriffs and those who enforce local laws are beginning to understand the difference between federal and state law enforcement. Here is an excerpt from an article posted at Natural News (see excerpt at beginning of this article) and also placed beneath the YouTube version of the Rhodes/Infowars interview:

Last month, at the Yreka fairgrounds in northern California, the sheriffs — who, of course, are elected by the people — gathered with a large group to discuss what to do about Big Brother and his consistent meddling in state and local affairs. Speaking of the federal bureaucracy, Plumas County (California) Sheriff Greg Hagwood declared, “A giant has been awakened, and they didn’t count on that.”

And here’s a telling quote: “I had spent a good part of my life enforcing the penal code, but not understanding my oath of office,” Sheriff Dean Wilson of Del Norte (Sacramento) County told the group. “I was ignorant and naive, but now I know of the assault against our people by the federal government,” he said, receiving some of the loudest and longest applause of the gathering.

1 Comment

SPECIAL REPORT: County Sheriffs Push Back Against Feds & County Sheriffs Project

From RTR.org

Americans are pushing back all over the country. It’s very clear that a revolution is in full swing. Tea Parties have been organizing to fight the bailouts and taxation. Occupy Movements have be springing up to fight against Wall St corruption at the hands of the Federal Reserve. Americans are pulling their cash out of Big Banks and supporting local Credit unions, as we move into a heated election season where it looks like it’s anyone’s game.

In today’s exclusive special report Gary Franchi is joined by Former Graham County Sheriff Richard Mack. They discuss the County Sheriff Project, a movement that will compound the effort to push back against an over reaching Federal Government, a movement that needs your support.

There are a few things you can do to support the County Sheriff Project:

1st. Visit their website at http://CountySheriffProject.org and make a financial contribution or click the County Sheriff Project image at the top of the right side bar on this site.

2nd. Simply share this video to your social networks and email lists: http://on.fb.me/sharvid

3rd. Give your local Sheriff a copy of Sheriff Mack’s book “The County Sheriff: America’s Last Hope” available at http://SheriffMack.com, and tell them about the County Sheriff Project.

Website: http://CountySheriffProject.org
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/County-Sheriff-Project
Share it: http://on.fb.me/sharvid

Leave a comment

A Message To The SPLC From A Montana “Extremist”

Gadsen FlagGadsen Flag

-

A Message To The SPLC From A Montana “Extremist”

by Brandon Smith

Monday, 21 November 2011

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/345-a-message-to-the-splc-from-a-montana-extremist

I’ll be the first to admit, people who refuse to compromise their principles under any circumstances can be utterly terrifying. Defiance, in its purest form, requires fearlessness; a brand of fearlessness we have little experience of today. For many in our society, fearlessness in the face of immeasurable opposition is unthinkable, and (unjustly) considered a sign of “madness”, or of “extremism”. To go against the tides of a culture, a collective, and point out its crimes and inconsistencies, is so counter to what they have been conditioned to expect, any sign of dissent triggers in them feelings of confusion and fury.

The Liberty Movement, and all it’s more specific and specialized branches, represents a resurgence of the immovable ideal. We refuse to set aside the truth. We refuse to relinquish our freedoms. We refuse to be silent. We refuse to negotiate. Regardless of the consequences, and despite contrary impositions of so called “national security”, we simply will not go away. This kind of philosophy is a serious obstacle for any establishment system which seeks to maintain or even expand its base of power. If you cannot buy off a person, if you cannot co-opt a person, and if you cannot frighten him into compliance, then all that is left to do is to demonize his public character, lock him up, or kill him. Men of conscience force the agents of centralization to expose their inherent tyranny before they are ready for the citizenry to know who they really are. Frankly, the Liberty Movement is a considerable pain in the neck for those who would see the American dynamic distorted to the benefit of a select few.

We wear this distinction like a badge of honor. If we were not a threat to the globalist corporatist strategy, then they would not consistently go out of their way to attack us. They attack us, because we are doing something right.

Only days ago the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the most prevalent propaganda think tank tied to the wretched tentacles of the Department Of Homeland Security (DHS), released yet another hit piece article slandering not just the Liberty Movement in general, or specific spokesmen like Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers, Chuck Baldwin of Liberty Fellowship, or James Rawles of Survivalblog fame, but also a specific action the movement has taken, namely, the relocation projects now gaining steam in the northwest Rocky Mountain regions of the U.S. You can read that disparaging editorial, called “A Gathering Of Eagles: Extremists Look To Montana”, here:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2011/winter/extremists-are-coming-together-in-mon

The hit piece was of course perfectly timed with the announcement of Bob Fanning and Chuck Baldwin’s run for Governor and Lt. Governor of Montana in 2012. However, beyond the obvious attempt to preemptively derail a campaign that would bring back 10th Amendment awareness to Montana and effectively restrict overt Federal involvement in state politics, there is a distinctive tone of dismay from the SPLC over Liberty Movement projects that involve active organization and community building.

From Liberty Fellowship’s relocation program, to James Wesley, Rawles’ American Redoubt, Stewart Rhodes’ Operation Sleeping Giant, and my own Safe Haven Project through Alt-Market.com, the powers-that-be are noticeably perturbed at the very idea of Americans walking away from their computers, leaving their homes, talking to each other face-to-face, and forming mutual aid groups. God forbid…

Mark Potok, the frontman for the SPLC, has remained an entertainingly impotent figure, and I’ve always seen his bumbling media statements and actions as more helpful to the movement than hurtful, but there comes a point in any nation teetering on the brink of oligarchy when the propagandists start to gain more power and more sway in the way activist groups are treated.

For now, the SPLC’s job is essentially to make average people with little background information believe that what we are doing here in the Northwest is first, a fringe activity with little support or reach beyond the boundaries of the Rocky Mountains. Second, that it is a movement based on inherent violence and a threat to the safety of average citizens. And third, that it is organized around racist methodologies, or any other socially detestable lifestyles they can come up with off the tops of their heads. The SPLC engages in this propaganda using the ever popular fallback strategies outlined by Saul Alinsky, a mentor to Hillary Clinton who believed that in social debate, there are no rules of engagement, and that those who play honorably, play to lose. For Alinsky, being right or factual in how you argue your position was unimportant. Instead, the point was to win, at any cost, even if you know you are entirely wrong.

Alinsky tactics relied heavily on character assassination. If you cannot effectively counter the arguments of your opponent, he believed, then you must attack his personal integrity, so that no one will listen to his ideas.

In his book “Rules For Radicals”, Alinsky also claims that effective action requires the “passport” of morality, meaning, the appearance of moral compass, but not necessarily honest intent. He goes on to say:

“…You do what you can with what you have and clothe it in moral arguments…Moral rationalization is indispensable at all times of action whether to justify the selection or use of ends or means.”

He elaborates further:

“…The practical revolutionary will understand Goethe’s conscience is the virtue of observers and not of agents of action; in action, one does not always enjoy a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind.”

In other words, Alinsky taught that taking on a false position of moral righteousness was important in influencing popular support, and, in convincing people to accept criminal methods as long as the end result met some arbitrarily assigned “greater good”. For Alinsky, lying is acceptable, hurting the innocent is acceptable, creating chaos and crisis is acceptable, if his concept of a “better world” is ultimately achieved in the process. If this doesn’t describe the underlying corrupt nature of the SPLC perching on their fabricated moral high horse while casting down judgments designed to manipulate rather than inform, I don’t know what does.

“The Nesting Of Eagles” uses subversion, false association, fear mongering, and blatantly disingenuous accusations in a fashion classic to Alinsky’s strategies. However, its poor composition and remedial narrative give it the tone of a frustrated pre-teen lashing out at what he doesn’t understand. I suppose we can be thankful that the SPLC still refuses to hire any competent writers, otherwise, the Liberty Movement might be in trouble.

Below, let’s outline the generalizations made in the article, as well as the insinuations they construct. Here is what the SPLC is trying to imply about the relocation and organizational projects of the Northwest, and the people who were brave enough to start them:

We’re All Racists

The only real trick the SPLC seems to have up its sleeve is to constantly associate, directly or indirectly, every group that opposes corrupt state power as being racist or terrorist. They especially strive to make readers believe that Montana itself is some kind of breeding ground for neo-nazis. I have to say that in the course of my relocation and establishment here in the Flathead Valley, I have only met ONE dyed in the wool racist. In the first few months I lived in Pittsburgh, PA, I met dozens.

Does this mean that Montana is free of hate? No. But according to the SPLC’s very own “Hate Map” (…oh boy), our state actually ranks very low on the list:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-map

States like Idaho and Wyoming rank equally or even lower, and yet we hear endless diatribes from the SPLC on how White Supremacists hide behind every rock and tree in these areas. Could it be that racism actually has nothing to do with their obsessive focus on our efforts? Oh, I think so…

The white supremacist that is consistently mentioned in the article is April Gaeda. I have never run into this woman during my time here. I have never seen her at any of the many meet-up groups or preparedness classes that take place here. I have never seen her at Chuck Baldwin’s services. As far as I can tell, no one in the movement here cares to know her at all. But, because she happens to live in the same area as us, our organizations are all made guilty by proximity?!

By this logic, the SPLC, whose headquarters is in Montgomery, Alabama, must be loaded with racists, and Mark Potok must dance daily around a burning cross. I mean, the League Of The South hangs out right down the road from them. Surely, there is room on the Hate Map for the likes of the SPLC, being that they are smack in the middle of so much bigotry…

We’re All Extremists

The word “extremism” is thrown around quite liberally by the SPLC and its representatives, but I have yet to hear them actually openly define what they mean by it. What makes someone an “extremist”? What definition does the SPLC or the DHS apply when they accuse movements like ours as being extremist entities? Is an extremist merely anyone who protests the abuse of governmental power? As a matter of fact, yes…

The truth was exposed clearly in the leaked and now highly publicized MIAC Report and the Virginia Fusion Center Threat Assessment, which used such broad profiles of extremist behavior that literally anyone who does not conform to current government policy could be labeled a danger, including veterans, and those who have Ron Paul bumper stickers on their vehicles:

http://www.constitution.org/abus/le/miac-strategic-report.pdf

http://publicintelligence.net/virginia-fusion-center-educational-facilities-threat-assessment/

Whether or not the SPLC was wholly responsible for the creation of the MIAC rhetoric handed out to police officers encouraging them to politically profile people is unclear, but what is clear is that the SPLC fully supported the assertions in the document back in 2009 despite massive legitimate criticism and is now pressing for its guidelines to be reinstituted:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/splc-urges-dhs-to-reassess-resources-after-key-analyst-reveals-unit-on-domestic-terror-was-scaled-back

What is the risk in allowing a purely establishment motivated construct like the SPLC to dictate the definitions of extremism as well as being given license to train law enforcement personnel? Eventually, we will see multiple activist groups harassed without probable cause due to their cultural and ideological concerns, and nothing more.

Honestly, I couldn’t care less what the SPLC or the DHS thinks of the Montana Safe Haven or the people who reside here. Their opinions are not important. Their actions, on the other hand, are. Any implementation of unconstitutional legislation or executive power which impedes the lives and freedoms of Americans, not just those in the Liberty Movement, should be met with unerring resistance. I and many others will NOT allow this particular path to gain favor. Government should always serve at the behest of the people. When it refuses to do so, it is no longer lawful. If this view makes me an “extremist”, then so be it…

We’re All Kooky Conspiracy Theorists

If the racist label won’t stick, then the “conspiracy theorist” label is usually next in the SPLC’s toolbox. “Conspiracy theorist” is thinly veiled code for “crazy person”, let’s be honest. It is not uncommon throughout history for elites in power to accuse their opponents of insanity rather than face their factual arguments on their own merit. Insanity is like leprosy; no one wants to look at you, let alone listen to what you have to say. It is certainly an effective method to defuse a potential dissenting movement.

In the “Nesting Of Eagles” article, the SPLC makes a point to immediately pigeonhole Stewart Rhodes as being a “conspiracy theorist”, and Oath Keepers as being conspiracy oriented, without explaining exactly what Oath Keepers is. The bottom line? Oath Keepers encourages current serving or retired military and police to uphold their oaths to the Constitution. Gee, I didn’t realize that Constitutional law was so conspiratorial, or theoretical. I rarely if ever come across an SPLC article or interview which does not automatically mention Timothy McVeigh, white supremacists, or conspiracy theory in the same sentence when talking about Oath Keepers. This is not an accident.

Stewart Rhodes is a very good friend of mine, and a tireless champion for Constitutional freedom. Being a practicing lawyer, he could just as easily take on multiple wrongful arrest lawsuits (there are a lot of those nowadays) and make a tidy income for himself and his family. Instead, he struggles daily to ensure that police and military men and women know that following unconstitutional orders is not an option. He does this as much to protect them, as he does it to protect the citizenry. To see him lumped in with neo-nazis by the SPLC is more than disconcerting.

If our positions as a movement bear resemblance to falsehood or exaggeration, then I welcome the SPLC to confront those positions up front and in detail, rather than hiding behind words like “racist” and “conspiracy theorist”. Not only is it cowardly, but it is destructive of legitimate public discourse, because it prevents any honest debate from taking place. If Mark Potok wants to argue over the existing threats to Constitutional Law with Stewart Rhodes, the existing threats to freedom of speech and of religion with Chuck Baldwin, or the existing threats to the U.S. economy with myself, then let’s pick an unbiased forum to do so. Let us see how well the SPLC fares without the comfortable protections of the corporate mainstream media playground, shall we…

Always Pursue What They Fear

For the most part, SPLC and DHS attacks on our movement are a fantastic thing. Rarely if ever do they actually hurt the growth of our organizations. Instead, they draw more attention to our cause, and, they expose what the establishment fears most. Whatever strategies they try to persuade us from following, those are the strategies we should be exercising. If we aren’t making Mark Potok or Janet Napolitano progressively nervous on a regular basis, then we aren’t doing our jobs correctly.

Without a doubt, the relocation programs being instituted in the Northwest have struck a nerve. Large numbers of freedom oriented, intelligent, and talented individuals coming together to end participation in the rigged system and build something new? Of course they hate us! If we can set an example here, then millions of Liberty Movement participants around the country today might just follow it, or even improve upon it. Community without complacency has always been a threat to tyranny. Governments would much rather we stay idle in our homes in front of our TV’s and computer screens, and far away from each other. This is not how we do things in Montana, and I believe, it is not how most Americans will be doing things across the country very soon.

-

You can contact Brandon Smith at: Brandon@alt-market.com

Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense.  Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.

To contribute to the growth of the Safe Haven Project, and to help us help others in relocating, or to support the creation of barter networks across the country, visit our donate page here:

http://www.alt-market.com/donate

Leave a comment

Feds Raid Washington State Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

Drug ThugsDrug Thugs

-

Feds Raid Washington State Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

By Laura L. Myers

SEATTLE | Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:41pm EST

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/16/us-marijuana-raids-washington-idUSTRE7AF0BN20111116

-

(Reuters) – Federal agents and police raided state-sanctioned medical marijuana dispensaries across western Washington on Tuesday, targeting storefronts deemed to be engaged in illegal drug trafficking and money laundering.

The dispensaries singled out by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration were essentially operating under the state’s medical marijuana law to conceal criminal activity, U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan said in a statement.

Federal officials did not immediately disclose the number of suppliers shut down in the sweep.

But the Cannabis Defense Coalition, a nonprofit advocacy group for marijuana, said on its website that 15 “medical cannabis access points” in at least six western Washington cities — Seattle, Tacoma, Olympia, Puyallup, Lacey and Rochester — were raided on Tuesday.

A spokeswoman for Durkan’s office, Emily Langlie, said one person was arrested by federal agents, and that additional arrests had been made by sheriff’s deputies in separate raids across three counties although she could not say how many.

Search warrant affidavits unsealed in federal court cited evidence that the dispensaries targeted in the sweep were involved in large-scale drug distribution and money laundering.

Storefront cannabis shops are neither explicitly permitted nor banned under a 1998 voter-approved state law that legalized pot in Washington for medical purposes, but they have widely proliferated nevertheless.

State law does allow collective medical marijuana gardens of up to 45 plants, or a maximum of 15 plants per patient.

Although cannabis is still listed as an illegal narcotic under federal law, 16 states and the District of Columbia have statutes decriminalizing marijuana for medical reasons, according to the National Drug Policy Alliance.

NOT GOING AFTER PATIENTS

Tuesday’s sweep marked the first major federal crackdown on pot shops in western Washington since Governor Christine Gregoire in April vetoed most provisions of a bill that would have established a new regulatory system for medical marijuana.

Gregoire has said she was swayed by a legal opinion from U.S. prosecutors threatening to target not only dispensary owners but state regulators who would enforce the proposed new law.

Federal prosecutors said they were not going after patients who have a legitimate medical need for pot.

“We will not prosecute truly ill people or their doctors who determine that marijuana is an appropriate medical treatment,” Durkan said.

Federal agents had raided more than seven dispensaries in the eastern Washington city of Spokane in May and April after facility operators there refused to shut down.

Last month, federal prosecutors announced a get-tough stance against dispensaries in California that were found to be engaged in drug trafficking under the guise of supplying medical marijuana patients.

The raids on Tuesday appeared to take dispensary operators by surprise, said Seattle defense attorney Aaron Pelley, who told Reuters that two pot dispensary clients were “served with pre-indictment paper” by law enforcement but not jailed.

“In eastern Washington and California, they fired a shot over the bow. Here in western Washington, it looks like the feds put boots on the ground and started kicking down doors.”

In July, Seattle’s mayor signed into law a city licensing system for medical marijuana distribution, requiring suppliers to comply with city codes that govern public nuisance complaints, plumbing and food-handling, for example.

Three of the facilities that Cannabis Defense Coalition said were raided are in Seattle.

(Editing by Steve Gorman and Cynthia Johnston)

2 Comments

Howard Nemerov: A Veterans Day Tale of Woe

Gun RightsGun Rights

-

A Veterans Day Tale of Woe

by Howard Nemerov

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/11/11/a-veterans-day-tale-of-woe/

This unpleasant experience began with a simple inquiry: Were we coming to the banquet honoring veterans, being held at the local high school?

I had previously declined a Tea Party invitation to speak at this venue, asking promoters: How can we celebrate Liberty when the law makes us felons if we don’t agree to void our Second Amendment rights? (It’s a third degree felony in Texas to bring a firearm into a school’s premises.)

I expressed doubt about attending, based upon this reflection.

Their response was that this was “not so much celebrating liberty as it is recognizing those who have served in our military.”

But how can the two be separated? The mental compartmentalization resulting from rationalizing is a great concern of mine. Experience has taught that humans are not so much rational as rationalizing.

My reply: Veterans offered their lives to protect our once-in-history Constitution that actually acknowledges Divinely-endowed inalienable rights, and that the government is supposed to serve the People. Why should we then turn around and let the government tell us we are the servants, and that we may not enjoy the God-given rights that so many gave their lives to preserve? I cannot in good conscience support such a dishonor against those who have honor, foisted upon us by those without honor in the name of safety and security. We either honor the words of the Founders and reject the illusion that the government, even if it wanted to, could provide security at the expense of Liberty, or we dishonor those who served to uphold those Founding principles.

Unfortunately, they chose to label themselves Patriot–implying I’m not–and tell me that considering my attitude, my presence “would be an insult to those who served.”

Disheartened, I submitted to the Oath Keepers for judgment on the matter.

Stewart Rhodes, Oath Keepers’ Founder and President, replied:

“It’s disgusting and disturbing to have an event supposedly honoring     veterans for their service “in defense of freedom” but also insisting that they disarm when they attend the event. Public schools are now nothing more than little Petri dishes of how the elites would like our whole nation to be – Bill of Rights free zones where only those in official power have the full rights of citizens, including the right to bear arms.”

It’s a sad day, when we start rationalizing to justify support for government infringement of our God-given, Constitutionally-acknowledged, and honor-defended Liberty.

Leave a comment

Oldie But Goodie: Ron Paul On The Psycho State

Dr. Ron PaulDr. Ron Paul

-

Oldie But Goodie: Ron Paul On The Psycho State

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul203.html

-

The Psycho State


by Rep. Ron Paul, MD

A presidential initiative called The “New Freedom Commission on Mental Health” has issued a report recommending forced mental health screening for every child in America, including preschool children. The goal is to promote the patently false idea that we have a nation of children with undiagnosed mental disorders crying out for treatment.

One obvious beneficiary of the proposal is the pharmaceutical industry, which is eager to sell the psychotropic drugs that undoubtedly will be prescribed to millions of American schoolchildren under the new screening program. Of course a tiny minority of children suffer from legitimate mental illnesses, but the widespread use of Ritalin and other drugs on youngsters who simply exhibit typical rambunctious, fidgety, and impatient behavior is nothing short of criminal. It may be easier to teach and parent drugged kids, but convenience is no justification for endangering them. Children’s brains are still developing, and the truth is we have no idea what the long-term side effects of psychiatric drugs may be. Medical science has not even exhaustively identified every possible brain chemical, even as we alter those chemicals with drugs.

Dr. Karen Effrem, a physician who strongly opposes mandatory mental health screening, warns us that “America’s children should not be medicated by expensive, ineffective, and dangerous medications based on vague and dubious diagnoses.” She points out that psychiatric diagnoses are inherently subjective, as authors of the diagnostic manuals admit. She also is concerned that mental health screening could be used to label children whose attitudes, religious beliefs, and political views conflict with the secular orthodoxy that dominates our schools.

The greater issue, however, is not whether youth mental health screening is appropriate. The real issue is whether the state owns your kids. When the government orders “universal” mental health screening in schools, it really means “mandatory.” Parents, children, and their private doctors should decide whether a child has mental health problems, not government bureaucrats. That this even needs to be stated is a sign of just how obedient our society has become toward government. What kind of free people would turn their children’s most intimate health matters over to government strangers? How in the world have we allowed government to become so powerful and arrogant that it assumes it can force children to accept psychiatric treatment whether parents object or not?

Parents must do everything possible to retain responsibility and control over their children’s well-being. There is no end to the bureaucratic appetite to rule every aspect of our lives, including how we raise our children. Forced mental health screening is just the latest of many state usurpations of parental authority: compulsory education laws, politically-correct school curricula, mandatory vaccines, and interference with discipline through phony “social services” agencies all represent assaults on families. The political right has now joined the political left in seeking the de facto nationalization of children, and only informed resistance by parents can stop it. The federal government is slowly but surely destroying real families, but it is hardly a benevolent surrogate parent.

September 14, 2004

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

-

See Ron Paul’s archives at LewRockwell dot com – http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

Leave a comment

No Freedom Of ‘Farm To Fork’

Nevada CSA GardenNevada CSA Garden

-

No Freedom of ‘Farm to Fork’

Saturday, October 29, 2011

http://karendecoster.com/no-freedom-of-farm-to-fork.html

-

Here’s another farm raid that hasn’t made the news. Quail Hollow Farm CSA is a farm in Nevada, about 50 miles north of Las Vegas,  that grows and sells fresh food to its CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) members. The philosophy of the owners and the purpose for the CSA is reflected as such:

The purpose for Quail Hollow Farm CSA is fourfold. Number one, it is our desire to be good stewards over our land. Nothing seems more beneficial than to plant a garden and orchard in which we may share the abundance of our harvest with friends and family. The second reason is that we believe that fresh locally-grown fruits and vegetables are indispensable for optimal nutrition and health. The third is a strong desire for self-sufficiency. And lastly, is simply the joy of the whole gardening process: working the soil (literally being grounded,) patiently watching the growing process, the taste of the first ripe tomato, and the harmony of the seasons.  In addition, it is our desire to share this experience with others, offering enjoyable hands-on opportunities to learn the science and skill of gardening and preserving the harvest, and to pass on this knowledge for future generations.

That all sounds evil and barbaric, doesn’t it? On October 21, 2011 farm owners Monte and Laura Bledsoe were holding their first annual Farm to Fork dinner for folks who desired to check out the farm. The dinner is described this way:

After a tour of the farm, dinner will be served family style (or farm style). The menu will be dictated by what we freshly harvest from our farm and other local small family farms.

Prior to the dinner, Monte and Laura were contacted by the Nevada Health Department and they were told they needed a special permit to be able to hold the event. Not wanting trouble, the Bledsoes gave in to the threat and applied for the permit. As the guests arrived for the dinner on October 21, so did the health inspector. In spite of the fact that there was a “certified kitchen trailer” on the farm premises for preparation of the food (yes, there are such things), the health inspector, who was taking orders by phone from her boss, declared that all of the food was unfit for consumption and she demanded the event be called off and the food be thrown away. The food was not consumable because:

1. Some of the prepared food packages did not have labels on them.  (The code actually allows for this if it is to be consumed within 72 hours.)  2.  Some of the meat was not USDA certified.  (Did I mention that this was a farm to fork meal?)  3.  Some of the food that was prepared in advance was not up to temperature at the time of inspection. (It was being prepared to be brought to proper temperature for serving when the inspection occurred.) 4.  Even the vegetables prepared in advance had to be thrown out because they were cut and were then considered a “bio-hazard”.

Not only was all of this freshly-prepared, chef-created, non-industrialized, non-processed, non-chemicalized food not fit for human consumption, but it was also deemed unfit for pig consumption That’s right – the health department despot’s orders were to throw all of the food away and then douse it with bleach to make sure the food did not get recycled as feed for the pastured pigs. At that point, the Bledsoes were reminded to call the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

They did, and they received advice from an attorney with the organization that allowed them to chase the health inspector off of their land. With no search warrant and no arrest warrant, the state’s leech left.

Following the parting of the Unhealth Nazi, the farm owners and attendees of the dinner teamed up to descend upon a stash of fresh food that was set to go to the market the next day. The crew got busy and they got to cooking. Dinner eventually became a reality, though not in its original form.

The health department hack returned, this time with local police. Thankfully, the police officers, not understanding why they were called, did nothing and left.

This is just another reminder that people are not free to make their own choices regarding their own health and food, nor are they free to voluntarily transact with others to maintain those choices. The real crime committed by Bledsoes is that they are dedicated to that dirty word found in their manifesto (quoted up above): “self-sufficiency.” Self-sufficient as in freedom to choose, or freedom from the government-supported-and-subsidized industrial food corporatocracy. Horrors.

You can read about this raid in its entirety here.

Leave a comment

The Duped Generation

Article originally published here:

http://politicalpistachio.blogspot.com/2011/10/duped-generation.html

-

Douglas V. Gibbs
Douglas V. Gibbs

-

Sunday, October 30, 2011

The Duped Generation

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Radicalized progressives have marched on Wall Street. They know that they are angry, and they want to change the system, but they don’t know what they will do once their protest reaches beyond the simplicity of marches and sleeping in tents. They only do this because they know they are angry, and things must change. They understand little beyond that because the programming has not gotten that far, yet.

Today’s hard left version of the hippie, just like their predecessors, were programmed to act this way. We let it happen. Nikita Khrushchev knew it would happen. He once remarked, “The United States will eventually fly the Communist Red Flag. . . The American People will hoist it themselves.”

This belief in big government suggests that the federal government knows best, and should be trusted with regulatory powers over pretty much anything you can think of. Globalists and communists alike share in this belief. Well known statist Zbigniew Brzezinski once said, “I think we accept the idea of a vast expansion in social regulation. It may take such forms as legislation for the number of children, perhaps even legislation determining the sex of children, once we have choice, the regulation of weather, the regulation of leisure, and so forth.”[1]

To achieve their vision of a new world, the old world must be destroyed. Statism cannot coexist with liberty, and an all-powerful government cannot coexist with religion, morals, or individualism. The problem is that the existing population is aware of the existence of God, remembers the days of liberty, have moral fiber, and consider themselves individuals. Therefore, the existing generation is beyond reach. However, the children can be molded, taught the new way, the communal way, the way of statist utopianism.

The reeducation of America began when the progressive era marched into America. As early as the late 1800s, progressives were launching their strategies for the reshaping of the American Culture. Socialism began its invasion within, masquerading the creeping incremental changes as spontaneous historical events that happened on accident. The design was shielded by an explanation of chaos. The conspiracy was wrapped up in a veil of an unfortunate series of events.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a progressive himself, once revealed the truth. “In politics,” he said, “Nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” [2]

We live in a new world, we are told. It is a global economy, now, and we must adjust with it. That adjustment, according to the liberal progressives, means to let go of our sovereignty and give in to the statist goals of the international community. Communism by a new name. Fascism with a new face. Slavery in the name of progress.

Historian Arnold Toynbee, a subscriber to the rise of a new utopian global society, remarked, “We are approaching the point at which the only effective scale for operations of any importance will be the global scale. The local states ought to be deprived of their sovereignty and subordinated to the sovereignty of a global world government. I think the world state will still need an armed police and the world government will have to command sufficient force to be able to impose peace.”

Peace by force?

Dr. Brock Chisolm, The First Director of the World Health Organization from 1948 to 1953, is on record as saying, “To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family tradition, national patriotism, and religious dogmas. . . The reinterpretation and eventual eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training, the substitution of intelligent and rational thinking for faith in the certainties of the old people, these are the belated objectives. . . for charting the changes in human behavior. In addition to destroying man’s basic loyalties to family, nation and religion, the nation must be conditioned to the belief that less is better than more. The standard of living of those in the affluent nations must be reduced. This will be done by a slow, gradual process of conditioning the citizens of the rich nations to survive on less than they produce.” [3]

The policies of these Marxists has been adopted by the American liberal, and through the agenda of the democrat party, the programming of The West has been instituted in the educational system. We have been told that education is aimed at teaching children reading, writing, and arithmetic, and long ago that was truly the goal of education. Those seeking to change the fabric of the American system, however, believe that education has a more important function.

Today’s students, after years of public education, score among the lowest in the world. Graduates are unable to properly read and write. That is because the basics of education are not the goal, and therefore those skills are not properly taught. The students are not expected to learn to read, write, and perform arithmetic. The school system has instead gradually evolved into a means of introducing the children to statist philosophies that include Secular Humanism, pluralism, and socialism/communism.

John Dewey, the so-called father of Progressive Education, believed that “There is no God and no soul. Hence, there are no needs for the props of traditional religion. With dogma and creed excluded then immutable truth is also dead and buried. There is no room for fixed, natural law or permanent absolutes.” [4]

The road to an America operating on the concept of collectivism, and to accept a socialist national philosophy necessary for the nation to be willing to join a global order, reasoned the statist, must be achieved by destroying the old system that is anchored in the Constitution, the Christian faith, and a system of morals. Therefore, the Constitution, Christianity, and any system of morals anchored in Biblical teachings, must be eradicated.

This philosophy that has taken hold of the American liberal left is consistent with the teachings of communism. Vladimir Lenin said, “We must combat religion. Down with religion. Long live atheism. The spread of atheism is our chief task. Communism abolishes eternal truths. It abolishes all religion and morality.” [5]

The progressives aim to teach the children that there is no right and wrong. The children are special, can do no wrong, and can be anything they want to be when they grow up if they just want it bad enough. There are no winners and losers, so in games it is wrong to keep score. After all, we don’t want to injure a child’s precious self-esteem. The government, to protect the children from the sting of failure, criticism, or harsh circumstances will provide equality in the results they encounter through programs, entitlements, and regulations. All the federal government asks for in return is the student’s undying loyalty to the federal government, and the political ideology that provides these things.

The schools teach that there are no values through programs like sex education. The student is taught that whatever he desires or pleasures is proper to take. Madlyn Murray O’Hair got the Supreme Court to remove prayer from school as the religion of secular humanism oozed its way into the curriculum in totality. A teacher cannot mention Creationism for fear of being removed from the system, but is required to teach the theory of evolution regardless of the teacher’s beliefs, or the preferences of the parents. A child cannot receive an aspirin without parental approval, but the system is urged to provide the children with contraception or abortions without the knowledge of the parents. In California, the FAIR Act beginning in 2012, will require teachers to teach students the history of the homosexual movement, along with issues such as same-sex marriage that are dear to the hearts of the homosexual lobby, receive favorable treatment in social studies textbooks, instructional materials, and classroom curricula. In short, the education system, under the guiding eye of progressivism, is changing the knowledge of the past by revising it, or striking the truth from the curriculum.

“Give us one generation of small children to train to manhood and womanhood and we will set up the Bolshevist form of the Soviet Government.” – American Communist Party slogan, 1919. [6]

In Germany, Hitler outlawed home schooling (a law that is still on the books today in Germany), and used education to further the NAZI philosophy. In a speech delivered in 1939, Hitler proclaimed, “When an opponent declares: ‘I will not come over to your side,’ I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to us already. What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.” [7]

The American communists agreed, as well. The Tenth Plank of the Communist Manifesto is “Free Education For All.”

William Z. Foster, the National Chairman of the Communist Party U.S.A. in 1932, wrote a book entitled “Toward a Soviet America.” In the book he wrote: “Among the elementary measures the American Soviet government will adopt to further the cultural revolution are the following: the schools, colleges, universities will be coordinated and grouped under a National Department of Education and its state and local branches. The studies will be revolutionalized, being cleansed of religious, patriotic and other features of bourgeois ideology.” [8]

Big Government understands that it can control the education of the young very easily, because nobody can argue against a good education. Once they have the younger generation in their education system, they can then mold those minds to adopt the statist economic and social agenda. Once that generation has been programmed to believe the same thing as the progressive socialists, there will be no opposition to The State.

Today’s liberal progressives work to force conformity in the education system by labeling the children with a variety of ailments (ADD, ADHD, etc.) that are behaviors that actually run in line with children simply being children, and then blaming the individualism of the student on poor diet and unbalanced chemicals in their brains. The establishment dictates to the parents how the children should be fed, and a massive amount of the children have been drugged to ensure they fall into the compliance dictated by the education system. Through these techniques, combined with the utopian curriculum, the schools are molding the character of the children to conform with their standards. The students are being taught that their parents are incompetent, but they will be happy in the long run because the government will tell them that it is so. The student is being told their individualism is a disease, or a learning disability, but through drugs or proper psychological sessions, they will learn to properly conform to the standards set forth by the progressive education system.

If the parents dare to oppose what the schools are doing, the government will then deem those parents negligent, or abusive, and remove the children from the home.

In the fall of 1970, six children were removed from their parents and placed in a foster home because the parents refused to send them to a public school teaching “sex education” in conflict with their religious beliefs. [9]

In 1972, a father lost his daughter when he refused to allow her to be bussed into what he perceived was a high crime area. The judge fined the father. [10]

In August of 1981, a pastor’s children were forced to go back to the school he had taken them out of because he felt the school was exposing his children to homosexuality and drugs in violation of his religious beliefs. [11]

In 2008, a California judge ordered the children of parents Phillip and Mary Long in Los Angeles to attend public schools, rather than be homeschooled, despite the parent’s opposition to the anti-Christian influences in California’s public schools. [12]

In 2009, a New Hampshire child, age 10, was ordered into government-run public school for having “sincerely held” religious beliefs. The case arose out of a disagreement between the parents regarding the child’s schooling. The court order stated: “According to the guardian ad litem’s further report and testimony, the counselor found Amanda to lack some youthful characteristics. She appeared to reflect her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith.” The guardian also noted that Amanda’s relationship with her father suffered because she did not think he loved her as much as he said he did due to the fact that he refused to “adopt her religious beliefs.” In other words, the mother’s homeschooling was unacceptable because it was “too religious.”

According to the court order, the guardian concluded that Amanda’s “interests, and particularly her intellectual and emotional development, would be best served by exposure to a public school setting in which she would be challenged to solve problems presented by a group learning situation and…Amanda would be best served by exposure to different points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior.” [13]

Last Spring, Mississippi state judge issued an order to public school attendance officers in his judicial district to provide the names of all homeschoolers there. Though no reason was given, the assumption was for the same reason the government wants to know the names of all gun owners – for the purpose of later confiscation or court orders. [14]

German White, once an official with the U.S. Office of Child Development, said while he held that position, “Parents don’t mean to be incompetent but they are, and the remedy is federal establishment of acceptable standards of child raising.” [15]

Earlier this year, Sarah Knopp, a Los Angeles teachers union leader and Megan Behrent a New York City teacher affiliated with the International Socialist Organization, were caught on video explaining how to push Marxism in the public school classroom. [16]

The teachers were trained to teach Marxism, and the students have been programmed to fight for it.

The Occupy Protesters are the result of the long campaign by liberal progressivism to create a generation programmed to seek change, to demand progressivism/Marxism, and to be willing to fight the communist revolution. They were told they were special, that all things are equal, and that if they just do what the government tells them they will be fine and their precious little feelings won’t be hurt. But now these kids have grown up, and what they want has not fallen into their laps. In fact, they are realizing that they are not only not “special,” but that the real world is harsh and they were not properly equipped to handle it. They don’t know how to cope with defeat, don’t know how to rise to the challenge, they are easily offended, and they have been left behind by those that are the achievers. Government hasn’t even come through for them like they expected. So, out of their anger, they lash out at who they were programmed to hate: Wall Street, Corporations, the Wealthy, the Bourgeois.

This generation has been duped to believe that Marxism is their freedom, so they cry out for bigger government, for the fall of capitalism, and stand ready to applaud the new liberal progressive order of the future.

As Queen Amidala said in Star Wars, Episode III: “So, this is how liberty dies. With thunderous applause.” [17]

Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

[1] Alan Stang, “Zbig Brother,” American Opinion, (February, 1978), page 6.

[2] A. Ralph Epperson, The Unseen Hand, Publius Press, Tucson AZ: (1985), page 7.

[3] The Utah Independent, (September 1977).

[4] “Education,” Saturday Review, (August 10, 1974), page 84.

[5] A. Ralph Epperson, The Unseen Hand, Publius Press, Tucson AZ: (1985), Page 379.

[6] R.M. Whitney, Reds in America, (Western Islands, Boston, Los Angeles: (1970), page 55.

[7] William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Simon and Schuster, New York: (1960), page 249.

[8] The Review of the News, (September 10, 1980), page 37.

[9] The Review of the News, (May 24, 1972, page 31.

[10] The Review of the News, (May 24, 1972), page 32.

[11] The Arizona Daily Star, (August 19, 1981), page A-7.

[12] Judge orders homeschoolers into government education – World Net Daily

[13] New Hampshire Court orders Christian homeschooled girl to attend public school – OneNewsNow

[14] Shocker! On his own, judge demands homeschool student IDs – World Net Daily

[15] The Review of the News, (March 10, 1976), page 47.

[16] Union Teachers Explain How to Push Marxism in the Classroom – You Tube

[17] Liberty Dies – You Tube

Leave a comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,635 other followers

%d bloggers like this: