Saturday, October 20, 2012
Cannabis Oil cures certain cancers. We said in the 80's, "I'll bet if pot cured cancer, they would make it legal in a minute!" We need a CHANGE IN THE PHARMACOLOGY SCHEDULING of Cannabis as Schedule I "no medical use". Schedule I prevents the "mainstream" research needed for the AMA to once again find favor with Cannabis.
The Green Association for Sustainability
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Although I applaud the Pennsylvania Commonwealth court’s decision to withhold implementation of the Voter Identification requirement until after the 2012 Presidential election, I assert that it does not go far enough.
On October 2, 2012, Commonwealth Court Judge Robert E. Simpson Jr. withheld implementation of the recently enacted controversial voter identification requirement until after the 2012 Presidential Election. On hearing the ruling, both sides celebrated victories. The attorney for the ACLU called it a "huge win", while the State was allowed to continue running advertisements erroneously stating that voter ID would be required at the ballot box. Poll workers are instructed to ask for a government-issued picture identification from voters. Should a prospective voter not have such identification, they are given information on how to obtain such an ID, and then allowed to vote. A previous ruling from Simpson allowed those without ID to vote provisionally, their vote valid only if they return with identification within six days. This was overturned with the suspension of the regulation until after the November election.
According to the Huffington Post, these voter id requirements are based on the faulty premise that voter fraud is a threat to the election process. These Republican-sponsored regulations have been place by 19 states since 2010, based on the myth that to function in a "modern society", one must have a government issued identification card. Yet according to the Huffington Post, the Republican's own research does not bear this out. Researchers found that of 600 million votes cast in Presidential elections since 2000, voter fraud has been alleged only 2,068 times. Only ten cases of actual in-person voter fraud have been identified, which calculates to approximately 1.666 e -8 (.000000016%).
The same study shows that nearly 11% of the population does not have such identification for a variety of reasons, including disability, age, poverty, or lack of transportation. They may live too far from an "official" identification procurement agency, or may not be able to recover their birth certificate or other required information. They may not have any need for a state issued drivers license. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/gop-voter-id-data-voter_n_1773142.html ) Although governments may wish to have the vital statistics, fingerprints and a picture of every citizen, they do not. And in this journalist's opinion, they should not.
Even in debating their defense for voter identification, the Republicans concede that voter fraud is rare. "What in the heavens is wrong with showing an ID at polls?” said Bill Denny, a Republican congressman from Mississippi, further illustrating the party's disconnect with the reality of America.
Wrong is that these conservative based restrictions on voting rights set precedents for more specious regulations, all of which have the ultimate effect of discouragement from voting to disenfranchisement of entire demographics. Historically, these demographics are most often minorities, women, the poor, elderly, and disabled, for reasons that range from health and finance, education and literacy, and even include family social dynamics. Traditionally, these are often Democratic based voters.
The continued airing of advertisements claiming that identification will be required at the polls will serve to cause even more confusion to the complicated ideology and procedures of electoral politics.
Judge Simpson gave a timely eleventh hour ruling on an issue which thumbs its nose at fifty years of civil rights.
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Read more from Colleen at http://mccoolportraits.com/2010rebelwithjustcause.htm#Ooooops
My Mom survived cancer but died from pharmaceutical damage to her organs. If I'd only known then what I know now...
The truth is out and spreading like wildfire! Cannabis cures cancer! This truth will not be suppressed, until every household knows the clamor, the swelling protest, exposing dark, dirty secrets of heinous crimes against humanity! Does anyone you know or love have cancer? It is down right sinister, a crime against humanity, for the medicinal uses of cannabis to be suppressed.
An internet search for "THC cancer" brings up thousands of research papers from all over the world. Ooooops! Who spilled the beans? SCIENTISTS and PATIENTS all over the world, that's who! (http://mccoolportraits.com/2010rebelwithjustcause.htm#Ooooops)
Big pharmacy lobbyist have paid for road blocks to cannabis research. For all these decades, the medical profession has been treating cancer patients to killer cocktails of antiangiogenesis drugs that cut off the blood supply to tumors while also killing healthy cells! Ifosfamide destroys the patients bladder and kidneys. And as a last hope treatment, thaledomide, the sleeping pill that produced clubfeet and webbed fingers will also starve tumors. These poison drip cocktails come with side effects you can count on to make life no longer worth living. Radiation is another poisonous, "cure" and surgery often triggers the cancer to spread. We all know someone who has suffered these hellish treatments. One day these, "cures," will be looked on as a step back to the dark ages in medicine.
Monday, July 23, 2012
I recently received a post on Facebook, from a friend swearing to “Vote Republican” in protest to a mock-news clip. I was about to shoot a quick comment back, but did some research first, which took me deep into the darkest corners of the ICN (Internet Conspiracy Network).
Reading for myself Paul Joseph Watson’s writings, including his in-text linked articles, begs the question to my Facebook friend, “Why the hell are you even reading this trash, and worse yet, how can anyone take this seriously?”
I have to agree with @Alton Burns’ condemnation of both the “newscaster” and the author of the July 2012 article that is fallaciously warranted.
Watson claims that the United States Military (under Commander in Chief, Barack Obama) through a yea vote to a United Nations Arms Treaty, has begun preparation to eliminate private gun ownership in the United States, with an ultimate goal of a Military State (2012, Watkins).
Watson comes to this alarming, alarmist, and anti-Obama hyperbole through the linkage of three documents, separated by time and space. Early July of this year, Fox News published the article “UN arms treaty could put U.S. gun owners in foreign sights, say critics” (July, FoxNews). The article alluded without support that the Treaty had “roots” in a 1961 report from the State Department on Disarmament. In reality, the treaty may require that the UN receive the names of registered gun owners in the United States.
Less than a week later, Watson had made ethereal connections between the UN Treaty, and documents he had written about on July 6 including a US Military training manual for response to wide-spread riot or civil unrest, with a goal to “restore order” under extreme large scale public disaster conditions. This document is part of a six-credit continuing education course for military personnel, and is not an unusual “manual”, as one exists in every administration for every possible crisis. This is common in business too: For example, hospitals routinely practice “Triage” and Emergency Disaster drills, and manuals exist for every possible scenario. In fact, the ICD-9 coding system used for analytics and insurance reimbursement includes a code for injury by “terrorist”. Even our children have fire drills regularly at school, and the teachers also follow a manual that would include worst case scenarios, such as happened at Columbine. The manuals are written with the hopes and prayers that they will never have to be used; yet should disaster happen, first responders will be trained, as was prophetically witnessed recently in Aurora, Colorado Movie Theater Massacre.
Watson offers no premise for his claim, no statement or warrant that is a generally accepted statement. His support, other than his own writings, is tenuously tied to his conclusion. Any ability he may have to convince is based on an emotional appeal by continuing the slippery slope fallacy that was introduced in the Fox News article, and by placing blame directly on Barack Obama, who was still in diapers when the Cold War document was drafted. The truth, however, is much more benign, as the Fox News article at least reminds us, a UN Treaty must receive a full 2/3 Senate approval before accepted. The President just doesn’t have this much power in a tripartite government!
The “newscaster” in the YouTube video, who continually interjected personal alarmist comments between reading selected clips of the 1961 document. This 50+ year old document was written during the cold war, and related to nuclear weapons and nation states.
Although Watson’s article is eerily prophetic in the wake of the last weekend’s mass murder with an easily obtainable assault rifle, his logic is still flawed and naïve of the slow-moving, cumbersome, and inefficient international bureaucracy…not to mention the inability of our own legislative bodies ability to accomplish tasks.
Rest easy. No one is taking your guns. The Bill of Rights have withstood 200+ years of assault, and has remained intact. It will continue, at least for some time to come.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
California has six cannabis reform initiatives competing to qualify for the 2012 ballot.
Repeal Cannabis Prohibition Act of 2012With a static web site listing 4 changes this bill would make, I found the information to be “generic” and understated. The four items noted are:
1. Repeals all criminal prohibitions and penalties on cannabis related conduct for adults, 19 and over
2. Mandates strict rules against unlawful distribution to and by minors, driving impaired.
The “driving impaired” clause has had opponents in many states, as the testing for cannabis intoxication is imperfect, and many of these bills require blood or urine tests to determine the “level of intoxication”. The issue should be driving under “impairment”, which can be determined through standard road-side tests, and should not require the collection of blood or urine
3. Maintains medical rights for patients under Prop 215 and SB 420
4. Vests the newly created California Cannabis Commission with the regulation of commercial cannabis
Regulate Marijuana Like Wine,
Medical Marijuana Regulation, Control and Taxation Act of 2012 Initiative,
California Cannabis Hemp and Health Initiative of 2012,
Marijuana Penalties Act of 2012
Patient Reasonable Access Act.
ASA Forum>Access Southern California>California Cannabis Initiative Forum. susansoiree, SSDP Los Angeles 2012-02-22 08:12:31
RCPA 2012. http://w.ww.causes.com/causes/650028-repeal-cannabis-prohibition-2012/about
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
After passing two unenforcable Compassionate Use laws in the 90's, and full cannabis medicalization in 2010, Arizona has failed to open dispensaries, and created extraordinary requirements (such as submitting three years of Arizona Tax Returns, and other irrelevant and illegal financial requirements that would disenfrancise the patient population deriving the most benefit from dispensaries).
In New Jersey, another state with Medicalization and Compassionate Use laws, an M.S. patient appealed his arrest for growing cannabis to the state's Supreme Court, which summarily sentenced him to five years in prison.
Even after Compassionate Use laws have been passed, Medical Marijuana patients are still being arrested and imprisoned with the judicial rational that State administered dispensaries have not been implemented.
Travesties such as this may be expected in the yahoo states that have yet to pass compassionate use laws; but they have become much too common in states who's citizenry has approved and supported the medical use of cannabis. The fact that state-level medical marijuana administrations have failed in developing dispensaries should have no bearing on the impementation of the law, and acceptance of the law by the judicial system.
Advocacy and activist efforts would do well to define and promote medicalization and compassionate use plans that give more than lip service to the voters' wishes. Voters should be encouraged to deny passage of propositions and plans that rely heavily on government organization, are full of loop-holes to stall implementation, that have restrictive and irrelevant application requirements, and (especially) forbid patients to grow their own plants. Medical marijuana laws must be fair, accessible, and consistent, but most of all, they should be implementable.
The Green Association for Sustainability
Monday, January 23, 2012
Check out Mpora Gear
Thursday, January 19, 2012
His platform? LEGALIZE MARIJUANA. Now, before you run out and put a Libertarian in the White House, you may want to find out what Libertarianism is about, and then you know WHY he wants to legalize marijuana. Libertarians want to eliminate the prohibition not because they believe that cannabis has true value, but because they don't believe in government administration.
Gov Gary Johnson Election Platform: It's Time to End the Drug War
1. Gary Johnson: Does he REALLY think that as Prez, he would have that much power to overturn one hundred years of government deception, to open the can on a century of the federal government's "War on Drugs", and to pull back the covers to reveal the true cost of human life and suffering that the prohibition of Marijuana has wrought. Too many high power people are making too much money by maintaining the drug war status quo, to allow a President to thwart them.
2. Would you be willing to give your NAME, ADDRESS, DATE OF BIRTH, SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER, LICENSE NUMBER, MOTHERS MAIDEN NAME, and FINGERPRINTS to obtain a "permit" to purchase marijuana from the Government, or government regulated pharmaceutical? No one who really thinks about it says yes.
I won't waste your time with info you already know, or personal experiences we've all had. I believe that human beings are intended to ingest cannabis, having been created/evolved with Cannabinoid receptors in our human biology, The health, emotional, and social benefits of cannabis could be a positive forward move for humanity, but the benefits have been eliminated by prohibition. Yet, I also believe that LEGALIZATION will play into the hands of the Prohibitionists. Legalization allows for taxation, and taxation allows for regulation...and we already know how Federal Administrations work/don't work. The answer is in MEDICALIZATION and DECRIMINALIZATION. I promise that Federal legalization will NOT allow you to "grow your own", just as you cannot have your own alcohol still. Read "The Case Against Legalization" at http://sustainablygreen.blogspot.com/2010/07/case-against-legalization.html
The Green Association for Sustainability