Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
41

      

By Catherine J. Frompovich



Astroturfing is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message or organization (e.g., political, advertising, religious or public relations) to make it appear as though it originates from and is supported by grassroots participants. — Wikipedia


***


The basic tool for manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words. — Philip K. Dick


***


A lie told often enough becomes the truth. —Vladimir Ilyich Lenin


***


When it comes to controlling human beings, there is no better instrument than lies. Because you see, humans live by beliefs.  And beliefs can be manipulated. The power to manipulate beliefs is the only thing that counts. — Michael Ende [1]


***


Knowledge is power. — Sir Francis Bacon, Meditationes Sacrae and Human Philosophy (1597)



         



      

Just about every aspect of science, medicine, pharmacology, technology, governance, politics – even religion to a certain degree – have “spin masters” who produce and promote embellished stories, consensus science, fraud or downright lies deliberately falsifying information those vested interests [control freaks, New World Order crowd, Black Ops, government agencies, the Shadow Government and the Deep State] want, and need, to control what will become “accepted norms and memes” for monitoring, controlling and governing human society, ethics, law and even your personal beliefs!


Probably no time in human history has the above agenda been more active – and successful to a point due to Internet censors, corporate influences, control and money – than the current unbelievable times in which we live.  The ‘actors’ are known as trolls and astroturfers who often are paid for their criminal actions against the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, something not fully recognized by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. law!


“Political correctness” acted as greased lightning in promoting a ‘cottage industry’ often performed by folks in their pajamas pounding out what’s become known as “fake news.”   Why?  Is there some psychological aspect to their personalities that propels them to do it, which necessarily may not be the money they earn?  Something in their psyche apparently drives them, something I figured out a long time ago and, therefore, realized it was not worth my time and effort to engage them because they more often than not, were looking to have their own sordid jollies fulfilled.


One of the most prominent astroturfing fields to evolve is vaccine/vaccination safety and efficacy issues. 


It’s hotter than red hot chili peppers, but also is vicious due to various factors, the least of which probably is Big Pharma’s apparent intended control over almost every aspect of human life, down to Pharma’s influences on Medicaid, Medicare, prescription drug pricing/availability/middle-men contracts, and possibly even eliminating your seeing a medical doctor in favor of a nurse practitioner, if various pharmaceutical plans in the works are allowed to materialize utilizing Pharma’s influences at federal health regulatory agencies!


So what propels an individual to partake in such craziness?  Fame, fortune or psychopathology?


Psychopathology is the more likely driving force.  Why?  Well, here is some information one of the researchers I network with, Gary Kohls, MD (a retired family physician from Duluth, MN; researcher/journalist/author), shared with me and for which I truly am grateful: his article of March 13, 2019 for which he generously gave me permission to quote verbatim:


“Our research suggests that, for those (trolls) with sadistic personalities, (their) ideal self may be a villain of chaos and mayhem”


A 2014 psychology journal article done by a group of Canadian researchers studied the personality traits of internet trolls. The well-designed study was published in the Journal of Personality and Individual Differences. It was titled Trolls Just Want to Have Fun”.


This writer was able to access the PDF for the article here from which I took the following:


“These findings provide a preliminary glimpse into the mechanism by which sadism fosters trolling behavior.” [Pg. 5]


However, Dr. Kohls goes on with, “The article included these comments:



Trolling correlated positively with sadism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism”;


“Internet trolls engage in the practice of behaving in a destructive or disruptive manner in a social setting on the internet with no apparent purpose”;


“Trolls operate as agents of chaos on the Internet”; 


“Cyber-trolling appears to be an internet manifestation of everyday sadism”;


“If an unfortunate person falls into their trap, trolling intensifies for further “merciless amusement”; 




Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   
   





“Both trolls and sadists feel glee at the distress of others. Sadists just want to have fun and the internet is their playground”;


“Sadists tend to troll because they enjoy it;


Sadists just want to have fun and the internet is their playground.”



Here are some telling comments from some of the trolls that participated in the study:



“I enjoy physically hurting people.”


“I enjoy making jokes at the expense of others.”


“I enjoy playing the villain in games and torturing other characters.”


“I like to troll people in forums or the comments section of websites.” 


“I enjoy griefing other players in multiplayer games.’’ 


‘‘The more beautiful and pure a thing is, the more satisfying it is to corrupt.”



And from the Discussion section of the paper:



Consequently, antisocial individuals have greater opportunities to connect with similar others, and to pursue their personal brand of “self-expression” that they did before the advent of the internet. Online identity construction may be important to examine in research on trolling, especially in terms of antisocial identity. Its role in trolling behavior.


The troll persona appears to be a malicious case of a virtual avatar, reflecting both actual personality and one’s ideal self. Our research suggests that, for those with sadistic personalities, that ideal self may be a villain of chaos and mayhem the online Trickster we fear, envy and love to hate: the cyber-troll. 



As I told Dr. Kohls in my query email about the above, it





American Natural Superfood - Free Sample



[….] addresses the underlying, hidden “belly of the beast” at all levels of the Corporatocracy, which propels modern life! AND which is the modus operandi of the new consensus science, plus its ultimate prize: CONTROL and DOMINATION.


Source: CJF personal email 3-19-19


If only the Corporate-controlled media would realize how they have sold out the citizens of the USA, and the world, by utilizing fake news, trolls and astroturfers!


1:38 minutes



https://youtu.be/ksb3KD6DfSI?t=35


References:


[1] http://www.wiseoldsayings.com/manipulation-quotes/ for all quotations


Image credit: Experience Life


Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.


Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on Amazon.com.


Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook.


Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)


Catherine’s NEW book: Eat To Beat Disease, Foods Medicinal Qualities ©2016 Catherine J Frompovich is now available


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


Next post


      
   

42

      

By Michael Maharrey


On Monday, Governor Asa Hutchinson signed a bill that reforms Arkansas’ asset forfeiture laws to prohibit the state from taking a person’s property without a criminal conviction in most situations. Current law already takes a step toward shutting a loophole that would allow state and local police to circumvent the more stringent state asset forfeiture process by passing cases off to the feds.


Sen Bart Hester (R-Cave Springs) introduced Senate Bill 308 (SB308) on Feb. 12. The new law specifically ends civil asset forfeiture in most Arkansas cases and replaces it with a criminal procedure. Under the law, prosecutors cannot proceed with forfeiture without a criminal conviction in all but a handful of cases.


There shall be no civil judgment under this subchapter and no property shall be forfeited unless the person from whom the property is seized is convicted of a felony offense that related to the property being seized and that permits the forfeiture of the property.


         



      

The Institute for Justice gave Arkansas asset forfeiture laws a D- grade, calling them “awful.”


The House passed SB308 by a 93-0 vote. The Senate previously approved the measure 35-0. With Gov. Hutchinson’s signature, the new law will go into effect 90 days after the legislature adjourns.


NECESSARY


While some people believe the Supreme Court “ended asset forfeiture,” the recent opinion in Timbs v. Indiana ended nothing. Without further action, civil asset forfeiture remains. Additionally, as law professor Ilya Somin noted, the Court left an important issue unresolved. What exactly counts as an “excessive” in the civil forfeiture context?


“That is likely to be a hotly contested issue in the lower federal courts over the next few years. The ultimate effect of today’s decision depends in large part on how that question is resolved. If courts rule that only a few unusually extreme cases qualify as excessive, the impact of Timbs might be relatively marginal.”


Going forward, opponents of civil asset forfeiture could wait and see how lower federal courts will address this “over the next few years,” or they can do what a number of states have already taken steps to do, end the practice on a state level, and opt out of the federal equitable sharing program as well.


FEDERAL LOOPHOLE


While the current asset forfeiture process in Arkansas desperately needs reforming, the state has already taken a step toward withdrawing from a federal program that allows state and local police to circumvent the state process. This will become key if SB308 becomes law.


This is particularly important in light of a policy directive issued in July 2017 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions for the Department of Justice (DOJ).


A federal program known as “Equitable Sharing” allows prosecutors to bypass more stringent state asset forfeiture laws by passing cases off to the federal government through a process known as adoption. The DOJ directive reiterates full support for the equitable sharing program, directs federal law enforcement agencies to aggressively utilize it, and sets the stage to expand it in the future.




Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   
   





Law enforcement agencies can circumvent more strict state forfeiture laws by claiming cases are federal in nature. Under these arrangements, state officials simply hand cases over to a federal agency, participate in the case, and then receive up to 80 percent of the proceeds. However, when states merely withdraw from participation, the federal directive loses its impact.


Until recently, California faced this situation. The state has some of the strongest state-level restrictions on civil asset forfeiture in the country, but state and local police were circumventing the state process by passing cases to the feds. According to a report by the Institute for Justice, Policing for Profit, California ranked as the worst offender of all states in the country between 2000 and 2013. In other words, California law enforcement was passing off a lot of cases to the feds and collecting the loot. The state closed the loophole in 2016.


Arkansas law prohibits the transfer of property to the feds without judicial approval.



 (1) No state or local law enforcement agency may transfer any property seized by the state or local agency to any federal entity for forfeiture under federal law unless the circuit court having jurisdiction over the property enters an order, upon petition by the prosecuting attorney, authorizing the property to be transferred to the federal entity.


(2) The transfer shall not be approved unless it reasonably appears that the activity giving rise to the investigation or seizure involves more than one (1) state or the nature of the investigation or seizure would be better pursued under federal law.



As the Tenth Amendment Center previously reported the federal government inserted itself into the asset forfeiture debate in California. The feds clearly want the policy to continue.




American Natural Superfood - Free Sample



Why?


We can only guess. But perhaps the feds recognize paying state and local police agencies directly in cash for handling their enforcement would reveal their weakness. After all, the federal government would find it nearly impossible to prosecute its unconstitutional “War on Drugs” without state and local assistance. Asset forfeiture “equitable sharing” provides a pipeline the feds use to incentivize state and local police to serve as de facto arms of the federal government by funneling billions of dollars into their budgets.


NEXT STEP


While current law does limit law enforcement’s ability to transfer forfeiture cases to the federal government by requiring a judicial order, it still leaves a loophole open to circumvent the requirement for a criminal conviction. There is no guarantee judges won’t rubber-stamp prosecutors’ requests. Arkansas should effectively withdraw from the federal equitable sharing program altogether. We can suggest the following language for a bill in the next legislative session:



A local, county or state law enforcement agency shall not refer, transfer or otherwise relinquish possession of property seized under state law to a federal agency by way of adoption of the seized property or other means by the federal agency for the purpose of the property’s forfeiture under the federal Controlled Substances Act, Public Law 91 513-Oct. 27, 1970, under the federal Controlled Substances Act or other federal law.


In a case in which the aggregate net equity value of the property and currency seized has a value of $50,000 or less, excluding the value of contraband, a local, county or state law enforcement agency or participant in a joint task force or other multijurisdictional collaboration with the federal government (agency) shall transfer responsibility for the seized property to the state prosecuting authority for forfeiture under state law.


If the federal government prohibits the transfer of seized property and currency to the state prosecuting authority as required by paragraph (1) and instead requires the property be transferred to the federal government for forfeiture under federal law, the agency is prohibited from accepting payment of any kind or distribution of forfeiture proceeds from the federal government.



This article was sourced from the Tenth Amendment Center.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


Next post


      
   
43

      

By Patrick Wood


Internationally, the Green New Deal first appeared in England in 2008 with a 44-page report by the Green New Deal Group, simply called A Green New Deal. An excerpt appears below, concluding with a download button and a supporting video produced by a sister organization called the New Economics Foundation.


The board of the Green New Deal Group is stacked with radical members of the green movement, including Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth:




Larry Elliott, Economics Editor of the Guardian

Colin Hines, Co-Director of Finance for the Future, former head of Greenpeace International’s Economics Unit, policy advisor to Caroline Lucas

Tony Juniper, former Executive Director of Friends of the Earth

Jeremy Leggett, founder and Chairman of Solarcentury and SolarAid

Caroline Lucas, Green Party MEP (Politician)

Richard Murphy, Co-Director of Finance for the Future and Director, Tax Research LLP

Ann Pettifor, Fellow at New Economics Foundation, former head of the Jubilee 2000 debt relief campaign, Campaign Director of Operation Noah

Charles Secrett, University of Cambridge, Advisor on Sustainable Development, former Director of Friends of the Earth

Andrew Simms, Policy Director,  New Economics Foundation), board member of Greenpeace.

         



      

The Green New Deal is the total encapsulation of Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy, in a political form. All of its rhetoric is about economics but the plea is for political action to allow it to happen. As with the Trilateral Commission in 1973, which claimed it was never about politics but rather economics, they hijacked the U.S. Executive Branch in order to execute their economic policies. It was never about political power per se, but rather about economic accumulation.


The global elite are lurking behind the Green New Deal crowd, which has become their ‘useful idiots’ to promote their schemes of Agenda 21, 2030 Agenda, New Urban Agenda, etc. Real environmentalists who attended the 1992 Agenda 21 conference in Rio De Janeiro wrote a book called The Earth Brokers in 1994. They saw through the Agenda 21 scam and wrote:


We argue that UNCED (UN Conference on Economic Development) has boosted precisely the type of industrial development that is destructive for the environment, the planet, and its inhabitants. We see how, as a result of UNCED, the rich will get richer, the poor poorer, while more and more of the planet is destroyed in the process.


All Americans, including those involved in the Green New Deal, should wake up and smell the organic coffee: 100 percent of the ecological hysteria is fake and has always been fake.  Remember that it was the Club of Rome who openly claimed authorship of global warming in its 1991 book,  The First Global Revolution:


In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill.



A Green New Deal


The global economy is facing a ​‘triple crunch’. It is a combination of a credit-fuelled financial crisis, accelerating climate change and soaring energy prices underpinned by an encroaching peak in oil production.


These three overlapping events threaten to develop into a perfect storm, the like of which has not been seen since the Great Depression. To help prevent this from happening we are proposing a Green New Deal.


This entails re-regulating finance and taxation plus a huge transformational programme aimed at substantially reducing the use of fossil fuels and in the process tackling the unemployment and decline in demand caused by the credit crunch. It involves policies and novel funding mechanisms that will reduce emissions contributing to climate change and allow us to cope better with the coming energy shortages caused by peak oil.


The triple crunch of financial meltdown, climate change and ​‘peak oil’ has its origins firmly rooted in the current model of globalisation. Financial deregulation has facilitated the creation of almost limitless credit. With this credit boom have come irresponsible and often fraudulent patterns of lending, creating inflated bubbles in assets such as property, and powering environmentally unsustainable consumption.


This approach hit the buffers of insolvency and unrepayable debts on what we think of as ​‘debtonation day’, 9 August 2007, when the banks suddenly fully understood the scale of debts on the balance sheets of other banks, and stopped lending to each other.


In the same year, natural disasters struck body blows to entire national economies, and rising prices began to alert the world to the potential scarcity of oil. At both ends of the climatic spectrum, Australia saw a prolonged drought decimate its domestic grain production, and Mexico saw floods wipe out the agricultural production of an entire large state.


In the oil markets, growing numbers of whistleblowers pointed to the probability of an early peak in production, and a possible subsequent collapse of production. The International Energy Agency (IEA) said an oil crunch is likely in 2012.






Drawing our inspiration from Franklin D. Roosevelt’s courageous programme launched in the wake of the Great Crash of 1929, we believe that a positive course of action can pull the world back from economic and environmental meltdown.


The Green New Deal that we are proposing consists of two main strands. First, it outlines a structural transformation of the regulation of national and international financial systems, and major changes to taxation systems. And, second, it calls for a sustained programme to invest in and deploy energy conservation and renewable energies, coupled with effective demand management.


In this way we believe we can begin to stabilise the current triple-crunch crisis. We can also lay the foundations for the emergence of a set of resilient lowcarbon economies, rich in jobs and based on independent sources of energy supply. This will create a more stable economic environment in which there is a lot more local production and distribution, and enhanced national security.


In the first half of this report we examine the financial, economic and environmental landscapes that are the backdrop to this triple crisis. In the second half, we propose a series of policies that can be used to tackle the problems we have identified.


THE GREEN NEW DEAL


We call our programme a Green New Deal – one that combines stabilisation in the short term with longer-term restructuring of the financial, taxation and energy systems. The Green New Deal is international in outlook, but requires action at local, national, regional and global levels.


Focusing first on the specific needs of the UK, an interlocking programme of action needs to involve:



Executing a bold new vision for a low-carbon energy system that will include making ​‘every building a power station’. Involving tens of millions of properties, their energy efficiency will be maximised, as will the use of renewables to generate electricity. This will require a £50 billion-plus per year crash programme to be implemented as widely and rapidly as possible. We are calling for a programme of investment and a call to action as urgent and far-reaching as the US New Deal in the 1930s and the mobilisation for war in 1939.
Creating and training a ​‘carbon army’ of workers to provide the human resources for a vast environmental reconstruction programme. We want to see hundreds of thousands of these new high- and lower-skilled jobs created in the UK. It will be part of a wider shift from an economy narrowly focused on financial services and shopping to one that is an engine of environmental transformation. The UK has so far largely missed out on the boom in ​‘green collar’ jobs, with Germany already employing 250,000 in renewable energy alone.
Ensuring more realistic fossil fuel prices that include the cost to the environment, and are high enough to tackle climate change effectively by creating the economic incentive to drive efficiency and bring alternative fuels to market. This will provide funding for the Green New Deal and safety nets to those vulnerable to higher prices via rapidly rising carbon taxes and revenue from carbon trading. We advocate establishing an Oil Legacy Fund, paid for by a windfall tax on the profits of oil and gas companies. The monies raised would help deal with the effects of climate change and smooth the transition to a low-carbon economy.
Developing a wide-ranging package of other financial innovations and incentives to assemble the tens of billions of pounds that need to be spent. The focus should be on smart investments that not only finance the development of new, efficient energy infrastructure but also help reduce demand for energy, particularly among low-income groups, for example by improving home insulation. The science and technology needed to power an energy-and-transport revolution are already in place. But at present the funds to propel the latest advances into full-scale development are not.
Re-regulating the domestic financial system to ensure that the creation of money at low rates of interest is consistent with democratic aims, financial stability, social justice and environmental sustainability. Our initial proposals for financial renewal are inspired by those implemented in the 1930s. They involve the reduction of the Bank of England’s interest rate to help those borrowing to build a new energy and transport infrastructure, with changes in debt-management policy to enable reductions in interest rates across all government borrowing instruments. In parallel, to prevent inflation, we want to see much tighter controls on lending and on the generation of credit.
Breaking up the discredited financial institutions that have needed so much public money to prop them up in the latest credit crunch.We are calling for the forced demerger of large banking and finance groups. Retail banking should be split from both corporate finance (merchant banking) and from securities dealing. The demerged units should then be split into smaller banks. Mega banks make mega mistakes that affect us all. Instead of institutions that are ​‘too big to fail’, we need institutions that are small enough to fail without creating problems for depositors and the wider public.
Re-regulating and restricting the international finance sector to transform national economies and the global economy. Finance will have to be returned to its role as servant, not master, of the global economy, to dealing prudently with people’s savings and providing regular capital for productive and sustainable investment. Regulation of finance, and the restoration of policy autonomy to democratic government, implies the re-introduction of capital controls. These are vital if central banks and governments are to fix and determine one of the most important levers of the economy – interest rates
Subjecting all derivative products and other exotic instruments to official inspection. Only those approved should be permitted to be traded. Anyone trying to circumvent the rules by going offshore or on to the internet should face the simple and effective sanction of ​‘negative enforcement’ – their contracts would be made unenforceable in law. Ultimately our aim is an orderly downsizing of the financial sector in relation to the rest of the economy.
Minimising corporate tax evasion by clamping down on tax havens and corporate financial reporting. Tax should be deducted at source (i.e. from the country from which payment is made) for all income paid to financial institutions in tax havens. International accounting rules should be changed to eliminate transfer mispricing by requiring corporations to report on a country by-country basis. These measures will provide much-needed sources of public finance at a time when economic contraction is reducing conventional tax receipts.

We also urge the UK to take action at the international level to help build the orderly, well-regulated and supportive policy and financial environment that is required to restore economic stability and nurture environmental sustainability. Our Government’s objectives should include:



Allowing all nations far greater autonomy over domestic monetary policy (interest rates and money supply) and fiscal policy (government spending and taxation).
Setting a formal international target for atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations that keeps future temperature rises as far below 2°C as possible.
Delivering a fair and equitable international climate agreement to succeed the Kyoto Protocol in 2012.
Giving poorer countries the opportunity to escape poverty without fuelling global warming by helping to finance massive investment in climate-change adaptation and renewable energy.
Supporting the free and unconstrained transfer of new energy technologies to developing countries.



American Natural Superfood - Free Sample



In the words of France’s President Sarkozy, ​‘we have to put a stop to this financial system which is out of its mind and which has lost sight of its purpose.’ The Green New Deal will rekindle this vital sense of purpose, restoring public trust and refocusing the use of capital on public priorities and sustainability. In this way it can also help deliver a wide range of social benefits that can greatly improve quality of life in the future.


There is also an immediate imperative to restore some faith that society can survive the dreadful threats it now faces as a result of the triple crunch. Beyond that, we believe the Green New Deal can deliver a crucial national plan for a low-energy future and its provision on the ground. The absence of any such plan at present leaves the country very vulnerable.


There is no risk analysis of the peak-oil threat, and there is no contingency plan for what would happen if oil and/​or gas supplies collapsed rapidly. Our plan would include oversight and coordination for generating the funding from government, the energy industry and a range of private savings vehicles for investment in a vital multi-decade programme for the transition to a low-energy future. In short, it is a route map for the journey from energy and economic insecurity to one of energy and environmental security.


A Green New Deal– The first report of the Green New Deal Group


A Green New Deal, Green New Deal Group – UK


Listen to the Weekly Economics Podcast “What’s the Deal with the Green New Deal?” HERE.



You can read more from Patrick Wood at his site Technocracy News and Trends, where this article first appeared.


Image: University of Cambridge


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


      
   
44

      

By Derrick Broze


If governments and tech companies insist on censoring “offensive” content from the minds of the masses, it will lead to more censorship of free speech and a black market for banned material.


Over the last week, the Internet and news landscape has been filled with stories dissecting the shooting at the Al Noor Mosque and the Linwood Islamic Centre in Christchurch, New Zealand. Fifty people were murdered as a result of the shooting. Authorities and news pundits reacted to this disturbing act of violence in typical fashion: ignore inconvenient questions surrounding the incident, shut down all potential dissenters, and finally, call for more state control as the solution (including the obligatory call for gun control). However, this particular shooting in New Zealand has helped reveal the truly scary lengths governments will go to in their attempt to control the narrative.


         



      

What sets this shooting apart from others is that the New Zealand shooter livestreamed the massacre via Facebook where it was viewed more than 4,000 times before being taken down. Video of the shooting was then posted on YouTube, Twitter, LiveLeak, and other platforms before all platforms began actively removing it.


The Wall Street Journal called the livestream “a gruesome example of how social-media platforms can be used to spread terror despite heavy spending by their owners to contain it.” New Zealand government officials and police reportedly made the public aware they might face up to ten years in prison for possessing the video. Government officials are also calling on social media platforms to create new ways to halt the spread of “hate content.”


In a speech at Parliament on Tuesday, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said social media companies are not neutral and must be held accountable for allowing the spread of videos depicting violence. “We cannot simply sit back and accept that these platforms just exist and that what is said on them is not the responsibility of the place where they are published. They are the publisher, not just the postman. It cannot be a case of all profit, no responsibility,” Ardern stated.






Reuters reports that New Zealand’s biggest telecommunications company, Spark NZ Ltd, worked with Internet Service Providers to cut access to websites that were hosting or allowing sharing of the video. Spark spokesman Andrew Pirie would not publicly identify the websites that had been blocked, but did admit that it was a “pretty extreme step” that has not happened before this incident. In addition, New Zealand companies are being asked to reconsider using social media companies for advertising until they find ways to combat the spread of this so-called hate content.


While some readers may initially believe these steps are necessary to prevent the spread of the graphic and traumatic images and to deny the shooter his wanted infamy, these types of actions ultimately lead to more censorship of free speech and a black market for banned content. Of course, private companies have the right to police their platforms how they please, according to their own community standards. The danger comes when a tragedy leads to calls for increased “speech-policing” practices, as we are already seeing in New Zealand and Australia. (Not to mention the fact that New Zealand is a part of the global surveillance state known as the Five Eyes nations—the U.S., Britain, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada—yet none of the five countries were aware of this terror threat.)


As the non-profit Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) notes, these type of practices often expand to silence legitimate voices. “It’s understandable to call for more aggressive moderation policies in the face of horrifying crimes. Unfortunately, history has shown that those proposals frequently backfire,” EFF writes. “When platforms over-censor, they often disproportionately silence the speech of their most vulnerable, at-risk users.”




Survival Solar Battery Charger - Free Today!



The obvious truth is that when governments pressure platforms to drastically increase efforts to police speech, the inevitable result is an increase in more censorship than intended. How would the governments of 2019 react if the World Trade Center towers were struck by planes? Would the social media companies and government officials threaten anyone who shared a livestream video of JFK’s assassination if it took place today?


It’s important to ask these questions as calls for censorship and policing of “hate content” ramp up. If we allow tragedies to be exploited in the name of protecting our virgin eyes and ears from graphic content, we will ultimately find ourselves locked inside a sanitized world where only approved opinions and approved experiences are allowed.


This article was sourced from The Mind Unleashed.


Derrick is an author and the founder of TCRN.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


      
   
45

      

By Cory Doctorow


The EU’s Copyright Directive will be voted on in the week of March 25 (our sources suggest the vote will take place on March 27th, but that could change); the Directive has been controversial all along, but it took a turn for the catastrophic during the late stages of the negotiation, which yielded a final text that is alarming in its potential consequences for all internet activity in Europe and around the world.


More than 5,000,000 Europeans have signed a petition against Article 13 of the Directive, and there has been outcry from eminent technical experts, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on free expression, and many other quarters.


Now, a coalition of more than 130 EU businesses have entered the fray, led by file storage service NextCloud. Their letter to the European Parliament calls Article 13—which will lead to mass adoption of copyright filters for online services that will monitor and block user-submitted text, audio, video and images—a “dangerous experiment with the core foundation of the Internet’s ecosystem.” They also condemn Article 11, which will allow news publishers to decide who can quote and link to news stories and charge for the right to do so.


         



      

Importantly, they identify a key risk of the Directive, which is that it will end up advantaging US Big Tech firms that can afford monitoring duties, and that will collect “massive amounts of data” sent by Europeans.


March 21st is an EU-wide day of action on the Copyright Directive, with large site blackouts planned (including German Wikipedia), and on March 23, there will be mass demonstrations across the EU. Things are getting down to the wire here, folks.


Here’s the text of the letter; you can find the original, with the full list of signatories, here.


The companies signing this letter to the European Parliament are urging you to vote against Articles 11 and 13 of the proposed copyright directive. The text of the trilogue agreement would harm the European economy and seriously undermine the ability of European businesses to compete with big Internet giants like Google.


We support the goal of the legislation to protect the rights of creators and publishers, but the proposed measures are inadequate to reap these benefits and also fail to strike a fair balance between creators and all other parts of society. The success of our business enterprises will be seriously jeopardized by these heavy-handed EU regulations.






Especially Article 13 is dangerously experimenting with the core foundation of the Internet’s ecosystem. Making companies directly liable for the content of their users forces these businesses to make billions of legal decisions about the legality of content. Most companies are neither equipped nor capable of implementing the automatic content filtering mechanisms this requires, which are expensive and prone to error.


Article 11 is creating a completely new intellectual property right for press publishers. The experience with similar laws in Germany and Spain raises serious doubts about the expected benefits, while the negative impact would be very real. An additional layer of exclusive rights would make it harder to clear the necessary legal hurdles to start new projects. It will make entrepreneurs more hesitant to just launch new projects. Europe would lose any chance to play a significant role on the world stage. Startups that build services based on aggregated online information would go out of business, and every company that publishes press summaries of their appearance in the media would be in violation of this law.


Although the purpose of these regulations is to limit the powers of big US Internet companies like Google or Facebook, the proposed legislation would end up having the opposite effect. Article 13 requires filtering of massive amounts of data, requiring technology only the Internet giants have the resources to build.


European companies will be thus forced to hand over their data to them, jeopardizing the independence of the European tech industry as well as the privacy of our users. European companies like ours will be hindered in their ability to compete or will have to abandon certain markets completely.




Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!



Given all of these issues it is noteworthy that the final trilogue agreement lacks meaningful safeguards for small and medium enterprises. The broad scope of this law would most likely lead to less new companies being founded in Europe and existing companies moving their headquarters out of Europe. For all those reasons we urge every pro-Startup politician to vote against Article 11 and Article 13.


We hope EU lawmakers hear the concerns of these businesses and take them to heart. If you live in the EU, consider taking part in the day of action on March 21; and contact your MEP right now.


Take action and stop Article 13 HERE.






Cory Doctorow is a science fiction author, activist, journalist and blogger — the co-editor of Boing Boing and the author of young adult novels like HOMELAND, PIRATE CINEMA and LITTLE BROTHER and novels for adults like RAPTURE OF THE NERDS and MAKERS. He is the former European director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and co-founded the UK Open Rights Group. Born in Toronto, Canada, he now lives in London.





This article was sourced from EFF.org


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


      
   
46

      

By Catherine J. Frompovich


Folks the information below is no techno bull malarkey!


Seriously, auto makers probably will be installing “smart meters” in all new cars so as to prevent accidents but, realistically, it’s surreptitiously a way to pave the way for – you got it – “self-driving cars”!


The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is proposing to mandate radar (called V2V technology) in all new cars and light trucks. [1]


The system is the V2V, which is like a smart meter in the car!


Smart meters on your utility services pump radiofrequencies (RFs) into your homes and, if being proposed for autos, somewhere operating close to your body while in your new high-tech automobile!


         



      

Isn’t microwave technology going crazy?


How much in the way of RFs do you think your body, especially your central nervous system, i.e., the brain, can be subjected to before you go bonkers?


What do you think will happen when 5G pumps out millimeter waves, which will activate your body’s sweat glands?  Don’t believe that?  Check out this research.


Will everyone now enjoy “hot sweats,” not just menopausal women?



5G is ultra-high frequency and ultra-high intensity. 5G uses between 24 to 90 gigahertz frequency.


Source: Radiation Health Risks



Consider the constant exposures to and from:



Wi-Fi everywhere you go
Cell towers, cell phones, iPhones
Stingray towers
GWEN towers
4G, 5G and possibly 6G broadband
5G cell towers probably every 300 or so feet

Even in front of your home or bedroom window



‘Smart’ home appliances, which spy on you inside your home
Utility [electric, natural gas, water] company AMI Smart Meters

According to EMF Safety Network,





Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   
   





The [V2V] antenna is omni-directional, allowed to transmit up to approximately 2 watts of power output at 10 Mhz and 5.9 Ghz with a range of 300 meters, or three football fields in length, every 100 milliseconds, or 10 pulses a second. The proximity of the transmitter to the driver and passengers is unknown, but could be inches to a few feet away from people in the car.



Do you want your children walking down a street being RF-irradiated by everyone’s car on the road? 


Seriously, consider checking out the V2V’s OUTPUT: 10 Mhz and 5.9 Ghz!


Remember, one Ghz is one billion [1,000,000,000 Hz (2)] cycles of man-made microwave energy per second, while you, the driver, and your passengers, probably will be sitting on top of it.  What a thrill?


However, we apparently missed our chance to offer our input into a bad idea [microwave technology/radar in cars] apparently going from bad to worse – even off the rails?


The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) had a Proposed Rule:Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: V2V CommunicationsThe comment period ended April 12, 2017.


Question: What are your evolving thoughts about technology, especially microwaves, being forced upon our bodies from every possible concept?


References:




American Natural Superfood - Free Sample



[1] http://emfsafetynetwork.org/stop-radar-in-cars/
[2] https://www.computer-hardware-explained.com/gigahertz.html


Resource:


Transduction of the Geomagnetic Field as Evidenced from Alpha-band Activity in the Human Brainhttp://www.eneuro.org/content/early/2019/03/18/ENEURO.0483-18.2019   [March 18, 2019]


Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.


Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on Amazon.com.


Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook.


Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)


Catherine’s NEW book: Eat To Beat Disease, Foods Medicinal Qualities ©2016 Catherine J Frompovich is now available


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


Next post


      
   
47

      

By WeAreChange


Another trial has showed that Monsanto and Bayer are finally beginning to pay for their crimes.



         



      

Visit our MAIN SITE for more breaking news http://wearechange.org/https://teespring.com/stores/wearechange
SubscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/wearech…
STEEMIT: https://steemit.com/@lukewearechange
MINDS: https://www.minds.com/wearechange
OH YEAH since we are not corporate or government owned help us out http://wearechange.org/donate


   
48

      

By B.N. Frank


Proponents of the controversial “Green New Deal” demand that the U.S. install technology to create “Smart Cities,” which include utility “Smart” Meters.  This makes climate change worse because “Smart” Meter technology has been proven to require more energy use which then increases the emissions of harmful Electrosmog pollution.  Not only that, the need for frequent replacement of these meters adds to electronic waste in landfills as well as mining for more polluting conflict minerals.


Even scarier — hundreds of thousands of these meters have been replaced and/or recalled due to fires and explosions.  In fact, some California residents filed lawsuits against PG&E after their meters caught fire.  This was even BEFORE the devastating California wildfires.


Most would agree that fires and explosions aren’t “green,” right?   Unfortunately, neither is most – if not all – wireless technology.  Recently New Jersey environmental groups wised up about “Smart” Meters, whereas the Sierra Club’s San Fransisco chapter formally opposed their installation years ago.


         



      

Over the years, many articles have been written about how utility “Smart” Meters are NOT “green.” Some examples include:




WHO KNEW? The Wireless Smart Meter Meltdown


Who knew that you could save more energy by unplugging a few appliances? 




Green Electricity or Green Money?

In failing to understand, or ignoring the grassroots public pushback against smart meters, Krupp, Marston, and their EDF, as well as the NRDC, have again lost touch with their public and its concerns. The rebellion against smart meters,6 having spread to many states as well as to Canada, Australia, Europe, and the UK, may be really only one symptom of a broadly dysfunctional, entrenched, institutionalized, and polluting electricity and energy economy that EDF and NRDC are abetting. The shortcomings and failures of state and federal electricity policy exemplified by the preoccupation with smart meter has been extensively documented (Schoechle, 2012).




Environmentalists Not Buying Smart Meter Greenwash


So are ‘smart’ meters really green?  It seems like the only people who think so are those making large profits from tax and ratepayer funds flowing to the smart grid industry.  We’re talking about groups like EDF, whose board member Ann Doerr stands to make millions if ‘smart’ meters become ubiquitous.


PG&E and other utilities have spent millions on public relations firms to convince the public that ‘smart’ meters will stop climate change and reduce energy consumption.  Nothing could be further from the truth


No one ever said it was easy being “green.”  Environmentalists who continue to ignore the enormous and harsh environmental impact of “Smart” Meters are choosing to make a bad problem worse.





For more information, visit the following websites:



Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
EMF Safety Network
InPowerMovement
SmartMeterHarm
StopSmartMeters.org
Smart Grid Awareness
Smart Meter Education Network
Take Back Your Power
Wireless Information Network

   
49

      

By Peter Kirby


A great warrior for truth is in trouble and needs our help.


Patrick Roddie has been doing effective boots-on-the-ground, grassroots activism exposing chemtrails and geoengineering for many years now. He got the interview with Princess Basmah Bint Saud who was not afraid to tell us about the ongoing geoengineering catastrophe. He testified before the Environmental Protection Agency about the megatons of toxic waste raining down upon us. He even got top geoengineer Ken Caldiera to tell him to, “Shut the f_<% up!” These are but a few of his many accomplishments. In short, Patrick has been a tireless crusader against chemtrails and geoengineering for a long time now.


In recent years, Patrick has been working on his greatest endeavor yet. Patrick has been going about collecting evidence for an epidemiological study linking spray-days to localized mortalities. Although our loving government has thrown many roadblocks in his path, Patrick says that he has recently obtained the official death records needed to prove his case.


         



      

Isn’t it funny how, just when he gets what he needs to do some serious damage to the geoengineering agenda, his life is suddenly turned upside-down.


Patrick says that his landlord has been practicing strong-arm eviction tactics against him. He says that he was wrongly taken to the local psych ward against his will and on false pretenses. He says that he has been burgled of his money, bank cards, and the like. He says that what was not stolen from him, he has been forced to sell. He says that the documentary evidence pertaining to his epidemiological studies is in danger of being lost.


It’s even worse than that, folks. Patrick says that, as a result of his persecution he has suffered a series of strokes that have left him permanently disabled and that he continues to undergo serious health issues as a result of all this. For the whole story, please watch the following video Patrick published yesterday.



As one can learn from watching the video, Patrick believes that he can come back to prevail in this situation, but he needs our help. Patrick is requesting donations to help him get himself back on his feet so that he can beat these people.


Please consider donating what you can to help Patrick in his hour of need. You can donate money to Patrick at his PayPal account.


https://www.paypal.me/patrickroddie


Thank you.


Peter Kirby is a San Rafael, CA researcher, writer, and activist. Please subscribe to his email list at his website peterakirby.com. His book Chemtrails Exposed: A New Manhattan Project is available HERE at Amazon.com.


   
50

      

By Michael Maharrey


Last Thursday, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt signed a bill into law that formalizes and expands the state’s medical marijuana program, further nullifying federal cannabis prohibition in effect.


Last summer, Oklahoma voters approved a measure legalizing medical marijuana in the state. A coalition of three Republicans introduced House Bill 2612 (HB2612) on Feb. 4 to create a regulatory structure and establish important patient protections for the state medicinal cannabis program.


The Oklahoma House passed HB2612 by a 93-5 vote. The Senate approved the measure 43-5. With Gov. Stitt’s signature, the bill will take effect 90 days after the legislature adjourns.


         



      

The new law creates the Oklahoma Medical Marijuana Authority and establishes a registry for qualified patients and their caregivers. It also creates a revolving fund to handle fees, taxes and fines related to the medical marijuana program.


The expanded patient protections written into HB2612 are significant. Under the law, “a medical marijuana patient or caregiver licensee shall not be denied the right to own, purchase or possess a firearm, ammunition, or firearm accessories based solely on his or her status as a medical marijuana patient or caregiver licensee.”


It also prohibits the state from denying a medical marijuana patient access to public assistance programs, including Medicaid, SNAP and WIC.


As Suzanne Sherman noted, the federal government has long claimed the power to restrict the right to keep and bear arms of medical marijuana patients:



If you purchase a firearm from an FFL, you will be presented with the Firearms Transaction Record form 4473, which you must, under penalty of perjury, answer fully and truthfully. You may see it for yourself HERE.


Question 11(c) asks prospective gun purchasers if they are unlawfully using any controlled substances. You think, “Hey, I can answer ‘no,’ as marijuana is now legal in my state. Immediately following the inquiry is the following admonition (in bold letters):


Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law, regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.


Not surprisingly, in 2016, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of appeals ruled that this restriction does not violate the Second Amendment.







Most states have adopted this federal ban on owning firearms for medical marijuana users, or simply help in its enforcement. For instance, police in Hawaii sent letters to medical marijuana patients who owned guns telling them they had 30 days to surrender their weapons.


While passage of HB2612 does not overturn the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, it does remove the state and local enforcement arm of that unconstitutional act as it applies to medical marijuana users in Oklahoma.


FEDERAL PROHIBITION


While medical marijuana has become widely accepted across the U.S., the federal government still claims it is illegal. As we’ve seen with immigration sanctuary cities, when state and local enforcement ends, the federal government has an extremely difficult time enforcing their acts.


Under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) passed in 1970, the federal government maintains complete prohibition of marijuana. Of course, the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to ban or regulate marijuana within the borders of a state, despite the opinion of the politically connected lawyers on the Supreme Court. If you doubt this, ask yourself why it took a constitutional amendment to institute federal alcohol prohibition.


Oklahoma’s medical marijuana program removes a layer of laws prohibiting the possession and use of marijuana, and passage of HB2612 expand that, but federal prohibition remains in place.




American Natural Superfood - Free Sample



FBI statistics show that law enforcement makes approximately 99 of 100 marijuana arrests under state, not federal law. By curtailing state prohibition, Kentucky could sweep part of the basis for 99 percent of marijuana arrests.


Furthermore, figures indicate it would take 40 percent of the DEA’s yearly annual budget just to investigate and raid all of the dispensaries in Los Angeles – a single city in a single state. That doesn’t include the cost of prosecution either. The lesson? The feds lack the resources to enforce marijuana prohibition without state assistance.


A GROWING MOVEMENT


The Sooner State joins a growing number of states simply ignoring federal prohibition, and nullifying it in practice.


Colorado, Washington state, Oregon and Alaska were the first states to legalize recreational cannabis, and California, Nevada, Maine and Massachusetts joined them after ballot initiatives in favor of legalization passed in November 2016. In 2018, Michigan voters approved recreational marijuana and Vermont became the first state to fully legalize marijuana through a legislative act.


With 33 states and the District of Columbia allowing cannabis for medical use, the feds find themselves in a position where they simply can’t enforce prohibition anymore.


“The lesson here is pretty straightforward. When enough people say, ‘No!’ to the federal government, and enough states pass laws backing those people up, there’s not much the feds can do to shove their so-called laws, regulations or mandates down our throats,” Tenth Amendment Center founder and executive director Michael Boldin said.


This article was sourced from The Tenth Amendment Center.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


      
   
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10