So, in just a couple of days, Missouri will definitely pass some kind of initiative on cannabis. Marijuana for those who are unfamiliar with the history of the term.
Just an fyi for those who don’t know; the entire propaganda piece of “reefer madness” was predicated upon conflating racial issues with terminology. Everyone knew what “hemp” and cannabis were, but applying the idiomatic Mexican phrase of “marijuana” to the plant enabled the people pushing to keep cannabis from being used for health, wealth, and national security, into a position of control over the dialogue.
Rest assured, not one of these initiatives will do anything to enable people to get “high” without the potential of legal and severe monetary consequences.
Edited to add, that if anyone in my household were to come down with cancer, we would leaving Missouri and going to Colorado to begin treatments. And I know of several parents with children having leukemia and seizures who have had to leave Missouri to treat their child with effective types and applications of cannabis. It’s very, very sad that not one of these proposals will allow people to take control of their own health and the health of their loved ones. It’s actually heart breaking.
The initiative getting the largest amount of “airtime” is the biggest pile of manure that pretends to be helpful and will harm, hamper and probably actually cause loss of life. That is Amendment 3. It is being put forth by “Doctor and Lawyer: Brad Bradshaw. ” Notably, this amendment allows for a less than certain dosage to be available for people dying from cancer as the maximum allowable amount of cannabis. Again, for people who haven’t studied it out, to cure cancer, a person needs to have a POUND of flower reduced to oil in a month. Not the 3 ounces per month allowed by Amendment 3. It’s enough to make a person feel better without being able to actually heal them of the problem. In simple terms, enough to keep you happily sick and under the care of an industry that is not interested in curing you….. Read More
Securus Technologies markets a product to law enforcement that taps into realtime cell-tower data from mobile carriers to produce fine-grained location tracking of anyone carrying a phone; it is nominally marketed to find parolees and wandering https://boingboing.net/2018/05/12/extraordinary-access.htmAlzheimer’s patients, but because it has no checks or balances, cops can query it willy-nilly to find anyone’s location.
That’s what, Cory Hutcheson, ex-Sheriff of Mississippi County, MO, is accused of doing; prosecutors say that for three years, Hutcheson abused Securus’s system to track all kinds of people — even a local judge — without a warrant.
Securus claims that it restricts the use of its system to legally permitted surveillance, requiring users to upload warrants or court orders prior to use; but it does not vet or review those orders before granting access. Securus also does not make the alleged court orders visible to carriers before it queries their databases, meaning that the phone companies have to take Securus’s word for it.
The carriers, meanwhile, are exploiting a loophole in privacy laws that nominally prohibit selling this kind of data: by burying “consent” to the sale of your location data in their lengthy, never-read agreements, the carriers are able to circumvent the law; primarily to sell your data to marketers, but also to surveillance companies like Securus…… Read More
Looks to me like both our churches and our governments are run by pedophiles….
Commentary by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News
There are things in life that happen that change you. There are things that, once you see, you cannot un-see.
Throughout history, there have been individuals who rise up against the evil that confronts their society, who become a voice for their generation who say, “No more! This wickedness must end, and I will not stop until it does.”
These voices lead by example and inspire those around them to stand strong and never give up, no matter how intimidating the battle may be.
Jennifer Winn is such a voice for families fighting against the evils of medical and state-sponsored kidnapping of children. She has become known for her fiery passion, uncompromising quest for justice, and inspirational speeches that call governmental officials and agencies out on the carpet for the injustice they inflict on the people they are supposed to serve.
It was not until shortly after her run for governor of the state of Kansas in 2014 that she learned that Child Protective Services (CPS) and family courts were taking children away from non-abusive parents, often putting them into horrific foster care situations. Once she recognized what was happening to thousands of families, she refused to be silent.
She immediately began speaking up for families and speaking out against the corruption that she found in the CPS system.
Jennifer Winn joined Connie Reguli and others on September 11, 2018, as part of a team of activists and professionals who gathered in Washington DC to participate in an Educational Panel put together by 4 the Children USA. The event was live-streamed to hundreds of thousands of viewers, including District Attorneys’ offices from several states according to event founder Robert Slaven.
See Connie Reguli’s speech here:
The Ease with which Government Kidnaps Children – A Review of Current Legislation and the Multi-Billion Dollar Child “Protection” Industry
Various speakers educated the audience regarding law, medical practices, and legislation. Some shared personal stories of first-hand encounters with corruption within the system.
Jennifer Winn has no such story of having her own family members taken by CPS. However, she is a mother, a grandmother, an American, and a human being, all of which means to her that she must stand and fight for those who are being torn apart by injustice:… Read More
Please take the time to read what the animals on a “FBI hit team” did to an American citizen. Read this on an empty stomach.
Gordon Kahl Story
By Joe Jarvis
The Daily Bell
October 6, 2018
When the FBI came out with a report on Hillary Clinton weeks before the 2016 election, Democrats were livid.
But so were Republicans… The report said that even though she had committed a crime by negligently using a personal computer for state business, she would not be charged.
Democrats later cheered the FBI as the Mueller Probe began investigating Trump. Investigations are the same thing as a guilty verdict, right?
And Republicans fumed when it surfaced that two agents exchanged anti-Trump text messages. They even discussed ways to subvert the presidential election and choose the winner!
And now Democrats are back to accusing the FBI of being a partisan tool used by whoever is in power. That’s because an FBI investigation could not prove a 36-year-old sexual assault accusation true.
Clearly, no one feels super confident in the FBI. And of course, we shouldn’t. They’re sketchy as all hell.
J. Edgar Hoover set the tone when, as Director of the FBI, he compiled a list of disloyal Americans. He’s famous for his enemies lists, in fact. But you didn’t have to break any laws to be considered an enemy…
More recently the FBI spent three years covering up evidence that they sent snipers to surround Bundy Ranch. They conspired with the Bureau of Land Management to suppress evidence favorable to the Bundy’s.
And the FBI received at least two tips about the Parkland Shooter in the months before the shooting…Read More
by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News
When Child Protective Services (CPS) takes children from a loving, non-abusive family, the parents, and sometimes grandparents, aunts, and uncles, often seek out information about what is happening. Many gravitate toward groups on social media that provide education and support for those fighting CPS for their children.
As the confused parents try to sort out the information and learn how to get their children back, one question dominates their search: How can this happen in America?
It isn’t long before they will hear of ASFA – the Clintons’ Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, which provides billions of federal dollars to states to place children in foster care and adopt them out to strangers. Parents quickly learn that ASFA is one of the most destructive pieces of legislation to ever impact American families. Activists and parents alike are calling for it to be abolished.
However, before there was ASFA, there was CAPTA. The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974, or “The Mondale Act,” doesn’t receive nearly the attention that ASFA does, yet it is the piece of legislation that established Child Protective Services in all 50 states.
It remains in existence today. It has to be reauthorized periodically. Since its passage, it has been re-approved every 4 to 6 years, with new amendments added each time.
Richard Wexler, the executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, calls CAPTA “the one-stop shop for bad ideas.” In a recent article called, “CAPTA Law Codifies Everything Wrong With How We ‘Fight’ Child Abuse,” Wexler writes:
Reform? If anything the criminals that have implemented this atrocity to our rights and to our children’s physical and mental health should be tried and dealt with for the same reasons that we tried the Nazi guards at Auschwitz prison camp.
“Reform” would still mean that you get a jury trial for littering, but not if the state wants to kidnap your children. I vote on jail and even the death sentence for people that kidnap children, even if they work for the state under color of law. If you are interested there is a Federal “Law” that could be applied: USC Title 18 sections 241 & 242 Not that we need this law. There was no such law that permitted us to have the Nuremberg trials and hang Nazi war criminals. This kidnapping of our children and their resultant sexual, physical abuse, and even their deaths at the hands of the state is a very similar situation IMHO and deserves a similar response.
Commentary by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News
Losing a child for any reason is one of the most devastating things that can ever happen to a parent. The process of dealing with Child Protective Services and family court, while never easy, often serves to dehumanize parents and children. Instead of serving to help families overcome challenges, the system creates further harm when it treats parents as though they are worthless.
Not only are civil and constitutional rights violated routinely, but many parents find that the system seeks to strip them of their basic human dignity.
Law professor Vivek Sankaran recognizes that the treatment of parents by the courts is counterproductive to goals of restoring the family and helping the children.
Sankaran wrote a piece for the American Bar Association addressing these concerns, with suggestions that could be implemented by the courts when dealing with parents facing allegations by CPS.
I would add a couple more suggestions:
- Require actual evidence before accusing a parent or taking their children.
- Ensure that social workers, doctors, police, attorneys, and judges follow the law… Read More
by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News
A baby’s first year is crucial to a baby’s emotional and cognitive development. It is in the earliest months of life that the foundations for basic trust, security, and relationships are laid. The parent-child relationship is the environment in which that is designed to happen.
Yet the majority of children who enter foster care are taken within their first year of life, depriving them of critical bonding time and causing permanent trauma and damage to the babies’ ability to trust. More children in this age group are not returned home and are later adopted out than any other age group.
Human babies are born with an innate emotional and psychological need for their biological parents. When the child cannot or does not receive the love and acceptance of their own mother and father, he or she is left with a gaping hole deep inside that they may struggle the rest of their lives to fill even if they are loved, wanted, and cherished by a substitute parent.
The rationale behind the existence of Child Protective Services is that the state works for “the best interest of the child,” removing children from homes that the state decides are not good for the child.
Social workers and judges alike argue that they would rather be “on the safe side” and “err on the side of the child” by removing children to prevent the chance of them being harmed by their family. Countless social worker court reports of families whose stories we have covered contain references to the “possibility of future harm” without any evidence of actual harm having taken place…. Read More