Ukraine Uncategorized

McCain Wants More War!

Published by:

Senator John McCain’s rhetoric and concluded that the Arizona senator wanted the American military to be involved in Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Nigeria, North Korea, and Ukraine. This, I concluded, was sufficient evidence to question his sanity.

Now McCain is doubling down on the Ukrainian end of that list. President Obama seems less than eager to embroil us in a ground war with Russia, and McCain isn’t happy:

U.S. lawmakers will write legislation requiring the United States to send arms to Ukraine if President Barack Obamadoes not move to send weapons, Republican Senator John McCain said on Thursday.

McCain led about a dozen Republican and Democratic senators at a news conference in pressing Obama to send arms to help Kiev defend itself against a Russian-backed separatist movement.

What would happen if the U.S. armed the Ukrainian government? We can’t be sure, but it’s quite likely that Putin, cornered and watching his oil fortunes dry up, would escalate his troop involvement in Ukraine. And then what? America would have already committed itself to Kiev; we couldn’t just pick up and walk away. Does anyone honestly believe that Donetsk Oblast, where three quarters of the population speaks Russian, is worth a ground war?

Given his track record, the answer for McCain is probably: why, of course. That ought to be enough for a primary challenge from someone serious.

 So every place McCain goes there is conflict. I blame the people of Arizona for voting this man to the U.S Senate!

The war hawks in Washington D.C need to be voted out, but the American people keep voting these people back in.

Are empire will come to an end, with over 900 bases around the world and we are in over 150 countries. This can’t go on much longer!!

McCain with ISIS leaders below!

ISIS Leaders

ISIS Leaders

Marijuana Uncategorized

6 States Try to Legalize Marijuana

Published by:

marijuana_horiz_735_350Marijuana is  now in 23 states, as well as D.C., which have legalized marijuana in some form. The only states to have legalized marijuana for recreational purposes are Colorado, Washington, Alaska, and Oregon, while the rest have medical marijuana laws in place. And as many might suspect, we’ll soon be seeing some blockbuster years for marijuana legalization.  So what’s next? Legalization bills have been popping up in state legislatures around the country. Here is where we will likely see marijuana legalization appear next:

1. California

California was first with medical marijuana in 1996, but a measure looking to truly legalize marijuana failed in 2010, garnering 46% of the vote on Election Day. Unfortunately, activists gave up on a major petition effort early in 2014 that would have put the issue of legalization to voters in November. It seems that some prominent figures urged organizers to wait until 2016, when a measure would be more likely to pass due to key demographics and voter turnouts. Things may be different in 2016. Multiple polls from 2014 found that the majority of Californians are in favor of legalizing pot. And the state’s cannabis community will likely push hard with a community-driven initiative. Yeah, we all thought marijuana would be legalized for recreational purposes by now in CA, but with each failed attempt, the state gets that much closer.

2. Nevada

A legalization initiative for the 2016 ballot has already been qualified in Nevada. It would legalize the possession of up to an ounce by adults 21 and over and allow for taxed and regulated marijuana commerce.

“Nevada’s Secretary of State Ross Miller announced enough signatures were submitted to qualify the The Initiative to Tax and Regulate Marijuana for the November 2016 ballot — if the legislature doesn’t enact the measure first. During the first 40 days of its 2015 session, the Nevada Legislature will have an opportunity to adopt the measure. If it fails to act on the petition or rejects it, the proposal will appear on the ballot in November 2016.”

Nevadans approved medical marijuana in 1998 (59%) and again in 2000 (65%), but voted down decriminalization in 2002 (39%) and legalization in 2006 (44%). However, it is now decriminalized, where possession of less than ounce is allowed.

3. Arizona

It seems that support was lacking when it came to legalizing marijuana in 2014, but things are looking up for the future in Arizona. Recreational marijuana use could be legal in Arizona by this summer if the Legislature and new Gov. Doug Ducey approves a plan introduced by a Phoenix lawmaker. If not this summer, then proponents of legalizing marijuana are expected to try to get a measure on the 2016 Arizona ballot

Activists with the influential Marijuana Policy Project have said they’re on board with a forthcoming ballot initiative to fully legalize the drug in 2016. The group has also said that by then, they’ll have had enough time to figure out which aspects of previous efforts have been successful in other states.

Arizona is one of 23 states to have legalized medicinal marijuana, while Oregon, Washington, Colorado, and Alaska have legalized marijuana for recreational use. Cannabis was legalized in the state for medical use in 2010 by ballot initiative.

4. Maine

While legalization attempts have repeatedly failed in Maine, the Marijuana Policy Project has announced that it will help coordinate a grassroots campaign to get a legalization measure on the ballot in 2016. But MPP may not draft legislation so easily, as a state-based group known as Legalize Maine says it is crafting its own initiative and is “criticizing both MPP and Maine politicians for advancing ‘out of state corporate interests’ at the expense of Mainers”. Maine residents decriminalized and approved cannabis for medical use in 1999. A poll taken in 2013 has also found that 48% of registered voters in Maine support recreational legalization of marijuana.

5. Massachusetts

The state of Massachusetts is still viewed as a hot spot for the near-future legalization of marijuana – in that it should happen any day now. Marijuana reform advocates point to high margins of support, while marijuana reform group Bay State Repeal and activists work on an already-begun campaign to legalize marijuana via ballot initiative in 2016. Massachusetts has decriminalized marijuana in 2008 and passed medical marijuana initiatives in 2012.

6. Vermont

There is no initiative process in the state of Vermont, so legalization would happen through the legislative process. But that process is looking green – in more than one way. Gov. Peter Shumlin (D) has endorsed legalization in principle. What’s more, other state officials are showing support. One May 2014 poll found 57% support for legalization. Last year, the legislature approved a RAND study on the impacts of legalization – finding that legalization could bring the state $20 to $70 million in annual pot tax revenues. Previous polls have consistently shown that citizens of Vermont want softer penalties for marijuana possession and use, though the issue of legalization was still foggy.


DEA Surveillance Uncategorized

License Plate Surveillance!

Published by:

shutterstock_70825069-300x173 Surveillance state is going Hay Wire!

The drug war has made a series of waves recently, but one in particular hasn’t been receiving the attention it deserves and the surveillance state too.

Through a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, the American public had the opportunity to learn more about the high-speed license plate cameras and the Drug Enforcement Administration program behind them. Such details were kept under wraps until ACLU took action.

The program that stores data pertaining to motorists nationwide has one use: to gather drivers’ personal information.

Once the cameras harvest the data, it is either sold to third-party companies or made available to local law enforcement agencies. To some extent, it’s safe to say data collected may have been widely used in civil asset forfeiture operations–the legal practice that got President Obama’s Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch under the spotlight recently.

Drug trafficking activity near the Mexican border prompted the DEA to first launch the program. But as officers’ access to the technology expanded, so did the program’s reach.

In an interview with Watchdog Arena,  EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) spokesperson Dave Maass said it’s hard to pinpoint just one rationale behind the development of the national license plate reader program.  Regardless of its goals, Maass says, “Maintaining a massive database of locational data on everyday people is a disproportionate response to the amount of crime the DEA seeks to investigate.”

Reporters and activists have been voicing concerns linked to how officers are making use of this data. Considering we’re dealing with officers having hands-on access to this powerful tool, it’s not unlikely that the program may be vulnerable to malfeasance. According to Maass, “Such databases invite opportunities for abuse, whether it’s police using it to stalk women or using it to spy on political adversaries.”

Maass explained to Watchdog Arena how the DEA is jeopardizing our privacy by collecting license plate information on all Americans:

It only takes a few locational data points to begin to identify the individual traits of a person. Combined with other forms of data collection, plate data can create detailed pictures of the private lives of citizens and visitors to this country.

But if the program was allowed to be carried out unchecked surveillance for so long, what could be done now to turn things around?

In the name of transparency, EFF is filing a lawsuit against the Los Angeles police and sheriff’s offices “to gain access to one week’s worth of ALPR (Automatic License Plate Recognition) data.” The action would offer more details into how the program works. Such information would play an important role in making the public understand the importance of challenging the DEA surveillance.

But that is not all; pressuring lawmakers could also make a difference, Maass said. “Too often, policymakers aren’t even asking questions about civil liberties and privacy when approving this surveillance technology.”