Lincoln, Kennedy & Obama’s "Warnings" (Whistle Blowers Corps & Secret Societies)


Lincoln, Kennedy & Obama’s "Warnings" ( Whistle Blowers Corps & Secret Societies )
Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Obama and many more have openly said in public that Private Bankers, Corporations and Secret Societies like the Bilderbergs, Council On Foreign Relations and U.N. were the biggest threat to America. People just don’t what to listen, out of fear for the obvious. So they use defense mechanisms like displaced anger, Racism and they cling to the RED & Blue with a death grip. Meanwhile Campaign Contributions in Tax Havens like Ireland pay for, Outsourcing, Bank Fraud, Corporate Tax Fraud, Wars For Rothschild OPIC Profits and Wall Street Fraud. Meanwhile Corporation profits, Wall Street Profits, Taxes, Printing Money, Food Prices go up and American Citizens have less food on the table.
(People Need To Listen)
Whistle Blower Elected President Teddy Roosevelt "Warnings" Corporations :
Whistle Blower Elected President Kennedy "Warnings" Secret Society Speech :
Whistle Blower Elected President Obama "Warnings" Secret Society Speech :
Whistle Blower Ireland’s Parliament :
Whistle Blower FBI :
Whistle Blower FED & World Bank :
Whistle Blower CIA :
Whistle Blower Economic Hit Man Killing US Jobs :
Whistle Blowers TTP Outsourcing, SOPA Internet Regulation & Banker Deregulation :
Whistle Blowers "Warnings" Private Banks, Corporations & Secret Societies :
Whistle Blowers Confront Rothschild :
P.S. An election will only turn what could be a good man into a political puppet and put power into the wrong hands again.

I Will Not Comply !!! : I’m done being passive, you can wallow in your Government Sponsored delusion and petty arguments. I’m not supporting Corruption, Outsourcing, Bank Thievery, Debasing our Currency or Corporate Oil Trade Wars and Washington’s High Treason anymore. Every entitlement, service or oath breaker I have paid taxes for or supported to this day has turned out to be a legal battle or a total rip off. I Will Not Comply any more the IRS and ObamaCare will be getting a "I Will Not Comply" return letter this year. I use cash, barter, trade and go tax free from now on. If this government spies on us I will spy on them back. If this government taxes us I will tax them back. If this government fines, warrants or attacks, American Citizens, American Citizens will attack them back. If this government targets us at our homes American Citizens will Target them at theirs back. We are American Citizens ! We will not be tread on by this treasonous and corrupt government any more. Kevlar and High Tech Toys will not mean shit if they cross my line in the sand.


Prohibition DOES NOT work–Neither will “Legalization”…





Kentucky Cannabis Hemp Health Initiative 2013-2014



Make It Lawful



Pot Push in D.C. May Spur Congress to Weigh Legalizing

By Michael C. Bender – Nov 1, 2013 10:10 AM CT

A proposal backed by most District of Columbia council members to decriminalize small amounts of pot may spur federal lawmakers to consider marijuana regulation for the first time since two states legalized recreational sales.

Congress has the power to block legislation approved by the Washington council. U.S. lawmakers can also stop local initiatives in the nation’s capital through the federal budget, which authorizes the city’s spending, as they did to stall the use of medical marijuana there for a decade.

 Marijuana Push in D.C. Invites Congress to Consider Legalization Medbox CEO Bruce Bedrick on Medical Marijuana

Alliance, say the effects of pot are less harmful than alcohol or tobacco, the U.S. government maintains that marijuana can lead to serious mental-health issues. Photographer: Andrew Hetherington/Redux

Aug. 16 (Bloomberg) — Bruce Bedrick, chief executive officer of Medbox Inc., talks about the outlook for the medical marijuana market and prospects for legalization of the drug in the U.S. Bedrick speaks with Betty Liu on Bloomberg Television’s “In the Loop.” (Source: Bloomberg)

The push to loosen local pot penalties, which few expect Congress to block, would set up what supporters say is the next step: legalizing recreational use. Growing support for legal pot and the billions in tax revenue and prison savings the change may bring has convinced some that Congress will ease laws.

“This is where you’re going to see federal movement coming in the next year or two,” said Erik Altieri, a spokesman for the Washington-based National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, which was founded in 1970.

Groups such as Norml and the DC Cannabis Campaign are considering a ballot initiative next year to legalize pot sales in the district. If approved, it would force Congress to consider an issue the federal government has mostly left to states. The hands-off approach has created a patchwork of laws ranging from Missouri, where possession of 35 grams, about 1.25 ounces, can mean seven years in prison, to Colorado and Washington state, which legalized recreational sales last year.

Gaining Support

In Oregon, activists submitted a statewide ballot proposal last week that would legalize possession of as much as eight ounces of pot, while proponents are gathering signatures for measures in Alaska and Florida. Three Maine lawmakers from Portland today endorsed a question on the city’s Nov. 5 election ballot to decriminalize possession of 2.5 ounces or less.

For the first time, a majority of Americans now favor legalization, according to a Gallup Poll last week showing that support has increased 10 percentage points in one year.

Seventy-six percent of doctors worldwide favor using pot for medicinal purposes, according to a May poll published by the New England Journal of Medicine. Forty-eight percent of U.S. adults reported using it, according to a Pew Research Center survey.

Federal Opposition

While advocates, including the Washington-based Drug Policy Alliance, say the effects of pot are less harmful than alcohol or tobacco, the U.S. government maintains that marijuana can lead to serious mental-health issues.

“Legalization of marijuana, no matter how it begins, will come at the expense of our children and public safety,” said an April report from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. “It will create dependency and treatment issues, and open the door to use of other drugs, impaired health, delinquent behavior and drugged drivers.”

Sale or possession of marijuana accounted for 48 percent of the 1.55 million drug arrests in the U.S. in 2012, Federal Bureau of Investigation data show. While drug busts have dropped, those for marijuana have risen by 18 percent since 2001, according a June report from the American Civil Liberties Union.

Racial Gap

At the same time, racial disparities have increased, according to the report. In the U.S., pot use among whites and blacks is about the same, yet blacks are arrested for possession almost four times as often. In Washington, blacks accounted for 91 percent of marijuana arrests in 2010, even though they account for about half of the population of 632,000.

“We’re saving thousands of black boys and a few girls from having a criminal record for small amounts of marijuana, and that’s important because most employers won’t consider you if they see an arrest record,” said council member Marion Barry, referring to the proposal.

Barry is no stranger to drug laws. He was sentenced to six months in prison in 1990 for possession of crack cocaine while he was mayor. He said that experience hasn’t informed his support for the pot proposal.

Barry wouldn’t say whether he supported legalization. Asked whether that was the next step in D.C., he said, “Yes.”

Big Business

Estimates on a potential national marijuana market vary from $10 billion to $120 billion a year, with $35 billion to $45 billion being likely, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Tax collections from such sales could reach as much as $20 billion, according to a March report by Brad Barker, a Bloomberg Industries analyst, who cited projections by the Cato Institute, a nonprofit research group, and the Congressional Research Service.

When voters in Washington and Colorado legalized pot a year ago, they forced the federal government’s hand. In an Aug. 29 memo, U.S. Deputy Attorney General James Cole said the Justice Department wouldn’t intervene in the states’ pot regulations, so long as they prevented out-of-state distribution, access to minors, impaired driving and kept revenue from going to gangs and cartels.

In Congress, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, said in an Aug. 26 statement that “these state laws should be respected.”

The Tea Party movement that helped restore Republican control in the House in 2010 included a wave of libertarian lawmakers who are more receptive to loosening marijuana regulation.

A House bill from California Republican Dana Rohrabacher to give state marijuana laws priority over the U.S. Controlled Substances Act has 20 co-sponsors, ranging from Arizona Democrat Raul Grijalva, among the most liberal members of Congress, to Justin Amash of Michigan and Steve Stockman of Texas, both Republicans aligned with the Tea Party movement.

Kentucky Grass

A triumvirate of Kentucky Republicans is backing proposals to allow farming of hemp, which U.S. law classifies the same as marijuana even though it has a non-intoxicating amount of THC, the psychoactive ingredient in the cannabis plant.

In the Senate, the measure has support from Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senator Rand Paul, a potential Republican presidential candidate in 2016. A third Kentucky lawmaker, Representative Thomas Massie, has 48 co-sponsors for the same bill in the House.

“We’re seeing Congress move this way,” Norml’s Altieri said. “It’s hard to see them really rolling back.”

Rohrabacher said he doesn’t expect his bill to pass until the Republican Party nominates a presidential candidate who supports marijuana legislation. The limited-government Tea Party movement increases the chances, he said.

“It all depends on whether or not, with this Tea Party group, we end up with a Republican that has courage enough to be more libertarian on the marijuana issue,” Rohrabacher said.

Parking Ticket

The District of Columbia proposal to decriminalize possession of less than one ounce of marijuana has support from 10 of 12 local lawmakers and may get final approval in January, said council member Tommy Wells, who is sponsoring the measure.

Wells’s plan would mean fines of $100 for small amounts of pot, instead of a maximum six months in prison. Wells said in an interview that he’ll probably change his bill at a December hearing to reduce the fine to $25 — the same as the punishment for parking at an expired meter.

Sixteen states have decriminalized first-time possession of small amounts of marijuana, according to Norml.

Mayor’s Support

Once it passes the council and gets a signature from Mayor Vincent Gray, who supports it, Congress has 60 days to object with a disapproval resolution. Congress hasn’t used that method since 1991, when lawmakers overturned a proposal to exceed a 110-foot height limit for downtown buildings.

When voters in the nation’s capital were among the first in the U.S. to legalize medicinal marijuana in 1998, Congress prevented the district from spending money on the program for a decade with a budget rider.

There are now three dispensaries and three cultivation centers in the district, said Najma Roberts, a D.C. health department spokeswoman.

Both Wells and council member David Grosso said they’d back legalization in Washington, a question that two-thirds of district votes said they’d support, according to an April poll by Public Policy Polling. Neither Wells nor Grosso would venture a guess as to how Congress might respond.

“That fight would have national repercussions,” Rohrabacher said.

To contact Bloomberg News staff for this story: Michael C. Bender in Washington at

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jodi Schneider at


Pot Block! Trapped in the Marijuana Rescheduling Maze

One citizen-journalist’s journey into the drug war bureaucracy shows why previous efforts to reschedule pot have been DEA’d on arrival.

Harmon Leon

October 30, 2013





Under the Controlled Substances Act, marijuana is classified as a Schedule 1 drug in America. According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, Cannabis sativa is as dangerous as heroin. (You know… as in heroin!) To justify this ranking, the DEA has declared that the plant has absolutely no medical value. Zero. Nada. Zip. The federal government has determined that this position is backed by science.

Marijuana’s current status as one of the most dangerous drugs in America became official in 1970, during the Nixon administration. (Putting matters in ludicrous perspective, cocaine and even Breaking Bad meth are Schedule II.) Every administration since then has treated marijuana as mad, bad and dangerous to know, with virtually no attempt made to reclassify it. And that list includes the current one.

About the Author
Harmon Leon

Harmon Leon is the author of six books, including The American Dream, The Harmon Chronicles and Republican Like Me. His…

“It’s a bit of an Alice in Wonderland scenario with the Obama administration,” explains Kris Hermes of American for Safe Access (ASA). “He made statements prior to being elected about changing the policy on marijuana, but in reality the opposite has happened.”

Not only have there been more medical marijuana arrests during Obama’s administration than the entire Bush regime, but even in states like California and Washington, there’s been a steady rise in the number of people being raided even though they’re in full compliance with state law. The federal government has threatened landlords and financial institutions working with medical marijuana businesses; the IRS has been involved with audits; pro-pot lawmakers have been bullied; and veterans using marijuana for conditions like post-traumatic stress disorder have been denied medical benefits by the Veterans Administration—all because of marijuana’s Schedule I status.

On the other hand, dropping pot down a notch to Schedule II (let alone III, IV or V, or removing it from the Controlled Substances Act completely) would be a big step in resolving the clash between state and federal law, since such a move would at least acknowledge marijuana’s medical utility and allow doctors to legally prescribe it.

So what can be done to reschedule marijuana in a country where the “drug czar” is required by law to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a Schedule I substance—in any form?

Time to put on our citizen-journalist’s hat and go through the looking glass into the bizarre legal labyrinth of the rescheduling process. Kris Hermes warned that it wouldn’t be easy: “Bureaucrats shut down and refuse to talk when it’s convenient for them not to talk… when it suits their purpose!”

I Contact the DEA

Phoning the DEA is an unnerving experience—a sensation similar to being in high school and calling your dad at 2 am to inform him that you’ve crashed the family car (though now safe in the knowledge that the NSA will keep tabs on me).

I get a DEA representative on the phone. He goes by the name Rusty. (Perhaps because of his employer’s corroded views on ending the drug war?)

“Could I get any information regarding the rescheduling of medical marijuana?”

“I don’t want to spark a debate,” Rusty from the DEA replies. “I don’t know if that’s something we’d weigh in on. I don’t know what the point would be—our stance is pretty much on our website.”

Rusty from the DEA informs me that the agency’s position on medical marijuana can be found under the tab astutely labeled “The Dangers and Consequences of Marijuana Abuse.” (The thirty-page PDF reads like some bureaucrat’s idea for a remake of Reefer Madness.)

The key words in this manifesto: dangers, consequences, abuse. That doesn’t seem to indicate much willingness to consider pot’s medical value. Apparently, the DEA is still convinced that cancer victims are merely “abusing” marijuana to alleviate their chemotherapy-induced vomiting and nausea.

Rusty from the DEA adds: “You know, Congress can change this at any point—which people seem to forget.”

Perfect. That would be the same body that recently shut down the federal government and threatened the United States with default. But while the DEA might say that rescheduling is up to Congress, according to the ASA, that’s not exactly the case. The DEA actually delays the process—with no time limit imposed for answering rescheduling petitions, the agency takes the longest possible time before reaching a decision. (And then it says no.) To get around to denying the ASA’s rescheduling petition, it took the federal government a whopping nine years.

I Contact the FDA

According to a memorandum of understanding between the DEA and the Food and Drug Administration, a rescheduling petition has to go through the FDA. (Despite the fact that the DEA is under no obligation to recognize the conclusions of that agency.) Meanwhile, roughly every nineteen minutes, an American dies of accidental prescription-drug overdose—and these are pills approved by the FDA. (“Approved!”) Since the big pharmaceutical companies can’t make money off homegrown medical marijuana, might that be swaying the FDA’s recommendation?

“Can I ask a few questions about the rescheduling of medical marijuana?” I ask an unnamed FDA representative.

“I’m looking into this for you,” she replies.

Moments later…

“We cannot comment on this topic due to pending citizen petitions, other than to say our analyses and decision-making processes are ongoing.”

Not much to work with there, though I’m intrigued by the mention of “pending citizen petitions.” I press on: “What would be the process needed for medical marijuana to be approved by the FDA?”

“As you are aware, Schedule 1 drugs have no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and as I indicated before, we cannot comment on this topic of rescheduling due to pending citizen petitions.”

My information parade has been rained out. Why so cagey? After all, the FDA approved Marinol, whose active ingredient is 100 percent synthetic THC (i.e., the stuff that makes pot so dangerous and addictive that it has to be classified as Schedule I). And Marinol, strangely enough, is Schedule III—even though no pot plant in the history of marijuana has tested at 100 percent THC. (Even the strongest pot these days clocks in at under 40 percent.)

So my basic question goes unanswered, though the FDA representative does grant me an open invitation to check out the agency’s website—anytime I please!

My inquiry at the Justice Department yields similar results: “Hi Harmon—DOJ’s enforcement policy on marijuana is in the attached. Thanks.”

My attempt at securing a comment from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals—which threw out the ASA’s appeal on its rescheduling petition—doesn’t go much better: “I’m sorry. I don’t know the answer to your question. I am sure there must be subject matter experts out there who would know.… Good luck!”

Down and Down the Rabbit Hole…

At the heart of the approval process is the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Ironically—or maybe not—the organization is funded by the federal government. Catch-22: for the DEA to reschedule marijuana, scientific studies authorized by NIDA have to prove its medical benefits. This is basically like putting the mice in charge of the mousey snacks. In his now-famous about-face on medical marijuana, Dr. Sanjay Gupta pointed out how many of NIDA’s studies are actually designed to find detrimental effects—with only about 6 percent, he estimates, looking into medical benefits. The end result of NIDA’s efforts: the almost-complete suppression of research into the therapeutic value of marijuana.

“Will Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s statement have any impact on rescheduling medical marijuana?” I ask the NIDA rep.

NIDA’s response: “The best resource for questions about rescheduling is the Drug Enforcement Administration.” (A phone number is provided.)

Reaching deep into my citizen-journalist’s bag of tricks, I try a more straightforward approach: “What would it take to have medical marijuana rescheduled? Clearly we’re at a crossroads where public opinion is changing, yet the federal government doesn’t want to change its stance. Is it left to further scientific studies or any other factors?”

The Nation is facing a crippling postal rate hike—donate by October 31 to help us foot this $120,272 bill.

“You’ll need to contact the DEA for questions about rescheduling.”

And so I’m back at square one. It turns out that getting an answer from the federal government on rescheduling marijuana is a lot like contacting the local Scientology center and asking them to go on record about the planet Xenu. In the meantime, the Supreme Court recently declined to hear ASA’s appeal on its rescheduling petition—the one that the DEA waited nine years to reject, and that the DC Circuit Court turned down on appeal, declaring that only Congress has the power to amend the Controlled Substances Act.

If the federal government is determined to maintain marijuana as a highly illegal Schedule 1 substance—despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary and an ongoing sea change in public opinion—then perhaps its best ploy at this point would be to sit on its hands and do absolutely nothing.

Mission accomplished.

Also In This Issue

Katrina vanden Heuvel: “Why Its Always Been Time to Legalize Marijuana

Mike Riggs: “Obama’s War on Pot

Carl L. Hart: “Pot Reform’s Race Problem

Harry Levine: “The Scandal of Racist Marijuana Possession Arrests—and Why We Must Stop Them

Martin A. Lee: “Let a Thousand Flowers Bloom: The Populist Politics of Cannabis Reform

Martin A. Lee: “The Marijuana Miracle: Why a Single Compound in Cannabis May Revolutionize Modern Medicine

Kristen Gwynne: “Can Medical Marijuana Survive in Washington State?

Atossa Araxia Abrahamian: “Baking Bad: A Potted History of High Times

Various Contributors: “The Drug War Touched My Life: Why I’m Fighting Back

And only online…

J. Hoberman: “The Cineaste’s Guide to Watching Movies While Stoned

Seth Zuckerman: “Is Pot-Growing Bad for the Environment?

Harmon Leon

October 30, 2013