littlebigman
Registered on
Jun-21-2004
More User Info
|
Message #980 posted by littlebigman (Info) June 21, 2004 19:38:43 ET
OPEN LETTER TO MPP AND ROB CAMPIA
It's great that y'all are going to court on something,baby steps.
Some day,maybe when y'all grow up,you will more fully understand
how Americas system of checks and balance works.
In the example of the cannabis issue,like any other civil rights issue,
civil rights challenges to unconstitutional laws are the appropriate response.
The growing of plants goes to ones basic human rights,such rights are in fact protected
by our constitution by way of the first and ninth amendments.
The idea that one would need to go begging any legislative representative for basic
human rights already protected by the constitution is an idea held strong by ignorance
and naivety, and will, if "successful", compromise our ability to regain the full impact of our rights, in court. The more reasonable the access that congress grants,the less our ability to use the arguments in court to gain our full and proper access protected by the constitution.
Trying to convince folks to pass new laws may be a great way to cover your pay check
but it may end in screwing all of us out of our just constitutional rights.
This is not about someones opinion, or just another approach.
This is about the appropriate response when congress passes an unconstitutional law and the executive branch checks off on it, it then is taken to the third branch in the check and balance equation, by the people or person, and struck down, it's U.S. GOV. 101, iv only got an eighth grade education and i figured it out, shame on all you so called "POT" lawyers, i guess your to busy cashing your checks from defendants to be filing any civil cases?
One need not wounder if this approach works, one only needs to glance back at history to
confirm this "approach".
Take a look at racial equality, gender discrimination, discrimination based on sexual orientation, a woman's right to choose, the list goes on, whats wrong with you people?
Brown -vs- Board of education is the foundation from which the NAACP was born, so wheres ours?, the ACLU is to busy with other things, i guess.
Whats up, lets get it together, your "approach" is killing us.
Please stay away from congress, they work for the spooks!!
Some of us out here are actually fighting on the real battle fields,FED.DIST.COURTS.
So,while your out there pioneering and rangering money out of good intentioned unsuspecting folks who you have convinced your on the right track,we will be out here
winning the war against the war,and maybe,,just maybe,if you don't screw it up first, and if your smart, you will learn from our examples, because there are many more, important battles ahead,long after this one is settled,and the world will need your help.
REBOOT THE SCALES
some say americans are far to litigious
when i here that, it sounds so suspicious
i think it would be more accurate to say
lawyers are to litigious in an unduly frivolous way
americans are quite not litigious enough
thats why lawyers get away with their stuff
the lawyers control this third balancing pole
on which we all hang our hats
judicial, legislative, executive
i guess they handle all that
and i suppose they do what their told to do
by the ones who call the shots
those ones i don't know
so i call them the spooks
i just know its not any of us
so if lawyers run courts filled with frivolous suites
and folks facing bale on victimless dues
why then,would they further gridlock the scene
by passing more laws no one has seen
could it be they want to make us believe
that we cant go to court to get what we need
the one place they know we could find checks and balance
where constitutional tests should be crowding the palette
i think lawyers know
if folks took back the courts
the world would look much different of course
farmers, not spooks, might then have control
and possibly lawyers could get back their souls
our system might finally work as it should
by checking and dumping the laws that aren't good
while to many laws are part of the cause
if you still feel the urge to pass a new law
one new law i would never begrudge
would be a law to keep a lawyer from becoming a judge
that might give the scales a nudge
but next time you feel like your rights are suppressed
don't run crying to lawyers who run the congress
twas those crazy fools got you into your mess
take back the court rooms
reboot the scales
take your brain off the shelf and speak for yourself
balance the scale by telling your tale to the third branch of government
to build off that foundation was the framers intent
until we go there our democracy's spent
TO PLANT OR NOT TO PLANT
plant a seed, watch it grow
eat the fruit, you will know
it keeps you alive
and that is why your here today
some might say
it's the nature of gods way
in your garden you will find
the answers to the questions you ask in your mind
how to survive, how to thrive, how to heal
alive you'll feel
the pollution will fade
giving way to the trees that your garden has saved
oil rigs become obsolete
when your garden's growing plants that compete
a victory garden it once was called
all your problems could be solved
apply food, water,sun and love
maybe a little help from above
grow your houses, grow your cars
grow yourself steps that lead to the stars
wait
don't plant that seed yet
the spooks that ruled the day
took that human right away
was it while you wernt lookin
or perhaps you were
i guess the grocery stores
and wall mart doors
have made it all a blur
but if you could go back in time
and do whats right for human kind
there is no doubt inside my mind
you'd be growing hemp for Independence
and the ties that bind
OPEN MESSAGE TO ANITA RODDICK,
the boys and i are doing great!
iv got some pretty cool projects going on that I'm hoping will at least ripple if not rock the casba to its core.
i Finlay filed the case iv been speaking of and planning for years, the right to grow plants case. I'm about 7 months into it and it seems to be going well so far.
the case is in the 9th circuit federal court district and will most likely end up in the supreme court.
i don't know if you would remember, but in Nebraska i had got intuch with a California lawyer and explained the case to him, he thought it was interesting but i never heard from him again. just before i filed this case, i heard of a case in the 9th circuit court of appeals that might have some relevance. conrad and i drove to frisco and entered the court room just as the preceding began. low and behold it turned out to be the lawyer i had talked to on that occasion years prior, and what do ya know , he had extracted certain parts of my arguments and applied them to his medical cannabis law suit. when i heard the judges reaction to the arguments, i knew the case would win.
robert raich is the attorney's name and his timing could not have been more apropos.
the raich case not only protects me as a patient in the interim, but it set precedent that makes my case much more palatable to the courts.
if my case wins, it would Finlay allow for the potential of farmers to take back raw material feedstock production from oil corps, especially in the energy markets. as you can imagine the oil corps are watching this case closely.
i also filed a petition with the interior dept about 3 months ago, starting the official proses to list feral hemp as endangered do to DEA's mandate to eradicate the species into extinction, could this be an irreconcilable conflict of law, ha ha. well actually its not about DOI really listing the species, its about the required taxonomic eval they must go through to specifically identify a species or a sub specie variety. for all these years it has been left to DEA to arbitrarily classify wild industrial non drug hemp the same as the smokable.
it has been this classification that has kept the crop from being reintroduced and kept DEA
receiving hundreds of millions of $ for eradication efforts every year.
DOI may declare the world is round just as a matter of the routine science they use in getting to their policy decision of whether or not to list a species. for DEA the taxonomy is a policy decision.
I'm also in the proses of starting an organization somewhat in the vain of the ACLU, but far more target oriented like NAACP,which also was born out of civil suits against the gov - brown -vs- board of education and alike, so my organization is arising out of a proven model. there is a void in this country screaming for this kind of org.
constitutional tests on the battle fields of the third branch are the only way to take our country back without a bloody revolution, at least so far as i can see.
the case I'm arguing now will, in itself, make a huge difference in peoples lives, but its the not so obvious precedents that will be set by this case that will go to building a foundation for many other cases i have in mind on seemingly unrelated issues, but we all know everything is relative.
its amazing what you can do when you realize you can do pretty much whatever some ridicules mouth piece can do, and without all the bad side effects, its kind of like petroleum -vs- hemp, either source can get the job done, its just with the one there is a far greater price to pay.
don't get me wrong though, I'm always keeping an eye out for attorney's that haven't lost their souls, in fact heres a comunakay i just sent out to one who currently represents the tree sitting protesters trying to stop the destruction of the old growth.
Michael,
Yesterday i sent the case priority mail, i hope you'll get it tomorrow.
I wanted to request that, if possible, please try to read this case from
the perspective of what secures our right to grow a carrot or a tomato,
is it that it's just not against the law? Thats offal thin ice to base one's
natural ability to survive.
Standing stems from the current DEA permit proses and my involvement
with that proses.
I believe, and have put to the court, that DEA has no jurisdiction to issue
me a permit for the class of activities i intend to engage in.
I'm trying take the court to the argument that the first and ninth amendments
of the bill of rights guaranty the basic human right that DEA has unconstitutionally
and arbitrarily asserted jurisdiction over and denied.
The commerce clause works to reinforce my position.
I believe the conscientious objector cases I've tried to bring to the
courts attention, seeger-1965, and welsh-1970, may set precedent for the first
amendment argument.
The 1997-glucksberg case i believe may help to support the ninth amendment
argument.
I'm tying to avoid the privacy argument, if possible, because i believe the above arguments are more basic, more relevant, and more necessary not only to
the core of this case, but to help this case set precedent for future cases i have
in mind on seemingly unrelated issues.
There is much more to know about this case that i would feel more comfortable
discussing in person if your still with me after you reed the stuff you should be
receiving tomorrow.
Thanks for taking the time to reed this case,.again, thanks very much.
just another soldier,sincerely,
|
