Nevada can make MARIJUANA legal by voting on Nov. 7th, 2006

dj_john69 · Post by **dj_john69** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 5:58 pm

On November 7th, 2006, we...the Nevada voters can make a difference on Nevada's marijuana laws. Question #7 on the ballot deals with making pot legal...up to 1 ounce on a person over the age of 21.

Here's some interesting info: http://www.regulatemarijuana.org/

Why should I vote for the marijuana initiative (Question 7) this November?

Question 7 provides a sensible alternative to Nevada's current marijuana laws, which do not work. Why do we say our laws don't work? Because anybody who wants to use marijuana currently is. What we're proposing is removing marijuana from the criminal market -- where it finances the activities of violent gangs and drug dealers -- and putting marijuana into a tightly regulated and controlled market, where we can tax it and place sensible safeguards on its sale.

Drug dealers don't card, but once Question 7 becomes law, everyone who sells marijuana will.

What does Question 7 do?

Question 7 would allow for the possession and sale of up to one ounce of marijuana by adults ages 21 and older in the state of Nevada. By removing marijuana from the criminal market, Question 7 takes money out of the hands of violent gangs and drug dealers and taxes it. Half of the tax money would fund state-sponsored alcohol and drug treatment, while the other half would be earmarked for the general fund, where it can be used for education, fixing the roads, and other expenses the state faces.

Question 7 institutes reasonable safeguards on who may purchase marijuana and how marijuana is sold: Only state-licensed shops will be able to sell marijuana. The shops cannot be located within 500 feet of a school or house of worship. No place that sells alcohol will be allowed to sell marijuana -- nor would gas stations, convenience stores, grocery stores, casinos, or dance halls, and you’d have to be 21 years of age or older and show valid ID to even enter a shop. Finally, Question 7 doubles the penalties for giving or selling marijuana to a minor, and it doubles the maximum penalties for killing someone while driving under the influence of marijuana, alcohol, or any other drug.

Is Question 7 for medical marijuana?

No, Question 7 is about taking the sale of small amounts of marijuana to adults out of the hands of violent gangs and drug dealers and putting it into a tightly regulated market. However, even though the state allows patients to possess marijuana, it does not provide a legal and safe way for patients to obtain it.

Although Question 7 is not specifically geared toward patients, it will give them a safe way to obtain a consistent supply of their medicine by setting up a regulated system of state-licensed marijuana retail shops. Currently, state-registered medical marijuana patients are forced to resort to the criminal market to obtain their medicine.

Will Question 7 increase teen access to marijuana or send the wrong message to children?

That’s a reasonable concern. But Question 7 does not make it easier for teens to get marijuana, and it does not send the wrong message to children. It’s a fact that our current laws don’t work. Right now, anyone who wants marijuana can get it -- no matter how young they are. Under the current system of prohibition, 86% of high school seniors admit to the federal government that they find marijuana easy to obtain ... a figure that has remained nearly constant over the past 30 years. Here in Nevada, nearly half of high school seniors admit to having tried marijuana, and one in five admit to using it habitually.

Under Question 7, we'll know who is selling marijuana and whom they’re selling it to. You’d have to be an adult aged 21 or older with a valid ID to even enter retail establishments that sell marijuana. Also, Question 7 would prohibit any establishment from being within 500 feet of a school -- and it doubles the penalty for giving or selling marijuana to a minor. The state of Nevada has undeniably succeeded in reducing teen smoking through the We Card program. There is no reason to think that a similar -- and even more restrictive -- program for marijuana would not have similar success. Drug dealers don’t card.

Won’t Question 7 mean more stoned drivers on the road?

Anybody who wants to use marijuana is already doing so because our current laws are a complete failure. It’s silly to believe that someone who isn’t using marijuana because it’s illegal would suddenly start smoking marijuana once Question 7 passes and then ignore the DUI laws. However, if someone is reckless enough to get behind the wheel intoxicated, Question 7 punishes that person by doubling the current penalties for killing someone while driving under the influence of marijuana, alcohol, or any other drug. Our campaign is completely opposed to anyone who drives intoxicated, and we believe they should be severely punished if they do.

Is the driving-under-the-influence provision too strict?

Question 7 increases the maximum penalty only for people who kill someone while driving under the influence. It does not increase the minimum penalty. We firmly believe that anyone who drives under the influence of marijuana, alcohol, or any other drug should be punished. And anyone who kills someone while driving impaired should be punished severely.

Won't Question 7 make it illegal to drive if you've used marijuana within the past 30 days?

No. Question 7 does not create a law that criminalizes sober drivers. Unfortunately, that law is already on the books in Nevada. Question 7 cannot fix every bad law in the state. But we hope that Question 7 will bring attention to this law and that the legislature will pass a law that accurately measures marijuana intoxication.

Is marijuana a gateway to harder drugs?

The gateway theory is just a myth made up by prohibitionists to justify making something illegal that is less harmful than alcohol. According to a recent study commissioned by the British Parliament, "the gateway theory has little evidence to support it despite copious research." According to the Institute of Medicine (in a report commissioned by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy), "There is no evidence that marijuana serves as a stepping stone [to other drugs] on the basis of its particular physiological effect." To put it simply, if you ask hard drug users if they’ve used marijuana, it’s not surprising that they have. But the vast majority of marijuana users do not move on to use hard drugs. Otherwise, we would have nearly 100 million people in this country who use hard drugs.

Won’t Question 7 allow people to have too much marijuana?

Question 7 allows the sale and possession of only a small amount of marijuana -- limited to no more than an ounce, the same amount patients are allowed to possess under Nevada’s medical marijuana law. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the government agency that supplies marijuana to federally approved medical marijuana patients, one ounce equals roughly 31 marijuana cigarettes -- or the equivalent of a pack-and-a-half of tobacco cigarettes.

Where will the marijuana stores be located?

Question 7 contains sensible safeguards that restrict who can buy marijuana, who can sell it, and where they can sell it. Only state-licensed shops will be able to sell marijuana, and they cannot be located within 500 feet of a school or house of worship. Also, no place that sells alcohol will be allowed to sell marijuana -- nor would gas stations, convenience stores, grocery stores, casinos, or dance halls. Finally, you’d have to be an adult aged 21 or older with a valid ID to even enter a marijuana store. This is a vast improvement over our current marijuana laws, which have created a violent criminal market where drug dealers sell marijuana wherever they want, to whomever they want.

If Question 7 passes, won’t the feds just come in and shut it down?

It is within Nevada’s power to pass this law. Back when Nevada’s medical marijuana initiative was on the ballot, federal authorities threatened to shut it down if it passed. It’s been in effect now for over five years, and these threats never materialized. In an age when the federal government cannot manage to inspect even five percent of containers coming into this country or adequately respond to a hurricane, one would hope they have better things to do than prosecute Nevadans who are abiding by state law.

Register to VOTE and make a difference !!!

~John

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:32 pm

Marijuana is a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act. You can vote on it all you want, Federal Law supercedes State Law in all cases, up to and includine medical weed. Good luck.

Desert Duck · Post by **Desert Duck** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:22 pm

helitack wrote:Marijuana is a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act. You can vote on it all you want, Federal Law supersedes State Law in all cases, up to and including medical weed. Good luck.

Corected Heli's misspellings (were you stoned?), and have to say"Go get 'em!!" California has decent laws on the books, and the Feds are now more interested in the legal sellers than the illegal dealers. This is an issue where the Federal Government is behind the times (again), and it will take more conservative states to join the fray before the Gov realizes that it's in the wrong (if it ever does).

The recreational and medicinal marijuana industry in the United States represents close to 6Bil annually, and the Feds best get on board quick or they're gonna continue to lose a HUGE slice of that tax pie!! Personally, I don't feel that we, as Americans, can afford to wait. Under current law, the only people who profit are individual police agencies (increased funding combined with seized assets), and the dealers and growers.

We can either continue to stumble along insisting that alcohol and tobacco are fine (as people die from both), and that marijuana is the scourge of all mankind and the root of all terrorism (total bullshit, herb doesn't flourish in the desert), or we can take a look at ourselves and our laws, and agree to change them.

Please excuse if I ramble (I've been drinking), but you'll notice I'm also paranoid about mistakes (stoned).

not edited

Post by **Eric** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:20 pm

I agree with the Duck.

The feds will never change the laws until the states lead the way. Prohibition (the alcohol one) started at the state level and only went national when Congress realized enough people seemed to want it to pass it. The same, in reverse, will happen with mary-g-wanna. It will only become legal when Congress thinks they're going to lose more (ie: re-election) by opposing legalization than by just making it legal.

Besides- we're what? 16 years into the war on drugs, and they're still as common as cracks in the sidewalk. This is not a war that the government will ever win.

And you know there's something wrong when neither the criminals or the cops want it legalized.

Lorgasm · Post by **Lorgasm** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:40 am

Hi.
Wish I lived in NV right now. I'm in FLA. I believe strongly in the legalization of Marijuana; for medicinal purposes and/or otherwise. I believe that if you need it, you should be able to cultivate, posses, and smoke (or eat).

It is sad that we are in a society that a doctor can risk losing his/her liscence if he/she even suggests to the cancer patients, AIDS patients, MS, etc. taking marijuana to help with their pain, appetite, nausea.

I know about the synthetic "alternative" which is Marinol. It contains the ingredient THC that is found in Marijuana. People listen, Marinol is just not that effective as actual pot. Case in point: you take Marinol, then due to your nause, you vomit it out, you take another, another, another...You now have OD'd. Also, Marinol is very expensive!!!! Patients cannot monitor the administration of Marinol, but can monitor the ingestion of pot.

Just something to think about. My sister had cancer and I did some research on the matter. I hope y'all vote and I wish you luck.

XOXO, Lorgasm

pinemom · Post by **pinemom** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:03 am

I need to re-register at my new addy. But yes I will be voting...AND I will vote yes on measure 7
why? not neccesarily cause I like to smoke on occasion, but at least for our government to TRY to use the taxes correctly and...ok picture this lil' senerio...use drug taxes to get rid of meth labs!

Meth is the leading cause of life loss...and Im not just talking death here...Ive lost alot of friends due to them starting to use...then abuse it. They drop out of college, they quit their great paying jobs(or are fired),sell their cars, cut themselves off from family and friends(ok only the friends who dont do it every minute of everyday).

I have a teenage daughter, my worst fear is that at some point someones gonna offer her a line of meth...it will eventually happen. My worst'er fear is she's gonna except it, and her will power will be knocked out of her conscience and she'll be hooked!

Lorgasm · Post by **Lorgasm** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:23 am

(Takes Pinemom by hand)

I have to agree with PM on this too. Tax the herb and utilize the $$$ for good and not evil: education and treatment (drug related), destruction of labs, giving the recovering a better life.

I admire the parents of today. I don't know how they do it. I applaude all of you.

Incarcerating the folks over a bloody joint is pointless and unecessary. Not to mention not very cost effective. There are much more serious perps out there with much more serious drugs that can kill and destroy the lives of our loved ones.

How stupid they tax the cigarettes, push the sale of cigarettes, increase the nicotine in cigarettes, and punish for marijuana.

pinemom · Post by **pinemom** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 7:46 am

thnx Lor' Yes very scary about that damn Methshit...it really is our countries worst disease! I betcha's if it isnt got under control...we will start losing more people to it than cancer!

It would be amazing to have a explainable taxation on Marijane, The lives it would eventually save would be unmeasureable!

blyslv · Post by **blyslv** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 7:51 am

helitack wrote:Marijuana is a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act. You can vote on it all you want, Federal Law supercedes State Law in all cases, up to and includine medical weed. Good luck.

1. Federal law often trumps, but not in all cases.

2. Laws change. Who do you think made it schedule one, Posiedan, Captian Kirk? No. They were made by mere mortals who put their pants on one leg at a time. People like Foley or Hastert or Santorum. Wise leaders with an eye to the future and a desire to do the Right Thing.

3. If a state makes it legal, that's one less set of LEOs to worry about.

4. The more states make it legal, the more the federal laws will become illegitimate and thus subject to change.

Fatalism is soooooooo tiresome, doancha think?

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:19 pm

Changes must take place within the states, one by one, then congress will ultimately change the fed laws. someone is speaking with the voice of the fuzz. who could that be?

In Montana, there are those that protect drug dealers, but it comes at a price for drug dealers, pay up or we bust you. I know dealers that have dealt for years and have never got busted, but someone new moves into an area and wham they end up busted. Lots of corrupt feds and local cops making some moonlighting cash.

If you live in NV not just vote, but speak up and show your support and don't let anyone scare you from doing so!!!!

AIIZ

dj_john69 · Post by **dj_john69** » Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:40 pm

Here's some more interesting reading...the actual ballot question and some other stuff...Read from page 37 - 52: http://www.secretaryofstate.biz/nvelect ... nGuide.pdf

~John

Ron · Post by **Ron** » Sat Oct 07, 2006 9:35 am

Go, Nevada and thanks to dj_john for posting this info here! Following the campaign schnanagins of the local, and federal, government provides bonus amusement and chagrin. For those so interested the locals and feds have a well deserved reputation for breaking campaign law to try to get this, and other similar NV initiatives defeated over the years....

Ron

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Sat Oct 07, 2006 9:44 am

Hey if legalize all drugs then we would have less corruption in government and law.

I have personally seen DEA agents selling drugs!

Using their office to file false reports to open investigations on personal non-drug related matters!

I know some drug dealers that have cops on the payrole or potrole.

AIIZ

Lorgasm · Post by **Lorgasm** » Sat Oct 07, 2006 9:44 am

and if you don't vote....don't bitch

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 10:27 pm

Oregon. Medical marijuana.

Oregon law allows for card holders to have marijuana. Feds say this is a no go. Oregon police tell feds to bust card holders on their own as they won't do it. When busts happen to medical marijuana holders, state reps raise a big ass fuss over state vs. fed jurisdiction. The result? Generally medical marijuana folks don't get busted. They would have to get jailed in a fed prison too. Just not worth it except in high profile cases where the feds need a whipping boy just to show they mean business.

Marijuana is illegal in Amsterdam too. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean you will get busted for it.

dj_john69 · Post by **dj_john69** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 4:22 pm

For those of you on Myspace...please add these guys: http://www.myspace.com/crcm ...they are in charge of Committee to Regulate and Control Marijuana in Nevada. Add the and show your support !!

Thanks!

~John

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 12:44 am

Rob the Wop wrote:Oregon. Medical marijuana.

Oregon law allows for card holders to have marijuana. Feds say this is a no go...

Yep, and it's still common in Oregon. That is of course occasionally threatened by random dumbshittery, such as the guy with the "Field of Dreams" behind Parkrose--Home of Tonya Harding--High School who had so many plants growing in his back yard that kids could literally walk up to the fence and pick the buds poking through. (tens of thousands of people in PDX went "DUDE! Why the fuck didn't somebody tell ME about this?!")

Even though a lot of people in Oregon could get a medical card easily, many don't because once they do, their name will be on a federal register somewhere and if the law is ever repealed, Uncle Sam knows where to look first.

There used to be a Portland cop that sold weed out of a parking structure at a local hospital, and a state trooper that sold it on the coast.

Good luck, Nevada. It will surprise no one if the politicians support prostitution and gambling but shoot down weed 'cause it's harmful.

-zb

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:33 am

ZaphodBurner wrote: Even though a lot of people in Oregon could get a medical card easily, many don't because once they do, their name will be on a federal register somewhere and if the law is ever repealed, Uncle Sam knows where to look first.

Sorry ZB, but this is paranioa talking. Yes, they are on a list. But Feds charging in on people can happen already, there doesn't need to be any law repealed. If Oregon state repeals the law, it becomes a sticky subject open to major legal battles if they stalk the same folks they gave permission to. Also look at who they are stalking. How newsworthy are stories of cops busting cancer patients after allowing them to have their medicine for years. How many elected officials want that mess pinned to them?

There is a big difference between the public image of a crack dealer and the public image of a physician perscribed marijuana ingesting cancer patient. Few state and local officials want to be the person associated with photos of sickly citizens in hospital gowns being manhandled by police. And this is EXACTLY the image that makes the news.

So, could it happen? Legally- absolutely. Practically- even if the state repeals the law, I would expect there to be a grace period of forgiveness. And I seriously doubt that they would go after most of the patients anyway. Just not good LOCAL politics (Feds are going to do whatever they want, but even then the costs involved will generally keep them away from patients).

FungusAmongus · Post by **FungusAmongus** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:59 am

I'm glad to see that more propositions like this are coming foward. This one struck me as odd though. It definately is a step in the right direction, and i encourage all those elligable to vote in nevada to do so. But, personally, I'm not all for the taxation of pot. I'm all for hemp and what it can do, and also for cannibus and what it is capable of. I'd much rather see things moving in the direction of decriminalization instead of turning it into a tax dollar cash cow.~

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 7:34 am

Let us not forget that corrupt DEA have and do belong to Hate Groups. They also allow others to funnel drugs into minority getto's.

So how much money is the DEA spending this time to defeat a public referendum?

AIIZ

dadinpain · Post by **dadinpain** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 10:36 am

Good luck to you all, and please dont forget to vote. Just as my screen name says. I have been in pain for many years and my liver can thank me later for not abusing it with all the prescribed pills the doctors have me on. Oxycotin. morphine, vicodine, percocet. MMJ in california is setting the standards, and many states are following. Get the word out, and show them you care.

Later Gator
Dad

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 10:44 am

Apollonaris Zeus wrote:Let us not forget that corrupt DEA have and do belong to Hate Groups. They also allow others to funnel drugs into minority getto's.

So how much money is the DEA spending this time to defeat a public referendum?

AIIZ

dare i ask for cites to support your claims?

or is that too threatening?

EvilDustBooger · Post by **EvilDustBooger** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:05 am

Well,...it was a good thought.
----------------------------------

2006 Mid-Term Election Results Offer Mixed Bag For Marijuana Law Reform

November 8, 2006 - Washington, DC, USA

Washington, DC: The 2006 mid-term elections offered mixed results for marijuana law reformers, with voters rejecting three statewide liberalization efforts, but approving numerous local measures to 'deprioritize' pot law enforcement.

Voters in Colorado, Nevada, and South Dakota turned back efforts to amend state penalties on the use and possession of cannabis. Colorado's Amendment 44, which gained 40 percent of the vote, sought to eliminate civil penalties on the possession and use of up to one ounce of marijuana by adults. Question 7 in Nevada, which won 44 percent of the vote, sought to remove all civil penalties for the private possession and use of small quantities of cannabis, and directed state officials to create a statewide system for the taxation, legal cultivation, distribution, and sale of marijuana to adults by licensed vendors. South Dakota's Initiated Measure 4, which gained 48 percent of the vote, sought to allow the physician-authorized use of cannabis for medicinal purposes.

Regarding the three failed statewide initiative efforts, NORML Executive Director Allen St. Pierre stated: "These outcomes, while disappointing, were not unexpected. Despite these results, adults in both Colorado and Nevada continue to live under state laws that authorize the medical use of marijuana and allow adults to possess and use small amounts of pot without the threat of incarceration or a criminal record. South Dakota's result, while disheartening, does nothing to change the fact that according to national polls, nearly eight out of ten Americans support the physician-approved use of medicinal cannabis."

Local cannabis reform initiatives won overwhelmingly in yesterday's election. In Eureka Springs, Arkansas, 64 percent of voters approved a citywide ordinance directing local law enforcement to issue a summons in lieu of a criminal arrest for adults found to be in possession of up to one ounce of cannabis and/or marijuana paraphernalia. The measure, sponsored by the Fayetteville/University of Arkansas chapter of NORML, is the first pot 'depenalization' measure ever approved in the state.

In California, local voters approved a trio of pot 'deprioritization' measures. In Santa Barbara, 65 percent of voters backed Measure P, which directs municipal police to make all law enforcement activities related to the investigation, citation, and/or arrest of adult cannabis users their lowest priority, and also appoints a community oversight committee to monitor police activity as it pertains to marijuana law enforcement. Santa Cruz and Santa Monica voters approved similar measures (Measure K and Measure Y) each by votes of 63 percent.

A separate pot deprioritization measure (Initiative 2) also passed in Missoula, Montana, with 53 percent of the vote.

Finally, in Massachusetts, voters in several House and Senate Districts approved public policy questions concerning the decriminalization of cannabis for personal use and the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes. Since 2002, more than 420,000 Massachusetts voters in 110 communities have approved similar non-binding resolutions.

NORML's St. Pierre said that the strong showing in local races demonstrates Americans' overwhelming support for more responsible pot policies. "What these results tell us is that citizens strongly support reforming America's marijuana laws, but that they prefer to do so incrementally," he said. "These successes on the municipal level, once again, affirm that a majority of US citizens don't want adults who use marijuana responsibly to face arrest or jail, and they do not want their tax dollars spent on policies that prioritize targeting and prosecuting marijuana offenders."

St. Pierre added that this year's election results also have potential federal ramifications, noting that California Democrat Nancy Pelosi, who now stands to be House Speaker, is a longtime supporter and former co-sponsor of medical marijuana legislation. "It is our hope that with new Democratic leadership in the US House of Representatives we will finally be able to move forward with legislation and hearings on both the physician-approved medical use of marijuana as well as the decriminalization of cannabis for responsible adults," he said.

For more information, please contact NORML Executive Director Allen St. Pierre or NORML Senior Policy Analyst Paul Armentano at (202) 483-5500.

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 12:54 pm

Hurray for us!

But I forgot what we were talking about?????

Who cares I'm stoned!!!!

AIIZ

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:43 pm

joel the ornery wrote:
Apollonaris Zeus wrote:Let us not forget that corrupt DEA have and do belong to Hate Groups. They also allow others to funnel drugs into minority getto's.

So how much money is the DEA spending this time to defeat a public referendum?

AIIZ
dare i ask for cites to support your claims?

or is that too threatening?

The Military Intelligence is involved along with the Secretary of Defense!!!!

AIIZ

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 2:53 pm

Apollonaris Zeus wrote:
joel the ornery wrote:
Apollonaris Zeus wrote:Let us not forget that corrupt DEA have and do belong to Hate Groups. They also allow others to funnel drugs into minority getto's.

So how much money is the DEA spending this time to defeat a public referendum?

AIIZ
dare i ask for cites to support your claims?

or is that too threatening?
The Military Intelligence is involved along with the Secretary of Defense!!!!

Our Administation turns a blind eye because it negotiates a covert operation to release hostages from militants!

AIIZ

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 2:56 pm

So close to Area 51...trust no one

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Wed Nov 22, 2006 1:32 pm

Apollonaris Zeus wrote:
joel the ornery wrote:
Apollonaris Zeus wrote:Let us not forget that corrupt DEA have and do belong to Hate Groups. They also allow others to funnel drugs into minority getto's.

So how much money is the DEA spending this time to defeat a public referendum?

AIIZ
dare i ask for cites to support your claims?

or is that too threatening?
The Military Intelligence is involved along with the Secretary of Defense!!!!

AIIZ

Our Administation turns a blind eye because it negotiates a covert operation to release hostages from militants!

AIIZ

They are selling the insurgency weapons!

AIIZ

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:21 am

Apollonaris Zeus wrote:
Apollonaris Zeus wrote:
joel the ornery wrote: dare i ask for cites to support your claims?

or is that too threatening?
The Military Intelligence is involved along with the Secretary of Defense!!!!

AIIZ

Our Administation turns a blind eye because it negotiates a covert operation to release hostages from militants!

AIIZ

They are selling the insurgency weapons!

AIIZ

And the administration is using that money to finance other Insurgence groups in other countries!

AIIZ

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 8:30 pm

Apollonaris Zeus wrote:
Apollonaris Zeus wrote:
Apollonaris Zeus wrote: The Military Intelligence is involved along with the Secretary of Defense!!!!

AIIZ

Our Administation turns a blind eye because it negotiates a covert operation to release hostages from militants!

AIIZ

They are selling the insurgency weapons!

AIIZ
And the administration is using that money to finance other Insurgence groups in other countries!

AIIZ

No its not too threatening because you all heard of the Iran-Contra covert operation. Everyone of the above agencies broke the law.

I still don't trust any of the above agencies, perhaps I never will!

Corrupt to the CORE!

AIIZ

Nevada can make MARIJUANA legal by voting on Nov. 7th, 2006

Are you voting November 7th ??

Nevada can make MARIJUANA legal by voting on Nov. 7th, 2006

The way things work.

Re: The way things work.

Re: The way things work.