My Blog

ok, not written in a while.. new posts are at fantasyfreddy.com/cblog.. but moving to nyc soon!

FantasyFreddy — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:09:20 GMT

yes, am very excited.. not forever, but maybe.. we shall see .. any way the wind blows!! shalom shalom!! shalom, salam, and peace!! we shall see! all i kno is, as the magnificent and resplendent and ..u kno.. whatever... lou reed says, ... " th beginning of a great adventure"!! yeah! cu soon!! f and feel free to write to say hi! will b painting and singing a lot, and doin lotsa law too! mostly law probably.. but always time to paint and sing!!! ... f

Reunite Texas "polygamist" families, stop smoking, voltaire quotes, the wild party by joseph moncure march, etc.

FantasyFreddy — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:31:01 GMT

Thursday, April 17. 2008 watch the video of ruined homes at cnn.com/larryking soooo shocking it is hard to describe. they tore these families apart because upset about plural marriage, and maybe getting married at young age without judicial approval. big whoop. do you know how many men (and women!) have many sexual partners they are not officially married to. and even have children with all these people. i mean, what is so shocking? that a religion condones it? do you know how many women in this world get pregnant as teenagers? many many millions i am sure. i mean, what's going on here??!! why the cops, guns, child services people? this is pure hatred and not understanding a way of life of a religious group, and believing it is ok, even legal and just, to persecute these families and "save" these children by ruining their lives. ok, i've said enuf for now. this is such an outrage it is hard to express!! from a nation that professes to care about and protect all religions. this horror must end now!!!! we must stop it now!! love, freddy Posted by fantasyfreddy at 23:20 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Edit entry Here is the applicable Texas law I found in 2 seconds on the web... It obviously says a minor may get married in Texas with a judge's approval. So all allowing the children to go home would do would be deciding that the ("minor") young women and men marrying and their parents know better what is in their "best interests" than some judge who is not even from their community or of their religious faith!! Here is the law I found on google!: § 2.103. COURT ORDER FOR UNDERAGE APPLICANT. (a) A minor may petition the court in the minor's own name for an order granting permission to marry. In a suit under this section, the trial judge may advance the suit if the best interest of the applicant would be served by an early hearing. (b) The petition must be filed in the county where a parent resides if a court has not awarded another person the right to consent to marriage for the minor. If a court has awarded another person the right to consent to marriage for the minor, the petition must be filed in the county where that person resides. If no parent or person who has the court-ordered right to consent to marriage for the minor resides in this state, the petition must be filed in the county where the minor lives. (c) The petition must include: (1) a statement of the reasons the minor desires to marry; (2) a statement of whether each parent is living or is dead; (3) the name and residence address of each living parent; and (4) a statement of whether a court has awarded to a person other than a parent of the minor the right to consent to marriage for the minor. (d) Process shall be served as in other civil cases on each living parent of the minor or on a person who has the court-ordered right to consent to marriage for the minor, as applicable. Citation may be given by publication as in other civil cases, except that notice shall be published one time only. (e) The court shall appoint an amicus attorney or an attorney ad litem to represent the minor in the proceeding. The court shall specify a fee to be paid by the minor for the services of the amicus attorney or attorney ad litem. The fee shall be collected in the same manner as other costs of the proceeding. (f) If after a hearing the court, sitting without a jury, believes marriage to be in the best interest of the minor, the court, by order, shall grant the minor permission to marry. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, § 1, eff. April 17, 1997. Amended by: Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 172, § 12, eff. September 1, 2005. Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 52, § 2, eff. September 1, 2007. Posted by fantasyfreddy at 14:54 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Edit entry US Constitution demands we leave those poor Mormons alone, and return their children to their parents!! The First Amendment of the Constitution states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Read that carefully. And think about it. And think about what free exercise of religion really means. And remember that many states, including Texas, allow young adults under age 16 to get married with judicial approval. And Texas allows those 16 or over to get married with parental approval. And across the country, and world, young women as young as 13 sometimes are starting to be "sexually" active... this is common. very common. and not usually prosecuted. So, this is really not about "child abuse". I saw the video on Larry King of those women, and their beautiful house, and empty beds. So so so sad. Yes, there are laws against polygamy. And against marriage under age 16 without judicial consent. But what would a judge ask? How old is your husband. Freedom of religion means that. And we must respect people's right to live as they want. If a young woman was beaten, as Texas police claim, then they should have arrested the alleged beater. I've got to go to bed. Remember, the ancestors of these very Mormons were persecuted, and families split apart, a few decades ago. There was a public outcry and the families were reunited. We should all speak out now to reunite these families. But this is not about a vote, or democracy. This is about the Constitution , and Free Exercise of Religion. Which is being banned here. "Polygamy" was common in Bible times, and still is in many countries, especially Muslim ones, and Sephardi Jews, but other remote societies too I am sure. (The Muslims and Sephardi Jews made a 4 wife limit.. there was no such limit in Biblical times.) Ashkenasi Jews only stopped marrying multiple wives 1000 years ago, and the ban has recently expired I hear. But I only want one wife!! ... My point is, we should honor the 1st Amendment, meaning the MOST important part of the whole of American law, and let it trump some silly laws about polygamy or needing "judicial " approval to marry at ages 13-15 (which we don't even know if that was happening or not anyway..) and remember such marriages are allowed in many states with parental or judicial approval! And in many countries without. And young marriages have been the norm worldwide for all of human history.. repeat: the norm worldwide for all of human history.. And so, when given conflicting laws, the way these things are resolved in American law is, THE MORE IMPORTANT LAW TRUMPS THE SILLY LAW: MEANING THE FIRST AMENDMENT FREEDOM OF RELIGION TRUMPS LAWS ABOUT POLYGAMY OR NEEDING JUDICIAL APPROVAL TO MARRY UNDER 16!! LET THE YEARNING FOR ZION PEOPLE PRACTICE THEIR RELIGION AND LIVE THEIR LIVES IN PEACE. AND LET THOSE FAMILIES LIVE TOGETHER IN PEACE, INCLUDING WITH THE FATHER OF MANY, WARREN JEFFS!! AND IF ANY CHILDREN WANT TO NOT GO HOME, THEN LET THEM GO LIVE WITH FOSTER FAMILIES! IF THEY WANT TO GO HOME, LET THEM!! IT IS ONLY RIGHT. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RELIGIOUS FREEDOM HERE, THE CORE OF WHY THIS NATION WAS FOUNDED IN THE FIRST PLACE, REMEMBER. (THE PURITANS WERE FREEING RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION, NEVER FORGET!!).. WE MUST NOT ALLOW THIS MODERN PERSECUTION TO PROCEED ANY LONGER!!! SHALOM, SALAAM, AND PEACE!! FRED PS: you really must watch the cnn/larry king special.. available on the internet too. it is so sad to see these grieving, lonely mothers, praying their children and husbands are returned. I think Marilyn was the name of the mother who spoke. And I felt sooo soo sad for her, watching her cry in that house without husbands or children!! I pray that the families are reunited tomorrow. And that the judge honors America and the world by honoring the Constitution, and honoring the rights of those poor persecuted people. Peace. Love, Fred PPS: I do not believe that there are allegations of beating women regularly. It sounds like an isolated incidence, if the phone call was real. However, if abuse is common, I would hope that it stops immediately.. I have heard now a woman (from a DIFFERENT plural marriage Mormon group) speak on CNN who says that beatings are often wife on wife, which must stop too. And I would hope that if beatings do go on, that these women leave the religious community for the outside world. However, I believe the heart of the government's case is "underage" plural marriage. While as I discussed earlier, marriage in Texas is allowed with parental consent as young as 16, and younger with judicial consent. So all these marriages were lacking was judicial consent. One way to prevent any abuse of women or children, if that is going on there, would be to issue a cell phone which could only call for emergency help to every man woman and child at the ranch, and tell them that they had the right to call for help, and make it clear to all that if anyone confiscated the cell phones or did not allow them to be charged, then the ranch would be shut down. That is just a way to provide an escape hatch for anyone living there if they might want to leave safely. And if any do chose to leave, I pray the outside community welcomes them with open arms and love. I do pray they are allowed to go back to their peaceful lives if they choose to do so, which I predict most if not all would. Oh, and I did not mean to imply earlier that Ashkenasi (European) Jews now conduct plural marriages again. We do not. But it is not my place to judge others' way of life. Shalom! Fred just read that many had cellphones when "rescued" , but they were confiscated, so unnecessary proposal i guess... f> Posted by fantasyfreddy at 00:53 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Edit entry Wednesday, April 16. 2008 NYTimes article @ NYC anti-smoking campaign: photos and interview with "Marie", who has had 20+ amputations.. due to smoking: the smoking reduced her circulation, so fingers, toes, pieces of those, and other parts, had to be cut off. She is still alive, and tells of her troubles to get us to quit smoking. We should all listen to her, any of us who still smoke.. Me, I'm not perfect yet.. Probably had about 6 ciggies in last 2-3 months. Still , now, after seeing ad, don't think will ever continue, thank G d!! Here's the article and an ad: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/city-unveils-another-hard-hitting-dont-smoke-ad/index.html?hp I bet that the videos are on youtube already, but have not checked. Shalom Shalom! Fred PS: If she were a guy, the photos would be x-rated. bet that'll get u 2 stop!! ;P f Posted by fantasyfreddy at 18:08 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Edit entry Voltaire quotes from quotationspage.com.. also read Candide!! Read it a few years ago, and is one of my faves b/c reminds me a lot of me!! just without the llamas!!! (read it to get the joke!) here are a bunch of his quotes,.. enjoy!!! f Voltaire (1694 - 177 French author, humanist, rationalist, & satirist [more author details] ...the safest course is to do nothing against one's conscience. With this secret, we can enjoy life and have no fear from death. Voltaire A witty saying proves nothing. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Quotations] All sects are different, because they come from men; morality is everywhere the same, because it comes from God. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Morality] Animals have these advantages over man: they never hear the clock strike, they die without any idea of death, they have no theologians to instruct them, their last moments are not disturbed by unwelcome and unpleasant ceremonies, their funerals cost them nothing, and no one starts lawsuits over their wills. Voltaire Anything too stupid to be said is sung. Voltaire Appreciation is a wonderful thing: It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well. Voltaire Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Doubt] [Uncertainty] Every man is guilty of all the good he didn't do. Voltaire God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. Voltaire - More quotations on: [God] God is always on the side of the big battalions. Voltaire History is a pack of lies we play on the dead. Voltaire I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Enemies] [Prayer] If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Atheism] Indeed, history is nothing more than a tableau of crimes and misfortunes. Voltaire - More quotations on: [History] [Crime] Indolence is sweet, and its consequences bitter. Voltaire It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Government] It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. Voltaire Judge of a man by his questions rather than by his answers. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Questioning] Love is a canvas furnished by Nature and embroidered by imagination. Voltaire Love truth, and pardon error. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Truth] Marriage is the only adventure open to the cowardly. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Marriage] Men are equal; it is not birth but virtue that makes the difference. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Equality] Prejudice is opinion without judgement. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Prejudice] Regimen is superior to medicine. Voltaire The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Medicine] The multitude of books is making us ignorant. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Books] [Ignorance] The secret of being boring is to say everything. Voltaire There is a wide difference between speaking to deceive, and being silent to be impenetrable. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Silence] Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Belief] To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered. Voltaire - More quotations on: [Stupidity] Posted by fantasyfreddy at 14:35 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Edit entry Tuesday, April 8. 2008 NYTimes today: Drinking Age limit encourages binge drinking leading to death upon reaching 21! This is what I have always said: the USA's laws making a minimum legal drinking age make alcohol seem wonderful and amazing and adult, leading to overdrinking by those under 21, and upon hitting 21. So the law has the opposite effect it intends. Smarter to just have no drinking age. Then we will have a healthier view towards drinking, not making it lok so exotic and wonderful. And younger Americans will drink less, and not die as much of binge drinking. It works in Spain and France, and it will work here! Love, Freddy here's the article: New York Times: April 8, 2008, 4:46 am Drinking to Extremes to Celebrate 21 The ritual of drinking 21 or more alcoholic beverages to celebrate the 21st birthday appears to be far more common than expected, according to new research. Jesse Drews died in March on his 21st birthday after a drinking binge.It’s estimated that more than four out of every five American 21-year-olds drink alcohol to celebrate the birthday milestone, which is the the legal drinking age in the United States. But a new study from University of Missouri researchers of 2,518 students shows that many young adults aren’t just drinking to celebrate — they are drinking to extremes. Among those students who drank alcohol to celebrate their 21st birthdays, 34 percent of the men and 24 percent of the women reported consuming 21 or more drinks, according to the research to be published in The Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. The report is believed to be the largest study of the “21 at 21″ drinking ritual, which often involves shots of alcohol. The students in the study were followed for four years and asked a variety of questions about their drinking behavior over the course of their college years. Although the findings likely can’t be applied to the general population, the data likely reflect the drinking culture at large, public universities, researchers said. Based on the data, researchers estimated that half of the men and more than a third of the women who drank on their birthdays experienced blood alcohol levels of 0.26 or higher, the level at which a person is severely impaired and at risk for choking on vomit or suffering serious injury. While researchers say its possible some students overstated how much they actually drank, the consistency of the answers suggests students are consuming large quantities of alcohol when they celebrate a 21st birthday. “I think a lot of people view this as a feel-good rite of passage and don’t calibrate what a big risk it is,'’ said Kenneth Sher, professor of psychological sciences at the University of Missouri-Columbia and the study’s lead author. Alcohol researchers have been searching for ways to curb the extreme drinking common on the 21st birthday. One concern is that interest in the ritual appears to be spreading because drinkers who attempt or succeed at downing 21 drinks post videos and photos of the drinking binges on YouTube or Flicker or social networking sites like MySpace. One of the biggest worries about the ritual is alcohol poisoning. The body’s ability to metabolize alcohol depends on several factors, including gender, weight, the type of alcohol, whether the person vomits during the binge and the time period during which the alcohol is consumed. But in some cases, as few as 10 drinks can push blood alcohol levels to 0.30, the point at which the respiratory system slows enough that death is possible. That appears to be what happened to Jesse Drews, a 21-year-old Fox Lake, Wis., resident who died on March 24, his 21st birthday. Although the death is still under investigation, it’s believed he may have attempted to drink 21 shots to celebrate at a Waupun, Wis., tavern. A friend who brought him home said he had “10 or 12 shots,'’ although his parents have since been told different stories about how much alcohol was consumed. What is known is that his family found him unresponsive at 4 a.m., and a hospital test showed a blood alcohol level of 0.38, according to his family and the Dodge County Sheriff’s Office. Waupun police chief Dale Heeringa said he couldn’t comment on the details of the investigation until the medical examiner’s report is finished. He said Mr. Drews did not finish 21 shots, although he did consume “a significant amount of alcohol.'’ Jesse’s mother, Jody Drews, said her son had been reluctant to go out that night but relented after friends persuaded him. He returned home around 1:15 a.m. and went to bed, and Mrs. Drews checked on him throughout the night, including around 3:30 a.m., when she heard him snoring and returned to bed. “I never in a million years thought we would be in this situation,'’ Mrs. Drews said. “Kids have to know about this risk. I hope anybody who goes into a bar and sees this happening will say something.'’ Clayton Neighbors, associate professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the University of Washington Center for the Study of Health and Risk Behaviors in Seattle, is studying Internet-based interventions he hopes will convince more young people to moderate their drinking on their 21st birthdays. In one study of 316 students, to be presented at the American Psychological Association conference this year, those who were given Web-based information about drinking prior to their 21st birthday drank less than students who didn’t receive the information. Students in the intervention group were asked how much they planned to drink on their 21st birthday and how common they believed extreme drinking really is. The interactive tool then showed them that only a minority of students drink 21 or more drinks. It also calculated a student’s blood alcohol level based on the amount he or she planned to drink. Giving students extra information about drinking appeared to result in blood alcohol levels that were about 25 percent lower than the group that wasn’t given the information, he said. “One of the problems is a lot of these kids don’t realize that 21 drinks in an hour can kill you,'’ Dr. Neighbors said. One group, Be Responsible About Drinking (B.R.A.D.), was started by family and friends of Michigan State University student Bradley McCue, who died from extreme drinking on his 21st birthday. The group sends out birthday cards prior to the 21st birthday warning people about the dangers of alcohol poisoning. The site also includes numerous charts showing how various numbers of drinks affect blood alcohol levels. And to see how alcohol affects you, based on standard height and weight charts, use this calculator. For a more detailed look at the 21st birthday drinking binge, see this earlier story by my colleague Kate Zernike at The Times. Posted by fantasyfreddy at 19:35 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Edit entry The Wild Party.. illus by Art Spiegelman, lyrics by ?.. now two broadway shows w/ cds' .. chek it!! Queenie was a blonde and her age stood still and She danced twice a day in Vaudeville.. Gray eyes lips like coals aglow her face was a painted mask of snow.. ok, just read it! precurser of rap!! and stunningly illustrated by the totally awesome art spiegelman (who i met once and signed and illustrated my first edition copy!!), of maus fame, who i will always love too!! btw, read maus too!! depressing, but amazing, and stunning!!! never again!!!! love, ff

new blogs on fantasyfreddy.com/cblog for now..

FantasyFreddy — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:55:13 GMT

i'm too lazy/busy to cut and paste right now.. so for latest blog updates (uv missed a few) ucan goto www.fantasyfreddy.com/cblog.. i am studying for the ca bar exam now, so can't deal.. won't write any new for a week. i'm thrilled barak is winning though!! he and his wife michelle and their awesome daughters will do a great job running this country and getting us and the world back on the right track... choo choo.. there's an obama train a comin!!! shalom shalom! peace and love!! Freddy PS: I wonder where that Power Puff Girls towel is now!! ... the story of that encounter, and how they stalked me to create that moment, is in an article they wrote for a Columbia publication that didn't print it, so I published it on my website instead.. it's called "meeting the ultimate campus icon" or something like that!! I love them!! They are so awesome!! They b icons 2!! big time!!! the real power puff girls, heroically saving the world!!!!!! xo F

DOCUMENTARY "GHOSTS OF ABU GRAIB" ON HBO IS AWESOME!! SHOWS TORTURE AND MURDER AS POLICY OF BUSH!!!!!

FantasyFreddy — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:30:59 GMT

MOVIE "GHOSTS OF ABU GRAIB" ON HBO: TORTURE AND MURDER BY US TROOPS AND CIA AND MERCENARIES!! Category: Life THE MOVIE IS A DOCUMENTARY SHOWING TORTURE AND MURDER AT ABU GRAIB, AND THE COVERUP. ONLY ONES PUNISHED WERE THOSE WHO TOOK PHOTOS!! THIS GOES TO THE TOP!! BE AFRAID!! BE VERY AFRAID!! WE MUST STOP THIS EVIL ADMINISTRATION NOW!!!!! NOW!! TORTURE AND MURDER WAS THEIR POLICY, AND STILL IS. DO NOT DOUBT IT. FIX IT!! LOVE, FREDDY

BIG BROTHER ON THE ATTACK!! WE MUST STOP THE INSANITY NOW!! LISTEN TO "BUSH CAN LICK MY ASS" FREE AT FANTASYFREDDY.COM FOR INSPIRATION, THEN STOP BIG BRO!! LOVE, FREDDY

FantasyFreddy — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:16:19 GMT

Wednesday, February 13. 2008 Senate advocates increased Big Brother Spying, legalizing phone companies' illegal and immoral mass spying!! This is many many Democrats siding with Bush and the Republicans!! How totally evil!! Sens. Leahy and Feingold are right. As are the 30 others who voted with them. The rest are wrong!! This spying has been turned into spying on millions of phones, probably hundreds of millions, and may be expanded (if not already) to every phone line in the nation.. every conversation in world, and emails too, will be tapped soon. BIG BROTHER IS HERE!! BE AFRAID!! BE VERY AFRAID!! THIS INFO WILL BE USED TO STIFEL POLITICAL ORGANIZING AND CONVERSATION, AND FOR ORDINARY BLACKMAIL. ALREADY HAS BEEN USED FOR THOSE PURPOSES, AND WILL AGAIN. FOREVER, AND LEGALLY NOW, UNLESS HOUSE STOPS THIS HORROR NOW. NEVER FORGET, FBI TAPPED MARTIN LUTHER KING AND USED TAPES OF CONVERSATIONS WITH WOMEN TO BLACKMAIL HIM. WATERGATE WAS ABOUT BREAKING INTO DANIEL ELLSBERG'S PSYCHIATRIST'S OFFICE TO STEAL NOTES OF HIS THERAPY TO DISCLOSE THOSE TREATMENT CONVERSATIONS TO THE WORLD, TO EXPLAIN HE IS CRAZY, AND THAT IS WHY HE RELEASED PENTAGON PAPERS WHICH PROVED THAT EVEN GOVT OFFICIALS ADVOCATING WAR IN VIETNAM DID NOT BELIEVE WAR WOULD SOLVE ANYTHING. LEADING TO MIKE GRAVEL READING THOSE PENTAGON PAPERS INTO SENATE RECORD, RISKING JAIL... I COULD GO ON.. MY POINT IS SIMPLE.. MORE SPYING MEANS LESS RIGHTS. AND ALL THOSE PSYCHO MUSLIMS DON'T USE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS ANYWAY. THEY MEET IN PERSON IN SECRET BASEMENTS, AND OUR BEST HOPE IS TO TRY TO AS A WORLD GET ALONG BETTER. THAT IS OUR BEST HOPE. SHALOM. I LOVE YOU ALL. LET'S STOP THIS BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE. NOW AND FOREVER!! PEACE!! FREDDY pS: NEVER FORGET: THE GOVT IS CALLING ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISTS TERRORISTS. THEY ARE SPYING ON PETA AND ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS. I DON'T AT ALL APPROVE, BUT EVEN THE WORST EXCESSES OF ENVIRONMENTALISTS, AND I MEAN THE WORST, IS BURNING HUMMERS. WITHOUT PEOPLE IN THEM. THINK ABOUT IT. THEY ARE USING THE EXCUSE OF A FEW BURNED HUMMERS, AND 9/11, TO SPY ON ALL OF US , EVERYDAY, IN ALL THE WORLD. WE MUST STOP THE INSANITY!! LOVE, ME PPS: THE PROPER JAIL TERM FOR THOSE TRUCK DESTROYERS WAS PROBABLY UP TO ONE YEAR IN JAIL, OR EVEN BETTER MANY YEARS OF COMMUNITY SERVICE (VOLUNTEER WORK FOR SOCIETY), AND PAY FOR THE HUMMERS. THAT IS FAIR, NOT LIFE IN JAIL OR SOME SUCH SENTENCES WHICH I AM SURE WERE HANDED OUT LIKE CANDY FOR "TERRORISM", WHEN PEOPLE WERE PURPOSELY NOT HARMED AT ALL, EVER. AND THIS DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY WAS DONE REALLY TO STOP PEOPLE FROM BEING HARMED BY GOING TO WAR FOR OIL. AND FROM KILLING OTHERS. MANY THOUSANDS OF INNOCENTS MAIMED AND MURDERED FOR NOTHING. FOR NOTHING. FOR NOTHING. WE MUST END THIS HORROR NOW. NOW!!! NOW!!!! NOW!!! LOVE, ME NY Times February 13, 2008 Senate Votes for Expansion of Spy Powers By ERIC LICHTBLAU WASHINGTON — After more than a year of wrangling, the Senate handed the White House a major victory on Tuesday by voting to broaden the government’s spy powers and to give legal protection to phone companies that cooperated in President Bush’s program of eavesdropping without warrants. One by one, the Senate rejected amendments that would have imposed greater civil liberties checks on the government’s surveillance powers. Finally, the Senate voted 68 to 29 to approve legislation that the White House had been pushing for months. Mr. Bush hailed the vote and urged the House to move quickly in following the Senate’s lead. The outcome in the Senate amounted, in effect, to a broader proxy vote in support of Mr. Bush’s wiretapping program. The wide-ranging debate before the final vote presaged discussion that will play out this year in the presidential and Congressional elections on other issues testing the president’s wartime authority, including secret detentions, torture and Iraq war financing. Republicans hailed the reworking of the surveillance law as essential to protecting national security, but some Democrats and many liberal advocacy groups saw the outcome as another example of the Democrats’ fears of being branded weak on terrorism. “Some people around here get cold feet when threatened by the administration,” said Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who leads the Judiciary Committee and who had unsuccessfully pushed a much more restrictive set of surveillance measures. Among the presidential contenders, Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, voted in favor of the final measure, while the two Democrats, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, did not vote. Mr. Obama did oppose immunity on a key earlier motion to end debate. Mrs. Clinton, campaigning in Texas, issued a statement saying she would have voted to oppose the final measure. The measure extends, for at least six years, many of the broad new surveillance powers that Congress hastily approved last August just before its summer recess. Intelligence officials said court rulings had left dangerous gaps in their ability to intercept terrorist communications. The bill, which had the strong backing of the White House, allows the government to eavesdrop on large bundles of foreign-based communications on its own authority so long as Americans are not the targets. A secret intelligence court, which traditionally has issued individual warrants before wiretapping began, would review the procedures set up by the executive branch only after the fact to determine whether there were abuses involving Americans. “This is a dramatic restructuring” of surveillance law, said Michael Sussmann, a former Justice Department intelligence lawyer who represents several telecommunication companies. “And the thing that’s so dramatic about this is that you’ve removed the court review. There may be some checks after the fact, but the administration is picking the targets.” The Senate plan also adds one provision considered critical by the White House: shielding phone companies from any legal liability for their roles in the eavesdropping program approved by Mr. Bush after the Sept. 11 attacks. The program allowed the National Security Agency to eavesdrop without warrants on the international communications of Americans suspected of having ties to Al Qaeda. AT&T and other major phone companies are facing some 40 lawsuits from customers who claim their actions were illegal. The Bush administration maintains that if the suits are allowed to continue in court, they could bankrupt the companies and discourage them from cooperating in future intelligence operations. The House approved a surveillance bill in November that intentionally left out immunity for the phone companies, and leaders from the two chambers will now have to find a way to work out significant differences between their two bills. Democratic opponents, led by Senators Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, argued that the plan effectively rewarded phone companies by providing them with legal insulation for actions that violated longstanding law and their own privacy obligations to their customers. But immunity supporters said the phone carriers acted out of patriotism after the Sept. 11 attacks in complying with what they believed in good faith was a legally binding order from the president. “This, I believe, is the right way to go for the security of the nation,” said Senator John D. Rockefeller, the West Virginia Democrat who leads the intelligence committee. His support for the plan, after intense negotiations with the White House and his Republican colleagues, was considered critical to its passage but drew criticism from civil liberties groups because of $42,000 in contributions that Mr. Rockefeller received last year from AT&T and Verizon executives. Senator Olympia J. Snowe, a Maine Republican on the intelligence panel, said the bill struck the right balance between protecting the rights of Americans and protecting the country “from terrorism and other foreign threats.” Democratic opponents, who six months ago vowed to undo the results of the August surveillance vote, said they were deeply disappointed by the defection of 19 Democrats who backed the bill. Mr. Dodd, who spoke on the floor for more than 20 hours in recent weeks in an effort to stall the bill, said future generations would view the vote as a test of whether the country heeds “the rule of law or the rule of men.” But with Democrats splintered, Mr. Dodd acknowledged that the national security argument had won the day. “Unfortunately, those who are advocating this notion that you have to give up liberties to be more secure are apparently prevailing,” he said. “They’re convincing people that we’re at risk either politically, or at risk as a nation.” There was a measure of frustration in the voice of Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, as he told reporters during a break in the daylong debate, “Holding all the Democrats together on this, we’ve learned a long time ago, is not something that’s doable.” Senate Republicans predict that they will be able to persuade the House to include immunity in the final bill, especially now that the White House has agreed to give House lawmakers access to internal documents on the wiretapping program. But House Democrats vowed Tuesday to continue opposing immunity. Congress faces a Saturday deadline for extending the current law, but Democrats want to extend the deadline for two weeks to allow more time for talks. The White House has said it opposes a further extension. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats hope to put some pressure on Republicans on Wednesday over another security-related issue by bringing up an intelligence measure that would apply Army field manual prohibitions against torture to civilian agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency. Republicans plan to try to eliminate that provision, a vote that Democrats say will force Republicans to declare whether they condone torture. Democrats also say it could show the gap between Mr. McCain, who has opposed torture, and the administration on the issue. “We know how we would feel if a member of the armed services captured by the enemy were, for example, waterboarded,” Mr. Reid said. “So I think that we’re headed in the right direction, and I hope that we’ll get Republican support on this.” Carl Hulse contributed reporting from Washington. Posted by fantasyfreddy at 01:56 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) Tuesday, February 12. 2008 e mail from Rep. Wexler: "Attorney General" Michael Mukasey won't compel Bush people to testify in Congress!!! Dear Frederic, Our Constitution is under threat and the most basic principle of checks and balances is being undermined. Not since Watergate has a president so openly disregarded the will of Congress. During hearings in the Judiciary Committee yesterday, I told Attorney General Michael Mukasey that I called for impeachment hearings because of the stonewalling and blatant abuses of the Bush Administration. He responded by stating that he will NOT enforce a contempt of Congress citation against Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten for refusing to testify before Congress. The video is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7M9sjRLCtQ Alberto Gonzales may be long gone, but the Bush Administration continues its executive overreach with the new Attorney General. We can debate the need for Impeachment hearings. We can argue its effects on the election or our agenda. But one thing is abundantly clear: If Congress' right to require testimony is undermined, then our country's leaders - Democrat, Republican, or Independent - will be immune from accountability. The power of the subpoena - to call officials before us - is one of the most fundamental safeguards in our system of government. To have it effectively discarded - by virtue of the President instructing Administration officials to ignore a congressional subpoenas and not even appear before Congress - is unprecedented. The idea that the Attorney General would willingly defend this position - despite Congress' constitutional right to call such witnesses, is outrageous. Impeachment hearings could render this moot: The President, Vice President, and all officials under them would no longer invoke executive privilege. There would be no more smokescreens. In one week, I will be delivering my letter calling for impeachment hearings to Chairman John Conyers. Already, 16 Members of Congress have joined my call, including 3 Judiciary Committee members. I am hopeful for more in the coming days, but it is important for you to reach out to your representative in Congress to express how you feel. You can view the current list of signers, here: http://www.wexlerforcongress.com/news.asp?ItemID=230 I do not know how Congress will react, but I do know this: I will pursue this course aggressively. I will not compromise away the constitutional role of Congress. Your support is invaluable. Please know that I am working everyday to ensure that the Bush Administration is held accountable. Please continue to support this movement at www.wexlerwantshearings.com. Yours truly, Congressman Robert Wexler DONATE Paid for by "Wexler for Congress" Posted by fantasyfreddy at 20:09 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) senate considering making phone companies immune from criminal charges for wiretapping for bush!!!! evil!!! New York Times Feb. 12 2008 Senate Moves to Shield Phone Companies on Eavesdropping By ERIC LICHTBLAU WASHINGTON — After more than a year of heated political wrangling, the Senate handed the White House a major victory Tuesday by voting to broaden the government’s spy powers and to give legal protection to phone companies that cooperated in President Bush’s warrantless eavesdropping program. The Senate rejected a series of amendments that would have restricted the government’s surveillance powers and eliminated immunity for the phone carriers, and it voted in convincing fashion — 69 to 29 — to end debate and bring the issue to a final vote. That vote is expected later this afternoon, with the result all but assured. On the vote to end debate, 28 Democrats and Senator Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont, opposed the measure. Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Lindsey Graham did not vote. The House has already rejected the idea of immunity for the phone companies, and Democratic leaders reacted angrily to the Senate vote. But Congressional officials said it appeared that the House would ultimately be forced to accept some sort of legal protection for the phone carriers in negotiations between the two chambers this week. The Senate vote amounted to a proxy on the president’s warrantless wiretapping program, which allowed the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans’ international communications without a court warrant if they were suspected of having terrorist ties. With resistance led by Democratic Senators Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, critics of the administration’s plan argued that it effectively rewarded phone companies by providing them with legal insulation for actions that violated longstanding law and their own fiduciary responsibilities to their customers. Immunity would protect the phone companies from some 40 lawsuits now pending that charge the firms broke the law by taking part in the program. But supporters of the plan said the phone carriers acted out of patriotism after the Sept. 11 attacks in complying with what they believed in good faith was a legally binding order from the president. Republicans were able to garner the support of 19 Democrats and Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut. Democratic leaders charged that the tactics the Republicans used smacked of fear-mongering. “This, I believe, is the right way to go for the security of the nation,” said Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who leads the intelligence committee and who was a pivotal supporter of the White House-backed plan approved Tuesday. Beyond the immunity provision, the Senate measure would also widen the executive branch’s surveillance powers by allowing the National Security Agency and intelligence agencies to use broad orders — without getting court orders in advance — to eavesdrop on groups of overseas targets, rather than using individualized warrants. Posted by fantasyfreddy at 13:43 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) jrr tolkein heirs paid nada for rings movies, sue newline studio!!! (nyt today)... February 12, 2008 Tolkien Heirs Sue New Line Over Millions From ‘Rings’ By MOTOKO RICH Following in the footsteps of Peter Jackson, the director of the Oscar-winning “Lord of the Rings” trilogy, heirs to J. R. R. Tolkien, the author of the books on which the films are based, are suing New Line Cinema for failing to pay them at least $150 million, which they say they are owed as part of the movies’ gross receipts. In a complaint filed Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court, trustees of the Tolkien Trust, a British charity, joined trustees of a private family trust of Tolkien heirs and the British arm of HarperCollins Publishers in suing New Line Cinema for breach of contract. Charging “unabashed and insatiable greed,” the plaintiffs said in the complaint that New Line, which produced and distributed the “Lord of the Rings” movies, had failed to pay anything despite a nearly 40-year-old contract that entitles the trusts and the publishers to 7.5 percent of the films’ gross revenues, less certain costs. According to the complaint, the three movies generated about $6 billion in box office receipts and ancillary revenues from DVD sales, cable television licensing fees and other sales, although Steven Maier, the British-based lawyer for the trustees, said they had not been allowed to audit the receipts from the second and third films. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argue that New Line has “clearly engaged in the infamous practice of creative ‘Hollywood accounting,’ ” by excluding certain revenue from calculations and racking up costs that have so far prevented the studio from paying out a single dime. “I think that it’s going to be extremely interesting to see how New Line is going to explain to a jury that these films grossed $6 billion and yet by their calculations the creators’ heirs are not going to get even a single penny,” said Bonnie Eskenazi, the United States lawyer for the trustees. A spokesman for New Line declined to comment. According to the complaint, the trustees and a predecessor to HarperCollins signed a contract with United Artists in 1969 for the film rights to “The Hobbit” and “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy. The trustees and the publisher were entitled to a 7.5 percent share of the gross receipts. New Line eventually inherited the rights to make the movies in 1998. Mr. Jackson sued New Line in 2005 and settled last year, paving the way for New Line, owned by Time Warner, to produce two movies based on “The Hobbit,” with Mr. Jackson serving as the executive producer. In the current lawsuit the plaintiffs are also seeking unspecified punitive damages and are asking the court to terminate New Line’s rights to make any subsequent films based on “The Hobbit” or “The Lord of the Rings.”

Holocaust Survivor Rep. Tom Lantos and Actor Roy Schieder (Marathon Man, Jaws) dead!!

FantasyFreddy — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:15:42 GMT

Representative Tom Lantos and Actor Roy Scheider (Marathon Man) Dead Now!! Israel mourns Holocaust survivor Lantos 2 hours ago JERUSALEM (AFP) — Israel on Monday hailed the late US congressman Tom Lantos, a Hungarian-born Holocaust survivor who played a key role in rallying US support for the Jewish state. Israel "expresses great sorrow" over the loss of the 80-year-old Lantos, who died earlier the same day from cancer of the esophagus, the foreign ministry said. Lantos "was a leader in promoting Israeli-US ties in Congress. His commitment to human rights and the commemoration of the Holocaust were the pillars of his public work," it said. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said that "Israel owes a great debt to Lantos for dedicating himself to promoting Israeli-US ties and his activities for the Jewish people." Born in Budapest to a Jewish family in February 1928, Lantos was 16 when Nazi Germany occupied Hungary. As a teenager, he was a member of the anti-Nazi resistance and later of the anti-Communist student movement. After the Soviets invaded Hungary, he discovered that most of his family had died in the Holocaust. By 1947, he was in the United States on an academic scholarship and became an economics professor in San Francisco. He was elected to Congress in 1980 where he served as the chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. Since the Democrats regained control of Congress in 2006 elections, Lantos used his committee to launch strident appeals for greater US action on human rights in China, Darfur, Myanmar and Russia. Under his stewardship, the committee voted in October to describe the mass slaughter of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire as "genocide" -- plunging US relations with Turkey into crisis. Posted by fantasyfreddy at 12:07 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) .. -->

some recent posts from my blog at fantasyfreddy.com/cblog re: death penalty, greek sex scandal, facebook's big brother

FantasyFreddy — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:20:38 GMT

Monday, February 11. 2008 NYT: US to seek death for accused 9/11 murderers... BAD IDEA!! Punishing murder (if all these people are guilty!) with murder is just not a good idea. I'm mostly thinking about reprisals here. (although the issue of guilt or innocence certainly exists given that torture was used in interrogations). setting aside the possibility of error (which can't be set aside!).. reprisals are a real possibility. And does murdering someone for murdering someone really show or teach that murdering someone is wrong? Not really! Quite the opposite. It just teaches that murder is OK for the right reasons.. not a great lesson today!! Shalom! Freddy Ps: I mean, if murder is wrong, how can we do it, or allow it? Heres the story: New York Times February 11, 2008 U.S. Said to Seek Execution for 6 in Sept. 11 Case By WILLIAM GLABERSON Military prosecutors have decided to seek the death penalty for six Guantánamo detainees who are to be charged with central roles in the Sept. 11 terror attacks, government officials who have been briefed on the charges said Sunday. The officials said the charges would be announced at the Pentagon as soon as Monday and were likely to include numerous war-crimes charges against the six men, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the former Qaeda operations chief who has described himself as the mastermind of the attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people. A Defense Department official said prosecutors were seeking the death penalty because “if any case warrants it, it would be for individuals who were parties to a crime of that scale.” The officials spoke anonymously because no one in the government was authorized to speak about the case. A decision to seek the death penalty would increase the international focus on the case and present new challenges to the troubled military commission system that has yet to begin a single trial. “The system hasn’t been able to handle the less-complicated cases it has been presented with to date,” said David Glazier, a former Navy officer who is a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. In addition to Mr. Mohammed, the other five to be charged include detainees officials say were coordinators and intermediaries in the plot, among them a man labeled the “20th hijacker,” who was denied entry to the United States in the month before the attacks. Under the rules of the Guantánamo war-crimes system, the military prosecutors can designate charges as capital when they present them, and it is that first phase of the process that is expected this week. The military official who then reviews them, Susan J. Crawford, a former military appeals court judge, has the authority to accept or reject a death-penalty request. A Pentagon spokesman declined to comment on Sunday. Some officials briefed on the case have said the prosecutors view their task in seeking convictions for the Sept. 11 attacks as a historic challenge. A special group of military and Justice Department lawyers has been working on the case for several years. Even if the detainees are convicted on capital charges, any execution would be many months or, perhaps years, from being carried out, lawyers said, in part because a death sentence would have to be scrutinized by civilian appeals courts. Federal officials have said in recent months that there is no death chamber at the detention camp at the United States naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and that they knew of no specific plans for how a death sentence would be carried out. The military justice system, which does not govern the Guantánamo cases, provides for execution by lethal injection in death sentence convictions. But the United States military has rarely executed a prisoner in recent times. The last military execution was in 1961, when an Army private, John A. Bennett, was hanged after being convicted of rape and attempted murder. Currently, there are six service members appealing military death sentences, according to a recently published article by a lawyer who specializes in military capital cases, Dwight H. Sullivan, a former chief military defense lawyer at Guántanamo. One official who had been briefed on the war-crimes case said the charges were expected to be lodged against six detainees held at Guantánamo, including Mr. Mohammed, who is said to have presented the idea of an airliner attack on the United States to Osama bin Laden in 1999 and then coordinated its planning. The official identified the others to be charged as Mohammed al-Qahtani, the man officials have labeled the 20th hijacker; Ramzi bin al-Shibh, said to have been the main intermediary between the hijackers and leaders of Al Qaeda; Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, known as Ammar al-Baluchi, a nephew of Mr. Mohammed, who has been identified as Mr. Mohammed’s lieutenant for the 2001 operation; Mr. al-Baluchi’s assistant, Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi; and Walid bin Attash, a detainee known as Khallad, who investigators say selected and trained some of the hijackers. Relatives of the Sept. 11 victims have expressed differing views of potential death sentences, with some arguing that it would accomplish little other than martyring men for whom martyrdom may be viewed as a reward. But on Sunday, Debra Burlingame, whose brother Charles F. Burlingame III was the pilot of the hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 that was crashed into the Pentagon, said she would approve of an effort by prosecutors to seek the execution of men she blames for killing her brother. Ms. Burlingame said such a case could help refocus the public’s attention on what she called the calculated brutality of the attacks, which she said has been largely forgotten. “My opinion is,” she said, “if the death of 3,000 people isn’t sufficient for a death penalty in this country, then why do we even have the death penalty?” Lawyers said a prosecution move to seek the death penalty in six cases that will draw worldwide attention was risky. They said it would increase the stakes at Guantánamo partly by amplifying the attention internationally to cases that would draw intense attention in any event. The military commission system has been troubled almost from the start, when it was set up in an order by President Bush in November 2001. It has been beset by legal challenges and practical difficulties, including a 2006 decision by the Supreme Court striking down the administration’s first system at Guantánamo. Although officials have spoken of charging 80 or more detainees with war crimes, so far only one case has been completed, and that was through a plea bargain. Eric M. Freedman, a Hofstra University law professor who has been a consultant to detainees’ lawyers, said a decision to seek the death penalty would magnify the attention on each of the many steps in a capital case. Intense scrutiny, he said, “would be drawn to the proceedings both legally and politically from around the world.” Some countries have been critical of the United States’ use of the death penalty in civilian cases, and a request for execution in the military commission system would import much of that criticism to the already heated debates about the legitimacy of Guantánamo and the Bush administration’s legal approach there, some lawyers said. Tom Fleener, an Army Reserve major who was until recently a military defense lawyer at Guantánamo, said that bringing death penalty cases in the military commission system would bog down the untested system. He noted that many legal questions remain unanswered at Guantánamo, including how much of the trials will be conducted in closed, secret proceedings; how the military judges will handle evidence obtained by interrogators’ coercive tactics; and whether the judges will require experienced death-penalty lawyers to take part in such cases. “Neither the system is ready, nor are the defense attorneys ready to do a death penalty case in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba,” Major Fleener said. Professor Glazier of Loyola said the military commission system was devised to avoid many of the hurdles that have slowed civilian capital cases. Still, he said, he expected intense scrutiny and criticism of such cases that could slow proceedings. In any event, vigorous trial battles and appeals would probably mean that no execution would be imminent. “It certainly seems impossible to get this done by the end of the Bush administration,” Professor Glazier said. Posted by fantasyfreddy at 03:17 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) Sunday, February 10. 2008 hard to ever leave facebook: beware!! i've always been scared of facebook for reasons like this, and telling friends what book you buy, etc!! psychos!! New York Times How Sticky Is Membership on Facebook? Just Try Breaking Free By MARIA ASPAN Published: February 11, 2008 Are you a member of Facebook.com? You may have a lifetime contract. Some users have discovered that it is nearly impossible to remove themselves entirely from Facebook, setting off a fresh round of concern over the popular social network’s use of personal data. While the Web site offers users the option to deactivate their accounts, Facebook servers keep copies of the information in those accounts indefinitely. Indeed, many users who have contacted Facebook to request that their accounts be deleted have not succeeded in erasing their records from the network. “It’s like the Hotel California,” said Nipon Das, 34, a director at a biotechnology consulting firm in Manhattan, who tried unsuccessfully to delete his account this fall. “You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.” It took Mr. Das about two months and several e-mail exchanges with Facebook’s customer service representatives to erase most of his information from the site, which finally occurred after he sent an e-mail threatening legal action. But even after that, a reporter was able to find Mr. Das’s empty profile on Facebook and successfully sent him an e-mail message through the network. In response to difficulties faced by ex-Facebook members, a cottage industry of unofficial help pages devoted to escaping Facebook has sprung up online — both outside and inside the network. “I thought it was kind of strange that they save your information without telling you in a really clear way,” said Magnus Wallin, a 26-year-old patent examiner in Stockholm who founded a Facebook group, “How to permanently delete your facebook account.” The group has almost 4,300 members and is steadily growing. The technological hurdles set by Facebook have a business rationale: they allow ex-Facebookers who choose to return the ability to resurrect their accounts effortlessly. According to an e-mail message from Amy Sezak, a spokeswoman for Facebook, “Deactivated accounts mean that a user can reactivate at any time and their information will be available again just as they left it.” But it also means that disenchanted users cannot disappear from the site without leaving footprints. Facebook’s terms of use state that “you may remove your user content from the site at any time,” but also that “you acknowledge that the company may retain archived copies of your user content.” Its privacy policy says that after someone deactivates an account, “removed information may persist in backup copies for a reasonable period of time.” Facebook’s Web site does not inform departing users that they must delete information from their account in order to close it fully — meaning that they may unwittingly leave anything from e-mail addresses to credit card numbers sitting on Facebook servers. Only people who contact Facebook’s customer service department are informed that they must painstakingly delete, line by line, all of the profile information, “wall” messages and group memberships they may have created within Facebook. “Users can also have their account completely removed by deleting all of the data associated with their account and then deactivating it,” Ms. Sezak said in her message. “Users can then write to Facebook to request their account be deleted and their e-mail will be completely erased from the database.” But even users who try to delete every piece of information they have ever written, sent or received via the network have found their efforts to permanently leave stymied. Other social networking sites like MySpace and Friendster, as well as online dating sites like eHarmony.com, may require departing users to confirm their wishes several times — but in the end they offer a delete option. “Most sites, even online dating sites, will give you an option to wipe your slate clean,” Mr. Das said. Mr. Das, who joined Facebook on a whim after receiving invitations from friends, tried to leave after realizing that most of his co-workers were also on the site. “I work in a small office,” he said. “The last thing I want is people going on there and checking out my private life.” “I did not want to be on it after junior associates at work whom I have to manage saw my stuff,” he added. Facebook’s quiet archiving of information from deactivated accounts has increased concerns about the network’s potential abuse of private data, especially in the wake of its fumbled Beacon advertising feature. That application, which tracks and publishes the items bought by Facebook members on outside Web sites, was introduced in November without a transparent, one-step opt-out feature. After a public backlash, including more than 50,000 Facebook users’ signatures on a MoveOn.org protest petition, Facebook executives apologized and allowed such an opt-out option on the program. Tensions remain between making a profit and alienating Facebook’s users, who the company says total about 64 million worldwide (MySpace has an estimated 110 million monthly active users). The network is still trying to find a way to monetize its popularity, mostly by allowing marketers access to its wealth of demographic and behavioral information. The retention of old accounts on Facebook’s servers seems like another effort to hold onto — and provide its ad partners with — as much demographic information as possible. “The thing they offer advertisers is that they can connect to groups of people. I can see why they wouldn’t want to throw away anyone’s information, but there’s a conflict with privacy,” said Alan Burlison, 46, a British software engineer who succeeded in deleting his account only after he complained in the British press, to the country’s Information Commissioner’s Office and to the TRUSTe organization, an online privacy network that has certified Facebook. Mr. Burlison’s complaint spurred the Information Commissioner’s Office, a privacy watchdog organization, to investigate Facebook’s data-protection practices, the BBC reported last month. In response, Facebook issued a statement saying that its policy was in “full compliance with U.K. data protection law.” A spokeswoman for TRUSTe, which is based in San Francisco, said its account deletion process was “inconvenient,” but that Facebook was “being responsive to us and they currently meet our requirements.” “I kept getting the same answer and really felt that I was being given the runaround,” Mr. Burlison said of Facebook’s customer service representatives. “It was quite obvious that no amount of prodding from me on a personal level was going to make a difference.” Only after he sent a link to the video of his interview with Britain’s Channel 4 News to the customer service representatives — and Facebook executives — was his account finally deleted. Steven Mansour, 28, a Canadian online community developer, spent two weeks in July trying to fully delete his account from Facebook. He later wrote a blog entry — including e-mail messages, diagrams and many exclamations of frustration — in a post entitled “2504 Steps to closing your Facebook account” (www.stevenmansour.com). Mr. Mansour, who said he is “really skeptical of social networking sites,” decided to leave after a few months on Facebook. “I was getting tired of always getting alerts and e-mails,” he said. “I found it very invasive.” “It’s part of a much bigger picture of social networking sites on the Internet harvesting private data, whether for marketing or for more sinister purposes,” he said. His post, which wound up on the link-aggregator Digg.com, has been viewed more than 87,000 times, Mr. Mansour said, adding that the traffic was so high it crashed his server. And his post became the touchstone for Mr. Wallin, who was inspired to create his group, “How to permanently delete your Facebook account,” after joining, leaving and then rejoining Facebook, only to find that all of his information from his first account was still available. “I wanted the information to be available inside Facebook for all the users who wanted to leave, and quite a few people have found it just by using internal search,” said Mr. Wallin. Facebook has never contacted Mr. Wallin about the group. Mr. Wallin said he has heard through members that some people have successfully used his steps to leave Facebook. But he is not yet ready to leave himself. “I don’t want to leave yet; I actually find it really convenient,” he said. “But someday when I want to leave, I want it to be simple.” Posted by fantasyfreddy at 19:36 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) this is wild!! (from nyt today!) ATHENS (Reuters) - As Greek scandals go, it started as a trivial but titillating tale -- a ministry official jumps from his balcony after being blackmailed by an angry lover. Many Greeks yawned. Few suspected that what would soon be known as the "sex, lies and DVDs scandal" would effectively freeze planned reforms, push the conservative government closer to snap elections, and shake the foundations of Greek society. "This scandal has shown us what has been happening for years but none of us would publicly admit," said architecture student Victoria Deligianni, 24, sitting at a central Athens cafe. "There is just no progress in this country." Political analysts say the affair has turned the spotlight on all of Greece's ills -- nepotism, widespread corruption in politics and the press, sexism and lack of opportunity for qualified young people with no connections. It was no secret Greece was in need of a cleanup in 2004, when voters fed up with socialist scandals in the 1990s voted in the conservative New Democracy party. Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis vowed to "re-launch the state" and end the chronic corruption that had long angered citizens and kept many foreign investors away. He also promised to put in motion the reforms Greece needed to catch up with its European Union partners -- in education, social security, health and public services. Instead, the public has been treated to a series of scandals. In the past year alone, overpriced government bonds were sold to state pension funds and a labor minister was sacked over illegal Indian workers at his country house. Greece's ranking on the Transparency International corruption watchdog's list has gone from bad to worse, falling to 56th in 2007 -- behind countries such as Jordan, Botswana and Costa Rica -- from 49th in 2004. SEX TALE The DVD scandal has overshadowed the government's economic achievements, bringing its popularity to the lowest point since 2004, under 30 percent, a recent poll showed. According to the Greek press, it started when a young woman slept with her boss, who promised her a permanent ministry job. When he did not deliver, she taped their private meetings in an attempt to blackmail him. Then she went to Greek media with her DVD. Most sent her away, but one journalist has been accused in the media of making a copy and delivering it to the prime minister's office. When the DVD made it to Karamanlis's office, the official -- Culture Ministry general secretary Christos Zachopoulos, 54 -- resigned and then jumped. He is now recovering in hospital. A conservative MP was alleged to have acted as a go-between for the journalist and financial authorities. After pressure, he resigned from his parliamentary group, cutting the government's number of seats to 151 in the 300-seat house and raising the specter of snap elections. NATION MESMERISED Greek viewers have been mesmerized by the twists and turns in the saga that has dominated television news for weeks. Newspapers on display at Athens' yellow kiosks publish daily revelations and the scandal dominates dinner conversation in tavernas across the country. Greek blogs are rife with comments on the DVD's content, saying a sex scandal alone would hardly be reason for a Greek official to attempt suicide. They say what may have pushed him over the edge was that he was caught making negative comments about the prime minister. The government has insisted the issue was personal and any wrongdoing should be legally prosecuted. "We remain focused on the reforms we promised the Greek people," a senior government official told Reuters on condition of anonymity. "This issue will be resolved by Greek justice." Opposition parties accuse Karamanlis of trying to obscure his own office's involvement, deflecting his political responsibilities and refusing to shed light on the case. "The government line has been disorientation, blackout, cover-up, lies," said socialist opposition PASOK party spokesman Yannis Ragoussis. "They set out to paint this as a personal issue and it has proven to be a deeply political case." Zachopoulos, a former teacher who was hand-picked by Karamanlis, was close to the prime minister and his wife and held powers almost greater than the minister -- distributing large amounts of Greek and EU funds. "When I needed anything from the Culture Ministry, it was made clear to me that I should go to Zachopoulos, not the minister," a European ambassador to Athens told Reuters, also on condition of anonymity. "It was clear he was the man in charge." Prosecutors are investigating Zachopoulos's financial records as well as ministry decisions to allow construction on or near historic sites. So far, the only person to get into trouble over the scandal is the woman, 35-year-old Evi Tsekou. She has been charged with blackmail and is held pending trial. Zachopoulos has not been charged over his sexual relationship with an employee. "The woman was the object of abuse of power and sexual harassment by a superior, even if she consented, according to Greek law," said Sissy Vovou, a member of the Athens Feminist Center. "It is unacceptable she is held in jail. The only reason she is in is to keep her mouth shut." For the many Greek women struggling to make it in a largely male-dominated society, she is an example of someone who took the easy way up and paid the price. "You study, you work hard and still you have to let someone grab your butt to rise," said Maria Saratsi, 38, a former manager at a construction company. (Additional reporting by Renee Maltezou; editing by Sara Ledwith)

SUDAN GOVT ATTACKS DARFUR TOWNS TODAY, KILLING HUNDREDS!!

FantasyFreddy — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:35:00 GMT

February 8, 2008 Sudan Planes, Militia Attack Darfur Towns By REUTERS Filed at 12:02 p.m. ET KHARTOUM (Reuters) - Sudanese government aircraft, army and militia attacked two towns in West Darfur state on Friday, causing heavy civilian casualties, Darfur rebels and witnesses said. "The government attacked the town of Abu Surouj this morning ... a direct attack with cars and horses and bombardment," Darfur rebel Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) commander Abdel Aziz el-Nur Ashr told Reuters from Darfur. "Also, as I am speaking to you, they are attacking Sirba town." He said initial estimates put the death toll at around 200 but it was hard to tell because the attackers were still in the towns. A West Darfur government official confirmed the attacks but could not give details. Residents of el-Geneina, the state capital, told Reuters they could hear Antonov planes flying nearby and had seen helicopters. Darfur rebels say they control the area north of el-Geneina, where they have often fought army troops, and which aid workers have been forbidden from entering. Ashr had said previously that the rebels had expected the attacks as Khartoum had again mobilized militia groups, known locally as Janjaweed, in the area. The militia stand accused of widespread atrocities and the International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for a junior cabinet minister and an allied militia leader accused of war crimes. Khartoum refuses to hand them over. U.N. URGEST RESTRAINT The Sudanese army said it had attacked the area to move JEM out because the insurgents had been ambushing their forces. But it denied killing any civilians. "The armed forces attacked the areas where the rebels are and they have rid them of the area totally," an armed forces spokesman said. Two other rebel groups also said the nearby Chad-Sudan border area of Jabel Moun was also bombed. Commander of the joint U.N.-African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur Martin Luther Agwai said in a statement he was very concerned about the government attack, urging all sides to show restraint. "In addition to the loss of life and damage to property, there is the potential for displacement of large numbers of villagers, compounding an already critical humanitarian situation," he said. The force, still awaiting an agreement from Khartoum on its operational rules due to be signed on Saturday, according to UNAMID, has only 9,000 of its required 26,000 troops and police. It also lacks attack and transport helicopters. Ethiopia said on Thursday it would provide five of the required 24. Witnesses said the attacks were similar to those in the early days of the Darfur conflict in 2003, when Khartoum mobilized militias to quell mostly non-Arab rebels who took up arms in western Sudan, accusing the government of neglect. "First of all I saw two helicopters and Janjaweed on horses and camels, after that I saw cars," said Abu Surouj resident Malik Mohamed, who escaped during the attack early on Friday. "The helicopters hit us four times and around 20 bombs were dropped," he told Reuters by telephone. His voice breaking, he said he had no idea where his family was. "I am outside the city and can see burning. They (the attackers) are still inside." Yehia Abakr, a resident of Sirba town, told Reuters by telephone. "I was in the town centre when the attack happened," he said. "I ran outside the town. They have killed many people."

"SUICIDE" BOMBING IN ISRAEL!! THE HORROR!! I PRAY FOR PEACE THERE NOW!! AND MY PRAYERS GO OUT TO THE VICTIMS AND THEIR FAMILIES!! SOOOO SAD!!!

FantasyFreddy — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 11:51:27 GMT

Woman killed, 10 hurt, 1 critically in Dimona suicide attack -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JPost.com Staff , THE JERUSALEM POST Feb. 4, 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- One woman was killed and ten were wounded, one critically, one moderately and eight lightly, in a suicide attack in a Dimona commercial center. Police said the attack was a suicide bombing carried out by two attackers, but only one succeeded in detonating his explosives. The other terrorist was killed by Kobi Mor, a police officer from an elite unit who happened to be on the scene, seconds before the bomber could detonate himself. Magen David Adom ambulances evacuated the wounded to Soroka Hospital in Beersheba. Rosa Elberg, a resident of the town, said that the bomber detonated his explosives inside a café. "It is like a war, people are running like crazy," she told Channel 2. "I didn't see anyone suspicious. I heard a boom and my ears are still ringing." Another eyewitness told Israel Radio that many people were at the commercial center at the time because of the sunny weather. Shalom Bar Avi, a journalist speaking to Channel 10, said "I am here no longer as a journalist but as a simple citizen ... I pray and hope my wife is okay." Bar Avi praised the police's quick response to the attack, and said Mor, the officer who identified the second attacker shot "four or five times ... he took no chances." Later Mor's heroism was revealed in detail: He shot the terrorist in the head, and when the latter in his last breath still tried to press the detonator button, shot him four more times and killed him. Mor managed to kill the terrorist before he could explode and without hitting his explosive belt, thus preventing a much more devastating attack. A police officer speaking to Channel 10 praised Mor's quick response and said he acted "in the best possible way, all considerations taken into account." The Jerusalem Brigades of Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack, confirming in its statement that the attackers entered Israel through the Sinai, but several minutes later several organizations, including Hamas and Fatah, also claimed responsibility according to Channel 10. Southern Israel has been on alert against terror attacks since the Gaza Strip's Hamas rulers breached the border with Egypt on January 23. The breach made the Negev, where Dimona is located, more vulnerable to penetration by Palestinian terrorists who could enter through the Sinai. The last suicide attacker to succeed in penetrating Israel and detonate his explosives was Muhammad Faisal Saksak, on January 29, 2007 in Eilat. Three people were killed in that attack. Details on wounded evacuated to Soroka Hospital in Beersheba can be received by phone on 1255-177. AP contributed to this report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1202064575658&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull [ Back to the Article ]

DECRIMINALIZING MARIJUANA, ENDING JAIL FOR NON-VIOLENT "DRUG OFFENSES"!!!

FantasyFreddy — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 11:17:16 GMT

DECRIMINALIZING MARIJUANA, ENDING JAIL FOR NON-VIOLENT "DRUG OFFENSES"!!! Just read in the Washington Times that Barak Obama supports "decriminalizing" cannabis (but not "legalizing" it!).. and supports ending jail for non-violent "drug offenses", but supports rehab instead, so obviously still wants to keep some foods/drugs illegal.. Still , this is way better than Hillary, or any of the Republicans (except Ron Paul who supports legalizing all drugs, which I agree with)... And he advocates doing away with the evil mandatory minimum sentences for drug use, and has often discussed how horrible the discrepancies of criminal sentences are for "black" and "white" people.. ssooooooo, I am sure that he supports releasing millions of non-violent "drug offenders" from prison, even though he has not said so.. THANK GOD!!! I PRAY HE GETS ELECTED SO WE CAN END THIS NATIONAL TRAGEDY. HE IS NOT PERFECT, IN THAT HE DOES NOT SUPPORT FULL LEGALIZATION OF ALL DRUGS, BUT HE IS AT LEAST MEETING US HALF-WAY, WHICH IS BETTER THAN ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES.. WE WILL HAVE TO ELECT ME LATER TO FINISH THE JOB!! OR JUST WIN IN THE COURTS.. OR BOTH!! SHALOM SHALOM!! LOVE, FREDDY AND BABY PS: I DO NOT ADVOCATE ANY DRUG USE, EVEN LEGAL. ONLY PEOPLE KNOW WHAT IS BEST FOR THEM THOUGH, NOT ME. AND GIVEN THE CHOICE OF EXTREME PAIN OR USING A "DRUG", I'D GO WITH THE DRUG!! WHAT I WANT TO DO AWAY WITH IS THE VIOLENCE OF POLICE HOME INVASIONS, ARRESTS, THE HELL OF JAIL FOR YEARS, PRISON RAPE, ETC. AND GET PEOPLE BACK TO THEIR FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES SO THEY CAN LEAD PRODUCTIVE PEACEFUL LIVES OUT OF JAIL. NEVER FORGET, JAIL COSTS WAY MORE THAN COLLEGE, AND HURTS SOCIETY INSTEAD OF HELPING US. SHALOM SHALOM!! -- FREDDY!!!

Bush: "Koran is working to get nukular weapons..." !!!!!!

FantasyFreddy — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 06:05:06 GMT

Did any of you notice that during the "State of the Union" speech, Bush "slipped up" (although I really wonder how much was intentional and how much was not), and, while talking about Iran and how dangerous they are, said, "Koran is working to get nucular weapons." He said "Koran" instead of "Iran"!!! Amazing!! I mean, it is obvious he is trying to restart the Crusades, and even used the word "Crusade" within a few days after 9/11, but really, this is waaaay over the top to say "Koran is working to get nucular weapons." Just insanely over the top!!! And when will he learn that the word is "nuclear" not "nukular"???!!! Any five year old knows that!! ANY five year old!! What a moron!! The Soviets had nuclear weapons, and we didn't bomb them!! And really, with this recent agreement between Iran and Russia, bombing their nuclear site will do no good, as they would just buy the material from Russia, or anyone else they want it from.. just thinkin here!! Peace Out!! Love, Freddy ps: psyched the Fed cut rates again, and properly today! They are helping the world economy immensely, finally!! Halaluyah!!!!! and thanks to all at the Fed, and Jim Cramer too!! You rock Jim!!! Muah!!! - FF

BARUCH HASHEM!! BARUCH JIM CRAMER AND BEN BERNANKE AND THE FED!!

FantasyFreddy — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:40:27 GMT

Haleluyah!! Thank GOD and the Federal Reserve Directors and Ben Bernanke for the INTEREST RATE CUT!! YEAH! I BELIEVE IN MIRACLES!!! Thank GOD, and all of you for praying, and especially Jim Cramer for ranting about the necessity of this cut since about August of last year!! THANK GOD!!! This is the turnaround. Impossible to truly know, but this looks like a bottom, because this should inspire investors by showing that the Federal Reserve can, and will, act when extremely necessary!! WAAAY better than nothing, but not neearrlyy as early as needed. Still, way better late than never! As Woody Allen used to say, 90% of success is showing up!! (or something like that!).. OK, gotta get some sun!! Thank GOD!! Impossible to call bottoms, but this looks like a juicy bottom!! Shalom! Freddy and Baby and Friends!! Thank you God soooo much!! And Ben Bernanke and Jim Cramer too!! And Barak and Hillary and John for getting scared on MLK Day!! Shalom Shalom!!!!!! F

THESE STOCKS HAVE REAL VALUE!! MOST DO, AT LEAST!!

FantasyFreddy — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 13:12:08 GMT

JUST NEVER FORGET, THESE STOCKS AND COMPANIES HAVE REAL VALUE, AND ALWAYS WILL. AT LEAST MOST DO!! MY POINT IS, NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS, THINGS WILL TURN AROUND. IT IS JUST A QUESTION OF IF IT TAKES A DAY OR TWO, OR A MONTH OR TWO , OR A YEAR OR TWO. BUT THINGS WILL TURN AROUND. I PRAY WITHIN THE NEXT HOUR!! SHALOM SHALOM!! AND WHEN THEY TURN AROUND, THEY WILL BE WAY WAY HIGHER THAN THEY ARE NOW, FOREVER!! BARUCH HASHEM!!

FEDERAL RESERVE MUST CUT INTEREST RATES NOW 1%, AND PRAY THAT WORKS!! NOW!!!

FantasyFreddy — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:50:39 GMT

WORLD ECONOMIES ARE IN A FREE-FALL BECAUSE OF THE CREDIT CRISIS WHICH HAS BEEN EMERGING SINCE HOUSING PRICES TURNED AROUND IN THIS NATION IN 2005. FINALLY, THIS PAIN HAS CAUGHT UP TO THE MARKETS, AND THEY ARE REELING. THE US MARKETS HAVE FALLEN 15% SINCE THE FIRST OF THE YEAR (OR SO), WITH MANY COMPANIES WORTH A SMALL FRACTION OF WHAT THEY WERE. THE FEDERAL RESERVE CAN TRY TO STOP THIS FREEFALL BY LOWERING INTEREST RATES, MAKING IT EASIER TO BORROW MONEY, WHEN OTHERWISE RATES WOULD BE GOING THROUGH THE ROOF. THE FED, AND THE FED CHIEF BEN BERNANKE, MUST NOW OWN UP TO THE FACT THEY HAVE NOT DONE A GOOD JOB OF STOPPING THIS FREE-FALL, WHICH IS THEIR JOB, AND MUST TAKE EMERGENCY ACTION NOW TO TURN THE MARKETS AROUND. JUST LISTEN TO JIM CRAMER. HE KNOWS WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT: 1) 1% CUT NOW!!! NOW!! 2) FED GOVT GUARANTEE MORTGAGES AT 50% RATE TO STOP SNOWBALL EFFECT OF DEFAULTED MORTGAGES FROM CONTINUING!! I PRAY THEY DO THESE THINGS IMMEDIATELY!! EVERYONE IN THE WORLD KNOWS WHAT'S NEEDED, AND HAS KNOWN SINCE AT LEAST AUGUST, IF NOT SINCE HOUSING PRICES STARTED TANKING!! SHALOM!!! LOVE , FREDDY AND BABY AND FRIENDS!! AND TO ALL OF YOU HURTING RIGHT NOW, JUST REMEMBER THINGS WILL GET BETTER. LET'S PRAY SOON!! THE FALL WILL FUEL THE MASSIVE FLIGHT HIGHER.. LET'S PRAY IMMEDIATELY!!!! THESE ARE GREAT COMPANIES (MOST) COMPRISED OF GREAT PEOPLE DOING GREAT WORK FOR THE WORLD. LET'S PRAY THESE MARKETS TURN AROUND IMMEDIATELY. I MEAN NOW!!! AND PLEASE GOD LET THE FED CUT INTEREST RATES 1% NOW!! NOW!! NOW!! NOW!! BARUCH HASHEM!!! (BLESS GOD!!) PEACE!!!! FRED PS: THIS IS AN EMERGENCY! I SAW AN OLD AND WISE FEDERAL RESERVE GUY RECOMMENDING THIS DAYS AGO. I KNEW HE WAS RIGHT. I WONDER WHAT HAS TAKEN THE FEDERAL RESERVE SO LONG. THIS IS CRAZY!!

LEGALIZE IT!! END PROHIBITION NOW!!

FantasyFreddy — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:06:25 GMT

New York Times August 31, 2007, 7:25 pm Dispatches from the War on the Drugs By John Tierney Tags: addiction, D.E.A., opioids, pain, terrorism I recommend a couple of articles chronicling the unintended consequences of the war on drugs. One, by Ethan Nadelmann, is a global look at the damage done by prohibitionist policies. The other, by Radley Balko, is a look at a doctor convicted for prescribing opioids — and this case is in some ways more troubling than the Hurwitz case that I’ve been writing about. Dr. Nadelmann’s article is the cover story of Foreign Policy magazine, which summarizes the article’s findings with large lettters on the cover: “Legalize It: Why It’s Time to Just Say No to Prohibition.” Dr. Nadelmann, the executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, shows how America has exported its preoccupation with drugs to the rest of the world, harming other countries and financing terrorists that pose a threat to America. (Not that this narco-financed threat seems to matter much in Washington. After 9/11, Americans were told that we had to revise our assumptions about the world — and about little things like civil liberties — but the drug prohibitionists in Washington don’t seem to have revised their thinking one whit.) “Looking to the United States as a role model for drug control is like looking to apartheid-era South Africa for how to deal with race,” Dr. Nadelmann writes in detailing the failure of prohibition at home. After surveying other countries, like Afghanistan, he concludes: Global drug prohibition is clearly a costly disaster. The United Nations has estimated the value of the global market in illicit drugs at $400 billion, or 6 percent of global trade. The extraordinary profits available to those willing to assume the risks enrich criminals, terrorists, violent political insurgents, and corrupt politicians and governments. Many cities, states, and even countries in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Asia are reminiscent of Chicago under Al Capone—times 50. By bringing the market for drugs out into the open, legalization would radically change all that for the better. More importantly, legalization would strip addiction down to what it really is: a health issue. Most people who use drugs are like the responsible alcohol consumer, causing no harm to themselves or anyone else. They would no longer be the state’s business. But legalization would also benefit those who struggle with drugs by reducing the risks of overdose and disease associated with unregulated products, eliminating the need to obtain drugs from dangerous criminal markets, and allowing addiction problems to be treated as medical rather than criminal problems. No one knows how much governments spend collectively on failing drug war policies, but it’s probably at least $100 billion a year, with federal, state, and local governments in the United States accounting for almost half the total. Add to that the tens of billions of dollars to be gained annually in tax revenues from the sale of legalized drugs. Now imagine if just a third of that total were committed to reducing drug-related disease and addiction. Virtually everyone, except those who profit or gain politically from the current system, would benefit. Meanwhile, Radley Balko reports in Reason on the case of Dr. Bernard L. Rottschaefer, a doctor in Pittsburgh who’s serving a five-year sentence after being convicted of illegally prescribing opioids. His arrest made headlines when he was accused of trading prescriptions for sex. But the allegations about sex were made by addicts who cut deals with the Drug Enforcement Administration and prosecutors for reduced sentences in exchange for their testimony, and their stories looked shaky during the trial. After the trial, as I wrote about in this column, the boyfriend of one of the women produced letters in which she repeatedly confessed to making up the story about sex in order to get a reduced sentence. Mr. Balko reviews those facts and digs up new evidence that supports Dr. Rottschaefer — and possibly implicates the prosecutors for misconduct. They persuaded a jury to convict him by claiming his prescriptions were unnecessary and outside the bounds of medicine, and caused damage to the patients. But the jury didn’t hear evidence that emerged later in civil suits related to the case — and that prosecutors omitted either out of ignorance or malice. As Mr. Balko explains: It’s now clear that all five women perjured themselves in Rottschaefer’s criminal trial-both about the bargains they’d struck with federal prosecutors, and about their own medical histories. One failed to inform the jury that she’d been diagnosed with several psychological disorders, allowing the jury to conclude that a breakdown she’d suffered in 2002 was due to the drugs Dr. Rottschaefer had prescribed her, not her underlying medical conditions. The other four had been or were later treated with medications similar to those Dr. Rottschaefer prescribed, and for the same conditions he had diagnosed. Meaning that not only were Dr. Rottschaefer’s actions not outside the scope of accepted medical practice, they were actually duplicated by other doctors. It’s unclear if [U.S. Attorney Mary Beth] Buchanan and her subordinates are guilty of basic incompetence here, or something more sinister. That they could look at what’s come out since Dr. Rottschaefer’s conviction and still feel he belongs in prison is telling, as is the fact that they’ve yet to charge their star witness with perjury, despite overwhelming evidence that she committed it. Why haven’t prosecutors charged their star witness with perjury even though they have abundant evidence from her own words that she committed it? I couldn’t get an answer from them when I wrote about it. If anyone has any insight, I welcome it.

Happy MLK Day!! I love Martin Luther King, and I LOVE BARAK OBAMA!!!!

FantasyFreddy — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:06:56 GMT

I am watching this debate, and really really love Barak Obama!! It would make the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King soooo proud to see this debate right now!! He is smiling down and looking out for us from heaven!! GO BARAK!!!! OBAMA!!! OBAMA!!! BARAK!!! BARAK!!! GOOOOOOOO BARAK!!! WE LOVE YOU!! GOD BLESS YOU!!! BARAK!!! BARAK!!! BARAK!!!! GOOOOOOOO BAAARRRAAAKKK!!!!!! I HAVE A DREAM!!!!!!!! (check out the video on you tube!!) LOVE, FREDDY, BABY, AND FRIENDS!!! I SEE A LANDSLIDE (THE GOOD DEMOCRATIC KIND) SOON IN THE FUTURE!! SHALOMMMMMMMMMMMM!! ONE LOVE!! ONE!!! PS: I do feel really bad that Sen. Mike Gravel, and Dennis Kucinich too, was not in this current debate. Total censorship. And total evil. But I do totally support Barak right now!! Love, Freddy PPS: Barak did allude to releasing people convicted of non-violent "drug crimes" from jail. When he talked about equalizing penalties between "races". Unless he was referring to locking up many more "whites", which I think he was not!! Now, this is not as good as legalizing drugs flat out, but it is a good start.. In the meantime I will fight and win that battle in the courts. But releasing non-viloent "offenders" is a good start, and way better off than we are now. As to those convicted of violence, I am sure that if you subtract the "drug" part of the sentence, many have already served their time for violence, and thus would be released. Best to do by Presidential pardon.. btw, thought a lot about this, and earlier I mentiond that I thought Scooter Libby should not be in Jail if Bush and Cheney were not.. Not that Bush will listen to me, at all!, but I have decided that he should be in jail, so he can tell the truth to prosecutors, in exchange for his freedom, about who ordered him to lie.. was it Cheney? Who told Cheney to cover up the discovery that there were no nukes (centrifuges) going from Africa to Iraq.. was it Bush.. Betcha!! btw2: Bush and Cheney ordered the destruction of those cia videotapes of torture, because they knew the world would see it as torture.. this is impeachable. but may now take too long.. still, might as well start the trial now. shalom shalom!! love, Freddy, Baby and Friends (not to be confused with "Barney and Friends"!!) lol!! ppps: I do pray that after elected, Barak does the right thing and pushes for legalizing drugs.. starting with the argument that it was unconstitutional to make them illegal!! shalom shalom shalom!! F pppps: I stil am furious that all candidates have not come out for legalizing "drugs" as they all profess to care about this nation and the world. I mean, millions of people worldwide are on synthetic versions of these same drugs.. and really, speed is made from sudafed.. and millions of adults, and even children, and even toddlers!!!!! are on ritalin.. and it has just been determined that caffeine causes miscarriages.. HELLOOOOO!!!! I WAS A COFFEE BABY!!! HELLOOO!!! LEGALIZE IT!!! LEGALIZE IT!!! (AS BOB MARLEY SINGS!!) (AND I BET MLK SMOKED SOME REEFER.. I BET!!) HELLLOOOOOOO!!!!! LEGALIZE IT!!! PPPPPPS: JOHN EDWARDS WAS BETTER THAN HILLARY, BUT BARAK IS BEST BY FAR! AND ALL OF THEM NEED TO GO FOR MY TAX PLAN, WHICH IS BETTER BY FAR, AS IT ONLY TAXES THE WEALTHY.. I REPEAT, ONLY ONLY ONLY TAXES THE WEALTHY!!!.. OH, I GUESS I'LL RUN AGAIN, SOME DAY... FOR NOW, GOOOOOO BARAKKKK!! OH, AND LISTEN, I AM NOT SAYING I THINK TODDLERS, OR REALLY ANYONE, SHOULD REALLY BE ON RITALIN.. BUT IT SHOULD BE LEGAL, AND SOLD OVER-THE-COUNTER. AND PEOPLE SHOULD WISE-UP AND GET OFF THIS SHIT!! I MEAN, IT WAS INVENTED BY NAZIS.. DOESN'T THAT SAY ENOUGH?

I HAD A DREAM!! I HAVE A DREAM!!! OBAMA 4 PREZ!!!!

FantasyFreddy — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 07:52:53 GMT

OK, I am switching from Gravel to Obama right now!! Barak!! Barak!! Wooooohoooo!! Why you ask?? Well, I felt sick when Mike Gravel did poorly in NH.. But the night of the 9th, Barak Obama came to me in a dream, and he was upset that I had not supported him earlier for president. Moreover, I stopped breathing during the dream, woke up, and was not breathing, and had to force myself to breathe again.. thank God, that worked!! So, I feel that God let me live to change my support to Barak!! Now, let me say, I have major concerns.. about the "War On Drugs" especially. But I believe that Obama will "Do the Right Thing" and free all non-violent "drug offenders" from jail. And I know that Hillary (or any of the Republicans except for Ron Paul, who has pledged to pardon all non-violent "offenders" if he is elected) would not.. This might sound like a tiny issue, but it is huge. It relates to approximately 1-2 million Americans who are in jail for non-violent "drug offenses". Now, I am not advocating drug use (although many times people, ususally without medical insurance, were simply self-medicating for real pain and suffering as opposed to going to a medical doctor). What I am saying is that jail is wrong for these people. And it is wrong to define possession (a strange concept) or consumption of a plant or plant derivative or even a man-made food/"drug" as illegal. Immoral and wrong. (But legal under our often-wonderful nation's twisted "drug" laws). My point is, Barak and Hillary both supported making the penalties for powder and crack cocaine as equal for weight. (Which is a hilarious concept as it is, as both are always "cut" with other substances, and crack with much higher percentages of cutter (baking soda or powder, I am not sure!).. (Kids, I definately recommend being as close to a raw vegan, and maybe raw fish and vegan, diet as possible here, with exercise for an adrenaline rush.. for the record!).. (The speed I recommend is flying down a hill on a bicycle or on rollerblades, with a helmet! ;) ) (Ok, I often don't wear one, but still!).. So my point is, when they both advocated bringing "crack" cocaine penalties down to meet powder penalties, and mind you I will never condone penalties for a God-given right!, but when they proposed equalizing the penalties, Barak endorsed letting the reduced setences apply retroactively, and Hillary did not... The Congress decided on allowing the judges, on an individual basis, to apply the lessened sentences retroactively, so now there are thousands of cases going to the courts which will be decided on an individual basis.. which is nowhere's near as good as simply a presidential pardon, or at the very least a universal retroactivity application to prisoners , which would automatically free thousands.. Now Hillary advocated AGAINST RETROACTIVITY for equalizing the punishments, any degree of which is evil anyway!! Good behavior should be advocated through education!! But my point is, she advocated against retroactivity, and lost in the Congress, thank God!! Now, apply this concept to the future.. Both Barak and Hillary are advocating "drug courts" which have started to crop up across the nation, which allow first time non-violent offenders to be "diverted" to "rehab" (which I am not that big a fan of, but it beats the hell out of jail... but it is just government-forced religion (AA) and brainwashing (AA).. with classic cult techniques of breaking down the person in order to build them up.. right!! and of getting them to trade illegal "addicitions" to legal "addicitons", like cigarettes, or "psychotropic drugs" prescribed by doctors for all those "dual diagnosis" "patients").. (and do not get me wrong, there are good education programs and encouragement therapy which when optional can work .. all modern research, I REPEAT , ALL MODERN RESEARCH ON "ADDICTION" SHOWS THAT "ZERO TOLERANCE" DOES NOT WORK, AND THE BEST WAY IS TO UDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE OFTEN TAKE TWO, THREE , FOUR STEPS FORWARD AND ONE STEP BACK!! AND THE BIGGEST PROBLEM FOR MOST "ADDICTS" OR EVEN "DRUG USERS" IS OTHER'S OPINIONS OF THEM/JAIL/PUNISHMENT!!! anyway, my point is, they both support these drug courts and rehab not jail for first time offenders.. BUT, neither has addressed the issue of retroactivity!!! How do you think they would react? I have a hunch that they would react to that issue the same way they did for cocaine for all other drugs.. (Keep in mind that 90%, last I heard, of all illegal "drug" use is ingesiton of marijuana..).. so my point is that if we apply the issue of retroactivity, we could be looking at freeing up to 2 million non-violent offenders from federal and state prisons. The best, because it is simplest, way would be to address this through a presidential pardon.. But anyway.. Onto other issues... Barak in general is inspiring, appealing to our most noble goals as humans of helping others, helping ourselves through helping others and ourselves, and building a strong, peaceful, happy world together. A world with awesome, free education, healthcare, and where no one is homeless. A world without war. Go to his website and download his platform (like 40 pages or so!) (or just read it online!).. truly inspirational!! And he is.. and he appears to be kind, fair, just, and brilliant!! And, while I deeply believe there is no such thing as race, certainly there are many people who hate who believe there is. (And many people who don't hate who have just been brainwashed!).. And the community of people descended from American slaves who were captured in Africa and kidnapped here... well, and to all people who are not part of the "WASP establishment" .. (you never hear that term any more , but when I was a kid you did a lot.. it stands for "White Anglo-Saxon Protestant").. NOT that there is such a thing as white or black, as there isn't , but even if you believed that there is, as the government tries to make us believe that there is every time we have to check off our "race", well then Barak is BOTH!! And no, being "black" and "white" does not make one "black", unless you are a slave-owner!! Oh , I make myself laugh!! Barak's election will give hope to all people who were brought up without much money, the underdogs, the oppressed, the misfits!! He is our hero!! And really most Americans love him, and trust him, more than Hillary or certainly more than any of the psycho Republicans who psychotically support this major War we have going on, which should really be a hunt for Bin Laden and his few henchmen who planned 9/11 and the Cole attacks (Ron Paul excepted, who I really mostly have a problem with because he supports making pregnancy termination, or "abortion", murder, making 1/6 of our nation's population unconvicted murderers overnight!! and their thousands of good doctors!!).. So people do love Sen. Barak Obama, and he will be our next president, and I am thrilled about that.. I just hope and pray that as our first "black" or "African-American" president, he will do the right thing and pardon all non-violent "drug offenders" who are drastically disproportionately "African-Americans"!!!!!!! I really pray he does the right thing and legalizes drugs. I really do! Briefly, as for Hillary, she voted to allow Bush to use force in Iraq, leading to the deaths and maimings of thousands of Americans and millions of Iraquis. Yes, I am pissed off!! And yes, I hold her responsible. And yes, I accept her apology for being duped by Bush. But it is still completely unacceptable and inexcusable. She probably meant well in authorizing this "use of force" which turned into a war, but she knew it would be a big war. And she, and anyone who voted for this war, should have known that it would turn out exactly as it did. She says she is upset at Bush for "how he conducted the war".. what does that mean? not enough troops? She's sounding more like McCain!! Ok, enough.. you get where I stand. As for Sen. Mike Gravel: I love him. I really do. And I am thrilled that he and Ron Paul have both stood up for ending the "War on Drugs" tomorrow and ending the War in Iraq tomorrow. But he simply has not done enough to inspire this nation to vote for him at this point, and it is looking like a battle between Barak and Hillary, and I am scared enough that the polls are tilting way towards Hillary that I want to make the case for Barak, who will bring major healing to a nation that has been torn apart for too long by differences, instead of saying we are all one. One people, humanity. One color: all colored!!! And Hillary is just annoying. Really annoying. And yes, I have a lot of sympathy for her and Bill getting smeared by the "Republican" hit-men like Kenneth Starr, who spent millions of tax-payer earned dollars investigating the degree of intimacy between Bill and Monica, who was just abused by the Republicans. Dragging a nice Jewish girl through the mud like that!! And pissing off Bin Laden and the other Muslims like that, at the expense of national and really world security just to get a war-monger Republican into office!! I mean really!!! OK, I really do love Gravel, and think his real democracy movement has potential. (It has worked really well in CA and many other states!!) We would need ways to make it work, like making sure all the numbers work, but as Mike Gravel says, if we had direct democracy right now, we would not have a war right now. Which would save trillions of dollars... Oh, and speaking of trillions of dollars, in addition to FREEING MILLIONS OF BROKEN AMERICANS from the HELL HELL HELL of JAIL, and helping them restart their lives and rejoin their families and become happy and productive members of society, they would contruibute successfully to society, or at least most would, earning at least a million dollars each over a lifetime, which adds up to EXACTLY THE COST OF THE WAR IN IRAQ!! That's right, one million times one million is one trillion.. the cost of the war in Iraq is 1-2 trillion, minimum, right now, and so is the war on "drugs".. and if even one forms the next google, you can add 16 billion to that number. And if 100 form the next googles, you are talking at least another two trillion added to the economy.. So we go from subtracting two trillion to adding two to four to forty or more trillion to the economy from ending each of these wars now!!!!! This is just math, not just talking about the lives ruined from the "War On Drugs".. Now also, never forget that much, if not all, of the violence that accompanies the "drug" trade is because these plants and foods are illegal, making them valuable. Leading to gangs. Leading to killings. and on and on.. And leading to their being more instead of less concentrated. Leading to more accidental overdoses. Legality would mean that "drugs" could be sold legally by companies, taxed, and rated by consumer reports for quality. Nobody would buy "drugs" rated poorly by Consumer Reports, like today with vitamins!! And a lawsuit could be brought against a company that labeled a "drug" as opium, but it was something synthetic posing as opium. And never forget how much this "drug war" has hurt those truly in pain, not allowing them to get sufficient natural or synthetic drugs. That's right, millions of Americans and people worldwide are in major pain right now, but can't get proper medications because the drugs they want are highly (sorry!) regulated!! And even doctors are reluctant to write prescriptions, and often underprescribe, out of fear of jail!! That's right, when a doctor, in his medical judgement, believes that a person needs lots of painkillers, and so prescribes them, he is often charged with a crime of drug distribution and convicted by unwitting juries who are duped by psychotic prosecutors who have no clue about medicine or pain.. yes, there are good, famous doctors in jail right now for this "crime" of trying to be good doctors... And as for race, there is no such thing. but I am thrilled that the world recognizes Sen. Barak Obama for all of his qulalities, and looks at, as would make the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King proud, "the content of his character and not the color of his skin".. Dr. King would be proud to see Obama get elected as president. I know I will be. Shalom Barak, Michelle, your beautiful daughters, your friends, your millions of followers.. The world will be a better place with you as President!! It was an honor to meet you in my dream. I pray we meet again some day, in this physical world!! And to Sen. Mike Gravel, who is suffering right now from exhaustion and bronchitis from fighting the good fight till he almost died.. I love you sooo much!! But this is now a battle against Hillary and the Republicans.. and we need Barak to beat them back!! I do love Bill Clinton, but the number of people in jail for drug offenses skyrocketed to 2.3 million or so while he was in office. I don't care whether he inhaled or not. He had that joint in his hand, which could have sent him to jail under laws he promoted!! WTF???!! And for George Bush who I am sure did countless lines of coke, WTF??!!! Shame on you for not ending the "War On Drugs"... Shame on you for starting this War in Iraq!! Shame on You!! We have a new president comin to town, and his name is Barak Obama, and he will be a LIGHT TO THE WORLD!!! BARUCH HASHEM (BLESS/PRAISE GOD!!)!! NOTICE HOW THE HEBREW WORD BARUCH IS LIKE BARAK? COINCIDENCE? NO!!!! BARUCH HASHEM!! BARUCH BARAK!!!! OBAMA!! OBAMA!! OBAMA!! OBAMA!!! OBAMA!!! OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!

Gravel losing in NH!! WTF?? Also, protests in Pakistan and new tiny apple computer.. read on!

FantasyFreddy — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:25:13 GMT

Tuesday, January 8. 2008 Gravel getting 0 percent of NH vote!! WTF???!!!!??? 79 votes with 23% of precincts reporting!! With 23% of precints reporting, Mike Gravel is getting ZERO PERCENT of the vote. So far, Hillary is beating Barak by several percentage points and several thousand votes, which is also surprising. But I would really think that NH voters would love and vote for Mike Gravel over all the others. 79 votes!!! 79 votes!!! This is not looking good, unless the other precincts really come out in force for Mike G., this is really not looking good. He had been driving across the state for a month in an RV!!!! Boy, did I misjudge the voters of NH!! 79 votes!!!! If that number is representative, then Mike G will get about 320 votes in the WHOLE STATE!!!! That is far less than one percent!! I don't know the exact number, but maybe 1/3 of one percent, or 1/4 of one percent!! OH BOY!!! LOL!!! I hope he stays in the race, but what is going on here?????!!! As for Hillary beating Barak, that is shocking too... I really thought that NH people, who are so against this war, would hold Hillary responsible for playing a role in starting it. Guess not!! Although, to be honest, Barak should NEVER NEVER have voted one dollar to support this HORRIBLE WAR!! NEVER!!! This war is EVIL, and he is trying to have it both ways, as is Hillary!! Well, at least they both are strongly against the war now!!!! Still, with NH voters soooo against this war, I am shocked they did not vote strongly for Mike G, who helped to end the draft, helped to end the Vietnam/Laos/Cambodia War, opposed the Iraq War before, during and after it started and has never wavered in this opposition!! And such a Libertarian State not voting for Ron Paul in huge numbers??!!! I guess they are pissed at him over the issue of Women's Health Care!! Shalom!! Freddy GO MIKEY G!!! YOU CAN STILL RECOVER, DON'T WORRY!! STAY IN THE RACE!!!!! PS: Congratulations so far to Hillary!! She is probably the first woman to ever win a state's primary for president!! But I deeply believe that while encouraging and impressive and exciting, what is more important is how a person thinks and votes, and she voted for this War.. not a very motherly move!! Shalom Salam and Peace!! - Freddy PPS: I am really curious why New Hampshirites did not come out IN FORCE for Mike Gravel, with his opposition to the War, opposition to the Income Tax, his support of Direct Democracy, his opposition to the War on "Drugs".. I am really shocked and and pretty appalled. I wonder why?? Lack of trust of Direct Democracy Idea?? Want a better tax plan? What?? I would really like to know!! I really would!! He might not be perfect, but he is better than the others I think.. so I am really curious why they are not supporting him? I wonder, does NH have electronic voting machines... I wonder!!! Still, if the exit polls confirm this, then the campaign really needs a shot in the arm now!! Some human growth hormone, maybe!! I hope the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and the Colbert Report with Steven Colbert come back on the air soon, because his viewers love Mikey G, and he needs some free publicity now!! So end this writers strike now, even if the networks are not agreeing to your terms, and restrike next year after Mike Gravel wins!! He will help you with your contract negotiations, believe me!!!! -xo F Posted by fantasyfreddy at 18:08 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Edit entry Pakistan and Bhutto A brief word about Pakistan and Benazir Bhutto and their current dictator, "President" Mushareff, and the brave people of Pakistan. Those people rose up in anger and burned lots of the country I saw on tv. And they took to the streets, wildly. Then the media said that "dozens died in the violence." That is a mischaracterization. While I and everyone else is opposed to burning buildings down, there is no comparison between burning a building, and shooting a person. Yes, someone could be in a building before it burns, and the fires can spread to buildings that people are in. And yes, I deeply favor and call for peaceful protests, as Gandhi-ji did. But the Dictator Mushareff and his troops used fires and crowds in the street as an excuse to murder protesting citizens. Outright murder. The only VIOLENCE was on the part of the troops, not the people. While the protesting was disorderly, and fires are extremely dangerous, they just are not violence, and should not be called violence. However, the protests, because they were disorderly, provided an excuse for the dictator and his soldiers to fire on the people!! Not a reason, an excuse. That is why orderly protesting and civil disobedience is always better. The idea is to prevent government violence. Gandhi and his followers somehow did not react in self defense when beaten and murdered by British troops. This I somehow do not understand. Even American Law recognizes that a killing in self-defense is not murder, but rather a reason to not be charged with any crime. I pray for peaceful change to real democracy in Pakistan, and the whole world, immediately. ps: I do not mean to downplay the danger of fires, or to condone them. I do not. People often die or are grievously injured in fires, daily. But troops murdering people only causes more fires, not less. And the people really should not burn their neighborhoods down, but focus on peacefully achieving democracy. It sounds like Bhutto's son has a great chance of getting elected when he runs for office after college! However, I sadly must add that the forces of darkness are strong. And killed his mother and grandfather. So he should probably get married and have at least one or two children before running for office.. Just a thought. But, G d willing, he will live many many years and lead a happy life helping the world!! And die of natural causes at least at the age of 120 years!!! Shalom! Freddy Posted by fantasyfreddy at 17:38 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Edit entry new apple notebook computers.. I just read online that apple is planning two "big" changes to its notebook computers.. which is exciting for geeks everywhere. The first advance, if these rumors are true, is a super-tiny, light and thin laptop, with an external optical drive, which sounds really exciting, especially for people with bad backs. You may laugh, but my dad got so hurt lifting an old heavy dell laptop up and down in airplanes that he ruptured a disk in his back, necessitating two emergency operations, and a month in bed!! Thank G d he is getting better, and only has slight paralysis in his foot (from the nerve damage) which is hopefully getting better, but you get the point... Now, the second advance, which is really amazing but also an ancient idea, is to have a solid-state ram drive instead of a hard drive. This will make computing sooo much faster. Also, as a general proposition, fewer moving parts means fewer mechanical failures. But what is really funny is that the first notebook computer I ever bought (and the first notebook, as opposed to laptop, computer ever), the Toshiba T1000SE, which weighed about 6 lbs I think, had a floppy drive (which took the new hard-cased disks) and a RAM drive!!! Yes, I shit you not!! No hard drive!! This thing had backlighting, a new advancement for Toshiba!! Also, the RAM-drive thing was awesome.. This was a DOS machine (not windows), so the operating system and the programs were tiny!! I fit the OS and the wordprocessor (Letterperfect) ONTO RAM, as well as all the documents I saved onto RAM!!!!! So, in my final year of lawschool, when I started using the computer to take some notes (and yes, I was the only one in the class using a computer to take notes!!) (this was in 1994, about a millenium ago!!), I could save whole classes onto RAM, no problem!! One class I had over 100 pages of single typed notes I think.. and I could search a topic or word in those 100 pages, and the search would take about 1-2 seconds, tops!!!!! I shit you not!! Sometimes if I wanted to make it easy to go back to an area, I would misspell a word, then just search for the misspelled word!! Anyway, I am glad that finally they are going back to the original great ideas!! OK, I love you all.. gotta go!! Gotta study for this CA bar exam, and pass it already!!! And gotta check the results of the NH primary to see how Mike Gravel is doing... And gotta exercise a lot, as i am now OFFICIALLY A GAINER, TOPPING 190 LBS. Up to like 191 or 192.. now, lots of that is muscle and lots is fat.. just gotta turn the fat into muscle.. Imagine me at 190, but in pure rippling muscle!!! Yeah Baby!!!!! lol!!! OK, ta ta for now!!! Love, Freddy

CONGRESS MUST DECLARE WAR TO START ONE, AND THEY DID NOT!!

FantasyFreddy — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:12:50 GMT

The thought I was trying to make was that to start a war, congress must vote to declare war on a nation. And in this case, even though they voted to authorize the president to use force if he saw such use of force as necessary in Iraq, THEY NEVER VOTED TO DECLARE WAR ON IRAQ.. Soooo, we could call this a technicality, and it is certainly a moot point in that challenging the legality of the war in court will not turn back time, but it will , possibly, end this war once and for all, which is what we want now. Which is what a majority of Americans, Iraquis, and citizens of the World want, that is. ps: in response to your probable questions in relation to a previous post, I can just hear you asking me now how i would feel if my children all went into the profession of providing physical and even emotional intimacy for monetary compensation.. ok, i would not be thrilled.. i would hope that when i have children they get happily married and stay happily married and don't provide other healing to strangers in that manner.. but that is my personal thing. i do not feel it is my or anyone elses right to impose that on others!! i read the bible for guidance on this issue. In the "Old Testament" or "Hebrew Bible" there is a whole story about this.. I think the woman's name was Tamara.. I can't remember.. we should all read it again soon!! Peace!!! Freddy

MIKE GRAVEL FOR PRESIDENT!! AN AMERICAN HERO FOR HELPING END THE DRAFT AND THE VIETNAM WAR! A PEACEFUL WARRIOR!!!!

FantasyFreddy — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:03:32 GMT

Sen. Hillary Clinton said, many times over the last few days I am sure, "Since when did "experience" become such a dirty word?" When you voted for the War, Hillary... Why is she playing dumb??!! She played a major role, or as big a role as she could, at least, in getting us into this disastrous war in Iraq. Yes, she was voting to authorize the use of force if Bush saw fit to use it, but did she really think he wouldn't??? On a more disturbing note, I just heard her say at a rally in NH that Sen. Barak Obama, whom I also really like, and a lot more than Hillary because he did not vote to start the "conflict", aka WAR, had voted to authorize spending $300 BILLION TO CONTINUE THE WAR!! I MEAN REALLY!! WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON HERE? And need I mention that Sen. John Edwards, whom I also like a lot, also voted to start the WAR (in the guise of authorizing the use of force if the "president" saw fit, which will make this WAR EASILY CHALLANGEABLE IN COURT, AS THE CONSTITUTION CLEARLY STATES (AND EVERYONE SHOULD TAKE AN HOUR OR TWO OR THREE AND READ IT, AS WELL AS THE FEDERALIST PAPERS WHICH ACCOMPANIED ITS ADOPTION BY OUR NATION'S FOUNDERS) THAT CONGRESS HAS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY TO START A WAR. (I WOULD THINK THAT THAT GIVES CONGRESS, SIMILARLY, THE POWER TO END A WAR, BUT THAT WAS QUITE UNDERSTOOD BY THE FOUNDERS, I AM SURE, ALTHOUGH THEY PROBABLY DID NOT ANTICIPATE THIS GREAT NATION EVER LOSING A WAR, OR AT LEAST EVER SURVIVING TO WORRY ABOUT IT!!).. ANYWAY, Edwards I am sure (although I have not confirmed this) voted to apropriate money for the war after voting to start it... Which leads us to the brilliant, brave Sen. Mike Gravel!!! He played a huge role in ENDING THE VIETNAM WAR AND THE DRAFT, BY SHUTTING DOWN THE SENATE UNTIL NIXON ENDED THE DRAFT, AND BY READING THE "PENTAGON PAPERS" INTO THE SENATE RECORD TO EXPOSE THE FACT THAT THOSE "LEADERS" WHO GOT US INTO THAT WAR NEVER BELIEVED IT WAS "WINNABLE" IN ANY WAY!! ALSO, SEN. MIKE GRAVEL TRIED VERY HARD TO PREVENT OUR NATION FROM ENTERING THIS CURRENT WAR IN IRAQ!! HE WENT ON CNBC BEFORE THE WAR ARGUING THAT THERE WAS NO GOOD REASON TO GO INTO THIS WAR.. NONE OF THESE "EXPERIENCED POLITICIANS" LISTENED TO HIM!!! LOOK, I AND MANY THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE ABOUT A YEAR AGO WORKED VERY HARD TO GET THE DEMOCRATS IN OFFICE NOT BECAUSE WE LIKED THEM THAT MUCH , BUT BECAUSE WE BELIEVED THEY WOULD END THIS WAR. MILLIONS OF US VOTED FOR THEM TOO, SPECIFICALLY TO END THIS WAR. AND THEY HAVE NOT DONE SO!! AND WHETHER OBAMA AND EDWARDS LIKE IT AT ALL OR NOT, THEY VOTED TO CONTINUE THIS WAR (AND EDWARDS AND CLINTON VOTED TO START IT),.. AND I HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THE RECORD, BUT I BET THAT HILLARY MADE MANY VOTES TO FUND THIS WAR.. GRAVEL WILL END IT WITHIN 120 DAYS OF ASSUMING THE PRESIDENCY. HE IS 77, AND HAS PROMISED TO ONLY SERVE ONE TERM!! (DO NOT WORRY THAT HE IS NOT UP TO THE JOB, AS HE LOOKS HEALTHIER AND MORE VITAL THAN MANY 20 YEAR OLDS OUT THERE!!).. HE WILL END THE WAR ON DRUGS. HE WILL INSTITUTE A DIRECT DEMOCRACY TO HELP MORE LEGISLATION BUBBLE UP FROM THE PEOPLE, DIRECTLY. HE ALSO HAS A RADICAL TAX PLAN TO ABOLISH THE IRS, AND HAVE A CONSUMPTION TAX INSTEAD. I WOULD SUBSTITUTE A POSSESSIONS TAX, PERSONALLY, AS A CONSUMPTION TAX WILL ALLOW VERY WEALTHY PEOPLE TO PAY ALMOST NOTHING COMPARED TO THEIR NET WORTH.. SEN. GRAVEL SAYS HE HAS A WAY OF MAKING THE CONSUMPTION TAX FAIR, BY MAKING IT GRADATED TO SPENDING, BUT EVEN A 100% TAX ON CARS OVER $100,000 DOLLARS WILL NOT GO TOO FAR !! ANYWAY.. THESE ARE MINOR ISSUES, AS WE CAN WORK WITH HIM TO FIX TAXES AFTER HE ASSUMES OFFICE.. IF WE ALL VOTE FOR HIM THAT IS.. WHICH BRINGS US TO NEW HAMPSHIRE TOMORROW.. YES, I KNOW THAT BARAK IS THE FIRST MAN THAT MANY CALL "AFRICAN-AMERICAN" TO HAVE SUCH WIDE NATIONAL APPEAL IN A RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY. AND YES, THAT MAKES ME PROUD TO SAY THAT A "BLACK MAN" (OR WOMAN) COULD NEVER DO SUCH A THING!! AS YOU KNOW FROM MY PREVIOUS POSTS, I VEHEMENTLY DENY THAT THERE IS SUCH A THING AS "RACE".. THERE IS NOT.. IT IS A FICTION CREATED BY RACISTS AND PSEUDO-SCIENTISTS AND NAZIS!! BUT I DO RECOGNIZE THE HISTORICAL MOMENT THAT IS AT HAND.. AND SAME WITH HILLARY!! I RECOGNIZE HOW EXCITING IT IS THAT A WOMAN IS GETTING CLOSE TO BEING THE NEXT PRESIDENT!! AND IN THE LAST DEBATE, I THOUGHT THAT WHEN SHE SAID THAT HER FEELINGS WERE HURT THAT SHE RUBBED MANY VOTERS THE WRONG WAY THAT SHE SEEMED SWEET!! SHE REALLY DID! BUT SHE DID VOTE FOR THIS WAR. AND SHE AND EDWARDS AND OBAMA HAVE VOTED TO CONTINUE IT!! AND NONE OF THEM HAS EVER DONE A DAMN THING TO END THE "WAR ON DRUGS" WHICH IS A WAR ON AMERICANS, AND A WAR ON FOREIGN FARMERS, AND HAS KILLED THOUSANDS OR MORE OF FOREIGNERS AND LOCKED UP MILLIONS OF AMERICANS, MANY FOR LIFE OR FOR DECADES, MANY OF WHOM HAVE DIED OR WILL DIE IN JAIL UNLESS WE CHANGE THE SYSTEM AND END PROHIBITION AND LEGALIZE DRUGS IMMEDIATELY. MANY HAVE BEEN AND WILL BE RAPED, EVEN DAILY, I AM SURE, WITH THE APPROVAL OF GUARDS, BECAUSE OF THIS WAR ON DRUGS.. HELLOOOO!! HEEELLLLLOOOOOOO!!!! SEN. MIKE GRAVEL IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE, BESIDES THE AWESOME RON PAUL WHOM I ONLY OPPOSE FOR HIS VIEW ON ABORTION, BUT OTHERWISE SUPPORT.. BUT GRAVEL IS CERTAINLY THE ONLY OTHER CANDIDATE, AND THE ONLY ONE WHO CALLS HIMSELF A DEMOCRAT, TO BE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE WAR ON DRUGS.. AND I SUPPORT HIM FOR THAT!! DEEPLY!! AND I PRAY THAT TOMORROW NEW-HAMPSHIRITES (AND I DID LIVE THERE FOR THREE YEARS AT EXETER AND DID GROW UP IN WORCESTER MASSACHUSETTS, WHICH IS CLOSE) VOTE FOR GRAVEL.. THEY SHOULD VOTE WITH THEIR HEARTS AND THEIR HEADS AND I AM SURE THEY WILL VOTE FOR GRAVEL!! YES, RON PAUL IS AWESOME.. BUT HE DOES WANT TO MAKE ALL TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY A CRIME, MURDER, PUNISHABLE AS SUCH FOR THE WOMAN AND HER DOCTOR.. NOT TOO LIBERTARIAN IF YOU ASK ME!! ALSO, HE HAS NOT EXPRESSED MUCH COMPASSION FOR THE POOR , AND HASN'T SAID HOW THE FEDERAL (OR STATE) GOVERNMENTS SHOULD STEP IN IF CHARITIES DO NOT PROVIDE ENOUGH OF A SAFETY-NET, WHICH THEY WILL NOT!! OK, I'VE WRITTEN ENOUGH.. NOBODY WANTS TO BE TOLD WHAT TO DO.. AND I AM NOT TRYING TO DO SO.. I DEEPLY BELIEVE THAT NEW-HAMPSHIRITES PROBABLY AGREE MOST WITH MIKE GRAVEL ON THE ISSUES, MORE THAN ANY OTHER CANDIDATE. HE JUST DID NOT FOCUS ON IOWA BECAUSE HE THOUGHT THAT HIS STRONG OPPOSITION TO ETHANOL SUBSIDIES WOULD HURT HIM THERE, AND HE IS PROBABLY RIGHT.. BUT HE IS RIGHT THAT ETHANOL IS A SCAM THAT TAKES ALMOST AS MUCH ENERGY TO CREATE AS IT PROVIDES IN A TANK OF A CAR, AND ALSO THAT IT WASTES WATER TO SUCH A DEGREE THAT IT COULD RUIN OUR NATION'S FARMS, AND ALSO THAT IT RAISES FOOD, GRAIN, MEAT, AND MILK PRICES SO MUCH THAT WE COULD HAVE WORLDWIDE FAMINES, IF NOT JUST MILLIONS OF SLIGHTLY STARVING PEOPLE!!!!! HE IS RIGHT TO FIGHT THE POWER.. AND WE SHOULD JOIN HIM AND HIS WIFE AND DOGGIE TODAY!!! SHALOM!! I LOVE YOU ALL!!!! GOOD LUCK VOTING TOMORROW!! I LOVE YOU ALL!! AND TO THE OTHER CANDIDATES, I KNOW YOU ARE ONLY HUMAN, AND DO MAKE MISTAKES, BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MISTAKES THAT COST LIVES HERE. AND GRAVEL HAS SAVED THOUSANDS OR MILLIONS OF LIVES INSTEAD BY ENDING THE DRAFT IN THIS NATION AND PLAYING A HUGE ROLE IN ENDING THE VIETNAM WAR, EVEN RISKING JAIL OR MURDER TO DO SO.. THE LEAST WE CAN DO IS ELECT HIM PRESIDENT AS A THANK YOU!! PEACE AND LOVE!! MAKE LOVE NOT WAR!! LOVE, FREDDY

Congratulations Sen. Barak Obama and wife Michelle and daughters!! Amazing!! Sen. Mike Gravel's stillin the race though!!

FantasyFreddy — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 07:33:51 GMT

Congratulations to Senator Barak Obama on a crushing victory in Iowa!! Historic for overcoming American's narrowminded thinking about "race"!!! And he is very inspiring and moving as a speaker and as a politician, I must admit... But I still love Mike Gravel, mostly for his stance on ENDING PROHIBITION AND LEGALIZING "DRUGS"!! And I was thrilled to see Sen. Ron Paul trounce Rudy Juliani, who is such a "Drug Warrior".. Good work, Ron!! (Although I know you are seriously mistaken on the issue of terminating pregnancy, and when life begins.) While I still hold out some hope for Sen. Mike Gravel, I must admit the tide looks like it is swaying to Obama! And I am thrilled he trounced Edwards and Clinton, because he proved that strong morals, against entering that mistaken and nightmarish war in Iraq our nation is caught up in, trumps "experience" of making the wrong decisions, especially ones that were obvious and led to the deaths of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraquis. Shabat Shalom! I love you all!! And wish you all amazing luck in N.H., but especially Mike Gravel, Barak Obama, and Ron Paul. I must tell you, my hunch is that very soon we will all be saying "President Obama"!! Read up on Sen. Mike Gravel though.. he is a true American hero who had a huge role in ending the War in S.E. Asia in Vietnam and Laos. Huge role. And, he really does support ground-up Democracy, and has a plan to institute it (like the ballot initiative rubric, but for the whole nation)... His tax plan I have some doubts about, though... whether there will be any money to pay for things, for instance. and whether it will tax wealthy people enough.. ok, i said it... now i have lots more to say, and probably shouldn't even be typing on the Sabbath, but maybe somehow this posting could save a life (i don't know), so i had to type!! Shalom to you all! More later! And Congratulations to Sen. Obama and to the people of Iowa for having the guts to vote for him.. Sen. Gravel would have been there but he didn't raise enough money to criscross the state.. also, he is (correctly) very against ethanol subsidies and thought that would hurt him in Iowa. he is right though.. watch his videos on youtube.. he explains that each gallon of ethanol takes tons of water to create, and i believe that every gallon produced uses almost as much energy to create as it yields.. not to mention rising food prices and famines worldwide.. we really have to legalize "drugs" so marijuana/hemp seeds can be grown for fuel , as they grow anywhere and do not degrade the soil.. Gravel explains that these subsidies were lobbied for by big Agribusiness, and only helps them in the end, as growing ethanol will eventually cause food and water shortages, and eventually droughts. OK, enough Doom and Gloom.. I have a lot of hope for our nation right now, and feel the Obama wave comin.. but I still hold out hope for Mike Gravel.. As for Hukabee, he obviously wants to criminalize ending a pregnancy, which could lead to more deaths of women, more women in jail, and more doctors in jail.. not a good thing. nuff said. I've gotta go to bed. I deeply congratulate Obama, I just wish he would come out for legalizing drugs, and emptying our prisons of non-violent "drug offenders". Shalom, and good night! I love you all! Freddy PS: Congratulations again Sen. Barak Obama, wife Michelle, two young girls, and Iowans for choosing an incredible candidate!! I still hold out some hope for Sen. Mike Gravel, but I do realize he has not fared well in the polls yet!! Despite appearing on every talk show and many debates. So congratulations to Sen. Obama and all his supporters... Awesome victory.. But Sen. Mike Gravel's still in the race!! Watch his New Year's video with his wife and cute doggie.. very cute!! Shalom Shalom! - Freddy

one more thing ...

FantasyFreddy — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:21:32 GMT

PPS: I just heard Sen. Barak Obama and Rep. Ron Paul and Sen. John Edwards, speaking from a cafe in Iowa on CNN. They were both wonderful. I must admit, I am constantly impressed with Sen. Edwards. He is committed to making life better for average Americans, and even talked about possibly changing laws if necessary to prosecute, or at least change the business practices of, Oil Compainies for price gauging. If that is what's going on. Look, he has the right mindset. (Of course, someone can't be prosecuted for a new criminal law retroactively, but at least his heart is in the right place!). And, I forgot to mention, I do believe that the last election was stolen using electronic ballot fixing, crowding at polling places, disallowing people from voting for ancient misdemeanors, disallowing students from voting where they go to college, and other means.. which means that he is the current Vice President already!! I was reading his website and he really does have brilliant, detailed ideas for helping out regular Americans.. Oh, and he did also mention about the War in Iraq, which is the NUMBER ONE issue facing the world right now, that there is no military solution to this war.. this in response to a questions saying something like " General Petraeus says pulling out now will reverse all the good we've done.".. ok, listen up folks: Generals believe that war is a way to solve the world's problems. If they didn't believe this, they probably wouldn't be generals. So, when people are getting blown up and shot all around them, they say, "send more troops!!"... does that mean they are right about their solution?? HELL NO!!! Edwards and Obama, and Clinton too, all believe that war is not the solution there. But only Obama stood against starting that war in the first place.. So, (IF NOT SEN. MIKE GRAVEL) my vote goes to SEN. BARAK OBAMA, for having the strength and foresight to see that war would not work there (Iraq), and really is rarely the solution to a problem, and is the last resort, not the first. So, if Gravel is not the Democratic nominee, I'd vote for Sen. Barak Obama, big time!!! He saw that this would would be a fiasco, and bears no responsibility for getting us into it, and should be rewarded by being the next president, (if it's not Sen. Mike Gravel , who would be sooo awesome!), so he can keep us out of the next war. But, for helping to end the Vietnam and Laos War, and for pledging to end the "War on Drugs", I support Sen. Mike Gravel, big time!!! I LIKE MIKE!!! HE ROCKS!!! And keep in mind, Gravel is 77, so he might not run again!!! Obama will be around in 8 years!! Now, I might be more excited about Obama, or Edwards, if they had come out as MASSIVELY OPPOSED TO THE WAR ON DRUGS, for PUTTING MILLIONS OF AMERICANS IN JAIL, FOR NO GOOD REASON!!! THEY MUST CHANGE THEIR STANCE!! THIS IS JUST AS IMPORTANT AS EDWARDS AND CLINTON CHANGING THEIR STANCE ON THE IRAQ WAR!!! THEY WILL, I JUST PRAY THEY DO IT TODAY!! FOR NOW, AND FOREVER, I LIKE MIKE GRAVEL, THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. IF THE POLLS ARE TO BE BELIEVED, HE IS NOT EVEN REGISTERING. BUT I WOULDN'T BELIEVE THE POLLS. I PRAY THE PEOPLE OF IOWA AND NH VOTE FOR MIKE GRAVEL!!! The irony of this situation , is that I am a registered Libertarian (I used to be a registered Democrat), and have only voted for Democrats for president ever (although I've voted for Libertarians for every other position!)... my point is, I can only vote for Ron Paul, unless I change my registration, which it is probably too late to do!! So, I guess I will be voting for Ron Paul, but I am soooo concerned about his stance on abortion I can't tell you, so I just hope I can change my registration right now so I can vote for Mike Gravel, then change it back to Libertarian right after the election!! I really pray that Mike Gravel wins today, and if not him then Obama, and if not him, Edwards, then Clinton! But Mike Gravel will win tomorrow!! And I pray that on the Republican side Ron Paul wins, and in the general election Of Gravel vs. Paul, I'd vote for Gravel!! But good luck to Ron Paul and to all the Democrats today!! Peace and Love to you all!! AND TO THE PEOPLE OF IOWA FOR GOING THROUGH THIS.. IN THE FUTURE THOUGH, I'D LIKE TO SEE ALL PRIMARIES ON THE EXACT SAME DAY!! THAT WOULD BE EQUALLY FAIR TO ALL AMERICANS!! LOVE, FREDDY

Election, Gravel, Paul, Obama, Hillary, Edwards, War in Iraq and "War on drugs", "race", gender, pregnancy, poverty, homelessness, etc.

FantasyFreddy — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 11:02:30 GMT

Look, I am not really running for president this year, but if all of you in Iowa want to stand in a corner for Freddy and Hella as Veep tomorrow, we will be honored and rise to the occasion and stand as write in candidates in all the other states and assume office with vigor and optimism and strength when elected. As that is unlikely to happen (although I still hold out some hope!), I will now endorse Sen. Mike Gravel on the Democratic side and Rep. Ron Paul on the Republican side. Yes, neither would do nearly as good a job as Hella and me, but they would do a great job nonetheless. And yes, I have issues with each of them that I do not totally agree with them on.. Let's take Sen. Mike first.. my problems with him (that I know of!) are: 1) While he wants to end the "War on Drugs", he still talks on his website about "regulating hard drugs" "for the benefit of addicts". This policy would still lead to government agents spying on us daily, to find large hordes of "drugs". And would lead to wiretapping, and illegal searches and seizures of such "drugs" and the property they are found on. Listen: ALL MEDICINES, WHETHER FOR ILLNESSES OR FOR PAIN OR FOR A BRIEF ADJUSTMENT OF CONSCIENCE, WERE LEGAL WORLDWIDE FOR ALL OF THE HISTORY OF HUMANKIND!! NO "DRUGS" WERE MADE ILLEGAL BY OUR FOUNDING MOTHERS AND FATHERS!! NONE!!!!! MARIJUANA, COCAINE, AND OPIUM HAVE BEEN TRADITIONAL NATIVE NATURAL FOODS AND MEDICINES SINCE THE DAWN OF HUMANITY!! IN THIS NATION, SUCH "DRUGS" HAVE BEEN "ILLEGAL" FOR A HUNDRED YEARS OR LESS (DEPENDING ON THE DRUG). THERE IS NOTHING IN THE CONSTITUTION WHICH SAYS AT ALL THAT ANY FOOD OR MEDICINE CAN BE BANNED BY THE GOVERNMENT. SUCH A BAN IS AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION, AGAINST THE INTENT AND WILL OF OUR FOUNDING MOTHERS AND FATHERS, AND AGAINST THE RIGHTS OF MANKIND. THAT'S RIGHT, JUST BECAUSE MY NEIGHBORS BAND TOGETHER AND CALL THEMSELVES "THE GOVERNMENT" AND WRITE "LAWS" WHICH VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION AND ARM THEMSELVES WITH THE BEST WEAPONRY AND THE FIERCEST DOGS TRAINED TO MAIM OR KILL AND WITH JAILS DOES NOT MEAN THEY HAVE ANY RIGHT TO DO SO. THEY DO NOT. THEY HAVE PASSED ILLEGAL LAWS. THOMAS JEFFERSON RAISED MARIJUANA PLANTS ON HIS PROPERTY, AS DID MANY OF THE FOUNDING MOTHERS AND FATHERS (THE MOTHERS TO TREAT MENSTRUAL PAINS AND HEADACHES PROBABLY). JEFFERSON (I HAVE READ) SPECIFICALLY WENT LOOKING FOR FEMALE MARIJUANA PLANT SEEDS IN FRANCE, WHOSE SOLE PURPOSE IS TO GROW PLANTS WITH A HIGHER MEDICINAL QUALITY. ALSO, NOTHING IN THE BIBLE BANS THE ENJOYMENT OR MEDICAL USE OF SUCH PLANTS. IN FACT, MANY HAVE SUGGESTED THAT THE MANNA THAT G D PROVIDED FOR THE ISRAELITES IN THE DESERT DURING THEIR 40 YEAR ESCAPE FROM EGYPT WAS REALLY MUSHROOMS, LIKELY THE "MAGIC" KIND. ALL PEOPLE HAVE A NATURAL RIGHT, INHERENT FROM BIRTH, TO EAT OR DRINK ALL PLANTS. NOTHING COULD BE MORE BASIC A HUMAN RIGHT THAN THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE WHAT FOOD (OR "MEDICINE") ONE CONSUMES. NOW, AS WE ALL LIVE IN AMERICA, WE ALL MUST OBEY THE LAWS UNTIL WE CHANGE THEM, AND I DO NOT ADVOCATE BREAKING ANY LAWS. ESPECIALLY AS I AM A LAWYER!! I DO HOWEVER ADVOCATE CHANGING THEM. MIKE GRAVEL IS ON THE RIGHT TRACK, BUT HE STILL THINKS ABOUT "REGULATING" "HARD DRUGS".. THESE "HARD DRUGS" ARE PRECISELY THE DRUGS THAT WERE STAPLES OF ANCIENT SOCIETIES FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, COCA LEAVES AND TEAS IN SOUTH AMERICA AND OPIUM POPPIES IN THE "MIDDLE EAST" AND SOUTHEAST ASIA. THESE WERE NATURAL FOODS EATEN, DRUNK, OR SMOKED DAILY FOR HEALING, PLEASURE, PRODUCTIVITY, AND ENERGY. AND YES, I HAVE SEEN AN OLD TRIBESMAN IN THAILAND RUNNING THROUGH THE JUNGLE AT DOUBLE THE SPEED OF ANY YOUNG WESTERNER, TAKING BREAKS WHEN HE GOT WAY AHEAD OF US TO SMOKE A PIPE OF OPIUM, AND MAYBE TRY TO SHOOT A WATER BUFFALO WITH A 100 YEAR OLD RIFLE, ALL THE WHILE CLEARING THE TRAIL OF DEADLY SNAKES BEFORE WE APPROACHED. YES, OBVIOUSLY, SOME PEOPLE SMOKE ENOUGH OPIUM AND FALL ASLEEP. AND YES, IN OUR MODERN WORLD, LARGELY DUE TO THE LAWS MAKING SUCH "DRUGS" ILLEGAL, THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN CONCENTRATED IN THEIR STRENGTH. BUT JUST BECAUSE THE STRENGTH IS CONCENTRATED DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE PLANT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. MAKING THE PLANTS LEGAL WOULD ALTERNATELY MEAN THAT LESS CONCENTRATED, MORE NATURAL VERSIONS , SUCH AS PLAIN COCA LEAVES FOR CHEWING, OR OPIUM TEAS, WOULD BE AVAILABLE. ALSO, VIOLENT CRIME WOULD GO WAY WAY DOWN AS THE PROFIT MOTIVE OF SELLING SUCH PLANTS WOULD BE LARGELY GONE. SO, THIS IS JUST SOMETHING WE MUST ALL DO, AND MIKE GRAVEL IS WRONG ON "REGULATION". Also, we must never forget that according to federal law, marijuana is a "hard drug" punishable as a "SCHEDULE ONE" drug by many years in jail. Millions of people in many states have voted to legalize marijuana (not that they should have to, as it is illegal to make it illegal!), but the "Supreme Court" has said that national law takes precedence, so people suffering from AIDS, Cancer, Glaucoma, headaches, etc. are still arrested in federal raids. 2) MIKE does not mention a plan to end homelessness, which must be a national goal. I do not mean the right of every American to own a home (although the current crisis must be addressed): I mean the fact that millions of Americans have nowhere to sleep on a given night. Can't even afford rent. And shelters are a degrading solution. A better solution would be cheaply built, tiny, free apartments one could crash in till they got on their feet again. And opening small areas of state and national parks to people to sleep in a tent or shack or trailer at no nightly cost. These are real solutions. Even providing small vans people could borrow till they got on their feet again, with free public garages to fix them.. they could sleep in the vans!! And drive from town to town to find new work. Or sleep in a van parked outside a workplace. Even park in free parking areas for the special govt.-owned vans (which would run on vegetable oil!). These are real, and cheap, solutions to a national tragedy that Mike did not even address at all!! 3) Mike does not provide at all for alternates to public schools, as Rep. Ron Paul does. A child should get a government subsidized education, no matter what kind of school the parent selects. 4) Mike does not talk at all (nor does Ron Paul, surprisingly), about legalizing the exchange of money for certain physical massages, aka "prostitution". Or about legalizing all gambling, not just state-authorized gambling. These are natural human rights which a government has no right to make illegal. I will go into all this more later, but I am tired now.. Just check out my own Presidential Platform on the "splash page" (front page). Nowhere in the Constitution do the founding Mothers and Fathers of our nation make such activities illegal. I consider making "prostitution" and "pornography" illegal a way of subjugating women. You might be laughing right now!! But think about it!!! Men are willing to pay hard-earned money (pun intended), and lots of it, for a small degree of physical intimacy lasting only a few minutes usually. In the book "Candide" by Voltaire, for instance (yes, it's fiction, but still), a pirate pays all his money in the world to a "prostitute" for a few moments of pleasure. Yes, he dies soon thereafter (not of a sexually transmitted disease!) so he doesn't really care.. My point is, if "prostitution" were legal, many women would only work for an hour a day or less, or even for just a day a month. Many men would choose these professions of healing intimacy over other work also. And who would benefit? There would be quick transfers of wealth from richer to poorer people. And the elderly, those differently abled, or just the socially awkward would be able to have some intimacy in their lives, albeit not nearly as wonderful as having a boyfriend , a girlfriend, or a spouse. My point is that these laws are a way of keeping women poor. And keeping the elderly celibate and lonely. Which we do not want as a society. If I know my history correctly, in ancient China and the Middle East, the courtesans held great power, wealth, and prestige. Probably much more power, wealth, and prestige than most men. Think about it!! Now, a note on "human traffiking" and slavery and "prostitution": 1) If America made it easier to enter this country legally, then there would be fewer people willing to pay people to sneak them in , and then be indebted for years to these "human smugglers". My ancestors came to America legally, but in the 1890's, when AMERICA LET ALL COME THROUGH ELLIS ISLAND AND ENTER THE COUNTRY WITHOUT QUOTAS PER COUNTRY. THE ONLY THING BARRING ONE FROM ENTRY WAS A DISEASE SUCH AS PINK EYE (!) WHICH BECAUSE SHE HAD THAT AS A 10 YEAR OLD GIRL UPON ENTRY, MY GREAT-GRANDMA HELEN HAD TO LEAVE HER FAMILY IN NYC AND GO TO CANADA TO WORK AS A MAID FOR A MEAN CANADIAN FAMILY FOR A YEAR UNTIL SHE COULD REJOIN HER FAMILY.. My point is not that Canadians are mean: at least they took her in to scrub their floors!! My point is that most American's ancestors came here when we had open borders. With processing centers such as Ellis Island. You get the point.. Yes, today, we must be careful to screen terrorists out, and we should certainly continue investing in the world's economy to make all nations wealthy, but letting in far more people legally would prevent people from selling themselves into slavery to gain entry into the United States. In terms of the law, slavery has been illegal in the United States since Abraham Lincoln made the "Emancipation Proclamation" around the time of the Civil War.. So, any slaveholders are easily prosecutable under such laws. Also, if we wanted, we could institute laws like in Amsterdam or Nevada where the government would approve official prostitutes, and have doctor exams every month. But such approval would not be necessary to engage in the profession, known as the oldest profession in the world. Ron Paul: He does not address poverty and homelessness as a national tragedy. He should. Just because one is a Libertarian (and yes, I HAVE BEEN A REGISTERED LIBERTARIAN FOR ABOUT NINE YEARS!!) does not mean that one cannot have compassion for others, and act on it. America has always been a country that tries to help the helpless. I am not saying Ron Paul has no compassion. I am sure he has a lot, but trusts that private charities would provide all the services needed for those who can't "get on their feet". Well, the government must be a safety net if , as during the Great Depression, millions of Americans are willing to "work for food" but have no place to work, no place to sleep, and no food. We can't allow that tragedy to ever happen again in America. And currently, there are many thousands, maybe millions, who are suffering that fate tonight. As for Ron Paul on abortion, he obviously believes that human life begins at conception. And he has done a great service to the world in being a gynecologist to thousands of women and babies by delivering thousands of babies in his life. And I greatly commend and respect him for that. However, the concept that life begins at conception is a religious one, not a medical one. Medically, a potential life begins at conception, and the life begins upon birth. So, our Founding Mothers and Fathers found no need to discuss abortion in the Constitution because they knew that a woman had the right to have a doctor treat her health as she and the doctor saw fit. They saw no need to state such an obvious truism in the Constitution. And as most people know, until very recently giving birth was probably the number one cause of death to women (as opposed to disease or old age) for all of human history. So if a woman and her doctor felt that an abortion was an apropriate health measure for the mother's safety, then such a procedure would be done. Just as one would treat any other life-threatening medical condition. This is why abortion was never mentioned in the Constitution: because it was always legal. I must learn more about the history of abortion, but my guess would be that the procedure has been performed for hundreds of years, throughout the world. I am not saying I have no sympathy for the potential lives which are lost. I do. I myself was born two months premature, at seven months in my mother. I weighed four pounds I believe. And, the umbilical cord was wrapped around my neck 19 times. But I lived (thank G d and the Army doctors - my dad was an Army eye surgeon - and nurses and nannies and father and mother who cared for me!!). And I had to stay in an incubator for a month before I was released from the hospital, because I was too light to release. So yes, I care about the issue. But human life, medically and legally, begins at birth. Until birth, the fetus is a potential baby, not a baby. Yes, it is very difficult for me to talk about such issues. But a woman and her doctor have, and must continue to have, the right to care for her as she deems fit. I greatly commend those who choose to give birth when they discover they are pregnant (such as the younger Spears TV Star sister), but I can't fault a young woman (or older woman) for making a decision on what is best for her life at the time. And I think that as a society, we must do much much more to care for women who find out they are pregnant but have no money. We should have nurseries in high schools and universities and work places. Free nurseries. And we should have safe, free housing and food for such mothers until they get on their feet financially. But we can't just call and make women and doctors murderers, when they are healers. And any birth has the possibility of threatening the mother's life. Many abortions probably happen because mothers are worried that the child would starve if they gave birth to it, so really as a society we should figure out, for all our good, how to make all Americans have a solid economic footing, whatever that takes. For the good of all of us now alive, and all of us to come. And let's end this War today!! And end the "War on Drugs" which is a war on people. (As to the "War on Drugs" never forget that wealthy Americans with health insurance take many legal drugs prescribed by doctors, as Nancy Reagan's diet/pep pills were prescribed probably, and poor Americans without health care take illegal drugs. And the pharmaceutical companies that make synthetic opiates and marijuana and cocaine are allowed to make billions of dollars, but the farmers in South America and the Middle East and Southeast Asia are gassed with poisons and murdered with guns daily. Think about it!!!!) Peace!! I love you all!! And good luck to all the Democrats tomorrow, especially Senator Mike Gravel, Representative Ron Paul, Representative Mike Kucinich, Senator Barak Obama, Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator John Edwards, and all the others who have valiantly served our nation for years. This race to find a good president is not ending tomorrow. It is beginning tomorrow. PS: A few words about "race" and gender and the President. There is no such thing as "race", although our nation certainly has "racism" in its past. What I mean by the fact that there is no such thing as race is that there is no scientifically definable quantity called race. The way that humankind evolved, according to scientists (who I believe) (and yes, I believe this is all G d's will!) is that some very smart apes in Africa evolved into human beings over millions of years, and from Africa spread throughout the world, probably before the continents separated from one large land mass. So, we are all humans. Yes, depending on climate and inbreeding, certain humans living in certain locales evolved with certain traits. And yes, one of those distinguishing traits is the shade and coloration of skin, largely based on proximity to the equator and the sun's hot rays determining shade of skin. But we all evolved from one man and woman (probably), who for simplicity sake we can call Adam and Eve. So, we are all one race, the human race. The concept that there were genetically different races was promoted by Nazi scientists in the 1930's and 1940's, who believed there were several races of humans, with the Aryan race being the genetically superior race. That concept was, and is, rubbish and lies!!! Americans in the south, and South Africans, based laws on the concept of race. They invented that concept out of thin air. It is not a scientific, or a socielogical concept. It is a concept of narrow-minded pseudo scientists. Of the millions of genes in a human body (maybe more, I must study this area more), only a few relate to the physical features on which our whole concept of race is based. While whole arease of American law are based on the concept of race, RACE IS NOT DEFINED IN ONE LAW DICTIONARY I HAVE EVER SEEN, GOING BACK TO THE 1800'S!!! Yes, our country has an evil history of slavery, and of lighter-skinned people calling themselves white and darker-skinned people black or negro and putting that on their birth certificates (in the south at least), and then saying that if they were "negro" they could only eat at certain "negro" restaurants , or sleep in "negro" hotels,, and not swim in the county swimming pool, and not date "white" women (or men!)... but that does not mean there is such a thing as race!!! It means there are people who hated other people in the past, or just thought they had the right to own them because they were of a "different race"... that does not mean there is such a thing as race.. it means that certain people who hated other people wanted to believe that there was and wanted everyone to believe there was such a thing as race so they could continue owning slaves, or continue "Jim Crowe" segregation laws... WHEN THERE IS REALLY NO SUCH THING AS RACE!!! This is why I believe that the BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION DECISION WAS WRONGLY DECIDED. NOT IN ITS RESULT, BUT IN ITS REASONING. IT ACCEPTED, WITHOUT QUESTION, THE SCIENTIFICALLY DISCREDITED CONCEPT THAT THERE IS SUCH A THING AS RACE, AND THEN SAID THAT "SEPARATE BUT EQUAL IS NOT EQUAL" INSTEAD OF JUST DECIDING, "THERE IS NO SCIENTIFICALLY DEFINABLE CONCEPT OF RACE( BASED ON THE FACT THAT ALL PEOPLE HAVE ANCESTORS FROM AFRICA, AND MANY OF US HAVE ANCESTORS DESCENDED FROM THOSE IN AFRICA, WHO WERE BORN IN MANY REGIONS OF THE WORLD), SO THERE IS NO BASIS, LEGALLY OR SCIENTIFICALLY, ON WHICH TO SEPARATE AMERICANS FROM OUR RIGHT TO FREE ASSOCIATION IN SCHOOLS, RESTAURANTS, HOTELS, SWIMMING POOLS, OR ANYWHERE ELSE, AS THE CONCEPT OF RACE IS NOT LEGALLY OR SCIENTIFICALLY VALID".. TO BE MORE SUCCINCT, THEY COULD HAVE RULED, "THE SEGREGATION OF SCHOOLS BASED ON THE CONCEPT OF RACE, AND THE CONCEPT OF SEPARATE BUT EQUAL, IS INVALID AND ILLEGAL AS THERE IS NO LEGALLY RECOGNIZED CONCEPT OF RACE." END OF STORY. I WILL WRITE MORE ON ALL THIS LATER, BUT I AM VERY TIRED NOW, AND MUST GET UP EARLY TOMORROW TO STUDY FOR THE CALIFORNIA BAR EXAM (PASSED IN NY MANY YEARS AGO)... I can't wait to bring a lawsuit destroying all laws based on the false concept of race... (Also, let us never forget that in the north at least were many signs on hotels, etc., saying, "NO JEWS OR DOGS".. for example..).. WE MUST NEVER FORGET THAT BECAUSE OF SLAVERY, DARKER SKINNED PEOPLE DESCENDED FROM AFRICAN SLAVES EVOLVED THEIR OWN CULTURE OF STRENGHT AND DEFIANCE AND JUSTICE (AND FOODS AND ENTERTAINMENT!), AND A CULTURE OF "WE SHALL OVERCOME.. SOME DAY!!" OF WHICH THEY SHOULD BE VERY VERY PROUD. AND THAT CULTURE OF SURVIVAL AND EVEN FLOURISHING AGAINST HORRIBLE OPPRESSION SHOULD NEVER BE FORGOTTEN, EVER!! BUT LABELS SUCH AS "BLACK" "WHITE", "LATINO" (WHICH MEANS SOMEONE'S ANCESTORS CAME FROM A COUNTRY WHERE SPANISH WAS SPOKEN), ETC.. SHOULD NEVER BE INSTITUTED IN LAW, BUT RATHER BE REMEMBERED AND KEPT ALIVE THROUGH FAMILY HISTORY AND COMMUNAL CELEBRATIONS, ETC. NOW, AS TO THE FACT THAT WE MIGHT HAVE OUR FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT (SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON) OR "BLACK" PRESIDENT (BARAK OBAMA).. YES, WOMEN HAVE THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY BEEN RESTRICTED FROM PUBLIC OFFICE (AND WERE ONLY ALLOWED TO VOTE AFTER THE SUFFRAGE MOVEMENT IN THE U.S.A.), AND YES, AMERICA HAS A HISTORY OF SLAVERY OF DARKER SKINNED PEOPLE FROM AFRICA (ALTHOUGH, IRONICALLY, SENATOR OBAMA IS NOT DESCENDED FROM SLAVES!), AND YES, IT WOULD BE GROUNDBREAKING TO HAVE A DARKER-SKINNED OR A WOMAN PRESIDENT!! BUT THE MAIN THING WE SHOULD CARE ABOUT IS WHAT'S BETWEEN A PERSON'S EARS, NOT BETWEEN THEIR LEGS OR ON THEIR SKIN. WHAT I MEAN, IS, VOTE WITH YOUR HEARTS, NOT BECAUSE OF A GENDER OR "RACE". HOWEVER, IT WOULD BE A SOURCE OF PRIDE TO ALL AMERICANS IF WE DID ELECT A WOMAN OR "BLACK" PRESIDENT, PROVING THAT THE BEST PERSON WINS, NO MATTER WHAT GENDER OR "RACE"!! ALSO, ALTHOUGH BARAK SAYS HE SUPPORTS "AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" AND IS A PRODUCT OF IT, I KNOW HE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN WHERE HE IS TODAY WITHOUT "AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" (WHICH IS REALLY JUST GOVERNMENT INSTITUTED "RACISM", OR DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SKIN COLOR OR LANGUAGE OR CULTURE.. INSANE!!!), AND I DO BELIEVE THAT ELECTING A "BLACK" (I PUT IT IN QUOTES BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE CONCEPT OF RACE, NOT BECASUE HIS MOTHER IS LIGHT SKINNED OR HIS FATHER WAS BORN IN AFRICA) PRESIDENT WILL BE A FIRST STEP TO OVERTURNING "AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" AND ALL RACE BASED LAWS IN THE COURTS... NOT THAT WE WON'T DO SO IF HILLARY OR JOHN EDWARDS WINS, BUT WE WILL HAVE THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ARGUMENT THAT A "BLACK MAN" CAN GET ELECTED PRESIDENT.. AND IF HILLARY WINS, WE HAVE THE ARGUMENT THAT A WOMAN CAN GET ELECTED!!! EITHER WAY WE WIN.. NOW I ADMIT, HILLARY HAS RUBBED ME THE WRONG WAY FOR A WHILE, AND I REALLY DO LIKE EDWARDS TOO, AND KUCINICH FOR THAT MATTER!!.. AND CERTIANLY LOVE MIKE GRAVEL.. BUT MY POINT IS ... I HAVE GOTTEN TO RESPECT AND SOMEWHAT LIKE HILLARY.. BUT IT MAKES ME FURIOUS THAT SHE (AND EDWARDS) DID VOTE TO AUTHORIZE THE USE OF FORCE AGAINST IRAQ (NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH DECLARING WAR ON IRAQ, WHICH LEGALLY THE CONGRESS MUST DO TO GO TO WAR.. SO WE HAVE A GOOD LEGAL ARGUMENT IN COURT THAT THIS WAR IS ILLEGAL). BUT SHE AND EDWARDS HAVE DONE PENANCE FOR CALLING FOR THIS WAR TO END IMMEDIATELY.. NOW EDWARDS AND OBAMA ARE A LITTLE MORE CLEAR IN SAYING ALL TROOPS MUST EXIT IMMEDIATELY , EXCEPT FOR ABOUT 5000 TO PROTECT THE EMBASSY, WHICH MIGHT BE SOON UNSUSTAINABLE ANYWAY.. AND CLINTON, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS TALKING ABOUT LEAVING FORCES THERE AS PART OF A UN FORCE, BUT NOT MANY. SHE DOESN'T SAY HOW MANY THOUGH. AND GRAVEL IS CLEAR THAT HE WANTS ALL OUT WITHIN FOUR MONTHS OF HIS COMING TO OFFICE, AND EDWARDS I THINK JUST SAID EIGHT TO TEN MONTHS, WITH SOME TRAINING OF OTHER FORCES OUTSIDE OF IRAQ, AND RON PAUL, CORRECTLY, WANTS ALL US FORCES WORLDWIDE TO COME HOME THE DAY HE IS ELECTED. MY POINT IS, ALL OF THESE OPTIONS ARE BETTER THAN THE PSYCHO REPUBLICANS WHO BELIEVE THAT THIS WAR CAN BE "WON". IT CAN'T. GET OVER IT. LET'S START HEALING THE WORLD AND STOP BLOWING IT UP, AND WE WILL MAKE MORE FRIENDS AND FEWER ENEMIES. AS MY GRANDMOTHER USED TO SAY, "FLIES GO TO HONEY, NOT VINEGAR!" ;P GOOD NIGHT!! I LOVE YOU ALL!! AND VOTE TOMORROW, OR NEXT MONTH, OR WHENEVER YOUR STATE OR COUNTRY VOTES!! LOVE, FREDDY

my response to today's nyt editorial about cia torture: VOTE FOR MIKE GRAVEL FOR PRESIDENT!!

FantasyFreddy — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:26:42 GMT

This editorial is so spot on I almost cried reading it. I just wish that it had acknowledged that the decision to go to war at all over the 9/11 massacre was misguided, as a focused search for the plotters would have been an adequate response. We now must choose who will restore trust and dignity to America, and make our nation loved and not feared as we are now. Senator Mike Gravel is an American hero for fighting to end the military draft and end the Vietnam War. Senator Mike Gravel is the only candidate who would not have entered into this current Iraq War and will bring all our troops home within 4 months of becoming President, who deeply wants to end the equally evil and destructive "war on drugs", give all Americans national healthcare and a great education, replace the income tax with a fair tax, who believes deeply in a woman's right to control her body without government intrusion, and believes in the equal rights of the lesbian/gay community. Mike Gravel also does not believe in torture (or "enhanced interrogation techniques") as a means of coercing testimony, searches or wiretapping without a court order, using the government to oppress political opponents, or in holding people in prison without filing criminal charges or providing legal representation. Basically, he believes in upholding the Constitution of the United States and restoring dignity to our once great nation. A patriot who dropped out of college to become a spy when the Korean war started, he later graduated from Columbia University in NYC (Senator Obama's and my Alma Mater also). Later as an Alaskan Senator he single-handedly shut the Senate down until Nixon ended the draft. He also risked jail to expose the "Pentagon Papers", a secret government study which proved that those who got us into that war never believed it was "winnable," even as they always said "success is right around the corner." (Sound familiar?) He was the ONLY senator with the guts to work with Daniel Ellsberg to expose the lies that got us into that war, precipitating the break-in at Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office, Watergate, Nixon's downfall, and eventually to the end of the Vietnam War. If not for Senator Mike Gravel reading the Pentagon Papers into the Senate record, the supreme court might have blocked the NY Times' publication of the documents and the war could have dragged on for years more than it did. His brave defiant and questionably legal act probably saved thousands of American, Vietnamese, and Laotian lives. Just as Senator Gravel played a huge role in ending the war in Vietnam and Laos, he will end the "war on drugs" and the war on women. He has proved himself a hero as a warrior for peace. We can trust he will do so when he is the next President of the United States. He deserves our votes to make that possible. Don't believe the polls or the fundraising success. Don't let the fact that he has been censored from involvement in the last few debates sway you. None of that matters at the polling booth. Vote with your heart and we will have Mike Gravel as our next President, and will have no more War in Iraq, "War on Drugs", War on Women, or War on Americans. We will have PEACE. I pray that your exposure of the destruction of the CIA videotapes of torture will have the same effect that the exposure of the coverup of the Watergate break-ins had, leading us to impeach Bush and Cheney for "high crimes and misdemeanors" as is provided for in our Constitution. I also pray that we elect Senator Gravel to be President, as I am sure he will not pardon them, but will let them spend years in prison for their multiple crimes, including going to war based on false pretenses of Iraq possessing nuclear weapons, and ordering the torture and cover-up of torture of prisoners of war, in violation of international and national law. The fact that doctors, who are sworn to "do no harm", were used in the torture is making America sound more like Nazi Germany every day. Mike Gravel, the former Korean War spy, will have the guts and authority to reign in a CIA and a military run amok. And he will never let America go to war unless we have no choice. I LIKE MIKE!!

Benazir Bhutto Murdered! Let Peace Prevail!! Honor her and Gandhi and King with the power of nonviolent protest, civil disobedience.

FantasyFreddy — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 22:21:42 GMT

Benazir Bhutto Murdered! Let Peace Prevail!! Honor her and Gandhi and King with the power of nonviolent protest, civil disobedience. We must make her proud in the tradition of Mahadma Gandhi and the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Non-violent struggle will bring peace and democracy back to Pakistan! We must make her and Gandhi and King and her 20 murdered supporters and countless maimed that peace will prevail. This does not mean putting up and shutting up. It means peaceful nonviolent struggle. Marches, strikes, etc. She is looking down on us and calling us to action. In the words of the Dalai Lama of Tibet, who has struggled with Tibetans to bring peace to Tibet and to the world: NEVER GIVE UP No Matter what is going on Never give up. Develop the heart. Too much energy in your country is spent Developing the mind instead of the heart. Be compasionate not just to your friends but to everyone Be compassionate. Work for peace in your heart and in the world. Work for peace and I say again Never give up. No matter what is happening, No matter what is going on around you, Never give up. (Quoted in the Journal of the Tibet Society of the United Kingdom, Winter 1999/2000.) Another quote of his to help us now: MAY THE FORCE of observing that which is right And the abstinence from wrong practices and evil deeds Nourish and augment the prosperity of the world. May it invigorate living beings and help them blossom. May sylvan joy and pristine happiness Ever increase, ever spread and encompass all that is. (Part of a Poem Written to mark the opening of the International Conference on Ecological Responsibility: A Dialogue With Buddhism, New Delhi, October 1993). I pray with the whole world for Benazir Bhutto, her family and loved ones, her supporters and their family and loved ones, and for all of us to bring the world to peace, fully and immediately!! Shalom, Salam, and Peace!